Basis Overstatement Doesn't Extend Limitations Period
AUG. 21, 2009
ECC 200944035
DOCUMENT ATTRIBUTES
- Institutional AuthorsInternal Revenue Service
- Cross-ReferenceFor the Federal Circuit opinion in Salman Ranch Ltd. et al. v.
United States, No. 2008-5053 (Jul. 30, 2009), see Doc
2009-17311 or 2009 TNT 145-13. - Code Sections
- Subject Area/Tax Topics
- Jurisdictions
- LanguageEnglish
- Tax Analysts Document NumberDoc 2009-23917
- Tax Analysts Electronic Citation2009 TNT 209-74
Citations: ECC 200944035
UILC: 6501.16-00
Release Date: 10/30/2009
ID: CCA_2009082114545243
Office: * * *
From: * * *
Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 2:54:53 PM
To: * * *
Cc:
Subject: FW: IRC 6501(e)(2) question
* * * -- * * * has asked me to assist with your question.
* * * is correct that an entire item must be omitted and that the misvaluation of an item would not extend the period of limitations. We have been litigating (and losing) some high profile cases with respect to overstating the basis of an asset for 6501(e)(1) purposes, but as you can see from the Salman Ranch opinion, even we concede that an item must be fully omitted to fall within 6501(e)(2).
DOCUMENT ATTRIBUTES
- Institutional AuthorsInternal Revenue Service
- Cross-ReferenceFor the Federal Circuit opinion in Salman Ranch Ltd. et al. v.
United States, No. 2008-5053 (Jul. 30, 2009), see Doc
2009-17311 or 2009 TNT 145-13. - Code Sections
- Subject Area/Tax Topics
- Jurisdictions
- LanguageEnglish
- Tax Analysts Document NumberDoc 2009-23917
- Tax Analysts Electronic Citation2009 TNT 209-74
