IRC § 6110(i)(1)(A) defines CCA as written advice or instruction, under whatever name or designation, prepared by any National Office component of the Office of Chief Counsel that

CCA includes both taxpayer specific and nontaxpayer specific advice. CCA includes Service Campus Advice, TAS Advice, and any written legal opinion pertaining to revenue provisions from a National Office component of the Office of Chief Counsel to any Field Office. The following general guidelines should be followed in determining whether a document is CCA:

For a document to be CCA, it must be issued by a National Office component of the Office of Chief Counsel. The following offices are considered National Office components, and all other offices are considered field offices:

To qualify as CCA, a document must be issued to field or Service Campus employees of the Service or Field employees of the Office of Chief Counsel. Service Campuses, processing centers, and other organizations denoted as field functions are considered field organizations for purposes of receiving CCA. The following offices, however, are considered National Office components:

The Service is required to delete of the names, addresses, and other identifying details of the person to whom the legal advice pertains and of any other person identified in the legal advice when legal advice is released to the public. The standard for deciding whether legal advice contains taxpayer identifying details is whether a reasonable person generally knowledgeable with respect to the appropriate community will be able to identify the person or entity based on the information available in the community at the time the document is to be released. The "appropriate community" can be an industry or geographical community.

Dates, dollar amounts, percentages, or the taxpayer’s industry, geographic location, business relationships, or associates should be redacted only when, given the facts of a particular case, it identifies the taxpayer.

Information in a legal advice document that is protected from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) may be deleted before the document is made available for public inspection. This includes, but is not limited to, information that would not be available by law to a party other than the Service in litigation against the Service (attorney work product or attorney-client communications), or information compiled for law enforcement purposes if the release of such information could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy, could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source, would disclose law enforcement techniques or procedures, tolerances, or guidelines if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law. See IRM 11.3.13.7 , Review and Editing.

Generally, discussions of a legal argument that may be applicable to a given set of facts is not per se protected by the attorney-client privilege. Information the government attorney gives to the case agent to assist in case development may, however, include material protected by the attorney-client privilege. For example, discussion of how the case agent should develop a set of facts to support a given legal argument may be protected by the attorney-client privilege.

The claim of deliberative process only applies to discussions as to the shape and direction of ongoing or upcoming policy discussions and/or considerations which may appear in legal advice. For example, language such as "we are discussing with Treasury the prospects for legislation to close this loophole" or "we are recommending that Treasury expedite this regulation project" may be withheld, so long as the information is not otherwise already known by the public (e.g., public addresses before external stakeholders or press, which may discuss, for example, details of the Guidance Priority List) may be redacted.

Claiming attorney work product requires a litigation predicate, either docketed in court, or, based on the totality of the facts, there is a reasonable anticipation of litigation (e.g., designated case, prior cycles with the taxpayer on these issues were litigated; taxpayer representative advises of intention to litigate, etc.). In cases where the legal advice is not to be made available for public inspection on the basis of attorney work product, the appropriate Check Sheet must be completed and accompany the legal advice when it is transmitted to the Disclosure & Litigation Support Branch.

Strategic discussions should be redacted. A specific assessment of a litigating hazard, and the recommendation which follows from it (i.e., settle, litigate, concede a particular issue), also should be redacted." We see the court holding in our favor as a 50-50 proposition" along with an analysis may be withheld. A numeric assessment, however, is not needed in order to redact. For example, the phrase "the court is likely to accept taxpayer’s position" should be redacted because the phrase "likely" means "more than 50%."

In documents for which the attorney work product predicate is not present, information may be redacted in reliance on FOIA exemptions 2 or 7. These types of strategic discussions, which may include recommendations as to the development of specific additional facts, tolerances, assessments of litigating hazards or the case’s strengths and weaknesses, or particulars as to the scope and direction of the case, may be redacted in reliance on FOIA exemption 7A, where it is established that the information’s disclosure will frustrate, or otherwise adversely affect, the audit, investigation, litigation, or similar ongoing compliance activity. Similarly, discussions of litigating hazards, tolerances, settlement criteria, or the prospects for concession, when they may affect similarly situated taxpayers, should be redacted under FOIA exemptions 2 and 7E, which protect from disclosure guidelines for law enforcement investigations.

The following are types of interferences with ongoing enforcement activities (e.g., examinations, criminal investigations, collection activities, judicial proceedings) that are encompassed by FOIA exemption 7A — fears of disclosure of:

The exemptions incorporated into IRC § 6110(i)(3) are borrowed from the FOIA, which is a disclosure, rather than a confidentiality, statute. Accordingly, the presumption is to disclose, with the burden on the Service to justify any nondisclosure. Even where it is determined that information may be subject to one or more of the permissive exemptions, the information may be disclosed, consistent with the Commissioner’s discretionary disclosure policy (Policy Statement 11–13 (4/23/2004)), after giving "a full and deliberate consideration of the institutional, commercial and personal privacy interests that could be implicated by disclosure." Before making the decision to waive any applicable FOIA exemption and release the information, the attorney and manager should give equal weight to all competing governmental, proprietary, and personal interests, including the need for candor in decision-making. A memorandum to the file should, thus, be prepared and placed in the official case file that reflects the balancing of these competing interests and the reasons why (or why not) any applicable exemption is (or is not) to be waived as a matter of discretion. For a more detailed explanation of the discretionary disclosure policy, see CCDM 30.11.1.6 , Discretionary Disclosure.

Legal advice that inadvertently includes material that could be redacted as privileged "above the line," that is, other than in the section labeled "Case Development & Strategy Recommendations," should not be rewritten to place this material below the line. If, however, sensitive governmental information is included in other portions of an issued legal advice, the privileged information should be redacted before it is made available to the taxpayer and the public.

The Associate office that issues the Chief Counsel Advice (CCA) must fax (not e-mail) the unredacted CCA and the Black and Gray version of the CCA to the person who requested the CCA, with a CCA Transmittal Cover Sheet requesting comments on the proposed redactions on the same date that the CCA is issued.

The assigned attorney in Field Counsel or the attorney’s manager must telephone or e-mail the Associate Office attorney verifying receipt of the fax. If there has been no contact to confirm receipt of the fax one business day after it was sent, the Associate office attorney should confirm by telephone or e-mail that the fax was received and that the assigned attorney in Field Counsel (or the attorney’s manager) knows that the CCA will be submitted for processing, if no comments on the proposed redactions are received within three business days after the fax was sent.

The recipient of the CCA has three business days to provide any comments on the proposed redactions. If no comments are received, the Associate office may assume that none are forthcoming and submit the CCA for processing. When Field Counsel recommends either additional or fewer redactions to the CCA, the Associate office attorney must review these recommendations and make a judgment on their appropriateness. The Associate office and Field Counsel must agree on the redactions before the CCA is sent to the Disclosure and Litigation Support Branch for processing. Any disagreements concerning the proposed redactions must be reconciled under reconciliation procedures within five business days after the Field has provided its comments on the proposed redactions.

The appropriate CCA check sheet must be completed and placed in the official case file. The check sheets must be used to accompany closing cases to ensure proper processing. See Exhibits 33.1.3-1, 33.1.3-2, 33.1.3-3, 3 and 33.1.3-4. The check sheets include instructions regarding use of the UILC, taxpayer mailing information (if appropriate), number of copies, and electronic processing. The check sheets are also available on the Procedure & Administration website. See Exhibit 33.1.3–6 for a non-exclusive list of taxpayer identifiers.

An electronic copy of the CCA must be submitted to the Disclosure and Litigation Support Branch using the submit button on the eWord toolbar no later than five business days after the Field has provided (or is deemed to have provided) its comments on the proposed redactions to the Associate office. A copy of the automated message acknowledging receipt of the document for processing by the Branch must be placed in the official case file.

A paper copy of the completed check sheet must be forwarded to the Disclosure and Litigation Support Branch no later than five business days after the field provided (or was deemed to have provided) their comments on the proposed redactions to the Associate office.

The assigned attorney in Field Counsel will, within three business days from the date on which the approved and signed advice is transmitted to the Field under the procedures in CCDM 33.1.2.3, Legal Advice Prepared in the Field and Reviewed by an Associate Office , submit the black and white version of the document and the memorandum discussing the claimed privileges to the Associate office for review as an attachment to an e-mail message sent to the Associate office attorney who had primary responsibility for reviewing the advice.

The Associate office attorney will review the proposed redactions to ensure that the material deleted either identifies the taxpayer or is privileged. Within three business days from the date on which the redacted advice has been submitted to the Associate office for review of the proposed deletions, the Associate office attorney will send a response to Field Counsel.

Within one business day after agreement is reached on the proposed redactions, the assigned attorney in Field Counsel will submit the advice for processing using the submit button on the eWord toolbar. A copy of the automated message acknowledging receipt of the document for processing by the Disclosure and Litigation Support Branch must be placed in the official case file.

A completed check sheet should be e-mailed to the "6110 Disclosure" mailbox using normal sensitivity contemporaneous with submission of the advice to the Disclosure and Litigation Support Branch. See Exhibit 33.1.3-5, Check Sheet for Processing Field Advice Reviewed by the Associate Offices. The Branch is responsible for providing the taxpayer with the notice of intention to disclose when the advice is taxpayer specific.