Browse Articles:   By Category   /   By Author
HIDE

Other Publications

Insights

Publications

Unravelling of the Matryoshka Doll – Impact of the C.T.A. on entities having nexus to the U.S.

/
Unravelling of the Matryoshka Doll – Impact of the C.T.A. on entities having nexus to the U.S.

Aimed at curbing money laundering, terrorism financing, and other nefarious activity, Congress enacted the Corporate Transparency Act (“C.T.A.”) on January 1, 2021. However, the C.T.A. became fully effective from January 1, 2024. It now requires certain domestic and foreign entities to disclose to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”), a division of the U.S. Treasury Department, the identity of their beneficial owners and control persons. A failure to do so can attract heavy penalties. The targets of the C.T.A. are much like Matryoshka dolls, having many layers between what appears on the surface and what exists at the heart. Neha Rastogi and Stanley C. Ruchelman guide the reader through the in’s and out’s of what is likely the most invasive legislation enacted by Congress.

Read More

Did You Just Manifest the Opposite of What You Wanted - (IN)Ability to Use G.I.L.T.I. Losses to Offset Gain

/

Forward-looking tax planning for U.S. taxpayers and their foreign subsidiaries was never an easy task. Since the adoption of the G.I.L.T.I. regime, domestic tax plans must be adjusted when applied to a cross border scenario. In their article, Stanley C. Ruchelman and Neha Rastogi examine a straightforward merger of related corporations, each operating at a loss, followed by a significant gain from the sale of an operating asset. What is a statutory merger when two companies are based outside the U.S.? What information must be reported on a U.S. Shareholder’s U.S. income tax return? What forms are used to report the information? Do the G.I.L.T.I. rules make operating losses of a C.F.C. useless to a U.S. Shareholder when a C.F.C. sells operating assets at a sizable gain? These and other issues are explored by the authors.

Read More

Too Bad To Be True – Code §§267A and 894(c) Signal the End for Cross Border Hybrids

/
Too Bad To Be True – Code §§267A and 894(c) Signal the End for Cross Border Hybrids

If you are a tax professional, you know your client is in a pickle if a provision under U.S. tax law disallows a deduction for the payor of an expense and another provision subjects the corresponding income of a foreign counterparty to U.S. tax, notwithstanding its residence in a treaty partner jurisdiction. That is the predicament that is faced when Code §§267A and 894(c) apply to outbound payments of deductible items to hybrid entities. In their article, Stanley C. Ruchelman and Neha Rastogi explain the death knell of what had been a common planning technique for U.S. tax advisers. They point out that, in certain circumstances involving payments to a reverse hybrid entity, relief might be provided by resort to competent authority proceedings.

Read More

Late Filed Form 3520 – What Penalties to Expect and How to Respond

/
Late Filed Form 3520 – What Penalties to Expect and How to Respond

When a U.S. person is faced with an asserted penalty for late filing of Form 3520 reporting the receipt of a foreign gift or bequest, the process to have the penalty abated is long and winding. Neha Rastogi and Stanley C. Ruchelman explain all the steps and suggest a strategy for supporting the taxpayer’s contention that reasonable cause exists for the compliance shortfall. In many areas of the tax law, less is more. The authors point out that as much favorable information as possible must be given to the Appeals Officer in order to demonstrate that the shortfall in compliance was not the result of negligence or disregard of the rules by the taxpayer.

Read More

The Economic Substance Doctrine: A U.S. Anti-Abuse Rule→

/

Re-printed as part of LexisNexis’s Practical Guidance product on April 26, 2022.

Read More

The More You Know, The More You Don't Know – U.S. Tax Issues on a Disposition of a Foreign Business

/
The More You Know, The More You Don't Know – U.S. Tax Issues on a Disposition of a Foreign Business

When a U.S. person disposes of a business situated in a foreign country, the nature of the gain as capital or ordinary and the source of the gain may sound like simple issues that require simple tax advice. It may, however, turn out to be far more complex as one begins to review the relevant provisions of U.S. tax law in light of the facts and circumstances that exist. It is not uncommon for issues to pop up, one after the other and on a never-ending basis. In their article, Neha Rastogi and Stanley C. Ruchelman discuss the various U.S. Federal income tax issues that must be addressed by a U.S. seller in connection with a sale of a business as a going concern held indirectly through an entity that is treated as a disregarded entity for U.S. tax purposes. Mind-blowing complexity is not an overstatement.

Read More

Rescission – Undoing a Transaction That Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time

/
Rescission – Undoing a Transaction That Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time

How many times have we watched a movie, read a book, or listened to a colleague talk about an action that appeared to be a no-risk proposition, only to turn into a nightmare? At some point, the general lament is uttered: “It seemed like a good idea at the time, but . . .” Tax plans can be like that, too. A company identifies an acquisition target, proposes a merger with a supplier, or considers an internal restructure. Teams of lawyers, accountants, and operations personnel perform appropriate due diligence. The deal closes. At some point, blemishes, problems, errors float to the surface. The same lament is uttered: “It seemed like a good idea at the time, but . . .” While the laments are the same, the suffering for a tax planning mistake need not linger forever. If the parties to a transaction act quickly, the doctrine of rescission may apply, allowing the parties to treat the event as if it never occurred. Stanley C. Ruchelman and Neha Rastogi explain the early cases and discuss a published ruling and several private letter rulings in which the principal concern of the I.R.S. is that the transaction and its rescission occur in the same taxable year.

Read More

Taxation in India and the U.S.: Stages in the Life of a U.S. Owned Indian Company

/
Taxation in India and the U.S.: Stages in the Life of a U.S. Owned Indian Company

When a U.S. corporation expands its operations to India and forms an Indian subsidiary, tax issues need to be addressed in both countries at various points in time – when the investment is first made, as profits are generated, as funds are repatriated, and when the investment is sold. In their comprehensive article, Sanjay Sanghvi, a partner of Khaitan & Co., Mumbai, Raghav Jumar Baja, a principal associate of Khaitan & Co., Mumbai, Stanley C. Ruchelman and Neha Rastogi explain all facets of tax planning in both countries at each stage of the investment and do so in an integrated way.

Read More

The 15 Most Important Questions That Should Be Asked When Estate Planning for a Foreign Parent with U.S. Children

/
The 15 Most Important Questions That Should Be Asked When Estate Planning for a Foreign Parent with U.S. Children

· U.S. estate tax planning is said to be among the most complicated aspect of tax planning because of the numerous moving parts and the changing needs and objectives of the family. The exercise becomes complicated when the client is not a U.S. person, but the heirs live in the U.S. and have started families in the U.S. For an estate planner with a focus on domestic clients, the customary tools may not work. It is easy to know what you know, but not always easy to know what you don’t know. Neha Rastogi and Stanley C. Ruchelman ask and answer 15 questions that highlight the favorable and unfavorable provisions of U.S. tax law affecting nonresident, non-citizen individuals having U.S. persons as heirs.

Read More

With Great Power (Control) Comes Great Responsibility – Form 5471 Category 4 Filer

/
With Great Power (Control) Comes Great Responsibility – Form 5471 Category 4 Filer

Like Spiderman, it is imperative that controlling shareholders of foreign corporations must recognize that if they have the power to control a foreign corporation, they face a greater responsibility when filing Form 5471, the reporting form for ≥10% shareholders. Neha Rastogi and Galia Antebi take a deep dive into the reporting obligations of a Category 4 Filer. Must read for those U.S. persons that reside outside the U.S. and operate through owner managed businesses.

Read More

Final G.I.L.T.I. High-Tax Regulations and the Tested Unit: Would a Rose by Any Other Name Smell as Sweet?

/
Final G.I.L.T.I. High-Tax Regulations and the Tested Unit: Would a Rose by Any Other Name Smell as Sweet?

A precursor to a global minimum tax for multinational enterprises, the G.I.L.T.I. rules under Subpart F ensure that tax is imposed on cross-border income. The tax rate on G.I.L.T.I. reported by U.S. corporations is relatively low, currently 10.5% and a foreign tax credit is allowed for 80% of the foreign taxes imposed on tested income taxed under the G.I.L.T.I. provisions. In the summer, the I.R.S. issued proposed and final regulations allowing taxpayers to avoid the tax by claiming an exclusion for highly taxed income of tested units. Are the regulations a true benefit or is the benefit illusory? Andreas Apostolides and Neha Rastogi explain all.

Read More

Heads I Win, Tails You (I.R.S.) Lose – Not Any More: Hybrid Dividends And Code §245A(e)

/
Heads I Win, Tails You (I.R.S.) Lose – Not Any More: Hybrid Dividends And Code §245A(e)

With the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, much hoopla was made regarding the adoption of a territorial tax system in the U.S. What was not appreciated at the time was that so many anti-abuse rules were adopted in conjunction with the adoption of the G.I.L.T.I. rules, that the foreign D.R.D. is less of a lion and more like a hamster for most cross-border businesses based in the U.S. Neha Rastogi and Nina Krauthamer explore all the nuances and exceptions that make global tax planning under prior law an ever fonder memory.

Read More

Variety Is the Spice of Life: Alternate Tax Structures for a U.S. Individual Disposing of Foreign Real Property

/
Variety Is the Spice of Life: Alternate Tax Structures for a U.S. Individual Disposing of Foreign Real Property

When U.S. individuals acquire personal use real property or fallow land located abroad, the property often is owned by a corporation.  Typically, that decision is driven by local considerations, of one kind or another.  However, corporate ownership poses income tax issues in the U.S. at the time the property or the shares are sold.  Neha Rastogi, Nina Krauthamer, and Stanley C. Ruchelman explore various ways by which a sale can be effected and the U.S. tax considerations that result.  The answers may not be what the client expects to hear, especially if the sale transaction is cast as a sale of real property by a foreign corporation.

Read More

Same Same, But Different: Taxing a Sale of Indian Stock by a U.S. Person

/
Same Same, But Different: Taxing a Sale of Indian Stock by a U.S. Person

While tax rules generally appear to be similar in India and the U.S., several divergent provisions in the domestic law of each country produce adverse consequences for those who are not well-advised. The prime example involves the taxation of gains from the sale of shares of an Indian company by a U.S. person: India sources the gain based on the residence of the target while the U.S. sources the gain based on the residence of the seller. No relief from double taxation is provided, notwithstanding the capital gains and relief from double taxation articles in the U.S.-India income tax treaty. The result is tax that can be as high as 43.8% of the gain. Rahul Jain and Sanjay Sanghvi of Khaitan & Co., Mumbai, India, along with Neha Rastogi and Stanley C. Ruchelman explain the problem and, more importantly, suggest a path forward for U.S. individuals realizing sizable gains.

Read More

Domestic Partnerships Treated as Entities and Aggregates: New Approach for G.I.L.T.I. and Subpart F

/
Domestic Partnerships Treated as Entities and Aggregates: New Approach for G.I.L.T.I. and Subpart F

The effects of the 2017 U.S. tax reform continue to be encountered in unexpected ways. Two prime examples are the final and proposed G.I.L.T.I. regulations issued by the I.R.S. earlier this year. These 2019 regulations attempt to bring order out of the chaos created by proposed G.I.L.T.I. regulations released in September 2018. In their article, Neha Rastogi and Stanley C. Ruchelman look at how the rules treat a domestic partnership and its partners when determining who is – and who is not – a U.S. shareholder of a controlled foreign corporation. The answer affects the application of the G.I.L.T.I., Subpart F, and P.F.I.C. rules. For those who follow the debate over whether a partnership is an aggregate of the partners or an entity that is separate from the partners, chalk up a victory for the proponents of the aggregate approach.

Read More

Preferred Yet Neglected — A Plea for Guidance on Redemptions of C.F.C. Preferred Stock in the Wake of U.S. Tax Reform

/
Preferred Yet Neglected — A Plea for Guidance on Redemptions of C.F.C. Preferred Stock in the Wake of U.S. Tax Reform

Most tax advisers in the U.S. view Code §1248 as a supporting part of U.S. C.F.C. rules. Under the provision, capital gain derived by a 10% shareholder of a C.F.C. from the sale or disposition of shares of the C.F.C. may be converted into dividend income to the extent of some or all of the accumulated earnings of the C.F.C. Prior to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, Code §1248 applied to all 10% U.S. Shareholders of a C.F.C. However, that is no longer the case. Whether the delinking was intentional is not clear. What is clear is that some U.S. Shareholders are not subject to Code §1248, and the tax consequences may be sub-optimal for the U.S. Shareholder. Neha Rastogi, Andreas A. Apostolides, and Stanley C. Ruchelman explain the pitfalls that may occur.

Read More

Is the 100% Dividend Received Deduction Under Code §245A About as Useful as a Chocolate Teapot?

/
Is the 100% Dividend Received Deduction Under Code §245A About as Useful as a Chocolate Teapot?

Remember when Code §1248 was intended to right an economic wrong by converting low-taxed capital gain to highly-taxed dividend income? (If you do, you probably remember the maximum tax on earned income (50% rather than 70%) and income averaging over three years designed to eliminate the effect of spiked income in a particular year.) Tax law has changed, and dividend income no longer is taxed at high rates. Indeed, for C-corporations receiving foreign-source dividends from certain 10%-owned corporations, there is no tax whatsoever. This is a much better tax result than that extended to capital gains, which are taxed at 21% for corporations. Neha Rastogi and Stanley C. Ruchelman evaluate whether the conversion of capital gains into dividend income produces a meaningful benefit in many instances, given the likelihood of prior taxation under Subpart F or G.I.L.T.I. rules for the U.S. parent of a multinational group. Hence the question, is the conversion of taxable capital gains into dividend income under Code §1248 a real benefit, or is it simply a glistening

Read More

Peeling the Onion to Allocate Subpart F Income – This Will Make You Cry!

/
Peeling the Onion to Allocate Subpart F Income – This Will Make You Cry!

When Congress expanded the definition of a “U.S. Shareholder” in the T.C.J.A. by requiring the measurement of value as an alternative to voting power, it opened a Pandora’s box of issues.  First, more U.S. Persons became U.S. Shareholders.  Second, it imposed a difficult task for shareholders and corporations to measure relative value of all classes of shares and all holdings of shareholders.  Finally, many plans based on the existence of direct or direct or indirect dividend rights of foreign shareholders were shut down. Proposed regulations will modify the way Subpart F Income is allocated to various classes of shares having discretionary dividend rights. Neha Rastogi and Stanley C. Ruchelman explain the broadened scope of income inclusions under Subpart F.

Read More

It’s Time for Cayman Shell Entities to Come Out of Their Shells and Show Economic Substance

/
It’s Time for Cayman Shell Entities to Come Out of Their Shells and Show Economic Substance

·       It is said that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  The same can be said about economic substance.  In a step to adopt a standardized definition in the context of business arrangements that are typical for Cayman Islands companies, the country enacted the International Tax Cooperation (Economic Substance) Law, 2018 (“E.S. Law”) on December 27, 2018, and issued supplemental guidance on February 22, 2019.  Neha Rastogi and Galia Antebi address relevant aspects of the new rules, including (i) entities that fall within the ambit of the E.S. Law, (ii) entities that are exempt, (iii) identified business activities under the E.S. Law, and (iv) steps that may be taken to meet the economic substance test.

Read More

More Permanent Establishments: The Dwindling Preparatory and Auxiliary Activities Exception

/
More Permanent Establishments: The Dwindling Preparatory and Auxiliary Activities Exception

Nothing is certain in this world, except death and taxes – and even taxes are subject to change.  The ever-expanding definition of a permanent establishment (“P.E.”) and ever diminishing exceptions to a P.E. under the O.E.C.D.’s B.E.P.S. Project has made one thing clear – the restrictions local jurisdictions put on activities by foreign taxpayers to trigger taxation are tightening.  The dwindling preparatory and auxiliary activities exception is a prime example.  Neha Rastogi and Beate Erwin explain.

Read More