• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to secondary sidebar

Alston & Bird Tax Blog

  • Home
  • Services
  • Contacts

Downstream D

April 7, 2012 By Jasper L. (Jack) Cummings, Jr. and Edward Tanenbaum

LTR 201214013 applies a 55 year old ruling to treat a subsidiary liquidation as a downstream D reorganization, thus preserving the basis in the liquidating subsidiary’s stock, which would not be the case if it had liquidated under section 332.

Facts. Holdco owns Parent, which owns Target Parent, which owns Target Sub. Holdco wants to wind up owning Target Sub directly, but evidently did not want to lose its basis in its Parent stock and wanted to maintain Parent in existence as an entity.

The transaction involves Target Parent recapitalizing (so that Parent can claim it transferred its assets for stock of the acquirer), Parent converting to DRE status, and Target Parent merging into Target Sub.

Rulings. Parent was the target in a D reorganization downstream into Target Parent and Target Parent was the target in an A reorganization downstream into Target Sub.

The ruling relied on (but did not cite) Rev. Rul. 57-465, which treated a foreign to foreign downstream merger as a D reorganization for the benefit of foreign corporations that could not then effect offshore A reorganizations.

Analysis. The assets that Parent transferred to Target Parent in the D reorganization were the stock of Target Parent. The IRS went along with treating the preliminary recapitalization of Target Parent as part of the Parent reorganization. That did not occur in Rev. Rul. 57-465 because that ruling involved a downstream merger.

As a result of the recharacterizations Holdco was able to retain its basis in its Parent stock and to retain Parent as an entity for state law purposes, but eliminate two tiers of holding companies between it and its operating subsidiary.

Filed Under: Corporate - Federal, Federal - Corporate Tax Planning, Mergers and Acquisitions - Domestic

About Jasper L. (Jack) Cummings, Jr.

Jack Cummings is counsel in the Federal Tax Group of Alston & Bird in Raleigh and Washington, D.C. He served as IRS associate chief counsel (corporate) and chair of the Corporate Tax Committee of the ABA Section of Taxation.

[Read Bio]

About Edward Tanenbaum

Edward Tanenbaum is co-chair of the firm’s Federal & International Tax Group and a member of the firm’s Global Resources & Strategies Committee. Mr. Tanenbaum’s practice consists primarily of planning and structuring tax efficient solutions for cross-border business transactions and investments by foreign multinational corporations and high-net-worth individuals.

[Read Bio]

Primary Sidebar

As a service of Alston & Bird’s Tax groups, this blog focuses on current issues and events in international, federal, state and local tax and wealth planning of interest to business.

Subscribe

Receive email notifications when new posts are added.

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

Tags

401(k) ACA Affordable Care Act audit BEAT CARES Act CFC Corporate Tax Planning covid-19 Delaware ERISA Escheat FATCA FDII Gift cards GILTI international tax IRA IRAs IRS Kelmar New York nexus OECD qualified plans Quill RUUPA SCOTUS Section 351 Section 355 Section 367 Section 385 section 482 section 965 State legislation Subpart F Supreme Court Tax Court Tax Cuts and Jobs Act tax reform TCJA Treasury Unclaimed property UP Wayfair

Secondary Sidebar

Categories

Recent Posts

  • Litigate, Legislate and Repeat: The Delaware Escheat Law Spin Cycle
  • Looking Back at Georgia’s 2022 Legislative Session
  • Diving into IRS’s Annual Report on Advance Pricing Agreements: Can APMA Overcome Its Sisyphean Task?
  • California Dreaming of a Voluntary Compliance Program
  • Testing for COVID and Your Kits for Free: Expanded Coverage of OTC COVID-19 Test Kits and Developments in Preventive Care

Archives

Copyright © 2022 · Alston & Bird · All Rights Reserved. Privacy.