SEE-3 - Representation before the IRS (29% of the exam) - Section 2.1

Apply the rules for authorising a representative using Form 2848 and for granting information access using Form 8821, including scope, signatures, and revocation.

Distinguish Form 2848, Power of Attorney and Declaration of Representative, which authorises a recognised representative to act for a taxpayer, from Form 8821, Tax Information Authorization, which only permits the IRS to disclose information. Apply the rules for specifying tax matters and periods, the signature and declaration requirements, and how a new power of attorney revokes a prior one unless retained.

Form 2848Form 8821Power of attorneyTax information authorizationRevocation

Practice question for this objective

Free sampleRepresentation before the IRSmedium

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.

Recognise that a new Form 2848 automatically revokes a prior one for overlapping matters unless the taxpayer checks the retention box and attaches the earlier form. The IRS keeps only the current authority for a given matter, so submitting a new Form 2848 for the same periods displaces the earlier representative by default; the taxpayer must affirmatively check the retention box and attach the prior form to keep both authorisations active.

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.

See more SEE-3 practice questions, answers explained.

Exam traps in Representation before the IRS

Answers that look right on this material and are not. Each one is a distractor from a different question in the SEE-3 bank for this domain.

Both authorisations remain active side by side, so each designee may receive the taxpayer's confidential information for the overlapping periods until the taxpayer separately writes REVOKE on the first one.
Why it is wrong: Co-existing authorisations seem possible because the taxpayer never marked the first one, but a new Form 8821 automatically revokes prior ones unless the taxpayer acts to retain them, so the earlier authority does not simply continue.
Form 2848 lets the named person inspect and receive confidential information only, while Form 8821 lets that person argue the taxpayer's position and sign agreements before the IRS on the taxpayer's behalf.
Why it is wrong: This option reverses the two instruments, which is tempting because both grant third-party access; in fact Form 2848 confers representation and Form 8821 confers disclosure only, so the roles are swapped and the statement is wrong.
The Form 8821 is revoked at the same time, because ending a power of attorney for a period automatically cancels every other authorisation the taxpayer has on file for that same period.
Why it is wrong: It feels tidy to assume one revocation clears the account for a period, but each authorisation is treated separately, so revoking the power of attorney does not also cancel an unrelated disclosure consent.

Examworthy is not affiliated with or endorsed by IRS / Prometric. Original, blueprint-aligned practice material only.