- 49 -
frustrate, by delay, respondent’s ability to collect any tax.
Nevertheless, absent any extension of the 3-year minimum period,
once that period has expired, the unity of a single entity-level
period of limitations is at an end. The partnership items will
still be determined in a unified partnership proceeding, but a
partner is a party to that proceeding only if the section 6501
period particular to that partner has not expired. See sec.
6226(d)(1). Section 6503(a)(1) specifically provides that the
running of the section 6501 period shall be suspended after the
mailing of a notice of deficiency under section 6212(a). In
order for respondent to proceed against one or more partners, for
deficiencies attributable to partnership items or affected items,
beyond the 3-year minimum period, but within the partner’s
section 6501 period, respondent should directly notify such
partners of the partnership proceeding by notices of deficiency
issued pursuant to section 6212.3 Assuming that I am right that
Maxwell v. Commissioner, supra, is wrong, my approach presents a
technically more straightforward approach to the statute.4
3I assume that respondent would make a preliminary
determination that the partners to whom he would send such
notices of deficiency do, indeed, have open sec. 6501 periods.
4I recognize that the deficiency procedures provided for in
subchapter B, chapter 63, subtitle F of the Internal Revenue Code
(subchapter B), do not generally apply to the assessment and
collection of any computational adjustment resulting from a
partnership proceeding. See sec. 6230(a)(1). Unless subchapter
B applies, respondent may have no authority to send the notice of
(continued...)
Page: Previous 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011