- 185 -
The Commissioner is not required to exercise her discretion
under section 7805(b) to limit the retroactive application of a
revenue ruling solely because it may apply to a type of transac-
tion that is, and that the Service knows is, commonplace. If the
Commissioner decides not to exercise her authority to limit the
retroactive effect of a revenue ruling, she generally has an
obligation to apply the ruling retroactively to all similarly
situated taxpayers. Petitioner has the burden of showing that
the Commissioner failed to apply Rev. Rul. 87-89, supra, retroac-
tively to all similarly situated taxpayers or that he otherwise
was singled out by respondent.
With respect to petitioner's second contention (viz., the
Service's general administrative practice was to apply Rev. Rul.
87-89, supra, on a prospective basis only), except for the
present cases, the only instance of the application of that
ruling disclosed by the record is Fu Inv. Co. v. Commissioner,
docket No. 13306-92. In this connection, the parties entered
into the following stipulation:
After making reasonable inquiry of the Office of Asso-
ciate Chief Counsel (International), the Office of the
Assistant Commissioner (International), the Office of
Western Regional Counsel, and the San Francisco Dis-
trict Office, respondent has not discovered any un-
agreed case in the Examination Division or docketed
case other than these cases and the case of Fu Invest-
ment Company v. Commissioner, Docket No. 13306-92, in
which Rev. Rul. 87-89 has been applied retroactively.
* * *
Page: Previous 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011