In This Section
Introduction
Jurisdiction of Appeals
Collection Due Process
Closing Agreements
Early Referrals
Mediation and Arbitration
Notice of Deficiency Rescissions
Important References
Web Links
Part I
Introduction
Appeals Mission
Strategic Priorities
Appeals Organization
Introduction
Appeals Mission
The mission of Appeals is to resolve tax controversies, without litigation, on
a basis that is fair and impartial to both the Government and the taxpayer,
and in a manner that will enhance voluntary compliance and public
confidence in the integrity and efficiency of the Service. Today, alternative
dispute resolution instead of litigation is widely valued and applied in many
areas of our society. Customers expect more dispute resolution options,
and we have adapted our approach to keep up with the new methods and
developments.
Our vision is to provide premier dispute resolution services that meet our
customer needs through a highly skilled workforce, utilizing innovative
approaches, dynamic processes, and interpersonal skills that promote
quality business results. Our goal is to increase confidence in the overall
fairness of the tax system by providing an efficient, independent
administrative appeal process for all taxpayers.
Strategic Priorities
• Ensure that each taxpayer has the right to resolve a dispute in an
independent and timely administrative process, without going to court.
• Reduce the length of the Appeals process.
• Improve taxpayer awareness of Appeal rights and processes.
• Increase confidence in the overall fairness of the tax system by
providing an efficient, independent administrative appeal process for all
taxpayers.
Appeals Organization and Contacts
The Appeals organization has a toll-free help line for questions related to
the Appeals process. The system automatically routes callers to the
appropriate Appeals Office.
Toll-Free Customer Service: 1-877-457-5055
Part II
Jurisdiction of Appeals
Appeals Role in Dispute Resolution Background
Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1998
Appeals Expectations
Appeals Customer Service Program
Appeals Alternative Dispute Resolution Process
Representatives Qualified to Practice Before Appeals
How to Appeal a Decision by the IRS
Appeals Conferences
Ex Parte Communications
Jurisdiction of Appeals
Appeals Role in Dispute Resolution
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
(1) Appeals is the Internal Revenue Service’s dispute resolution forum. The
Commissioner has granted Appeals authority to consider and negotiate
settlements of internal revenue controversies (see Delegation Order No.
66, as revised, in the Handbook of Delegation Orders and Policy Statement
P-8-47 in "Policies of the Internal Revenue Service").
(2) Appeals’ responsibility includes but is not limited to:
the administrative determination of liability for income, estate gift,
employment and excise taxes, plus additions to tax additional amounts
and IRC Chapter 68 penalties,
offers-in-compromise,
penalty appeals,
abatement of interest,
administrative costs under IRC Section 7430,
jeopardy levies,
recommendations concerning settlement offers in refund suits
Code Section 534(b) letters,
refund claims including Joint Committee cases, and
over assessments in which a taxpayer appeals the decision of a District
Director, a Service Center Director, Austin Compliance Center Director, or
the Assistant Commissioner (International)
(3) Appeals jurisdiction includes, but is not limited to, cases that are subject
to notice of deficiency procedures or that involve a tax liability. In most
cases, a preliminary (30 or 60 day) letter has been issued to the taxpayer
by the district or service center director. In general, taxpayers request an
appeals conference and, when required, file a protest against the proposed
deficiency, over assessment, or determination (See IRM 8.6, Conference
and Settlement Practice for protest requirements.)
Background
In 1927, the Internal Revenue Service established an administrative appeal
process to resolve tax disputes without litigation. Local Appeals Officers
have traditionally reported to different managers than the Service officials
who proposed the adjustment. Appeals has historically been able to settle
the vast majority of the cases that come within its jurisdiction.
The inventory of cases handled by Appeals falls into two major categories ­
- nondocketed and docketed – determined by whether the case is pending
in the United States Tax Court. Nondocketed cases typically involve an
administrative protest by the taxpayer of the findings and conclusions of the
Examination, Collection, or other IRS function that initially considers a
taxpayer's case. The taxpayer's protest is typically followed by a
conference, or series of conferences, with the taxpayer or the taxpayer's
representative, during which Appeals and the taxpayer attempt to reach
resolution of the issues in dispute. Docketed cases involve disputes where
the taxpayer has filed a petition in the U.S. Tax Court, contesting a
determination made by the Service in a statutory notice of deficiency.
Following the filing of the petition, taxpayers who have not previously
availed themselves of the opportunity for an Appeals conference generally
are afforded an opportunity to resolve their case with Appeals before the
case proceeds further in the litigation process. In both types of disputes,
Appeals has broad authority to negotiate settlements by applying a
"hazards of litigation" standard.
Proceedings before Appeals have traditionally followed a much less formal
course than court proceedings. While proceedings before Appeals are
designed to be fair and impartial, they are not subject to judicial rules of
evidence or procedure.
For a full discussion of Tax Court small case procedures, refer to Section
X “Tax Court” of this CD-ROM.
Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1998, (Revenue Procedure
2000-43)
As ultimately enacted, § 1001(a)(4) of RRA 98 did not impose a
comprehensive overhaul of Appeals’ processes. Instead, that section
requires the IRS, as part of its reorganization plan, to establish an
independent Office of Appeals "within the Internal Revenue Service." The
plan must prohibit ex parte communications "to the extent such
communications appear to compromise the independence" of Appeals.
When the evolution of § 1001(a)(4) of RRA 98 during the1998 legislative
process is considered in light of Appeals longstanding methods of
operation, it can be fairly concluded that Appeals must be accorded a
significant degree of independence from other IRS components, and
should be mindful to avoid ex parte communications with other IRS
functions that might appear to compromise that independence. The
statutory provision cannot, however, be interpreted as mandating a major
redesign of the fundamental processes Appeals has traditionally followed
to carry out its dispute resolution mission.
The procedures set forth in this Rev. Proc. 2000-43 are designed to
accommodate the overall interests of tax administration, while preserving
operational features that are vital to Appeals’ case resolution processes
within the structure of the IRS and ensuring more open lines of
communication between Appeals and the taxpayer/representative. Thus, in
order to preserve the informal give-and-take and flexibilities that have been
conducive to achieving settlements in Appeals, the guidance provided in
this Rev. Proc. 2000-43 does not adopt the formal ex parte procedures
that would apply in a judicial proceeding. The guidance is designed to
ensure the independence of the Appeals organization, while preserving the
role of Appeals as a flexible administrative settlement authority, operating
within the Internal Revenue Service's overall framework of tax
administration responsibilities.
For example:
Appeals will retain procedures for (a) returning cases that are not ready for
Appeals consideration, (b) raising certain new issues, and (c) seeking
review and comments from the originating IRS function with respect to new
information or evidence furnished by the taxpayer or representative.
Appeals will continue to be able to obtain legal advice from the Office of
Chief Counsel, subject to limitations designed to ensure that the advice to
Appeals is not provided by the same field attorneys who previously gave
advice on the same issue to the IRS officials who made the determination
Appeals is reviewing. These limitations adopt some of the suggestions
received in response to Notice 99-50 and reflect a balance between
meeting Appeals’ needs for legal assistance and avoiding ex parte
communications that might appear to compromise Appeals’ independence.
Finally, the Revenue Procedure makes clear that the Commissioner and
others responsible for overall IRS operations (including Appeals) may
continue to communicate ex parte with Appeals in order to fulfill their
responsibilities.
Appeals Expectations - Yours and Ours
The Appeals organization has thirty-three offices nationwide, which are
separate from and independent of the IRS office that proposed the
adjustment to your tax return. The Appeals mission is to resolve tax
disputes without litigation, and be fair and impartial to both the taxpayer and
the Government. An Appeals Officer will review the strengths and
weaknesses of the issues in your case and give them a "fresh look."
Appeals Office reviews are conducted in an informal manner, by
correspondence, telephone or at a personal conference. Most differences
are settled in these appeals without expensive and time-consuming court
trials. Appeals will consider any reason you have for disagreeing, except for
moral, religious, political, constitutional, conscientious objection, or similar
grounds. Our goal is to provide a forum for us to work together to resolve
the tax dispute.
Taxpayers are generally entitled to:
• Appeal disputes arising under the Internal Revenue Code, regulations and
procedures;
• An explanation of the Appeals process;
• A timely conference and resolution of their dispute
See Appeals Policy Statement P-8-1, Publication 1, Publication 5, and
Publication 556 for more detailed information.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Our commitment to you is to:
Explain your appeal rights and the Appeals process
Listen to your concerns
Be courteous and professional
Be responsive (and allow you the time you need to respond to any
requests for information)
Be fair and impartial
The handling of your case will be expedited if you provide us:
A list of all issues that you don’t agree with and tell us why you don’t agree
Any additional information or documentation that will be helpful to your
case
A statement as to your understanding of the facts and law
What you believe is the appropriate compromise or concession by the
government or yourself
The best time to contact you
The month and date by when you would expect to close your case with us
Appeals Customer Service Program
Announcement 2000-80 informs the public of the new Appeals Officer
(Customer Service/Outreach) program. Appeals now has a toll-free number
for contacting an Appeals Officer (Customer Service/Out-reach) who will
provide assistance with an Appeals tax matter. Previously, Announcement
99–98, 1999–42 I.R.B. 520, listed telephone numbers which were not tollfree. The toll-free number for contacting an Appeals Officer (Customer
Service/Out-reach) is 1-877-457-5055. The new toll-free system will
automatically send the call to the nearest Appeals Officer (Customer
Service/Outreach). This new service emphasizes Appeal’s commitment to
advancing its customer service program under the Internal Revenue
Service Re-structuring and Reform Act of 1998.
Appeals presently has an Appeals Officer (Customer Service/Outreach) in
each of the thirty-three Appeals Offices nation-wide. A list of the office
locations appears at the end of this announcement. The duties of the
Appeals Officer (Customer Service/Outreach) include:
1) Serving as proponents of the Appeals process;
2) Providing assistance to taxpayers during their administrative appeal;
3) Handling taxpayers’ complaints regarding Appeals;
4) Participating in National Problem Solving Days;
5) Coordinating with Taxpayer Advocate Service representatives on
Appeals matters;
6) Performing Appeals education and outreach with the public, as well as
other IRS functions;
7) Ensuring that taxpayer rights are not abridged; and
8) Identifying problems and trends, including analyzing customer survey
and balanced measures results. The Appeals Officers (Customer
Service/Outreach) endorse the Commissioner’s concept for modernizing
the Internal Revenue Service to focus on:
1) Service to Each Taxpayer
2) Service to All Taxpayers
3) Productivity Through a Quality Work Environment
Please call 1-877-457-5055 whenever you need assistance with an
Appeals tax matter.
Appeals on the World-Wide Web
For further information on the Appeals organization, visit the recently
updated Appeals section of the IRS Web Site at
www.irs.gov/prod/ind_info/appeals. Included are links to information on:
• Appeals Redesign and Program Development - An introduction to the
Appeals organization;
• Appeals Expectations-Yours and Ours - A review of mutual
commitments for the Appeals Process;
• Alternative Dispute Resolution Programs - Are you having trouble
resolving your Appeals case?;
• Appeal Rights - IRS publications providing detailed information on what
can be appealed;
• Appeals Officer (Customer Service/Outreach) Program - How to
contact nationwide Appeals Officers (Customer Service/Outreach) and their
role in the Appeals process;
• Other Appeals Programs - Collection Appeals, Innocent Spouse,
Bankruptcy, Offer-In-Compromise, and Industry Specialization; and
• Other Sites - Various sites and publications including the new IRS
organization, tax law questions, U.S. Tax Court Site, where to get
assistance.
Appeals Officer (Customer Service/Outreach) Program
[Office Location]
Toll-Free Number: 1-877-457-5055
Phoenix, AZ
Laguna Niguel, CA
Los Angeles, CA
San Francisco, CA
San Jose, CA
Denver, CO
East Hartford, CT
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Jacksonville, FL
Atlanta, GA
Chicago, IL
Indianapolis, IN
New Orleans, LA
Boston, MA
Baltimore, MD
Detroit, MI
St. Paul, MN
St. Louis, MO
Greensboro, NC
Newark, NJ
Buffalo, NY
Hempstead, NY
New York, NY
Cleveland, OH
Oklahoma City, OK
Philadelphia, PA
Nashville, TN
Austin, TX
Dallas, TX
Houston, TX
Richmond, VA
Seattle, WA
Milwaukee, WI.
Appeals Administrative Dispute Resolution Process
The Appeals Office is the only level of appeal within the IRS, and generally
is the principal administrative function that exercises settlement authority to
resolve tax disputes for cases that are not docketed in the U.S. Tax Court.
The National Director of Appeals, as the administrative dispute resolution
specialist in tax matters for the Commissioner, has line authority over the
Appeals field operations throughout the United States. For a full analysis
of the Tax Court small case procedures, see Section X “Tax Court” of
this CD-ROM.
The Service supports the development and use of alternative dispute
resolution (ADR) techniques by Appeals to create an administrative forum,
independent of compliance functions, to efficiently prevent or resolve
disputes. Appeals is encouraged to survey its customers and expand ADR
test programs to enhance taxpayer service. For a full analysis of Alternate
Dispute Resolution Procedures, see Section IX “Alternative Dispute
Resolution” of this CD-ROM.
Representatives Qualified to Practice Before Appeals
Qualifications for Practice Before the Internal Revenue Service are defined
in Circular No. 230, Regulations Governing the Practice of Attorneys,
Certified Public Accountants, Enrolled Agents, Enrolled Actuaries, and
Appraisers before the Internal Revenue Service, and 26 CFR 601.501–509
inclusive. Sections 10.5(c) and 10.7, Circular No. 230, permit defined
individuals to practice without enrollment.
You can represent yourself in Appeals, and you may bring another
person with you to support your position. If you want to be represented by
someone, the person you choose to represent you must be an attorney, a
certified public accountant, or an enrolled agent authorized to practice
before the IRS. If you plan to have your representative talk to us without
you, we need a copy of a completed power of attorney (Form 2848, Power
of Attorney and Declaration of Representative).
Confidentiality privilege. Generally, the same confidentiality protection
that you have with an attorney also applies to certain communications that
you have with federally authorized practitioners. See Confidentiality
privilege in Section VI “Examination” of this CD-ROM.
At the conclusion of the Appeals process, the Appeals Officer will
explain any IRS payment options and interest computations, including
installment payment agreements and offers-in-compromise.
How to Appeal a Decision by the IRS
1.
Appeals will consider matters under its small case request procedures if
the total amount for any tax period is not more than $50,000. In computing
the total amount, include a proposed increase or decrease in tax (including
penalties), or claimed refund. For an offer in compromise, in calculating the
total amount, include the total unpaid tax, penalty and interest due.
For a small case request, the taxpayer needs to send a written request
that asks for Appeals consideration, indicates the changes the taxpayer
doesn’t agree with and why the taxpayer doesn’t agree. With the exception
of the special liability types listed in (4) and (5), the protest rules vary solely
by money amounts, instead of considering the source (i.e. field, Office
Examination, or service center) from which the case is transferred to
Appeals.
A written protest is required to obtain Appeals consideration if the total
amount for any tax period is more than $50,000.
2. Special appeal procedures may be provided for some kinds of cases, such
as for appeals of liens, levies, seizures or installment agreements, for
which an appeal request form is provided. See Publication 1660,
Collection Appeal Rights.
3. A written protest by the taxpayer is required to obtain consideration in all
employee plan and exempt organization cases.
4. A written protest by the taxpayer is required to obtain Appeals
consideration in all partnership and S corporation cases.
5. When a written protest by the taxpayer is required, it must include the
taxpayer’s name, address and daytime telephone number, a copy of the
letter showing the proposed changes and findings (or the date and symbols
from the letter), identification of the tax periods involved, a list of the
changes the taxpayer doesn’t agree with and why, the facts supporting the
taxpayer’s position on any disagreed issue, and the law or authority, if any,
on which the taxpayer relies. The protest must be signed under the
penalties of perjury. See Publication 5, Your Appeal Rights and How To
Prepare a Protest If You Don’t Agree, for more information.
Appeals Conferences
(1) Appeals conferences are informal to promote frank discussion and
mutual understanding. Ideological kinds of arguments are not considered.
(2) The appeals officer must handle cases objectively with the goal of
reaching a sound decision based upon the merits of the issues in dispute
and not with the attitude that settlements must be obtained.
Conducting Conferences
The appeals officer should strive to resolve the disputed issues in a quasijudicial manner. It is essential to have an open mind and genuine interest in
working out a mutually acceptable agreement.
Conference techniques will vary among cases and representatives, but
there is no substitute for preparation, judgment and common sense. The
appeals officer, taxpayers, and representatives should set realistic target
dates for the submission of additional information, proposals and
counterproposals of settlement and understand the need to adhere to
them.
Participation in Conferences by Other Service Employees
If advisable, Appeals may request representatives of the IRS, engineering,
or other experts to attend conferences. District Counsel personnel will
generally not be involved in appeals conferences but may be present in
cases where criminal prosecution was recommended by the Department of
Justice and the fraud penalty is contested.
Ex Parte Communications
Prohibition Of Ex Parte Communications Between Appeals Officers And
Other Internal Revenue Service Employees, Revenue Procedure 2000-43:
Notice 99-50, 1999-40 I.R.B. 444 (October 4, 1999), set forth a proposed
revenue procedure concerning the ex parte communication prohibition. The
proposed revenue procedure provided guidance in the form of a series of
questions and answers that address situations frequently encountered by
the Service during the course of an administrative appeal and invited public
comment. The Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue
Service considered all comments received, and the proposed revenue
procedure has been modified to take into account the concerns raised.
Specifically, the scope of permissible communications has been clarified,
limitations have been placed on communications between Appeals and
certain employees in the Office of Chief Counsel, concerns about
communications that take place in the context of multi-functional meetings
have been addressed, and other questions and answers have been
modified. In addition, new questions and answers have been included to
define key terms and clarify responsibilities of the parties, permit taxpayers/
representatives to waive the prohibition, and to address certain
management issues.
Ex Parte Frequently Asked Questions
RRA 98, Guidance Concerning The Ex Parte Communications
Prohibition Described In § 1001(A)(4) Of The Internal Revenue Service
Restructuring And Reform Act Of 1998
Q-1 What is an ex parte communication and when is it prohibited?
A-1 For the purposes of this revenue procedure, ex parte communications
are communications that take place between Appeals and another Service
function without the participation of the taxpayer or the taxpayer’s
representative (taxpayer/ representative). While the legislation refers to
"appeals officers," the overall intent of the ex parte provision is to ensure
the independence of the entire Appeals organization. Ex parte
communications between any Appeals employee, e.g., Appeals Officers,
Appeals Team Case Leaders, Appeals Tax Computation Specialists, and
employees of other Internal Revenue Service offices are prohibited to the
extent that such communications appear to compromise the independence
of Appeals.
Q-2 Is the prohibition on ex parte communications limited to oral
communications?
A-2 No. The prohibition is not limited to oral communications. It applies to
any form of communication, oral or written (manually or computer
generated).
Q-3 Are communications between Appeals Officers and other Appeals
employees subject to the prohibition on ex parte communications?
A-3 No. As indicated in A-1 above, the ex parte communication prohibition
was intended to preserve the independence of the Appeals organization as
a whole. Intra-Appeals communications during the deliberation process do
not compromise or appear to compromise that independence. Appeals
employees may communicate freely with other Appeals employees without
inviting the taxpayer/representative to participate.
Q-4 Is the administrative file transmitted to Appeals by the office that
made the determination which is subject to the Appeals process (the
originating function) considered to be an ex parte communication
within the context of this revenue procedure?
A-4 No. The administrative file is not considered to be an ex parte
communication within the context of this revenue procedure. The
administrative file, containing the proposed determination and the
taxpayer’s protest or other approved means of communicating
disagreement with the proposed determination, sets forth the boundaries of
the dispute between the taxpayer and the Service and forms the basis for
Appeals to assume jurisdiction.
Q-5 Does the prohibition on ex parte communications extend to
discussions between Appeals employees and the originating function
during the course of preliminary review of a newly assigned case?
A-5 It depends on the nature of the communication. During the preliminary
review of a newly assigned case, officials in Appeals may ask questions
that involve ministerial, administrative, or procedural matters and do not
address the substance of the issues or positions taken in the case. For
example, Appeals employees may make the following types of inquiries
without involving the taxpayer/representative:
� Questions about whether certain information was requested and
whether it was received.
� Questions about whether a document referred to in the workpapers
that the Appeals Officer cannot locate in the file is available.
� Questions to clarify the content of illegible documents or writings.
� Questions about case controls on the IRS’s management
information systems.
� Questions relating to tax calculations that are solely mathematical
in nature.
Communications with the originating function which extend beyond matters
of the type described above and address the substance of the issues in the
case are prohibited unless the taxpayer is given the opportunity to
participate. Examples of prohibited communications include:
� Discussions about the accuracy of the facts presented by the
taxpayer and the relative importance of the facts to the
determination.
� Discussions of the relative merits or alternative legal interpretations
of authorities cited in a protest or in a report prepared by the
originating function.
� Discussions of the originating function’s perception of the demeanor
or credibility of the taxpayer or taxpayer’s representative.
Q-6 Does the ex parte communications prohibition apply to Appeals
consideration of cases which originated in the Collection function,
e.g., collection due process (CDP) appeals, collection appeals
program (CAP) cases, offers in compromise, trust fund recovery
penalty cases, etc.?
A-6 Yes. The principles applicable to discussions between Appeals
employees and officials in other originating functions also apply to
discussions between Appeals and Collection employees. Appeals may not
engage in discussions of the strengths and weaknesses of the issues and
positions in the case, which would appear to compromise Appeals’
independence. The taxpayer/representative should be given an opportunity
to participate in any discussion that involves matters other than ministerial,
administrative or procedural matters.
Section 3401 of RRA 98 (§§ 6320 and 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code),
regarding due process in IRS collection actions, states that at a hearing,
the Appeals Officer must obtain verification that the requirements of any
applicable law or administrative procedure have been met.
Communications seeking to verify compliance with legal and administrative
requirements are similar to the ministerial, administrative or procedural
inquiries discussed in A-5 above. Therefore, such communications are not
subject to the prohibition on ex parte communications.
Q-7 Does the prohibition on ex parte communications change the
criteria for premature referrals?
A-7 As a general rule, there is no change to current criteria or procedures.
In essence, RRA 98 reinforces the instructions in Section 8.2.1.2 of the
Internal Revenue Manual (IRM) and reaffirms Appeals role as the
settlement arm of the Service. If a case is not ready for Appeals
consideration, Appeals may return it for further development or for other
reasons described in IRM 8.2.1.2. Appeals may communicate with the
originating function regarding the anticipated return of the case, but may
not engage in a discussion of matters beyond the types of ministerial,
administrative or procedural matters set forth in A-5 as part of a discussion
of whether the premature referral guidelines require further activity by the
originating function.
Q-8 Is there any change to the Appeals new issue policy?
A-8 No. The prohibition against ex parte communications does not affect
Appeals’ existing policy about raising new issues in Appeals. However, any
new issue must first satisfy Appeals’ new issue policy. New issues must
continue to meet the material and substantial tests of IRM 8.6.1.4 and
succeeding sections. If discussions with the originating function are needed
in order to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the possible new
issue, the taxpayer/representative must be given an opportunity to
participate in such discussions. Appeals will continue to follow the
principles of Policy Statement P-8-49 and the General Guidelines outlined
in IRM 8.6.1.4.2 in deciding whether or not to raise a new issue.
Q-9 May Appeals continue to have ongoing communication with the
originating function during the course of an appeal?
A-9 Yes. However, the prohibition on ex parte communications will affect
the manner in which Appeals has traditionally operated during the course
of the appeal. Appeals must give the taxpayer/representative the
opportunity to participate in any discussions with the originating function
which concern matters beyond the ministerial, administrative or procedural
matters described in A-5 above.
Q-10 What should Appeals do if new information or evidence is
submitted? Can Appeals still return the new material to the
originating function for review and comment?
A-10 There is no change to existing procedures. The principles in IRM
8.2.1.2.2 remain in effect. The originating function should be given the
opportunity to timely review and comment on significant new information
presented by the taxpayer. Significant new information is information of a
non-routine nature which, in the judgment of Appeals, may have had an
impact on the originating function’s findings or which may impact on the
Appeals' independent evaluation of the litigating hazards. Generally, the
review can be accomplished by sending the material to the originating
function while Appeals retains jurisdiction of the case and proceeds with
resolution of other issues. However, if it appears that important new
information or evidence was purposely withheld from the originating
function, the entire case should be returned to the originating function and
jurisdiction relinquished pursuant to IRM 8.2.1.2.2(3). The
taxpayer/representative must be notified when a case is returned to the
originating function or new material not available during initial consideration
has been sent to the originating function. The results of the originating
functions review of the new information will be communicated to the
taxpayer/representative.
Q-11 Does the prohibition on ex parte communications have any
impact on the relationship between Appeals and Counsel?
A-11 Chief Counsel is the legal adviser to the Commissioner of Internal
Revenue and his or her officers and employees (including employees of
Appeals) on all matters pertaining to the interpretation, administration and
enforcement of the internal revenue laws and related statutes. Attorneys in
the Office of Chief Counsel are expected to provide legal advice based on
a determination of "…the reasonable meaning of various Code provisions
in light of the Congressional purpose in enacting them," without bias in
favor of either the Government or the taxpayer. Rev. Proc. 64-22, 1964-1
C.B. 689. To balance Appeals employees’ need to obtain legal advice with
the requirement that they avoid ex parte communications that would
appear to compromise Appeals' independence, the following limitations will
apply to communications between Appeals employees and attorneys in the
Office of Chief Counsel in cases not docketed in the United States Tax
Court:
• Appeals employees should not communicate ex parte regarding an issue
in a case pending before them with Counsel field attorneys who have
previously provided advice on that issue in the case to the IRS employees
who made the determination Appeals is reviewing. Counsel will assign a
different attorney to provide assistance to Appeals. If an Appeals
employee believes it is necessary to seek advice from any Counsel field
attorney who previously provided advice to the originating function
regarding that issue in the case, the taxpayer/representative will be
provided an opportunity to participate in any such communications.
• Appeals' requests for legal advice that raise questions that cannot be
answered with a high degree of certainty by application of established
principles of law to particular facts will be referred to the Chief Counsel
National Office and will be handled as requests for field service advice or
technical advice, as appropriate, in accordance with applicable
procedures. The response of the National Office to Appeals will be
disclosed to the taxpayer in accordance with § 6110.
Appeals employees are cautioned that, while they may obtain legal advice
from the Office of Chief Counsel, they remain responsible for independently
evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the specific issues presented
by the cases assigned to them, and for making independent judgments
concerning the overall strengths and weaknesses of the cases and the
hazards of litigation. Consistent with this assignment of responsibility,
Counsel attorneys will not provide advice that includes recommendations of
settlement ranges for an issue in a case pending before Appeals or for the
case as a whole.
The foregoing limitations on ex parte communications do not apply to
cases docketed in the United States Tax Court. Docketed cases will be
handled in accordance with Rev. Proc. 87-24, 1987-1 C.B. 720, and the
Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
Q-12 Appeals is required to submit certain cases to the Joint
Committee on Taxation for review. On occasion, the Joint Committee
(or its staff) will question a settlement or raise a new issue. Are
communications with the Joint Committee (or its staff) covered by the
ex parte communications prohibition?
A-12 No. The prohibition applies only to communications between Appeals
and other Internal Revenue Service employees.
Q-13 Does the prohibition on ex parte communications have any
impact on the requirement that Industry Specialization Program (ISP)
issues in cases in Appeals jurisdiction be reviewed and approved by
the Appeals ISP Coordinator?
A-13 No. Existing procedures for review and approval remain in place. The
Appeals ISP Coordinator serves as a resource person for the Appeals
organization. The purpose of the review is to ensure consistency of
settlements and adherence to approved settlement guidelines.
Communications between Appeals employees and the Appeals ISP
Coordinator are entirely internal within Appeals, and consequently, the ex
parte communications prohibition does not apply.
Q-14 Delegation Order 247, 1996-1 C.B. 356, gives Examination case
managers limited settlement authority to resolve ISP coordinated
issues which have Appeals Settlement Guidelines, provided that they
secure the review and approval of both the Examination and Appeals
ISP Coordinators. Would such communications constitute a violation
of the ex-parte communications prohibition?
A-14 No. The purpose of the review is to ensure that the resolution by
Examination fits within the guidelines developed by Appeals and that the
application of the guidelines is consistent. The role of the Appeals ISP
coordinator is directive in nature and has no impact on the independence of
Appeals.
Q-15 Does the prohibition on ex parte communications apply in the
context of meetings which include representatives from Appeals,
Counsel, Collection and Examination (ACCE meetings), industry wide
ISP coordination meetings, or meetings of Compliance Councils or
the Large Case Policy Board?
A-15 Generally, no. Meetings of this type usually involve general
discussions of how to handle technical issues or procedural matters. As
long as the discussions do not identify specific taxpayers, the prohibition on
ex parte communications would not apply. Participants in cross-functional
meetings need to remain cognizant of the prohibition on ex parte
communications and ensure that discussions do not appear to compromise
the independence of Appeals.
Q-16 Does the prohibition on ex parte communications apply to
communications between Appeals and the Commissioner or other
Service officials who have overall supervisory responsibility for IRS
operations?
A-16 No. In accordance with § 7803, the Commissioner is responsible for
managing and directing the administration of the internal revenue laws and
tax conventions to which the United States is a party. In the course of
exercising that statutory responsibility, the Commissioner and those
officials, such as the Deputy Commissioner Operations, who have overall
supervisory responsibility for IRS operations may communicate with
Appeals about specific cases or issues and may direct that other IRS
officials participate in meetings or discussions about such cases or issues
without providing the taxpayer or representative an opportunity to
participate.
Q-17 Does the prohibition on ex parte communications apply to
discussions Appeals employees have with personnel in the IRS
competent authority office regarding a taxpayer’s request for relief
under a tax treaty?
A-17 No. Communications between Appeals employees and IRS officials
considering relief under competent authority procedures are not subject to
the ex parte prohibitions because the Appeals Officer may assume that the
competent authority is acting at the request, and with the consent, of the
taxpayer.
Q-18 Does the prohibition on ex parte communications have any
impact on Appeals communications with the Taxpayer Advocate
Service (TAS) on an open case?
A-18 No. Communications by Appeals with the TAS that are initiated by the
TAS are not subject to the prohibition because the Appeals Officer may
assume that the TAS is acting at the request, and with the consent, of the
taxpayer.
Q-19 Are communications between Appeals and outside consultants
or experts under contract to the IRS subject to the ex parte
communication prohibition?
A-19 Yes. Under the ex parte rules adopted here, outside consultants or
experts under contract to the IRS (other than those employed directly by
Appeals) will be treated as "other IRS employees." Therefore, the
principles set forth in A-5 will apply. Appeals must give the
taxpayer/representative the opportunity to participate in case-specific
discussions that concern matters beyond the non-substantive ministerial,
administrative or procedural matters described in A-5 above.
Q-20 A number of questions and answers have referred to
communications with the "originating function." How is that term
defined?
A-20 An "originating function" is an organization within the IRS that makes
determinations which are subject to the Appeals process. For purposes of
this revenue procedure, the term includes the Examination, Collection,
Service Center, International, and Tax Exempt/Government Entities
functions, or their successor organizations.
Q-21 Several responses in this document refer to the
taxpayer/representative being given an opportunity to participate.
What does this phrase mean?
A-21 It means that the taxpayer/representative will be given a reasonable
opportunity to attend a meeting or be a participant in a conference call
between Appeals and the originating function when the strengths and
weaknesses of issues or positions in the taxpayer’s case are discussed.
The taxpayer/representative will be notified of a scheduled meeting or
conference call and invited to participate. If the taxpayer/representative is
unable to participate at the scheduled time, reasonable accommodations
will be made to reschedule. This does not mean that the Service will delay
scheduling a meeting for a protracted period of time to accommodate the
taxpayer/representative. Facts and circumstances will govern what
constitutes a reasonable delay.
Q-22 May the taxpayer/representative waive the prohibition on ex
parte communications?
A-22 Yes. If the taxpayer/representative is given an opportunity to
participate in a discussion, but decides that such participation is
unnecessary, the prohibition can be waived. Generally, a waiver will be
granted on a communication-by-communication basis. However, if the
taxpayer/representative so desires, the waiver could encompass all
communications that might occur during the course of Appeals’
consideration of a specified case. The Appeals Officer should document
the waiver in the Case Activity Record.
Q-23 What if the taxpayer/representative declines to participate or
seeks to delay the meeting/conference call beyond a reasonable
time?
A-23 Appeals should proceed with the meeting or discussion and
document the taxpayer/representatives declination or the reason for
proceeding in the absence of the taxpayer/representative. This could be
accomplished by an entry in the Case Activity Record and a letter to the
taxpayer/representative documenting the reason for proceeding.
Q-24 The IRM provides for computational review within 120 days of a
team case being assigned. If this review reveals computational errors
affecting the proposed tax liability, can Appeals discuss these errors
with the originating function without violating the prohibition on ex
parte communications?
A-24 It depends on the nature of the error. If the discrepancy is purely
mathematical, any discussion would likely be informational only, and no
violation of the prohibition is likely. Both the taxpayer/representative and
the originating function would be advised before a mathematical correction
is made.
However, if the error involves the interpretation of a legal principle or
application of the law to a particular set of facts, the
taxpayer/representative should be afforded the opportunity to participate in
any scheduled meetings with the originating function to discuss the
discrepancy. In such cases, there may be instances where the best
approach is for Appeals to return the case for further development and
correction.
Q-25 Does the prohibition on ex parte communications apply to preconference meetings between Appeals and Examination?
A-25 Yes. This is clearly a situation where the intended communications
could appear to compromise the independence of Appeals. Pre-conference
meetings should not be held unless the taxpayer/representative is given
the opportunity to participate.
Q-26 Does the prohibition on ex parte communications apply to postsettlement conferences between Appeals and Examination?
A-26 No. The post-settlement conference with Examination is intended to
inform Examination about the settlement of issues and to supply
information that may be helpful in the examination of subsequent cycles.
Appeals’ objective is to ensure that Examination fully understands the
settlement and the rationale for the resolution. In addition, the conference
provides an opportunity for Appeals to discuss with Examination the
application of Delegation Orders 236 and 247 (i.e., settlement by
Examination consistent with prior Appeals settlement or ISP settlement
guidelines) to issues settled by Appeals.
The tax periods that are the subject of the post-settlement conference have
been finalized, and the participants are cautioned to limit discussion to the
results in the closed cycle. Discussion of the resolution of issues present in
the closed periods does not jeopardize the independence of Appeals. Any
discussion that addresses open cycles of the same taxpayer should be
postponed, and the guidance provided in this revenue procedure relating to
ongoing disputes should be followed.
Q-27 Does the prohibition on ex parte communications alter existing
procedures for handling claims filed late in the Appeals process?
A-27 No. There is no change to existing procedure. The claim should be
referred to the originating function with a request for expedited
examination. Because such a referral is in the nature of a ministerial act
and involves no discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of the
issue, the referral is not subject to the prohibition.
Q-28 How will the Service monitor compliance with the prohibition on
ex parte communications?
A-28 Employees will receive training on the contents of this revenue
procedure and will be encouraged to seek managerial guidance whenever
they have questions about the propriety of an ex parte communication.
Managers will consider feedback from other functions and will be
responsible for monitoring compliance during their day-to-day interaction
with employees, as well as during workload reviews and closed case
reviews. Violations will be addressed in accordance with existing
administrative and personnel processes.
Q-29 Are IRS employees assigned to functions other than Appeals
responsible for complying with the prohibition on ex parte
communication?
A-29 Yes. It is recognized that Appeals cannot always fully control
communications from other IRS personnel. Appeals will make every effort
to promptly terminate any discussion that verges into matters not permitted
by these rules. However, all IRS and Counsel employees share the
responsibility to ensure that communications do not appear to compromise
the independence of Appeals.
Part III
Collection Due Process
Introduction
How to Request a Collection Due Process Hearing
What Will Happen When You Request a Hearing
Collection Appeals Program
Collection Due Process (CDP) and Collection
Appeals Program (CAP)
Introduction
You can appeal many IRS collection actions. There are various collection
appeal procedures available to you. The two main procedures are
Collection Due Process (CDP) and Collection Appeals Program (CAP).
There are other collection actions which have their own specific appeal
procedures. These other actions are discussed later.
Offers in Compromise Submitted During Collection Due Process
(CDP) and Equivalent (EH) Hearings
IRC 6320 and 6330, added by the Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998,
allow taxpayers to request a hearing before the Office of Appeals after the
filing of a Notice of Federal Tax Lien (NFTL) and after issuance of a final
notice and warning of intent to levy (generally, Forms 1058 and LT11). As
provided in these statutes, taxpayers may (among other remedies) raise an
offer in compromise as an alternative to collection.
Unlike other offers received in Appeals, CDP and EH offers are under the
continuous (initial through conclusion) jurisdiction of Appeals. The offer
constitutes a component of the final determination/decision that Appeals is
required to reach with regard to these hearings. Appeals will be responsible
for determining that these offers are processable, reaching a conclusion
regarding acceptability (with assistance from Compliance to investigate and
verify information as necessary), and for processing the closing
documents.
Collection Due Process (CDP) is available if you receive one of the
following notices: Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a
Hearing Under IRC 6320 (Lien Notice), Final Notice - Notice of Intent to
Levy and Notice of Your Right to A Hearing, a Notice of Jeopardy Levy and
Right of Appeal, a Notice of Levy on Your State Tax Refund – Notice of
Your Right to a Hearing (Levy Notices). If you disagree with the CDP
decision, you can go to court.
Hearing Available Under Collection Due Process (CDP)
For Lien and Levy Notices, you have the right to a CDP hearing by the IRS
Office of Appeals for these collection actions: the first time a Notice of
Federal Tax Lien is filed on a tax period; before we send the first levy on
your property for a tax period; when we levy your state refund; and when
we issue a jeopardy levy. You may contest the CDP decision in the Tax
Court or an U.S. District Court, as appropriate.
Lien Notice: The IRS is required to notify you the first time a Notice of
Federal Tax Lien is filed for each tax period. We have to notify you within 5
days after the lien notice filing. You then have 30 days, after that 5-day
period, to request a hearing with the Office of Appeals. The lien notice you
receive will indicate the date this 30-day period expires.
Levy Notice: For each tax period, the IRS is required to notify you the first
time we intend to collect a tax liability by taking your property or rights to
property. We do this by sending you a levy notice. We can ’t levy or seize
your property within 30 days from the date this notice is mailed, or given to
you, or left at your home or office. During that 30-day period, you may
request a hearing with the Office of Appeals. There are two exceptions to
this notice of intent to levy provision. We may issue a levy without sending
this notice or waiting 30 days when collection of the tax is in jeopardy. We
may also levy on your state tax refund without sending a notice or waiting
30 days. You can request a hearing after the levy action for both of these
instances.
How To Request A Hearing Under Collection Due Process
With The Office Of Appeals
Complete Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing, and
send it to us at the address shown on your lien or levy notice within 30
days. Check the IRS action(s) you disagree with, and explain why you
disagree. If you received both a lien and a levy notice, you may appeal
both actions. You must identify all of your reasons for disagreement with us
at this time. You may raise issues relating to the unpaid tax including:
-Appropriateness of collection actions
-Collection alternatives such as installment agreement, offer in
compromise, posting a
bond or substitution of other assets
-Appropriate spousal defenses
-The existence or amount of the tax, but only if you did not receive a notice
of deficiency or did not otherwise have an opportunity to dispute the tax
liability.
You may not raise an issue that was raised and considered at a prior
administrative or judicial hearing, if you participated meaningfully in the
prior hearing or proceeding.
To preserve your right to go to court, you must send us the Form 12153
within 30 days. Form 12153 is also available by calling 1-800-829-3676,or
from our web site at Digital Daily. Include a copy of your lien and/or levy
notice. List all taxes and tax periods for which you are requesting a
hearing. Under CDP, you are entitled to only one hearing relating to a lien
notice and one hearing relating to a levy notice, for each taxable period. If
you receive a subsequent lien or levy notice after you request a hearing on
an earlier notice, Appeals can consider both matters at the same time.
Before you formally appeal a lien or levy notice by sending us Form 12153,
you may be able to work out a solution with the Collection function that took
the action. To do so, contact the IRS employee whose name appears on
the lien or levy notice and explain why you disagree with the action. This
contact, however, does NOT extend the 30-day period to make a written
request for a CDP hearing.
What Will Happen When You Request A CDP Hearing With
The Office Of Appeals?
After you request a hearing, you can still discuss your concerns with the
office collecting the tax or filing the Notice of Federal Tax Lien. If you are
able to resolve the issues with that office, you may withdraw your request
for a hearing. The Office of Appeals will contact you to schedule a hearing.
Your hearing may be held either in person, by telephone, or by
correspondence. Unless we have reason to believe that collection of the
tax is in jeopardy, we will stop levy action during the 30 days after the levy
notice and, If your appeal is timely, during the appeal process. Your
appeal is timely if you mail your request for a hearing to the address shown
on our notice on or before the 30th day after the date of the levy notice or
the date shown on the lien notice. If we receive a timely filed Form 12153,
we will also suspend the 10-year collection statute of limitations until the
date the determination is final or you withdraw, in writing, your request for a
hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing, Appeals will issue a written
determination letter. If you agree with Appeals ’determination, both you and
the IRS are required to live up to the terms of the determination. If you
don’t agree with Appeals’ determination, you may request judicial review of
the determination by initiating a case in a court of proper jurisdiction
(United States Tax Court or United States District Court, depending on the
circumstances) on or before the 30th day after the date of Appeals ’
determination.
Once the Court rules, its decision will be binding on both you and the IRS.
The Office of Appeals will retain jurisdiction over its determinations and
how they are carried out. You may also return to Appeals if your
circumstances change and impact the original determination. However, you
must exhaust your administrative remedies first. If your appeal request is
not timely, you will be allowed a hearing, but there will be no statutory
suspension of collection action and you can’t go to court if you disagree
with Appeals’ decision.
Collection Appeals Program (CAP)
CAP is generally quicker and available for a broader range of collection
actions. You may represent yourself at CDP, CAP and other Appeals
proceedings. Or, you can have an attorney, certified public accountant, or a
person enrolled to practice before the IRS represent you. If you want your
representative to appear without you, you must provide a properly
completed Form 2848, Power of Attorney and Declaration of
Representative This form is available at your local IRS office, or by calling
1-800-829-3676,or from our web site at Digital Daily.
For liens, levies, seizures and installment agreements under the CAP
procedure, you don’t have the right to a judicial review of Appeals’ decision.
The CAP procedure is available under more circumstances than the
Collection Due Process hearing procedure. It is important to note that you
can’t proceed to court if you don’t agree with Appeals’ decision in your CAP
case.
Notice of Federal Tax Lien. You may appeal before or after the IRS files a
lien. You may also appeal denied requests to withdraw a Notice of Federal
Tax Lien, and denied discharges, subordinations, and non-attachments of
a lien. If the IRS files a Notice of Federal Tax Lien, you may have additional
Collection Due Process appeal rights. See the preceding information
regarding Hearing Available under Collection Due Process.
Notice of Levy You may appeal before or after the IRS places a levy on
your wages, bank account or other property. Before a levy is issued, you
may have additional Collection Due Process appeal rights. See the
preceding information regarding Hearing Available Under Collection Due
Process.
Seizure of Property. You may appeal before or after the IRS makes a
seizure. If you request an appeal after the IRS makes a seizure, you must
appeal to the Collection manager within 10 business days after the Notice
of Seizure is provided to you, or left at your home or business.
Denial or Termination of Installment Agreement
You may appeal when you are notified that the IRS intends to deny you an
installment agreement. You may also appeal when we propose to
terminate or terminate your installment agreement. The right to appeal
denials or terminations of installment agreements is provided by law rather
than provided by IRS administratively. As such, there are some differences
between CAP for installment agreements and other CAP cases, such as
levies etc.
How do you appeal one of these IRS actions if your only collection
contact has been a notice or telephone call?
1.Call the IRS at the telephone number shown on your notice. Be prepared
to explain which action(s)you disagree with and why you disagree. You
must also offer your solution to your tax problem.
2.If you can ’t reach an agreement with the employee, tell the employee
that you want to appeal their decision. The employee must honor your
request and will refer you to a manager. The manager will either speak with
you then, or will return your call within 24 hours.
3.Explain which action(s)you disagree with and why you disagree to the
manager. The manager will make a decision on the case. If you don ’t
agree with the manager ’s decision, your case will be forwarded to an
Appeals Officer for review.
How do you appeal one of these IRS collection actions if you have
been contacted by a Revenue Officer?
1.If you disagree with the decision of the Revenue Officer, and wish to
appeal under CAP, you must first request a conference with a Collection
manager.
2.If you do not resolve your disagreement with the Collection manager, you
may request Appeals consideration by completing Form 9423, Collection
Appeal Request. This form is available by calling 1-800-829-3676, or from
our web site at Digital Daily. Check the action(s) you disagree with and
explain why you disagree. You must also explain your solution to resolve
your tax problem.
3.Submit the Form 9423 to that Collection Office.
4.The Collection Office must receive your appeal request for a lien, levy or
seizure within 2 days of your conference with the Collection manager or we
will resume collection action. For an appeal request for a denial or
termination of an installment agreement, you have 30 days from the date of
denial or termination of your installment agreement, to submit your request
to the Collection Office.
What will happen when you appeal your case?
Lien, Levy and Seizure: Normally, the IRS will stop collection action on
the tax periods the Appeals Officer is considering, unless we believe the
collection of the tax is at risk.
Installment Agreements: The IRS can ’t levy until 30 days after the denial
or termination of your agreement. If you appeal within that 30-day period,
we will stop levy action until your appeal is completed. Once the Appeals
Officer makes a decision on your case, that decision is binding on both you
and the IRS. This means that both you and the IRS are required to accept
the decision and live up to its terms. You cannot obtain judicial review of an
Appeals Officer ’s decision following a CAP hearing.
Note: Providing false information, failure to provide all pertinent information
or fraud will void Appeals ’ decision.
Appeal Of Other Collection Actions
You may also appeal other Collection actions such as denied Offers in
Compromise (OIC) or Trust Fund Recovery Penalties (TFRP) that the IRS
is proposing. Other penalties are also appealable, if you made an
abatement request that was denied. For OICs and TFRPs, follow the
protest requirements in Publication 5, Your Appeal Rights and How To
Prepare A Protest If You Don’t Agree. The correspondence you receive on
these types of cases will explain where you should send your protest. For
other penalties, follow the instructions in the letter that denies your
abatement.
Part IV
Closing Agreements
Introduction
Examples of Closing Agreement Use
Collateral Agreements
Closing Agreements
Introduction
A closing agreement under IRC section 7121 is an agreement authorized
under that statute. While exhibiting some of the attributes of a contract, it is
not strictly subject to the law of contracts. For example, legal consideration
is not required. Nevertheless, recent court decisions hold that closing
agreements are interpreted using ordinary contract law principles. The
greatest disparity between the ordinary contract and a closing agreement is
the finality accorded the latter by the terms of the statute. See IRM
8.13.1.6.1 with respect to finality.
Examples of Closing Agreement Use
(1) Tax liability closing agreements may be entered into when it is
advantageous to have the matter permanently and conclusively closed, or
when a taxpayer can show that there are good reasons for an agreement
and that making the agreement will not prejudice the interests of the
government. The following represent examples of acceptable reasons for
entering into a determination of tax liability by closing agreement:
a. The taxpayer wishes to definitely establish its tax liability in order that a
transaction may be facilitated, such as a sale of its stock.
b. The fiduciary of an estate desires a closing agreement so he /she can be
discharged by the court.
c. The fiduciary of a trust or a receivership desires a final determination
before distribution is made.
d. A Corporation in the process of liquidation or dissolution desires a
closing agreement in order to wind up its affairs.
e. A taxpayer wishes to fulfill creditors’ demands for authentic evidence of
the status of its tax liability.
f. Where proposed assessments are contested on the theory that the years
are barred and the taxpayer wishes to agree to some portion or all of the
assessments. See IRM 8.13.1.7.1.
g. A taxpayer wants to be assured that a controversy between it and the
Service is disposed of with finality. As an alternative, a taxpayer may be
satisfied that the reopening of his/her case is unlikely if the practice of the
Service not to reopen cases is explained (see Rev. Proc. 94-68, 1994-2
C.B. 803 and Policy statements P-4-3 and P-8-50 and IRM 4.3.6, Audit
Reconsideration and IRM 8.6.1.4). Use of special agreement forms in
Appeals cases may also be satisfactory to the taxpayer.
h. To determine personal holding company tax in order to permit deficiency
dividends under IRC section 547.
i. To reflect a competent authority determination.
(2) At the request of the taxpayer or the government, a determination of
one or more specific matters may be accomplished by entering into a
closing agreement for good reasons. However, a closing agreement should
not be entered into where there is a disadvantage to the government. A few
examples of circumstances that may merit entering into such closing
agreements follow:
a. Determine cost, fair market value, or adjusted basis as of a given date.
For example, it may be desirable to have both an estate and its legatees or
devisees (or both donors and donees) sign such agreements.
b. Dispose of certain IRC Section 482 cases pursuant to Revenue
Procedure 65-17, 1965-1.B. 833.
c. Ensure finality and consistency in disposing of cases involving divisions
of community property between spouse incident to divorce.
d. Dispose of change of accounting method issues in Appeals cases
involving principles similar to those applied in Rev. Proc. 97-27.
e. Determine a fraud penalty reflecting complete or partial concession in
cases where the statute of limitations is otherwise barred. See IRM
8.11.1.11.1.
f. Determine the amount of net operating loss, tax credit, or capital loss.
g. Provide determinations for disposition of cases involving mitigation (IRC
section 1311 to IRC section 1314).
h. Determine an alternative method of adjusting basis under Regulations
section 1.1017-2 as a result of receipt of income from cancellation of
indebtedness under IRC section 108(a).
i. Prevent loss of revenue from “whipsaw” situations. A closing agreement
will prevent a related taxpayer from contesting an issue previously settled
with another taxpayer by filing a claim to seek further tax benefits after the
statutory period of limitations has expired with respect to the settling party.
Once the Service resolves the dispute between the taxpayer and a related
party, a closing agreement will bar the related party from attempting to
create inconsistency in tax treatment for the matter(s) addressed in the
closing agreement.
j. Provide finality to those agreed upon issues involving mutual
concessions in Appeals cases where partial settlements are effected.
k. Determine the consequences of deferred intercompany transactions of
domestic consolidated groups.
l. Determine gross income, the amount of income from a transaction, the
amounts of deductions for losses, depreciation, depletion, etc. or the year
of includibility or deductibility.
m. Establish the effect on future years when an issue is disposed of on an
intermediate basis and the issue is recurring (providing later tax treatment
will not depend on factual circumstances of later years.
n. Close cases involving failure to withhold income tax on payments such
as taxable reimbursements of moving expenses.
o. Resolve cases involving the settlement of employment tax controversies.
p. Resolve issues involving qualification of employee retirement plans.
See IRM Part 7 on determinations relating to employee retirement plans.
q. Reflect competent authority determinations under Rev. Proc. 96-13,
1996-1 C.B. 616 as modified by Rev. Proc. 96-53, 1996-2 C.B. 375.
r. Resolve an issue in a Coordinated Exam Program (CEP) audit under
Revenue Procedure 94-67.
s. Finalize an agreement for an early referral issue under Rev. Proc. 96-9.
t. To address a mass error that affects a higher volume of information
returns but involves a de minimus amount of understated reported income
for select information returns.
Collateral Agreements
(1) Collateral agreements are utilized in compromise cases, estate tax
cases and related income tax valuations, gift tax cases, and in other
Appeals cases under appropriate circumstances. This subsection applies
to all of these categories of collateral agreements except those involving
offers in compromise.
(2) Collateral agreements have often been used to commit related
taxpayers where there is privity of interest (mutual or successive
relationship to the same rights of property) and legal consideration
involved. For example, collateral agreements have been frequently
obtained from trustees or beneficiaries who have received or will receive
assets from an estate. The signing of a collateral agreement may commit a
trustee or beneficiary to use the same valuation for income tax purposes as
was used for estate tax purposes.
(3) One important distinction between collateral agreements and closing
agreements is that the former do not purport to bind the Service. They are
one-sided commitments. The Service does not enter into and sign these
agreements.
(4) Courts have pointed out that the Code provides two methods of
disposing of tax matters by agreement with finality and that those methods
are by offer in compromise under IRC section 7122 and by closing
agreement under IRC section 7121. Therefore, if large amounts are
involved and the government is potentially subject to a substantial loss of
revenue if a taxpayer or related party should fail to comply with a
contemplated disposition, a closing agreement should be secured instead
of a collateral agreement.
Part V
Early Referrals
Introduction
Appropriate Issues for Early Referral
How to Request Early Referral
Early Referrals
Introduction
Section 7123 of the Internal Revenue Code, as added by section 3465 of
RRA 98, provides that the Secretary shall provide procedures by which any
taxpayer may request early referral of one or more issues from the
Examination or Collection Division to Appeals. Consequently, the early
referral procedure has been expanded to allow for additional cases to be
eligible for early referral. Early referral is no longer limited to Coordinated
Examination Program taxpayers.
The early referral procedures allow taxpayers, whose returns are under
examination, to request the transfer of a developed, unagreed issue to
Appeals while the other issues in the case continue to be developed in the
District. The purpose of early referral is to resolve cases more quickly.
The early resolution of a key issue may encourage taxpayers and the
Service to agree on other issues in the case. Early referral may save time
because Appeals and the District are working simultaneously.
Rev. Proc. 99-28 describes the procedures that allow taxpayers to request
early referral of an issue from the Examination or Collection Division to
Appeals. The revenue procedure also contains special procedures for
requesting early referral of one or more unagreed issues with respect to an
involuntary change in method of accounting, employment tax, employee
plans and exempt organizations.
Procedures: Following are some highlights of the early referral process set
forth in Rev. Proc. 99-28.
1)The district will advise the taxpayer of their decision to approve or deny
the early referral request within 14 days of the date the request is received
from the taxpayer. (A taxpayer’s early referral request no longer requires
the concurrence of Appeals.)
2)Taxpayers can request an informal conference with the supervisor of the
case/ group manager to discuss the District’s denial of an early referral
request.
Regular Appeals procedures apply, including taxpayer conferences.
Appropriate Issues for Early Referral
Issues that may qualify for early referral are cases that:
1. if resolved, can reasonably be expected to result in a quicker resolution
of the entire case;
2. both the taxpayer and the District agree should be referred to Appeals
early;
3. are fully developed; and
4. are part of a case where the remaining issues are not expected to be
completed before Appeals could resolve the early referral issue.
Industry Specialization Program (ISP) issues can be referred to Appeals for
early resolution under the early referral procedures. ISP issues are listed
in Exhibit 8.7.1-1 of the Internal Revenue Manual. For specific procedures
for the early referral of issues arising during the examination of the taxexempt status of a bond issue, see Rev. Proc. 99-35, 1999-41 I.R.B. 501.
Early referral does not apply to an issue:
1. with respect to which a 30-day letter has been issued. Thus, a
qualified offer under section 7430(c), may not be made as part of the
early referral process because such offers may only be made
subsequent to the issuance of a 30-day letter;
2. that is not fully developed;
3. when the remaining issues in the case are expected to be completed
before Appeals could resolve the early referral issue;
4. that is designated for litigation by the Office of Chief Counsel;
5. for which the taxpayer has filed a request for competent authority
assistance, or issues for which the taxpayer intends to seek competent
authority assistance. Taxpayers are encouraged to request the
simultaneous Appeals/competent authority procedure described in
section 8 of Rev. Proc. 96-13, 1996-1 C.B. 616 (see discussion
beginning on page 4). If a taxpayer enters into a settlement with
Appeals (including an Appeals settlement through the early referral
process), and then requests competent authority assistance, the U.S.
competent authority will endeavor only to obtain a correlative
adjustment with the treaty country and will not take any actions that
would otherwise amend the settlement;
6. that is part of a whipsaw transaction. (The term “whipsaw” refers to
the situation produced when the government is subjected to conflicting
claims of taxpayers. A potential whipsaw situation exists whenever
there is a transaction between two parties and differing characteristics
of transactions will benefit one and hurt the other for tax purposes.)
Early referral is:
• Optional, requested by the taxpayer
• Approved by the District
• No longer limited to Coordinated Examination Program cases
A closing agreement will be used to secure a taxpayer’s agreement to the
early referral issue. Early referral is available for issues in Joint Committee
cases, but any closing agreement will not be finalized until after Joint
Committee review. Taxpayers initiate early referral on an unagreed issue
by making a request to the District. The District must concur for the
request to be approved.
How to Request Early Referral
Taxpayers request early referral in writing. The written request
should:
• Be submitted to the case/group manager
• Identify the taxpayer, tax period, and issue
• Request resolution of a specific unagreed issue
• Fully describe the taxpayer’s position with regard to the issue
Early referral and section 6621 (c) "hot" interest:
• Early referral does not trigger "hot" interest under section 6621(c)
• A Form 5701, Notice of Proposed Adjustment, or an equivalent form
(the Notification Form) will be issued by the District on the early referral
issue
• Since the Notification Form is not a 30-day letter, there will be no "hot"
interest until a 30-day letter is issued by the District
Effect of Conclusion of Examination:
If the District concludes its examination of any issues not referred as part of
the early referral process, it will issue a preliminary notice of deficiency
("30-day letter") with respect to unagreed issues. The letter will include any
issues referred under the early referral process that are still pending in
Appeals at the time the examination is concluded. The issuance of the 30day letter generally will constitute the first letter of proposed deficiency
which allows the taxpayer an opportunity for administrative review for
purposes of the increased underpayment rate of interest for large
corporations as provided in section 6621(c), or for the award of
administrative costs under section 7430(c).
If the only unagreed issues present in the case at the time the examination
is concluded are issues that were considered by Appeals under the early
referral process and returned to the District unagreed, no 30-day letter will
be issued. Instead a statutory notice of deficiency ("90-day letter") will be
issued. If a 90-day letter is issued instead of the 30-day letter, the 90-day
letter will constitute the first letter of proposed deficiency for purposes of
sections 6621(c) and 7430(c).
Coordination With Pre-Filing Agreements: Rev. Proc. 2001-22
describes the Large & Mid-Size Business Division pre-filing agreement
program (PFAs). The purpose of the PFA program is to enable both
taxpayers and the IRS to resolve before filing the treatment of issues
otherwise likely to be disputed in post-filing audits. Section 9 discusses
coordination with Appeals and the availability of early referral if the
taxpayer and the IRS are unable to reach a PFA.
Coordination With Appeals Mediation Program: Section 2.16 of Rev.
Proc. 99-28 provides that if early referral negotiations are unsuccessful
and an agreement is not reached with respect to an early referral issue,
taxpayers may then request mediation. The early referral issue must meet
the mediation criteria. See Announcement 98-99, 1998-46 I.R.B. 34, and
the mediation discussion below.
Simultaneous Appeals/Competent Authority Procedure
The simultaneous Appeals/competent authority procedure encourages
taxpayers to request competent authority assistance and the participation
of Appeals while a case is under Examination jurisdiction. Rev. Proc. 9613, 1996-1 C.B. 616, contains the competent authority procedures and
supersedes Rev. Proc. 91-23, 1991-1 C.B. 534. Section 8 of Revenue
Procedure 96-13 specifies the circumstances under which the
simultaneous Appeals/competent authority procedure may be requested
and describes the role of Appeals.
Part VI
Mediation
Arbitration
Mediation and Arbitration
Mediation and Arbitration
Mediation
Appeals is testing mediation as an extension of the Appeals process. The
procedures allow taxpayers, whose cases are not docketed in any court
and are already in the Appeals administrative process, to request
mediation as an alternative dispute resolution technique. Mediation is a
negotiation between the parties assisted by an objective and neutral third
party mediator who has no authority to impose a decision. Mediators can
come from Appeals or outside the IRS; co-mediators can also be used.
For a full discussion of Mediation and Arbitration, see Section IX
"Alternative Dispute Resolution" of this CD-ROM.
The purpose of the mediation procedures is to attempt to resolve issues
while the case is in non-docketed status. Mediation is intended to apply
only after good faith negotiations in Appeals have been unsuccessful.
Factual issues, such as valuation and transfer pricing issues, are appropri­
ate for mediation.
Test of Mediation Procedure for Appeals
Announcement Number 98-99 explains that the IRS has tested the use of
mediation for Coordinated Examination Program (CEP) cases assigned to
Appeals Team Chiefs. The Service is now expanding the mediation test to
allow taxpayers to request mediation for factual issues involving an
adjustment of $1 million or more that are already in the Appeals
administrative process. Under the mediation procedure the taxpayer and
Appeals will continue to negotiate a settlement, but an objective and
neutral third party mediator will assist them. The mediator has no authority
to impose a decision; decision-making authority remains with the taxpayer
and Appeals. This procedure is effective for requests for mediation made
during the two-year test period beginning on November 16, 1998, the date
this Announcement is published in the Internal Revenue Bulletin.
Additionally, section 3465 of the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring
and Reform Act of 1998, P.L. 105-206 (the Act), provides for expansion of
mediation below the $1 million threshold contained in this procedure. See
Announcement Number 2001-9 for a full discussion of the extension of
the test period.
Mediation is optional: A taxpayer and an Appeals Team Case Leader
(formerly Appeals Team Chief) or Appeals Officer may request mediation,
after consultation with each other. Such request is initiated by the taxpayer
sending a written request seeking approval for mediation to the appropriate
Area Director (formerly Appeals Assistant Regional Director of Appeals-
Large Case), with a copy to the National Chief Appeals. For cases
assigned to an Appeals Officer, the handling of such request will be
expedited if the taxpayer also sends a copy of the mediation request to the
Appeals Officer and the appropriate Appeals Team Manager (formerly
Appeals Associate Chief).
Mediation may be available in the following cases:
Early referral issues described in Rev. Proc. 99-28.
Joint Committee cases, but any agreement will not be finalized until after
Joint Committee review.
Appeals mediation cannot be used if the issue is:
- Designated for litigation or docketed before the United States Tax Court
An Industry Specialization Program (ISP) issue or an Appeals Coordinated
Issue (ACI). ISP issues are listed in Exhibit 8.7.1-1 of the Internal Revenue
Manual (IRM) and ACIs are listed in Exhibit 8.7.1-3 of the IRM.
- A competent authority issue (see discussion below).
Relationship to Other ADR Techniques: The new alternative dispute
resolution (ADR) techniques tend to have narrow application, and it is
helpful to review how they relate to each other. For example, the early
referral and mediation procedures are generally not used to resolve issues
for which the taxpayer has filed a request for competent authority
assistance. This is because if a taxpayer enters into a settlement with
Appeals (including an Appeals settlement through the early referral or
mediation process), and then requests competent authority assistance, the
U.S. competent authority will endeavor only to obtain a correlative
adjustment with the treaty country and will not take any actions that would
otherwise amend the settlement. Rather, taxpayers are encouraged to
request the simultaneous Appeals/competent authority procedure.
Taxpayers may be able to use the mediation procedures in conjunction
with early referral, provided the early referral issue meets the requirements
for mediation. After early referral negotiations are unsuccessful in Appeals,
taxpayers may then request mediation for the issue. By combining the two
procedures, taxpayers could expedite their resolution. As explained above,
taxpayers considering this option do not have income tax treaty
considerations.
Benefits of Mediation: Unlike arbitration, mediation is a non-binding
process. While the mediator does not have settlement authority -- the
parties to the mediation do; and if the parties reach agreement, they can
resolve the dispute with finality. Mediation is particularly useful for issues
that are highly factual, such as valuation, reasonable compensation or
transfer pricing issues. Mediation facilitates communication and also
enhances our services to taxpayers and tax practitioners.
Beginning the Process: If the taxpayer and Appeals agree in principle to
mediate one or more issues, the parties will prepare a concise, written
agreement to mediate. Usually, the parties negotiate the agreement and
select the mediators within two weeks. The mediation Announcement 98-
99 contains a model agreement to mediate, with exhibits that can be used.
Our experience is that the entire mediation process can be completed
within 90-120 days. Appeals and the taxpayer will share the expenses of
the mediator. If the parties select a mediator from Appeals, Headquarters
Appeals will assume all of the mediator’s expenses. The taxpayer and
Appeals can use any local or national organization that provides a roster of
neutrals in selecting a mediator. Most mediation sessions are concluded in
one day, and the parties can schedule two additional mediation sessions to
follow the initial session, if needed.
Fast Track Mediation: The Internal Revenue Service is testing a new
service that uses mediation to help taxpayers resolve disputes resulting
from:
•an examination (audit)
•an offer in compromise
•a trust fund recovery penalty
Fast Track Mediation began its pilot program July 1, 2000 for a one-year
period in Hartford, Houston, Jacksonville and Denver. It offers an
expedited process, a neutral mediator and a neutral setting. A written
protest is not needed to request Fast Track Mediation. A case will qualify
for Fast Track Mediation if it:
• has a proposed tax deficiency of $100,000 or less;
• is not docketed in any court; or involves an offer in compromise, of less
than $50,000.
If a taxpayer does not agree with any or all of the IRS findings, a meeting
with the manager of the person who issued the findings can be requested.
Mediation can take place at the meeting with the manager or afterwards.
To begin the process, both the taxpayer and the IRS manager must sign a
simple agreement form--then an Appeals mediator will be assigned.
Generally within a week, the Appeals mediator will contact the taxpayer
and the IRS supervisor to schedule a meeting. After a brief explanation of
the process, the mediator will discuss with the parties when and where to
hold the mediation session.
Arbitration
Section 7123 (b) (2) of the Internal Revenue Code provides that the
Secretary shall establish a pilot program under which a taxpayer and the
Internal Revenue Service Office of Appeals may jointly request binding
arbitration on any issue unresolved at the conclusion of: (A) appeals
procedures, or (B) unsuccessful attempts to enter into a closing agreement
under section 7121 or a compromise under section 7122. The
Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-320, also
encourages federal agencies to use all alternative dispute resolution
techniques in the federal administrative process (including binding
arbitration where warranted) to resolve disputes. Chief Counsel presently
has a voluntary binding arbitration program for factual issues in docketed
cases under Tax Court Rule 124, see Chief Counsel Directives Manual
(CCDM) (35)3(17)1. Appeals developed procedures for a pilot program to
test binding arbitration. Taxpayers may request arbitration for factual
issues that are already in the Appeals administrative process. See
Announcement 2000-4, 2000-3 I.R.B. 317. For a full discussion of
Mediation and Arbitration, see Section IX "Alternative Dispute
Resolution" of this CD-ROM.
Part VII
Notice of Deficiency Rescission
Introduction
Provisions of IRC 6212
Significant Changes
Notice of Deficiency Rescissions
Introduction
Rev. Proc. 98-54 provides taxpayers with instructions for entering into an
agreement with the Internal Revenue Service under § 6212(d) of the
Internal Revenue Code to rescind a notice of deficiency. This revenue
procedure clarifies, modifies, and supersedes Revenue Procedure 88–17.
Provisions of IRC 6212
.01 Section 6212(a) provides that if the Secretary determines that there is a
deficiency in respect of any tax imposed by subtitle A of title 26 (relating to
income taxes), subtitle B (relating to estate, gift, and generation-skipping
taxes), or chapters 41, 42, 43, or 44 (relating to certain excise taxes), the
Secretary is authorized to send a notice of the deficiency to the taxpayer by
certified mail or registered mail.
.02 Section 6212(c)(1) provides, in general, that if the Secretary has mailed
to the taxpayer a notice of deficiency as pro-vided in § 6212(a), and the
taxpayer files a petition with the Tax Court within the time prescribed in
§ 6213(a), the Secretary has no right to determine any additional
deficiency, except in the case of fraud, and except as provided in § 6214(a)
(relating to assertion of greater deficiencies before the Tax Court), in
§ 6213(b)(1) (relating to mathematical or clerical errors), in § 6851 or 6852
(relating to termination assessments), or in § 6861(c) (relating to jeopardy
assessments).
.03 Section 6213(a) states that within 90 days, or 150 days if the notice is
addressed to a person outside the United States, after the notice of
deficiency authorized in § 6212 is mailed, the taxpayer may file a petition
with the Tax Court for a redetermination of the deficiency. Except as
provided in § 6851, 6852, or 6861, no assessment of a deficiency and no
levy or proceeding in court for its collection can be made, begun, or
prosecuted until the notice has been mailed to the tax-payer, nor until the
expiration of the 90-day or 150-day restriction period, as the case may be,
nor, if a petition has been filed with the Tax Court, until the decision of the
Tax Court has become final. Under § 6213(d), a taxpayer may waive these
restrictions at any time.
.04 Section 6501 provides generally that the amount of any tax imposed by
title 26 must be assessed within 3 years after the return was filed. Section
6503(a) provides that the running of the period of limitations in § 6501 is
suspended (after the mailing of a notice under § 6212(a)) for the period
during which the Secretary is prohibited from making the assessment or
from collecting by levy or a proceeding in court, and for 60 days thereafter.
.05(1) Section 6212(d) provides that the Secretary may, with the consent of
the taxpayer, rescind any notice of deficiency mailed to the taxpayer. Any
notice so rescinded is not treated as a notice of deficiency for purposes of
§ 6212(c)(1) (relating to further deficiency letters restricted), § 6213(a)
(relating to restrictions applicable to deficiencies and petition to Tax Court),
and § 6512(a) (relating to limitations in case of petition to Tax Court), and
the taxpayer has no right to file a petition with the Tax Court based on the
notice.
(2) The Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988 (Act),
§ 1015(m), 1988–3 C.B. 232, amended § 6212(d) by adding the following
sentence: “Nothing in this subsection shall affect any suspension of the
running of any period of limitations during any period during which the
rescinded notice was outstanding.” This amendment is effective for notices
of deficiency issued on or after January 1, 1986.
The House Report accompanying the Act provides the following example to
illustrate the operation of the final sentence of § 6212(d): Assume that six
months remain to run on the statute of limitations with respect to a return
when the IRS issues a statutory notice of deficiency. Issuance of this notice
suspends the statute of limitations. If the IRS and the taxpayer agree to
rescind the statutory notice, then as of the date the notice is rescinded, the
statute of limitations again begins to run and (in this example) six months
remains [sic] until the statute expires. H.R. Rep. No. 795, 100th Cong., 2d
Sess. 364 (1988).
Significant Changes
Changes and Clarifications to superceded Revenue
Procedure 88–17
.01 Section 3.05(1) of Revenue Procedure 88–17 provides, in part, that the
Service will not rescind a notice of deficiency if, on the date of rescission,
the period of limitations on assessment would have expired but for the
issuance of the notice of deficiency. This provision is deleted as a result of
the 1988 amendment to § 6212(d), which clarifies that a notice of
deficiency that is subsequently rescinded suspends the period of limitations
until the date of its rescission. See section 4.05(1) of this revenue
procedure.
.02 Section 3.05(4) of Revenue Procedure 88–17 provides that the Service
will not rescind a notice of deficiency if, prior to the issuance of the notice of
deficiency, the taxpayer and the Service have executed a Form 872–A,
Special Consent to Extend the Time to Assess Tax, covering any of the tax
years in the notice of deficiency. This provision is modified to permit
rescission, provided the taxpayer and the Service execute another Form
872–A prior to rescission). See section 4.05(4) of this revenue procedure.
.03 Section 4.03 of Revenue Procedure 88-17 is clarified to provide that the
Service may initiate rescission of a notice of deficiency). See section 5.03
of this revenue procedure.
.04 In lieu of using a Form 8626, Agreement to Rescind Notice of
Deficiency, the use of an alternative document is authorized for rescission
of a notice of deficiency. See section 5.06 of this revenue procedure.
Scope And Objective - Revenue Procedure 98-54
.01 This revenue procedure applies to agreements to rescind a notice of
deficiency mailed to a taxpayer pursuant to § 6212(a). This procedure does
not apply to a Notice of Final Partnership Administrative Adjustment
(FPAA).
Important References
Announcement 98-99, Test of Mediation Procedure for Appeals
Announcement Number 2000-3, Deductions for Transfers for Public,
Charitable, and Religious Uses, etc…
Announcement Number 2000-4, Test of Arbitration Procedures for Appeals
Announcement Number 2000-80, Toll Free Number for Appeals Officer
Program
Appeals Policy Statement P-8-1
Circular No. 230, Regulations Governing the Practice of Attorneys, CPAs,
Eas, and Appraisers before the IRS
Form 2848, Power of Attorney of Declaration of Representation
Form 9423, Collection Appeal Request
Form 12153, Request for a Collection of Due Process Handling
Notice 99-50, Prohibition Of Ex Parte Communications Between Appeals
Officers And Other Internal Revenue Service Employees
Publication 1, Your Rights as a Taxpayer
Publication 5, Your Appeal Rights and How to Prepare a Protest If You
Don't Agree
Publication 556, Examination of Returns, Appeal Rights, and Claims for
Refund
Publication 594, What You Should Know About the IRS Collection
Process
Publication 1660, Collection Appeal Rights
Revenue Procedure 96-9, Procedures for Requesting Early Referral
Revenue Procedure 96-13,Simultaneous Appeals/Competent Authority
Procedures
Revenue Procedure 96-53, Allocations Between Related Parties
Revenue Procedure 97-27, Appeals Cases
Revenue Procedure 98-54, Agreements to Rescind a Notice of Deficiency
Revenue Procedure 99-28, Early Referral Procedures
Revenue Procedure 99-35, Tax-exempt Status of a Bond Issue
Revenue Procedure 2000-43, Ex Parte Communications
Revenue Procedure 2001-9, Mediation Test Period Extended
Revenue Procedure 2001-22, Coordination with Pre-filing Agreements
Web Links
Appeals
Digital Daily
U.S. Tax Court