- 6 -
change an accounting method for an existing business, and
therefore a section 481(a) adjustment was not necessary.
Caplin & Drysdale advised petitioner that he had bound
himself to adopt the mark-to-market method of accounting for his
trading business by filing the section 475(f) election and
requesting section 9100 relief on July 21, 2000. On that basis,
Caplin & Drysdale and Mr. Sellers advised petitioner that he
could resume his securities trading activities without adversely
affecting his request for section 9100 relief. Petitioner
resumed his trading activities on July 26, 2000.
Between the date that petitioner should have filed his
section 475(f) election, April 17, 2000, and the date petitioner
actually filed his section 475(f) election, July 21, 2000,
petitioner: (1) Did not purchase any publicly traded stock; (2)
did not sell any publicly traded stock; and (3) had no gain or
loss from the disposition of any publicly traded stock. Thus,
petitioner’s losses on July 21, 2000, were exactly the same as
they were on April 17, 2000.
On October 27, 2000, Caplin & Drysdale submitted to
respondent on behalf of petitioner a formal private letter ruling
request seeking section 9100 relief for his 2000 section 475(f)
election (section 9100 relief request).
On December 5, 2001, respondent denied petitioner’s section
9100 relief request in Priv. Ltr. Rul. 129057-00 (200209053),
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011