§1311 — Correction of error
59 cases·11 followed·4 distinguished·2 questioned·2 criticized·1 overruled·39 cited—19% support
Statute Text — 26 U.S.C. §1311
If a determination (as defined in section 1313) is described in one or more of the paragraphs of section 1312 and, on the date of the determination, correction of the effect of the error referred to in the applicable paragraph of section 1312 is prevented by the operation of any law or rule of law, other than this part and other than section 7122 (relating to compromises), then the effect of the error shall be corrected by an adjustment made in the amount and in the manner specified in section 1314.
Except in cases described in paragraphs (3) (B) and (4) of section 1312, an adjustment shall be made under this part only if—
in case the amount of the adjustment would be credited or refunded in the same manner as an overpayment under section 1314, there is adopted in the determination a position maintained by the Secretary, or
in case the amount of the adjustment would be assessed and collected in the same manner as a deficiency under section 1314, there is adopted in the determination a position maintained by the taxpayer with respect to whom the determination is made,
and the position maintained by the Secretary in the case described in subparagraph (A) or maintained by the taxpayer in the case described in subparagraph (B) is inconsistent with the erroneous inclusion, exclusion, omission, allowance, disallowance, recognition, or nonrecognition, as the case may be.
In the case of a determination described in section 1312(3)(B) (relating to certain exclusions from income), adjustment shall be made under this part only if assessment of a deficiency for the taxable year in which the item is includible or against the related taxpayer was not barred, by any law or rule of law, at the time the Secretary first maintained, in a notice of deficiency sent pursuant to section 6212 or before the Tax Court, that the item described in section 1312(3)(B) should be included in the gross income of the taxpayer for the taxable year to which the determination relates.
In the case of a determination described in section 1312(4) (relating to disallowance of certain deductions and credits), adjustment shall be made under this part only if credit or refund of the overpayment attributable to the deduction or credit described in such section which should have been allowed to the taxpayer or related taxpayer was not barred, by any law or rule of law, at the time the taxpayer first maintained before the Secretary or before the Tax Court, in writing, that he was entitled to such deduction or credit for the taxable year to which the determination relates.
In case the amount of the adjustment would be assessed and collected in the same manner as a deficiency (except for cases described in section 1312(3)(B)), the adjustment shall not be made with respect to a related taxpayer unless he stands in such relationship to the taxpayer at the time the latter first maintains the inconsistent position in a return, claim for refund, or petition (or amended petition) to the Tax Court for the taxable year with respect to which the determination is made, or if such position is not so maintained, then at the time of the determination.
59 Citing Cases
Mitigation Section 1311 provides for the corr etion ofthe effect ofcertain errors under circumstances specified in section 1312 hen one or more provisions oflaw, such as the statute oflimitations, would otherv ise prevent such correction.
ess eliminated certain pre-1983 accumulated earnings and profits for certain S corporations that existed before 1983, effective for the first taxable year beginning after Dec. 31, 1996. See Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104-188, sec. 1311, 100 Stat. 1755, 1784. Accordingly, this legislative provision is inapplicable to the instant case. - 20 - that Bonnevista and Castle Towers had no accumulated earnings and profits as the result of reorganizations and the like. Accordingly,
Under section 1311, the same adjustment is required to be made to your beginning inventory for 2005. * * * This results in an increase to your [2005] income of [$20,549]. On the basis of the above inventory adjustment and other adjustments that petitioner and respondent agreed to, respondent determined a $5,516 deficiency in petitioner's 2005 Federal inc
vocation of these provisions will not deal with the similar, but sometimes not identical, rules for taxpayers’ refund claims. O’Donnell v. Belcher, 414 F.2d 833, 841 (5th Cir. 1969). Section 13115 provides for the correction of an error if, on the 5 Sec. 1311 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: SEC. 1311. CORRECTION OF ERROR. (a) General Rule.--If a determination (as defined in section 1313) is described in one or more of the paragraphs of section 1312 and, on the date of the determination,
vocation of these provisions will not deal with the similar, but sometimes not identical, rules for taxpayers’ refund claims. O’Donnell v. Belcher, 414 F.2d 833, 841 (5th Cir. 1969). Section 13115 provides for the correction of an error if, on the 5 Sec. 1311 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: SEC. 1311. CORRECTION OF ERROR. (a) General Rule.--If a determination (as defined in section 1313) is described in one or more of the paragraphs of section 1312 and, on the date of the determination,
§ 12:1311 (2007), while section 1312 provides that the articles of organization can require that the LLC be managed by “one or more managers who may, but need not, be members.” La.
§§ 1311, 1321(c), 1401, 1501, 124 Stat. at 173, 186, 213, 242. As to the credit, ACA § 1401 created section 36B, which allows an “applicable taxpayer” a refundable credit equal to the PTC amount of the taxpayer for the taxable year. § 36B(a), (b), and (c); see McGuire v. Commissioner, 149 T.C. 254, 259–60 (2017). Under section 36B(c)(1)(A), an “appl
nths of COBRA coverage in 2016. 3 Pursuant to Rule 201 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, we take judicial notice that New York has established a health benefit exchange under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), Pub. L. No. 111-148, § 1311, 124 Stat. 119, 173–81 (2010) (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 18031), which is currently called NY State of Health and previously was called the New York Health Benefit Exchange. See History and Development, NY State of Health, https://info.nystateof
ched thereto. See Rule 121(b). Petitioners resided in California when they petitioned this Court. Covered California is an American health benefit exchange (exchange) un- der the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), Pub. L. No. 111-148, sec. 1311, 124 Stat. at 173 (2010) (codified at 42 U.S.C. sec. 18031 (2012)).2 Dur- ing 2014 petitioners enrolled through Covered California in two Blue Shield medi- cal insurance plans. Petitioners enrolled in the first plan from February 1 through
such as, for example, where the taxpayer omits 25% ofgross income from the return, s_ee sec. 6501(e)(1)(A)(i), it would prejudice the IRS for it to have to prove the applicability ofan exception. The Whitesells do not suggest that mitigation under sec. 1311 would be available, so we do not address it. - 29 - [*29] We conclude thatjustice does not require that the Whitesells be permitted to file their amendment to amended petition. See Rule 41(a).¹° To reflect the foregoing, An order will be iss
e to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue, unless otherwise indicated. - 8 - offset the cost ofhealth insurance for those who qualify. Id. sec. 1501, 124 Stat. at 242; sec. 5000A; ACA sec. 1401, 124 Stat. at 213; sec. 36B; ACA sec. 1311, 124 Stat. at 173. The individual mandate is enforced by the imposition ofa penalty on individuals who do not maintain qualifying health insurance coverage. Sec. 5000A; ACA sec. 1501. The exchanges are health insurance markets that are admini
The circumstances under which-an adjustment under section 1311 is authorized are set forth in section 1312 and include such things as the double inclusion of an item of gross income and the double allowance or double disallowance of a deduction for credit.
Petitioners argue that the loss and recapture are affected items, or in the alternative that the mitigation provisions of section 1311 through 1314 apply.
Suffice it to say that neither 1985 nor 1986 is a year before us, and, therefore, we have no jurisdiction to determine any overpayment for either of such years. See sec. 6512(b). Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the years in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax C