Browse Articles:   By Category   /   By Author
HIDE

Other Publications

Insights

Publications

Impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act on U.S. Investors in Foreign Corporations

/
Impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act on U.S. Investors in Foreign Corporations

International tax planning in the U.S. has been turned on its head by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“T.C.J.A.”).  This article looks at (i) the new dividends received deduction that eliminates U.S. tax on the receipt of direct investment dividends paid by a 10%-owned foreign corporation to a U.S. corporation, (ii) the repatriation of post-1986 net accumulated earnings of 10%-owned foreign corporations by U.S. persons and the accompanying deferred tax rules, (iii) changes to Code §367(a) that eliminate an exemption from tax on outbound transfers of assets that will be used in the active conduct of a foreign trade or business, and (iv) a broadening of the scope of Subpart F income by reason of a change to certain definitions.  Rusudan Shervashidze and Stanley C. Ruchelman address and comment on these revisions.

Read More

A New Tax Regime for C.F.C.’s: Who Is G.I.L.T.I.?

/
A New Tax Regime for C.F.C.’s: Who Is G.I.L.T.I.?

The T.C.J.A. introduces a new minimum tax regime applicable to controlled foreign corporations (“C.F.C.’s”).  It also provides tax benefits for incomefrom “intangibles” used to exploit foreign markets.  The former is known as G.I.L.T.I. and the latter is known as F.D.I.I.  Together, G.I.L.T.I. and F.D.I.I. change the dynamics of cross-border taxation and can be seen as an incentive to supply foreign markets with goods and services produced in the U.S.  Both provisions reflect a view that only two value drivers exist in business: (i) hard assets (such as property, plant, and equipment) and (ii) intangible property.  In a detailed set of Q&A’s, Elizabeth V. Zanet and Stanley C. Ruchelman look at the ins and outs of the new provisions.

Read More

Anti-Inversion Rules Are Not Just for Mega-Mergers – Private Client Advisors Take Note

/
Anti-Inversion Rules Are Not Just for Mega-Mergers – Private Client Advisors Take Note

The U.S. has rules that attack inversion transactions, wherein U.S.-based multinationals effectively move tax residence to low-tax jurisdictions.  If successful, these moves allow for tax-free repatriation of offshore profits to the inverted parent company based outside the U.S.  However, the scope of the anti-inversion rules is broad and can also affect non-citizen, nonresident individuals who directly own shares of private U.S. corporations.  Attempts to place those shares under a foreign holding company as an estate planning tool may find that the exercise is all for naught once the anti-inversion rules are applied.  Elizabeth V. Zanet, Galia Antebi, and Stanley C. Ruchelman discuss the hidden reach of the anti-inversion rules to private structures.

Read More

Treasury Turns Back the Clock on 2016 Tax Regulations

/
Treasury Turns Back the Clock on 2016 Tax Regulations

On October 4, the “other shoe dropped” on eight regulations issued by the Obama administration in 2016 and January 2017.  These eight measures, which were first identified in an interim report to the president as unnecessary, unduly complex, excessively burdensome, or failing to provide clarity and useful guidance, will be withdrawn, revoked, or modified.  Stanley C. Ruchelman, Sheryl Shah, and Neha Rastogi identify the targets and explain the plans of the Treasury Department.

Read More

When Does an Aged Account Receivable Give Rise to a Deemed Repatriation?

/
When Does an Aged Account Receivable Give Rise to a Deemed Repatriation?

One form of taxation under Subpart F is an “investment in U.S. Property.”  The law treats the investment as a form of taxable repatriation of earnings.  Under certain circumstances, aged accounts receivable may be seen as a form of taxable investment in U.S. property.  Most U.S. tax advisers look to a 60-day rule under which the account receivable is treated as a loan if not settled by the last day of the second month following a sale.  However, that is a safe harbor.  I.R.S. private letter rulings and Tax Court cases have addressed fact patterns in which the account receivable remains open for a much longer time.  Some taxpayers win and others lose.  Elizabeth V. Zanet and Stanley C. Ruchelman explain.

Read More

O.E.C.D. Receives Public Comments on Proposed Changes to the Model Tax Convention

/
O.E.C.D. Receives Public Comments on Proposed Changes to the Model Tax Convention

In August, the O.E.C.D. released public comments on proposed changes to the Model Tax Convention.  Beate Erwin and Stanley C. Ruchelman examines the suggestions received by the O.E.C.D. and provides observations on the interplay between the O.E.C.D. proposed changes and existing U.S. approaches to these issues.  Areas covered include whether competent authority agreements can define undefined terms thereby removing the interpretation from local courts, whether a limitation on benefits (“L.O.B.”) clause or a principle purpose test (“P.P.T.”) is the better approach to limit treaty shopping, and whether a home that is leased to others can be a permanent home for purposes of applying the residence tiebreaker provision in a treaty. 

Read More

The Changing Face of Service Permanent Establishments

/
The Changing Face of Service Permanent Establishments

As governments struggle to adapt the old rules of taxable presence within a jurisdiction to economic activities in the digital age, new concepts have been asserted to impose tax on foreign service providers who are based abroad but regularly furnish services within a country.  India is among the global leaders rejecting physical presence in favor of location of the customer.  Neha Rastogi and Stanley C. Ruchelman look at the concept of destination based taxation and a recent case, where an Indian Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that the physical presence of the foreign taxpayer’s employees is not relevant for determining the existence of a Service P.E. in the source country.

Read More

Tax 101: Taxation of Intellectual Property—Selected Tax Issues Involving Corporations and Partnerships→

/

Published in The Licensing Journal vol. 37, no. 9 (October 2017): pp. 11-18.

Read More

O.E.C.D. Issues Proposed Changes to Permanent Establishment Provisions Under Model Tax Convention

/
O.E.C.D. Issues Proposed Changes to Permanent Establishment Provisions Under Model Tax Convention

Earlier this year, the O.E.C.D. proposed amendments to Article 5 (Permanent Establishment) of the Model Tax Convention and Commentary.  The revisions eliminate loopholes that exist for commissionaire arrangements, artificial characterization of core activities as “preparatory,” avoidance of permanent establishment status through artificial fragmentation of contracts, and the use of not-so-independent agents.  Neha Rastogi, Beate Erwin, and Stanley C. Ruchelman explain the replacement provisions.

Read More

Tax 101: Deemed Annual Royalty on Outbound Transfers of I.P. to Foreign Corporations

/
Tax 101: Deemed Annual Royalty on Outbound Transfers of I.P. to Foreign Corporations

U.S. tax law contains provisions that attempt to discourage the outbound migration of intangible assets including specific rules that target transfers affected through corporate inversions.  Elizabeth V. Zanet and Stanley C. Ruchelman discuss the history and current standing of those provisions, while pointing out an alternative that is currently available to limit ongoing tax liability in the context of a start-up operation.

Read More

Tax Roulette: Buying a Business Jet in 2017 – Why Following the Patriot’s Example May Lead to a Jackpot

/
Tax Roulette: Buying a Business Jet in 2017 – Why Following the Patriot’s Example May Lead to a Jackpot

The New England Patriots recently made headlines with the purchase of two private team jets.  Was this plan implemented only to provide more space for beefy footballers, or did ownership identify the nifty situation that could lead to a jackpot of tax savings for high-ticket assets purchased in 2017?  Beate Erwin and Stanley C. Ruchelman explain that with increased depreciation deductions this year at high tax rates and possible recapture in a future year at low tax rates, the odds are good.

Read More

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

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

While the O.E.C.D. and the European Commission have only recently discovered the “principal purpose” test as a tool to combat aggressive tax planning, U.S. case law has enforced an economic substance rule for over 85 years and that rule was codified in 2010.  Fanny Karaman, Neha Rastogi, and Stanley C. Ruchelman explain the hurdles that must be achieved in order for a plan to have economic substance.

Read More

Tax 101: Taxation of Intellectual Property – Selected Issues Involving Corporations and Partnerships

/
Tax 101: Taxation of Intellectual Property – Selected Issues Involving Corporations and Partnerships

Tax 101 continues its series regarding the U.S. Federal tax considerations involving the creation, acquisition, use, license, and disposition of intellectual property (“I.P.”).  This month, Elizabeth V. Zanet and Stanley C. Ruchelman focus on I.P. held through a corporation or a partnership/L.L.C.  In particular, the not-well-understood rules regarding the sale of interests in a partnerships/L.L.C.’s owning “hot assets” are explained.  Not all gain benefits from favorable long-term capital gains tax rates.

Read More

European Commission Proposes New Advisor Disclosure Obligation for Aggressive Tax Planning

/
European Commission Proposes New Advisor Disclosure Obligation for Aggressive Tax Planning

In June, the European Commission proposed a set of rules calling on tax advisers to report aggressive tax plans submitted to clients.  The proposal identifies the hallmarks of aggressive plans and provides rules for the timing of reports and the exchange of information within Europe.  Fanny Karaman and Stanley C. Ruchelman explain.

Read More

I.R.S. Explains “Substantially Complete” in Relation to International Information Return

/
I.R.S. Explains “Substantially Complete” in Relation to International Information Return

Taxpayers having cross-border operations are confronted with numerous tax information forms to be filed as part of the annual tax return.  Because the forms are not directly used to compute taxable income, they frequently are completed at the last minute and with less attention to detail.  However, the I.R.S. imposes penalties for filing an incomplete form.  Taxpayers faced with asserted penalties often argue that the forms are substantially complete.  In a recent International Practice Unit (“I.P.U.”) issued by the Large Business & International Division of the I.R.S., the I.R.S. view regarding substantially complete form was explained.  Not surprisingly, the I.R.S. view is significantly different from taxpayer expectations.  It also differs from holdings in several Tax Court decisions involving other forms.  Neha Rastogi and Stanley C. Ruchelman discuss the I.P.U. in detail.

Read More

Sale of a Partnership Interest by a Foreign Partner – Is Rev. Rul. 91-32 Based on Law or Administrative Wishes?

/
Sale of a Partnership Interest by a Foreign Partner – Is Rev. Rul. 91-32 Based on Law or Administrative Wishes?

The I.R.S. has a long history in misapplying U.S. tax rules applicable to a sale of a partnership interest.  For U.S. tax purposes, a partnership interest is treated as an asset separate and apart from an indirect interest in partnership assets.  In Rev. Rul. 91-32, the I.R.S. misinterpreted case law and Code provisions to conclude that gains derived by foreign investors in U.S. partnerships are subject to tax.  No one thought the I.R.S. position was correct, but then, in a field advice to an agent setting up an adjustment, the I.R.S. publicly stated that the ruling was a proper application of U.S. law when issued and remains so today. The adjustment was challenged in the Tax Court, and the tax bar is eagerly awaiting a decision.  Stanley C. Ruchelman and Beate Erwin examine the I.R.S. position, the string of losses encountered by the I.R.S. when challenged by taxpayers, and the Grecian Magnesite case awaiting decision.

Read More

I.R.S. Information Exchanges & the Coordinated Tax Raids on Credit Suisse

/
I.R.S. Information Exchanges & the Coordinated Tax Raids on Credit Suisse

In April, coordinated tax raids targeted three separate offices Credit Suisse involved in tax fraud examinations by the Netherlands, France, Germany, the U.K., and Australia.  Was it merely a coincidence that these are countries with which the U.S. regularly cooperates in the exchange of tax information?  Rusudan Shervashidze and Stanley C. Ruchelman discuss the many avenues through which the I.R.S. furnishes and receives information.  One thing is clear: The I.R.S. had the means to transfer information to the relevant tax authorities.

Read More

Tax 101: Taxation of Intellectual Property – The Basics

/
Tax 101: Taxation of Intellectual Property – The Basics

This month, Tax 101 presents an overview of the basic U.S. Federal tax considerations of transactions that occur over the life cycle of intellectual property (“I.P.”) – from its creation to its acquisition, exploitation, and ultimate sale in a liquidity event.  The article address several important questions: Should expenditures be capitalized or deducted?  If capitalized, over what period is the expenditure amortized?  How are acquisitions of I.P. reported to the I.R.S. when an entire business is acquired?  What is the character of gain on sale?  When is a sale treated as a license?  And when is a license treated as a sale?  Elizabeth V. Zanet and Stanley C. Ruchelman explain.

Read More

LB&I Audit Insights: Using a Code §6038A Summons When a U.S. Corporation is 25% Foreign Owned

/
LB&I Audit Insights: Using a Code §6038A Summons When a U.S. Corporation is 25% Foreign Owned

Code §6038A provides that a U.S. corporation that is 25% or more foreign-owned must provide the I.R.S. with information on certain transactions with its 25% foreign owner and any other foreign related party.  The goal is to obtain access to documents that are helpful in determining the correctness of the U.S. tax return.  In an I.P.U., LB&I explains how it plans to obtain documents held outside the U.S.  This may include a requested exchange under a tax information exchange agreement or a summons served on a domestic agent appointed to receive a summons that is enforceable abroad.  Galia Antebi and Stanley C. Ruchelman explain the process that will be followed by the I.R.S.

Read More

How to Calculate Gain or Loss on Payables & Receivables Denominated in Nonfunctional Currency

/
How to Calculate Gain or Loss on Payables & Receivables Denominated in Nonfunctional Currency

If all currencies were pegged to one single standard and did not fluctuate in value among themselves, the concept of currency gain and loss would not be needed.  However, no universal standard exists and major currencies tend to fluctuate.  Consequently, a uniform method must be applied to identify the amount of a transaction when the conversion rate changes between a booking date and a payment date of a transaction denominated in a non-functional currency.  In a recent International Practice Unit (“I.P.U.”), the LB&I Division of the I.R.S. provides a broad overview of how currency gains and losses are recognized for U.S. tax purposes.  Elizabeth V. Zanet and Stanley C. Ruchelman examine the applicable rules in the I.P.U.

Read More