The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Law 111-148 (124 Stat. 119 (2010)), added sections 501(r) and 4959 to the Internal Revenue Code (Code). A hospital organization seeking to obtain or maintain tax-exempt status as a charitable organization described in section 501(c)(3) must comply with the requirements of section 501(r), including the requirement to conduct a CHNA under section 501(r)(3).

Section 501(r)(2)(A)(i) defines a hospital organization to which section 501(r) applies as including any organization that operates a facility that is required by a state to be licensed, registered, or similarly recognized as a hospital. Section 501(r)(2)(B)(i) requires a hospital organization that operates more than one hospital facility to meet the requirements of section 501(r) separately with respect to each hospital facility.

Section 501(r)(3) requires hospital organizations to conduct a CHNA at least once every three years and adopt an implementation strategy to meet the community health needs identified through the CHNA. The requirements of section 501(r)(3) are effective for taxable years beginning after March 23, 2012.

Section 4959 imposes a tax equal to $50,000 if a hospital organization to which section 501(r) applies fails to meet the requirements of section 501(r)(3) for any taxable year. A hospital organization fails to meet the requirements of section 501(r)(3) for any taxable year if the hospital organization fails to conduct a CHNA and adopt an implementation strategy during the three-year period ending on the last day of any taxable year of the hospital organization. For example, a hospital organization reporting on a calendar year basis that operates only one hospital facility and that fails to conduct a CHNA by the last day of 2013, and that also did not conduct a CHNA in 2011 or 2012, will be subject to the tax under section 4959 with respect to that facility for its 2013 taxable year. The same hospital organization that fails to conduct a CHNA in 2014 also will be subject to a tax under section 4959 with respect to that facility for its 2014 taxable year (for failure to meet the CHNA requirements during the three-year period ending on the last day of 2014). See Joint Committee on Taxation, Technical Explanation of the Revenue Provisions of the “Reconciliation Act of 2010” As Amended, in Combination With the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” (JCX-18-10) (March 21, 2010), at 83 fn. 192 (and accompanying text).

Section 6011 generally requires any person liable for tax imposed by the Code to make a return or statement according to the forms and regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. Section 6071 generally provides that return filing dates are prescribed by regulation. Section 6151 generally provides that a tax must be paid when the return reporting the tax is due, without regard to extensions of time to file the return. Treas. Reg. §§53.6011-1 and 53.6071-1 require persons subject to certain excise taxes under Chapters 41 and 42 of the Code to file a Form 4720, Return of Certain Excise Taxes Under Chapters 41 and 42 of the Internal Revenue Code, to accompany payment of those excise taxes and provide the time for filing the return. Section 4959 was added to Chapter 42 of the Code.

On April 5, 2013, the Treasury Department and the IRS published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register (REG-106499-12; 78 FR 20523) containing proposed regulations providing guidance to hospital organizations on the CHNA requirements of section 501(r)(3) and the related excise tax of section 4959. That notice of proposed rulemaking did not include amendments to the regulations under section 6011 and section 6071 regarding the return to accompany the payment of the excise tax under section 4959 and the time for filing such a return.

Under §53.6011-1(c) of these temporary regulations, a charitable hospital organization that is liable for the section 4959 excise tax must file a return on Form 4720. Under §53.6071-1(h) of these temporary regulations, a hospital organization liable for the section 4959 excise tax must file a Form 4720 by the 15^th day of the fifth month after the end of the organization’s taxable year during which the liability under section 4959 was incurred. Thus, for example, a hospital organization reporting on a calendar year basis that failed to meet the requirements of section 501(r)(3) by December 31, 2013, would have to file a Form 4720 and pay the section 4959 tax due by May 15, 2014.

It has been determined that this Treasury decision is not a significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563. Therefore, a regulatory assessment is not required. It also has been determined that section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply to these regulations. For the applicability of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6), refer to the Special Analyses section of the preamble to the cross-reference notice of proposed rulemaking published in this issue of the Bulletin. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Code, these regulations were submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on their impact on small business, and no comments were received.

Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 53 continues to read in part as follows:

Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

Par. 2. Section 53.6011-1 is amended by:

1. Redesignating paragraphs (c) through (e) as (d) through (f).

2. Adding new paragraphs (c) and (g).

The addition reads as follows:

Section 6013(a) of the Code permits taxpayers who are husband and wife to file a joint Federal income tax return. Married individuals who choose to file a joint income tax return are each jointly and severally liable under section 6013(d)(3) for the tax arising from that return, which, pursuant to sections 6601(e)(1) and 6665(a)(2), includes any additions to tax, additional amounts, penalties, and interest. Because the liability is joint and several, the IRS is authorized to collect the entire amount from either spouse, without regard to which spouse the items of income, deduction, credit, or basis that gave rise to the liability are attributable.

Section 6015 was enacted in 1998 to provide relief from joint and several liability in certain circumstances. Section 6015 sets forth three bases for relief from joint and several liability. First, section 6015(b) allows a taxpayer to elect relief from understatements of tax attributable to erroneous items of the other spouse if the taxpayer had no reason to know of the understatement and, taking into account all the facts and circumstances, it is inequitable to hold the taxpayer liable. Second, section 6015(c) allows a taxpayer who is divorced or legally separated from, or no longer living with, the spouse or former spouse with whom the joint return was filed to elect to allocate a deficiency (or a portion of a deficiency) to the other spouse, as if the spouses had filed separate tax returns. Third, section 6015(f) provides that a taxpayer may request, under “procedures prescribed by the Secretary,” relief from a tax understatement or underpayment when the taxpayer does not qualify for relief under the other two subsections and it would be inequitable to hold the taxpayer liable considering all the facts and circumstances.

Section 6015(h) directs the Treasury Department and the IRS to prescribe such regulations as are necessary to carry out the provisions of section 6015. The Treasury Department and the IRS exercised that authority by promulgating regulations under section 6015 on July 18, 2002 (TD 9003, 67 FR 47278). Sections 1.6015-2, 1.6015-3, and 1.6015-4 of the final regulations provide guidance on the bases for relief in section 6015(b), (c), and (f), respectively. Section 1.6015-5 provides rules on the time and manner to request section 6015 relief.

By their terms, paragraphs (b) and (c) of section 6015 impose a two-year deadline for a taxpayer to elect the application of either subsection. Under the deadline, a taxpayer must make the election no later than two years after the date of the IRS’s first collection activity with respect to the taxpayer. See section 6015(b)(1)(E) and (c)(3)(B). In contrast, paragraph (f) of section 6015 does not contain an explicit deadline to request relief. In accordance with the authority in section 6015(f) to prescribe procedures for the administration of equitable relief, the Treasury Department and the IRS, beginning in 1998, prescribed in published guidance a two-year deadline to request equitable relief under section 6015(f) to be consistent with the statutory time limit to claim relief under section 6015(b) and (c). The two-year deadline to request equitable relief was first prescribed in Notice 98-61 (1998-2 C.B. 758 (December 21, 1998)) (see §601.601(d)(2)(ii)(b) of this chapter). The two-year deadline was reiterated in Rev. Proc. 2000-15 (2000-1 C.B. 447), which was superseded by Rev. Proc. 2003-61 (2003-2 C.B. 296), and ultimately adopted in the regulations under section 6015, which were issued on July 18, 2002, as §1.6015-5(b)(1).

Besides establishing when and how to request relief from joint and several liability, §1.6015-5 also defines key terms, such as “collection activity,” sets forth examples illustrating the time and manner provisions, and explains the effect of a final administrative determination.

In Lantz v. Commissioner, 132 T.C. 131 (2009), the Tax Court considered for the first time whether the two-year deadline to request equitable relief was valid. After analyzing the issue under the standard for judicial review of an agency regulation, the Tax Court held the two-year deadline for equitable relief in §1.6015-5(b)(1) invalid. The Lantz decision was reversed on appeal by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in an opinion upholding the validity of the deadline to request equitable relief. Lantz v. Commissioner, 607 F.3d 479 (7th Cir. 2010). After Lantz, the Tax Court continued to find the two-year deadline invalid in cases not appealable to the Seventh Circuit but the deadline was upheld again in Mannella v. Commissioner, 631 F.3d 115 (3d Cir. 2011), and Jones v. Commissioner, 642 F.3d 459 (4th Cir. 2011).

Notwithstanding the validity of the regulation setting the two-year deadline, the Treasury Department and the IRS considered whether to retain the deadline and determined, in the interest of tax administration, that the time period to request equitable relief under section 6015(f) should be extended. As announced in Notice 2011-70 (2011-32 I.R.B. 135 (Aug. 8, 2011)), the two-year deadline no longer applies to requests for equitable relief under section 6015(f). In place of the prior two-year deadline, Notice 2011-70 provides that, to be considered for equitable relief, a request must be filed with the IRS within the period of limitation for collection of tax in section 6502 or, for any credit or refund of tax, within the period of limitation in section 6511. Notice 2011-70 explains that the regulations under section 6015 will be revised to reflect the change. These proposed regulations reflect the changes made by Notice 2011-70. Notice 2011-70 has no effect on the two-year deadline to elect relief under section 6015(b) (and §1.6015-2) or section 6015(c) (and §1.6015-3).

Notice 2011-70 specifies transitional rules that apply until the Treasury Department and the IRS amend the regulations under section 6015. Under the transitional rules, the two-year deadline does not apply to any request for equitable relief filed on or after July 25, 2011 (the date Notice 2011-70 was issued) or any request already filed and pending with the IRS as of that date. The transitional rules provide that the IRS will consider these current and future requests for equitable relief if they were filed within the applicable limitation period under section 6502 or 6511. As for past requests for equitable relief-requests that the IRS denied as untimely under the two-year deadline-the notice allows the individuals who filed those requests to reapply for equitable relief, unless the individual litigated the denial or the denial included a determination that the individual was not entitled to equitable relief on the merits. In addition, Notice 2011-70 provides separate rules for claiming equitable relief with respect to litigated cases.

A similar rule is added to §1.66-4 for claims for equitable relief under section 66(c). Section 66(c) provides two avenues for married taxpayers who do not file a joint Federal income tax return in a community property state to request relief from the operation of the state community property laws. Under state law, each spouse generally is responsible for the tax on one-half of all the community income for the year. Traditional relief under section 66(c) allows the requesting spouse to avoid liability for tax on community income of which the requesting spouse did not know and had no reason to know. If a requesting spouse does not satisfy the requirements for traditional relief, the Secretary may grant equitable relief. The IRS uses the same procedures for determining eligibility for equitable relief under section 66(c) as it does for equitable relief under section 6015(f). As a result, it is appropriate for the IRS to use the same timing rules for consideration of requests for equitable relief, whether under section 66(c) or section 6015(f).

The Treasury Department and the IRS propose to amend the provisions of §1.6015-5 on the time and manner for requesting relief from joint and several liability under section 6015. A similar rule is added to §1.66-4(j)(2)(ii) for claims for equitable relief from the Federal income tax liability resulting from the operation of state community property law.

The proposed regulations revise §1.6015-5(a) to reflect that a requesting spouse (defined in §1.6015-1(h)(1)) may elect the application of section 6015(b) [§1.6015-2 ] or section 6015(c) [§1.6015-3] or request equitable relief under section 6015(f) [§1.6015-4] as part of the collection due process (CDP) hearing procedures under sections 6320 and 6330. A corresponding change is made to §1.6015-5(c)(1) to clarify that, although section 6015 relief may be raised in a CDP proceeding, a requesting spouse may not request section 6015 relief in the course of a CDP hearing if the requesting spouse previously requested section 6015 relief and the IRS ruled on that request by issuing a final administrative determination. These proposed regulations do not change existing CDP hearing procedures. See §301.6330-1(e)(2). Rather, these changes make the regulations under section 6015 consistent with the regulations under section 6330.

Section 1.6015-5(b) of the proposed regulations retains the two-year deadline, measured from the date of the first collection activity, to elect the application of §1.6015-2 (describing the circumstances in which a taxpayer may be eligible for relief under section 6015(b)) or 1.6015-3 (describing the circumstances in which a taxpayer may be eligible for relief under section 6015(c)). In accordance with Notice 2011-70, the deadline is removed for a request for equitable relief under §1.6015-4 (describing the circumstances in which a taxpayer may be eligible for relief under section 6015(f)) and replaced with a requirement that a request for equitable relief must be filed with the IRS within the period of limitation in section 6502 for collection of tax or the period of limitation in section 6511 for credit or refund of tax, as applicable to the specific request. A similar rule is added to §1.66-4(j)(2)(ii) for claims for equitable relief from the Federal income tax liability resulting from the operation of state community property law.

Under section 6502(a)(1), the period of limitation on collection of tax is normally ten years after the date of assessment of the tax, although it may be extended by other provisions of the Code. Under section 6511(a), the period of limitation to claim a credit or refund of tax is generally the later of three years after the date a tax return for the taxable period was filed or two years after the date the tax was paid. If no return was filed, the two-year period applies.

Section 1.6015-5(b)(2) of the proposed regulations explains that if a requesting spouse files a request for equitable relief under §1.6015-4 within the limitation period on collection of tax, the IRS will consider the request, but any relief in the form of a tax credit or refund depends on whether the limitation period for credit or refund was also open as of the date the claim for relief was filed and the other requirements relating to credits or refunds are satisfied. In cases in which the limitation period for credit or refund happens to be the longer of the two periods and is open when a request for equitable relief is filed, the request can be considered for a potential refund or credit of any amounts collected or otherwise paid by the requesting spouse during the applicable look-back period of section 6511(b)(2), even if the collection period is closed.

If a request for equitable relief is filed after the expiration of the limitation period for collection of a joint tax liability, the IRS is barred from collecting any remaining unpaid tax from the requesting spouse. Similarly, if a request for equitable relief under §1.6015-4 is filed after the expiration of the limitation period for a credit or refund of tax, section 6511(b)(1) bars the IRS from allowing, and a taxpayer from receiving, a credit or refund. The proposed regulations provide, therefore, that the IRS will not consider an individual’s request to be equitably relieved from a tax that is no longer legally collectible.

The proposed regulations clarify what constitutes collection activity for purposes of starting the two-year deadline that continues to apply to §§1.6015-2 and 1.6015-3.

A notice of intent to levy and right to request a CDP hearing (section 6330 notice) is a type of collection activity that starts the two-year period applicable to applications to elect relief under §§1.6015-2 and 1.6015-3. The proposed regulations at §1.6015-5(b)(3)(ii) clarify that the two-year period will start irrespective of a requesting spouse’s actual receipt of the section 6330 notice, if the notice was sent by certified or registered mail to the requesting spouse’s last known address. This clarification is consistent with the holding in Mannella v. Commissioner, 132 T.C. 196 (2009), rev’d on other grounds, 631 F.3d 115 (3d Cir. 2011).

Section 1.6015-5 in its current form contains several examples intended to illustrate how the timing rules for requesting relief under section 6015 operate. The proposed regulations update these examples to reflect the proposed changes to the timing rules. Thus, Example 1 is revised to explicitly limit it to elections under §1.6015-2 or 1.6015-3. Example 2 illustrates the operation of both the two-year deadline for purposes of §§1.6015-2 and 1.6015-3 and the periods of limitation that apply to equitable relief requests under §1.6015-4, including a situation in which the requesting spouse will still be considered for relief for unpaid amounts even though the limitation period for credit or refund had expired when the request was filed as discussed in §1.6015-5(b)(2). Example 3 is principally intended to illustrate that collection activity against a nonrequesting spouse (defined in §1.6015-1(h)(2)) does not begin the time in which a requesting spouse must elect the application of §1.6015-2 or 1.6015-3. Example 4 illustrates the rule of §1.6015-5(c)(3)(i) that a section 6330 notice sent to a requesting spouse’s last known address, even if not actually received by the requesting spouse, is a collection activity for purposes of the timing rules, but the issuance of the notice, or the time between the mailing of the notice and the filing of a request for relief, does not affect the IRS’s consideration of equitable relief under §1.6015-4 as no two-year deadline applies. Example 5 illustrates the timing rules in §1.6015-5(b)(2) under which if a requesting spouse has paid some or all of a joint tax liability, or if the IRS has collected all or a part of the liability from a requesting spouse, the requesting spouse will be considered for equitable relief under §1.6015-4 if the requesting spouse filed for relief within the limitation period for a credit or refund of tax, even though the limitation period for collection of tax was expired when the request was filed. The example further illustrates that in a case of payments or collection activity over time, a requesting spouse is eligible for a credit or refund only for amounts of tax for which the period of limitation allows a credit or refund as of when the request for relief was filed. The last example, Example 6, builds off of Example 5 and illustrates a situation in which the IRS will not consider a request for equitable relief under §1.6015-4 because both the limitation period for a credit or refund of tax and the limitation period for collection of tax had expired as of the date the claim for relief was filed.

The proposed regulations also revise §1.6015-5(c), which prescribes the effect of a final administrative determination. Under §1.6015-5(c)(1), a requesting spouse generally is entitled to submit only one request for relief under section 6015 from a joint tax liability (except as provided in §1.6015-1(h)(5)), and the IRS will issue only one final administrative determination. The proposed regulations clarify in §1.6015-5(c)(1) that after a final administrative determination, a requesting spouse may not, even under the procedures for a CDP hearing, again request relief under section 6015 with respect to the same joint tax liability.

Consistent with the general restriction, but to provide flexibility within that framework, the IRS has developed procedures in the Internal Revenue Manual (Chapter 25.15.17 (Rev. 03/08/2013)) to reconsider a final administrative determination if a requesting spouse submits additional information not previously submitted and considered and the requesting spouse did not petition the Tax Court from the prior final administrative determination. If the requesting spouse did petition the Tax Court, then the requesting spouse is not eligible for reconsideration unless the Tax Court case was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. A reconsideration process allows for relief in situations where a requesting spouse was unable to initially provide the information, such as the requesting spouse not fully understanding how to file a complete request for relief under section 6015. The reconsideration process, however, does not replace the IRS’s final administrative determination for purposes of determining whether Tax Court review is available or whether a Tax Court petition was timely filed. A request for reconsideration is not a qualifying election (“the first timely claim for relief from joint and several liability for the tax year for which relief is sought”) under §1.6015-2 or 1.6015-3, or request under §1.6015-4, for purposes of §1.6015-1(h)(5), and does not trigger the restrictions on collection pursuant to section 6015(e)(1)(B) or the suspension of the collection period of limitation under section 6015(e)(2). A reconsideration letter (formerly Letter 4277C and currently either Letter 5186C, Letter 5187C, or Letter 5188C)) is not a final determination letter for purposes of section 6015(e) and §1.6015-7. Accordingly, a requesting spouse who receives a reconsideration letter may not petition the Tax Court to challenge a denial of relief following the IRS’s reconsideration even if the requesting spouse provided new information not previously considered. The proposed regulations add a new provision to §1.6015-5(c) acknowledging the reconsideration process but also providing that the reconsideration letter is not the IRS’s final determination and is not subject to review by the Tax Court.

The general restriction in the regulations to one request for relief under section 6015 per tax liability and one final administrative determination of that request does not prohibit a requesting spouse from reapplying for equitable relief under §1.6015-4 pursuant to the terms of Notice 2011-70 if the requesting spouse’s request for relief under §1.6015-4 was denied solely for being untimely and that denial was not litigated. The notice allows individuals who filed requests for equitable relief that were denied by the IRS solely on the basis of the two-year deadline and were not litigated to reapply to the IRS for equitable relief. A Form 8857, Request for Innocent Spouse Relief, or substitute written statement, signed under the penalties of perjury, filed as a reapplication for equitable relief under Notice 2011-70 is not considered a second request, and the resulting determination will be the final administrative determination for purposes of the regulations. A reapplication under Notice 2011-70 is not a reconsideration under the IRS’s reconsideration process, and a denial of equitable relief on reapplication may be timely petitioned to the Tax Court for review.

Except as provided below, these proposed regulations are effective as of the date that final regulations are published in the Federal Register. For proposed dates of applicability, see §1.6015-9.

Notice 2011-70 announced that the Treasury Department and the IRS intended to amend the regulations under section 6015 to remove the requirement that taxpayers request equitable relief under section 6015(f) and §1.6015-4 within two years of the first collection activity. Under section 7805(b)(1)(C), the proposed regulations provide that §1.6015-5(b)(1) and (b)(2) will be effective as of July 25, 2011, the date that Notice 2011-70 was issued to the public.

For copies of recently issued Revenue Procedures, Revenue Rulings, Notices and other guidance published in the Internal Revenue Bulletin or Cumulative Bulletin, please visit the IRS website at http://www.irs.gov.

It has been determined that this notice of proposed rulemaking is not a significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563. Therefore, a regulatory assessment is not required. It has also been determined that section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply to these regulations. In addition, because the regulation does not impose a collection of information on small entities, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) does not apply. Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6). Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Code, this notice of proposed rulemaking has been submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on its impact on small business.

Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations, consideration will be given to any written comments (a signed original and eight (8) copies) or electronic comments that are submitted timely to the IRS. The Treasury Department and the IRS request comments on all aspects of the proposed rules. All comments submitted by the public will be made available for public inspection and copying at http://www.regulations.gov or upon request. A public hearing may be scheduled if requested in writing by any person who timely submits comments. If a public hearing is scheduled, notice of the date, time, and place for the public hearing will be published in the Federal Register.

Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read in part as follows:

Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

Section 1.66-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 66(c). * * *

Section 1.6015-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6015(h). * * *

Section 1.6015-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6015(h). * * *

Par. 2 In §1.66-4, paragraph (j)(2)(ii) is revised to read as follows:

Temporary regulations in this issue of the Bulletin amend the existing regulations under sections 6011 and 6071 to (1) specify the form that must be used to accompany payment of the excise tax imposed by section 4959 for failure to meet the community health needs assessment requirements of section 501(r)(3), and (2) provide the due date for filing the form. Section 501(r) and section 4959 were enacted by section 9007 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Law 111-148 (124 Stat. 119 (2010)).

The text of those temporary regulations also serves as the text of these proposed regulations. The preamble to the temporary regulations explains the amendments.

It has been determined that this notice of proposed rulemaking is not a significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563. Therefore, a regulatory assessment is not required. It also has been determined that section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply to these regulations. It is hereby certified that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This certification is based on the fact that this rule merely provides guidance as to the timing and filing of Form 4720 for charitable hospital organizations liable for the section 4959 excise tax, and completing the applicable portion (Schedule M) of the Form 4720 for this purpose imposes little incremental burden in time or expense. The liability for the section 4959 excise tax is imposed by statute, and not these regulations. In addition, a charitable hospital organization may already be required to file the Form 4720 under the existing final regulations in sections 53.6011-1 and 53.6071-1 if it is liable for another Chapter 41 or 42 excise tax. Therefore, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) is not required. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Code, these proposed regulations were submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on their impact on small business, and no comments were received.

Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations, consideration will be given to any comments that are submitted timely to the IRS as prescribed in this preamble under the “Addresses” heading. The Treasury Department and the IRS request comments on all aspects of the proposed rules. All comments will be available at www.regulations.gov or upon request.

A public hearing will be scheduled if requested in writing by any person that timely submits written comments. If a public hearing is scheduled, notice of the date, time, and place for the public hearing will be published in the Federal Register.

Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 53 continues to read in part as follows:

Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

Par. 2. Section 53.6011-1 is amended by:

1. Redesignating paragraphs (c) through (e) as (d) through (f).

2. Adding new paragraphs (c) and (g).

The addition reads as follows: