Subscribe by Email

Your email:


Entrust New Direction Blog

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Checkbook Control IRA, Swanson Case & Field Service Advisory 200128011

Posted by Catherine Wynne on Fri, May 22, 2009
  | Share on Twitter Twitter | Share on Facebook Facebook | Submit to Digg digg it |  Add to delicious  delicious |  Submit to StumbleUpon StumbleUpon 
We have frequently been asked about Field Service Advisory 200128011 in relation to the relevance of the Swanson Case and its use in supporting the “Checkbook Control IRA”. 

Field Service Advisories, in the hierarchy of “credible or useful” falls well below the Swanson Case, decided at the administrative (lowest) tax court level.  Private Letter Rulings, Internal IRS Memorandums and DOL Opinion Letters are much more useful than a field service advisory for gaining clarification of an IRS position.  This is clearly stated in the subject line of the Advisory, I quote “In accordance with I.R.C. § 6110(k)(3), this Chief Counsel Advice should not be cited as a precedent”. 

If you read through the Advisory it addresses the question of whether or not a corporation, created by a father for his and his three minor children’s IRAs, and his active involvement in that corporation, constituted an indirect circumvention of the rules on taxable gifts to the children.  Although the Swanson Case is quoted in great detail within this document, it has little relevance to the question asked regarding the taxable gift laws. The only portion of Swanson that was of any relevance was the reference to the payment of dividends to the IRAs from the Corporation.   The tangential visit to the prohibited transaction rules and inclusion of Swanson does not impact the gift tax issue.

The reference in the Advisory of the IRS conceding the issue of whether or not a prohibited transaction occurred in the Swanson case with regards to the interaction between Worldwide and Swanson was based, not on prohibited transaction rules, but on the IRS’s relentless pursuit of Swanson for the purpose in order to stall for time in the hope that the IRS agents could learn more about prohibited transactions in order to “find something” they could use against him. 

Reading the transcript of the Swanson Case (not a summary of the Swanson Case) reveals that the IRS internal memos submitted as evidence supported that from IRS internal memos that the IRS was absolutely at fault.  It doesn’t take a lot of thought to conclude that the IRS was not going to appeal this one. 

Just because the Swanson Case was liberally quoted in the Advisory does not serve as a validation of the “Checkbook Control IRA”.  Using it as a tool to support this structure is irresponsible.    

Tags: , , ,

COMMENTS

Do you know of an HSA trustee\custodian that will hold alternative assets\investments in an account? All seem to be savings or brokerage accounts only.

posted @ Monday, February 08, 2010 1:06 PM by Steve Bolton


Steve, if I understand your question correctly, we provide that service here. Please give us a call at 1-877-742-1270 and we can discuss in more detail.

posted @ Tuesday, July 06, 2010 4:57 PM by Amy Sheflin


Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics