Chief Counsel's Written Determinations Issued from 200015000 to 200019999

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.

200019048(PDF, 374K)	2/18/2001
Your request concerns whether distributions from Plan X to certain former employees of a subsidiary of Company M are made on account of the employees' "separation from service" within the meaning of § 401(k)(2)(B)(i)(I) of the Internal Revenue Code .
200019047(PDF, 141K)	2/16/2000
This is in response to your request for a ruling dated August 6, 1999, submitted by your authorized representative regarding the federal income tax consequences, under § 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code , of a proposed distributions from Plan X.
200019046(PDF, 232K)	2/16/2000
This request concerns the federal income tax consequences of certain transactions under § 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code ( Code ).
200019045(PDF, 304K)	2/14/2000
The request concerns the federal income tax consequences of certain transactions under § 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code .
200019044(PDF, 635K)	2/9/2000
Rulings that the transactions, described below, will not constitute any act of self-dealing under § 4941 of the Internal Revenue Code or any taxable expenditure under § 4945 of the Code.
200019043(PDF, 270K)	2/8/2000
Provided that none of the assets transferred to N would place N in a position of having excess business holdings as defined in § 4943(c) of the Code, the proposed transfer of all of the assets of M to N will not result in liability for tax on excess.
200019042(PDF, 29K)	5/12/2000
July 14, 1999, in which Taxpayer requests an extension of time provided by Treasury Regulation § 301.9100-3 to file the agreements and certifications required under § 1.1503-2(g)(2) with respect to the dual consolidated losses of the Separate Units for the tax year ended on Date A.
200019041(PDF, 32K)	5/12/2000
Issue: Do the "claim-of-right" doctrine and Rev. Rul. 58-225, 1958-1 C.B. 258, require insurance companies to include prepaid interest in income at the time the interest is due?
200019040(PDF, 8K)	5/12/2000
May 17, 1999, in which Taxpayer requests an extension of time under Treasury Regulation § 301.9100-3 to elect the provisions of Revenue Procedure 89-45, 1989-2 C.B. 596 for the Deferral Years.
200019039(PDF, 8K)	5/12/2000
July 21, 1999, in which Taxpayer requests an extension of time under Treasury Regulation § 301.9100-3 to file the agreement and certifications required under § 1.1503-2(g)(2) for the tax year ended on Date A.
200019038(PDF, 8K)	5/12/2000
Issue: Whether the PSC may certify that a single-owner limited liability company ("LLC") that is disregarded, for federal income tax purposes, as an entity separate from its owner is a resident of the United States that is therefore entitled to benefits under a bilateral income tax treaty to which the United States is a party.
200019037(PDF, 8K)	5/12/2000
July 14, 1999, as supplemented by a letter dated December 13, 1999, in which Taxpayer requests an extension of time under Treasury Regulation § 301.9100-3 to file the election, agreement and certifications required under Treas. Reg. § 1.1503-2(g)(2) with respect to Entity for the tax year ended on Date A.
200019036(PDF, 22K)	5/12/2000
June 18, 1999, in which you requested rulings on behalf of Taxpayer with respect to a proposed transaction. Additional information was received in letters dated September 23, 1999, December 9, 1999, December 17, 1999, and January 17, 2000.
200019035(PDF, 22K)	5/12/2000
August 9, 1999, in which rulings are requested as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. Additional information was submitted in letters dated November 8, and November 29, 1999.
200019034(PDF, 22K)	5/12/2000
September 24, 1999, in which rulings are requested as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. Additional information was submitted in letters dated December 8, 1999, and January 12, 2000.
200019033(PDF, 8K)	5/12/2000
January 6, 2000, submitted on behalf of X requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200019032(PDF, 8K)	5/12/2000
November 11, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of X, requesting a ruling that X's S corporation status will be effective as of D1.
200019031(PDF, 7K)	5/12/2000
October 13, 1999, 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.
200019030(PDF, 10K)	5/12/2000
November 19, 1999, 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.
200019029(PDF, 8K)	5/12/2000
August 17, 1999 ruling request and subsequent correspondence submitted as the Tax Matters Partner for Partnership, asking that the Service grant Partnership an extension of time to make an election under § 754 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200019028(PDF, 7K)	5/12/2000
November 15, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200019027(PDF, 12K)	5/12/2000
October 13, 1999, request asking us to treat Subsidiaries 1 through 7 (the Subsidiaries) as having joined in the making of the consolidated return filed by the Parent for taxable year ending on Date (1)
200019026(PDF, 93K)	5/12/2000
Issues: (1) Whether, in applying § 482 to determine the appropriate allocation between controlled parties of income from an intangible, the U.S. subsidiaries were entitled to income from a marketing intangible used in the United States, in years prior to execution of a formal agreement regarding the intangible. (2) Whether the formal agreement executed on Date E in Tax Year A, requiring the U.S. subsidiaries to pay a royalty to the foreign parent for use of the intangible in the United States, should be recognized under the § 482 regulations. (3) Whether the foreign parent's Date H application in Tax Year B for U.S. registration of the intangible should be given effect for purposes of § 482, as conferring on the foreign parent a right to the income from the intangible used in the United States.
200019025(PDF, 10K)	5/12/2000
October 13, 1998, by A's authorized representative 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.
200019024(PDF, 13K)	5/12/2000
October 13, 1999, submitted on your behalf by your authorized representative, that we supplement our letter ruling dated March 19, 1998 (PLR-121282-97)(the "Prior Ruling") regarding certain federal income tax consequences of a series of transactions, which included the distribution by Distributing 1 of all of the outstanding stock of Controlled 1 to Distributing 2 (the "Internal Spin"), followed by the distribution by Distributing 2 to its shareholders, pro rata, of all of the outstanding stock of Controlled 2 (the "External Spin").
200019023(PDF, 9K)	5/12/2000
September 21, 1999, and subsequent correspondence requesting a private letter ruling that (1) the income of X is excludable under § 115 of the Internal Revenue Code, and (2) X is not required to file a federal income tax return.
200019022(PDF, 31K)	5/12/2000
Request of Partnership A, dated August 25, 1999. Two rulings are requested: (1) Partnership A will produce a qualified fuel within the meaning of § 29(c)(1)(C) of the Internal Revenue Code; and (2) If Partnership A's facilities are "placed in service" prior to July 1, 1998, within the meaning of § 29(g)(1), relocation of a facility after June 30, 1998, will not result in a new placed in service date for the facility for purposes of § 29 provided the fair market value of the used property is more than 20 percent of the relocated facility's total fair market value at the time of the relocation.
200019021(PDF, 72K)	5/12/2000
Issue: Whether intangible rights in film characters developed by Corp A are export property within the meaning of Internal Revenue Code § 927(a)(1).
200019020(PDF, 24K)	5/12/2000
August 27, 1999, submitted on behalf of A, in which you seek rulings relating to the transactions described below.
200019019(PDF, 27K)	5/12/2000
Request for a private letter ruling dated May 24, 1999, regarding issues under §§ 1031, 761, and 752 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200019018(PDF, 27K)	5/12/2000
Request for a private letter ruling dated May 24, 1999, regarding issues under §§ 1031, 761, and 752 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200019017(PDF, 27K)	5/12/2000
Request for a private letter ruling dated May 24, 1999, regarding issues under §§ 1031, 761, and 752 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200019016(PDF, 27K)	5/12/2000
Request for a private letter ruling dated May 24, 1999, regarding issues under §§ 1031, 761, and 752 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200019015(PDF, 27K)	5/12/2000
Request for a private letter ruling dated May 24, 1999, regarding issues under §§ 1031, 761, and 752 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200019014(PDF, 27K)	5/12/2000
Request for a private letter ruling dated May 24, 1999, regarding issues under §§ 1031, 761, and 752 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200019013(PDF, 7K)	5/12/2000
January 27, 2000 request for a supplement to our ruling letter issued February 24, 1998, and designated PLR-119885-97 (the "Ruling Letter").
200019012(PDF, 24K)	5/12/2000
September 3, 1999, request for a private letter ruling as to whether Company timely filed its election for possessions corporation status under § 936 and 30A of the Internal Revenue Code pursuant to the cInternal Revenue Codeumstances described below.
200019011(PDF, 12K)	5/12/2000
June 15, 1999 letter, and subsequent correspondence, from your authorized representative requesting a ruling that rule that the bequest to Charity under article Sixth of Decedent's will qualifies for a deduction from Decedent's gross estate under § 2055(a) of the Internal Revenue Code in determining the United States estate tax due by reason of Decedent's death.
200019010(PDF, 11K)	5/12/2000
Request for rulings concerning the deduction limitation of § 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200019009(PDF, 31K)	5/12/2000
Issue: Whether the debtor or the factor that purchased wage claims from the debtor's employees is liable for the employment taxes at issue in this case.
200019008(PDF, 10K)	5/12/2000
November 22, 1999, 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.
200019007(PDF, 10K)	5/12/2000
September 15, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(g) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200019006(PDF, 13K)	5/12/2000
Issues: (1) Should Taxpayer be treated as a grantor trust instead of a complex trust? (2) If Taxpayer is properly treated as a grantor trust, are there any legal or equitable doctrines that provide a basis for partial or total disallowance of the claims for refund?
200019005(PDF, 9K)	5/12/2000
September 8, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, requesting rulings on behalf of Employer concerning the federal income tax treatment under § 104 and 105 of the Internal Revenue Code of long term disability benefits paid through the Plan.
200019004(PDF, 9K)	5/12/2000
Representative requesting permission for Taxpayer to revoke its election under § 41(c)(4).
200019003(PDF, 9K)	5/12/2000
Requesting permission for Taxpayer to revoke its election under § 41(c)(4).
200019002(PDF, 16K)	5/12/2000
Requesting a ruling regarding the substantial compliance with the requirements of § 1042 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and the applicable regulations in connection with the sale of stock of the Company to the employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) maintained by the Company.
200019001(PDF, 8K)	5/12/2000
Request for a private letter ruling, submitted on behalf of X, requesting a time extension under § 301.9100-3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations.
200018062(PDF, 387K)	2/2/2000
This is in reference to a letter dated December 30, 1998, submitted on behalf of X by its authorized representative, requesting rulings with respect to the federal tax consequence of the proposed transactions described below.
200018061(PDF, 125K)	3/3/2001
In your letter, you request rulings that the establishment and operation of a non-qualified excess benefit plan (Plan B) does not adversely affect the qualified status of a plan (Plan A) under § 401(a) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018060(PDF, 387K)	9/5/2001
This is in response to a request for a ruling, dated July 7, 1999, submitted on your behalf by your authorized representative, with respect to the federal income tax treatment of certain contributions to Plan X and Plan Y under § 414(h) (2) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018059(PDF, 279K)	9/5/2001
This is in response to a ruling request dated October 1, 1999 concerning the federal income tax treatment, under § 414(h)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code , of certain contributions to Plan X.
200018058(PDF, 296K)	9/5/2001
This is in response to a request for a private letter ruling, dated March 22, 1999, as supplemented by correspondence dated September 3, 1999, November 30, 1999, and January 14,2000, which was submitted on your behalf by your authorized representative concerning certain proposed transactions.
200018057(PDF, 341K)	9/5/2001
This is in response to the request for letter ruling submitted on your behalf bye your authorized representative in which a series of letter rulings under § 401(a) (9) of the Internal Revenue Code is requested. The following facts and representations support your ruling request.
200018056(PDF, 336K)	9/5/2001
This is in response to your request for a ruling dated October 7, 1998, submitted by your authorized representative in which rulings are requested under § 404(k) and 3402 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. A letter dated March 30, 1999, supplemented the request.
200018055(PDF, 150K)	9/5/2001
This is in response to your May 21, 1999, request for a private letter ruling, as supplemented by correspondence dated November 16, 1999, concerning the tax treatment of certain transactions relating to your individual retirement arrangement (IRA).
200018054(PDF, 7K)	5/5/2000
December 21, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018052(PDF, 43K)	5/5/2000
Taxability of Reimbursements for Local Transportation Expenses This Chief Counsel Advice is in response to your memorandum to Judith Dunn, Associate Chief Counsel (Domestic), dated January 7, 2000, concerning daily transportation expenses, and may be shared with field offices.
200018051(PDF, 30K)	5/5/2000
Issue: Whether a taxpayer whose gross proceeds from the sale of property reported on Form 1099-B exceed the § 6012(a) gross income filing requirements is required to file an individual income tax return if the gain from the sale of property is less than the § 6012(a) gross income filing requirements.
200018050(PDF, 85K)	5/5/2000
The First CInternal Revenue Codeuit, in Vinick v. United States, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 3593 (1 st Cir. March 8, 2000), held as a matter of law that in deciding whether a person qualified as a responsible individual for imposition of the Trust Fund Recovery Penalty, Internal Revenue Code § 6672, a court could not consider evidence for any period other than that when taxes were unpaid.
200018049(PDF, 10K)	5/5/2000
October 25, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, made on behalf of Taxpayer by its authorized representative, requesting whether the appropriate constructive sale price for articles that Taxpayer manufactures is the price at which Taxpayer purchases the same articles from a third party vendor X.
200018048(PDF, 7K)	5/5/2000
December 15, 1999, submitted by X's authorized representative on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018047(PDF, 9K)	5/5/2000
December 9, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018046(PDF, 18K)	5/5/2000
September 23, 1999 requesting two rulings under § 72 of the Internal Revenue Code regarding a group annuity contract that will be purchased and held by Trust.
200018045(PDF, 12K)	5/5/2000
June 18, 1999, submitted on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(f) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018044(PDF, 10K)	5/5/2000
December 27, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of X, requesting a ruling that X be given an extension of time under § 301.9100-3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to elect to be treated as a corporation for federal tax purposes for its taxable year beginning D1.
200018043(PDF, 27K)	5/5/2000
May 6, 1999, as supplemented by letters dated September 9, and 13, 1999 regarding the taxpayer, Company A. You request a ruling that premiums received by Company A on policies of insurance or reinsurance of United States risks are exempt from the insurance excise tax imposed by § 4371 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
200018042(PDF, 12K)	5/5/2000
October 9, 1999, written on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(d)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code that X's rental income from commercial and residential real properties is not passive investment income.
200018041(PDF, 8K)	5/5/2000
September 14, 1999, requesting rulings as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction.
200018040(PDF, 127K)	5/5/2000
September 14, 1999, requesting rulings as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction.
200018039(PDF, 26K)	5/5/2000
August 17, 1999 requesting rulings under § 355 of the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code") and other Code sections, as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction.
200018038(PDF, 7K)	5/5/2000
August 20, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018037(PDF, 8K)	5/5/2000
November 30, 1999, together with subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of X, requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018036(PDF, 14K)	5/5/2000
December 13, 1999, submitted on behalf of Trust 2, of which you are Trustee.
200018035(PDF, 16K)	5/5/2000
October 1, 1999, submitted on your behalf by your authorized representative, that we supplement our letter ruling dated May 13, 1997 (PLR-252563-96, LTR 9732026)(the "Prior Ruling") regarding certain federal income tax consequences of a series of transactions, which included the distribution of all of the outstanding capital stock of Controlled by Distributing to A.
200018034(PDF, 7K)	5/5/2000
November 30, 1999, submitted on behalf of X requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018033(PDF, 35K)	5/5/2000
Issue: Can the Internal Revenue Service adopt a more flexible administrative remedy for taxpayers who fail to file a suit to quiet title within the 180-day redemption period after the Service has conducted a procedurally defective tax sale and for purchasers in the same situation.
200018032(PDF, 19K)	5/5/2000
September 17, 1999, 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. Parent (as common parent of the consolidated group of which Purchaser is a member) and Target Parent are requesting an extension to file a "§ 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, with respect to Purchaser's acquisition of the stock of Target (sometimes hereinafter referred to as the "Election"), on Date A.
200018031(PDF, 7K)	5/5/2000
December 6, 1999, and additional information submitted on behalf of X, requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018030(PDF, 8K)	5/5/2000
December 30, 1999 submitted on behalf of X, requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018029(PDF, 8K)	5/5/2000
November 23, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of X, requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018028(PDF, 25K)	5/5/2000
Withdrawal of application for change in accounting method In accordance with § 8.07(2)(a) of Rev. Proc. 2000-1, 2000-1 I.R.B. 4, 33, this memorandum advises you that taxpayers within your district have withdrawn a Form 3115, Application for Change in Accounting Method.
200018027(PDF, 34K)	5/5/2000
Requesting rulings under § 864, 882, and 884 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. Additional information was submitted in letters dated Date b and Date c.
200018026(PDF, 49K)	5/5/2000
Issue: Whether research performed by T during Year 4, Year 5, and Year 6 was funded research under § 41(d)(4)(H).
200018025(PDF, 42K)	5/5/2000
Issue: When the Service has failed to credit a taxpayer's overpayment of estimated income tax against the same taxpayer's outstanding income tax liability for an earlier year, is the Service required, as a matter of law, to effectively credit taxpayer's subsequent remittance as of the date of the estimated tax refund?
200018024(PDF, 8K)	5/5/2000
December 21, 1999, submitted on behalf of X, requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018023(PDF, 7K)	5/5/2000
November 15, 1999, submitted on behalf of X, requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018022(PDF, 39K)	5/5/2000
September 16, 1999, and subsequent submission dated January 25, 2000 on behalf of Taxpayer requesting a ruling that none of the low-income housing tax credits derived through various partnership interests and reported on the consolidated tax returns of Taxpayer and its subsidiaries will be subject to recapture under § 42(j) of the Internal Revenue Code as a result of a proposed corporate restructuring described in the below facts.
200018021(PDF, 8K)	5/5/2000
July 23, 1999, and your supplemental letter dated August 2, 1999, requesting a ruling on whether gain from the sale of Residence would be excluded under § 121 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018020(PDF, 43K)	5/5/2000
Issues: (1) Whether decedent's transfers of stock to two inter vivos trusts and one testamentary trust should be viewed as one transaction for gift and estate tax valuation purposes. (2) Whether the QTIP trust satisfies the requirements under Internal Revenue Code § 2056(b)(7)(B) (ii).
200018019(PDF, 28K)	5/5/2000
Issue: Whether the taxpayer's or the Service's computation, in the incoming request for advice, of the loss disallowed to the parent on the sale of the subsidiary's stock under Treasury Regulation § 1.1502-20 is correct?
200018018(PDF, 44K)	5/5/2000
Issues: (1) Is Taxpayer a farm syndicate within the meaning of Internal Revenue Code § 464(c)(1)(A) and therefore a tax shelter for purposes of § 448 such that it cannot use the cash receipts and disbursements method of accounting. (2) Is A, a partnership spun-off from Taxpayer, a farm syndicate within the meaning of § 464(c)(1)(A) and therefore a tax shelter for purposes of § 448 such that it cannot use the cash receipts and disbursements method of accounting.
200018017(PDF, 75K)	5/5/2000
August 6, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of PRS, requesting rulings under § 704(c) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018016(PDF, 10K)	5/5/2000
Issue: Whether the described deicer vehicles (deicers) are subject to tax under § 4051 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018015(PDF, 60K)	5/5/2000
Issues: (1) Would it violate § 6103(a) of the Internal Revenue Code for Taxpayer A's examination team to obtain from sources within the Internal Revenue Service (Service), such as other examination teams or issue specialists, information relating to the lease stripping transaction in which Taxpayer B participated that other parties to the transaction provided to the Service in connection with their own returns or the examination of their own returns? (2) If A's examination team may obtain the above information, may it then disclose the information to A by including it in the Revenue Agent's Report ("RAR") issued to A?
200018014(PDF, 37K)	5/5/2000
Issues: (1) At what date does interest begin to run on an underpayment, where X reported an overpayment of tax on its return and elected to have the overpayment credited against its estimated tax liability for the succeeding taxable year, but the Service subsequently determined a deficiency in tax for the taxable year of the purported overpayment. (2) Where the Service offsets an overpayment in Year 3 against an underpayment for Year 4, whether the taxpayer is entitled to overpayment interest under section6611 from the return due date of the underpayment, against which the overpayment is credited, to the later date that the underpayment actually arose and the offset was effective.
200018013(PDF, 47K)	5/5/2000
Issues: (1) Whether donee liability under § 6324(b) may be imposed where the Internal Revenue Service has asserted a deficiency for additional gift tax against the donor with respect to unreported transfers of property to third parties while the case is pending in the Tax Court. (2) What is the Service's current policy with respect to the assertion of donee liability under § 6324(b).
200018012(PDF, 19K)	5/5/2000
August 6, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of PRS, requesting rulings under § 704(c) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018011(PDF, 19K)	5/5/2000
August 6, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of PRS, requesting rulings under § 704(c) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018010(PDF, 19K)	5/5/2000
August 6, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of PRS, requesting rulings under § 704(c) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018009(PDF, 19K)	5/5/2000
August 6, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of PRS, requesting rulings under § 704(c) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018008(PDF, 19K)	5/5/2000
August 6, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of PRS, requesting rulings under § 704(c) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018007(PDF, 19K)	5/5/2000
August 6, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of PRS, requesting rulings under § 704(c) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018006(PDF, 19K)	5/5/2000
August 6, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of PRS, requesting rulings under § 704(c) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200018005(PDF, 32K)	5/5/2000
Issues: (1) Whether a Notice of Intent to Levy and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing pursuant to Internal Revenue Code § 6330 issued after commencement of the bankruptcy violates the automatic stay in bankruptcy provided in 11 U.S.C. § 362. (2) Whether the taxpayer had a right to dispute the underlying liability pursuant to I.R.C. § 6330(c)(2)(B) because he did not receive a statutory notice of deficiency pursuant to I.R.C. § 6213.
200018004(PDF, 80K)	5/5/2000
Issues: (1) Whether the principles of Treasury Regulation § 1.817-4(d), relating to assumption reinsurance transactions, are applicable to the purchase Old Targets' life insurance company stock which is treated as a deemed asset sale as the result of an election under Internal Revenue Code § 338(h)(10).
200018003(PDF, 43K)	5/5/2000
Issues: (1) If the merger of Taxpayer and Company A is not a tax-free reorganization under Internal Revenue Code § 368(a)(1)(A),1 / then whether Taxpayer is precluded from including in its deduction for "losses incurred" from Year 3 through Year 4, the unanticipated adverse development respecting loss reserves it assumed in connection with its acquisition of Company A.2 / (2) Whether the extreme adverse financial position of Company A prior to its merger with Taxpayer has a significant impact on the value of any equity interest received by the former Company A policyholders in Taxpayer.
200018002(PDF, 35K)	5/5/2000
Issue: Under what cInternal Revenue Codeumstances may the Service reverse an abatement of tax after the statute of limitations for assessment has expired.
200018001(PDF, 27K)	5/5/2000
January 15, 1999, to EP Group Manager, regarding the Plan. As mentioned in a conversation on February 1, 1999, between Robert Walsh of this office and of your office, we agree with your primary conclusion in that memorandum that the one percent Basic Contribution provided for in the Plan is neither an elective contribution nor a qualified nonelective contribution but rather a mandatory employee contribution.
200017054(PDF, 195K)	9/5/2001
In letters dated June 9 and August 9 1999. your authorized representative requested a ruling on your behalf concerning the federal income tax treatment of certain contributions to Plan X under § 414(h)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017053(PDF, 676K)	9/5/2001
This letter is in response to a letter dated April 28, 1999, as supplemented by letters dated June 7, 1999, July 20, 1999, September 1, 1999, September 8, 1999, September 23, 1999, and November 2, 1999, submitted by your authorized representative, in which rulings are requested under § 414(d) and 414(h) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017052(PDF, 233K)	9/5/2001
This letter responds to Partnership's authorized representative's letter dated December 3, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of Partnership, requesting a private letter ruling that will waive, for the Project, the ten-year holding period requirement for existing buildings of § 42(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Internal Revenue Code, under the authority of the exception for the acquisition of certain federally-assisted buildings provided in § 42(d)(6)(C).
200017051(PDF, 633K)	9/5/2001
This is in response to your letter dated July 12, 1999, and additional submissions on behalf of FLP, H, W, and Trust 3 (referred to collectively as "Taxpayers"), requesting rulings concerning the income and estate tax consequences resulting from the formation of FLP and the transfer of policies insuring the lives of H and W to FLP.
200017050(PDF, 75K)	9/5/2001
This letter responds to a letter dated October 26, 1999, and subsequent correspondence submitted by you as x's authorized representative on behalf of &, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b) (5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017049(PDF, 77K)	9/5/2001
This letter responds to a September 22, 1999 letter that you I the authorized representative of X, submitted on behalf of X, requesting relief under § 1362(b) (5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017048(PDF, 140K)	9/5/2001
This is in reply to a letter dated July 16, 1999, that was submitted on behalf of Company by its authorized representative, in which a ruling is requested that Association will be an "employer corporation," as that term is used in § 421 through 424 of the Internal Revenue Code, and that, provided that the requisite stock-ownership requirement is met, Association will be a "subsidiary corporation," as defined in § 424(f).
200017047(PDF, 162K)	9/5/2001
You have requested that a ruling be issued to A under § 301.9100-1(c) of the Procedure and Administration Regulations, on behalf of its subsidiary B. A wishes to file a Form 970, Application To Use LIFO Inventory Method, for one of B's two divisions This ruling request is being made under § 301.9100-3.
200017046(PDF, 535K)	9/5/2001
Issues: (1) Whether the infrastructure items such as street, sewage, and utility systems constitute tangible or intangible property to Taxpayer. (2) Whether the infrastructure items such as street, sewage, and utility systems have determinable lives such that they constitute depreciable property. (3) What is the effect on Taxpayer's method of accounting as a result of the conclusions reached on the previous two issues as to whether Taxpayer can depreciate amounts expended to build infrastructure including street, sewage, and utility systems, in order to develop two commercial projects.
200017045(PDF, 59K)	4/28/2000
Issues: Issue 1 For purposes of determining the amount that a U.S. air carrier should withhold under § 3402 on wages paid to a nonresident alien flight attendant in scenarios 1 and 2 below, may an examiner require the air carrier to apply the source rule of Article 6(6) of the United States-Japan income tax convention (the "Treaty" or "Japanese Treaty")? Issue 2 For purposes of determining the amount that a U.S. air carrier should withhold on wages paid to a nonresident alien flight attendant in scenario 3 below, what facts would an examiner need to evaluate to determine which treaty controls: (1) the Japanese Treaty or (2) an income tax convention between the United States and a third country in which the flight attendant is resident?
200017044(PDF, 28K)	4/28/2000
Issue: When a levy payment creates an overpayment to a taxpayer's account (and there is not a balance due on any other period listed on the levy), may the overpayment be manually refunded, even though it has been over nine months since the date of the levy?
200017043(PDF, 41K)	4/28/2000
Issues: 1) Does the employee portion of the FICA tax that is imposed under § 3101 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), constitute a covered tax under Article 1, paragraph (1) (a) of the U.S.-Japan income tax convention (the "Treaty")? 2) If the employee portion of the FICA tax is a covered tax, will application of the Treaty reduce the FICA tax liability of a flight attendant who is a resident of Japan, employed on a U.S. aInternal Revenue Coderaft as part of the regular compliment of the aInternal Revenue Coderaft, and whose contract of employment was entered into in the United States? 3)Does the employer portion of the FICA tax that is imposed under § 3111 of the Code constitute a covered tax under Article 1, paragraph (1)(a) of the Treaty?
200017042(PDF, 45K)	4/28/2000
Issue: Whether cash payments by employers to employees in settlement of a suit by a class of employees for additional credit under their qualified pension plan for services performed prior to 1984 are wages for purposes of the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA).
200017041(PDF, 60K)	4/28/2000
FICA and FUTA Wage Base Refund Claims Filed by Professional Employer Organizations You have been contacted by field offices about various Federal Insurance Contributions Act ("FICA") and Federal Unemployment Tax Act ("FUTA") refund claims that have been filed around the country. You in turn contacted this office for advice. Because this advice will be distributed to the field offices, it constitutes conduit Chief Counsel Advice subject to disclosure under § 6110 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017040(PDF, 14K)	4/28/2000
Issue: Are State supplemental payments includible in the recipients' gross incomes if made to enable homeowners to purchase comparable housing outside the 100-year flood plain after their damaged homes in the flood plain were purchased under a federally assisted program?
200017039(PDF, 79K)	4/28/2000
Answering the question of whether the Service may disclose tax return information in issuing liens and levies, even if the proper collection procedures were not followed, the Tenth CInternal Revenue Codeuit in Mann v. United States, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 2487 (10 th Cir. Feb. 18, 2000), determined that Internal Revenue Code § 6103(k)(6) provides a safe harbor for such disclosures. Because tax return information may be disclosed under § 6103(k)(6), even if procedural deficiencies render the levies defective, no cause of action exists under I.R.C. § 7431.
200017038(PDF, 31K)	4/28/2000
Issues: (1) Should a Service Center treat a Form 8697, Interest Computation Under the Look-Back Method for Completed Long-Term Contracts, reporting look-back interest owed to the government as a tax return? (2) Should a Service Center treat a Form 8697 claiming look-back interest owed to the taxpayer as a claim for refund? Should a Service Center issue a statutory notice of deficiency (or notice of claim disallowance) if a Form 8697 contains a mathematical or clerical error otherwise subject to §6213(b)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code? (4) When does look-back interest compound?
200017037(PDF, 20K)	4/28/2000
September 24, 1999, in which rulings are requested as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. Additional information was submitted in letters dated December 2 and 7, 1999, and January 12, 2000.
200017036(PDF, 10K)	4/28/2000
September 11, 1998, from your authorized representative requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that your loss of permanent resident status (expatriation) did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code.
200017035(PDF, 8K)	4/28/2000
December 29, 1999, request for a letter ruling supplementing our letter ruling dated August 2, 1999 (the "Prior Letter Ruling"). In the Prior Letter Ruling, we ruled that the pro-rata distributions of all the outstanding common stock of Controlled 1 and Controlled 2 to the stockholders of Distributing 2 qualified as tax-free distributions under § 355 of the Internal Revenue Code (the "Distributions").
200017034(PDF, 12K)	4/28/2000
September 29, 1999 request for rulings on certain federal income tax consequences of a series of proposed transactions.
200017033(PDF, 15K)	4/28/2000
November 15, 1999, requesting a ruling on behalf of Fund A and Fund B (collectively, the "Funds"). The Funds request an extension of time under § 301.9100-1 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to make an election under § 855(a) of the Internal Revenue Code for the Funds' tax year ended August 31, Year 1.
200017032(PDF, 26K)	4/28/2000
October 8, 1999, requesting rulings as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction.
200017031(PDF, 7K)	4/28/2000
October 29, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017030(PDF, 11K)	4/28/2000
September 29, 1999, and subsequent correspondence submitted by X's authorized representative on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(f) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017029(PDF, 7K)	4/28/2000
August 10, 1999, requesting a ruling on behalf of Company under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017028(PDF, 7K)	4/28/2000
October 25, 1999, requesting a ruling on behalf of Company under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017027(PDF, 7K)	4/28/2000
October 8, 1999, requesting a ruling on behalf of Company under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017026(PDF, 28K)	4/28/2000
Jul 2, 1999 requesting an extension of time under §§ 301.9100-1 through 301.9100-3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations for the above taxpayers to an file election.
200017025(PDF, 7K)	4/28/2000
October 10, 1999, requesting a ruling on behalf of Company under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017024(PDF, 11K)	4/28/2000
March 19, 1998, as supplemented by your letters dated November 3, 1998 and June 9, 19999, submitted by A's authorized representative 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.
200017023(PDF, 12K)	4/28/2000
October 25, 1999, written on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(f) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017022(PDF, 12K)	4/28/2000
November 11, 1999, requesting a ruling on behalf of Fund. You have requested a ruling that Fund be granted an extension of time under § 301.9100 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to make an election under § 855 of the Internal Revenue Code for Fund's tax year ended Date 1.
200017021(PDF, 20K)	4/28/2000
September 23, 1999, submitted by your authorized representative on behalf of the Feeder Funds.
200017020(PDF, 12K)	4/28/2000
August 13, 1999, requesting a ruling on behalf of Fund A and Fund B (individually referred to as Fund and collectively referred to as Funds). You have requested a ruling that each Fund be granted an extension of time under § 301.9100 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to make an election under § 855 of the Internal Revenue Code for Funds' tax year ended Date 1.
200017019(PDF, 55K)	4/28/2000
Request dated April 8, 1999 for rulings about the federal income tax treatment of a proposed transaction.
200017018(PDF, 12K)	4/28/2000
Request for a ruling that the Authority qualifies as a political subdivision of the State for purposes of § 103 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017017(PDF, 8K)	4/28/2000
Request for a private letter ruling, submitted on behalf of X, requesting a time extension under § 301.9100-3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations.
200017016(PDF, 21K)	4/28/2000
September 24, 1999 request for rulings on the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. Additional information with respect to the proposed transaction was submitted in letters dated December 6, 1999, January 7, 2000, and January 12, 2000.
200017015(PDF, 19K)	4/28/2000
September 29, 1999, 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.
200017014(PDF, 18K)	4/28/2000
October 11, 1999, written on behalf of X, requesting rulings under § 1362(f) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017013(PDF, 22K)	4/28/2000
August 18, 1999, submitted on behalf of Donor and Spouse (Taxpayers). Taxpayers seek a ruling that they substantially complied with the requirements for making a timely allocation of their generation-skipping transfer exemptions to Trust on their year 1 and year 2 Form 709s, U.S. Gift Tax Returns.
200017012(PDF, 6K)	4/28/2000
Form 1128, Application to Adopt, Change, or Retain a Tax Year, submitted on behalf of the above-named taxpayers, requesting permission to change their accounting period, for federal income tax purposes, from a taxable year ending, to a taxable year ending, effective.
200017011(PDF, 31K)	4/28/2000
Issues: (1) Whether Internal Revenue Code § 1256(f)(2) permits Taxpayer to claim ordinary gains or losses on futures contracts that do not constitute hedging transactions, either under I.R.C. § 1256(e) or Treasury Regulation § 1.1221-2(b). (2) Whether I.R.C. § 1256(f)(1) precludes capital gains treatment for certain of Taxpayer's transactions.
200017010(PDF, 19K)	4/28/2000
August 6, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of PRS, requesting rulings under § 704(c) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017009(PDF, 19K)	4/28/2000
August 6, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of PRS, requesting rulings under § 704(c) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017008(PDF, 19K)	4/28/2000
August 6, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of PRS, requesting rulings under § 704(c) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017007(PDF, 19K)	4/28/2000
August 6, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, written on behalf of PRS, requesting rulings under § 704(c) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017006(PDF, 30K)	4/28/2000
Issues: Whether the federal tax lien of Internal Revenue Code § 6321 continues to attach to real property purchased by a taxpayer in after a judgment against him in in which the contract of sale was rescinded.
200017005(PDF, 15K)	4/28/2000
April 29, 1999, and prior correspondence submitted by your authorized representative, in which you request several rulings on the application of the generation-skipping transfer tax provisions of Chapter 13 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017004(PDF, 16K)	4/28/2000
April 29, 1999, and prior correspondence submitted by your authorized representative, in which you request several rulings on the application of the generation-skipping transfer tax provisions of Chapter 13 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200017003(PDF, 26K)	4/28/2000
Issue: Where Internal Revenue Code § 6621(d) provides for a zero rate of interest on equivalent underpayments and overpayments "by the same taxpayer," whether the interest netting procedures apply to allow the netting of an overpayment made by an affiliated group of corporations filing a consolidated income tax return in year 1 against an underpayment in year 3 incurred by a reorganized consolidated group with a different parent, but which includes the old parent of the first consolidated group.
200017002(PDF, 17K)	4/28/2000
April 12, 1999, as supplemented by letters of April 22, 1999 and April 27, 1999, requesting rulings on certain federal income tax consequences of proposed transactions.
200016028(PDF, 188K)	9/5/2001
This is in reference to your letter of September 8, 1999, requesting advance approval of your grant-making procedures under § 4945(g) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200016027(PDF, 489K)	9/5/2001
This is in response to M's request for certain rulings under § 501(c) (3), 507, 4940, 4941, 4942, 4944, and 4945 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 submitted by M's authorized legal representative relating to M's termination and charitable fund agreement with N.
200016026(PDF, 189K)	9/5/2001
This is in response to the ruling request contained in your letter dated December 29. 1999. wherein you requested approval for a set-aside, as described below, pursuant to § 4942(g)(2)(B)(i) of the Internal Revenue Code and § 53,4942(a)-3(b)(2) of the Foundation and Similar Excise Taxes Regulations. You are exempt from federal income tax under § 501 (c)(3) of the Code and you have also been classified as a private foundation under § 509(a) pursuant to a determination letter issued in July, 1995.
200016025(PDF, 197K)	9/5/2001
This is in response to your request for rulings dated October 8, 1999, pertaining to the termination of private foundation status and a related request under Chapter 41 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200016024(PDF, 282K)	9/5/2001
This is in reply to a request for a ruling concerning whether compensation attributable to the exercise of an option granted to one individual at the time of the formation of the business qualifies under § 162(m)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code as performance-based compensation.
200016023(PDF, 276K)	9/5/2001
This is in response to your letter requesting rulings, as amended, regarding the federal tax consequences associated with the transactions described below.
200016022(PDF, 511K)	9/5/2001
This is in reply to a letter dated July 13, 1999, and subsequent correspondence submitted on behalf of Company by its authorized representative, in which a ruling is requested that the Plan qualifies as an "employee stock purchase plan," as defined in § 423(b) of the Internal Revenue Code. Additional rulings are requested concerning the tax consequences of the Plan.
200016021(PDF, 414K)	9/5/2001
This letter responds to a letter dated April 9, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of P by its authorized representative, requesting rulings under § 29 and 702 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200016020(PDF, 466K)	9/5/2001
This letter responds to the request, dated April 29, 1999, letter of Taxpayer on behalf of its Subsidiary for a private ruling on the proper treatment of two of the Subsidiary's deferred tax accounts. Those tax accounts are the accumulated deferred investment tax credits (ADITC) under former §546(f)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code, and excess deferred income tax (EDIT) under former §167(1) and §168(f) and §203(e) of the 1986 Tax Reform Act, 1986-3tVol.l) C.B. 1, 63 (Act).
200016019(PDF, 19K)	4/21/2000
Issue: Are grants from a State program that assists individuals in repairing their flood- damaged homes by reducing their debt burden includible in the recipients' gross incomes?
200016018(PDF, 27K)	4/21/2000
Does Joint and Several Liability Apply to FICA Tax on Unreported Tips? This is in response to your inquiry of December 2, 1999, concerning whether joint and several liability applies to unpaid FICA tax.
200016017(PDF, 69K)	4/21/2000
Issues: 1) Is the statute of limitations on collecting a tax provided for by a confirmed Chapter 11 plan usually extended automatically, via I.R.C § 6503(h)(2), while the taxpayer is current on Chapter 11 plan payments for the tax, up until the time the taxpayer is in substantial default on the plan payments for the tax? 2) What alternatives (to reliance on our above answer to question #1) should the Service consider to ensure that the collection limitation period is either suspended or extended during a proposed, lengthy Chapter 11 plan payout period? 3) As a back-up argument to the above positions, do we stand by our published advice in a prior case (involving an expired assessment statute after confirmation) that a confirmed Chapter 11 plan also generally provides the Service with contract rights that are superadded to (rather than substituted for) the tax debt collection rights that arise for the Service under the Internal Revenue Code?
200016016(PDF, 37K)	4/21/2000
Issue: Whether an offer in compromise which has been terminated by the Service due to a taxpayer's default can later be reinstated by the Service.
200016015(PDF, 21K)	4/21/2000
September 21, 1999, and subsequent correspondence, submitted on behalf of Partnership, requesting that the Service grant Partnership an extension of time to make an election under § 754 of the Internal Revenue Code.
200016014(PDF, 8K)	4/21/2000
September 24, 1999 request for rulings on the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. Additional information with respect to the proposed transaction was submitted in letters dated December 6, 1999, January 7, 2000, and January 12, 2000.
200016013(PDF, 19K)	4/21/2000
Request for a ruling dated September 16, 1999, submitted by your authorized representative on behalf of the Feeder Funds.
200016012(PDF, 10K)	4/21/2000
Request for a ruling concerning whether certain disability benefits received from State are excludable from gross income under § 104(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code .
200016011(PDF, 10K)	4/21/2000
September 15, 1999, and subsequent correspondence by your authorized representative 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) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200016010(PDF, 10K)	4/21/2000
April 3, 1998, as supplemented by letters dated October 8, 1998, June 14, 1999, September 23, 1999, September 28, 1999 and November 10, 1999, submitted by A's authorized representative 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.
200016009(PDF, 27K)	4/21/2000
Requested permission to revoke the § 936 possessions corporation election for Location A Corporation, effective for Location A Corporation's taxable year ending Date 2, and all subsequent tax years.
200016008(PDF, 11K)	4/21/2000
September 15, 1999 requesting rulings relating to whether the proposed transaction meets the diversification requirements of § 817(h) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200016007(PDF, 8K)	4/21/2000
October 29, 1999, written on behalf of X, requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code that X's S corporation election will be effective as of the taxable year beginning D.
200016006(PDF, 34K)	4/21/2000
Issue: Whether the Service may make a summary assessment to recover a tentative refund that was made to a previous member of a consolidated group, if it is later determined that such member who made the request on its own behalf was not authorized to receive the tentative refund on behalf of the group?
200016005(PDF, 9K)	4/21/2000
Requesting permission for Taxpayer to revoke its election under § 41(c)(4).
200016004(PDF, 13K)	4/21/2000
Issues: In a transaction that purportedly qualified as a divisive spin-off under §§ 355 and 368(a)(1)(D) of the Internal Revenue Code, did Taxpayer acquire a major portion or a separate unit of Distributing for purposes of applying § 41(f)(3)(A)?
200016003(PDF, 8K)	4/21/2000
Issue: Is Taxpayer eligible for a refund under § 6427(l) of the Internal Revenue Code with respect to the tax imposed on kerosene that Taxpayer packages in one gallon containers and sells to retailers for resale to consumers for nontaxable uses?
200016002(PDF, 72K)	4/21/2000
Issues: (1) Whether a mutual fund distributor using the accrual method of accounting should include the fees earned with respect to mutual fund shares in the year that the shares are issued or in the year the fees are received. (2) Whether a mutual fund distributor using the accrual method of accounting may deduct commissions paid to broker dealers with respect to the issuance of mutual fund shares in the year the commissions are paid or incurred.
200016001(PDF, 24K)	4/21/2000
Issue: What is the period of limitations for a claim for refund of a civil penalty imposed under § 6721 of the Internal Revenue Code for failure to file an information return?
200015039(PDF, 145K)	9/5/2001
This letter is in reply to your letter dated September 7, 1999, on behalf of The Company, requesting a ruling as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction under § 367(a) of the Internal Revenue Code and temporary Treasury Regulation § 367(a)-3T(g)(7).
200015038(PDF, 218K)	9/5/2001
This letter is in reply to your letter dated September 7, 1999, on behalf of The Company, requesting a ruling as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction under § 367(a) of the Internal Revenue Code and temporary Treasury Regulation § 367(a)-3T(g)(7).
200015037(PDF, 53K)	4/14/2000
Issues: Your memorandum asks the following questions: (1) What kind of a claim should the Internal Revenue Service file in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy case when the tax liabilities have been compromised in a pre-petition offer in compromise ("OIC")? (2) Is the answer to the aforesaid question any different if the bankruptcy is filed under Chapter 7 or 11? (3) Should the language in the OIC Form 656 be changed to better protect the Service's interests?
200015036(PDF, 10K)	4/14/2000
Requesting a ruling under § 877(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that A's renunciation of the status of lawful permanent resident of the United States did not have for one of its principal purposes the avoidance of U.S. taxes under subtitle A or subtitle B of the Code 1.
200015035(PDF, 8.6K)	4/14/2000
Requesting a ruling that X's S corporation status will be effective as of D1. FACTS: X incorporated under State law on D1. X's shareholders intended that X be a subchapter S corporation for its tax year beginning D1; however, the S corporation election under § 1362 of the Internal Revenue Code was not filed timely.
200015034(PDF, 7.8K)	4/14/2000
Requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code. FACTS: X was incorporated on D1. X intended to be treated as an S corporation for federal income tax purposes effective on D1, but the S election was not timely filed.
200015033(PDF, 7.4K)	4/14/2000
Requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code. FACTS: X was incorporated under State law on D1. The shareholder of X intended that X elect to be treated as an S corporation effective D1. However, the election to be treated as an S corporation was not timely filed.
200015032(PDF, 23K)	4/14/2000
Requesting an extension of time under §§ 301.9100-1 through 301.9100-3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to file an election. The extension is being requested by Parent (as the common parent of the consolidated group that includes the foreign successor to the foreign purchasing corporation, and as the U.S. shareholder of the foreign purchasing corporation and the foreign successor thereto) to file a "section 338 election" under § 338(g) of the Internal Revenue Code and §§ 1.338-1(d) and 1.338-1(g) of the Income Tax Regulations, with respect to Purchaser's acquisition of Target stock (hereinafter referred to as the "Election"), on Date A.
200015031(PDF, 18K)	4/14/2000
Requesting an extension of time under §§ 301.9100-1 through 301.9100-3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to file an election. Parent (as common parent of a consolidated group of which Purchaser is a member) and Holding (as common parent of a consolidated group of which Seller is a member) 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 all of the stock of Target from Seller on Date 2.
200015030(PDF, 9.3K)	4/14/2000
Requesting a ruling that X be given an extension of time under § 301.9100-3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to elect to be treated as a corporation for federal tax purposes for its taxable year beginning D1. FACTS: Although X intended that it be taxed as a corporation for federal tax purposes as of D1, it failed to elect timely corporate status as of D1. X learned of this failure during D2.
200015029(PDF, 7.3K)	4/14/2000
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 one shareholder, Shareholder. It is represented that Company has intended to be an S corporation since its incorporation.
200015028(PDF, 25K)	4/14/2000
Requesting rulings as to the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. The information submitted in that request and in subsequent correspondence is substantially as set forth below. Distributing, a Country A corporation, has outstanding a single class of common stock.
200015027(PDF, 7.4K)	4/14/2000
Requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code. FACTS: X was incorporated under State law on D1. The shareholder of X intended that X elect to be treated as an S corporation effective D1. However, the election to be treated as an S corporation was not timely filed.
200015026(PDF, 8.2K)	4/14/2000
Requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code. FACTS: X was incorporated on D1, but did not begin doing business until D2. X intended to be treated as an S corporation for federal income tax purposes effective on D2, but the S election was not timely filed.
200015025(PDF, 7.8K)	4/14/2000
Requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code. Facts X was incorporated on Date (1) The sole shareholder 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. Accordingly, X requests a ruling that it will be treated as an S corporation effective Date 1.
200015024(PDF, 86K)	4/14/2000
Issues: Whether Internal Revenue Code § 482 applies to Taxpayer and other parties to the lease- stripping transaction at issue, and if so, what are the consequences of applying § 482.
200015023(PDF, 13K)	4/14/2000
Requesting an extension of time under § 301.9100-1 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations to make a reverse qualified terminable interest property (QTIP) election under § 2652(a)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
200015022(PDF, 8.9K)	4/14/2000
Requesting a ruling under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code that X's S corporation election will be effective as of the taxable year beginning D2. FACTS: According to the information submitted, X was incorporated on D1 and it was decided that X would be an S corporation effective D2. The Form 2553, Election by a Small Business Corporation, however, was not timely filed.
200015021(PDF, 11K)	4/14/2000
Requested assistance from your office, on behalf of the Attorney General's office, as to whether an arrangement established by qualifies as a cafeteria plan under § 125 of the Internal Revenue Code. Coincidentally, by letter dated November 16, 1999, Senator requested assistance from the National Director for Legislative Affairs on the same issue.
200015020(PDF, 7.9K)	4/14/2000
Requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code. FACTS: X began doing business under State law on D1. X's shareholder intended that X be a subchapter S corporation, effective D1; however, an S corporation election to be treated as an S corporation was not timely filed.
200015019(PDF, 8.0K)	4/14/2000
Requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code. FACTS: X was incorporated under State law. X intended to be treated as an S corporation for federal income tax purposes effective on D1, but the S election was not timely filed.
200015018(PDF, 7.4K)	4/14/2000
Requesting relief under § 1362(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code. FACTS: X was incorporated under State law. X's shareholders intended that X be a subchapter S corporation, effective D1; however, an S corporation election under § 1362 was not timely filed.
200015017(PDF, 14K)	4/14/2000
Requesting certain rulings under § 704 of the Internal Revenue Code on behalf of Fund. Specifically, you request rulings that: (i) the method of making reverse § 704(c) allocations by Fund (the partial-netting method) is a reasonable method within the meaning of § 1.704- 3(e)(3) of the Income Tax Regulations and (ii) that Fund may combine built-in gains and losses from qualified financial assets contributed to it with gains and losses from revaluations for purposes of performing aggregate allocations.
200015016(PDF, 14K)	4/14/2000
Requesting certain rulings under § 704 of the Internal Revenue Code on behalf of Fund. Specifically, you request rulings that: (i) the method of making reverse § 704(c) allocations by Fund (the partial-netting method) is a reasonable method within the meaning of § 1.704- 3(e)(3) of the Income Tax Regulations and (ii) that Fund may combine built-in gains and losses from qualified financial assets contributed to it with gains and losses from revaluations for purposes of performing aggregate allocations.
200015015(PDF, 14K)	4/14/2000
Requesting certain rulings under § 704 of the Internal Revenue Code on behalf of Fund. Specifically, you request rulings that: (i) the method of making reverse § 704(c) allocations by Fund (the partial-netting method) is a reasonable method within the meaning of § 1.704- 3(e)(3) of the Income Tax Regulations and (ii) that Fund may combine built-in gains and losses from qualified financial assets contributed to it with gains and losses from revaluations for purposes of performing aggregate allocations.
200015014(PDF, 14K)	4/14/2000
Representative of Fund, requesting certain rulings under § 704 of the Internal Revenue Code on behalf of Fund. Specifically, you request rulings that: (i) the method of making reverse § 704(c) allocations by Fund (the partial-netting method) is a reasonable method within the meaning of § 1.704- 3(e)(3) of the Income Tax Regulations and (ii) that Fund may combine built-in gains and losses from qualified financial assets contributed to it with gains and losses from revaluations for purposes of performing aggregate allocations.
200015013(PDF, 14K)	4/14/2000
Requesting certain rulings under § 704 of the Internal Revenue Code on behalf of Fund. Specifically, you request rulings that: (i) the method of making reverse § 704(c) allocations by Fund (the partial-netting method) is a reasonable method within the meaning of § 1.704- 3(e)(3) of the Income Tax Regulations and (ii) that Fund may combine built-in gains and losses from qualified financial assets contributed to it with gains and losses from revaluations for purposes of performing aggregate allocations.
200015012(PDF, 13K)	4/14/2000
Requesting a ruling that the proposed amendment to a partnership agreement will not cause §§ 2703 and 2704 of the Internal Revenue Code to apply to Partnership Agreement. You represent the facts to be as follows: Partnership is a general partnership created prior to October 8, 1990, under the terms of the Partnership Agreement.
200015011(PDF, 11K)	4/14/2000
Requesting a ruling concerning the federal income tax consequences of a proposed contribution of substantially all of the assets of three trusts to a limited liability company under § 721 of the Internal Revenue Code. FACTS: TT is the trustee of TR1, TR2, and TR3. TT proposes to contribute substantially all of the assets of each trust to LLC, a newly formed limited liability company that will be taxed as a partnership.
200015010(PDF, 11K)	4/14/2000
Requesting a ruling concerning the federal income tax consequences of a proposed contribution of substantially all of the assets of three trusts to a limited liability company under § 721 of the Internal Revenue Code. FACTS: TT is the trustee of TR1, TR2, and TR3. TT proposes to contribute substantially all of the assets of each trust to LLC, a newly formed limited liability company that will be taxed as a partnership.
200015009(PDF, 11K)	4/14/2000
Requesting a ruling concerning the federal income tax consequences of a proposed contribution of substantially all of the assets of three trusts to a limited liability company under § 721 of the Internal Revenue Code. FACTS: TT is the trustee of TR1, TR2, and TR3. TT proposes to contribute substantially all of the assets of each trust to LLC, a newly formed limited liability company that will be taxed as a partnership.
200015008(PDF, 8.6K)	4/14/2000
Requested a ruling concerning the application of § 2601 of the Internal Revenue Code. Decedent died in 1999, unmarried with no issue. Decedent had been under a guardianship of her person and estate since the age of 14, and was adjudged incompetent in 1928 when she reached the age of majority.
200015007(PDF, 49K)	4/14/2000
Issues: (1) Whether the self-dealing penalties of § 4941 would apply have if: a. all of the partners agreed to sell the partnership; b. the foundation were to sell its interest to a third party, either separately or as part of a transaction involving the sale of all partnership interests; c. if the other partners were to purchase the foundation's interest at fair market value to facilitate a sale of all interests to a third party? (2) Whether the exception found in § 4941(d)(2)(F) regarding liquidation of corporations would apply if all of the partners agreed to dissolve or liquidate the partnership. (3) What are the maximum penalties under § 4941 in any of the above situations. (4) Whether a private letter ruling could be obtained by the foundation covering any of the above situations.
200015006(PDF, 75K)	4/14/2000
Request for rulings on the federal income tax consequences of a proposed transaction. The rulings contained in this letter are based on the facts and representations submitted by the taxpayer and accompanied by a penalties of perjury statement executed by an appropriate party.
200015005(PDF, 74K)	4/14/2000
Issue: (1) Whether the P consolidated return group should be allowed deductions for losses allegedly suffered when mortgage certificates held by wholly-owned subsidiaries of P matured. (2) Whether the transactions at issue constituted a pre-defined series of steps that reached a tax result lacking in economic substance and not intended by Congress. (3) Whether Pp should be recognized for federal income tax purposes.
200015004(PDF, 19K)	4/14/2000
Requesting rulings concerning the application of the generation-skipping transfer tax imposed by § 2601 of the Internal Revenue Code to the proposed division of a trust. According to the facts submitted, in Year 1, Testator and Testator's Wife created an inter vivos trust, Trust I, for the benefit of Testator's daughters, Daughter A, Daughter B, and Daughter C.
200015003(PDF, 21K)	4/14/2000
Request rulings under § 2601 of the Internal Revenue Code. In 1965, Settlor and Spouse created and funded the Intervivos Trust. Child C was designated as trustee, and he has been the trustee since the inception of the trust. Bank was designated as successor trustee. In 1988, Corporation was substituted, by court order, as successor trustee in the place of Bank.
200015002(PDF, 19K)	4/14/2000
Request rulings under § 2601 of the Internal Revenue Code. When the Settlor died in 1979, the residue of his estate passed to the Testamentary Trust created under Clause Eighth of his will. Corporation was designated as the trustee. If Corporation ceases to act as trustee, Successor Bank is to be substituted as the trustee.
200015001(PDF, 47K)	4/14/2000
Issues: (1) Can overstatement of income tax prepayment credits on an individual income tax return (or claim for refund or credit) be considered in a deficiency determination? (2) Can a fraudulent Form W-2 be considered a fraudulent return? Does Internal Revenue Code § 6501(c)(1) apply to a return based on a false Form W-2? Must the civil fraud penalty be assessed, per IRM 121.2.5.6 for the unlimited assessment period of § 6501(c)(1) to apply? (3) Does the period of limitations for making an assessment set forth in I.R.C.§ 6501(a) and the unlimited period in § 6501(c)(1) apply to assessments of overstated prepayment credits made under § 6201(a)(3)? (4) Can reversal of income tax prepayment credit, on the ground that the credit is overstated and does not exist, be considered an assessment under § 6201(a)(3)?

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.

2000 Chief Counsel'sWritten Determinations

2000 Chief Counsel's
Written Determinations