IRS Guidance
Subscribe to IRS Guidance's Posts

Proposed Regulations Address Applicable Adjustments to Stock and Stock Rights under Code Section 305(c)

In an apparent response to coordination questions raised by comments to proposed regulations under Code Section 871(m) (relating to certain cross-border dividend equivalent payments), the US Department of the Treasury issued proposed regulations on April 12, 2016, (the Proposed Regulations) addressing deemed distributions of stock and stock rights under Code Section 305(c). Among other stated goals, the Proposed Regulations attempt to “resolve ambiguities concerning the amount and timing of deemed distributions that are or result from adjustments to rights to acquire stock.” The Proposed Regulations also provide guidance to withholding agents regarding the current withholding and information reporting obligations under chapters three and four with respect to such deemed distributions.

In the latest issue of the Journal of Taxation of Financial Products, we have published an article outlining the Proposed Regulations, describing the types of transactions, including adjustment events, giving rise to deemed distributions with respect to stock rights, as well as describing the amount and timing thereof. A companion article in this issue of the Journal addresses the related withholding and information reporting considerations.

As discussed in the article, the Proposed Regulations, while not answering all pertinent questions, attempt to provide clarity on the question of whether certain adjustments with respect to stock rights result in deemed distributions for purposes of Code Sections 305(b) and 301. It will be interesting to see whether the regulations are finalized in their current form or will be subject to extensive comments and potentially re-proposed. It is worth noting that a number of comments to the Proposed Regulations have already been submitted, largely seeking clarifications on certain aspects of the Proposed Regulations. However, some of the comments submitted to date suggest that the regulations are inappropriate and should not be adopted, based largely on the notion that the adjustments at issue do not result in an accretion to wealth in many instances, and thus should not result in taxable income. A critical question regarding the timing and content of final regulations may ultimately depend on the views of withholding agents as to the withholding and reporting provisions.




read more

Transfer Pricing Compensating Adjustments: Another IRS Loss

Following the resolution of a transfer pricing adjustment, there are inevitable compensating adjustment issues to be addressed. Revenue Procedure 99-32 provides the guidelines. A frequent issue concerns whether the “account” that can be elected constitutes “related-party indebtedness” for other purposes of the Internal Revenue Code. One issue has related to the long-since expired provisions of Section 965 relating to repatriations (which may arise from the dead in the Trump administration). In Notice 2005-64, the IRS indicated that it does without any analysis.

In BMC Software, Inc. v. Commissioner, 115 AFTR 2d 2015-1092 (5th Cir. 2015), the Fifth Circuit reversed a US Tax Court decision in favor of the IRS, finding, in essence, that the transfer pricing closing agreement entered long-after the taxable years in question was not indebtedness for Section 965 purposes. Its plain language interpretation was that under Section 965, “the determination of the amount of indebtedness was to be made as of the close of the taxable year for which the election under Section 965 was in effect.” Accordingly, the accounts receivable could not have existed at the end of the testing period. The court also noted that the taxpayer had not agreed to “backdate” the accounts receivable.

The Tax Court has just agreed to follow the Fifth Circuit opinion in BMC Software. In Analog Devices, Inc. v. Commissioner, 147 T.C. No. 15 (Nov. 22 2016), the Tax Court essentially followed the logic of the Fifth Circuit in a similar situation involving a IRS assertion of the same Section 965 consequence of a subsequent year closing agreement in a transfer pricing case.

Practice Point:  The relationship of closing agreement in transfer pricing cases and compensating adjustments is inevitably complex, especially in situations where there are other debt-related issues in the years in question. If the anticipated tax reform bill again introduces a repatriation incentive, these issues will arise once again. The key will be to address them in closing agreements as best as possible.




read more

IRS Changes Course on Characterization of Termination Fees

Termination fee clauses are commonly incorporated in merger agreements to compensate a party for time and expenses incurred in the event that the deal is not consummated. Where the merger is terminated by one party, the clause generally requires either the target to pay the acquirer a termination fee (if the target terminates), or the acquirer to pay the target a reverse termination fee (if the acquirer terminates). Typically, termination fees range from 1–3 percent of the transaction value, which may result in a cash payment in the billions of dollars depending on the size of the transaction. The tax treatment of termination fees, both in terms of deductibility or income inclusion and the character of the fee as either ordinary or capital, has been the subject of past litigation, Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulatory action, and informal IRS advice.

Internal Revenue Code (Code) Section 165 allows a deduction for any loss sustained during the taxable year and not compensated for by insurance or otherwise. Section 162 provides deductions for ordinary and necessary business expenses paid or incurred during the taxable year. In contrast, Code Section 263 provides generally that a deduction is not allowed for new buildings or for permanent improvements or betterments made to increase the value of any property of estate. Prior to the promulgation of the INDOPCO regulations, litigation ensued over whether the payor of a termination fee could deduct such payment under Code Sections 162 or 165 or had to capitalize the payment under Code Section 263. In 2003, the IRS promulgated the INDOPCO regulations and specifically addressed the situations under which termination fees could be deducted immediately. For more background on this subject, see here.

The above-referenced litigation and the INDOPCO regulations focused on the deductible versus capital issue and did not address the character a termination fee (either paid or received). However, informal IRS guidance treated termination fees as liquidated damages, and thus ordinary income, arguably because the taxpayer had not sold, exchanged or transferred any capital asset. See, e.g., Private Letter Ruling 200823012 (June 6, 2008), available here and Tech. Adv. Memo. 200438038 (Sept. 17, 2004), available here. In the Private Letter Ruling, the IRS held that Code Section 1234A, which provides that gain or loss attributable to the cancellation, lapse, expiration or other termination of a right or obligation with respect to property which is (or on acquisition would be) a capital asset in the hands of the taxpayer is treated as gain or loss from the sale of a capital asset, did not apply. However, in, recent guidance released in September and October of this year available here and here the IRS reversed course and provided that Code Section 1234A applies to termination fees pursuant to merger agreements. The IRS’s new position is that a target’s stock to which the termination fee relates would have been a capital asset in the hands of an acquirer, had the deal been completed, and that the acquisition agreement provides [...]

Continue Reading




read more

More than 100,000 Taxpayers Become Compliant with Reporting and Tax Requirements, Paying more than $10.3 billion in Taxes, Interest and Penalties

On October 21, 2016, the Internal Revenue Service announced the most current data on the success of its Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (OVDP) and Streamlined Filing Compliance Procedures (SFCP) programs. For our prior coverage on the OVDP and SFCP programs please see Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Update and Release of “Panama Papers” May Encourage New Wave of OVDP Submissions.

OVDP program has existed in several iterations off and on since 2009, and the SFCP was made available to non-willful taxpayers in 2014. The programs encourage taxpayers with undisclosed income from foreign financial accounts and assets to become compliant and current with their tax returns and information reporting obligations. The program allows taxpayers to voluntarily disclose foreign financial accounts and assets and pay lower penalties now, rather than risk detection and face more severe penalties and possible criminal prosecution later.

The programs have been successful by all accounts. As of October 21, 2016, 55,800 taxpayers have made disclosures under the OVDP program and have paid more than $9.9 billion in taxes, interest and penalties since 2009. Another 48,000 taxpayers have made disclosures under the SFCP program correcting non-willful omissions and have paid $450 million in taxes, interest and penalties.




read more

IRS Issues New IPU on FICA Rules for Employees Working Abroad

The Internal Revenue Service has made available unofficial but detailed and instructive guidance on the application of Social Security and Medicare taxes (FICA) to wages paid to employees working abroad. The new November 14, 2016, International Practice Unit (IPU) makes clear that both US citizens and resident aliens (green card holders) remain subject to payment of FICA taxes despite the fact the services are performed outside of the United States, in those instances where the employer is an American employer, certain foreign affiliates thereof, or a foreign person treated as an American employer. The IPU notes that an important exception to the general rule of FICA application is where the IRS has entered into a Totalization Agreement, a type of FICA tax treaty, with the country where the services are performed and the requirements of the Totalization Agreement have been met.




read more

Formal Document Requests – The IRS’s Tool for Collecting “Foreign-Based Documentation”

One important feature of every audit is the request and collection of relevant taxpayer materials by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Such materials are typically collected through the rules and procedures associated with an Information Document Request (IDR).  However, for audits that involve the collection of foreign-based documentation, the Internal Revenue Code (Code) provides a modified set of rules under the Formal Document Request (FDR) procedures outlined in Code Section 982.

(more…)




read more

IRS Identifies Certain 831(b) Captives As “Transactions Of Interest”

In Notice 2016-66, the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) identified a particular § 831(b) “micro-captive” transaction as a “transaction of interest” for purposes of § 1.6011-4(b)(6) of the Regulations and §§ 6111 and 6112 of the Internal Revenue Code. The notice also alerts persons involved in such transactions to certain responsibilities and penalties that may arise from their involvement with these transactions.




read more

IRS Litigation Guideline Memorandums Obsoleted

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issues many forms of public and private guidance, both to government personnel and to taxpayers. Litigation Guideline Memorandums (LGMs) are one such type of guidance, and were issued by the IRS Office of Chief Counsel through 1999 to provide information and instruction relating to litigating procedures and method, and standards and criteria on issues and matters of significant interest to litigating attorneys in the Office of Chief Counsel. LGMs have been cited many times as evidence of the IRS’s position on a matter, and courts have ranged from citing LGMs as supporting authority to dismissing them as inconsistent with other IRS guidance and/or merely reflecting the IRS’s litigating position.

On November 2, 2016, the IRS announced in Office of Chief Counsel Notice CC-2017-001 that, to the extent existing LGMs have not been formally obsoleted or withdrawn, they may now be considered obsolete. However, the IRS recognized that LGMs can serve as useful tools and historical records of previous positions taken by the IRS in litigation, and that IRS attorneys seeking guidance on issues that were previously covered by an LGM should determine whether updated guidance has been provided or request advice from the IRS National Office. This indicates that LGMs may continue to be relevant for both taxpayers and IRS personnel in determining the IRS’s position on a particular issue.




read more

Final Section 385 Regulations May Pose Compliance Burdens and Raise Potential Challenges

On November 2, 2016, we participated in a panel discussion at TEI’s Houston Global Tax Symposium regarding the effects of the newly-finalized section 385 regulations. Of interest from a controversy perspective, we discussed the potential compliance burdens and privilege concerns raised by the new documentation requirements in the rules, and the potential problems with the non-rebuttable per se presumption in the transaction rules. We also discussed how the Internal Revenue Service has endeavored, in the regulations’ lengthy preamble, to address potential procedural challenges by responding to public comments and by providing justifications for the regulations, particularly in light of recent challenges to other regulations under the Administrative Procedure Act. It remains to be seen how the new 385 rules will affect businesses in practice, and how the IRS intends to apply them, consistent with its statutory mandate.




read more

IRS and Treasury Release Update to 2016-2017 Priority Guidance Plan

The US Department of the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issue Priority Guidance Plans each year to identify and prioritize the tax issues they believe should be addressed through regulations, revenue rulings, revenue procedures, notices and other published administrative guidance.  On October 31, 2016, the IRS and Treasury released the first quarter update to the 2016-2017 Priority Guidance Plan originally released on August 15, 2016.

The original plan identified 281 guidance projects as priorities, and the first quarter update includes an additional six guidance projects.  The additional projects include:

  • Guidance regarding the removal of the no-rule positions for certain legal issues concerning device and business purpose under section 355 (PUBLISHED 09/12/16 in IRB 2016-37 as REV. PROC. 2016-45 (RELEASED 08/26/16)).
  • Revenue procedure providing a self-certification procedure for waivers of the 60-day rollover requirement under §§402(c)(3) and 408(d)(3) (PUBLISHED 09/12/16 in IRB 2016-37 as REV. PROC. 2016-47 (RELEASED 08/24/16)).
  • Announcement on hardship distributions and loans from retirement plans as a result of Louisiana storms (PUBLISHED 09/12/16 in IRB 2016-37 as ANN. 2016-30 (RELEASED 08/30/16)).
  • Announcement concerning the tax treatment of payments made on behalf of or reimbursements received by residents affected by the Southern California Gas Company natural gas leak (PUBLISHED 08/01/16 in IRB 2016-31 as ANN. 2016-25 (RELEASED 07/19/16)).
  • Guidance for income and employment tax purposes on the treatment of cash payments made by employers under leave-based donation programs for the relief of victims of the Louisiana storms (PUBLISHED 10/03/16 in IRB 2016-40 as NOT. 2016-55 (RELEASED 09/16/16); and
  • Guidance under §909 related to foreign-initiated adjustments and the separation of foreign taxes and related income (PUBLISHED 10/03/16 in IRB 2016-40 as NOT. 2016-52 (RELEASED 09/15/16)).



read more

STAY CONNECTED

TOPICS

ARCHIVES

jd supra readers choice top firm 2023 badge