§6221 — Determination at partnership level

Section 6221 provides that “the tax treatment of any partnership item .

Section 6221 provides that the tax treatment of all “partnership item[s]” is determined at the partnership level.7 Rather than mail a Notice of Deficiency to each partner, once the Commissioner makes partnership-level determinations, he must mail an FPAA to the TMP.

Section 6221 provides that, in a TEFRA partnership case, the tax treatment of any partnership item (and the applicability of any penalty relating to the adjustment of any such item) shall be determined at the partnership level.

Specifically, section 6221 provides that “the tax treatment of any partnership item (and the applicability of any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item) shall be determined at the partnership level.” The procedures for determining partnership items and affected items diffe

Section 6221 provides that the tax treatment of partnership items is determined at the partnership level.

Section 6221 provides that the tax treatment of partnership items shall be determined at the partnership level.

Accuracy-Related Penalties Section 6221 provides that the applicability ofany penalty that relates to an adjustment to a partnership item is determined at the partnership level.63 The determination ofpartnership items in a partnership-level proceeding is 6¹(...continued) 19, at *33.

Thus, pursuant to section 6221, "partnership item[s]" and the "applicability ofany penalty * * * which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item" must be determined in a TEFRA proceeding involving thepartnership; we lackjurisdiction to adjudicate "partnership item[s]" and related penalties in a deficiency proceeding such as

The disputed deductions are partnership items attributable to Lender Management, and section 6221 provides that the tax treatment ofthese items shall be determined at the partnership level.

The disputed deductions are partnership items attributable to Lender Management, and section 6221 provides that the tax treatment ofthese items shall be determined at the partnership level.

Section 6221 provides that the tax treatment ofall "partnership items" is determined at the partnership level.

- 9 - Section 6221 provides that "the tax treatment ofany partnership item (and the applicability ofany penalty * * * which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item) shall be determined at the partnership level." Likewise, section 6230(a)(2)(A)(i) excludes from deficiency procedures "penalties * * * that relate to adjus

Section 6221 provides that the tax treatment ofall "partnership items" is determined at the partnership level.

Section 6221 provides that the tax treatment ofall "partnership items" is determined at the partnership level.

Section 6221 provides that the tax treatment ofall "partnership items" is determined at the partnership level.

Section 6221 provides that the tax treatment ofall "partnership items" is determined at the partnership level.

Section 6221 provides that the tax treatment ofall "partnership items" is determined at the partnership level.

6221 provides that the applicability ofany penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item is determined at the partnership level.

Section 6221 provides that the tax treatment ofall "partnership items" is determined at the partnership level.

Section 6221 provides that the tax treatment ofall "partnership items" is determined at the partnership level.

Section 6221 provides that the tax treatment ofall "partnership items" is determined at the partnership level.

Section 6221 provides that the tax treatment ofall "partnership items" is determined at the partnership level.

Ifour concern was borne out,:the substantive issues would, within the meaning ofsection 6231(a)(3), constitute "partnership items", determinable, pursuant to section 6221, at the partnershij level.

Section 6221 provides that the applicability of any penalty , addition to tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item is determined at the partnership level .

After amendment, section 6221 provides : Except as otherwise provided * * * the tax treatment of any partnership item (and the applicability of any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item) shall be determined at the partnership level .

Section 6221 requires such partnership item to be determined in a partnership proceeding rather than in a deficiency proceeding .

In support of his jurisdictional argument, respondent points out that section 6221 requires “partnership items” to be determined at the partnership level.

Thus, section 6221 provides for the determination of all partnership items at the partnership level rather than at the partner level.12 Like subchapter K, however, the TEFRA partnership provisions blend the entity and aggregate theories.

Section 6221 provides: “Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, the tax treatment of any partnership item shall be determined at the partnership level.” The term “partnership item” is defined in section 6231(a)(3): The term “partnership item” means, with respect to a partnership, any item required to be taken i

artner’s income tax liability independently, “Congress decided that . . . ‘the tax treatment of any partnership item [would] be determined at the partnership level.’” Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787 (1988) (alteration in original) (quoting § 6221). All partners are deemed to be parties to a partnership-level proceeding and bound by its outcome. §§ 6226(c), 6228(a)(4)(A)(i). The parties agree that TEFRA applied to AD Investment Fund, of which Warner was a partner. Warner did not challen

Section 6221 provides that the tax treatment of all “partnership items” is determined at the partnership level. The Secretary must mail each notice partner whose name and address is furnished a notice of the beginning of an administrative partnership-level proceeding and an FPAA. Sec. 6223(a). The determination of partnership items in a partnership

Ifour concern was borne out,:the substantive issues would, within the meaning ofsection 6231(a)(3), constitute "partnership items", determinable, pursuant to section 6221, at the partnershij level.

TRA 1997 amended section 6221 to provide that a penalty or addition to tax “which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item” must be determined at the partnership level.

f that jurisdiction; and (2) even if the Secretary had authorization to issue section 301.6221-lT(c) and (d), Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs., supra, the regulation is invalid because it both conflicts with and is an unreasonable interpretation of section 6221. III. Tax Court Jurisdiction To Consider Partner Defenses Petitioner first argues that Congress gave the Tax Court jurisdiction to consider partner-level defenses during a partnership-level proceeding but that the Secretary exceeded his s

1026 (1997 T RA), Congress amended section 6221 to provide that the applicability of any penalty (including an accuracy-related penalty) which relates to an adjustment of a partnership item shall be determined at the partnership level .2 See sec .

Section 6221 provides that, except as otherwise provided in subchapte C dealing with the tax treatment of partnership items, the tax treatment of any partnership item must be determined at the partnership level . Section 6226(a) authorizes a tax matters partner to file a petition for readjustment of partnership items within 90 days after the date o

Pursuant to section 6221, the proper tax treatment of petitioner's AMCOR-related items was required to be determined at the partnership level .

Section 6221 provides : Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, the tax treatment of any partnership item (and the applicabliltiy of any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item) shall be determined at the partnership level . Further, section 301 .6231(a)(6)-1T(a)(2), Income Tax Re

Section 6221 requires such partnership item to be determined in a partnership proceeding rather than in a deficiency proceeding. * * * Contrary to petitioner’s contention, the status of an item as a partnership item depends solely on whether the partnership must determine the item under Subtitle A and whether the regulations make such an item a par

Pursuant to section 6221, the tax treatment of any partnership item is determined at the partnership level.

These facts, however, do not override the mandate of section 6221 that “the tax treatment of any partnership item * * * shall be determined at the partnership level.” Maxwell v.

Specifically, section 6221 provides 9 the tax treatment of any partnership item (and the applicability of any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item) shall be determined at the partnership level.

Specifically, section 6221 provides 9 the tax treatment of any partnership item (and the applicability of any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item) shall be determined at the partnership level.

Specifically, section 6221 provides 9 the tax treatment of any partnership item (and the applicability of any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item) shall be determined at the partnership level.

In support of his jurisdictional argument, respondent points out that section 6221 requires “partnership items” to be determined at the partnership level.

- 4 - Petitioner filed an objection to respondent's motion arguing that the motion should be denied on the grounds that: (1) Respondent's motion was not timely filed; (2) the FPAA includes an adjustment based on the penalty prescribed in section 6662(a); and (3) section 6221 was amended in 1997 to clarify that additions to tax and penalties are to be determined in partnership-level proceedings.

Thus, section 6221 provides for the determination of all partnership items at the partnership level rather than at the partner level. Like subchapter K, however, the TEFRA partnership provisions blend the entity and aggregate theories. For example, if a partner enters into a settlement agreement with the Commissioner with respect to all partnership items

Section 6221 provides: “Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, the tax treatment of any partnership item shall be determined at the partnership level.” The term “partnership item” is defined in section 6231(a)(3): The term “partnership item” means, with respect to a partnership, any item required to be taken into account for the partnersh

Under section 6221, the tax treatment of partnership items is determined at the partnership level. We conclude that Utah I is not entitled to a section 174(a) research - 27 - and experimental expense deduction for 1982 because it did not directly or indirectly engage in research or experimentation. In addition, we hold that Utah I was not actively invol

Under section 6221, the tax treatment of partnership items is determined at the partnership level. We conclude that Yuma Mesa and Cactus Wren are not entitled to section 174(a) research and experimental expense deductions for 1982 and 1983 because petitioners did not directly or indirectly engage in research or experimentation. In addition, we hold that

ship income, loss, deduction, or credit that affect each partner. Congress decided that no longer would a partner's tax liability be determined uniquely but "the tax treatment of any partnership item [would] be determined at the partnership level." Sec. 6221. [Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787 (1986); alteration in original.] Section 6221 provides that the tax treatment of partnership items shall be determined at the partnership level, except as otherwise provided in subchapter C of chap

Specifically, section 6221 (TEFRA) provides that “the tax treatment of 3 In 2015 Congress enacted BBA § 1101, 129 Stat.

§§ 6221, 6226; United States v. Woods, 571 U.S. 31, 39–42 (2013). While there is thus no limitation on our authority to determine the applicability of more than one accuracy-related penalty at the partnership level, Oconee Landing Prop., LLC, T.C. Memo. 2024-73, at *3–4, we need not do so in this case with respect to JSS because we find a 40% gross

Petitioners’ challenge to this regulation is of no consequence, since our conclusion in Hamel—holding we lacked jurisdiction as to the penalties being challenged—rejected petitioners’ reading of section 6230(a)(2) and the amendments to section 6221 under the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, Pub.

§§ 6221, 6226; United States v. Woods, 571 U.S. 31, 39–42 (2013). Although nothing limits our ability to determine the applicability of more than one accuracy-related penalty at the partnership level, Oconee Landing, T.C. Memo. 2024- 73, at *3–4, supplementing T.C. Memo. 2024-25, we need not do so here. 78 [*78] To reflect the foregoing, Decision w

11 The determination of an “underpayment” within the meaning of section 6662(a) cannot be made at the partnership level because partnerships do not pay tax.

The partnership proceeding is then followed by separate collections from individual partners. Goldberg v. Commissioner, 73 F.4th 537, 539 (7th Cir. 2023), aff’g T.C. Memo. 2021-119. When the IRS commences a partnership audit, it must mail to certain partners, including the TMP, a notice of the beginning of the administrative proceeding (NBA

See §§ 6221, 6226(f); Dynamo Holdings Ltd. P’ship v. Commissioner, 150 T.C. 224, 233 (2018). “Once a partnership-level proceeding is final, the liability of the partners, if any, may be determined in a partner-level proceeding, which may involve a computational adjustment or a notice of deficiency.” Dynamo, 150 T.C. at 233 (citing § 6230(a)). In a partn

Partnerships could challenge the resulting FPAA in this Court, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, or a U.S. district court having jurisdiction. § 6226(a).5 While section 6226 permitted TEFRA partnerships to seek judicial review of an FPAA, including the applicability of penalties,6 it did not confer a right to a jury trial. It is

§§ 6221, 6226; United States v. Woods, 571 U.S. 31, 39–42 (2013). While there is thus no limitation on our authority to determine the applicability of more than one accuracy-related penalty at the partnership level, Oconee Landing, T.C. Memo. 2024-73, at *3–4, we need not do so in this case because we find a 40% gross valuation misstatement penalty

§§ 6221, 6226; Woods, 571 U.S. at 39–42. Although nothing limits our ability to determine the applicability of more than one accuracy-related penalty at the partnership level, Oconee Landing, T.C. Memo. 2024-73, at *3–4, we need not do so here, see Seabrook, T.C. Memo. 2025-6, at *77 n.60. B. Constitutional Challenge Petitioner contends that the gro

mmissioner, 162 T.C. 228, 233 (2024). The BBA generally applies for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, see BBA § 1101(g)(1), 129 Stat. at 638, and BBA partnerships, including River Moss, are subject to special tax and audit rules, see §§ 6221–6241. 3 [*3] Mallery in the Large Business & International Division. On August 24, 2021, the IRS sent a Notice of Administrative Proceeding related to the 2019 Form 1065. During his examination, RA Mallery made the initial determination to ass

The deficiencies set forth in the SNODs were based on adjustments to partnership items determined in AD Global, which was a partnership-level proceeding. Likewise, the applicability of the section 6662(h) penalties set forth in the SNODs was determined in AD Global. Adjustments to partnership items in a partnership-level proceeding may resu

The IRS issues an FPAA notifying the partners of any adjustments to partnership items, and the partners may seek judicial review of those adjustments. § 6226(a) and (b). Once any adjustments to partnership items become final, the IRS may undertake further proceedings at the partner level to make any resulting “computational adju

See § 6221 (requiring the tax treatment of any partnership item including the applicability of any penalty relating to the adjustment of any partnership item be determined in a TEFRA partnership case); United States v. Woods, 571 U.S. 31, 41 (2013). The court did not address the FPAAs’ alternative position that the partnerships were shams. It entered i

See §§ 6221, 6226; see also United States v. Woods, 571 U.S. 31, 39–42 (2013). 15 [*15] 3. East Village PropertyCo On November 4, 2015, Baker Walton, Henry Phillip Richardson, James Donald Richardson, and Monroe Walton (collectively, East Village Landowners) recorded several limited warranty deeds transferring their entire interests in the East Village

§§ 6221, 6226; United States v. Woods, 571 U.S. 31, 39–42 (2013). While there is thus no limitation on our authority to determine the applicability of more than one accuracy-related penalty at the partnership level, Oconee Landing Prop., LLC v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2024- 73, at *3–4, supplementing T.C. Memo. 2024-25, we need not do so in this ca

The Fraziers and LHDC contend that in 2007 Bobbie sold half her 100% membership interest in Louisiana Assisted to LHDC and repurchased the interest in 2012. The IRS contends that in 2007 Bobbie sold half her 100% membership interest in Louisiana Assisted to William and repurchased the interest in 2012. We agree with the Fraziers and LHDC

324, and in effect before 2018 generally require tax items of partnerships to be determined in entity-level proceedings, see § 6221, those rules do not apply in these cases.

Petitioners point us to the change in section 6221 made by Congress after enactment of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, Pub.

Specifically, section 6221 (TEFRA) provided that “the tax treatment of any partnership item (and the applicability of any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item) shall be determined at the partnership level.” Under the TEFRA procedures, adjustments were determined at the partnership level, but the asse

§§ 6221, 6226; United States v. Woods, 571 U.S. 31, 39–42 (2013). “There is thus no limitation on our ability to determine the applicability of more than one accuracy- related penalty at the partnership level.” Oconee, T.C. Memo. 2024-73, at *3; see also Mill Road, T.C. Memo. 2023-129, at *70. 68 [*68] 40% penalty under section 6662(h) for a gross

See § 6221; Maxwell, 87 T.C. at 788. In the prior partnership-level proceeding, we held that the following items were partnership items within our jurisdiction: (1) petitioner is a partner of Solutus and the income was properly included in his personal gross income, (2) Solutus was organized for tax avoidance and had no business purpose, (3) the paymen

A partnership item is “any item required to be taken into account for the partnership taxable year” if “such item is more appropriately determined at the partnership level than at the partner level.” § 6231(a)(3). A nonpartnership item is “an item which is (or is treated as) not a partnership item.” § 6231(a)(4). To challenge a

See §§ 6221–6234 (as in effect for years before 2018). KRLLC, which appears to have qualified for small partnership status, checked a box on its 2017 return indicating that it was not electing to have TEFRA procedures apply. See § 6231(a)(1)(B). 3 [*3] The stock certificates show that petitioners and the Riemen- schneiders each held 138 shares, or 34.5

TEFRA requires the uniform treatment of all “partnership item[s]”—a term defined by section 6231(a)(3)—and its general goal is to have a single point of adjustment for the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) rather than having it make separate partnership- item adjustments on each partner’s individual return. See H.R. Rep. No. 97-760, at

TEFRA requires the uniform treatment of all “partnership item[s]”—a term defined by section 6231(a)(3)—and its general goal is to have a single point of adjustment for the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) rather than having it make separate partnership-item adjustments on each partner’s individual return. See H.R. Rep. No. 97-760, at

See §§ 6221–6234 (as in effect for years before 2018). Watley qualified for small partnership status under section 6231(a)(1)(B) for each of those years and checked a box on its 2008 through 2011 partnership returns indicating that it was not electing to have the TEFRA provisions apply. Therefore, Watley is not subject to the TEFRA provisions, and we pr

TEFRA required the uniform treatment of all “partnership item[s]”—a term defined by section 6231(a)(3)—and its general goal was to have a single point of adjustment for the IRS rather than having it make separate partnership-item adjustments on each partner's individual return. See H.R. Rep. No. 97-760, at 599–601 (1982) (Conf. Rep.),

Three single-member entities—C, N, and T—were partners of CRC in 2013 and negotiated a buyout of C in anticipation of the retirement of C’s principal owner, which they memorialized in a restated partnership agreement. The partnership agreement also included provisions governing allocations of income and distributions (both liquidating

§ 301.6231(a)(3)-1. Partners must treat any income received from the partnership in a manner consistent with the treatment of that income at the partnership level. § 6222(a). In certain instances, a partner may seek to treat income received from a partnership in a manner inconsistent with the income item’s treatment at the partn

Regs.; see also sec.

Commissioner, 148 T.C. 372, 375 (2017). The proper treatment of"affected items which require partner level determinations" is generally determined in deficiency proceedings involving the relevant partner(s). Sec. 6230(a)(2)(A)(i); see sec. 301.6231(a)(6)-1(a)(3), Proced. & Admin. Regs. However, "[i]fan adjustment to an affected

Bordelon without proceeding against any other obligor on 4The parties have not alleged nor do we perceive any issues as to whether any ofthe adjustments in dispute here might be "partnership items" under section 6231(a)(3), which under section 6221 are "determined at the partnership level" and over which we might not havejurisdiction in this deficiency case.

Bordelon without proceeding against any other obligor on 4The parties have not alleged nor do we perceive any issues as to whether any ofthe adjustments in dispute here might be "partnership items" under section 6231(a)(3), which under section 6221 are "determined at the partnership level" and over which we might not havejurisdiction in this deficiency case.

Bordelon without proceeding against any other obligor on 4The parties have not alleged nor do we perceive any issues as to whether any ofthe adjustments in dispute here might be "partnership items" under section 6231(a)(3), which under section 6221 are "determined at the partnership level" and over which we might not havejurisdiction in this deficiency case.

p ifthe partnership is subject to the provisions ofthe Tax Equity and Fiscal ResponsibilityAct of 1982, Pub. L. No. 97-248, sec. 402(a), 96 Stat. at 648. Blonien v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 541, 551-552 (2002), supplemented by T.C. Memo. 2003-308; see sec. 6221. However, a partnership qualifies for the small partnership exception under section 6231(a)(1)(B) ifit has fewerthan 10 partners and all partners are individuals rather than "pass-thru partners" as defined by section 6231(a)(9). As for True

6231(a)(3); sec. 301.6231(a)(3)-1(a), Proced. & Admin. Regs. "2Sec. 301.6231(a)(3)-1(a), Proced. & Admin. Regs. - 101 - [*101] A. Dynamo GP The Commissioner argues that Dynamo's general partner, Dynamo GP, received a deemed distribution ofcash in a 2007 restructuring transaction in an amount equal to the assumption ofthe advances

And insofar as this Court'sjurisdiction is concerned, section 6226(f) explicitly includes determining any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount that relates to an adjustment to a partnership item within -10- the scope ofourjudicial review. Consequently, the penalties included in the FPAAs are properly before the Court in this p

6231(a)(3); sec. 301.6231(a)(3)-1(a), Proced. & Admin. Regs. "2Sec. 301.6231(a)(3)-1(a), Proced. & Admin. Regs. - 101 - [*101] A. Dynamo GP The Commissioner argues that Dynamo's general partner, Dynamo GP, received a deemed distribution ofcash in a 2007 restructuring transaction in an amount equal to the assumption ofthe advances

111, 115 (1933); see also Rule 142(a)(1).

Section 6226(a) authorizes a TMP to file a petition for readjustment of ¹6At trial we stated that a document not admitted will be disregarded ifthe party wishing to rely upon it failed to argue and address the remaining objections to the document in his opening brief. Respondent has relied on documents not admitted in the record, and he

111, 115 (1933); see also Rule 142(a)(1).

TEFRA is a series ofspecial tax and audit provisions that apply in all partnership proceedings (with exceptions not relevant here). See sec. 6231(a)(1). The goal ofTEFRA is to have a single point of - 11 - [*11] adjustment for all partnership items at the partnership level. See Kligfeld Holdings v. Commissioner, 128 T.C. 192, 200 (2007)

301.6221-1, 301.6231(a)(3)-1(a)(2), Proced. & Admin. Regs. - 4 - [*4] Once the partnership item is determined at the partnership level, each partner's affected items can be challenged in a subsequent partner-level proceeding. Section 6662 imposes a penalty for negligence when the person responsible for a tax return fails to make a

Second, under section 6221 we may consider the applicability ofa penalty only to the extent that it "relates to an adjustmentto a partnership item".

Second, under section 6221 we may consider the applicability of a penalty only to the extent that it “relates to an adjustment to a partnership item”.

6221 through 6234, provide that "the tax treatment ofany partnership item (and the applicability ofany penalty, additionto tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustmentto a partnership item) shall be determined at the partnership level." Sec. 6221. Ifthe partnership seeks readjustment ofthe Commissioner's adjustments, any notice ofdeficiency to the individual partners that purports to determine deficiencies based on partnership adjustments or affected items is invalid ifsent before t

301.6231(a)(3)-1(a)(2), Proced. & Admin. Regs.; see also Brennan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2012-187. - 6 - [*6] The Court'sjurisdiction over a TEFRApartnership-level proceeding is invoked upon the Commissioner's issuance ofa valid FPAA and the proper filing ofa petition for readjustment ofpartnership items for the year or years t

301.6231(a)(3)-1(a)(2), Proced. & Admin. Regs.; see also Brennan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2012-187. - 6 - [*6] The Court'sjurisdiction over a TEFRApartnership-level proceeding is invoked upon the Commissioner's issuance ofa valid FPAA and the proper filing ofa petition for readjustment ofpartnership items for the year or years t

termination, the Court need not now make any such determination because the parties have stipulated the amount ofthe deficiency. Held, further, this Court's conclusion that it lacksjurisdiction to consider the accuracy penalty stands, and pursuantto I.R.C. sec. 6221 and sec. 301.6221-1(c), Proced. & Admin. Regs., Ps must raise any partner-level defenses, ifat all, in a refund suit pursuant to I.R.C. sec. 6230(c)(1)(C) and sec. 301.6221-1(d), Proced. & Admin. Regs. Edward M. Robbins, Jr., for pet

980, 982 (1987), we wrote: The FPAA is to the litigation ofpartnership items and affected items pursuant to the partnership audit and litigationprovisions of section 6221 et seq., whatthe statutory notice ofdeficiency is to tax - 41 - controversies before this Court that involve respondent's determination ofa deficiency, i.e., it is the notice to affected taxpayers that respondenthas made a final administrative determination for particulartax years.

6221 through 6234, provide that "the tax treatment ofany partnership item (and the applicability ofany penalty, additionto tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustmentto a partnership item) shall be determined at the partnership level." Sec. 6221. Ifthe partnership seeks readjustment ofthe Commissioner's adjustments, any notice ofdeficiency to the individual partners that purports to determine deficiencies based on partnership adjustments or affected items is invalid ifsent before t

As the Supreme Court recently noted in United States v. Woods, 571 U.S. _, __, 134 S. Ct. 557, 563-64 (2013), "[p]rohibiting courts in partnership-level proceedings from considering the applicability ofpenalties that require partner-level inquiries would be inconsistent with the nature ofthe 'applicability' determination that TEFRA requi

980, 982 (1987), we wrote: The FPAA is to the litigation of partnership items and affected items pursuant to the partnership audit and litigation provisions of section 6221 et seq., what the statutory notice of deficiency is to tax controversies before this Court that involve respondent’s determination of a deficiency, i.e., it is the notice to affected taxpayers that respondent has made a final administrative determination for particular tax years.

ership items ofa partnership ifthe partnership is subject to the provisions ofthe Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA), Pub. L. No. 97-248, sec. 402(a), 96 Stat. at 648. Blonien v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 541, 551-552 (2002); see sec. 6221. Partnership items include guaranteed payments, sec. 301.6231(a)(3)- 1(a)(2), Proced. & Admin. Regs., and a taxpayer's status as a partner, McIntyre v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2009-305. Neither FC nor CFC was a partnership subject to TEFRA

301.6231(a)(3)- 1(a)(2), Proced. & Admin. Regs.; see also Affiliated Equip. Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 792 (1986). The Ashlands dispute that Cutler was ever a TEFRA partnership during 2002. We focus now on whether Cutler was a TEFRA partnership during 2002. Generally, a

Section 761(a) provides that a "'partnership' includes a syndicate, group, pool,joint venture or ther unincorporated organization through or by means of which any business, financial operation, or venture is carried on" and issnot a corporation, or a trust or estate.

1238 made a comprehensive set ofprocedural amendments to the regime for the determination ofpenalties under TEFRA: (1) By amending section 6221, TEFRA's introductoryjurisdictional provision, to require the applicability ofany partnership-item penalty to be determined at the partnership level ("Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, the tax treatment ofany partnership item (and the applicability ofany penalty * * * which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item)

301.6231(a)(3)- 1(a)(2), Proced. & Admin. Regs.; see also Affiliated Equip. Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 792 (1986). The Ashlands dispute that Cutler was ever a TEFRA partnership during 2002. We focus now on whether Cutler was a TEFRA partnership during 2002. Generally, a

hip items. Pursuant to the procedures of TEFRA, assessments for nonpartnership item adjustments are subject to deficiency proceedings, secs. 6212(a), 6230(a)(2), whereas the tax treatment of a partnership item is determined at the partnership level, sec. 6221. Section 761(a) provides that a “‘partnership’ includes a syndicate, group, pool, joint venture or other unincorporated organization through or by means of which any business, financial operation, or venture is carried on” and is not a corp

TRA 1997 did not change the classification of penalties as affected items, but it amended section 6221 to provide that the applicability of a penalty “which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item shall be determined at the partnership level”.

Assessment of a penalty relating to an adjustment of a partnership item is based on partnership-level determinations. Sec. 301.6221-1T(c), Proced. & Admin. Regs. After a final partnership-level adjustment has been made to a partnership item in a partnership proceeding, a corresponding computational. .. adjustment must be made to the tax

29 Helbig v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2008-243, affd. withoutapublished opinion 106 AF,TR 2d 20]:0-6820, 2010-2 USTC par. 50;;692 3(9th Cir. 2010)-, HelbigEa þattner in the 'Contra Cdstäo ß partnérshipf claimed deductions froni ethe par:tnership on his, 1983, 1984, and 1985 tax returns . Afterathe-Tax Court entered a a decision against t

6221 (effective for years after Aug. 5, 1997). On October 17, 2007, petitioners timely filed petitions disputing respondent's determinations of penalties. • OPINION Section 6662(a) and (b) (1) and (2) imposes a 20-percent penalty on an underpayment of tax required to be shown ont a return if the underpayment is attributable to a taxpayer's neg

TRA 1997 amended section 6221 to provide that a penalty or addition to tax "which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item" must be determined at the partnership level.

301.6221-1(c), Proced. & Admin. Regs. And jurisdiction splits aren’t limited to the partnership-partner context. See Hinck, 550 U.S. at 509 (finding “nothing tellingly awkward” about sending interest abatement and refund claims to two different courts “even if in some respects it ‘may not appear to be efficient’”); Ron Lykins, 133 T

26, 1999.) (sometimes the temporary regulation), implementing section 6221 as amended by the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (TRA 1997), Pub .

1026 , amended section 6221 to provide that the applicability of any penalty (including an accuracy-related penalty) which relates to an adjustment of a partnership item shall be determined at the partnership level, the Court lacks jurisdiction to redetermine the applicability of such penalties at the partner level for partnership tax years ending after August 5,

6221 (penalties attributable to an “adjustment to a partnership item” are determined at partnership level). VI. Conclusion We conclude we have jurisdiction to decide this case. We have considered all arguments petitioners have made for a contrary conclusion and, to the extent not discussed, we have rejected those arguments as without merit. To

When considering the determination of penalties at the partnership level, the Court may consider defenses of the partnership, including a reasonable cause defense presented on behalf of the partnership. See Klamath Strategic Inv. Fund v. United States, supra at 547—548; New Millennium Trading, L.L.C. v. Commissioner, 131 T.C. 275, 280 (2

The tax matters partner timely petitioned the Court for review of the FPAA, asserting among other things that the statute of limitations bars the determination of a liability with respect to partnership items or affected items for 2001. Respondent, in his answer, asserted that section 6501(c)(10) applies to the transaction because it con

the correct amount. Sec. 6662(h) (2) (A) (i). The applicability of the penalty (except for partner-level defenses) is determined at the partnership level. Sec. 301.6221-1T(c), Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs., 64 Fed. Reg. 3838 (Jan. 26, 1999); see sec. 6221. Since the - 90 - partnership overstated the value of the servitude on the 1997 Form 1065 by slightly more than 415 percent, it made a gross valuation misstatement." C. Reasonable Cause Exception 1. Introduction (cid:16)042 Petitioner argues

Section 6221 now provides : "the applicability of any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item * * * shall be determined at the partnership level . " Petitioner acknowledges that under section 6226(f) the Court has jurisdiction to determine the "applicability of any penalty, addition to tax

The nature of the partnerships' transactions [i .e ., whether the transactions were tax motivated] is a "partnership item" * * * . As a "partnership item," the character of the partnerships' transactions is within the Tax Court's scope of review . The Tax Court erred in holding that it had no jurisdiction to make findings concerning

be the correct amount. Sec. 6662(h)(2)(A)(i). The applicability of the penalty (except for partner-level defenses) is determined at the partnership level. Sec. 301.6221-lT(c), Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs., 64 Fed. Reg. 3838 (Jan. 26, 1999); see sec. 6221. Since the partnership overstated the value of the servitude on the 1997 Form 1065 by slightly more than 415 percent, it made a gross valuation misstatement. C. Reasonable Cause Exception 1. Introduction Petitioner argues, however, that the

Section 6221 now provides: “the applicability of any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item * * * shall be determined at the partnership level.” Petitioner acknowledges that under section 6226(f) the Court has jurisdiction to determine the “applicability of any penalty, addition to tax, o

6221 ; see also sec . "( . . . continued) 2000, and filed on or before Oct . 30, 2000. - 21 - 301.6221-1T(c), Temporary Proced . & Admin . Regs ., 64 Fed . Reg. 3838 (Jan . 26, 1999) (partnership-level determinations include all legal and factual determinations underlying the determination of partnership-level penalties, including partnership

6221; Affiliated Equip. Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Sparks v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 1279, 1284 (1986); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 789 (1986). This Court has previously held that section 6621(c) interest is an affected item which may require findings of fact peculiar to a particular partner and as such cannot

6221; Maxwell, 87 T.C. at 787-88. TEFRA audits, with their sometimes arcane distinctions between “partnership,” “affected,” and “nonpartnership” items, can be burdensome, so Congress chose to keep the old audit rules under which each partner resolves his tax liability with the IRS separately, for “small partnerships.” Tax Compliance Act of 198

6221; see also sec. 301.6221-lT(c), Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs., 64 Fed. Reg. 3838 (Jan. 26, 1999) (partnership-level determinations include all legal and factual determinations underlying the determination of partnership-level penalties, including partnership-level defenses but not partner-level defenses). Before the Taxpayer Relief Act

The 1997 TRA further provides that a partner may assert a partner-level defense to a penalty in a refund forum. See H. Conf. Rept. 105-220, at 685 (1997), 1997-4 C.B. (Vol. 2) 1457, 2155; sec. 301.6221-1T, Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs., 52 Fed. Reg. 6781 (Mar. 5, 1987), amended by T.D. 8808, 1999-1 C.B. 682, Jan. 25, 1999. The notice

tnership not subject to TEFRA proceedings. 1All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect at all relevant times, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, unless otherwise indicated. - 3 - See sec. 6221. Respondent examined certain items relating to Comco for the taxable years 1987 through 1991 and reached agreement with Mr. Manko and Comco’s other partner on these items. The changes to the Comco items required changes to petitioners’ joint

In the above situation, in effeát (for everything other than interest relating to a corporation's tax overpayment up to $10,000) the regular interest rate, for practical purposes, 1s e eliminated from the statùtory language of section 6221, and there remains in section 6621(a)(1) only one interest rate -- the GATT rate -- that applies to all further interest accrual relating to corporate overpayments of tax and to accrual of compound interest thereon.

6221; see also sec. 6231(a)(3) (partnership item means, with respect to a partnership, an item that is more appropriately determined at the partnership level than at the partner level, according to applicable regulations). Any dispute regarding the tax treatment of a partnership item is resolved at the partnership level in a unified partnershi

In the above situation, in effect (for everything other than interest relating to a corporation’s tax overpayment up to $10,000) the regular interest rate, for practical purposes, is eliminated from the statutory language of section 6221, and there remains in section 6621(a)(1) only one interest rate –– the GATT rate -- that applies to all further interest accrual relating to corporate overpayments of tax and to accrual of compound interest thereon.

In the above situation, in effect (for everything other than interest relating to a corporation’s tax overpayment up to $10,000) the regular interest rate, for practical purposes, is eliminated from the statutory language of section 6221, and there remains in section 6621(a)(1) only one interest rate— the GATT rate — that applies to all further interest accrual relating to corporate overpayments of tax and to accrual of compound interest thereon.

6221; Maxwell v. Commissioner, supra at 787-788. Section 6231(a)(3) defines a partnership item as “any item required to be taken into account for the partnership’s taxable year * * * to the extent regulations prescribed by the Secretary provide that, for purposes of this subtitle, such item is more appropriately determined at the partnership l

ng.2 Under these procedures, “the tax treatment of any partnership item (and the applicability of any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item) shall be determined at the partnership level.” Sec. 6221. The Commissioner generally must wait until a partnership-level proceeding is over to assess a liability attributable to a partnership item. See sec. 6225(a); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 788 (1986). The Commissioner generally must

(the TEFRA partner- ship procedures). 3. For purposes of computing the overpayment in this case, petitioner's partnership items relating to WIN Enterprise, LC and Stephens City Chiropractic, PLC have been treated as if they were correctly reported on petitioner's income tax returns for the 1996 and 1997 taxable years and they have no

penalty for gross valuation misstatements applies to the underpayments that result from adjustments to the tax bases that SMP reported on its 1997 187 In the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, Pub. L. 105-34, sec. 1238(a), 111 Stat. 1026, Congress amended sec. 6221 to include, as an item to be determined at the partnership level, the applicability of any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount which relates to an adjustment to a partnership item, effective for partnership taxable years ending a

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

6221; Affiliated Equip. - 108 - Leasing II v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 575, 576 (1991); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Section 622622 authorizes the judicial review of FPAAs and provides in pertinent part: SEC. 6226(f) SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.-A court with which a petition is filed in accordance with this section shall ha

Section 6231(a)(3) defines “partnership item” as any item required to be taken into account for the partnership’s taxable year to the extent regulations prescribed by the Secretary provide that the item is more appropriately determined at the partnership level than at the partner level. Saso v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 730, 732 (1989). The

Rept. 97-760, at 599, (1982), 1982-2 C.B. 600, 662. Petitioner’s claimed loss from Arcanum is a partnership item, sec. 6231(a)(3); Sente Inv. Club Pship. of Utah v. Commissioner, 95 T.C. 243, 247 (1990); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 790 (1986); and must be decided in a partnership proceeding, Carmel v. Commissioner, 98

Rept. 97-760, at 599 (1982), 1982- 2 C.B. 600, 662.3 Under section 6223(a), the Secretary shall mail to each partner notice of the beginning of an administrative proceeding at the partnership level, as well as an FPAA resulting from any such proceeding. A tax matters partner may, within 90 days after the date the FPAA is mailed,

In general, the Commissioner is precluded from assessing a deficiency attributable to a partnership item until after the completion of the partnership-level proceeding. See sec. 6225(a). The same prohibition extends to the assessment of a deficiency attributable to an “affected item”, as the tax treatment of such an item is dependent on

In general, the Commissioner is precluded from assessing a deficiency attributable to a partnership item until after the completion of the partnership-level proceeding. See sec. 6225(a). The same prohibition extends to the assessment of a deficiency attributable to an “affected item”, as the tax treatment of such an item is dependent on

In general, the Commissioner is precluded from assessing a deficiency attributable to a partnership item until after the completion of the partnership-level proceeding. See sec. 6225(a). The same prohibition extends to the assessment of a deficiency attributable to an “affected item”, as the tax treatment of such an item is dependent on

mine the deficiencies determined in the notice. See, generally, secs. 6211 through 6214. Petitioner argues, however, that the determinations in the notice involve either partnership items that cannot be adjudicated in a partner-level proceeding, see sec. 6221, or affected items that cannot be determined before final resolution and adjustment of the partnership items to which they relate. Therefore, petitioner argues that the notice is invalid, citing N.C.F. Energy Partners v. Commissioner, 89 T.

Commissioner, supra, we noted that Congress recently amended section 6221 to provide that the applicability of any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount that relates to an adjustment to a partnership item shall be determined at the partnership level.

mine the deficiencies determined in the notice. See, generally, secs. 6211 through 6214. Petitioner argues, however, that the determinations in the notice involve either partnership items that cannot be adjudicated in a partner-level proceeding, see sec. 6221, or affected items that cannot be determined before final resolution and adjustment of the partnership items to which they relate. Therefore, petitioner argues that the notice is invalid, citing N.C.F. Energy Partners v. Commissioner, 89 T.

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

L. 97- 248, sec. 402(a), 96 Stat. 648 (TEFRA partnership procedures), governs the time period for filing the petition. Under the TEFRA partnership procedures, "the tax treatment of any partnership item shall be determined at the partnership level." Sec. 6221. "A partner's treatment of partnership items on the partner's return may not be changed except as provided in sections 6222 through 6231 of the Code and the regulations thereunder." Sec. 301.6221-1T(a), Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs., 52

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

See generally section 6221 through 6233.

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

6221; Brookes v. Commissioner, supra at 5; Maxwell v. Commissioner, supra at 788. A partnership item is defined as any item required to be taken into account for the partnership's taxable year to the extent that the Secretary provides by regulations that the item is more appropriately determined at the partnership level than at the partner lev

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

A partnership item must be considered solely in the - 328 - partnership proceeding and cannot be considered in the partner's personal or individual case. Disputes relating to "nonpartnership items", however, continue to be resolved at the individual partner level. Section 6231(a)(3) provides that a "partnership item" means any item requ

Petitioners point to the "Except as otherwise provided" language of section 6221 and to the language of section 6224(c)(2).

Petitioners point to the "Except as otherwise provided" language of section 6221 and to the language of section 6224(c)(2).

Petitioners point to the "Except as otherwise provided" language of section 6221 and to the language of section 6224(c)(2).

ner replied "No" to paragraphs 9 and 10, which stated that, for 1992 and 1993, the Partnership "did not file the statement required by Treas. Reg. 301.6231(a)(1)-1T(b) to elect treatment under the provisions of Subtitle F, Chapter 63, Subchapter C (I.R.C. sec. 6221 et al.) of the Internal Revenue Code." However, it is apparent from the record that the election contemplated by the above regulation was not filed for 1992 or 1993, and petitioner does not contend otherwise in his "Opposition to Moti

nder the TEFRA partnership audit and litigation procedures, Congress provided a method that did not determine a partner's tax liability on an individual basis: "The tax treatment of any partnership item shall be determined at the partnership level." Sec. 6221. The provisions of TEFRA, however, are effective only for partnership years beginning after its date of enactment, September 3, 1982, and to any partnership year ending after that date if the partnership, each partner, and each indirect par

Congress enacted the partnership audit and litigation procedures to provide a method for uniformly adjusting items of partnership income, loss, deduction, or credit that affect each partner. Congress decided that no longer would a partner's tax liability be determined uniquely, but the tax treatment of any partnership item would be deter

Congress enacted the partnership audit and litigation procedures to provide a method for uniformly adjusting items of partnership income, loss, deduction, or credit that affect each partner. Congress decided that no longer would a partner's tax liability be determined uniquely, but the tax treatment of any partnership item would be deter

Petitioners claim that section 6221' requires that the treatment of partnership items be determined at the partnership level.