Ezel / IRS Rulings / 201534011

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

Number
201534011
Outcome
Advice
Document type
Chief Counsel Advice
IRS subject
Settlement of Penalties
Topics
Procedure, penalties, and administration
Code sections
§ 6224
Ruling dated
July 24, 2015
Publicly released
August 21, 2015
Source
View Official PDF

Apply this to your situation

This page covers legal advice the IRS Office of Chief Counsel wrote for IRS staff, issued in 2015, which can't be cited as precedent. Ask about your situation and see what the current Code and IRS guidance say, 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 is advice from the IRS Office of Chief Counsel to IRS personnel on the facts they presented, 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.

What does the Code say today, for your facts?

This advice was written for IRS staff and cannot be cited. Ezel checks the current Internal Revenue Code and IRS guidance against your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace