rr-20-05.pdf

Preserve advance releases and the authoritative Internal Revenue Bulletin rendition; directory timestamps are file-publication metadata, not legal effective dates. HTML bulletins begin June 2003; earlier available issues require full PDF parsing.

This collection currently includes the publisher’s available advance-release directory. Historical bulletin renditions are discovered separately; an advance-release record alone does not certify the collection archive complete.

1

Section 1016.—Adjustments to basis

Rev. Rul. 2020-05

ISSUE
After the amendment of § 1016(a) of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) by section
13521 of Public Law No. 115-97, 131 Stat. 2054 (December 22, 2017), commonly
referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), what is the amount of A’s and B’s
income recognized upon the sale of the life insurance contracts described in Situation 2
of Rev. Rul. 2009-13, 2009-21 I.R.B. 1029; Situation 3 of Rev. Rul. 2009-13; and
Situation 2 of Rev. Rul. 2009-14, 2009-21 I.R.B. 1031?
LAW AND ANALYSIS
Sections 1011 and 1012 of the Code provide that the adjusted basis for determining
gain or loss is generally the cost of property adjusted as provided in § 1016, except as
otherwise provided in subchapters O (§§ 1011 through 1092), C (§§ 301 through 386),
K (§§ 701 through 777), and P (§§ 1201 through 1298) of chapter 1 of the Code.
Section 1016(a) provides that proper adjustment must be made for expenditures,
receipts, losses, or other items properly chargeable to capital account. Section 13521
of the TCJA amended § 1016(a) to provide that, in determining the basis of a life

2

insurance contract or an annuity contract, no adjustment is made for mortality, expense,
or other reasonable charges incurred under the contract. See § 1016(a)(1)(B). This
amendment is effective for transactions entered into on or after August 26, 2009 (the
effective date of Rev. Rul. 2009-13 with respect to Situations 2 and 3).
Rev. Rul. 2009-13 and Rev. Rul. 2009-14 apply § 1016 (prior to its amendment by
the TCJA) to determine the adjusted basis of life insurance contracts under §§ 1011 and
1012 in several factual situations.
In Situation 2 of Rev. Rul. 2009-13, A, an individual, entered into a life insurance
contract with cash value on January 1 of Year 1. Under the contract, A was the insured,
and the named beneficiary was a member of A’s family. On June 15 of Year 8, A sold
the contract to B, an unrelated person who would suffer no economic loss upon A’s
death, for $80,000. Prior to the sale of the contract, A had paid $64,000 in premiums.
The cost of insurance charges collected by the issuer was $10,000 as of the date of the
sale. Situation 2 of Rev. Rul. 2009-13 provides that if a taxpayer holds a life insurance
contract for purposes of insurance protection, it is necessary to reduce the taxpayer’s
basis in the contract by that portion of the premium paid for the contract that was
expended for the provision of insurance before the sale in order to measure the
taxpayer’s gain upon the sale of the contract. Therefore, Situation 2 of Rev. Rul. 2009-
13 provides that A must reduce A’s basis in the contract by the cost of insurance. As a
result, A’s adjusted basis as of the date of the sale was $54,000 ($64,000 premiums
paid less $10,000 expended as cost of insurance). Because A sold the contract for
$80,000, Rev. Rul. 2009-13 holds with respect to Situation 2 that A must recognize

3

$26,000 of income on the sale of the contract ($80,000 amount realized less $54,000
adjusted basis of the contract).
In Situation 3 of Rev. Rul. 2009-13, the contract was a level premium fifteen-year
term life insurance contract without cash surrender value. The monthly premium for the
term life insurance contract was $500, A held the contract for 89.5 months, and A paid
premiums totaling $45,000 as of the date of the sale. A sold the contract for $20,000 to
B, an unrelated person who would suffer no economic loss upon A’s death. Situation 3
of Rev. Rul. 2009-13 provides that A must reduce A’s basis in the contract by the cost of
insurance, which is presumed to equal the monthly premiums under the contract. A’s
adjusted basis in the contract as of the date of the sale was therefore $250 ($45,000
total premiums paid less $44,750 cost of insurance protection). Because A sold the
contract for $20,000, Rev. Rul. 2009-13 holds with respect to Situation 3 that A must
recognize $19,750 of income on the sale of the term life insurance contract ($20,000
amount realized on the sale less $250 adjusted basis of the contract).
In Situation 2 of Rev. Rul. 2009-14, the facts are the same as in Situation 3 of Rev.
Rul. 2009-13, except that B purchased the contract for $20,000 from A and then, at the
end of the following year, sold the contract to C, a person unrelated to either A or B, for
$30,000. Before selling the contract, B paid a total of $9,000 in premiums. In
Situation 2 of Rev. Rul. 2009-14, B, unlike A in Situation 3 of Rev. Rul. 2009-13, was
not required to reduce B’s basis by the cost of insurance because B was wholly
unrelated to the insured, did not purchase the life insurance contract for protection
against economic loss upon the insured’s death, purchased the contract solely with a
view to profit, and enjoyed no insurance protection from the contract. B’s cost basis

4

was $29,000, the sum of what B paid for the contract and the premiums B paid to keep
the contract in force ($20,000 purchase price plus $9,000 in premiums). B’s adjusted
basis was $29,000 ($29,000 cost basis with no adjustment for cost of insurance), and B
recognized $1,000 of income on the sale of the contract to C ($30,000 amount realized
on sale less $29,000 adjusted basis of the contract).
The analysis and holdings relating to A’s adjusted basis in the contract in Situations
2 and 3 in Rev. Rul. 2009-13 and the analysis relating to B’s adjusted basis in the
contract in Situation 2 in Rev. Rul. 2009-14 are inconsistent with the language of
§ 1016(a)(1)(B), added to the Code by the TCJA. Under § 1016(a)(1)(B), the cost basis
of a life insurance contract is not reduced by the cost of insurance, regardless of why
the contract is purchased. Rev. Rul. 2009-13 and Rev. Rul. 2009-14 are therefore
modified to the extent they are inconsistent with the rule set forth in § 1016(a)(1)(B).
In Situations 2 and 3 in Rev. Rul. 2009-13, under § 1016(a)(1)(B), as added by the
TCJA, A is not required to reduce A’s basis in the contract by the cost of insurance.
Accordingly, in Situation 2 of Rev. Rul. 2009-13, A’s adjusted basis in the contract
equals the premiums paid. A must recognize $16,000 of income on the sale of the
contract ($80,000 amount realized on sale less $64,000 adjusted basis). In Situation 3
of Rev. Rul. 2009-13, A’s adjusted basis in the contract equals the premiums paid. A
will recognize a $25,000 loss on the sale of the contract ($20,000 amount realized on
the sale less $45,000 adjusted basis). A will not be permitted to deduct the loss unless
the loss is incurred under § 165(c)(1) or (2).

5

In Situation 2 of Rev. Rul. 2009-14, B is not required to reduce B’s basis in the
contract by the cost of insurance because B was wholly unrelated to the insured, did not
purchase the life insurance contract for protection against economic loss upon the
insured’s death, purchased the contract solely with a view to profit, and enjoyed no
insurance protection from the contract. Under § 1016(a)(1)(B), as added by the TCJA,
B is not required to reduce B’s basis in the contract by the cost of insurance, regardless
of why the insurance contract is purchased. Accordingly, the outcome for B in
Situation 2 of Rev. Rul. 2009-14 does not change, but B’s situation is no longer
distinguishable from that of A in Situation 3 of Rev. Rul. 2009-13 with regards to the
treatment of cost of insurance charges.
HOLDINGS
1. In Situation 2 of Rev. Rul. 2009-13, A recognizes $16,000 of income upon the
sale of the life insurance contract, of which $14,000 is ordinary income, and $2,000 is
long-term capital gain.
1

2. In Situation 3 of Rev. Rul. 2009-13, A recognizes a long-term capital loss of
$25,000 upon the sale of the life insurance contract.
3. In Situation 2 of Rev. Rul. 2009-14, B recognizes $1,000 of long-term capital gain
upon the sale of the life insurance contract.
EFFECT ON OTHER DOCUMENTS

1
Section 13521 of the TCJA only applies to determine a taxpayer’s adjusted basis in a life insurance
contract under § 1016. Section 13521 of the TCJA does not affect the analysis in Situations 2 and 3 of
Rev. Rul. 2009-13 and Situation 2 of Rev. Rul. 2009-14 with respect to the character of any income or
loss recognized by a taxpayer on the sale of a life insurance contract.

6

This revenue ruling modifies Rev. Rul. 2009-13 and Rev. Rul. 2009-14.
EFFECTIVE DATE
Consistent with the effective date of the TCJA amendment to § 1016(a), this revenue
ruling is effective for transactions entered into on or after August 26, 2009. See
§ 7805(b)(8). A change in the internal revenue laws that is made retroactive to earlier
taxable years does not automatically permit a claim for a refund for such a year when
the claim is barred by the period of limitations. See United States v. Zacks, 375 U.S. 59
(1963). Congress did not amend the statute of limitations set forth in § 6511 or
otherwise express an intent to waive or extend the period of limitations for the
retroactive change made to § 1016(a) by section 13521 of the TCJA.
DRAFTING INFORMATION
The principal author of this revenue ruling is Megan McGuire of the Office of the
Associate Chief Counsel (Financial Institutions and Products). For further information
regarding this revenue ruling, contact Ms. McGuire at (202) 317-6995 (not a toll-free
number).