- 15 -
rational basis. See Hamilton v. Commissioner, 68 T.C. 603, 608
(1977).
One rational basis for the distinction between TEFRA
partnerships and small partnerships is the complexity of the
TEFRA procedures themselves. The TEFRA procedures, suited to
complex examinations and litigation of partnership items in the
case of large partnerships, may be unnecessarily burdensome--to
both the Commissioner and taxpayers--for the examination and
litigation of simple partnerships. We therefore reject
petitioners’ constitutional arguments.
Nor will we heed petitioners’ call to treat the listing of
Mr. Wadsworth as a tax matters partner on Gold Coast’s 2001 and
2002 partnership returns as a “deemed election” to be subject to
the unified partnership procedures of TEFRA. A taxpayer must
clearly notify the Commissioner of the taxpayer’s intent to make
an election. Kosonen v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-107
(citing Knight-Ridder Newspapers, Inc. v. United States, 743 F.2d
781, 795 (11th Cir. 1984)). To make an election, “the taxpayer
must exhibit in some manner * * * his unequivocal agreement to
accept both the benefits and burdens of the tax treatment
afforded” by the governing statute. Id. (quoting Young v.
Commissioner, 83 T.C. 831, 839 (1984), affd. 783 F.2d 1201 (5th
Cir. 1986)). “A taxpayer has not made an election if it is not
clear from the return that an election has been made.” Id.
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