Members of Ruchelman P.L.L.C. contribute to publications throughout the world and the Firm’s monthly tax journal, Insights.
B.E.P.S. Action 13 addresses country-by-country reporting among tax authorities as a means of ferreting out mismatches between functions and profits. Now, CbC reporting is morphing in Europe to a public disclosure tool to bring N.G.O.’s into the process. Your tax savings through planning becomes a global problem for the N.G.O.’s to redress through public outcry. Michael Peggs and Kenneth Lobo tell all.
Read MorePublished in GGi FYI International News No. 4, Spring 2016 (p.12).
Read MoreIn the March 2016 edition of Insights, Kenneth Lobo, Sheryl Shah, and Beate Erwin look at the following recent developments: (i) an A.B.A. recommendation for higher Cuban compensation for seized U.S. businesses, (ii) U.S. inversions and European State Aid investigations targeting U.S. companies, (iii) an increase in the stakes faced by Coca Cola in its transfer pricing dispute with the I.R.S., and (iv) the U.K. reaction to the Google Settlement tax payment.
Read MoreOn February 17, 2016, the Treasury Department released its 2016 Model Treaty. The model serves as the baseline from which the U.S. initiates treaty negotiations. Various provisions are discussed in detail in this month’s Insights.
Taking a cue from the U.S.-Canada Income Tax Treaty, the 2016 Model Treaty provides for mandatory arbitration as part of the article on Mutual Agreement Procedure. I.R.S. statistics indicate that under the Canadian treaty 80% of cases were resolved by the competent authorities in lieu of risking an adverse decision through arbitration. Kenneth Lobo explains the revised provision and places it in context.
Read MoreBeate Erwin, Kenneth Lobo, and Stanley C. Ruchelman explain how the branch rule works when a C.F.C. operates a manufacturing or selling branch in another country. While the concept is easy to explain, the computations are somewhat confusing. The article explains all.
Read MoreThis month, Insights discusses recent events including a Beanie Baby billionaire’s light sentence; a tax reform report by the European Parliament addressing tax rulings, a common consolidated corporate tax base, a crackdown on tax havens, whistle-blower protection, public access to country-by-country (CbC) reports, and a lower threshold to approve E.U. tax legislation; a House Ways and Means Committee action in regard to B.E.P.S., E.U. investigations on State Aid, patent box regimes, and inversions; identity theft risk in I.R.S. proposed regulations regarding charitable deductions; and allowance of accounting non-conformity for foreign-based groups that do not adopt L.I.F.O. accounting when that method is adopted by a U.S. member.
Read MoreThe latest step in inversion controversy involving U.S. publicly traded corporations is the upcoming merger between pharmaceutical giants, Pfizer and Allergan, in a stock transaction estimated to be worth $160 billion. Kenneth Lobo and Stanley C. Ruchelman look at recent I.R.S. countermeasures attacking cross-border mergers that the I.R.S. views as inversions. Among other measures, rules are announced to limit planning alternatives using check-the-box entities to stuff assets into an acquirer without exposing those assets to tax in the jurisdiction of residence of the acquirer and use of parent-company stock as the consideration for the acquisition.
Read MorePublished in Taxes & Wealth Management by Thomson Reuters, Issue 8-4: November 2015.
Read MoreFor many tax advisers, it is fashionable to complain about the O.E.C.D.’s B.E.P.S. project because it imposes an unrealistic standard of behavior on multinational groups. Then, along comes a case such as Russian Recovery Fund, Ltd. v. U.S. and one understands the problem of real base erosion. The case involved a distressed asset/debt (D.A.D.) transaction. Here, hubris and greed in the financial services sector team up to make the O.E.C.D. look good.
Read MorePublished in International Taxation, Volume 13, Issue 3: September 2015.
Read MoreThe I.R.S. recently released temporary and proposed regulations to limit the use of foreign partnerships to avoid income inclusions under Code §956. The Temporary Regulations are more limited in their scope while the Proposed Regulations are quite broad. If finalized in the current form, the Proposed Regulations would cause most C.F.C. loans to partnerships with related U.S. partners to be investments in U.S. property.
Read MorePublished in Taxsutra: September 2015.
Read MorePublished in Taxsustra: September 2015.
Read MoreFavorable long-term capital gains tax treatment for managers of hedge funds has been under attack by the Obama Administration. While the industry defended itself from outright changes to favorable tax treatment, the I.R.S. recently proposed to disallow favorable treatment where a manager’s right to payments bears no entrepreneurial risk. Nina Krauthamer, Philip R. Hirschfeld, and Kenneth Lobo explain.
Read MoreA “cascading tax” is a tax that is enforced more than once on the income from the same transaction or related transactions. A common example involves a back to back license in which:
First published by the Canadian Tax Foundation in (2015) 23:6 Canadian Tax Highlights.
Read MoreFollowing our previous articles regarding pre-immigration planning and the expatriation rules applicable to covered expatriates (see here and here), this article considers some techniques for implementation before and after expatriation, with the objective to reduce the adverse treatment of the covered expatriate regime to the extent possible depending on the specific facts and circumstances of each individual.
For a Green Card holder, expatriating prior to becoming a long-term resident would eliminate the application of the covered expatriate regime. For a U.S. citizen (other than children under certain situations), the circumstances that will allow for a tax-free expatriation are more restrictive. An individual is considered a covered expatriate if he or she meets one of three tests. Pre-expatriation planning can eliminate the application of the covered expatriate regime for some individuals, while for others additional planning may be needed to reduce the unfavorable effect of the covered expatriate rules.
Published by GGi in International Taxation News, No. 3: Spring 2015.
Read MoreContinuing on from our previous article concerning pre-immigration planning, this article will explain the tax rules by which an individual seeking to renounce his or her U.S. citizenship or green card status may be affected.
To relinquish U.S. citizenship or a green card, a formal act of relinquishment is required. Therefore, a green card holder who moves outside the U.S. will continue to be treated as a U.S. resident for tax purposes until he or she formally relinquishes green card status or it is rescinded by the government. A U.S. citizen residing outside the U.S. will have to formally relinquish his or her citizenship in order to be removed from the U.S. tax system. As a general rule, termination of U.S. residency becomes effective on the last day of the calendar year in which the status was relinquished. However, under certain circumstances, termination may be effective midyear.
Upon expatriation, should an individual be considered a “covered expatriate,” he or she may be subject to an exit tax, and following expatriation, any gifts and bequests made by such an individual may be subject to a succession tax in the case of U.S.-resident recipients.
For planning purposes, U.S. citizens wishing to relinquish their citizenship should determine if they are covered expatriates prior to undertaking any such action. Green card holders wishing to relinquish green card status must first determine if they are treated as long-term residents. If so treated, green card holders should determine if they are covered expatriates under the same tests applicable to U.S. citizens.
By Stanley C. Ruchelman and Kenneth Lobo
This month, our team delves into the Joint Committee Report addressing international tax reform in a series of articles.The report discovers that a better tax result is obtained when income is booked in low tax countries. Stanley C. Ruchelman and Kenneth Lobo explain. See more →
