Posts

Original Issue Discount and Debt Instruments

What is original issue discount?  Original issue discount (OID) is a form of interest that you may not realize you have earned, received or need to report.  The article below has been prepared by a tax attorney to provide information regarding (OID), but please consult directly with your tax advisors regarding your specific facts and circumstances.

Generally, you should (or will) report OID as income as it accrues over the term of any debt instruments even if you do not received any payment(s) of the actual interest from the party paying the debt and/or interest.  A debt instrument could be a promissory note, bond, debenture or any other evidence of indebtedness based upon the facts and circumstances.  You may typically see a debt instrument have OID when the debt instrument was issued for less than the stated redemption price.  A debt instrument that pays no interest before the instrument matures would likely be considered issued at a discount.  The following are examples of discounted debt instruments.

 

  • Municipal Bonds (interest may not be taxable)
  • Notes between individuals or private parties
  • United States Treasury Bonds
  • Stripped Bonds
  • Certificates of Deposit (CODs)

An example may help illustrate the discount and interest amount.  If a bank issues a bond with a maturity price of $1,000 for $900, the original issue discount is $100, and the discount would be included in income as it accrues over the term of the bond.  Please note, if the discount is less than one-quarter of an interest percentage (.0025) the discount may be considered de minimis discount and treated as zero.

 

All of the above being said, many people will ask if there are any exceptions to reporting OID income. The OID may not apply to the debt instruments below, but please always check current law and regulations with your tax attorney or tax advisors.

 

  • United Savings Bond
  • Tax Exempt Obligations
  • Debt instruments with a fixed maturity date less than one-year from the date of issuance (short-term debt instruments)
  • Obligations issued by an individual prior to March 2, 1984
  • A loan between individuals if the loan and any other prior loans between the same individuals is less than $10,000 (USD), the individual lending the money is not in the business or regularly lending money; and, a primary purpose of the loan is not to avoid federal income tax.

Is a 1099 issued?  If the total of the OID is $10 or greater, the party issuing the debt instrument should issue a 1099-OID.

You can speak with a tax attorney or business attorney with questions related to interest and OID by contacting The McGuire Law Firm.   Call 720-833-7705 to discuss your matters with a tax attorney.

Tax Attorney

Denver Tax Attorney

 

 

Operating Agreement Invalidating S Corporation Election

Limited Liability Companies (LLC) are a very popular entity choice and structure for new businesses and closely held entities.  An LLC can be formed quickly and has a lot of flexibility regarding members, operations and taxation structure.  It is not rare for an LLC to eventually consider and perhaps decide to be taxed as an S corporation.  Although, an LLC converting to a Subchapter S corporation has benefits, such as potentially reducing self-employment taxes, these benefits may be mistakenly lost if the Subchapter S corporation status is invalidated.  A means by which to invalidate the S corporation status, which is many business owners may not consider is the LLC operating agreement.  Abiding by the LLC operating agreement may cause the entity to operate in a manner than invalidates the S corporation election.  The article below has been prepared by a tax attorney and business attorney to further discuss the risk of losing S corporation status by abiding by an operating agreement.  Please remember this article is for information purposes only, and is not intended to be legal or tax advice.

To properly evaluate how an S corporation could lose or invalidate the S corporation election, it is important to remember how a business qualifies and the requirements for an S corporation.  The qualify as an S corporation, the corporation must:

 

  • Have only allowable shareholders (no partnership, corporate or non-resident alien shareholders)
  • Have only 100 shareholders or less
  • Have only one class of stock
  • Be a domestic corporation
  • Not be an ineligible corporation (insurance companies and other disallowed companies)

Our focus will be on the one class of stock requirement.  The one class of stock requirement requires that all shareholders receive distributions and liquidation preferences pro-rata per their stock ownership.  An S corporation can have a different class of stock for voting rights, but the economic benefits and distributions to the shareholders must follow the ownership percentage, which is directly related to the number of shares each shareholder owns.  Many LLC operating agreements will contain clauses and language that actually require unequal or disproportionate distributions to the LLC members.  Thus, if the distributions are in accordance with the operating agreement, the issuance of disproportionate distributions could lead to the IRS claiming the corporation has multiple classes of stock, and therefore, the S corporation election is invalid.  Treasury Regulation Section 301.7701-(3)(c)(1)(v)(c) states that the S corporation election is valid only if ALL requirements are met.  Thus, an LLC electing be to be taxed as an S corporation should consider removal of certain clauses within the operating agreement relating to substantial economic effect, IRC Section 704 and any other clause that could create disproportionate distributions.  If the S corporation election was lost, the owners may be subject to additional self-employment tax, or the business, if taxed as a C corporation would be subject to tax at the corporate level, and the shareholder level, thus double taxation.

If you have questions related to your choice of entity, taxation matters and internal business documents, it is recommended you speak with a tax attorney and/or business attorney to review the documents, taxation matters and intended tax treatment.

Denver Tax Attorney Denver Tax Lawyer IRS Tax Attorney

 

Denver Business Attorney

Deductible or a Capital Expense?

Is an amount paid by a business an expense that is currently deductible, or is it a capital expenditure that should be depreciated,, amortized or depleted?  This issue is one of the most common issues in a tax audit with the Internal Revenue Service, as well as one of the most litigated issues in United States Tax Court.  The article below has been prepared by a tax attorney to provide additional information related to this common issue.  Please remember that this article is for informational purposes, and you should consult directly with your tax attorney and advisors related to your specific issues.

A currently deductible expense is an ordinary and necessary expense that is paid or incurred by the business during the taxable year in the ordinary course of operating the trade or business.  Please reference Internal Revenue Code Section 162.  In comparison, a capital expenditure would be the cost to acquire, improve or restore an asset that is expected to last more than one year.  These capital expenditures are not allowed a deduction, but rather are subject to amortization, depreciation or depletion over the useful life of the property. See Internal Revenue Code Section 263.

That being said, how does one determine whether an expenditure is an expense to be deducted or a capital expenditure?  The answer is, it is a question of fact.  The Courts have applied the principles of deductibility versus capitalization on a case by case basis, and the facts and circumstances of each case will likely determine the outcome.

An example may help illustrate the difference between an expense that would be deductible versus one that would be capitalized.  If a business owner bought certain office supplies such as pens and paper, they would be deductible.  If the same business owner, purchased a building to operate the business, the building would be capitalized.  Let’s look at a different example that might not be as obvious.  Assume a business owns and rents property.  In one property a hole was placed in the wall when a tenant moved.  In another property, the owner decided to replace the walls with new drywall and paint.  It is likely the fixing of the hole in the wall would be deductible as a repair or maintenance, whereas the cost to replace the walls would be capitalized by the business.

One further issue to consider beyond the matters discussed above is that the Internal Revenue Code requires books and records to be maintained to verify and substantiate the expense whether it be a deduction or capital expense.  If the item or amount of the expense cannot be verified and substantiated by the taxpayer, the IRS may disallow the deduction or the capital expense.

If you have questions related to a deduction or capital expense, you can speak with a tax attorney by contacting The McGuire Law Firm.   The McGuire Law Firm offers a free consultation with a tax attorney to discuss your questions and issues.

Denver Tax Attorney

How is a Profits Interest in an LLC Taxed?

If I am given a profits interest in a partnership or limited liability company, how am I taxed?  It is relatively common for an LLC (for purposes of this article, a partnership and LLC may be considered the same type of business) to give an interest to a service provider.  The taxation of the interest is different depending upon the type of interest as a capital interest can be different than a profits interest.  The article below discusses a profits interest.  A profit’s interest is a type of equity in the applicable business, and is designed to give the individual a predetermined share of future growth in the value of the business.  A profits interest can be differentiated from a grant of stock within a corporation because the profits interest would not entitle the holder of the profits interest to share in the businesses current value.  Rather the profits interest provides for a share of future profits and appreciation within the business, as opposed to an interest or share in the company’s current value.  This position, is what dictates the tax treatment of a profits interest when provided to the holder of the interest.

 

Initially, courts appeared to have mixed feelings regarding the taxation of a profits interest.  In 1974, a federal court of appeals held that the receipt of the profits interest should be considered taxable income when the interest had a readily determinable market value.  However, later another federal court made a determination that would appear to suggest the service provider receiving a profits interest and acting as a partner within the company could receive the interest without the interest being taxed upon receipt.

 

Revenue Procedure 93-27 was issued by the Internal Revenue Service in 1993 to provide guidance regarding the taxation and treatment of a profit’s interest in a partnership.  The Internal Revenue Service used a hypothetical liquidation test in the Revenue Procedure 93-27 analysis.  Under the hypothetical liquidation analysis, a liquidation would not give the profits interest holder a share of the partnership assets if the partnership liquidated all assets and distributed cash to the partners.  In terms of the timing of the liquidation, the liquidation is deemed to occur at the time of the partner receives the profits interest, and thus there would have been no real increase in the value of the business from the time of receipt to the time of the deemed liquidation.  This analysis entitles the holder of the profits interest only to a share of future profits and appreciation in the business, rather than an immediate interest in the partnership’s current value.  Thus, when a partner receives a profits interest for services, or for the benefit of the partnership in a partner capacity, or even in anticipation of being a partner, the IRS will likely not treat the receipt of the interest as a taxable event.  It is important to note that the IRS may not treat the receipt of a partnership interest as a non-taxable event if in fact the profits interest would bring about a substantially certain and predictable amount of income to the recipient.

 

The article above has been prepared by John McGuire of the McGuire Law Firm.  As a tax attorney and business attorney, John’s practice focuses primarily on taxation issues and business transactions.

Denver Tax Attorney

Denver Tax Attorney

Deducting Business Expenses

Can I deduct my meals as a business expense?  Can I deduct this flight as a business expense?  Can I deduct the cost of my clothes or uniform as a business expense?  As a tax attorney, these are common questions I am asked, and rightfully so as everyone wants to take advantage of all potential deductions allowed by the Internal Revenue Code.  Not only is the deductibility of certain business expenses a hot topic with business owners, it is a hot topic and highly litigated topic with the Internal Revenue Service.  In fact, I recall reading a recent annual report to Congress by the Taxpayer Advocate Service whereby the deductibility of trade or business expenses he been one of the top ten most litigates issues for a very long time.  Furthermore, the same report stated that the courts affirmed the position taken by the Internal Revenue Service (the dissallowance 0f the deduction) in the vast majority of cases and that the taxpayer only prevailed (in full) about two-percent (2%) of the time.  The article below is not intended to be legal advice, but rather to provide general information regarding this issue.

First and foremost, we should start with the current law regarding deductions for business expenses.  Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”) Section 162 allows deductions for ordinary and necessary expenses incurred in a business or trade.  What actually constitutes ordinary and necessary may better be understood through an analysis of the case law, which is significant, surrounding the question.  Generally, the determination is made based upon a court’s full review of all facts and circumstances.

Based upon the black and white law under the Code, what constitutes a trade or business for purposes of Section 162.  Perhaps it is ironic that the term “trade or business” is so widely used in the Code, but yet, neither the Code nor the Treasury Regulations provide a definition for Trade or Business.  Personally, I think it would be quite hard to provide a definition for trade or business, especially under the auspices of income tax.  The concept of trade or business has been refined and defined by the courts more so than the Code.  The United States Supreme Court has held and stated that a trade or business is an activity conducted with continuity and regularity, and with the primary purpose of earning a profit.  Albeit broad, I would agree this definition would be sufficient for the majority of businesses I work and assist.

Now that we have an idea of what may constitute a trade or business, what is “ordinary and necessary?”  Again, the Supreme Court has helped provide definitions for these broad, but important terms.  Ordinary has been defined as customary or usual and of common or frequent occurrence in the trade or business.  Necessary has been defined as an expenses that is appropriate and helpful for the development of the business.  Further, it should be noted that some courts have also applied a level of reasonableness to each expense.

John McGuire is a tax attorney and business attorney at The McGuire Law Firm focusing his practice on issues before the IRS, tax planning & analysis and business transactions from formation to sale.

Denver Tax Attorney

Attempting to Avoid Shareholder Loan Reclassification

Many corporate shareholders may have taken a loan from their corporation.  In a prior article we discussed issues related to corporate loans and issues considered regarding the reclassification of a loan.  The article below discusses issues and actions a shareholder may consider taking to prevent the reclassification of a loan.  Please remember that this article is for informational purposes and it is recommended that you discuss any corporate loan issue directly with your tax attorney, business attorney or other advisors.

Proper recordkeeping and maintaining current promissory notes are of extreme importance regarding this issue.  The promissory notes must be kept current and reflect the payments that have actually been made by the shareholder to the corporation, the accrual of interest and other related issues in the previously executed notes.  Moreover, the approval of the loans should follow the proper approval and acceptance by the corporation’s board of directors and memorialized via the corporate minutes and other corporate memorandums.  The shareholder should also be able to verify that the interest has been paid on the note, the interest should be paid at regular intervals, and at least on an annual basis.  Contemporaneous evidence is always important when verifying loan payment and loan treatment to the Internal Revenue Service. From a tax return perspective, the corporate tax return should accurately reflect the loan on the balance sheet.

Because payment of the loan is such a vital factor, I often find it can be helpful to have multiple options or strategies for repayment.  Of course, the shareholder can make regular payments on a monthly, quarterly or yearly basis, but there are also other options for repayment.  If the corporation has strong earnings and profit, the shareholder could also use a distribution to pay make payment on the loan, perhaps even a lump sum payment to expedite payment on the note.  The shareholder may also be able to provide additional services to the corporation and receive bonuses for their work.  These bonuses could be paid to the shareholder and then paid to the corporation, or at least taxed to the shareholder as compensation and then reduce the amount of the note.

In short, generally the most important issues will be recordkeeping from corporate documents such as minutes, agreements and returns to the actual promissory note and making sure the shareholder is making payments with interest on the loan.

John McGuire is a tax attorney and business attorney at The McGuire Law Firm.  John assists clients with matters before the IRS, tax planning and advice, and business matters from contracts to the sale of business assets and interests.

Tax Attorney Denver Tax Lawyer Denver

Initial Considerations Regarding a Corporate Acquisition

In any corporate acquisition, there are tax and non-tax issues, multiple business considerations and goals of the parties involved with the transaction.  The tax planning that is involved before, during and after the acquisition process may include many options and alternatives to achieve the tax and non-tax wishes and goals of the parties.  Thus, one of the most important steps in the planning process of a corporate acquisition is to discuss and review the party’s intentions and goals, which may include short term matters and long term matters.

First, we need to identify the parties.  In any corporate acquisition you will have the buyer who is looking to acquire one or more businesses that are operated and owned by another business.  The seller, which may be referred to as the “target” or “target-corporation” may wish to be disposing of the business in exchange for some type or form of consideration, or merge in some way with the buyer.  Broadly stated, the buyer may wish to purchase the stock of the target corporation, or acquire the assets of the corporation.  Thus, in general, you can consider the purchase options to be a stock purchase or asset purchase of the target.  Furthermore, there is the possibility that the acquisition could be a hostile acquisition.  A hostile acquisition involves the acquisition of a publicly held company, like Wal Mart.  The acquisition begins without any agreement between the purchaser and the target corporation.  It is possible that through a hostile acquisition, the target may not even wish to be acquired or purchased by the buyer.

It is likely that the single most important factor in an acquisition will be the consideration to be paid or consideration received by target (property, stock and other items could be used as consideration).  Thereafter, an important issue to consider and understand is whether the shareholders of the target corporation plan to or wish to have an equity ownership in the combined entity after the acquisition is completed, or if such shareholders wish to sell their entire ownership interest in exchange for a cash payment or other financial benefit.  This issue will likely dictate the overall consideration involved and will, in many respects, control the overall structure of the transaction as well as the characterization of the transaction for tax purposes (taxable versus tax free).  For example, if the parties wished to have a tax free reorganization, a common theme in a tax free reorganization is continuing ownership interest in the combined business by the previous shareholders of the target business.  The transaction may only be able to qualify as a tax-free reorganization if a substantial portion of the consideration paid is the stock of acquiring corporation, or perhaps the stock of the acquiring corporation’s parent.  Thus, consider whether or not the target shareholders receiving shares of the acquiring corporation would be practical if in fact the some or all of the target shareholders wished to receive cash consideration for their ownership interests.  This example illustrates how the goals and wishes of the parties involved can dictate the transaction structure and thus the tax implications to the parties.

The above article has been prepared by John McGuire of The McGuire Law Firm.  As a tax and business attorney, Mr. McGuire’s practice is focused on tax planning, tax matters before the IRS and business transactions from business start-ups & formation, to business contracts & acquisitions.  You can schedule a free consultation with a business attorney at The McGuire Law Firm by calling 720-833-7705.

Denver Business Attorney Denver Small Business Attorney

Employee Stock Options

Successful businesses will have successful, driven and strong employees.  Often businesses are faced with questions and issues regarding maintaining employees, hiring the right employees and incentivizing employees.  Incentive compensation arrangements are often used by large and small businesses as a means by which to reward employees, as well as a benefit to individuals the business is hoping to hire and maintain.  An incentive compensation plan can have a number of benefits over cash compensation and qualified plans such as:

  • They can be easy to adopt, with low upkeep and administrative costs
  • Employees can defer taxation
  • The plan can allow a key employee to participate and share in corporate growth through direct equity ownership, or grant equity flavored compensation such as phantom stock
  • Incentive compensation plans do not need to meet discrimination requirements, whereas qualified plans may need to meet such requirements

A small business such as an S corporation can use an incentive plan just like a C corporation, but one must be mindful of the S corporation eligibility rules.  The eligibility rules for an S corporation create matters and issues that must be considered when an S corporation implements an incentive compensation plan.  This article has been prepared by a business attorney and tax attorney to provide information regarding stock options available to small businesses when implementing an incentive compensation plan.

Stock Options

Stock options can be used by corporations to compensate certain key employees.  There are two forms of these stock options: 1) Nonqualified Stock Options (NQSOs) and 2) Incentive Stock Options (ISOs).

A Nonqualified Stock Option is an option granted by the corporation to an employee.  The option provides the employee with the right to purchase corporate stock at a specific and designated price through some date established in the future.  Generally, the option will grant an executive or key employee the ability to purchase stock at a price that is below fair market value.  For example, John, a highly trained & key employee of Do It Right, Inc. may receive an option to buy shares at $15/share, when the fair market value of the share is $30/share through a certain date in the future.   After a specific holding period, the option can be exercised, or it may vest in steps or stages in the future.

Options are not taxed at the date they are granted under Section 83 of the Internal Revenue Code, unless there is a readily ascertainable fair market value.  Generally, the treasury regulations would hold that an option not actively traded on a market does not have an ascertainable fair market value unless the value can be determined with reasonable certainty.  Therefore, generally the regulations presume an untraded option would not have a readily ascertainable fair market value.  It also can be relatively safe to assume that S corporation options would rarely have an ascertainable fair market value and therefore, the option would not be taxed until exercised.  When exercised, the difference between the stock’s fair market value and the amount paid by the employee in exercising the option are taxed to the employee as compensation, and the employer is permitted a deduction for compensation.

 

Incentive Stock Options

An incentive stock option plan is similar to a nonqualified stock option in that it is an option purchase stock in the corporation at a future date.  The difference is, the holder of an incentive stock option can receive preferential tax treatment upon exercising the option that is not available to the holder of a nonqualified stock option.  The incentive stock option plan must meet very specific standards.  Under IRC Section 422(b), the option must: 1) be granted to an employee via a plan approved by the shareholders; 2) have an exercise price not less than the stock’s fair market value as of the date of grant; 3) no longer than a 10 year exercise period, and be granted within 10 years; 4) restrictions on transferability; 5) the holder of the option, at the time the option is granted cannot own more than 10% of the combined total voting power of all corporate stock.  The last issue #5, does not apply if the option price is at least 110% of the fair market value of the applicable stock when granted.  When the requirements are met, the holder of the option can exercise the option free of tax!  Yes, the holder postpones the taxable event until the stock received via the option is disposed, sold or exchanged.

John R. McGuire is a tax attorney and business attorney at The McGuire Law Firm.  In addition to his J.D. Mr. McGuire holds an LL.M. in taxation.  Mr. McGuire advises his clients on matters before the IRS, tax planning & issues and business transactions from formation & sale to contractual issues.

Contact The McGuire Law Firm to schedule a free consultation with a business attorney regarding your business matters and issues.

Denver Business Attorney Denver Tax Attorney

Direct Stock Acquisition and Reverse Triangular Merger

There are multiple options to implement the acquisition of a business.  The purchaser or acquirer could purchase the stock of the target corporation, or the assets of the target corporation.  If the stock of the target corporation is to be purchased there are multiple options and variations by which the stock can be acquired.  The article below will discuss some of the common stock acquisitions that are available for a corporation to acquire another.

The Direct Stock Purchase

The direct purchase of stock from the target shareholders may be the simplest structure and means by which to implement a stock acquisition.  Through a direct stock purchase, the acquirer will purchase stock of the target from the shareholders of the target for an agreed upon purchase price or consideration.  When the target is a closely held corporation, the acquirer can work out and negotiate the deal directly with the shareholders of the target corporation.  When the target corporation is a publicly held corporation, the acquirer could purchase stock via the open market, or produce a cash tender offer (or exchange offer) for the purchase of the target corporation’s stock.  A tender offer would be an offer to purchase shares of the corporation for cash, in comparison to an exchange offer, which is an offer to exchange stock, securities or other consideration.  Certain (and different) securities laws must be considered when weighing tender offers versus exchange offers.

Often one or both parties will wish for the transaction to be a tax-free exchange under the Internal Revenue Code.  It is important to note that for the exchange to be considered under Internal Revenue Code Section 368, a tax free exchange of stock would require the consideration paid to the target shareholders consist solely of the voting stock the acquiring corporation, or the parent of the acquiring corporation.  See IRC section 368(a)(1)(B) and related treasury regulations for more information regarding a tax-free exchange.

Reverse Triangular Merger (Indirect Stock Purchase)

 A direct stock purchase may not always be feasible to consummate an acquisition, especially if the target corporation is publicly held.  When publicly held, each shareholder must decide whether to sell their shares via the public market or via the tender or exchange offer.  The odds may be stacked such that one or a few number of shareholders do not wish to sell, or perhaps are even unaware of the offer to dispose of their shares. There is an approach that can legally require the shareholders to sell known as the reverse triangular merger.  The benefit of the reverse triangular merger is that conversion of the shares occurs via operation of law, and is binding on the target corporation’s shareholders.  Thus, the purchaser or acquirer can legally force and guarantee the acquisition of the shares.

The reverse triangular merger would work as follows: Purchasing, Inc. wants to acquire all of the shares of Targeted, Inc., which is publicly held.  Purchasing Inc. and Targeted, Inc. have agreed upon the consideration to be paid and the other terms and conditions.  Purchasing, Inc. would form Subsidiary, Inc. and Subsidiary, Inc. would be merged with Targeted, Inc., with Targeted, Inc. as the survivor.  Via operation of law, the stock of Subsidiary, Inc. is converted to stock of Targeted, Inc. and Purchasing, Inc. as the sole shareholder of Subsidiary, Inc. would receive all of the stock of Targeted, Inc.  The former shareholders of Targeted, Inc. would receive the agreed upon consideration.  Further, Purchasing, Inc. is now the sole shareholder of Targeted, Inc.

The above article has been prepared by John McGuire of The McGuire Law Firm.  John is a tax attorney and business attorney in Denver, Colorado and can be contacted at John@jmtaxlaw.com

Denver Business Attorney Small Business Attorney

 

 

 

Constructive Ownership Within Foreign Corporations

Under the context of controlled foreign corporations, a U.S. shareholder is defined as a U.S. Person who owns or is considered as owning 10% or more of the total combined voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote of a foreign corporation.  Does this language mean that constructive ownership is considered when determining whether the applicable person is a 10% owner and thus a U.S. shareholder?  The answer is yes!  Stock that is held directly, indirectly and constructively with the meaning of Internal Revenue Code Section 958 is taken into account when determining ownership.

Because of this rule and the application of attribution rules, a U.S. shareholder of shareholders are unable to avoid U.S. shareholder status by distributing stock of a foreign corporation to related parties.  For example, if Corporation 1 spread ownership equally amongst 20 other U.S. affiliates within an affiliated group, and thus each corporation would own 5% of the stock of Corporation 1, U.S. shareholder status could not be avoided for each shareholder because of the attribution rules, and each corporation would be treated as constructively owning the shares.  It can also be important to remember that the attribution rules, attribute the stock on the value of the shares owned and the not the voting power.  For example, assume stock was held by John in a corporation and the stock held was 10% of the votes but 25% of the value.  The value would be considered as owning 25% of the stock held.

What about ownership in a foreign partnership, foreign trust or even a foreign estate?  Do the controlled foreign corporation rules in Subpart F apply to these foreign “entities?”  The answer would be no because a foreign entity must be a corporation to fall within the definition of a controlled foreign corporation, and therefore, Subpart F would not apply as a result of ownership by a United State person.  Thus, we must ask the question, for purposes of a controlled foreign corporation, how is a corporation defined?  One should reference Internal Revenue Code Section 7701(a)(3) per the regulations when determining whether or not a foreign business or entity is in fact a corporation within the definition of the code.  Prior to 1997 a facts and circumstances test applied reviewing continuity of life, centralized management, limited liability and free transferability of assets whereby now, under 7701(a)(3) regulations, there are elective rules for classifying most foreign entities.  These classification matters could be akin to certain options, often referred to as “check the box” regulations.  For more information regarding check the box regulations, see 910 T.M.

You can contact a tax attorney and business attorney at The McGuire Law Firm to discuss your tax & business related matters.  The McGuire Law Firm has offices in Denver, Colorado and Golden, Colorado for your convenience and offers a free consultation to all potential clients.

Denver Business Attorney Denver Tax Attorney