Private Letter Ruling 201532039 Released August 7, 2015 Denied Transcribed from scan

Confusion did not justify an IRA rollover waiver

Apply this to your situation

This page covers one taxpayer's ruling from 2015, which can't be cited as precedent. Ezel answers your situation under the current Code and IRS guidance, with citations.

Currency note: this determination was released in 2015
Statutory amendments, regulation changes, court decisions, or later IRS guidance may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current tax advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, threshold, or position mentioned here.
Not precedent. Under 26 U.S.C. § 6110(k)(3), this written determination may not be used or cited as precedent. It resolved one taxpayer's situation on its specific facts, and identifying details were redacted by the IRS before release. The official IRS release (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source.
About this page: The plain-English summary and ruling snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official IRS release. The full text is the IRS's own document.
Transcribed from a scanned original: the IRS released this determination as an image-only PDF. The full text below is a machine transcription, proofread against the scan. Check the original PDF before quoting exact language.
View official IRS release (PDF)

Plain-English summary

An IRA owner withdrew Amount 1 and deposited it in her savings account, then used Amount 2 from savings to pay off her mortgage. More than a year later, her son discovered the IRA withdrawal and said she must have been confused because her existing savings were sufficient to pay the mortgage. She also said she relied on a bank financial adviser who was on vacation when she made the withdrawal. The IRS denied a 60-day rollover waiver because she supplied no evidence that the adviser had a duty to explain the tax consequences and no medical documentation of a mental impairment that prevented her from understanding the transaction.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: Did confusion about the taxpayer's accounts, an absent financial adviser, and an asserted decline in mental state justify a late IRA rollover?
  • Outcome: Denied
  • Key authorities: IRC § 408(d)(3); Rev. Proc. 2003-16

Full text (IRS public release)

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20224

201532039

TAX EXEMPT AND
GOVERNMENT ENTITIES
DIVISION

MAY 12 2015

Uniform Issue List: 408.03-00

SE:T:EP:RA:T1

Legend:

Taxpayer A =
IRA B =
Bank C =
Account D =
Individual E =
Amount 1 =
Amount 2 =

Dear :

This is in response to your request for a ruling dated August 31, 2014, as
supplemented by correspondence dated November 24, 2014, in which you
request a waiver of the 60-day rollover requirement contained in section
408(d)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”).

The following facts and representations have been submitted under penalty of
perjury in support of the ruling requested:

Taxpayer A represents that she received a distribution from IRA B totaling
Amount 1. Taxpayer A asserts that her failure to accomplish a rollover of
Amount 1 within the 60-day period prescribed by Code section 408(d)(3) was due
to her confusion concerning her financial accounts and the 60-day rollover rule.

Page 2 201532039

Taxpayer A maintained IRA B at Bank C. On March 4, 2013, Taxpayer A
completed the appropriate withdrawal instructions form requesting a distribution
of Amount 1 from IRA B. Taxpayer A immediately deposited Amount 1 into her
traditional savings account with Bank C. On March 7, 2013, Taxpayer A
withdrew Amount 2 from her savings account and paid off the mortgage on her
house. In April, 2014, Taxpayer A’s son discovered the withdraw from IRA B and
represents that Taxpayer A must have been confused since she already had
sufficient funds in her savings account to pay off the mortgage.

Taxpayer A represents that Individual E of Bank C was her financial advisor.
Based on her understanding of her relationship with Individual E, she relied on
her to provide guidance regarding the rules associated with her IRA investments,
specifically the 60-day rollover period. However, Individual E was on vacation at
the time Taxpayer A withdrew Amount 1 from IRA B. While Individual E felt the
withdrawal of Amount 1 from IRA B was unnecessary, Taxpayer A provided no
documented evidence that Individual E owed a duty to advise her of the tax
consequences of this transaction. In addition, Taxpayer A provided no
documentation from her physicians that she suffers from a declining mental state.

Based on the facts and representations, you request a ruling that the Internal
Revenue Service (the “Service”) waive the 60-day rollover requirement contained
in section 408(d)(3) of the Code with respect to the distribution of Amount 1.

Section 408(d)(1) of the Code provides that, except as otherwise provided in
section 408(d), any amount paid or distributed out of an IRA shall be included in
gross income by the payee or distributee, as the case may be, in the manner
provided under section 72 of the Code.

Section 408(d)(3) of the Code defines and provides the rules applicable to IRA
rollovers.

Section 408(d)(3)(A) of the Code provides that section 408(d)(1) of the Code
does not apply to any amount paid or distributed out of an IRA to the individual
for whose benefit the IRA is maintained if -

(i) the entire amount received (including money and any other property) is
paid into an IRA for the benefit of such individual not later than the 60th day after
the day on which the individual receives the payment or distribution; or

(ii) the entire amount received (including money and any other property) is
paid into an eligible retirement plan (other than an IRA) for the benefit of such
individual not later than the 60th day after the date on which the payment or
distribution is received, except that the maximum amount which may be paid into
such plan may not exceed the portion of the amount received which is includible
in gross income (determined without regard to section 408(d)(3)).

Page 3 201532039

Section 408(d)(3)(B) of the Code provides that section 408(d)(3) does not
apply to any amount described in section 408(d)(3)(A)(i) received by an individual
from an IRA if at any time during the 1-year period ending on the day of such
receipt such individual received any other amount described in section
408(d)(3)(A)(i) from an IRA which was not includible in gross income because of
the application of section 408(d)(3).

Section 408(d)(3)(D) of the Code provides a similar 60-day rollover period for
partial rollovers.

Section 408(d)(3)(E) of the Code provides that the rollover provisions of section
408(d) do not apply to any amount required to be distributed under section
408(a)(6).

Section 408(d)(3)(I) of the Code provides that the Secretary may waive the 60-
day requirement under sections 408(d)(3)(A) and 408(d)(3)(D) of the Code where
the failure to waive such requirement would be against equity or good
conscience, including casualty, disaster, or other events beyond the reasonable
control of the individual subject to such requirement. Only distributions that
occurred after December 31, 2001, are eligible for the waiver under section
408(d)(3)(I) of the Code.

Rev. Proc. 2003-16, 2003-4 I.R.B. 359 (January 27, 2003) provides that in
determining whether to grant a waiver of the 60-day rollover requirement
pursuant to section 408(d)(3)(I), the Service will consider all relevant facts and
circumstances, including: (1) errors committed by a financial institution; (2)
inability to complete a rollover due to death, disability, hospitalization,
incarceration, restrictions imposed by a foreign country or postal error, (3) the
use of the amount distributed (for example, in the case of payment by check,
whether the check was cashed); and (4) the time elapsed since the distribution
occurred.

The Service has the authority to waive the 60-day rollover requirement for a
distribution from an IRA where the individual failed to complete a rollover to
another IRA within the 60-day rollover period but was prevented from doing so
because of one of the factors enumerated above in Revenue Procedure 2003-16.
In this instance, however, the Service finds that the documentation and materials
provided by Taxpayer A do not demonstrate how any of these factors resulted in
her failure to accomplish a timely rollover of Amount 1. Taxpayer A represented
that her inability to complete a rollover of Amount 1 was caused by her confusion
over the need of the IRA funds to pay off her mortgage and the absence of
Individual E on the date of the transaction. However, no documentation was
provided that demonstrates Taxpayer A suffers from any mental impairment
which prevented her from understanding the nature of the distribution and the
need of the funds to complete a payoff of her mortgage.

Page 4 201532039

Therefore, the Service hereby declines to waive the 60-day rollover requirement
with respect to the distribution of Amount 1 from IRA B.

No opinion is expressed as to the tax treatment of the transaction described
herein under the provisions of any other section of either the Code or regulations
which may be applicable thereto.

This letter is directed only to the taxpayer who requested it. Section 6110(k)(3)
of the Code provides that it may not be used or cited as precedent.

If you wish to inquire about this ruling, please contact (I.D. # ),
, at ( ) .

Sincerely yours,

Carlton A. Watkins
Manager
Employee Plans Technical Group 1

Enclosures:
Deleted Copy of this Letter
Notice of Intention to Disclose, Notice 437

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what the IRS ruled for one taxpayer in 2015, and it can't be cited as precedent. Ezel checks the current Internal Revenue Code and IRS guidance and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.