🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242
Private Letter Ruling 201716027 Released April 21, 2017 Mixed outcome

Commodity-note ruling was revoked while subsidiary-income ruling remained

Apply this to your situation

This page covers one taxpayer's ruling from 2017, which can't be cited as precedent. Ezel answers your situation under the current Code and IRS guidance, with citations.

Currency note: this determination was released in 2017
Statutory amendments, regulation changes, court decisions, or later IRS guidance may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current tax advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, threshold, or position mentioned here.
Not precedent. Under 26 U.S.C. § 6110(k)(3), this written determination may not be used or cited as precedent. It resolved one taxpayer's situation on its specific facts, and identifying details were redacted by the IRS before release. The official IRS release (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source.
About this page: The plain-English summary and ruling snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official IRS release. The full text is the IRS's own document.
View official IRS release (PDF)

Plain-English summary

A fund had received an earlier ruling with separate conclusions for commodity-linked-note income and income from an investment in a subsidiary under section 851(b)(2). The IRS revoked only the commodity-linked-note conclusion because issuing a private ruling on that question no longer reflected its current position. The conclusion treating the subsidiary income as qualifying, whether or not attributable to Subpart F income, remained in effect. Because the fund did not request relief under section 7805(b), the commodity-linked-note revocation applied to all open years and future years.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: Which portions of the fund's earlier qualifying-income ruling would the IRS revoke?
  • Outcome: mixed, the commodity-linked-note ruling was revoked retroactively but the subsidiary-income ruling remained in effect
  • Key authorities: IRC §§ 851(b)(2), 7805(b); Rev. Proc. 2017-1 § 11.04

Full text (IRS public release)

Internal Revenue Service                                       Department of the Treasury
                                                               Washington, DC 20224

Number: 201716027                                              Third Party Communication: None
Release Date: 4/21/2017                                        Date of Communication: Not Applicable
Index Number: 851.02-00
                                                               Person To Contact:
------------------                                             ------------------------, ID No. ------------------
--------------                                                 ----------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------   Telephone Number:
------                                                         ----------------------
----------------------------------------------------           Refer Reply To:
---------------------------------                              [CC:FIP:B2]
                                                               PLR-131843-16
                                                               Date:
                                                               January 17, 2017




Legend

Fund                    =            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    ------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------

Dear ------------:

      This letter revokes a part of PLR 200840039 (PLR-155777-07) issued to Fund on
June 13, 2008.

         In PLR 200840039, the Internal Revenue Service (the “Service”) issued rulings
that (i) income and gain from certain commodity-linked notes constitute qualifying
income under section 851(b)(2) (the “CLN Ruling”), and (ii) income derived by Fund
from its investment in the Subsidiary, whether or not attributable to subpart F income, is
income derived from Fund’s business of investing in stock, securities, or currencies and,
therefore, constitutes qualifying income under section 851(b)(2) (the “Subsidiary
Ruling”). In a letter dated September 29, 2016, the Service notified Fund that it was
considering revoking the CLN Ruling.

        Since issuing PLR 200840039, the Service has determined that having provided
a private letter ruling on the issue in the CLN Ruling is not in accord with the current
views of the Service. See Rev. Proc. 2016-50, 2016-43 I.R.B. 522, superseded by Rev.
Proc. 2017-3, 2017-1 I.R.B.130, 140 (section 4.01(44)); see also REG-123600-16, 81
Fed. Reg. 66576-77 (Sept. 28, 2016). Section 11.04 of Rev. Proc. 2017-1, 2017-1
I.R.B. 1, 61, provides, in part, that unless it was part of a closing agreement, a letter
ruling found to be in error or not in accordance with the current views of the Service may
be revoked or modified. Accordingly, the CLN Ruling in PLR 200840039 is revoked.
PLR-131843-16                                 2

The Subsidiary Ruling is not revoked and that portion of PLR 200840039 remains in
effect at this time.

       Section 11.04 of Rev. Proc. 2017-1 also provides that, if a letter ruling is revoked,
the revocation applies to all years open under the statute of limitations on assessment
unless the Service uses its discretionary authority under section 7805(b) to limit the
retroactive effect of the revocation. To date, Fund has not responded to the September
29, 2016, letter from the Service with a request for relief under section 7805(b).
Therefore, the revocation of the CLN Ruling in PLR 200840039 applies retroactively to
all years open under the statute of limitations on assessment as of the date of this letter
and to all future years.

       We are sending a copy of this letter to the appropriate operating division.

                                                  Sincerely,


                                                  Andrea M. Hoffenson
                                                  Andrea M. Hoffenson
                                                  Branch Chief, Branch 2
                                                  Office of Associate Chief Counsel
                                                  (Financial Institutions and Products)

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what the IRS ruled for one taxpayer in 2017, and it can't be cited as precedent. Ezel checks the current Internal Revenue Code and IRS guidance and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.