31 C.F.R. § 10.7

Representing oneself; participating in rulemaking; limited practice; and special appearances

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Representing oneself. Individuals may appear on their own behalf before the Internal Revenue Service provided they present satisfactory identification.

(b) Participating in rulemaking. Individuals may participate in rulemaking as provided by the Administrative Procedure Act. See 5 U.S.C. 553.

(c) Limited practice—(1) In general. Subject to the limitations in paragraph (c)(2) of this section, an individual who is not a practitioner may represent a taxpayer before the Internal Revenue Service in the circumstances described in this paragraph (c)(1), even if the taxpayer is not present, provided the individual presents satisfactory identification and proof of his or her authority to represent the taxpayer. The circumstances described in this paragraph (c)(1) are as follows:

(i) An individual may represent a member of his or her immediate family.

(ii) A regular full-time employee of an individual employer may represent the employer.

(iii) A general partner or a regular full-time employee of a partnership may represent the partnership.

(iv) A bona fide officer or a regular full-time employee of a corporation (including a parent, subsidiary, or other affiliated corporation), association, or organized group may represent the corporation, association, or organized group.

(v) A regular full-time employee of a trust, receivership, guardianship, or estate may represent the trust, receivership, guardianship, or estate.

(vi) An officer or a regular employee of a governmental unit, agency, or authority may represent the governmental unit, agency, or authority in the course of his or her official duties.

(vii) An individual may represent any individual or entity, who is outside the United States, before personnel of the Internal Revenue Service when such representation takes place outside the United States.

(2) Limitations. (i) An individual who is under suspension or disbarment from practice before the Internal Revenue Service may not engage in limited practice before the Internal Revenue Service under paragraph (c)(1) of this section.

(ii) The Commissioner, or delegate, may, after notice and opportunity for a conference, deny eligibility to engage in limited practice before the Internal Revenue Service under paragraph (c)(1) of this section to any individual who has engaged in conduct that would justify a sanction under § 10.50.

(iii) An individual who represents a taxpayer under the authority of paragraph (c)(1) of this section is subject, to the extent of his or her authority, to such rules of general applicability regarding standards of conduct and other matters as prescribed by the Internal Revenue Service.

(d) Special appearances. The Commissioner, or delegate, may, subject to conditions deemed appropriate, authorize an individual who is not otherwise eligible to practice before the Internal Revenue Service to represent another person in a particular matter.

(e) Fiduciaries. For purposes of this part, a fiduciary (for example, a trustee, receiver, guardian, personal representative, administrator, or executor) is considered to be the taxpayer and not a representative of the taxpayer.

(f) Effective/applicability date. This section is applicable beginning August 2, 2011.

[T.D. 9011, 67 FR 48765, July 26, 2002, as amended by T.D. 9359, 72 FR 54544, 54547, Sept. 26, 2007; T.D. 9527, 76 FR 32305, June 3, 2011]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases, 1964–2017 · leading case: Wright v. Everson, 543 F.3d 649 (11th Cir. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Wright v. Everson, 543 F.3d 649 (11th Cir. 2008). · cites it 27× “Wright challenged the validity of 31 C.F.R. § 10.7 (c)(l)(viii), claiming that it unlawfully and arbitrarily limits his right to represent taxpayers before the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”).”

John Bowman, Jr. v. Kimberly Iddon, 848 F.3d 1034 (D.C. Cir. 2017). · cites it 4× “30 (citing 31 C.F.R. § 10.7 (c)(1)). But tax preparers have no special limited practice rights.”

Loving v. Internal Revenue Serv., 917 F. Supp. 2d 67 (D.D.C. 2013). “Finally, the parties scuffle over whether the IRS has changed its interpretation of § 330 over time. Plaintiffs seem to be correct that the new Rule contradicts previous interpretations of § 330.”

United States v. Cruz, 618 F. Supp. 2d 1372 (S.D. Fla. 2008). · cites it 2× “Rather, Defendant Real is authorized only to conduct “limited practice” before the Internal Revenue Service pursuant to 31 C.F.R., § 10.7 (e)(1)(viii). Under that regulation, Real is authorized to represent taxpayers on whose behalf she prepared and signed a tax return, but only…”

Ellis v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 346 F. App'x 346 (10th Cir. 2009). “See 31 C.F.R. § 10.7 (c)( 1 )(viii). Moreover, Townshend provided Bok with documentation naming Townshend as Ellis’ attorney in fact and representative at the beginning of the meeting.”

Curtis Gallery & Library, Inc. v. United States, 388 F.2d 358 (9th Cir. 1968). “See 31 C.F.R. § 10.7 (a) (1). And the only evidence in the record shows that appellants were not denied an “independent” informal conference.”

Wright v. Everson, 543 F.3d 649 (11th Cir. 2008). · cites it 27× “Wright challenged the validity of 31 C.F.R. § 10.7 (c)(1)(viii), claiming that it unlawfully and arbitrarily limits his right to represent taxpayers before the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS").”

Florida Bar re Advisory Opinion—Nonlawyer Preparation of Pension Plans, 571 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 1990). “§ 7701 (a)(36) and 31 C.F.R. § 10.7 allow a nonlawyer to prepare tax returns.”

Cooper v. Comm'r, 37 T.C.M. 529 (Tax Ct. 1978). · cites it 2× “553 (1976) ; (4) representation of taxpayers for whom a return was prepared and signed as having been prepared, but limited to representation "before revenue agents and examining officers of the Audit Division in the *407 offices of District Directors (but not at the District…”

Curtis Gallery & Library v. United States, 241 F. Supp. 312 (S.D. Cal. 1964). “31 C.F.R. § 10.7 (a)(1). It is alleged that Miss Castellano was and is the full-time employee of the individual plaintiffs.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.