- 48 -
limitations prescribed by section 6501 for the assessment and
collection of any tax (the section 6501 period), it is specific
to each partner. Each partner is entitled to participate in the
partnership proceeding for the purpose of asserting a period of
limitations defense. See sec. 6226(d)(1). If the majority is
correct that an FPAA issued to the tax matters partner can
suspend each partner’s section 6501 period (with respect to
partnership items and affected items), then each partner who
believes that her section 6501 period had expired prior to the
issuance of the FPAA will be required to defend against the FPAA.
Indeed, unless all of the partners successfully raise a period of
limitations defense against the FPAA, I assume that respondent
would be entitled to continue the partnership action on the
theory that there is at least one partner whose section 6501
period is still open.
The majority has painted itself into a corner by refusing to
reconsider Maxwell v. Commissioner, supra. See GAF Corp. & Subs.
v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. __ (2000). The majority does not agree
that the period specified in subsection (a) is the 3-year minimum
period because an FPAA issued thereafter would be ineffective to
suspend any partner’s unexpired section 6501 period. Of course,
I agree with the majority that it is unlikely that Congress
intended to create a preassessment procedure for partners to
contest partnership determinations that could be manipulated to
Page: Previous 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011