Actions on Decisions

From TaxAlmanac

You Are Here: Main Page > Tax Research Resources > Actions on Decisions

What are Actions on Decisions?

It is the policy of the Internal Revenue Service to announce at an early date whether it will follow the holdings in certain cases. An Action on Decision is the document making such an announcement. An Action on Decision will be issued at the discretion of the Service only on unappealed issues decided adverse to the government. Generally, an Action on Decision is issued where its guidance would be helpful to Service personnel working with the same or similar issues. Unlike a Treasury Regulation or a Revenue Ruling, an Action on Decision is not an affirmative statement of Service position. It is not intended to serve as public guidance and may not be cited as precedent.

Actions on Decisions shall be relied upon within the Service only as conclusions applying the law to the facts in the particular case at the time the Action on Decision was issued. Caution should be exercised in extending the recommendation of the Action on Decision to similar cases where the facts are different. Moreover, the recommendation in the Action on Decision may be superseded by new legislation, regulations, rulings, cases, or Actions on Decisions.

Prior to 1991, the Service published acquiescence or nonacquiescence only in certain regular Tax Court opinions. The Service has expanded its acquiescence program to include other civil tax cases where guidance is determined to be helpful. Accordingly, the Service now may acquiesce or nonacquiesce in the holdings of memorandum Tax Court opinions, as well as those of the United States District Courts, Claims Court, and Circuit Courts of Appeal. Regardless of the court deciding the case, the recommendation of any Action on Decision will be published in the Internal Revenue Bulletin.

The recommendation in every Action on Decision will be summarized as acquiescence, acquiescence in result only, or nonacquiescence. Both “acquiescence” and “acquiescence in result only” mean that the Service accepts the holding of the court in a case and that the Service will follow it in disposing of cases with the same controlling facts. However, “acquiescence” indicates neither approval nor disapproval of the reasons assigned by the court for its conclusions; whereas, “acquiescence in result only” indicates disagreement or concern with some or all of those reasons. Nonacquiescence signifies that, although no further review was sought, the Service does not agree with the holding of the court and, generally, will not follow the decision in disposing of cases involving other taxpayers. In reference to an opinion of a circuit court of appeals, a nonacquiescence indicates that the Service will not follow the holding on a nationwide basis. However, the Service will recognize the precedential impact of the opinion on cases arising within the venue of the deciding circuit.

- 1999-1 I.R.B. 5.

Actions on Decisions on TaxAlmanac

• AOD 2008-01: Herbert V. Kohler v. Comm.; T.C. Memo. 2006-152
• AOD 2007-05: Roosevelt Wallace v. Comm., 128 T.C. No. 11 (April 16, 2007)
• AOD 2007-04: U.S. v. Roxworthy, 457 F.3d 590 (6th Cir. 2006)
• AOD 2007-03: Snider v. U.S.; Turley v. U.S., 468 F.3d 500 (8th Cir. 2006)
• AOD 2007-02: Moore v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-171, T.C. Docket No. 11634-05L
• AOD 2007-01: North Dakota State University v. United States, 255 F.3d 599 (8th Cir. 2001).
• AOD 2006-02: Pacific Gas and Electric Company v. U.S., 417 F.3d 1375.
• AOD 2006-01: Erickson Post Acquisition, Inc. v. Comm., T.C. Memo. 2003-218.
• AOD 2005-03: Montgomery v. Comm., 122 T.C. 1 (2004).
• AOD 2005-02: Sherwin-Williams v. Comm., 330 F.3rd 449 (6th Cir. 2003).
• AOD 2005-01: Estate of Mitchell v. Comm., 250 F.3d 696 (9th Cir. 2001).
• AOD 2004-06: IRS v. Donald Snyder, 343 F.3d 1171 (9th Cir. 2003).
• AOD 2004-05: Diane Fernandez v. Comm., 114 T. C. 324 (2000)
• AOD 2004-04: Kaffenberger v. U.S., 314 F.3d 944 (8th Cir. 2003.
• AOD 2004-03: U.S. v. Roland Harry Macher (In re Macher), 91 AFTR2d 2003-2654.
• AOD 2004-02: Tax Analysts v. IRS, 215 F. Supp.2d 192, reversed, 350 F.3d 100.
• AOD 2004-01: Sidney L. Olson and Miriam K. Olson v. Comm. 48 T.C. 855. 2.
• AOD 2003-04: General Electric Co. & Subs. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-306.
• AOD 2003-03: Michael and Nancy B. McNamara v. Commissioner
• AOD 2003-02: Intermet Corp. & Subs. v. Comm., 117 T.C. 133 (February 4, 2002).
• AOD 2003-01: Doyle, Dane, Bernbach, Inc. v. Comm., 79 T.C. 101 (1982).
• AOD 2002-06: Curell v. U.S., 2001-2 U.S.T.C. Para. 50,740 (S.D. Ohio 2001).
• AOD 2002-05: Beck v. Comm., T.C. Memo 2001-198 (July 30, 2001).
• AOD 2002-04: Paul Pekar v. Commissioner, 113 T.C. 158 (1999).
• AOD 2002-03: Ridge and Marjory Harlan v. Comm., 116 T.C. 31 (2001)
• AOD 2002-02: Sutherland Lumber-Southwest, Inc. v. Comm.
• AOD 2002-01: Intermet Corporation & Subs. v. Comm., 117 T.C. No. 13.
• AOD 2001-08: N.Dakota State Univ v. USA, 84 F. Supp. 1043 (D.N.D. 1999),
• AOD 2001-07: Robert L. Beck v. Comm, T.C. 2001-198( filed 07/30/01).
• AOD 2001-06: Therese Hahn v. Commissioner, 110 T. C. No. 140 (1998)
• AOD 2001-05: Mesa Oil, Inc. v. United States.
• AOD 2001-04: Exxon v. Commissioner, 113 T. C. No. 338 (1999).
• AOD 2001-03: Farmland Industries, Inc. v. Comm., T.C. Memo. 1999-388 T.C.
• AOD 2001-02: Arnold W. Vinick v. USA, 205 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2000).
• AOD 2001-01: Security State Bank v. Comm., 214 F.3d 1254 (10 th Cir. 2000).
• AOD 2000-09: Weisbart v. United States Dept of Treas. & IRS.
• AOD 2000-08: John D. Shea v. Commissioner, 112 T.C. 183 (1999)
• AOD 2000-07: Kathy A. King v. Commissoner, 115 T.C. No. 8 (Aug 10, 2000).
• AOD 2000-06: Diane Fernandez v. Commissioner, 114 T. C. No 21.
• AOD 2000-05: Osteopathic Medical v. Commissioner, 113 T.C. No. 26.
• AOD 2000-04: Smith v. Comm, 198 F.3d 515 (5th Cir. 1999), rev'g, 108 T.C. 412.
• AOD 2000-03: Simpson v. United States, 183 F.3d 812 (8th Cir. 1999).
• AOD 2000-02: Ahadpour v. Comm., T.C. Memo. 1999-9.
• AOD 2000-01: McLeod v. United States, 276 F.Supp. 213 (S.D. Ala. 1967).
• AOD 1999-17: Duke Energy Natural Gas Corporation v. Comm.
• AOD 1999-16: Conway v. Commissioner, 111 T.C. 350 (1998)
• AOD 1999-15: William & Helen Woodral v. Commissioner, 112 T.C.19 (1999).
• AOD 1999-14: Mutual Assurance, Inc. v. United States, 56 F.3d 1353.
• AOD 1999-13: Dubin v. Commissioner, 99 T.C. 325 (1992) .
• AOD 1999-12: RJR Nabisco, Inc. et al. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-252.
• AOD 1999-11: James J. and Sandra A. Gales v. Comm, T.C. Memo. 1999-27
• AOD 1999-10: Boyd Gaming Corporation v. Comm., 9th Cir. 1999.
• AOD 1999-09: IRS v. Waldschmidt (In re Bradley), (M.D. Tenn. 1999).
• AOD 1999-08: Hospital Corp. of America and Subsidiaries v. Comm, 109 T.C. 21.
• AOD 1999-07: Vulcan Materials Company and Subsidiaries v. Comm.
• AOD 1999-06: Estate of Mellinger v. Commissioner, 112 T.C. 4 (1999).
• AOD 1999-05: St. Jude Medical, Inc. v Comm, 34 F. 3d 1394 (8th Cir. 1994).
• AOD 1999-04: Oshkosh Truck Corporation v. United States 123 F.3d 1477.
• AOD 1999-03: Murillo v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-13.
• AOD 1999-02: Larotonda v. Commissioner, AOD CC-1998-010.
• AOD 1999-01: Eisenberg v. Comm., 155 F. 3d 50 (2d Cir. 1998).
• AOD 1998-08: Fluor v. U.S., 126 F.3d 1397 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
• AOD 1998-07: Clark D. & Janis L. Pulliam v. Comm., T.C. Memo. 1997-274.
• AOD 1998-06: Estate of Clara K. Hoover v. Comm., 69 F.3d 1044 (10th Cir. 1995).
• AOD 1998-05: McCormick v. Peterson, CV93-2157 (E.D>N.Y. 1993).
• AOD 1998-04: Fredericks v. Commissioner, No. 96-7748.
• AOD 1998-03: Golden Belt Telephone Coop v. Comm, 108 T.C. 498 (1997).
• AOD 1998-02: Bilzerian v. United States, 86 F.3d 1067 (11th Cir. 1996)
• AOD 1998-01: Beatty v. Commissioner, 106 T.C. 268 (1996).
• AOD 1997-14: Transwestern Pipeline Co. v. United States, 639 F.2d 679.
• AOD 1997-13: Pacific Enterprises & Subs. v. Comm., 101 T.C. 1 (1993).
• AOD 1997-12: Jackson v. Comm, 108 T.C. 130 (1997) ( T.C. # 23558-94).
• AOD 1997-11: Trans City Life Insurance Company v. Commissioner.
• AOD 1997-10: Sun Microsystems, Inc. v. Commissioner, T.C.M. 1995-69.
• AOD 1997-09: Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Commissioner, 108 F.3d 290.
• AOD 1997-08: May Department Stores Co. v. United States, 36 Fed. Cl. 680.
• AOD 1997-07: The Edna Louise Dunn Trust v. Commissioner.
• AOD 1997-06: Risman v. Commissioner, 100 T.C. 1991 (1993) (T.C. # 11429-91).
• AOD 1997-05: Hurt v. USA, 70 F.3d 1261 (4th Cir. 1995).
• AOD 1997-04: Duncan v. U.S., Docket No. 95-228 (U.S. D.C.,E.D. Ky.)
• AOD 1997-03: Buckeye Countrymark v. Comm., 103 T.C. 547 (1994)
• AOD 1997-02: United States v. Kao, 81 F.3d 114 (9th Cir. 1996).
• AOD 1997-01: Xerox Corporation v. United States, 41 F.3d 647 (Fed. Cir. 1994).

Other Resources for Actions on Decisions

• IRS Actions on Decisions on the IRS website
• IRS Actions on Decisions on Legalbitstream.com