My original blog post - Partnership Late Filing Penalty Abatement – is one of the most popular articles here on PDXCPA, and that is due the fact that the IRS has become more and more agressive in assessing this penalty over the years. In fact, last year I encountered some new problems in requesting abatement of these penalties, so an update on the subject is well overdue.
- First off, the base penalty amount has been increased to $195, so if you have a number of partners or members, this has become a very substantial penalty that seems to far outweigh the offense.
- The IRS has been denying the standard abatement letters using Revenue Procedure 84-35 – especially for clients that have requested abatement several years in a row. In priors years, the abatement had been fairly automatic, but last year they fought very hard in some cases to keep the penalties in place.
- In talking to fellow tax practitioners from TaxQueries.com, I found that I was not being singled out by the IRS and that many others had received similar letters denying abatement and citing new arguments never raised before.
- The most common new argument I encountered was that the IRS claimed that they could not consider our request for penalty waiver under Rev Proc 84-35 because their records indicated that the partnership elected to be subject to the consolidated audit procedures under IRC 6221 through IRC 6233. Upon further inquiry, the IRS claimed that a TEFRA election (Form 8893) was filed in a prior year – usually about 10 years prior.
- The IRS agents were very uncooperative with providing me with additional information, and they simply stated they would have to request a copy of the return from their records department.
- Fortunately, my clients keep very good records and we pulled up copies of the return that the IRS claimed had a TEFRA election. Sure enough, the return did not include Form 8893 or any other elections with regard to TEFRA. After a lengthy phone call, they finally agree to abate the penalties if I faxed them a copy of the complete tax return in question.
- In talking with the agent, I found that they had been trained on some new procedures earlier in the year, and the TEFRA election was something they were looking at on all abatement requests. In this case, their records were simply incorrect regarding the TEFRA election, but had I not had a copy of the 10 year old return to prove that it was an error, the IRS might not have been willing to abate the penalty – especially since their records department had taken over a month without finding the return.
Over the next few months, the 2011 batch of late filing penalty letters will be mailed out, so it is important to be aware of some of these new tactics being employed by the IRS. The standard abatement letter using Rev. Proc. 84-35 is something any business owner can prepare and send to the IRS in response to an initial late filing penalty letter. However, if you get a denial letter citing a TEFRA election or another similar reason, make sure you engage a tax professional or lawyer to fight the IRS for you. The IRS is no longer rolling over when they get abatement letters, so be prepared.