Kligfeld Holdings, Kligfeld Corporation, Tax Matters Partner - Page 18

                                       - 18 -                                         
          partnership items with an eye to determining a deficiency for               
          2000.  But does the Code allow this--or must there be some                  
          “matching” of taxable years challenged by an FPAA and supplying             
          the period to calculate limitations under section 6501(a)?                  
               That is the question to which we now turn.                             
          B.   Section 6229 and the Matching of Taxable Years                         
               Kligfeld19 begins by making clear that he is not trying to             
          get us to overrule Rhone-Poulenc.  Instead, he is making a                  
          subtler point--that we need not, and should not, extend Rhone-              
          Poulenc beyond the situation where the taxable years of a                   
          partnership and its partners overlap.  An obvious problem with              
          this position is that we mentioned nothing about the overlapping            
          of taxable years in Rhone-Poulenc itself.  Because Rhone-Poulenc            
          involved the characterization of a single transaction between the           
          partner and partnership, see 114 T.C. at 536, one can infer that            
          the taxable years involved did overlap.  However, we made no                
          finding--and made no mention--of this fact.                                 
               Kligfeld has therefore, we believe, identified a real                  
          distinction between Rhone-Poulenc and his case, and he makes both           
          textual and policy arguments--including constitutional questions            

               19 This case is very similar to Bay Way Holdings v.                    
          Commissioner, docket No. 5534-05.  Bay Way’s TMP filed a summary            
          judgment motion very similar to Kligfeld’s, and the Court invited           
          Bay Way to appear as an amicus curiae on brief and oral argument            
          of this motion.  When we refer to “Kligfeld’s views,” we are                
          referring as well to the points made by Bay Way’s counsel, Paul             
          J. Sax.                                                                     

Page:  Previous  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007