A taxpayer files a new Form 2848 naming a different representative for the same tax matters and periods already covered by an earlier Form 2848. What is the effect on the earlier authorisation?
- AThe earlier Form 2848 stays fully in force alongside the new one, so both representatives hold concurrent authority for the same matters unless the taxpayer separately revokes the first.
- BThe earlier Form 2848 is automatically revoked for the overlapping matters and periods, unless the taxpayer attaches a copy of the earlier authorisation and checks the box to retain it. Correct
- CBoth forms are treated as invalid until the IRS resolves the conflict, because two powers of attorney covering the same periods cannot coexist on the taxpayer's account at one time.
- DThe earlier Form 2848 is automatically revoked, and in addition any Form 8821 the taxpayer had on file for those periods is cancelled at the same time by the new filing.
Why A is wrong: Concurrent authority seems possible since the taxpayer never wrote REVOKE, but a new Form 2848 for the same matters automatically supersedes the earlier one, so the first authority does not simply continue.
Why B is correct: Filing a new Form 2848 for the same matters automatically revokes a prior power of attorney for those matters unless the taxpayer marks the retention box and attaches a copy of the earlier form, which is exactly how the overlap is resolved.
Why C is wrong: It feels orderly to assume the IRS would suspend conflicting forms, but the agency does not void both; the later form controls for the overlapping matters, so this misdescribes the outcome.
Why D is wrong: The revocation of the prior Form 2848 is correct, but the claim that a new Form 2848 also cancels a Form 8821 is wrong, because filing a power of attorney does not revoke a separate tax information authorisation.