In the wake of the Panama Papers leak, the IRS and Treasury have announced proposed regulations to require significant reporting by foreign-owned domestic disregarded entities. Our International Tax Group considers the implications of this anticipated regulatory burden.
Do what Treasury said, not what it says it meant. Earlier this month, our Federal Tax Group explains why the circuit court affirmed one Tax Court decision and reversed another in the name of consistency – and why it means regulation preambles are more important than ever. Affirming in Amazon, reversing in Altera Holding the IRS to literal terms of the regulation Similarity to the Supreme Court ruling on the census citizenship question Read the full advisory here. [...]Read more
Last week, our International Tax Group examines the Ninth Circuit repeating itself in reversing a unanimous Tax Court holding on the validity of the Treasury's regulations under Section 482. We examine the reconstituted panel's significant decisions, which in many ways follow the first panel's conclusions. Altera v. Commissioner, Parts 1, 2, and now, 3 What is the meaning of “commensurate with income”? What does this case say about previous standards under Chevron? Read the full advisory here. [...]Read more
Citing aggressive taxpayer positions, recently proposed regulations do away with the foreign goodwill exception to gain or income recognition for outbound transfers under Section 367. The rules also restrict the type of property eligible for the active business exception. Reasons for Change Per the preamble, taxpayers interpret Section 367 and the regulations in one of two ways when claiming favorable treatment of foreign goodwill and going concern value. One interpretation argues that goodwill and going concern value are not IP within the meaning of Section 936(h)(3)(B) and thus not subject [...]Read more