Ezel / IRS Rulings / 201534011
Chief Counsel Advice 201534011 Released August 21, 2015 Advice

Consistent-settlement rights do not cover partner-level penalty defenses

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.
View official IRS release (PDF)

Plain-English summary

Chief Counsel addressed consistent-settlement rights for penalties in a TEFRA partnership matter. The advice stated that section 6224(c) does not give another partner a right to a consistent settlement when the penalty settlement rests on partner-level defenses or matters. Those issues depend on the circumstances of the individual partner rather than a partnership-wide determination. The memorandum cited Treasury Regulation section 301.6224(c)-3(b).

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: Does section 6224(c) require a consistent penalty settlement when the original settlement was based on partner-level defenses or matters?
  • Outcome: Advice given
  • Key authorities: IRC § 6224(c); Treas. Reg. § 301.6224(c)-3(b)

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA_2015072414212118 [Third Party Communication:

UILC: 6224.01-02 Date of Communication: Month DD, YYYY]

Number: 201534011
Release Date: 8/21/2015
From:
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2015 2:21:21 PM
To:
Cc:
Bcc:
Subject: RE: tefra question

That must have been his analysis then. Section 6224(c) does not extend rights to
consistent settlement with respect to penalties where the settlement is based on
partner-level defenses/matters. See Treas Reg 301.6224(c)-3(b).

Happy to discuss further if necessary.

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.