- 9 -
we found the standard articulated in the ruling to be somewhat
vague relative to the approach taken by the courts addressing the
question. Equally important, we did not feel bound to apply Rev.
Rul. 80-80, supra. Absent exceptional circumstances, revenue
rulings are viewed as “merely an opinion of a lawyer in the
agency”, they are not considered to have the effect of law, and
they are not binding on the Commissioner or the courts. See sec.
6110(j)(3); Foil v. Commissioner, 920 F.2d 1196, 1201 (5th Cir.
1990), affg. 92 T.C. 376 (1989); Stubbs, Overbeck & Associates v.
United States, 445 F.2d 1142, 1146-1147 (5th Cir. 1971); Lucky
Stores, Inc. & Subs. v. Commissioner, 105 T.C. 420, 433 (1995);
Gordon v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 630, 635-636 n.3 (1987); see also
Dickman v. Commissioner, 465 U.S. 330, 343 (1984). Of course, a
revenue ruling may achieve the force of law when a statute has
been reenacted unchanged after the interpretation of the statute
in the ruling was expressly called to congressional attention.
See Estate of Lang v. Commissioner, 64 T.C. 404, 406-407 n.4
(1975), affd. in part and revd. in part 613 F.2d 770 (9th Cir.
1980). In addition, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
has held that a revenue ruling may be binding on the Commissioner
where a taxpayer relies on the ruling and there is not a statute,
3(...continued)
443 F.2d 116 (5th Cir. 1971), the Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit's most detailed discussion of the issue presented herein,
predated the issuance of Rev. Rul. 80-80, 1980-1 C.B. 194.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011