HIDE

Other Publications

Insights

Publications

The Responsible Party – Changes Effective May 2019

The Responsible Party – Changes Effective May 2019

The U.S. Taxpayer Identification Number used by entities is the Employer Identification Number (“E.I.N.”).  To apply for an E.I.N., the entity must identify the “responsible party” who ultimately owns or controls the entity or who exercises ultimate effective control over the entity – in other words, the person who controls, manages, or directs the entity and the disposition of its funds and assets.  In March, the I.R.S. announced that, beginning on May 13, 2019, only individuals with a U.S. Taxpayer Identification Number will be allowed to request an E.I.N.  Moreover, the responsible party must be a natural person – not an entity – unless the applicant is a government entity.  This change will affect many foreign companies entering the U.S. market after the effective date.  Galia Antebi and Nina Krauthamer explain all and speculate on whether revisions to the new procedure should be anticipated.

Read More

Insights Vol. 5 No. 1: Updates & Tidbits

Insights Vol. 5 No. 1: Updates & Tidbits

This month, Neha Rastogi and Nina Krauthamer look briefly at three recent developments in international tax: (i) expired I.T.I.N.’s and how tax returns that use an expired I.T.I.N. will be treated by the I.R.S., (ii) the E.U. blacklist of uncooperative jurisdictions, which includes American Samoa and Guam, and (iii) and unanticipated tax demands on contributions to the Brexit campaign.

Read More

Insights Vol. 4 No. 6: Updates and Tidbits

This month, Beate Erwin, Astrid Champion, and Nina Krauthamer look briefly at several timely issues, including (i) the return of foreign certified acceptance agents to the passport certification process in connection with the issuance of U.S. I.T.I.N.’s, (ii) the effect of the French election on French tax reform proposals, and (iii) demands for the U.S. to provide the same type of information as is supplied to I.G.A. partner countries.

Read More

Insights Vol. 4 No. 1: Updates & Other Tidbits

This month, we look briefly at several timely issues, including (i) the termination of foreign acceptance agent agreements used to confirm copies of passports outside the U.S. when a non-U.S. individual obtains an I.T.I.N., (ii) a court order in Canada upholding a demand for disclosure of client names and documentation relating to participation in a discredited tax shelter, (iii) E.U. steps that identify potentially blacklisted low-tax or no-tax countries, and (iv) worsening relations between the U.S. and the E.U. stemming from widening differences in tax policies.

Read More

Insights Vol. 3 No. 7: Updates & Other Tidbits

This month, “Tidbits” explores the following developments: (i) the extension of FinCEN reporting requirements by title companies involved in all-cash real estate transactions; (ii) a European Commission decision calling for Spain to recover over €30 million from seven Spanish soccer clubs that unlawfully received State Aid; (iii) other tax breaks involving Spain that are under consideration by the E.C.J. that could affect State Aid cases against U.S.-based companies; and (iv) new rules regarding the need to refresh I.T.I.N.’s issued to nonresident, non-citizen individuals.  Kenneth Lobo, Fanny Karaman, and Galia Antebi discuss these developments.

Read More

P.A.T.H. Act Leads to Widespread Tax Changes

Everyone likes Christmas presents and the P.A.T.H. Act delivers. It provides favorable tax treatment in the form of (i) F.I.R.P.T.A. exemptions for foreign pensions funds, (ii) increased ownership thresholds before F.I.R.P.T.A. tax is imposed on C.I.V. investment in R.E.I.T.’s, (iii) increased ownership thresholds before F.I.R.P.T.A. tax is imposed on foreign investment in domestically-controlled R.E.I.T.’s, (iv) a reduction in the time that must elapse in order to avoid corporate level tax on built-in gain when an S-election is made by a corporation after the close of the year of its formation, and (v) a permanent exemption from Subpart F income for active financing income of C.F.C.’s.

However, not all taxpayers benefitted from the Act. The P.A.T.H. Act increases F.I.R.P.T.A. withholding tax to 15%, adopts new partnership tax examination rules, and tightens rules regarding I.T.I.N.’s. Elizabeth V. Zanet, Christine Long, Rusudan Shervashidze, and Philip R. Hirschfeld explain these and certain other legislative changes.

Read More

Insights Vol. 1 No. 8: Updates & Other Tidbits

Read Publication

U.K. WINDFALL WINDING DOWN

After an arduous path through the courts regarding the creditability of the U.K. windfall tax, the Third Circuit followed the holding of the U.S. Supreme Court and found the tax to be creditable in a case involve PPL Corp.

The U.S. and foreign countries can tax foreign-sourced income of U.S. taxpayers. To lessen the economic cost of double taxation, U.S. taxpayers are allowed to deduct or credit foreign taxes in computing income or net tax due. The amount of the U.S. income tax that can be offset by a credit cannot exceed the proportion attributable to net foreign source income. Code §901(b) specifies that a foreign credit is allowed only if the nature of the foreign tax is similar to the U.S. income tax and is imposed on net gain.

The U.S. entity PPL is a global energy company producing, selling, and delivering electricity through its subsidiaries. South Western Electricity PLC (“SWEB”), a U.K. private limited company, was an indirect subsidiary that was liable for windfall tax in the U.K. Windfall tax is a 23% tax on the gain from a company’s public offering value when the company was previously owned by the U.K. government. When SWEB paid its windfall liability, PPL claimed a Code §901 foreign tax credit. This was denied by the I.R.S. and the long and winding litigation commenced.

Initially, the Tax Court found the windfall tax to be of the same character as the U.S. income tax. The decision was reversed by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that the tax was neither an income tax, nor a war profits tax, nor an excess profits tax. It took into consideration in determining the tax base an amount greater than gross receipts. Then, the Supreme Court reversed, finding that the predominant character of the windfall tax is an excess profits tax based on net income. Therefore, it was creditable. In August, the Third Circuit followed the Supreme Court’s decision and ordered that the original decision in the Tax Court should be affirmed.