Free Trial: TheSiteFactory.com

Partnership penalty abatement Rev. Proc. 84-35

Technical topics regarding tax preparation.
#1
Andrew  
Posts:
132
Joined:
21-Nov-2018 5:00pm
Location:
CA
Anybody used this Rev. Proc? Client's first time filing of form 1065 for 2018 for 2 partners and he wasn't aware of the partnership return deadline. I rather not do a first time abatement which we can use for something else in my client's case, such as underpayment of estimated tax. However, correct me if I'm wrong.

Rev. Proc. 84-35 penalty relief to apply and concluded that it is the same criteria that has been documented in IRM 20.1.2.3.3.1(2):

1. The partnership must consist of 10 or fewer partners. For the purpose of this requirement, a husband and wife (or their estate) filing a joint return is considered one partner.

2. Each partner is either an individual (excluding nonresident aliens), or the estate of a deceased partner.

3. Each partner's items of income, deductions, and credits are allocated in the same proportion as all other items of income, deductions, and credits.

4. The partnership has not elected to be subject to the consolidated audit procedures under I.R.C. §§ 6221 through I.R.C. § 6233 (subchapter C).

5. Each partner reported his or her share of partnership income on his or her timely filed income tax return.
 

#2
juro  
Posts:
263
Joined:
18-Oct-2015 9:11am
Location:
USA
yes. i do.
 

#3
MWPXYZ  
Posts:
693
Joined:
23-Apr-2014 3:21pm
Location:
Lancaster NH
You can look up previous discussions, but I believe that Rev Proc 84-35 does not apply to 2018 partnership returns due to the repeal of Section 6231 and the "new" Section 6231 under the BBA, effective for 2018.
 

#4
Andrew  
Posts:
132
Joined:
21-Nov-2018 5:00pm
Location:
CA
Thanks! It took a while to find even anything about this, except for the post on this forum and the links in that post. It appears that if we had elected out of the new audit rules, Rev Proc 84-53 could still be used. I would have expected that internet searches would have netted more results about that Rev Proc 84-53 can no longer be used.
Also, the IRS still has Rev Proc 84-53 on their site dated 2/27/19 under Understanding Your CP162 Notice. Confusing.
If anyone has successfully used it for 2018, please let us know.

https://www.irs.gov/individuals/underst ... 162-notice
Feb 27, 2019 - The partnership had no more than 10 partners for the taxable year. ... to have the penalty removed for reasonable cause under the provisions of Rev. Proc. 84-35 ...
Missing: 84-53 ‎| Must include: 84-53
 

#5
juro  
Posts:
263
Joined:
18-Oct-2015 9:11am
Location:
USA
Andrew wrote:If anyone has successfully used it for 2018, please let us know.



i did for 2018, several times, the letters of abatement has not yet arrived, but at least the scary demands for payment have stopped, :lol:
 

#6
Andrew  
Posts:
132
Joined:
21-Nov-2018 5:00pm
Location:
CA
Did you elect out of the new audit rules for these partnerships for 2018?
 

#7
MWPXYZ  
Posts:
693
Joined:
23-Apr-2014 3:21pm
Location:
Lancaster NH
more on 84-35 "expiration"
The definition of small partnership used in the Conference report and Section 6698 is defined in (the former) Section 6231!

The small partnership exception was a TEFRA provision, and now TEFRA is gone.

Here is an interesting article: http://washburnlaw.edu/practicalexperie ... eption.pdf

A quick note here: https://ktllp.com/2018/01/heads-major-c ... uary-2018/

And here is some "reasoning" with the IRS already squeezing the exception: https://www.currentfederaltaxdevelopmen ... equirement
 

#8
Andrew  
Posts:
132
Joined:
21-Nov-2018 5:00pm
Location:
CA
Thanks for posting the links. From the last article, It sounds like it's not set in stone yet that Rev Proc 84-35 cannot be used for 2018. Is that your understanding as well?


While the IRS has not mentioned how or whether that will impact the small partnership relief ruling, the Service may decide that Congress’s intent in passing the revised partnership audit regime is no longer consistent with this grant of relief. Remember that under the new audit rules, a partnership is subject to the consolidated audit procedures unless it timely files a return and elects not to have the rules apply. Arguably, a partnership that fails to file a return beginning with 2018 tax years has forfeited the right to be treated as a small partnership.
 

#9
MWPXYZ  
Posts:
693
Joined:
23-Apr-2014 3:21pm
Location:
Lancaster NH
The last article, written in 2017, notes how the IRS was pushing back against Rev Proc 84-35; even then. The citations in the article refer to Code Sections that have been repealed & replaced for 2018. Given that the Code Section that stands as the foundation for Rev Proc 84-35 has disappeared I think Rev Proc 84-35 no longer stands for returns filed for 2018 and later.

Juro can let us know in a couple months!

Although, the IRS notices my clients have received over the last couple weeks indicate the IRS is having problems understanding the tax laws.
 

#10
Posts:
776
Joined:
4-Mar-2018 9:03pm
Location:
Earth
I've never understood why small partnerships were given relief under a rev proc while small S Corps were not given the same relief.

Yes juro, please update us once you receive a response.
 

#11
juro  
Posts:
263
Joined:
18-Oct-2015 9:11am
Location:
USA
uh oh, got a IRS notice "assigned to Collection Agency."


this is only one page. weird, they don't even mention our response, or a balance due.
 

#12
sjrcpa  
Posts:
1748
Joined:
23-Apr-2014 5:27pm
Location:
Maryland
How much time elapsed between your response and this collection agency notice?
 

#13
juro  
Posts:
263
Joined:
18-Oct-2015 9:11am
Location:
USA
sjrcpa wrote:How much time elapsed between your response and this collection agency notice?



May of this year is when i got the first & only notice, and my response was same time.
 

#14
sjrcpa  
Posts:
1748
Joined:
23-Apr-2014 5:27pm
Location:
Maryland
Given that it takes 6, 8 or 12 weeks for IRS to do anything, I am not surprised.
I would call, explain you responded and disagreed, and ask for a hold on collection for the account.
 

#15
juro  
Posts:
263
Joined:
18-Oct-2015 9:11am
Location:
USA
okay i will.

but when did the IRS begin to use a collection agency?
 

#16
EADave  
Posts:
990
Joined:
22-Apr-2014 9:25pm
Location:
Texas
For about a year now. They tried this program a few years ago and the program failed, which I’m hoping this one will too.

So frustrating. You call the CBE Group, one of the collection agencies, and they don’t authorize any payment plan beyond 60 months. You ask why and they tell you the Installment agreement beyond 60 months request needs the IRS’s permission to be granted. You call the IRS and they say, “Your client’s account has been assigned to a collection agency.” Back and forth you go. It’s driving me a bit batty.

I’m thinking when the Millennial generation (no offense meant here) take over the IRS there will be safe spaces available for taxpayers and forgiveness of tax debts if a taxpayer feels anxious/nervous about their liability or if the “IRS” triggers a sensory overload. Also, they will immediately ship you a service animal and a box of crayons for comfort. That’s my hope anyway.
 

#17
Posts:
1294
Joined:
21-Apr-2014 11:24am
Location:
North Carolina
Aye, Dave, but they will have to remove all the blue and green crayons in case the recipient draws something resembling algae, which then freaks out the emotional support animal.

Seriously, isn't there a clear process by which you can require that the file be reassigned to the IRS? Never had to worry about that since they started outsourcing again. If they don't do that, at what point does one ask the TA to get involved?
 

#18
juro  
Posts:
263
Joined:
18-Oct-2015 9:11am
Location:
USA
why did my response get ignored by the IRS?

what if i ignore the collection agency?
 

#19
sjrcpa  
Posts:
1748
Joined:
23-Apr-2014 5:27pm
Location:
Maryland
Your response was probably not ignored. It probably hasn't been dealt with yet. If you have a POA on file you can call and discuss. If you don't, anty reponse IRS makes will go to your client.
 

#20
juro  
Posts:
263
Joined:
18-Oct-2015 9:11am
Location:
USA
sjrcpa wrote:Your response was probably not ignored. It probably hasn't been dealt with yet. If you have a POA on file you can call and discuss. If you don't, anty reponse IRS makes will go to your client.


my client uses my office address, as he is a non-res alien.
 

#21
EADave  
Posts:
990
Joined:
22-Apr-2014 9:25pm
Location:
Texas
Hilarious! I hadn’t thought about sensory sensitive service animals! Hey Spell, is that alliteration or onomatopoeia? Me thinks alliteration.

SJ is on point, I too, would recommend contacting PPS if you have a POA just as SJ suggested and then contact the Collection Agency (or ask PPS) to request a collection hold until the response is worked. Please don’t forget to update us on the outcome. I do fear a favorable response from the IRS because if it was just a “fluke”, I’d hate to rely on it as Gospel, but maybe it will spur the IRS to provide some clear(er) guidance.

Also, from what I was told, the case does not get kicked back to IRS until the collection agency makes the determination they are not authorized to work the case. This happened to my client recently. You and the client, if under POA, will receive a letter indicating the case was returned to the IRS. Like, who’s on first Scooby???
 

#22
Andrew  
Posts:
132
Joined:
21-Nov-2018 5:00pm
Location:
CA
Some of you already indicated that penalty abatement under Rev. Proc 84-53 is no longer available. If you elect out of the new partnership audit rules, you may still be able to use Rev. Proc. 84-53. Can a partnership return be amended to change the election so a client becomes eligible for 84-53?
 

#23
Posts:
336
Joined:
29-Sep-2015 10:10pm
Location:
Gray, TN
Wow, yet another reason to elect out.
 

#24
sjrcpa  
Posts:
1748
Joined:
23-Apr-2014 5:27pm
Location:
Maryland
 

#25
EADave  
Posts:
990
Joined:
22-Apr-2014 9:25pm
Location:
Texas
That "timely filed return" thing is a double-edged sword indeed. You can't amend if you file late, and if you file late, the election is invalid anyway. So, if you file late, and the election to opt out must be made on a timely filed return, when you file late are you giving the IRS permission to use the audit regime if they select your return for audit?

Sounds like filing late, as long as you file the K1s and the individuals file their returns timely, may not be so bad after all? Or, did I just open a portal that can never be closed?
 

#26
Andrew  
Posts:
132
Joined:
21-Nov-2018 5:00pm
Location:
CA
Sjrcpa, thanks for posting the link. Next year I may just mark the box "opt out" of centralized partnership audit regime.
 

#27
MWPXYZ  
Posts:
693
Joined:
23-Apr-2014 3:21pm
Location:
Lancaster NH
Rev Proc 84-35 Section 3.01 and .02 states:

".01 A domestic partnership composed of 10 or fewer partners and coming within the exceptions outlined in section 6231(a)(1)(B) of the Code will be considered to have met the reasonable cause test and will not be subject to the penalty imposed by section 6698 for the failure to file a complete or timely partnership return, provided that the partnership, or any of the partners, establishes, if so requested by the Internal Revenue Service, that all partners have fully reported their shares of the income, deductions, and credits of the partnership on their timely filed income tax returns.

.02 Partnerships having a trust or corporation as a partner, tier partnerships, and partnerships where each partner's interest in the capital and profits are not owned in the same proportion, or where all items of income, deductions, and credits are not allocated in proportion to the prorata interests, do not come within the exception provisions of section 6231(a)(1)(B) of the Code and, are subject to the penalty imposed by section 6698. "

It seems that one needs Section 6231(a)(1)(B) for Rev Proc 84-35 to be applicable.

Pub. L. 114–74, title XI, § 1101, Nov. 2, 2015, 129 Stat. 625, 638, provided that, applicable to returns filed for partnership taxable years beginning after Dec. 31, 2017, section 6231 was repealed.

A new Section 6231, "Notice of proceedings and adjustment" stands in its place.
 


Return to Taxation



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: EADave, lenraphael, Spell Czech, Terry Oraha and 159 guests