Ezel / IRS Rulings / 201614033

Unidentified revenue ruling is compatible with the proposed approach

Number
201614033
Outcome
Advice
Document type
Chief Counsel Advice
IRS subject
Distributions of Property
Topics
Corporate transactions and reorganizations
Code sections
§ 301
Ruling dated
February 29, 2016
Publicly released
April 1, 2016
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 2016, 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 2016
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.
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

The released Chief Counsel email is extremely brief. It addresses an unidentified revenue ruling in connection with an approach that is not described in the public release. The author says the ruling is not inconsistent with that approach and merely adds another layer. The redacted text does not provide enough information to identify the underlying transaction, analysis, or practical effect.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: Is the unidentified revenue ruling inconsistent with the recipient's approach?
  • Outcome: Advice given: no, the ruling is compatible but adds another layer.
  • Key authorities: IRC § 301; unidentified revenue ruling

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA_2016022915423523
UILC: 301.00-00

Number: 201614033
Release Date: 4/1/2016

From:

Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 3:42:35 PM
To:

Cc:

Bcc:

Subject: RR

The RR is not inconsistent with your approach. Just adds another layer.

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