For Tax Professionals  

1999 Chief Counsel's
Written Determinations

199915000 to 199919999

Taxpayer-specific rulings or determinations are written memoranda furnished by the IRS National Office in response to requests by taxpayers under published annual guidelines. Technical advice memoranda are written memoranda furnished by the National Office of the IRS upon request of a district director or chief appeals officer pursuant to annual review procedures. Chief Counsel advice are written advice or instructions prepared by the Office of Chief Counsel and issued to field or service center employees of the IRS or Office of Chief Counsel.

It is important to note that pursuant to 26 USC § 6110(j)(3), such items cannot be used or cited as precedent.

All files below are in the Adobe Acrobat PDF Format.

5/3/1999
Dependency Exemption for Foster Child This memorandum is a response to an e-mail from Jeryl Crawford that raises the question why the Service deleted the following language from Publication 17: " However, if a state, one of its political subdivisions, or a tax-exempt child placing agency makes payments to you as a foster parent, you may not take an exemption for the child."
5/3/1999
Issue: Whether § 3201(d) of the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 (RRA98) requires the Service to send separate "TEFRA Notices" to a nonpartner spouse in TEFRA audit cases where a partner in a TEFRA partnership and his/her spouse file a joint income tax return under § 6013 of the Code?
5/3/1999
Issue: Should the exception from information reporting for payments of "freight" under § 1.6041-3(d) be narrowly construed to include only a taxpayer's payment of incidental freight costs during the taxable year and should information reporting be required for payments of freight that are an integral part of a taxpayer's business?
5/25/1999
Issues: (1) Can the Service assess the amount refunded pursuant to Internal Revenue Code § 6201(a)(3)? (2) What must the Service do to effectuate an assessment under I.R.C. § 6201(a)(3)?(3) What collection remedies are available to the Service to collect the tax once an assessment under I.R.C. § 6201(a)(3) is made?(4) Can the Service file an erroneous refund suit under I.R.C. § 7405 to recover the amounts erroneously refunded?
5/4/1999
Proposed Administrative Forfeiture of Computer Equipment, Printers and Typewriters We have reviewed your proposed law and fact memorandum from a policy perspective with respect to the proposed administrative forfeiture of the above referenced property.
5/3/1999
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration The Secretary recently issued Treasury Order 115-01, setting out the authority and responsibility of the newly-created Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA).
5/3/1999
June 8, 1998, submitted by your authorized representative requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that your loss of U.S. citizenship did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
5/3/1999
October 30, 1998, requesting a ruling concerning the application of § 2632 of the Internal Revenue Code and § 301.9100-1 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations.
5/3/1999
August 31, 1998, and subsequent correspondence submitted by X's authorized representative on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
5/3/1999
October 12, 1998 request for rulings on certain federal income tax consequences of a series of proposed transactions.
5/3/1999
October 16, 1998, and subsequent correspondence submitted by your authorized representative on behalf of X, requesting an extension of time to file an election for X to be treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes under § 301.7701-3(c) of the Procedure and Administration Regulations for its taxable year beginning D1.
5/4/1999
July 6, 1998 requesting, on behalf of the above taxpayers, an extension of time under §§ 301.9100-1 and 301.9100-3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to file elections
5/3/1999
December 17, 1997, requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that A's loss of U.S. citizenship did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
5/3/1999
October 15, 1998. Field Service Advice is not binding on Examination or Appeals and is not a final case determination.
5/3/1999
Issues: (1) Is § 1033 (pertaining to deferral of gain recognition in the event of an involuntary conversion) available to a taxpayer receiving a Program grant? (2) Must a taxpayer receiving a Program grant take that grant into account in determining the availability of a loss deduction under § 165?(3) Are the costs of the street level and facade improvements constructed with Program funds deductible by taxpayers under § 162, or must those costs be capitalized under § 263?
5/3/1999
Issues: (1) Can Taxpayer elect the repair allowance provision of Treasury Regulation § 1.167(a)-11(d) of the Asset Depreciation Range system (ADR) pursuant to Internal Revenue Code § 263(f) (redesignated § 263(e)) without applying any of the other ADR provisions set forth in the Treas. Reg. § 1.167 regulations? (2) Does taxpayer's record keeping practices comport with the requirements of the regulations?(3) Has Taxpayer's non-compliance with various regulations risen to the level of substantial noncompliance such that its election under these regulations is invalidated?(4) Is retirement of equipment for book purposes under Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) rules and regulations equivalent to retirement for purposes of ADR, such that Taxpayer could not deduct the cost of overhauling and/or rebuilding the equipment because it has retired it for ICC purposes?
5/3/1999
August 25, 1998, you originally referred the cases against to the Department of Justice. In a letter dated November 18, 1998, the Tax Division declined the cases concluding that prosecution was not warranted because there was not a reasonable probability of conviction. Our review of your resubmission was based on the memorandum you submitted, along with the exhibits and Tax Division review notes.
5/3/1999
December 23, 1998 letter, submitted on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(f) of the Internal Revenue Code.
5/3/1999
Requesting rulings as to certain income tax consequences of a proposed transaction.
5/3/1999
June 1, 1998, as well as subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of Company, requesting a ruling that the rental income received by Company from the Property is not passive investment income within the meaning of § 1362(d)(3)(C)(i).
5/3/1999
June 1, 1998, as well as subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of Company, requesting a ruling that the rental income received by Company from the Property is not passive investment income within the meaning of § 1362(d)(3)(C)(i).
5/3/1999
June 1, 1998, as well as subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of Company, requesting a ruling that the rental income received by Company from the Property is not passive investment income within the meaning of § 1362(d)(3)(C)(i).
5/3/1999
June 1, 1998, as well as subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of Company, requesting a ruling that the rental income received by Company from the Property is not passive investment income within the meaning of § 1362(d)(3)(C)(i).
5/3/1999
June 1, 1998, as well as subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of Company, requesting a ruling that the rental income received by Company from the Property is not passive investment income within the meaning of § 1362(d)(3)(C)(i).
5/3/1999
June 1, 1998, as well as subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of Company, requesting a ruling that the rental income received by Company from the Property is not passive investment income within the meaning of § 1362(d)(3)(C)(i).
5/16/1999
Issue: Whether the provisions of the partnership agreement preventing liquidation constitute an applicable restriction within the meaning of § 2704(b).
5/20/1999
Issues: (1) Whether the taxpayer may rescind an offer in compromise (offer) which was submitted as a result of alleged harassment or coercion by Internal Revenue Service personnel, where the offer in compromise is currently pending and has not been accepted/rejected by the Service. (2) What action should the Service take with regard to the pending offer.
5/3/1999
Issues: (1) What are the federal income tax consequences to a business taxpayer on whose behalf interest subsidy payments are made by the City to a lender? (2) What information reporting requirements, if any, does the City have with respect to the interest subsidy payments?
5/3/1999
On Date 2, the Service sent the taxpayer a "Notice of Determination Concerning Worker Classification Under § 7436", advising the taxpayer that the Service had determined during the course of an employment tax audit that one or more individuals performing services for the taxpayer are to...
5/3/1999
On Date 2, the Service sent the taxpayer a "Notice of Determination Concerning Worker Classification Under § 7436", advising the taxpayer that the Service had determined during the course of an employment tax audit that one or more individuals performing services for the taxpayer are to...
5/3/1999
On Date 2, the Service sent the taxpayer a "Notice of Determination Concerning Worker Classification Under § 7436", advising the taxpayer that the Service had determined during the course of an employment tax audit that one or more individuals performing services for the taxpayer are to...
5/3/1999
On Date 2, the Service sent the taxpayer a "Notice of Determination Concerning Worker Classification Under § 7436", advising the taxpayer that the Service had determined during the course of an employment tax audit that one or more individuals performing services for the taxpayer are to...
5/3/1999
On Date 2, the Service sent the taxpayer a "Notice of Determination Concerning Worker Classification Under § 7436", advising the taxpayer that the Service had determined during the course of an employment tax audit that one or more individuals performing services for the taxpayer are to...
5/3/1999
Tax Court case legal file to you for assignment to an attorney in your office because the designated place for trial is Chicago, Illinois.
4/28/1999
Request for Deviation From Approved National Template for the Federal Employee Identification Numbers (FEINS) Initiative
4/28/1999
January 14, 1999. You requested our views on the tax treatment of payments made by the Fund to qualified individuals in State pursuant to a disaster emergency declared by the governor of State in 1998. Specifically, you have asked (1) whether payments to qualified individuals from the Fund are taxable income to the recipients, and (2) whether State must issue a Form 1099 to the recipients.
4/28/1999
Form 1128, Application to Adopt, Change, or Retain a Tax Year, submitted on behalf of the above-named taxpayer, requesting permission to change its accounting period, for federal income tax purposes, from a taxable year ending September 30, to a taxable year ending December 31, effective for the tax year beginning October 1, The taxpayer has requested that the Form 1128 be considered timely filed under the authority contained in § 301.9100-3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations.
4/28/1999
October 9, 1998, in which a ruling is requested as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction.
4/28/1999
September 9, 1998, submitted on behalf of X by its authorized representative, requesting a ruling under § 1361(b)(1)(D) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/28/1999
January 29, 1999, and other submissions in which you request several rulings concerning the application of § 2702 of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/28/1999
Railroad Retirement Act Tax Status Attached for your information and appropriate action is a copy of a letter from the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the status under the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act of:
4/28/1999
January 9, 1998, submitted on your behalf by your authorized representative, requesting rulings that (i) Corp X is eligible to make an election under § 865(h) of the Internal Revenue Code to treat gain realized from the sale of the stock of FCo as foreign source income, and (ii) any taxes imposed by Country D on the sale would be related to that foreign source gain
4/28/1999
October 7, 1998, submitted on behalf of Grantor, requesting a ruling that proposed Trust will satisfy the requirements of a charitable remainder unitrust under § 664(d)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/28/1999
October 12, 1998, on behalf of Company, requesting relief under § 1362(f) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/28/1999
Requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that A's loss of U.S. citizenship did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
4/28/1999
July 14, 1997, requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that your loss of U.S. citizenship did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
4/28/1999
September 11, 1998, and prior correspondence in which you requested rulings concerning a qualified personal residence trust.
4/28/1999
November 3, 1998, written on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code that X's S corporation status will be effective as of the taxable year beginning D1.
5/11/1999
Issue: As of what date (or dates) does underpayment interest begin to accrue on an underpayment of tax for X's Year 01 where the underpayment is attributable to X's election on 9/15/02 to have an overpayment of tax from Year 01 credited to its estimated tax liability for Year 02 without designating the estimated tax payments to which the overpayment was to be credited.
4/28/1999
April 6, 1998, in which you requested a ruling concerning the application of § 2056A of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/28/1999
August 3, 1998, requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that A's loss of long-term resident status will not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
4/28/1999
October 19, 1998 submitted by X's authorized representative on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/28/1999
Railroad Retirement Act Tax Status Attached for your information and appropriate action is a copy of a letter from the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the status under the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act of:
4/28/1999
Railroad Retirement Act Tax Status Attached for your information and appropriate action is a copy of a letter from the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the status under the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act of:
4/28/1999
October 30, 1998 request for a letter ruling supplementing our letter ruling dated September 30, 1998 and modified November 10, 1998 (collectively, the "Prior Letter Ruling"). The legend abbreviations, Summary of Facts, Completed Transactions, Representations, and Caveats appearing in the Prior Letter Ruling are incorporated by reference.
4/28/1999
September 10, 1998 in which Taxpayer requests an extension of time under Treasury Regulation § 301.9100-3 to file the agreement described in Treas. Reg. § 1.1503-2(g)(2)(i) for the tax year ended December 31, 1995, for Company X.
4/28/1999
September 10, 1998 in which Taxpayer requests an extension of time under Treasury Regulation § 301.9100-3 to file the agreement described in Treas. Reg. § 1.1503-2(g)(2)(i) for the tax year ended December 31, 1995, for Company X.
4/28/1999
September 30, 1998 ruling request and subsequent correspondence submitted on behalf of Taxpayer concerning § 1362(g) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/28/1999
October 6, 1998, requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that A's loss of U.S. citizenship did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
4/28/1999
October 6, 1998, requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that A's loss of U.S. citizenship did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
4/28/1999
Railroad Retirement Act Tax Status Attached for your information and appropriate action is a copy of a letter from the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the status under the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act of:
4/28/1999
Issue: Whether Taxpayer's revised return position properly allocates and apportions its research and development (R&D) expenditures for purposes of computing its allowable foreign tax credit.
4/28/1999
Issue: Whether, on the facts presented, sales of Product A to the United States Government by taxpayer Corp A through FSC generated foreign trading gross receipts within the meaning of § 924 of the Code.
4/28/1999
Requesting a ruling on behalf of Decedent's estate for an extension of time under § 301.9100-1 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to make a reverse qualified terminable interest property (QTIP) election pursuant to § 2652(a)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
5/11/1999
Issue: Whether the transfer by a tax-exempt corporation of its assets into a newly formed, wholly-owned subsidiary followed thereafter by the sale, pursuant to a pre-existing binding commitment, of the subsidiary's stock to an unrelated corporation qualifies under Internal Revenue Code § 351.
5/11/1999
Railroad Retirement Act Tax Status Attached for your information and appropriate action is a copy of a letter from the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the status under the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act of:
4/28/1999
Railroad Retirement Act Tax Status Attached for your information and appropriate action is a copy of a letter from the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the status under the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act of:
4/28/1999
Railroad Retirement Act Tax Status Attached for your information and appropriate action is a copy of a letter from the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the status under the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act of:
4/28/1999
Issue: Whether payments made pursuant to a collateral agreement may be deducted in computing "annual income" on Forms 2261, Collateral Agreement - Future Income and 3439, Statement of Annual Income (Individual)?
4/28/1999
Railroad Retirement Act Tax Status Attached for your information and appropriate action is a copy of a letter from the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the status under the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act of:
4/28/1999
Railroad Retirement Act Tax Status Attached for your information and appropriate action is a copy of a letter from the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the status under the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act of:
4/28/1999
Railroad Retirement Act Tax Status Attached for your information and appropriate action is a copy of a letter from the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the status under the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act of:
4/28/1999
Railroad Retirement Act Tax Status Attached for your information and appropriate action is a copy of a letter from the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the status under the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act of:
4/28/1999
Railroad Retirement Act Tax Status Attached for your information and appropriate action is a copy of a letter from the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the status under the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act of:
5/11/1999
Issues: (1) Whether certain training expenditures and other associated costs of building a workforce for a new division are capital expenditures and not currently deductible ordinary and necessary business expenses under Internal Revenue Code § 162. (2) Whether the aforementioned costs represent start-up expenses under I.R.C. § 195.
4/28/1999
Issue: Whether a Form 872 (Consent to Extend the Time to Assess Tax) is a valid waiver when it refers to the successor in interest of B, but the cover letter correctly refers to B.
4/28/1999
Issue: Whether the United States Tax Court has jurisdiction over a year for which a notice of deficiency was issued but no deficiency was determined.
4/28/1999
Issue: Whether a levy on a brokerage firm reaches stock and mutual fund shares if the firm was not in possession of any certificates representing the shares of stock but was managing them electronically.
4/28/1999
Issue: Are individuals paid by a state or local government agency fee-based public officials?
5/11/1999
On Date 2, the Service sent the taxpayer a "Notice of Determination Concerning Worker Classification Under § 7436", advising the taxpayer that the Service had determined during the course of an employment tax audit that one or more individuals performing services for the taxpayer are to be legally classified as employees for purposes of the federal employment taxes under subtitle C...
4/28/1999
On Date 2, the Service sent the taxpayer a "Notice of Determination Concerning Worker Classification Under § 7436", advising the taxpayer that the Service had determined during the course of an employment tax audit that one or more individuals performing services for the taxpayer are to be legally classified as employees for purposes of the federal employment taxes under subtitle C...
4/28/1999
October 27, 1998 letter, and prior correspondence, from your authorized representative requesting gift, estate, and generation-skipping transfer tax rulings concerning a proposed transaction.
5/11/1999
Form 1128, Application to Adopt, Change, or Retain a Tax Year, submitted on behalf of the above-named taxpayer, requesting permission to change its accounting period, for federal income tax purposes, from a taxable year ending September 30, to a taxable year ending December 31, effective for the tax year beginning October 1, 1997.
5/11/1999
Issue: Whether interest netting under Internal Revenue Code § 6621(d) is available to A under the facts detailed below.
4/28/1999
Issues: (1) Under the terms of Decedent's will and revocable trust, are estate taxes to be equitably apportioned under State law? (2) Does § 2207B, prior to amendment by the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, require that Decedent's revocable Family Trust reimburse the probate estate for any federal estate taxes paid that are attributable to the inclusion of the value of the trust corpus in the gross estate?
4/28/1999
Issue: Is the net profits royalty interest which E corporation received from C an economic interest under § 611 of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/28/1999
Issue: Whether the permanent bonds issued by City to fund the construction by Operator of a facility (the "Facility") to recycle into qualify as exempt facility bonds under § 142(a) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/21/1999
Issue: When the Service satisfies a taxpayer's outstanding liability by crediting an overpayment pursuant to § 6402(a), on what date is the outstanding liability deemed "paid"?
4/20/1999
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Maryland Comptroller of the Treasury This is in response to your request dated December 30, 1998.
4/20/1999
Issue: Whether an acquiring corporation, a party to a corporate reorganization, can substitute itself as the reporting agent for the former customers of a target corporation for federal employment tax deposits ("FTDs")?
4/20/1999
Issues: (1) Whether a settlement that disallows partnership losses and allows a theft loss to the partners in the amount invested in the partnership is subject to consistent settlement pursuant to Internal Revenue Code § 6224(c). (2) Whether spouses who signed and filed a joint return are required to jointly execute a settlement agreement.(3) Whether the failure to allow a spouse to settle separately violates a taxpayer's right to consistent settlement pursuant to I.R.C. § 6224(c).
4/20/1999
October 20, 1998, you asked our views regarding a taxpayer's ability to waive the notice requirement under Internal Revenue Code § 6672(b). This document is not to be cited as precedent.
4/20/1999
Issues: (1) Can or should the Service use administrative procedures to collect tax liabilities, for which Chapter 13 bankruptcy estate assets were sold under a modification of the automatic stay, where sale proceeds were erroneously refunded? (2) What is/are the available remedy(ies) for recovery of the erroneous refund?
4/20/1999
Request for information regarding the use of per diem rates to substantiate travel expenses, particularly with regards to the use by independent contractors of the federal lodging rate to substantiate deductions.
4/20/1999
August 3, 1998, and subsequent correspondence, requesting relief under § 1362(f) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/20/1999
November 9, 1998, written on behalf of X, requesting a ruling that X be given an extension of time to elect to be treated as a corporation for federal tax purposes.
4/20/1999
Requesting a ruling under § 42(n) of the Internal Revenue Code and § 1.42-13(b) of the Income Tax Regulations to allow Partnership and Agency to correct an administrative error or omission in an allocation of low-income housing credit dollar amounts.
4/20/1999
August 17, 1998, as well as subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of Company, requesting a ruling that the rental income received by Company from the Properties is not passive investment income within the meaning of § 1362(d)(3)(C)(i).
4/20/1999
Requesting a ruling under § 42(n) of the Internal Revenue Code and § 1.42-13(b) of the Income Tax Regulations to allow Partnership and Agency to correct an administrative error or omission in an allocation of low-income housing credit dollar amounts.
4/20/1999
August 10, 1998, requesting a ruling on behalf of Company under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/20/1999
August 11, 1998, in which you requested rulings as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. Additional information was provided in a letter dated November 20, 1998 and submitted on November 30, 1998. Specifically, you requested rulings under § 355 of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/20/1999
June 23, 1998, that was submitted by your authorized representative requesting a private letter ruling concerning the federal income tax consequences of property contributions to and distributions from a partnership.
4/20/1999
June 23, 1998, that was submitted by your authorized representative requesting a private letter ruling concerning the federal income tax consequences of property contributions to and distributions from a partnership.
4/20/1999
June 23, 1998, that was submitted by your authorized representative requesting a private letter ruling concerning the federal income tax consequences of property contributions to and distributions from a partnership.
4/26/1999
November 24, 1998, in which you request a ruling from this office on behalf of X. You request that we rule that certain vehicles are not highway vehicles and that the chassis used to manufacture those vehicles may be purchased free of the tax imposed on the first retail sale of heavy trucks and trailers by § 4051 of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/20/1999
July 1, 1997, requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that A's loss of U.S. citizenship did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code. Additional information was submitted in letters dated October 21 and November 3, 1997, and July 29, November 17, November 19, and December 1, 1998.
4/26/1999
September 23, 1998, and subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of the Partnership by the Partnership's authorized representative. In that letter, rulings are requested regarding the rehabilitation of a building financed by tax-exempt bonds for purposes of § 42(h)(4)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/20/1999
September 21, 1998, requesting a ruling concerning the distribution of assets from a qualified domestic trust (QDOT). This letter responds to that request.
4/20/1999
May 12, 1997, on behalf of A, requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that A's loss of U.S. citizenship did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
4/20/1999
August 18, 1998, requesting, on behalf of the taxpayers identified above, an extension of time under § 301.9100-1 through 301.9100-3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to file an election. Purchaser and Seller are requesting an extension to file a "section 338(h)(10) election" under §§ 338(g) and 338(h)(10) of the Internal Revenue Code and § 1.338(h)(10)-1(d) of the Income Tax Regulations (the "Election"), with respect to Purchaser's acquisition of the Target stock on Date A.
4/20/1999
July 2, 1997, submitted by your authorized representative requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that your loss of long-term resident status did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
4/20/1999
July 2, 1997, submitted by your authorized representative requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that your loss of long-term residence status did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
4/20/1999
June 29, 1997, on behalf of A, requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that A's loss of U.S. citizenship did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
4/20/1999
March 18, 1998, as supplemented by your subsequent correspondence dated August 10, 1998, August 25, 1998, September 22, 1998, October 6, 1998, November 30, 1998, and December 10, 1998.
4/20/1999
September 28, 1998, for rulings relating to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. You submitted additional information in letters dated November 24, 1998 and January 14, 1999.
4/20/1999
September 18, 1998, and subsequent correspondence dated January 15, 1999, requesting rulings on whether distributions made by Trust to an educational institution for educational expenses of Taxpayer may be used to compute the Hope Scholarship Credit or the Lifetime Learning Credit under § 25A of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/20/1999
September 18, 1998, and subsequent correspondence dated January 15, 1999, requesting rulings on whether distributions made by Trust to an educational institution for educational expenses of Taxpayer may be used to compute the Hope Scholarship Credit or the Lifetime Learning Credit under § 25A of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/20/1999
July 4, 1997, requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that A's surrender of her U.S. Alien Registration Card (Green Card) did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
4/20/1999
August 21, 1998 for rulings on the federal income tax consequences of completed and proposed transactions. Additional information was submitted in letters dated November 12, December 4, December 8, and December 31, 1998, and January 13, 1999.
4/20/1999
August 12, 1998, requesting, or behalf of the taxpayers identified above, an extension of time under § 301.9100-1 through 301.9100- 3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to file an election.
4/20/1999
October 22, 1998, and subsequent correspondence, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/20/1999
June 20, 1997, on behalf of A, requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that A's loss of U.S. citizenship did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
4/20/1999
December 30, 1998, submitted on behalf of X requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/20/1999
June 26, 1998, and subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of Company, requesting a ruling that the rental income received by Company from the Properties will not be passive investment income within the meaning of § 1362(d)(3)(C)(i).
4/20/1999
October 2, 1998, requesting a ruling on behalf of Taxpayer regarding whether income derived from his rendering of personal services as an employee of X Corporation on Johnston Island during Year 4 may be excluded from his gross income under § 931(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 ("Internal Revenue Code")?
4/20/1999
Form 1128, Application to Adopt, Change, or Retain a Tax Year, submitted on behalf of the above-named taxpayer, requesting permission to change its accounting period, for federal income tax purposes, from a taxable year ending September 30, to a taxable year ending December 31, effective for the tax year beginning October 1, 1997.
4/20/1999
September 21, 1998, requesting rulings as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. Additional information was received on December 4, 1998, January 11 and 26, 1999.
4/20/1999
July 14, 1998, and previous correspondence, submitted on behalf of A, conservator of the estate of X, requesting a ruling under § 1014 of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/20/1999
Issues: (1) Whether certain amounts paid by Company A to Company B in connection with the Insurance Program during the taxable years ended Date 2, and Date 3, are deductible as insurance premiums under Internal Revenue Code § 162. 1(2) If the amounts at issue are deductible as insurance premiums under § 162, whether such payments are nevertheless not deductible in the taxable years at issue because it cannot be determined that the requisite levels of risk shifting and risk sharing occurred during those taxable years.(3) If the amounts at issue are not deductible as insurance premiums under § 162, whether such amounts, to the extent they exceed claims actually paid for the taxable years at issue, create an addition to Company A's capital investment in Company C that increases Company A's cost basis in Company C.
4/20/1999
October 16, 1998, and subsequent letters, submitted by your and Taxpayer's authorized representatives, requesting a private letter ruling under § 42(n)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code and § 1.42-13(b) of the Income Tax Regulations to correct an administrative error in an allocation of the low-income housing credit dollar amounts.
4/20/1999
August 5, 1998, you requested rulings concerning the generation-skipping transfer tax consequences relating to the clarification of the Trust.
4/20/1999
Nominee - Offer in Compromise This responds to your request dated October 19, 1998.
4/20/1999
Issues: (1) Whether a nominee may file an offer in compromise on behalf of the taxpayer liable for the assessment. (2) Whether nominee liens may be compromised under Internal Revenue Code § 7122.
4/20/1999
July 21, 1998, as well as subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of Company by your authorized representative, requesting a ruling that Company's rental income from the Property is not passive investment income within the meaning of § 1362(d)(3)(C)(i) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/20/1999
September 14, 1998, submitted on behalf of Corporation, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Code that Corporation's S corporation election will be effective as of D1.
4/20/1999
September 18, 1998, submitted on behalf of Corporation, requesting a ruling on whether Corporation's gross revenue from leasing the Properties is passive investment income under § 1362(d)(3)(C)(i) of the Internal Revenue Code.
5/3/1999
Issues: (1) Who is the proper party to execute Form(s) 906 for the former Corp A & Subsidiaries consolidated group for taxable years C and D? 1a. What is proper language to use on the Form(s) 906 for the Corp A & Subsidiaries consolidated group's taxable years C and D? (2) Who is the proper party to execute Form(s) 906 for the former Corp B & Subsidiaries consolidated group for the taxable years B through C and the short D tax year? 2a. What is proper language to use on the Form(s) 906 for the former Corp B & Subsidiaries consolidated group for the taxable years B through C and the short D tax year?(3) Who is the proper party to execute Form(s) 906 for the Corp C & Subsidiaries consolidated group for the taxable year D? 3a. What is proper language to use on the Form(s) 906 for the Corp C & Subsidiaries consolidated group for the taxable year D?
4/20/1999
Issues: (1) Who is the proper party to execute Forms 872 (Consent to Extend the Time to Assess Tax) for the Corp A & Subsidiaries consolidated group for its taxable period A1? 1a. What is proper language to use on the Form 872 for the Corp A & Subsidiaries consolidated group's taxable period A1? (2) Who is the proper party to execute Forms 872 (Consent to Extend the Time to Assess Tax) for the Corp B & Subsidiaries consolidated group for its taxable period B1? 2a. What is proper language to use on the Form 872 for the Corp B & Subsidiaries consolidated group's taxable period B1?(3) Who is the proper party to execute Forms 872 (Consent to Extend the Time to Assess Tax) for the Corp C & Subsidiaries consolidated group for its taxable period C1? 3a. What is proper language to use on the Form 872 for the Corp C & Subsidiaries consolidated group's taxable period C1?(4) Who is the proper party to execute Forms 872 (Consent to Extend the Time to Assess Tax) for the Corp C & Subsidiaries consolidated group for its taxable period C2? 4a. What is proper language to use on the Form 872 for the Corp C & Subsidiaries consolidated group's taxable period C2?
4/20/1999
September 1, 1998 letter and subsequent correspondence, requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/20/1999
August 21, 1998, and subsequent correspondence submitted on behalf of X by X's authorized representative, requesting a ruling under § 1362(f) of the Internal Revenue Code.
5/3/1999
Issue: Whether the effect of § 601 of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Authorization Act of 1994, on taxpayer's intrastate operating authorities entitles taxpayer to a deductible loss under Internal Revenue Code § 165.
4/20/1999
Issue: This is in response to your E Mail of concerning the proper treatment of payments an employer makes to its employees for use of the employees. In addition to your E Mail, you provided copies of materials from X, which we have enclosed. This response will discuss _ and then whether the arrangement by X is an accountable plan.
5/3/1999
Issues: (1) Whether the separate existence of Foreign Sub should be respected. (2) Whether income received by Foreign Sub from U.S. Sub under the t Subcontract constitutes foreign base company services income.(3) Whether any of the income received by Foreign Sub from U.S. Sub under the t Subcontract will be excluded from Foreign Sub's subpart F income on account of it qualifying as U.S. source effectively connected income.(4) Whether Internal Revenue Code § 482 requires a reallocation of income from Foreign Sub to U.S. Sub.(5) What legal theories are relevant in determining whether a United States corporation is liable for the taxes imposed under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) and the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) with respect to United States nationals performing services for a foreign subsidiary.
5/4/1999
Assistant Chief Counsel (Employee Benefits and Exempt Organizations) (Patricia M. McDermott) Field Service Advice [199917010] responds to the issues raised in your memorandum.
4/20/1999
Issue: Whether rental payments received by petitioners from Corporation are includible in net earnings from self-employment under § 1402(a)(1) of the Code.
5/3/1999
Issue: Whether earned retrospective rate debits may be included in the unearned premium reserve on an estimated basis for the purpose of calculating the inclusion in earned premium income of 20 per cent of the year's increase in the unearned premium reserve or should be reported as increasing earned premiums and gross premiums written for the year of the insurance coverage.
5/3/1999
Issue: Whether rental payments received by B from A are includible in net earnings from self-employment under § 1402(a)(1) of the Code.
4/20/1999
Issue: Whether rental payments received by B from A are includible in net earnings from self-employment under § 1402(a)(1) of the Code.
4/20/1999
Issues: (1) Whether the Service may retain the amount paid by the taxpayers pursuant to a joint offer in compromise for income tax liability for Year 2 and Year 12, where the statute of limitations for collection of Year 2 taxes had expired prior to the submission and acceptance of the offer and the amount of money paid with the offer exceeded the taxpayers' Year 12 tax liability. (2) Whether the Service may retain the amount paid by the taxpayer husband pursuant to an offer in compromise for his separate tax liability for Period A.(3) Whether the Service may retain any refunds otherwise due to the taxpayers for years prior to and including the year in which the two offers in compromise were accepted by the Service.
4/20/1999
Issues: (1) Is interest on a tax refund computed under § 6611(e)(1) or § 6611(e)(3) of the Code if the tax return shows a balance due, but the Service issues a refund because the taxpayer made an error or errors on the return which the Service corrects? (2) Is interest on a tax refund computed under § 6611(e)(1) of the Code, § 6611(e)(3) of the Code, or both sections, if a return is filed claiming a refund, and the Service determines that the taxpayer is entitled to a larger refund than the amount claimed on the return?(3) In the case of a tax refund resulting from a Service-initiated adjustment under § 6611(e)(3) of the Code, does the interest-free period under § 6611(e)(3) include the interest-free period under § 6611(b)(2)?
4/26/1999
Issue: Whether seven discretionary trusts established by the decedent in 1969 are includible in the decedent's gross estate under § 2036(a)(1) and § 2038 of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/16/1999
Issue: Whether the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") may use civil enforcement procedures even though a taxpayer who was convicted of a criminal tax violation is making restitution payments pursuant to an expired district court order?
4/16/1999
Issue: Whether nontaxable disability income attributable to premiums paid by an employee is included in the computation for the earned income credit (EIC).
4/16/1999
Issue: What litigation hazards exist in asserting that machines which are held in storage for future installation have not been "placed in service" allowing depreciation deductions to begin?
4/16/1999
Request filed on behalf of the above-named taxpayer regarding the late filing of a Form 8716, Election To Have a Tax Year Other Than a Required Tax Year. The taxpayer has requested that its late-filed Form 8716 be considered timely filed under authority contained in § 301.9100-3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations.
4/16/1999
July 4, 1997, requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that A's surrender of his U.S. Alien Registration Card (Green Card) did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code. Additional information was submitted in letters dated November 5, 6, 25 and December 15, 1997.
4/16/1999
July 29, 1998 and subsequent correspondence, on behalf of Employer, requesting a ruling concerning the proposed deferred compensation plan ("Plan") under which Employer intends to provide benefits under § 457(b) and § 457(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and the related trusts thereunder.
4/16/1999
December 30, 1998, submitted on behalf of X, requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code. Facts X was incorporated on Date (1) The shareholders of X desired that X elect S corporation treatment for X, effective on Date 1, but the election to be treated as an S corporation was not timely filed.
4/16/1999
August 11, 1998, submitted by your authorized representative requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that your loss of U.S. citizenship did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
4/16/1999
January 19, 1999, submitted on behalf of X and requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code. FACTS X was incorporated on Date (1) The shareholders desired S corporation treatment for X effective on Date 1, but an election to be treated as an S corporation was not timely filed.
4/16/1999
October 22, 1998 request for a ruling under §§ 336 and 337 of the Internal Revenue Code regarding the proposed transaction described below. A prior ruling letter was issued in this matter on December 1, 1998 (PLR-111768- 98) (the "Prior Ruling Letter").
4/16/1999
September 15, 1998 ruling request and subsequent correspondence submitted on behalf of Taxpayer concerning § 1362(g) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/16/1999
Form 1128, Application to Adopt, Change, or Retain a Tax Year, submitted on behalf of the above-named taxpayer, requesting permission to change its accounting period, for federal income tax purposes, from a taxable year ending October 31, to a taxable year ending December 31, effective for the tax year beginning November 1, 1997.
4/16/1999
January 4, 1998, and prior correspondence in which you requested rulings concerning a qualified personal residence trust.
4/16/1999
October 26, 1998, and subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/16/1999
July 21, 1998 request for rulings on the Federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. Additional information was submitted in letters dated December 10 and December 29, 1998, and January 20, 1999.
4/16/1999
November 1, 1998, submitted on behalf of X requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/16/1999
November 30, 1998, and prior correspondence in which you requested a ruling under § 2652 of the Internal Revenue Code and § 301.9100-1 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations.
4/16/1999
Issues: (1) Whether H's disposition of his interest in the W Trust is subject to gift tax. (2) Whether the agreements in Year 3 and Year 4 between S and H resulted in a gift from H to S.(3) Whether the agreement in Year 4 between S and H resulted in estate tax consequences.(4) Whether H made an indirect gift that benefited the Descendants' Trust when in his capacity as general partner, he failed to require reimbursement of losses before he resigned as general partner, resulting in the depletion of his capital accounts to the benefit of the capital accounts of the Descendants' Trust.(5) Whether the Service may assert transferee liability for the transfers made pursuant to the Year 4 settlement agreement that are subject to estate and gift taxes.
4/16/1999
September 18, 1998, submitted on behalf of X by X's authorized representative, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/16/1999
May 8, 1998, and supplemental correspondence, regarding the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. Specifically, a ruling is requested that the conversion of a mutual insurance company to a stock insurance company will qualify under § 368(a)(1)(E) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/16/1999
September 2, 1998, submitted on behalf of X requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/16/1999
October 13, 1998, submitted on behalf of X requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/16/1999
Requesting a ruling under § 42(n) of the Internal Revenue Code and § 1.42- 13(b) of the Income Tax Regulations to allow Agency, Partnership, and General Partner to correct an administrative error or omission in an allocation of low-income housing credit dollar amounts.
4/16/1999
September 15, 1998, and subsequent correspondence, requesting that X be given an extension of time in which to elect to treat S1, S2, and S3 each as a qualified subchapter S subsidiary (QSSS) under § 1361(b)(3)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/16/1999
August 31, 1998 and subsequent correspondence submitted by you as authorized representative of X on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/16/1999
June 30, 1998 requesting, on behalf of the taxpayers identified above, an extension of time under §§ 301.9100-1 and 301.9100-3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to file an election.
4/16/1999
July 10, 1998, and subsequent correspondence, written on X's behalf, requesting inadvertent termination relief under § 1362(f) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/16/1999
Representative's request, dated September 4, 1998, that X be given an extension of time in which to elect to treat its subsidiary as a qualified subchapter S subsidiary (QSSS) under § 1361(b)(3)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/16/1999
April 15, 1998, requesting rulings on the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. Additional information was submitted in letters dated October 2, November 18, December 3, December 16, and December 28, 1998.
6/8/1999
Issues: (1) Whether the Tax Court has jurisdiction to redetermine adjustments set forth in an untimely notice of final partnership administrative adjustment. (2) Whether, under the facts described below, the Tax Court has jurisdiction to consider the Service's disallowance of the taxpayers' administrative adjustment request.
4/16/1999
Issue: Should the Internal Revenue Service assess a liability reported on an amended tax return, if the taxpayer has conditioned assessment of that liability on approval of a claim for another tax year and that latter claim cannot be allowed?
4/19/1999
February 18, 1998, requesting a ruling concerning the income and employment tax consequences of an arrangement that the Company proposes to implement to reimburse certain employee business expenses incurred by certain of its employees (the "Plan").
4/16/1999
Requesting a ruling on the application of the rules concerning predecessor and successor employers contained in § 3121(a)(1) and 3306(b)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code , dealing with the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) and Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA), respectively.
4/16/1999
November 6, 1998, for a letter ruling concerning the availability of the exemption from Medicare tax contained in § 3121(u)(2)(C) of the Internal Revenue Code to certain school district employees after the unification of two school districts to form a new school district.
4/16/1999
Issue: Whether Taxpayer properly claimed a loss upon the distribution of notes from lower-tier subs to Sub 1, followed by a contribution by Sub 1 of such notes to a newly-formed corporation, Newco, which was not a member of Taxpayer's consolidated group (because there were other (possibly) unrelated transferors). You have also raised a question of whether these transferors were in fact unrelated to Taxpayer. If they were not (because they were in fact acting on behalf of Taxpayer), then Newco would be a member of Taxpayer's consolidated group and Taxpayer would not recognize a loss upon the contribution of the notes by Sub 1 to Newco.
4/16/1999
Issues: (1) In the event that respondent wins the X phantom gain issue, what arguments should respondent raise regarding the court's discretion to decide the Treasury Regulation § 1.1502-20 issue. (2) Whether the LDRs were promulgated in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act.(3) What is the authority for applying the LDRs retroactively.(4) Whether Treas. Reg. § 1.1502-20 is a legislative regulation and thus entitled to greater judicial deference.
6/4/1999
Issue: Whether X realized forgone interest income under Internal Revenue Code § 7872 in the amounts of $a and $b for its tax years ending on Date 1 and Date 2, respectively. Specifically: (1) whether the loan from X to Corp can be characterized as an indirect loan between a corporation and its shareholders under I.R.C. § 7872(c)(1)(C); (2) whether the loans from X to each of PS1, PS2, PS3 and PS4 (the "borrowing partnerships") can be characterized as indirect loans from X to its shareholders under I.R.C. § 7872(c)(1)(C); and (3) whether I.R.C. § 7872(c)(1)(C) applies to the loans from X to each of B and C.
4/19/1999
Issues: (1) Whether X is entitled to deductions under § 163 for unpaid and accrued interest on a% junior subordinated debentures (a% debentures) issued to fund a leveraged buyout of X's stock on Date 1 and a% debentures issued Date 2 and Date 3 for taxable years 1 through 4 inclusive. (2) Whether the discharge granted to X under 11 U.S.C. § 1411 terminated X's liability to pay any of the interest that may have accrued from Date 4 through Date 5, inclusive on the following obligations: a. ESOP loan facility due year(5) b. b% senior notes due Date(6) c. c% senior subordinated debentures due Date(7) d. d% subordinated debentures due Date (8) e. Advances related to a% debentures due Date 9.
4/16/1999
Issue: (1) Whether it is appropriate for the IRS examination team to request information from A to respond to a request for information made by Country Z under the exchange of information provisions of the Treaty, relating to issues not currently being examined by the IRS for Period X, and relating to taxable years of A not yet under IRS examination, Period Y? If a request is appropriate, what procedures should be followed in requesting the information from A? (2) If it is appropriate for the IRS to request the information from A, whether making the request will constitute the initiation of an examination of Period Y?
4/16/1999
Request that we reconsider our previous advice regarding the use of a nominee lien or levy.
4/30/1999
Issues: (1) Under what theory or policy, if any, may the Service refund a gift tax payment made by an estate on behalf of the decedent's incompetent surviving spouse based upon an erroneous second gift tax return, when the estate, but not the surviving spouse filed a timely refund claim and the Service did not timely notify the estate or the surviving spouse that the deceased spouse had already filed a gift tax return accounting for the gift tax obligation. (2) What action should the Service take to protect itself from a whipsaw claim by the surviving spouse.
4/16/1999
Issues: (1) Whether Corp C should be included in Corp B.'s CFC group, as defined in § 956A(d)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code, where Corp B holds no stock of Corp C but holds a note exceeding 50 percent of the value of the assets of Corp C. (2) Whether, for purposes of determining the amount of assets of the CFC group, the adjusted basis of the assets is increased by unamortized research and experimental (R&E) expenditures because Corp A elected to capitalize and amortize such R&E expenditures under § 59(e) of the Code.
4/12/1999
July 6, 1998, and prior correspondence submitted on your behalf by your authorized representative requesting a ruling under § 2519 of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/7/1999
October 17, 1998, requesting a ruling on behalf of Company under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/8/1999
Issues: (1) Did taxpayers owning property that was damaged or destroyed by the bombing have a claim for reimbursement to which there was a reasonable prospect of recovery in 1995? (2) Under § 1033, may taxpayers defer recognition of gain realized on payments received under the Oklahoma City bombing disaster relief measures?
4/7/1999
Request for advice on the proper application of "related transactions" as used in Internal Revenue Code § 6050I(a)(2) to the following situation. The taxpayer is a wholesale distributor of food and supplies to various restaurants.
4/7/1999
August 26, 1997, requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that A's loss of long-term resident status did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
4/7/1999
August 25, 1998, submitted on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/7/1999
September 11, 1998, requesting an extension of time under §§ 301.9100-1 and 301.9100-3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to file elections.
4/12/1999
March 3, 1998, and subsequent correspondence submitted by your authorized representatives requesting the following rulings concerning the effect of a proposed transfer of an insurance policy to a charitable remainder trust:
4/16/1999
December 11, 1998, that was submitted on behalf of Agency and Partnership, requesting a letter ruling under § 42(n)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code and § 1.42-13(b) of the Income Tax Regulations to correct an administrative error in an allocation of the low-income housing credit dollar amounts.
4/7/1999
January 15, 1998, requesting a ruling that Fund did not change its method of accounting for market discount by attaching certain election statements to its income tax return for the tax year ending on January 31, 1997.
4/7/1999
Form 1128, Application to Adopt, Change, or Retain a Tax Year, submitted on behalf of the above-named taxpayer, an individual, requesting permission to change her accounting period, for federal income tax purposes, from a fiscal year ending June 30, to a calendar year ending December 31, effective for the tax year beginning July 1, The taxpayer has requested that the Form 1128 be considered timely filed under the authority contained in § 301.9100-3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations.
4/12/1999
September 11, 1998, on behalf of Purchaser, requesting an extension of time under §§ 301.9100-1 and 301.9100- 3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to file an election.
4/7/1999
January 4, 1999, and prior correspondence, requesting a ruling for TRUST under § 721 of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/7/1999
Form 1128, Application to Adopt, Change, or Retain a Tax Year, submitted on behalf of the above-named taxpayer, requesting permission to change its accounting period, for federal income tax purposes, from a taxable year ending May 31, to a taxable year ending June 30, effective for the tax year beginning June 1, 1998.
4/7/1999
Issues: (1) If Company, the maker of an option to buy shares of its own common stock, contributes the option to Foundation and Foundation sells it to an unrelated charity described in § 501(c)(3) of the Code, may Company take a charitable contribution deduction under § 170 of the Code upon the exercise of the option by the charity? (2) If so, what is the amount of Company's charitable contribution deduction?
4/13/1999
Issues: (1) If Company, the maker of an option to buy shares of its own common stock, contributes the option to Foundation and Foundation sells it to an unrelated charity described in § 501(c)(3) of the Code, may Company take a charitable contribution deduction under § 170 of the Code upon the exercise of the option by the charity? (2) If so, what is the amount of Company's charitable contribution deduction?
4/7/1999
Request for rulings concerning the application of § 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code, and the regulations thereunder, to certain compensation plans of Partnership, A, B, and C before and after a proposed transaction that will result in Partnership's activities being conducted by a corporation.
4/7/1999
Response to the request, dated February 3, 1998, for rulings pursuant to § 368(a)(1)(C) of the Internal Revenue Code on behalf of the above-captioned taxpayers.
4/7/1999
September 1, 1998, requesting a ruling on behalf of Company under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/7/1999
October 29, 1998, requesting a ruling on behalf of Company under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code. The information submitted discloses that Company was incorporated on a in State. Company has two shareholders, Shareholders.
4/7/1999
August 21, 1998, requesting a ruling on behalf of Company under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/7/1999
Request dated October 2, 1998, for rulings on the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. You submitted additional information in letters dated November 19, 1998, December 17, 1998, and December 31, 1998.
4/7/1999
May 7, 1998, requesting a ruling as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. Additional information was submitted in letters dated July 27, October 2, November 18, and December 2, 1998.
4/12/1999
September 25, 1998, requesting a ruling on behalf of Company under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/7/1999
May 29, 1998, and subsequent correspondence requesting a ruling on behalf of X regarding the tax consequences of the Plan.
4/12/1999
September 9, 1998, requesting rulings as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. Additional information was received on December 1, 1998 and January 7, 1999.
4/7/1999
April 24, 1998, in which rulings were requested as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. Additional information was submitted in and with letters dated June 19, November 18, and December 23, 1998.
4/7/1999
Request of Date B, as supplemented, submitted by the Acting Director of Insurance of State C as Liquidator of the Estate of Company A regarding the federal tax treatment under the Internal Revenue Code of certain transactions described below.
4/7/1999
October 28, 1998, that was submitted on behalf of Agency and Partnership, requesting a letter ruling under § 42(n)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code and § 1.42-13(b) of the Income Tax Regulations to correct an administrative error in an allocation of the low-income housing credit dollar amounts.
4/7/1999
October 28, 1998, that was submitted on behalf of Agency and Partnership, requesting a letter ruling under § 42(n)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code and § 1.42-13(b) of the Income Tax Regulations to correct an administrative error in an allocation of the low-income housing credit dollar amounts.
4/7/1999
October 28, 1998, that was submitted on behalf of Agency and Partnership, requesting a letter ruling under § 42(n)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code and § 1.42-13(b) of the Income Tax Regulations to correct an administrative error in an allocation of the low-income housing credit dollar amounts.
4/7/1999
September 8, 1998, requesting rulings under § 280G of the Internal Revenue Code. Specifically you requested a ruling that, under the facts outlined below, there will not be a change in the ownership or effective control of Corporation X, nor a change in the ownership of a substantial portion of the assets of Corporation X within the meaning of § 280G(b)(2) of the Code.
4/7/1999
July 27, 1998, which was supplemented by your letters of October 28 and December 16, 1998, in which your authorized representatives requested a ruling that distributions paid by Corporation X to Parent are entitled to a five percent reduced rate of withholding pursuant to Article VI(3) of the income tax convention that is currently in effect between the United States and Country G (the Treaty).
4/7/1999
July 29, 1998, and additional information, submitted on behalf of X, requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/7/1999
May 7, 1998, in which rulings were requested regarding the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction.
4/7/1999
June 19, 1998, requesting an extension of time to elect to treat B as an entity that is disregarded as an entity separate from its owner for federal tax purposes.
4/7/1999
Pursuant to a power of attorney on file in this office, this responds to a letter submitted on behalf of X that requests relief under §1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/7/1999
Requesting an extension of time under § 301.9100-1 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to change the amount of a qualified terminable interest property (QTIP) election under § 2056(b)(7) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/7/1999
Requesting a ruling under § 1362(f) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4/7/1999
July 13, 1998, requesting rulings about the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction.
4/8/1999
This Field Service Advice responds to your memorandum Field Service Advice is not binding on Examination or Appeals and is not a final case determination.
4/16/1999
Issues: (1) Whether advertising and salary credits received by Taxpayer from various vendors are properly treated as "trade and other discounts" or whether such credits are properly treated as allowances for the provision of services. (2) Whether Taxpayer could change its method of treating the advertising and salary credits by using the automatic change procedures of Rev. Proc. 9449, 1994-2 C.B. 705 for Fiscal Year 1.
4/7/1999
December 3, 1998, and prior correspondence, requesting rulings under § 707 of the Internal Revenue Code concerning the proposed contribution of an apartment complex (the "Property") to a partnership.
4/8/1999
Issues: (1) Whether the P group correctly applied the basis shifting rules of Internal Revenue Code § 267(f) in determining S3's loss on the sale of the F2 stock to X? (2) Whether the Service can assert the application of I.R.C. § 269 to S3's acquisition of the F2 stock.
4/7/1999
Issue: Whether the Service erred in issuing a joint refund check to A and B.
4/8/1999
Issue: Whether Purchaser had an "option to acquire" the stock of Taxpayer and therefore constructively owned the stock in Year (1) §318(a)(4)
4/8/1999
Issues: (1) Whether income derived from rendering personal services by taxpayer (Taxpayer) as an employee of X Corporation on Johnston Island during Year 4 may be excluded by the Taxpayer from her gross income under § 931(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (Internal Revenue Code) ? (2) Alternatively, whether the taxpayer can qualify for the I.R.C. § 911 "foreign earned income exclusion" on the basis that Johnston Island is a "foreign country" under I.R.C. § 911(b)(1)(A)?
4/7/1999
Issue: (1) Whether the Service should challenge taxpayer's assertion that S1's liquidation into FP, and FP's formation of S2, qualified as a tax-free reorganization under § 368(a)(1)(D) to which § 381(a) applied. (2) Whether on FP's cancellation of debt that S1 owed to FP, S1 recognized cancellation of indebtedness (C.O.D.) income that was excluded from S1's gross income under § 108(a), as a result of which S1 was required to reduce tax attributes under § 108(b). (3) Whether S1 must recognize gain by virtue of the application of: (1) § 367(a) to S1's distribution to FP of the S2 stock under § 361(c), and (2) § 367(b) to FP's contribution of debt to the capital of S1.
4/16/1999
Issues: (1) Whether amounts paid or accrued to A, a captive insurance company, by "brother- sister" corporations are deductible insurance premiums under Internal Revenue Code § 162. (2) Whether the Service continues as a matter of law to defend the disallowance of deductions of "premiums" paid by brother sister corporations.(3) Whether the present case is distinguishable from Humana Inc. v. Commissioner, 881 F. 2d 247 (6 th Cir. 1989) and Kidde Industries, Inc. v. United States, 40 Fed. Cl. 42 (1997), two cases which allowed deductions for brother-sister premiums.(4) Whether the facts in the present case are adequately developed to support pursuing the brother-sister issue.
4/16/1999
Issues: (1) Whether the "payment option" granted in the asset purchase agreement between S and T should be treated as a valid option. (2) Whether S's change in treatment of the $x1 payment in Date 1 from treatment as capitalized expense and amortized over 15 years pursuant to § 197 to treatment as a § 1234 deduction in the year incurred, is a change in method of accounting for which the permission of the Commissioner is required.
4/8/1999
Issue: Whether interest on a personal representative's liability accrues until the date of the Notice of Fiduciary Liability is issued or the time the liability is paid.
4/12/1999
Issues: (1) Under the terms of Decedent's will and revocable trust, are estate taxes to be equitably apportioned under State law, or are the estate taxes to be paid from the residuary probate estate without apportionment? (2) Does § 2206 of the Internal Revenue Code require that Decedent's irrevocable insurance trust reimburse the probate estate for any federal estate taxes paid that are attributable to insurance proceeds included in the gross estate?

SEARCH:

You can search the entire Tax Professionals section, or all of Uncle Fed's Tax*Board. For a more focused search, put your search word(s) in quotes.





1999 Written Determinations Main | Written Determinations Main

For Tax Professionals Main | Home

  to download the Adobe Acrobat PDF Reader