IRS Written Determinations
Free IRS private letter rulings, technical advice memoranda, and Chief Counsel advice with plain-English summaries and the official IRS release on every page.
No determinations match these filters
Try a different search term or clear the filters.
How basis and other "non-income" adjustments feed a BBA partnership's imputed underpayment
This is informal Chief Counsel advice, written as an email from a Senior Counsel to an examiner, about how the centralized partnership audit regime (BBA) computes an "imputed underpayment" (IU). The c…
To represent an estate in a gift tax exam, get a personal representative appointed by the state court
This is a short piece of Chief Counsel email advice arising from a gift tax examination involving a deceased donor's estate. The question was how someone can properly act for the estate before the IRS…
A change-of-accounting-method file may be disclosed under the 6103 transaction test, but only the parts tied to the issue
This is Chief Counsel email advice about when one taxpayer's return information can be disclosed in another taxpayer's proceeding. An IRS employee asked whether a change of accounting method (CAM) leg…
A partner's tax-exempt status is irrelevant to BBA election-out; only its entity type matters
This is brief Chief Counsel email advice about the centralized partnership audit rules enacted by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 (the BBA). A partnership can elect out of the BBA regime only if all…
A supervised-release condition to "pay taxes" with no fixed sum is not an assessable restitution order
This is Chief Counsel email advice on when the IRS can assess criminal restitution as if it were a tax. Section 6201(a)(4) lets the IRS assess and collect restitution that a criminal court orders a de…
When overpayment interest starts running on a foreign corporation's refund claim when it had no obligation to file a return
When the IRS refunds an overpayment, it usually owes the taxpayer interest running from the date of the overpayment, but a special rule (section 6611(b)(3)) cuts off interest for any period before a r…
Restitution is assessable because the Title 18 conspiracy count embraced the Title 26 false-return count (not a Westbrooks case)
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess court-ordered criminal restitution for unpaid tax as if it were a tax, but only when the restitution was ordered as an independent part of the sentence rat…
This is a Westbrooks case because the defendant was convicted solely of Title 26 crimes, so the restitution is not assessable
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess court-ordered criminal restitution for unpaid tax as if it were a tax, but only when the restitution qualifies (the "Westbrooks" question). This short Chie…
Restitution is assessable because the defendant's Title 26 plea agreement to pay restitution made it an independent part of the sentence (not a Westbrooks case)
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess court-ordered criminal restitution for unpaid tax as if it were a tax, but only when the restitution was ordered as an independent part of the sentence rat…
Restitution is assessable because the Title 18 conspiracy count embraced all the Title 26 false-return counts, so it was an independent part of the sentence (not a Westbrooks bar)
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess and collect court-ordered criminal restitution for unpaid tax as if it were a tax, but only when the restitution was ordered as an independent part of the …
Issuing a Letter 627 and accepting a return as filed is not an "examination," so the section 7605(b) one-inspection rule does not bar examining the return
Section 7605(b) generally limits the IRS to one inspection of a taxpayer's books for a given year unless it follows special reopening procedures. This short Chief Counsel email advises that issuing a …
The six-year assessment period for omitted subpart F income opens the entire return, but a section 6501(c)(4) extension does not revive an already-expired refund-claim period
This Chief Counsel Advice answers two statute-of-limitations questions for a corporate taxpayer that filed amended returns omitting subpart F income. First, when the six-year assessment period under s…
S corporation cannot change its tax year merely to accelerate a refund
Chief Counsel considered whether an S corporation could recover an overpaid federal tax deposit sooner by changing its accounting period. Because the corporation already used a December 31 year-end, S…
Section 6511 limits refunds of interest wrongly collected on restitution
Chief Counsel revisited whether Section 6511 applies when the IRS incorrectly assesses and collects Section 6601 interest on a restitution-based assessment. Even if the IRS should not have imposed the…
Restitution is assessable because the Title 18 conspiracy count includes the conduct of all three Title 26 false-return counts and is due immediately (not a Westbrooks case)
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess court-ordered criminal restitution for a Title 26 tax as if it were a tax, but only when it was imposed as an independent part of the sentence rather than …
Restitution is assessable because it is attributable to both the Title 18 conspiracy count and the Title 26 false-return count for the same year (not a Westbrooks case)
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess court-ordered criminal restitution for a Title 26 tax as if it were a tax, but only when it was imposed as an independent part of the sentence rather than …
Restitution is assessable because, despite some ambiguity, it was listed under Criminal Monetary Penalties and intended as an independent part of the sentence (not a Westbrooks case)
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess court-ordered criminal restitution for a Title 26 tax as if it were a tax, but only when it was imposed as an independent part of the sentence rather than …
This is a Westbrooks case because the Title 26 conduct is separate from the Title 18 conduct and the government represented restitution could only be a condition of supervised release
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess court-ordered criminal restitution for a Title 26 tax as if it were a tax, but only when it was imposed as an independent part of the sentence rather than …
Restitution is subject to the Westbrooks limitation because the court of appeals' mandate says it is due only during the period of supervised release
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess court-ordered criminal restitution for a Title 26 tax as if it were a tax, but when restitution is imposed only as a condition of supervised release it can…
The restitution for the Title 26 (section 7206(1)) counts is subject to Westbrooks, but the larger amount for the 18 U.S.C. 287 counts is not
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess court-ordered criminal restitution for a Title 26 tax as if it were a tax, but restitution ordered solely for Title 26 offenses is limited to the supervise…
Restitution for a conspiracy to file false returns and generate fraudulent refunds is traceable to a Title 26 tax and must be assessed under section 6201(a)(4)
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS must assess court-ordered criminal restitution that is traceable to a Title 26 tax as if it were a tax. This short Chief Counsel email advises that the restitution he…
Restitution is assessable because the sentencing transcript shows it was imposed independently, but the government must wait until non-government victims are paid
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess court-ordered criminal restitution for a Title 26 tax as if it were a tax, but only when it was imposed as an independent part of the sentence rather than …
The entire restitution is assessable because the Title 18 conspiracy count includes all the conduct in the Title 26 false-return count (not a Westbrooks case)
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess court-ordered criminal restitution for a Title 26 tax as if it were a tax, but only when it was ordered as an independent part of the sentence rather than …
Only the restitution tied to the tax-related Title 18 crime is assessable at any time; the Title 26-only portion is subject to the Westbrooks limitation
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess court-ordered criminal restitution for a Title 26 tax as if it were a tax, but restitution ordered solely for Title 26 offenses can be assessed and collect…
Restitution is assessable because the Title 18 counts embrace the single Title 26 count and it was not imposed solely as a condition of supervised release (not a Westbrooks case)
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess court-ordered criminal restitution for a Title 26 tax as if it were a tax, but only when the restitution was ordered as an independent part of the sentence…
Restitution is assessable because it was ordered for a Title 26 crime under a plea agreement and extends beyond supervised release (not a Westbrooks case)
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess court-ordered criminal restitution for a Title 26 tax as if it were a tax, but only when the restitution was ordered as an independent part of the sentence…
Restitution is assessable because it was ordered under a Title 26 plea agreement (not a Westbrooks case)
Under section 6201(a)(4), the IRS can assess court-ordered criminal restitution for a Title 26 tax as if it were a tax, but only when the restitution was ordered as an independent part of the sentence…
No innocent-spouse equitable relief is available for years where a closing agreement left no deficiency, understatement, or unpaid tax, only penalties and interest
Section 6015(f) can give a spouse who filed a joint return equitable relief from joint tax liability, but only in certain circumstances. This short Chief Counsel email advises that for two of the year…
Different deadlines apply to audited and pass-through partnership push-out statements
Chief Counsel advised on the deadlines for furnishing push-out statements under the centralized partnership audit rules. An audited partnership must furnish its statements within 60 days after the adj…
IRS cannot waive matching funds for Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands tax clinics
Chief Counsel considered whether the Low-Income Taxpayer Clinic Program Office could waive matching-fund requirements for grant recipients in Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands. Section 7526(c)(5)…
A partnership's designated individual needs no relationship to its entity partnership representative
This short Chief Counsel email explains who may serve as the designated individual for an entity partnership representative. The designated individual does not need any relationship with the entity se…
A levy can reach current and future rent fixed by an existing lease
Chief Counsel addressed which levy form the IRS should use for rent payable under a contract and whether using the other form changes the levy’s reach. The email found no authority expressly requiring…
A claim is for refund only if allowance would return money to the taxpayer
Chief Counsel explained how to distinguish a refund claim from a claim that merely seeks to reduce an unpaid assessment. A balance due when the claim is filed does not decide the issue. The key questi…
Section 7507 blocks recovery of a tentative refund paid to a bank in receivership
The FDIC filed Form 1139 for an insolvent bank in receivership, claimed the bank’s full 2018 alternative minimum tax credit, and received a tentative refund. The IRS later concluded that the request n…
Microcaptive promoters can face Section 6700 penalties for false tax claims and material factual statements
Chief Counsel considered what types of false or fraudulent statements can support a Section 6700 penalty against a promoter of abusive tax shelters. The promoter marketed microcaptive insurance transa…
Foreign tax credit refund cannot preserve deductions for the same taxes in closed years
A corporation timely changed several years from deducting foreign taxes to claiming foreign tax credits under the special ten-year refund period. The change created deficiencies in earlier years whose…
Defaulting purchaser forfeits entire payment at IRS sale
Chief Counsel considered a deferred-payment IRS property sale in which the purchaser defaulted and the area director declared the sale void. The question was whether the IRS could return part of the p…
Partnership-related adjustments enter imputed underpayment computation
Chief Counsel addressed the interaction between the BBA centralized partnership audit rules and self-employment tax. It advised that every adjustment to a partnership-related item enters the imputed u…
Reprisal concern does not alone permit unannounced third-party summons
Chief Counsel considered whether the IRS could contact or summon a former employee without notifying the taxpayer when the former employee feared reprisal. Section 7602(c)(3) permits the IRS to make t…
Foreign-corporation reporting penalty may apply separately to each spouse
Chief Counsel considered Section 6038 penalties when one spouse is treated as constructively owning a foreign corporation through the other spouse. The IRS may assess the penalty separately against ea…
Appraiser interview is not required before Section 6695A assessment
Chief Counsel considered whether an IRS penalty examiner must send a particular letter or information document request, or interview the appraiser, before assessing the Section 6695A penalty. It found…
COVID relief does not extend offer deadline outside relief window
Chief Counsel considered whether COVID-19 deadline relief extended a 24-month period for the IRS to accept an offer in compromise described in the email as an OIC-DALT. Notice 2020-23, its predecessor…
Specific Social Security levy may outlast collection period
Chief Counsel explained what happens to levies when the collection statute expiration date, or CSED, passes. A continuous wage levy under Section 6331(e) must be released at the end of the CSED even i…
Insolvent-bank immunity does not stop interest or estimated-tax additions
An insolvent bank entered FDIC receivership and qualified for Section 7507(a) immunity from assessment, collection, and payment of income tax while funds were needed to pay depositors. The IRS advised…
Restitution was solely a condition of supervised release
A defendant was ordered to pay restitution for two Title 26 crimes after pleading not guilty, so there was no plea agreement authorizing restitution as an independent part of the sentence. The judgmen…
Restitution was independently imposed under the mandatory statute
A defendant was convicted of a Title 18 conspiracy to defraud the United States and a Title 26 offense involving a false return. The conduct alleged for the tax count was entirely included within the …
Refund after the suit deadline would be erroneous
A taxpayer apparently filed a timely refund claim because Section 7503 extended the filing date, but the IRS incorrectly denied the claim as late. The taxpayer then did not bring a refund suit within …
No tax restitution was available for assessment
A criminal plea agreement identified restitution payable to a nongovernment victim, and the judgment ordered exactly that amount. The court did not order restitution for the Title 26 count, despite la…
Refund extension could not be signed after the suit deadline
The IRS issued a claim-disallowance notice that started the two-year period for filing a refund suit. Although Section 6532(a)(2) permits the parties to extend that period using Form 907, the extensio…
Restitution above the plea amount was a supervised-release condition
The restitution ordered by the court exceeded the amount stated in the plea agreement. The IRS advised that the restitution therefore could only have been imposed as a condition of supervised release …
Plea-agreement restitution was independently assessable
The court ordered restitution under the plea agreement and in the exact amount set by that agreement. The IRS advised that the case therefore did not fall under the Westbrooks rule for restitution imp…
Title 18 plea restitution was not a Westbrooks case
The defendant pleaded guilty to two Title 18 counts, and the plea agreement authorized restitution in the exact amount the court ordered. The IRS advised that the restitution therefore did not fall un…
Restitution matched the plea agreement
A plea agreement authorized restitution, and the court ordered the same amount stated in that agreement. The IRS advised that the case therefore did not fall under the Westbrooks rule for restitution …
Trial-based Title 26 restitution was a Westbrooks case
The defendant was convicted only of Title 26 offenses after a trial and had no plea agreement authorizing restitution. The IRS advised that the matter was therefore a Westbrooks case, meaning the rest…
Section 6700 reaches false micro-captive claims, ongoing fees, and individual promoters
A promoter marketed a turnkey micro-captive insurance program as eligible for insurance deductions and the Section 831(b) income exclusion. The IRS advised that Section 6700 covers both direct claims …
Section 6700 penalty base includes post-formation promoter fees
A promoter organized micro-captive insurance companies and then received continuing maintenance and management fees. It argued that Section 6700 penalties could be calculated only on income earned fro…
Restitution imposed only during supervised release is a Westbrooks case
Chief Counsel advised that a criminal restitution order was subject to the Westbrooks limitation because the judgment imposed payment to the United States only as a condition of supervised release und…
Tax matters partner authority does not extend to a Section 6707A penalty
An IRS email addressed who may sign a limitations extension involving a Section 6707A penalty. The response stated that a tax matters partner signs only TEFRA statute extensions. A Section 6707A penal…
IRS sustains audit treatment in a heavily redacted transaction
This Chief Counsel Advice addresses the tax treatment of a fee and the form of a proposed acquisition involving a publicly traded taxpayer, a target, and newly formed entities. The IRS release redacts…
Mandatory restitution order makes Westbrooks inapplicable
This brief Chief Counsel email addresses whether a criminal restitution case was subject to Westbrooks. The district judge's restitution order expressly stated that the defendant was subject to mandat…
What these documents are
- Private letter rulings (PLRs): A taxpayer asked the IRS to rule on a planned transaction before doing it. The ruling shows exactly how the IRS applied the Code to those facts.
- Technical advice memoranda (TAMs): The IRS National Office answering a question raised during an audit or other proceeding.
- Chief Counsel advice (CCAs): IRS lawyers advising their own field staff on how to apply the law.
- Determination letters: Rulings on exempt-organization matters, such as whether an organization qualifies under § 501(c)(3) or a foundation's grant procedures pass § 4945.
- Not precedent, still useful: Under 26 U.S.C. § 6110(k)(3) none of these can be cited as precedent. They remain the best public window into how the IRS actually rules on facts like yours, and practitioners read them for exactly that.