Form 706 Question - "Filed Pursuant to Rev. Proc 2017-34 to elect portability under Code Section 2010(c)(5)(A)

[joshuabarksatlcs]

I have received conflicting information about the requirement of printing

"Filed Pursuant to Rev. Proc. 2017-34 to elect portability under Code Section 2010(c)(5)(A)"

on Form 706.   Please help.

In reading 2017-34, (Section 4.01(2), it seems the disclosure is required to be printed for Relief for Certain Late Portability Election.  However, in a CPE class during 2020, I was told the line is still required for timely election.  Any help to resolve the conflicting info (perhaps a confusion on my part) is appreciated.

IF NEEDED, where can the text be entered in Lacerte?  There is a Form 1040 Text field for Form 1040 under Screen 3 "Miscellaneous".  Where is the comparable field for Form 706?

[BobKamman · Accepted solution]

Why not go back and ask the CPE instructor?  Those who can, do.  Those who can't, teach.  

That line clearly belongs only on qualifying returns filed after the due date.  

Use a pen or Sharpie to write the phrase at the top of the 706 when needed.  Or if a neatness freak, use a word processor program with top margin set at 0, to print it there.  Make sure to copy the page so marked, for yourself and your client.  Pharmaceutical companies don't spend money on orphan drugs, or charge exorbitant fees for them when they do.  Tax software companies don't spend money on orphan notations.  

[joshuabarksatlcs]

@BobKamman Thanks for your response as always. 

As to "why not ask the CPE instructor":

1.  Hangover from Night 1 of the multi-topic seminar CPE, from Bourbon consumed at the 21 table.  

2.  Was chasing @IRonMaN's turtles during the very dry (drier than the martini) class.

3.  Instructor said, "In my opinion" to put on every Form 706.  I didn't have the Rev Proc at that time and I'm no walking Rev Proc man like the rest of you here.  When folks say: "In my opinion", I don't confront them even with Rev Proc in hand, unless I'm on my 4th shot for the day.  (Anything after Shot #4, my confrontation DNA goes to sleep.)

4.  Honestly, I no longer have the instructor's info.  Thought it would be more time efficient to ask my colleagues here (even after counting the time for this rather long posting, on a lazy Sunday after my 5-mile walk.) 

To be honest, Bob, your answers here usually remind me of my roommate Ted Z from college.  Very bright and somewhere between all-knowing and know-it-all.   Lousy exam taker, though.  For example, when asked for the coefficient in friction in a physics final, we would use 6 to 8 lines to compute the coefficient, but, NO, Ted would come up with a 3-page answer explaining how air resistance and the viscosity of the air would affect the movement of the wood block.  He would get a 7 out of 10 because of the length of the answer and also that he had the correct answer for the coefficient - but without showing the computation.  (The computation was in his head.  A bright, bright student.)

In my posting, I ask for help to resolve the difference and ask "IF NEEDED", where to enter the disclosure line.

You clearly resolved the difference.  However, I already stated my understanding of the usage for the line in my posting.  Upon reading the Rev Proc I figured out the usage and intent for the disclosure.  In my posting, I asked whether it was needed for a timely-filed return.  I even cited the Section of the Rev Proc.  The answer, if it were for a final exam , would simply be something like:

The disclosure is not necessary for a timely-filed return; or

It is not necessary to cite the Rev. Proc. for a timely-filed return. 

An A+ answer would be, for example, that, as the portability has been on the book for quite some years, and there have been various pronouncements for the regulations (outlining the manner of the election and and the requirement for a timely-filed F706... and so forth, for the election), either (a) how a late filing could still be accepted with the disclosure by citing the Rev Proc., or (b) that a late filing would no longer be accepted even with the magic words.  I honestly haven't researched between (a) and (b).  I'm just cleaning up some loose ends that were put off until after Nov 15.   

Regarding where to enter the magic words, I clearly asked: "IF NEEDED".  For the purpose of taking on  the question (as in taking a final exam), a "it's NOT required for a timely-filed F706, therefore no need to discuss" would suffice. 

However, if late election is still acceptable these days, I don't see why Lacerte would not provide a place for the the standard disclosure.  Entries for similar (and useful) texts are available for every single other module.

F1040:  Form 1040 Text (Screen 3)

Partnership:  Print "Short Year"; or, Print Explanation on top of Form 1065... (Screen 3)

Corporation: Screen 3, Explanation on top of main form (Screen 3)

S Corp:  Explanation on top of F1120S (Screen 3) , also "Rev. Proc filing pursuant to [User to fill in] (F2553 Screen); Filing pursuant to section 301.9100-2 (Amended return Screen)...  

....

F990, F1041 and F709 modules all have fields for various texts or disclosures.

I know you have some beef against Lacerte providing input or Forms that are "unnecessary for us".  But then, who are the "us"?

As for the "those can't do" part, I'm sorry, but the humor of Shaw's quote was gone, and only some kind of cynicism was there when I read it.  Pardon me if I'm being too honest.

Nonetheless, short story long, Bob, thank you for your answer as always, I still count it as a 10 out of 10, but not because you've read all to way through here, but that this forum is nowhere comparable to a final exam. 

Here, we chat like professors.

[IRonMaN]

I got up to the part about turtles and then dozed off.  I can see why that class would have resulted in you chasing turtles.

[sjrcpa]

If the return is timely filed - no disclosure. You're relying on the law, not the Rev Proc.

If you're filing late but within 2 years of death to elect portability, you need the disclosure-at the top of page 1 of the 706. Get it there either way Bob suggested. I don't see a place in Lacerte to enter it.

I also stopped about halfway thru your reply to Bob.

[joshuabarksatlcs]

"You had me at Turtles," says IRonMaN. 

I suspect Jerry Maguire felt much better when he heard "You had me at Hello".

Please pardon the long posting.  It was not there because I had to make up for @sjrcpa , who once publicly declared she's not chatty, but my old bones were doing everything to drag on the Christmas lights project for the day. 

Nonetheless, the lights are up, the house is colorful and bright, and I hope you all are as ready as I am for Santa (or rather for 2021 to go away).  

Thanks again @BobKamman and @sjrcpa for the info.