Or. Admin. R. 150-314-0475
(1) General Rule.
(a) In general, the treatment of a partnership item on the partner’s return must be consistent with the treatment of that item by the partnership in all respects including the amount, timing, and characterization of the item. The following examples illustrate instances of inconsistent treatment:
Example 1: B is a partner of Partnership P. Both B and P use the calendar year as the taxable year. In December 1993, P receives an advance payment for services to be performed in 1994 and reports this amount as income for calendar year 1993. However, B reports B’s distributive share of that amount on B’s income tax return for 1994 and not on B’s return for 1993. B’s treatment of this partnership item is inconsistent with the treatment of the item by P.
Example 2: Partnership P incurred certain start-up costs before P was actively engaged in business. P capitalized these costs. C, a partner in P, deducted C’s proportionate share of these start-up costs. C’s treatment of the partnership expenditure is inconsistent with the treatment of the item by P.
(2) Manner of Notification of Inconsistency. If a partner does not treat a partnership item on the partner’s return in a manner that is consistent with the treatment of that item by the partnership, the partner must notify the department of the inconsistent treatment. Such notification shall be made by attaching a statement to the partner’s return. The statement must contain the following information:
(3) Multiple Inconsistencies. A partner who reports the inconsistent treatment of partnership items on the partner’s return is protected from computational adjustments under section (1) of this rule only with respect to those partnership items the inconsistent treatment of which is reported. Thus, if a partner notifying the department with respect to one item fails to report the inconsistent treatment of another item, the partner is subject to a computational adjustment with respect to that latter item.
Example: Partner A of Partnership P treats a deduction and a capital gain arising from P and A’s return in a manner that is inconsistent with the treatment of those items by P. A reports the inconsistent treatment of the deduction but not of the capital gain. A is subject to a computational adjustment under section (1) of this rule with respect to the capital gain.
(4) Adjustments Not Limited. If the department conducts a formal examination or audit of a return of a partner whose partnership items have been reported as being treated inconsistently, the department is not limited to making adjustments that merely conform the partner’s return to the partnership return.
Example: Partnership P allocates to E, one of its partners, a loss of $8,000. E. however, claims a loss of $9,000 and reports the inconsistent treatment. As a result of an examination of E’s return, the department may issue a deficiency notice which could include reducing the loss to $3,000.
ORS 305.100
ORS 314.714
Renumbered from 150-314.714(3), REV 34-2016, f. 8-12-16, cert. ef. 9-1-16
RD 7-1993, f. 12-30-93, cert. ef. 12-31-93