Doesn't it add confusion to misstate or garble what the law is? The poster might think that an oral modification that works under CA law doesn't work for tax purposes. But that's exactly wrong under the partnership regulations. If the poster made an effective state-law oral modification of their partnership agreement in early 2019, your advice would cause them to misfile their (already late) 1065.
If you're misstating the law intentionally to "help" someone, it seems like the person you're trying to help isn't the poster. If you weren't aware that oral modifications can be effective for tax, then you should acknowledge the mistake. If you think that it will be too hard to prove that an oral modification occurred, then you should correct your post. Taxpayers have been successful in proving such things, and poster's facts are open enough that the rules should be presented fairly.
