Greenberg Brothers Partnership #4, a.k.a. Breathless Associates, Richard M. Greenberg, Tax Matters Partner, et al. - Page 8

                                        - 8 -                                         

          Regs.  It follows, therefore, that the determinations of the                
          amounts at risk with respect to partnership liabilities are also            
          "nonpartnership items" within the meaning of section 6231(a)(4).            
          Accordingly, for purposes here we refer to paragraph one of the             
          original settlement agreement as the settlement of the                      
          partnership items provision and the remaining paragraphs                    
          referring to "at risk" as nonpartnership items settlement                   
          provisions.                                                                 
          TEFRA--Consistent settlement                                                
               The present dispute involves section 6224(c)(2) and section            
          301.6224(c)-3T, Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs., 52 Fed. Reg.              
          6787 (Mar. 5, 1987).8                                                       
               Section 6224(c)(2) provides, in part:                                  
                    Other partners have right to enter into consistent                
               agreements.--If the Secretary enters into a settlement                 
               agreement with any partner with respect to partnership items           
               for any partnership taxable year, the Secretary shall offer            
               to any other partner who so requests settlement terms for              
               the partnership taxable year which are consistent with those           
               contained in such settlement agreement. * * *                          
               In construing section 6224(c)(2) our task is to give effect            
          to the intent of Congress.  We begin with the statutory language,           
          which is the most persuasive evidence of the statutory purpose.             

               8                                                                      
                    No court has yet ruled upon the effect of sec.                    
          6224(c)(2) and sec. 301.6224(c)-3T. Temporary Proced. & Admin.              
          Regs., 52 Fed. Reg. 6787 (Mar. 5, 1987).  See, e.g., Pilie v.               
          United States, 56 F.3d 686 (5th Cir. 1995); Slovacek v. United              
          States, 40 Fed. Cl. 828 (1998); Vulcan Oil Tech. Partners v.                
          Commissioner, 110 T.C. 153 (1998); H Graphics/Access, Ltd.                  
          Partnership v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-345.                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011