as failing to satisfy [the anti-cutback rule of IRC § 411(d)(6) ] as a result of the amendments ehminating the retirees benefit increases, because the amendments were adopted before the effective date of the final regulations. Id. (emphasis added). We can logically deduce from this declaration that the IRS did not consider the post-retirement COLA an “accrued benefit” under the 2002 Regulation, which was unquestionably applicable prior to August 12, 2005. This position is diametrically opposed to Treasury’s proffered interpretation in Sheet Metal Workers’. Because Treasury has abandoned the litigation position it took in that case, the Court is relieved of any obligation to defer to it under Auer. Cf. Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173, 186-87, 111 S.Ct. 1759, 114 L.Ed.2d 233 (1991) (<HOLDING>). S. Pattern Regulation — 26 C.F.R. § Ull(d)-h
holding that chevron deference is due only to a reasonable interpretation made by the administrator of an agency holding that chevron deference is due only when the agency acts pursuant to delegated authority and the agency action has the force of law holding regulations entitled to chevron deference holding that agency interpretation which is reasonable is entitled to deference holding that a longstanding agency interpretation was no longer entitled to chevron deference given that the agency had changed its position on the issue