SECTION 11. REQUEST FOR

RECONSIDERATION OF USER FEE

A taxpayer that believes the user fee charged by the Service for its request for a letter ruling, determination letter, etc., is either not applicable or incorrect and wishes to receive a refund of all or part of the amount paid (see section 10 of this revenue procedure) may request reconsideration and, if desired, the opportunity for an oral discussion by sending a letter to the Internal Revenue Service at the applicable Post Office Box or other address given in section 7. Both the incoming envelope and the letter requesting such reconsideration should be prominently marked “USER FEE RECONSIDERATION REQUEST.” No user fee is required for these requests. The request should be marked for the attention of:

fee or an overpayment, and it is not timely perfected. When there is a failure to timely perfect the request, the case will be considered closed and the failure to perfect will be treated as a withdrawal for purposes of this revenue procedure. An exemption application that is not substantially complete is considered a procedurally deficient request for a letter ruling or a determination letter on exempt status.

(c) In the case of a request for a letter ruling, if the case has been closed by the Service because essential information has not been submitted timely, the request may be reopened and treated as a new request, but the requester must pay another user fee before the case can be reopened. See, section 11.04(5) of Rev. Proc. 2009–4, page 118, this Bulletin.

(d) A letter ruling, determination letter, etc., is revoked in whole or in part at the initiative of the Service. The fee paid at the time the original letter ruling, determination letter, etc., was requested will not be refunded.

(e) The request contains several issues and the Service rules on some, but not all, of the issues. The highest fee applicable to the issues on which the Service rules will not be refunded.

(f) The requester asserts that a letter ruling the requester received covering a single issue is erroneous or not responsive (other than an issue on which the Service has declined to rule) and requests reconsideration. The Service, upon reconsideration, does not agree that the letter ruling is erroneous or is not responsive. The fee accompanying the request for reconsideration will not be refunded.

(g) The situation is the same as described in subparagraph (f) of this section

10.02(1) except that the letter ruling covered several unrelated transactions. The Service, upon reconsideration, does not agree with the requester that the letter ruling is erroneous or is not responsive for all of the transactions, but does agree that it is erroneous as to one transaction. The fee accompanying the request for reconsideration will not be refunded except to the extent applicable to the transaction for which the Service agrees the letter ruling was in error.

(h) The request is for a supplemental letter ruling, determination letter, etc., concerning a change in facts (whether significant or not) relating to the transaction on which the Service ruled.

(i) The request is for reconsideration of an adverse or partially adverse letter ruling or a final adverse determination letter, and the taxpayer submits arguments and authorities not submitted before the original letter ruling or determination letter was issued.

(2) The following situations are examples in which the user fee will be refunded :

(a) In a situation to which section 10.02(1)(i) of this revenue procedure does not apply, the taxpayer asserts that a letter ruling the taxpayer received covering a single issue is erroneous or is not responsive (other than an issue on which the Service declined to rule) and requests reconsideration. Upon reconsideration, the Service agrees that the letter ruling is erroneous or is not responsive. The fee accompanying the taxpayer’s request for reconsideration will be refunded.

(b) In a situation to which section 10.02(1)(i) of this revenue procedure does not apply, the requester requests a supplemental letter ruling, determination letter, etc., to correct a mistake that the Service

If the matter involves primarily: Mark for the attention of:

Employee plans letter ruling requests and all other employee plans matters handled by EP Technical

Employee Plans Technical

Exempt organizations letter ruling requests Exempt Organizations Technical

Employee plans determination letter requests and opinion letter and advisory letter requests pursuant to Rev. Proc. 2005–16

Manager, EP Determinations Quality Assurance

Exempt organizations determination letter requests Manager, EO Determinations Quality Assurance

2009–1 I.R.B. 239 January 5, 2009

Rev. Proc. 87–50, 1987–2 C.B. 647, as modified by Rev. Proc. 91–44, Rev. Proc. 92–38, and Rev. Proc. 2002–10, 2002–1 C.B. 401, sets forth the procedures of the Service relating to the issuance of rulings and opinion letters with respect to the establishment of individual retirement accounts and annuities (IRAs) under § 408, the entitlement to exemption of related trusts or custodial accounts under § 408(e), and the acceptability of the form of prototype simplified employee pension (SEP) agreements under §§ 408(k) and 415. Rev. Proc. 92–24, 1992–1 C.B. 739, provides procedures for requesting determination letters on the effect on a plan’s qualified status under § 401(a) of the Code of plan language that permits, pursuant to § 420, the transfer of assets in a defined benefit plan to a health benefits account described in § 401(h).

Rev. Proc. 92–38, 1992–1 C.B. 859, provides notice that individual retirement arrangement trusts, custodial account agreements, and annuity contracts must be amended to provide for the required distribution rules in § 408(a)(6) or (b)(3) of the Code. In addition, Rev. Proc. 92–38 modifies the guidance in Rev. Proc. 87–50 with regard to opinion letters issued to sponsoring organizations, including mass submitters and sponsors of prototype IRAs.

Rev. Proc. 93–41, 1993–2 C.B. 536, sets forth the procedures of the Service relating to the issuance of an administrative scrutiny determination as to whether a separate line of business satisfies the requirement of administrative scrutiny within the meaning of § 1.414(r)–6.

Rev. Proc. 97–29, 1997–1 C.B. 698, describes model amendments for SIMPLE IRAs; guidance to drafters of prototype SIMPLE IRAs on obtaining opinion letters; permissive amendments to sponsors of nonSIMPLE IRAs; the opening of a prototype program for SIMPLE IRA Plans; and transitional relief for users of SIMPLE IRAs and SIMPLE IRA Plans that have not been approved by the Service.

Rev. Proc. 98–59, 1998–2 C.B. 727, provides guidance on obtaining opinion letters to drafters of prototype Roth IRAs, and provides transitional relief for users of Roth IRAs that have not been approved by the Internal Revenue Service.