- 14 -
T.C. Memo. 1991-78; Lardas v. Commissioner, 99 T.C. at 492
(grantor trust).
The rationale generally underlying those holdings was that
the assessment period of the beneficiary’s/shareholder’s/
partner’s return controlled, because: (1) The source entity was
of a passthrough nature; (2) the source entity was not subject to
income tax at the entity level; and (3) the return filed by the
source entity did not contain enough information to determine the
shareholder/taxpayer’s total individual tax liability.
In Lardas v. Commissioner, 99 T.C. 490 (1992), however, this
Court indicated disagreement with and an intention not to follow
the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit’s holding in Fendell
v. Commissioner, 906 F.2d 362 (8th Cir. 1990). In Lardas, we
noted that we have consistently subscribed to the rationale that
the return of the taxpayer against whom the Commissioner has
determined a deficiency is the relevant return for purposes of
section 6501(a) without regard to the nature of the source entity
involved. Id. at 493.
C. Bufferd v. Commissioner
The Supreme Court specifically resolved the question of
whether the passthrough entity’s period for assessment controlled
the Commissioner’s ability to make determinations for individual
taxpayer/shareholders. Bufferd v. Commissioner, 506 U.S. 523
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011