In Chapter 5, in the example on
mitigation on pages 271-272, the IRS would be barred by Code
section 1311(b)(2)(A), assuming a 3-year statute of limitations on
assessment (expiring April 15, 1999), because the IRS first
maintained its position in the notice of deficiency sent on
January 10, 2000.
In Chapter 8, on page 406, the
sentence that reads "What [6512(b)(3)(B)] does, in a
situation in which the taxpayer did not file a refund claim
before the notice of deficiency was mailed, and the payment
in question was made after the notice was mailed, is to deem
the date the notice was mailed to be the date of a hypothetical
refund claim for purposes of determining timeliness of that claim
under section 6511" should be revised to read as follows:
"What it does, particularly in a situation in which the
taxpayer did not file a refund claim before the notice of
deficiency was mailed, and the payment in question was not made
after the notice was mailed, is to deem the date the notice
was mailed to be the date of a hypothetical refund claim for
purposes of determining timeliness of that claim under section
6511." Note that, by its terms, section 6512(b)(3)(B)
can apply regardless of whether a refund claim was filed before
the notice of deficiency was mailed. However, if such a
claim were filed, section 6512(b)(3)(C) may apply.
Similarly, if payment was made after the mailing of the notice if
deficiency, section 6512(b)(3)(A) can apply.
In Chapter 10, in Section
10.02[D] on page 508, in the third line, the following phrase
should be deleted: "the delinquency penalty in section
Also in Chapter 10, on page 511,
in the reproduction of Internal Revenue Manual section 18.104.22.168.3
(1)(a.), the word "not" was inadvertently omitted.
The sentence should read, "Relying on another person to
perform a required act is generally not sufficient for
establishing reasonable cause."
In Chapter 1, the Teacher's
Manual says that Code section 7525 does not apply to a letter from
Carmen, a CPA, encouraging Bill Billionaire to invest in a
tax shelter. However, section 7525(b) states that section
7525(a) does not apply to "any
written communication between a federally authorized tax
practitioner and a director, shareholder, officer, or employee,
agent, or representative of a corporation in connection
with the promotion of the direct or indirect participation of such
corporation in any tax shelter . . . ." (emphasis
added). Carmen is apparently soliciting an investment from
Bill in his individual capacity, so the subsection (b) exclusion
from section 7525(a) would not apply.
In Chapter 5, the dates were
updated in Problem 1.B.i.c. but the updated dates are not
reflected in the problem as it is reproduced in the Teacher's
Manual on page 84. In addition, tolling in that problem
should extend 2 years and 183 days, bringing the expiration date
to October 15, 2005.
Also in Chapter 5, the facts of problem
4 do not raise the issue of the penultimate Form
872 extension expiring before the final 872 was signed.
Professors may wish to vary the facts with the hypothetical that
the final Form 872 was signed on May 1, 1999, which is the fact
pattern addressed in the Teacher's Manual on pages 86-87.