Title 26—Internal Revenue--Volume 1
PART 1—INCOME TAXES
§ 1.267A-6   Examples.
(a) Scope. This section provides examples that illustrate the application of §§ 1.267A-1 through 1.267A-5.
(b) Presumed facts. For purposes of the examples in this section, unless otherwise indicated, the following facts are presumed:
(1) US1, US2, and US3 are domestic corporations that are tax residents solely of the United States.
(2) FW, FX, and FZ are bodies corporate established in, and tax residents of, Country W, Country X, and Country Z, respectively. They are not fiscally transparent under the tax law of any country. They are not specified parties.
(3) Under the tax law of each country, interest and royalty payments are deductible.
(4) The tax law of each country provides a 100 percent participation exemption for dividends received from non-resident corporations.
(5) The tax law of each country, other than the United States, provides an exemption for income attributable to a branch.
(6) Except as provided in paragraphs (b)(4) and (5) of this section, all amounts derived (determined under the principles of § 1.894-1(d)(1)) by a tax resident, or attributable to a taxable branch, are included in income, as determined under § 1.267A-3(a).
(7) Only the tax law of the United States contains hybrid mismatch rules.
(c) Examples —(1) Example 1. Payment pursuant to a hybrid financial instrument —(i) Facts. FX holds all the interests of US1. FX also holds an instrument issued by US1 that is treated as equity for Country X tax purposes and indebtedness for U.S. tax purposes (the FX-US1 instrument). On date 1, US1 pays $50x to FX pursuant to the instrument. The amount is treated as an excludible dividend for Country X tax purposes (by reason of the Country X participation exemption) and as interest for U.S. tax purposes.
(ii) Analysis. US1 is a specified party and thus a deduction for its $50x specified payment is subject to disallowance under section 267A. As described in paragraphs (c)(1)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section, the entire $50x payment is a disqualified hybrid amount under the hybrid transaction rule of § 1.267A-2(a) and, as a result, a deduction for the payment is disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(1).
(A) US1's payment is made pursuant to a hybrid transaction because a payment with respect to the FX-US1 instrument is treated as interest for U.S. tax purposes but not for purposes of Country X tax law (the tax law of FX, a specified recipient that is related to US1). See § 1.267A-2(a)(2) and (f). Therefore, § 1.267A-2(a) applies to the payment.
(B) For US1's payment to be a disqualified hybrid amount under § 1.267A-2(a), a no-inclusion must occur with respect to FX. See § 1.267A-2(a)(1)(i). As a consequence of the Country X participation exemption, FX includes $0 of the payment in income and therefore a $50x no-inclusion occurs with respect to FX. See § 1.267A-3(a)(1). The result is the same regardless of whether, under the Country X participation exemption, the $50x payment is simply excluded from FX's taxable income or, instead, is reduced or offset by other means, such as a $50x dividends received deduction. See § 1.267A-3(a)(1).
(C) Pursuant to § 1.267A-2(a)(1)(ii), FX's $50x no-inclusion gives rise to a disqualified hybrid amount to the extent that it is a result of US1's payment being made pursuant to the hybrid transaction. FX's $50x no-inclusion is a result of the payment being made pursuant to the hybrid transaction because, were the payment to be treated as interest for Country X tax purposes, FX would include $50x in income and, consequently, the no-inclusion would not occur.
(iii) Alternative facts—multiple specified recipients. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section, except that FX holds all the interests of FZ, which is fiscally transparent for Country X tax purposes, and FZ holds all of the interests of US1. Moreover, the FX-US1 instrument is held by FZ (rather than by FX) and US1 makes its $50x payment to FZ (rather than to FX); the payment is derived by FZ under its tax law and by FX under its tax law and, accordingly, both FZ and FX are specified recipients of the payment. Further, the payment is treated as interest for Country Z tax purposes and FZ includes it in income. For the reasons described in paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this section, FX's no-inclusion causes the payment to be a disqualified hybrid amount. FZ's inclusion in income (regardless of whether Country Z has a low or high tax rate) does not affect the result, because the hybrid transaction rule of § 1.267A-2(a) applies if any no-inclusion occurs with respect to a specified recipient of the payment as a result of the payment being made pursuant to the hybrid transaction.
(iv) Alternative facts—preferential rate. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section, except that for Country X tax purposes US1's payment is treated as a dividend subject to a 4% tax rate, whereas the marginal rate imposed on ordinary income is 20%. FX includes $10x of the payment in income, calculated as $50x multiplied by 0.2 (.04, the rate at which the particular type of payment (a dividend for Country X tax purposes) is subject to tax in Country X, divided by 0.2, the marginal tax rate imposed on ordinary income). See § 1.267A-3(a)(1). Thus, a $40x no-inclusion occurs with respect to FX ($50x less $10x). The $40x no-inclusion is a result of the payment being made pursuant to the hybrid transaction because, were the payment to be treated as interest for Country X tax purposes, FX would include the entire $50x in income at the full marginal rate imposed on ordinary income (20%) and, consequently, the no-inclusion would not occur. Accordingly, $40x of US1's payment is a disqualified hybrid amount.
(v) Alternative facts—no-inclusion not the result of hybridity. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section, except that Country X has a pure territorial regime (that is, Country X only taxes income with a domestic source). Although US1's payment is pursuant to a hybrid transaction and a $50x no-inclusion occurs with respect to FX, FX's no-inclusion is not a result of the payment being made pursuant to the hybrid transaction. This is because if Country X tax law were to treat the payment as interest, FX would include $0 in income and, consequently, the $50x no-inclusion would still occur. Accordingly, US1's payment is not a disqualified hybrid amount. See § 1.267A-2(a)(1)(ii). The result would be the same if Country X instead did not impose a corporate income tax.
(vi) Alternative facts—indebtedness under both tax laws but different ordering rules give rise to hybrid transaction; reduction of no-inclusion by reason of inclusion of a principal payment. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section, except that the FX-US1 instrument is indebtedness for both U.S. and Country X tax purposes. In addition, the $50x date 1 payment is treated as interest for U.S. tax purposes and a repayment of principal for Country X tax purposes. On date 1, based on all the facts and circumstances (including the terms of the FX-US1 instrument, the tax laws of the United States and Country X, and an absence of a plan pursuant to which FX would dispose of the FX-US1 instrument), it is reasonably expected that on date 2 (a date that is within 36 months after the end of the taxable year of US1 that includes date 1), US1 will pay a total of $200x to FX and that, for U.S. tax purposes, $25x will be treated as interest and $175x as a repayment of principal, and, for Country X tax purposes, $75x will be treated as interest (and included in FX's income) and $125x as a repayment of principal. US1's $50x specified payment is made pursuant to a hybrid transaction and, but for § 1.267A-3(a)(4), a $50x no-inclusion would occur with respect to FX. See §§ 1.267A-2(a)(2) and 1.267A-3(a)(1). However, pursuant to § 1.267A-3(a)(4), FX's inclusion in income with respect to $50x of the date 2 amount that is a repayment of principal for U.S. tax purposes is treated as correspondingly reducing FX's no-inclusion with respect to the specified payment. As a result, as to US1's $50x specified payment, a no-inclusion does not occur with respect to FX. See § 1.267A-3(a)(4). Therefore, US1's $50x specified payment is not a disqualified hybrid amount. See § 1.267A-2(a)(1)(i).
(2) Example 2. Payment pursuant to a repo transaction —(i) Facts. FX holds all the interests of US1, and US1 holds all the interests of US2. On date 1, US1 and FX enter into a sale and repurchase transaction. Pursuant to the transaction, US1 transfers shares of preferred stock of US2 to FX in exchange for $1,000x, subject to a binding commitment of US1 to reacquire those shares on date 3 for an agreed price, which represents a repayment of the $1,000x plus a financing or time value of money return reduced by the amount of any distributions paid with respect to the preferred stock between dates 1 and 3 that are retained by FX. On date 2, US2 pays a $100x dividend on its preferred stock to FX. For Country X tax purposes, FX is treated as owning the US2 preferred stock and therefore is the beneficial owner of the dividend. For U.S. tax purposes, the transaction is treated as a loan from FX to US1 that is secured by the US2 preferred stock. Thus, for U.S. tax purposes, US1 is treated as owning the US2 preferred stock and is the beneficial owner of the dividend. In addition, for U.S. tax purposes, US1 is treated as paying $100x of interest to FX (an amount corresponding to the $100x dividend paid by US2 to FX). Further, the marginal tax rate imposed on ordinary income under Country X tax law is 25%. Moreover, instead of a participation exemption, Country X tax law provides its tax residents a credit for underlying foreign taxes paid by a non-resident corporation from which a dividend is received; with respect to the $100x dividend received by FX from US2, the credit is $10x.
(ii) Analysis. US1 is a specified party and thus a deduction for its $100x specified payment is subject to disallowance under section 267A. As described in paragraphs (c)(2)(ii)(A) through (D) of this section, $40x of the payment is a disqualified hybrid amount under the hybrid transaction rule of § 1.267A-2(a) and, as a result, $40x of the deduction is disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(1).
(A) Although US1's $100x interest payment is not regarded under Country X tax law, a connected amount (US2's dividend payment) is regarded and derived by FX under such tax law. Thus, FX is considered a specified recipient with respect to US1's interest payment. See § 1.267A-2(a)(3).
(B) US1's payment is made pursuant to a hybrid transaction because a payment with respect to the sale and repurchase transaction is treated as interest for U.S. tax purposes but not for purposes of Country X tax law (the tax law of FX, a specified recipient that is related to US1), which does not regard the payment. See § 1.267A-2(a)(2) and (f). Therefore, § 1.267A-2(a) applies to the payment.
(C) For US1's payment to be a disqualified hybrid amount under § 1.267A-2(a), a no-inclusion must occur with respect to FX. See § 1.267A-2(a)(1)(i). As a consequence of Country X tax law not regarding US1's payment, FX includes $0 of the payment in income and therefore a $100x no-inclusion occurs with respect to FX. See § 1.267A-3(a). However, FX includes $60x of a connected amount (US2's dividend payment) in income, calculated as $100x (the amount of the dividend) less $40x (the portion of the connected amount that is not included in income in Country X due to the foreign tax credit, determined by dividing the amount of the credit, $10x, by 0.25, the tax rate in Country X). See § 1.267A-3(a). Pursuant to § 1.267A-2(a)(3), FX's inclusion in income with respect to the connected amount correspondingly reduces the amount of its no-inclusion with respect to US1's payment. Therefore, for purposes of § 1.267A-2(a), FX's no-inclusion with respect to US1's payment is $40x ($100x less $60x). See § 1.267A-2(a)(3).
(D) Pursuant to § 1.267A-2(a)(1)(ii), FX's $40x no-inclusion gives rise to a disqualified hybrid amount to the extent that FX's no-inclusion is a result of US1's payment being made pursuant to the hybrid transaction. FX's $40x no-inclusion is a result of US1's payment being made pursuant to the hybrid transaction because, were the sale and repurchase transaction to be treated as a loan from FX to US1 for Country X tax purposes, FX would include US1's $100x interest payment in income (because it would not be entitled to a foreign tax credit) and, consequently, the no-inclusion would not occur.
(iii) Alternative facts—structured arrangement. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section, except that FX is a bank that is unrelated to US1. In addition, the sale and repurchase transaction is a structured arrangement and FX is a party to the structured arrangement. The result is the same as in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section. That is, even though FX is not related to US1, it is taken into account with respect to the determinations under § 1.267A-2(a) because it is a party to a structured arrangement pursuant to which the payment is made. See § 1.267A-2(f).
(3) Example 3. Disregarded payment —(i) Facts. FX holds all the interests of US1. For Country X tax purposes, US1 is a disregarded entity of FX. During taxable year 1, US1 pays $100x to FX pursuant to a debt instrument. The amount is treated as interest for U.S. tax purposes but is disregarded for Country X tax purposes as a transaction involving a single taxpayer. During taxable year 1, US1's only other items of income, gain, deduction, or loss are $125x of gross income (the entire amount of which is included in US1's income) and a $60x item of deductible expense. The $125x item of gross income is included in FX's income, and the $60x item of deductible expense is allowable for Country X tax purposes.
(ii) Analysis. US1 is a specified party and thus a deduction for its $100x specified payment is subject to disallowance under section 267A. As described in paragraphs (c)(3)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section, $35x of the payment is a disqualified hybrid amount under the disregarded payment rule of § 1.267A-2(b) and, as a result, $35x of the deduction is disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(1).
(A) US1's $100x payment is not regarded under the tax law of Country X (the tax law of FX, a related tax resident to which the payment is made) because under such tax law the payment involves a single taxpayer. See § 1.267A-2(b)(2) and (f). In addition, were the tax law of Country X to regard the payment (and treat it as interest), FX would include it in income. Therefore, the payment is a disregarded payment to which § 1.267A-2(b) applies. See § 1.267A-2(b)(2).
(B) Under § 1.267A-2(b)(1), the excess (if any) of US1's disregarded payments for taxable year 1 ($100x) over its dual inclusion income for the taxable year is a disqualified hybrid amount. US1's dual inclusion income for taxable year 1 is $65x, calculated as $125x (the amount of US1's gross income that is included in FX's income) less $60x (the amount of US1's deductible expenses, other than deductions for disregarded payments, that are allowable for Country X tax purposes). See § 1.267A-2(b)(3). Therefore, $35x is a disqualified hybrid amount ($100x less $65x). See § 1.267A-2(b)(1).
(iii) Alternative facts—non-dual inclusion income arising from hybrid transaction. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section, except that US1 holds all the interests of FZ (a specified party that is a CFC) and US1's only item of income, gain, deduction, or loss during taxable year 1 (other than the $100x payment to FX) is $80x paid to US1 by FZ pursuant to an instrument treated as indebtedness for U.S. and Country Z tax purposes and equity for Country X tax purposes (the US1-FZ instrument). The $80x is treated as interest for Country Z and U.S. tax purposes (the entire amount of which is included in US1's income) and is treated as an excludible dividend for Country X tax purposes (by reason of the Country X participation exemption). Paragraphs (c)(3)(iii)(A) and (B) of this section describe the extent to which the specified payments by FZ and US1, each of which is a specified party, are disqualified hybrid amounts.
(A) The hybrid transaction rule of § 1.267A-2(a) applies to FZ's payment because the payment is made pursuant to a hybrid transaction, as a payment with respect to the US1-FZ instrument is treated as interest for U.S. tax purposes but not for purposes of Country X's tax law (the tax law of FX, a specified recipient that is related to FZ). As a consequence of the Country X participation exemption, an $80x no-inclusion occurs with respect to FX, and such no-inclusion is a result of the payment being made pursuant to the hybrid transaction. Thus, but for § 1.267A-3(b), the entire $80x of FZ's payment would be a disqualified hybrid amount. However, because US1 (a tax resident of the United States that is also a specified recipient of the payment) takes the entire $80x payment into account in its gross income, no portion of the payment is a disqualified hybrid amount. See § 1.267A-3(b)(2).
(B) The disregarded payment rule of § 1.267A-2(b) applies to US1's $100x payment to FX, for the reasons described in paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(A) of this section. In addition, US1 has no dual inclusion income for taxable year 1 because, as a result of the Country X participation exemption, no portion of FZ's $80x payment to US1 (which is derived by FX under its tax law) is included in FX's income. See §§ 1.267A-2(b)(3) and 1.267A-3(a). Therefore, the entire $100x payment from US1 to FX is a disqualified hybrid amount, calculated as $100x (the amount of the payment) less $0 (the amount of dual inclusion income). See § 1.267A-2(b)(1).
(iv) Alternative facts—dual inclusion income despite participation exemption. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this section, except that the US1-FZ instrument is treated as indebtedness for U.S. tax purposes and equity for Country Z and Country X tax purposes. In addition, the $80x paid to US1 by FZ is treated as interest for U.S. tax purposes (the entire amount of which is included in US1's income), a dividend for Country Z tax purposes (for which FZ is not allowed a deduction or other tax benefit), and an excludible dividend for Country X tax purposes (by reason of the Country X participation exemption). For the reasons described in paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(A) of this section, the hybrid transaction rule of § 1.267A-2(a) applies to FZ's payment but no portion of the payment is a disqualified hybrid amount. In addition, the disregarded payment rule of § 1.267A-2(b) applies to US1's $100x payment to FX, for the reasons described in paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(B) of this section. US1's dual inclusion income for taxable year 1 is $80x. This is because the $80x paid to US1 by FZ is included in US1's income and, although not included in FX's income, it is a dividend for Country X tax purposes that would have been included in FX's income but for the Country X participation exemption, and FZ is not allowed a deduction or other tax benefit for it under Country Z tax law. See § 1.267A-2(b)(3)(ii). Therefore, $20x of US1's $100x payment is a disqualified hybrid amount ($100x less $80x). See § 1.267A-2(b)(1).
(4) Example 4. Payment allocable to a U.S. taxable branch —(i) Facts. FX1 and FX2 are foreign corporations that are bodies corporate established in and tax residents of Country X. FX1 holds all the interests of FX2, and FX1 and FX2 file a consolidated return under Country X tax law. FX2 has a U.S. taxable branch (“USB”). During taxable year 1, FX2 pays $50x to FX1 pursuant to an instrument (the “FX1-FX2 instrument”). The amount paid pursuant to the instrument is treated as interest for U.S. tax purposes but, as a consequence of the Country X consolidation regime, is treated as a disregarded transaction between group members for Country X tax purposes. Also during taxable year 1, FX2 pays $100x of interest to an unrelated bank that is not a party to a structured arrangement (the instrument pursuant to which the payment is made, the “bank-FX2 instrument”). FX2's only other item of income, gain, deduction, or loss for taxable year 1 is $200x of gross income. Under Country X tax law, the $200x of gross income is attributable to USB, but is not included in FX2's income because Country X tax law exempts income attributable to a branch. Under U.S. tax law, the $200x of gross income is effectively connected income of USB. Further, under section 882(c)(1), $75x of interest is, for taxable year 1, allocable to USB's effectively connected income. USB has neither liabilities that are directly allocable to it, as described in § 1.882-5(a)(1)(ii)(A), nor U.S. booked liabilities, as defined in § 1.882-5(d)(2).
(ii) Analysis. USB is a specified party and thus any interest or royalty allowable as a deduction in determining its effectively connected income is subject to disallowance under section 267A. Pursuant to § 1.267A-5(b)(3)(i)(A), USB is treated as paying $75x of interest, and such interest is thus a specified payment. Of that $75x, $25x is treated as paid to FX1, calculated as $75x (the interest allocable to USB under section 882(c)(1)) multiplied by 1/3 ($50x, FX2's payment to FX1, divided by $150x, the total interest paid by FX2). See § 1.267A-5(b)(3)(ii)(A). As described in paragraphs (c)(4)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section, the $25x of the specified payment treated as paid by USB to FX1 is a disqualified hybrid amount under the disregarded payment rule of § 1.267A-2(b) and, as a result, a deduction for that amount is disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(1).
(A) USB's $25x payment to FX1 is not regarded under the tax law of Country X (the tax law of FX1, a related tax resident to which the payment is made) because under such tax law it is a disregarded transaction between group members. See § 1.267A-2(b)(2) and (f). In addition, were the tax law of Country X to regard the payment (and treat it as interest), FX1 would include it in income. Therefore, the payment is a disregarded payment to which § 1.267A-2(b) applies. See § 1.267A-2(b)(2).
(B) Under § 1.267A-2(b)(1), the excess (if any) of USB's disregarded payments for taxable year 1 ($25x) over its dual inclusion income for the taxable year is a disqualified hybrid amount. USB's dual inclusion income for taxable year 1 is $0. This is because, as a result of the Country X exemption for income attributable to a branch, no portion of USB's $200x item of gross income is included in FX2's income. See § 1.267A-2(b)(3). Therefore, the entire $25x of the specified payment treated as paid by USB to FX1 is a disqualified hybrid amount, calculated as $25x (the amount of the payment) less $0 (the amount of dual inclusion income). See § 1.267A-2(b)(1).
(iii) Alternative facts—deemed branch payment. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section, except that FX2 does not pay any amounts during taxable year 1 (thus, it does not pay the $50x to FX1 or the $100x to the bank). However, under an income tax treaty between the United States and Country X, USB is a U.S. permanent establishment and, for taxable year 1, $25x of royalties is allowable as a deduction in computing the business profits of USB and is deemed paid to FX2. Under Country X tax law, the $25x is not regarded. Accordingly, the $25x is a specified payment that is a deemed branch payment. See §§ 1.267A-2(c)(2) and 1.267A-5(b)(3)(i)(B). In addition, the entire $25x is a disqualified hybrid amount for which a deduction is disallowed because the tax law of Country X provides an exclusion or exemption for income attributable to a branch. See § 1.267A-2(c)(1).
(5) Example 5. Payment to a reverse hybrid —(i) Facts. FX holds all the interests of US1 and FY, and FY holds all the interests of FV. FY is an entity established in Country Y, and FV is an entity established in Country V. FY is fiscally transparent for Country Y tax purposes but is not fiscally transparent for Country X tax purposes. FV is fiscally transparent for Country X tax purposes. On date 1, US1 pays $100x to FY. The payment is treated as interest for U.S. tax purposes and Country X tax purposes.
(ii) Analysis. US1 is a specified party and thus a deduction for its $100x specified payment is subject to disallowance under section 267A. As described in paragraphs (c)(5)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section, the entire $100x payment is a disqualified hybrid amount under the reverse hybrid rule of § 1.267A-2(d) and, as a result, a deduction for the payment is disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(1).
(A) US1's payment is made to a reverse hybrid because FY is fiscally transparent under the tax law of Country Y (the tax law of the country in which it is established) but is not fiscally transparent under the tax law of Country X (the tax law of FX, an investor that is related to US1). See § 1.267A-2(d)(2) and (f). Therefore, § 1.267A-2(d) applies to the payment. The result would be the same if the payment were instead made to FV. See § 1.267A-2(d)(3).
(B) For US1's payment to be a disqualified hybrid amount under § 1.267A-2(d), a no-inclusion must occur with respect to FX, an investor the tax law of which treats FY as not fiscally transparent. See § 1.267A-2(d)(1)(i). Because FX does not derive the $100x payment under Country X tax law (as FY is not fiscally transparent under such tax law), FX includes $0 of the payment in income and therefore a $100x no-inclusion occurs with respect to FX. See § 1.267A-3(a).
(C) Pursuant to § 1.267A-2(d)(1)(ii), FX's $100x no-inclusion gives rise to a disqualified hybrid amount to the extent that it is a result of US1's payment being made to the reverse hybrid. FX's $100x no-inclusion is a result of the payment being made to the reverse hybrid because, were FY to be treated as fiscally transparent for Country X tax purposes, FX would include $100x in income and, consequently, the no-inclusion would not occur. The result would be the same if Country X tax law instead viewed US1's payment as a dividend, rather than interest. See § 1.267A-2(d)(1)(ii).
(iii) Alternative facts—inclusion under anti-deferral regime. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(5)(i) of this section, except that, under a Country X anti-deferral regime, FX takes into account $100x attributable to the $100x payment received by FY. If under the rules of § 1.267A-3(a) FX includes the entire attributed amount in income (that is, if FX takes the amount into account in its income at the full marginal rate imposed on ordinary income and the amount is not reduced or offset by certain relief particular to the amount), then a no-inclusion does not occur with respect to FX. As a result, in such a case, no portion of US1's payment would be a disqualified hybrid amount under § 1.267A-2(d).
(iv) Alternative facts—multiple investors. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(5)(i) of this section, except that FX holds all the interests of FZ, which is fiscally transparent for Country X tax purposes; FZ holds all the interests of FY, which is fiscally transparent for Country Z tax purposes; and FZ includes the $100x payment in income. Thus, each of FZ and FX is an investor of FY, as each directly or indirectly holds an interest of FY. See § 1.267A-5(a)(13). A $100x no-inclusion occurs with respect to FX, an investor the tax law of which treats FY as not fiscally transparent. FX's no-inclusion is a result of the payment being made to the reverse hybrid because, were FY to be treated as fiscally transparent for Country X tax purposes, then FX would include $100x in income (as FZ is fiscally transparent for Country X tax purposes). Accordingly, FX's no-inclusion is a result of US1's payment being made to the reverse hybrid and, consequently, the entire $100x payment is a disqualified hybrid amount. However, if instead FZ were not fiscally transparent for Country X tax purposes, then FX's no-inclusion would not be a result of US1's payment being made to the reverse hybrid and, therefore, the payment would not be a disqualified hybrid amount under § 1.267A-2(d).
(v) Alternative facts—portion of no-inclusion not the result of hybridity. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(5)(i) of this section, except that the $100x is viewed as a royalty for U.S. tax purposes and Country X tax purposes, and Country X tax law contains a patent box regime that provides an 80% deduction with respect to certain royalty income. If the royalty payment would qualify for the Country X patent box deduction were FY to be treated as fiscally transparent for Country X tax purposes, then only $20x of FX's $100x no-inclusion would be the result of the payment being paid to a reverse hybrid, calculated as $100x (the no-inclusion with respect to FX that actually occurs) less $80x (the no-inclusion with respect to FX that would occur if FY were to be treated as fiscally transparent for Country X tax purposes). See § 1.267A-2(d)(1)(ii) and 1.267A-3(a)(1)(ii). Accordingly, in such a case, only $20x of US1's payment would be a disqualified hybrid amount under § 1.267A-2(d).
(vi) Alternative facts—payment to a discretionary trust —(A) Facts. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(5)(i) of this section, except that FY is a discretionary trust established in, and a tax resident of, Country Y (and as a result, FY is generally not fiscally transparent for Country Y tax purposes under the principles of § 1.894-1(d)(3)(ii)). In general, under Country Y tax law, FX, an investor of FY, is not required to separately take into account in its income US1's $100x payment received by FY; instead, FY is required to take the payment into account in its income. However, under the trust agreement, the trustee of FY may, with respect to certain items of income received by FY, allocate such an item to FY's beneficiary, FX. When this occurs, then, for Country Y tax purposes, FY does not take the item into account in its income, and FX is required to take the item into account in its income as if it received the item directly from the source from which realized by FY. For Country X tax purposes, FX in all cases does not take into account in its income any item of income received by FY. With respect to the $100x paid from US1 to FY, the trustee allocates the $100x to FX.
(B) Analysis. FY is fiscally transparent with respect to US1's $100x payment under the tax law of Country Y (the tax law of the country in which FY is established). See § 1.267A-5(a)(8)(i). In addition, FY is not fiscally transparent with respect to US1's $100x payment under the tax law of Country X (the tax law of FX, the investor of FY). See § 1.267A-5(a)(8)(ii). Thus, FY is a reverse hybrid with respect to the payment. See § 1.267A-2(d)(2) and (f). Therefore, for reasons similar to those discussed in paragraphs (c)(5)(ii)(B) and (C) of this section, the entire $100x payment is a disqualified hybrid amount.
(6) Example 6. Branch mismatch payment —(i) Facts. FX holds all the interests of US1 and FZ. FZ owns BB, a Country B branch that gives rise to a taxable presence in Country B under Country Z tax law but not under Country B tax law. On date 1, US1 pays $50x to FZ. The amount is treated as a royalty for U.S. tax purposes and Country Z tax purposes. Under Country Z tax law, the amount is treated as income attributable to BB and, as a consequence of County Z tax law exempting income attributable to a branch, is excluded from FZ's income.
(ii) Analysis. US1 is a specified party and thus a deduction for its $50x specified payment is subject to disallowance under section 267A. As described in paragraphs (c)(6)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section, the entire $50x payment is a disqualified hybrid amount under the branch mismatch rule of § 1.267A-2(e) and, as a result, a deduction for the payment is disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(1).
(A) US1's payment is a branch mismatch payment because under Country Z tax law (the tax law of FZ, a home office that is related to US1) the payment is treated as income attributable to BB, and BB is not a taxable branch (that is, under Country B tax law, BB does not give rise to a taxable presence). See § 1.267A-2(e)(2) and (f). Therefore, § 1.267A-2(e) applies to the payment. The result would be the same if instead BB were a taxable branch and, under Country B tax law, US1's payment were treated as income attributable to FZ, the home office, and not BB. See § 1.267A-2(e)(2).
(B) For US1's payment to be a disqualified hybrid amount under § 1.267A-2(e), a no-inclusion must occur with respect to FZ. See § 1.267A-2(e)(1)(i). As a consequence of the Country Z branch exemption, FZ includes $0 of the payment in income and therefore a $50x no-inclusion occurs with respect to FZ. See § 1.267A-3(a).
(C) Pursuant to § 1.267A-2(e)(1)(ii), FZ's $50x no-inclusion gives rise to a disqualified hybrid amount to the extent that it is a result of US1's payment being a branch mismatch payment. FZ's $50x no-inclusion is a result of the payment being a branch mismatch payment because, were the payment to not be treated as income attributable to BB for Country Z tax purposes, FZ would include $50x in income and, consequently, the no-inclusion would not occur.
(7) Example 7. Reduction of disqualified hybrid amount for certain amounts includible in income —(i) Facts. US1 and FW hold 60% and 40%, respectively, of the interests of FX, and FX holds all the interests of FZ. Each of FX and FZ is a specified party that is a CFC. FX holds an instrument issued by FZ that it is treated as equity for Country X tax purposes and as indebtedness for U.S. tax purposes (the FX-FZ instrument). On date 1, FZ pays $100x to FX pursuant to the FX-FZ instrument. The amount is treated as a dividend for Country X tax purposes and as interest for U.S. tax purposes. In addition, pursuant to section 954(c)(6), the amount is not foreign personal holding company income of FX and, under section 951A, the amount is gross tested income (as described in § 1.951A-2(c)(1)) of FX. Further, were FZ allowed a deduction for the amount, it would be allocated and apportioned to gross tested income (as described in § 1.951A-2(c)(1)) of FZ. Lastly, Country X tax law provides an 80% participation exemption for dividends received from nonresident corporations and, as a result of such participation exemption, FX includes $20x of FZ's payment in income.
(ii) Analysis. FZ, a CFC, is a specified party and thus a deduction for its $100x specified payment is subject to disallowance under section 267A. But for § 1.267A-3(b), $80x of FZ's payment would be a disqualified hybrid amount (such amount, a “tentative disqualified hybrid amount”). See §§ 1.267A-2(a) and 1.267A-3(b)(1). Pursuant to § 1.267A-3(b), the tentative disqualified hybrid amount is reduced by $48x. See § 1.267A-3(b)(4). The $48x is the tentative disqualified hybrid amount to the extent that it increases US1's pro rata share of tested income with respect to FX under section 951A (calculated as $80x multiplied by 60%). See § 1.267A-3(b)(4). Accordingly, $32x of FZ's payment ($80x less $48x) is a disqualified hybrid amount under § 1.267A-2(a) and, as a result, $32x of the deduction is disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(1).
(iii) Alternative facts—United States shareholder is a domestic partnership. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(7)(i) of this section, except that US1 is a domestic partnership, 90% of the interests of which are held by US2 and the remaining 10% of which are held by an individual that is a nonresident alien (as defined in section 7701(b)(1)(B)). Thus, although each of US1 and US2 is a United States shareholder of FX, only US2 has a pro rata share of any tested item of FX. See § 1.951A-1(e). In addition, $43.2x of the $80x tentative disqualified hybrid amount increases US2's pro rata share of the tested income of FX (calculated as $80x multiplied by 60% multiplied by 90%). Thus, $36.8x of FZ's payment ($80x less $43.2x) is a disqualified hybrid amount under § 1.267A-2(a). See § 1.267A-3(b)(4).
(8) Example 8. Imported mismatch rule—direct offset —(i) Facts. FX holds all the interests of FW, and FW holds all the interests of US1. FX holds an instrument issued by FW that is treated as equity for Country X tax purposes and indebtedness for Country W tax purposes (the FX-FW instrument). FW holds an instrument issued by US1 that is treated as indebtedness for Country W and U.S. tax purposes (the FW-US1 instrument). In accounting period 1, FW pays $100x to FX pursuant to the FX-FW instrument. The amount is treated as an excludible dividend for Country X tax purposes (by reason of the Country X participation exemption) and as interest for Country W tax purposes. Also in accounting period 1, US1 pays $100x to FW pursuant to the FW-US1 instrument. The amount is treated as interest for Country W and U.S. tax purposes and is included in FW's income. The FX-FW instrument was not entered into pursuant to the same plan or series of related transactions pursuant to which the FW-US1 instrument was entered into.
(ii) Analysis. US1 is a specified party and thus a deduction for its $100x specified payment is subject to disallowance under section 267A. US1's $100x payment is neither a disqualified hybrid amount nor included or includible in income in the United States. See § 1.267A-4(a)(2)(v). In addition, FW's $100x deduction is a hybrid deduction because it is a deduction allowed to FW that results from an amount paid that is interest under Country W tax law, and were Country W law to have rules substantially similar to those under §§ 1.267A-1 through 1.267A-3 and 1.267A-5, a deduction for the payment would be disallowed (because under such rules the payment would be pursuant to a hybrid transaction and FX's no-inclusion would be a result of the hybrid transaction). See §§ 1.267A-2(a) and 1.267A-4(b). Under § 1.267A-4(a)(2), US1's payment is an imported mismatch payment, US1 is an imported mismatch payer, and FW (the foreign tax resident that includes the imported mismatch payment in income) is an imported mismatch payee. The imported mismatch payment is a disqualified imported mismatch amount to the extent that the income attributable to the payment is directly or indirectly offset by the hybrid deduction incurred by FW (a foreign tax resident that is related to US1). See § 1.267A-4(a)(1). Under § 1.267A-4(c)(1), the $100x hybrid deduction directly or indirectly offsets the income attributable to US1's imported mismatch payment to the extent that the payment directly or indirectly funds the hybrid deduction. The entire $100x of US1's payment directly funds the hybrid deduction because FW (the imported mismatch payee) incurs at least that amount of the hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(i). Accordingly, the entire $100x payment is a disqualified imported mismatch amount under § 1.267A-4(a)(1) and, as a result, a deduction for the payment is disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(2).
(iii) Alternative facts—long-term deferral. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(8)(i) of this section, except that the FX-FW instrument is treated as indebtedness for Country X and Country W tax purposes, and FW does not pay any amounts pursuant to the instrument during accounting period 1. In addition, under Country W tax law, FW is allowed to deduct interest under the FX-FW instrument as it accrues, whereas under Country X tax law FX does not take into account in its income interest under the FX-FW instrument until the interest is paid. Further, FW accrues $100x of interest during accounting period 1, and FW will not pay such amount to FX for more than 36 months after the end of accounting period 1. The results are the same as in paragraph (c)(8)(ii) of this section. That is, FW's $100x deduction for the accrued interest is a hybrid deduction, see §§ 1.267A-2(a), 1.267A-3(a), and 1.267A-4(b), and the income attributable to US1's $100x imported mismatch payment is offset by the hybrid deduction for the reasons described in paragraph (c)(8)(ii) of this section. As a result, a deduction for the payment is disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(2). The result would be the same even if the FX-FW instrument is expected to be redeemed or capitalized before the $100x of interest is paid such that FX will never take into account in its income (and therefore will not include in income) the $100x of interest.
(iv) Alternative facts—notional interest deduction. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(8)(i) of this section, except that there is no FX-FW instrument and thus FW does not pay any amounts to FX during accounting period 1. However, during accounting period 1, FW is allowed a $100x notional interest deduction with respect to its equity under Country W tax law. Pursuant to § 1.267A-4(b)(1)(ii), FW's notional interest deduction is a hybrid deduction. The results are the same as in paragraph (c)(8)(ii) of this section. That is, the income attributable to US1's $100x imported mismatch payment is offset by FW's hybrid deduction for the reasons described in paragraph (c)(8)(ii) of this section. As a result, a deduction for the payment is disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(2). The result would be the same if the tax law of Country W contains hybrid mismatch rules because FW's deduction is a deduction with respect to equity. See § 1.267A-4(b)(2)(i).
(v) Alternative facts—foreign hybrid mismatch rules prevent hybrid deduction. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(8)(i) of this section, except that the tax law of Country W contains hybrid mismatch rules, and under such rules FW is not allowed a deduction for the $100x that it pays to FX pursuant to the FX-FW instrument. The $100x paid by FW therefore does not give rise to a hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(b). Accordingly, because the income attributable to US1's payment to FW is not directly or indirectly offset by a hybrid deduction, the payment is not a disqualified imported mismatch amount. Therefore, a deduction for the payment is not disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(2).
(9) Example 9. Imported mismatch rule—indirect offsets and pro rata allocations —(i) Facts. FX holds all the interests of FZ, and FZ holds all the interests of US1 and US2. FX has a Country B branch that, for Country X and Country B tax purposes, gives rise to a taxable presence in Country B and is therefore a taxable branch (“BB”). Under the Country B-Country X income tax treaty, BB is a permanent establishment entitled to deduct expenses properly attributable to BB for purposes of computing its business profits under the treaty. In addition, BB is deemed to pay a royalty to FX for the right to use intangibles developed by FX equal to cost plus y%. The deemed royalty is a deductible expense properly attributable to BB under the Country B-Country X income tax treaty. For Country X tax purposes, any transactions between BB and X are disregarded. The deemed royalty is $80x for accounting period 1. Country B tax law does not permit a loss of a taxable branch to be shared with a tax resident or another taxable branch. In addition, an instrument issued by FZ to FX is properly reflected as an asset on the books and records of BB (the FX-FZ instrument). The FX-FZ instrument is treated as indebtedness for Country X, Country Z, and Country B tax purposes. In accounting period 1, FZ pays $80x to FX pursuant to the FX-FZ instrument; the amount is treated as interest for Country X, Country Z, and Country B tax purposes, and is treated as income attributable to BB for Country X and Country B tax purposes (but, for Country X tax purposes, is excluded from FX's income as a consequence of the Country X exemption for income attributable to a branch). Further, in accounting period 1, US1 and US2 pay $60x and $40x, respectively, to FZ pursuant to instruments that are treated as indebtedness for Country Z and U.S. tax purposes; the amounts are treated as interest for Country Z and U.S. tax purposes and are included in FZ's income. Lastly, neither the instrument pursuant to which US1 pays the $60x nor the instrument pursuant to which US2 pays the $40x was entered into pursuant to a plan or series of related transactions that includes the transaction or agreement giving rise to BB's deduction for the deemed royalty.
(ii) Analysis. US1 and US2 are specified parties and thus deductions for their specified payments are subject to disallowance under section 267A. Neither of the payments is a disqualified hybrid amount, nor is either of the payments included or includible in income in the United States. See § 1.267A-4(a)(2)(v). In addition, BB's $80x deduction for the deemed royalty is a hybrid deduction because it is a deduction allowed to BB that results from an amount paid that is treated as a royalty under Country B tax law (regardless of whether a royalty deduction would be allowed under U.S. law), and were Country B tax law to have rules substantially similar to those under §§ 1.267A-1 through 1.267A-3 and 1.267A-5, a deduction for the payment would be disallowed because under such rules the payment would be a deemed branch payment and Country X has an exclusion for income attributable to a branch. See §§ 1.267A-2(c) and 1.267A-4(b). Under § 1.267A-4(a)(2), each of US1's and US2's payments is an imported mismatch payment, US1 and US2 are imported mismatch payers, and FZ (the foreign tax resident that includes the imported mismatch payments in income) is an imported mismatch payee. The imported mismatch payments are disqualified imported mismatch amounts to the extent that the income attributable to the payments is directly or indirectly offset by the hybrid deduction incurred by BB (a foreign taxable branch that is related to US1 and US2). See § 1.267A-4(a). Under § 1.267A-4(c)(1), the $80x hybrid deduction directly or indirectly offsets the income attributable to the imported mismatch payments to the extent that the payments directly or indirectly fund the hybrid deduction. Paragraphs (c)(9)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section describe the extent to which the imported mismatch payments directly or indirectly fund the hybrid deduction.
(A) Neither US1's nor US2's payment directly funds the hybrid deduction because FZ (the imported mismatch payee) does not incur the hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(i). To determine the extent to which the payments indirectly fund the hybrid deduction, the amount of the hybrid deduction that is allocated to FZ must be determined. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(ii). FZ is allocated the hybrid deduction to the extent that it directly or indirectly makes a funded taxable payment to BB (the foreign taxable branch that incurs the hybrid deduction). See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(iii). The $80x that FZ pays pursuant to the FX-FZ instrument is a funded taxable payment of FZ to BB. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(v). Therefore, because FZ makes a funded taxable payment to BB that is at least equal to the amount of the hybrid deduction, FZ is allocated the entire amount of the hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(iii).
(B) But for US2's imported mismatch payment, the entire $60x of US1's imported mismatch payment would indirectly fund the hybrid deduction because FZ is allocated at least that amount of the hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(ii). Similarly, but for US1's imported mismatch payment, the entire $40x of US2's imported mismatch payment would indirectly fund the hybrid deduction because FZ is allocated at least that amount of the hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(ii). However, because the sum of US1's and US2's imported mismatch payments to FZ ($100x) exceeds the hybrid deduction allocated to FZ ($80x), pro rata adjustments must be made. See § 1.267A-4(e). Thus, $48x of US1's imported mismatch payment is considered to indirectly fund the hybrid deduction, calculated as $80x (the amount of the hybrid deduction) multiplied by 60% ($60x, the amount of US1's imported mismatch payment to FZ, divided by $100x, the sum of the imported mismatch payments that US1 and US2 make to FZ). Similarly, $32x of US2's imported mismatch payment is considered to indirectly fund the hybrid deduction, calculated as $80x (the amount of the hybrid deduction) multiplied by 40% ($40x, the amount of US2's imported mismatch payment to FZ, divided by $100x, the sum of the imported mismatch payments that US1 and US2 make to FZ). Accordingly, $48x of US1's imported mismatch payment, and $32x of US2's imported mismatch payment, are disqualified imported mismatch amounts under § 1.267A-4(a)(1) and, as a result, deductions for such amounts are disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(2).
(iii) Alternative facts—loss made available through foreign group relief regime. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(9)(i) of this section, except that FZ holds all the interests in FZ2, a body corporate that is a tax resident of Country Z, FZ2 (rather than FZ) holds all the interests of US1 and US2, and US1 and US2 make their respective $60x and $40x payments to FZ2 (rather than to FZ). Further, in accounting period 1, a $10x loss of FZ is made available to offset income of FZ2 through a Country Z foreign group relief regime. Pursuant to § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(vi), FZ and FZ2 are treated as a single foreign tax resident for purposes of § 1.267A-4(c) because a loss that is not incurred by FZ2 (FZ's $10x loss) is made available to offset income of FZ2 under the Country Z group relief regime. Accordingly, the results are the same as in paragraph (c)(9)(ii) of this section. That is, by treating FZ and FZ2 as a single foreign tax resident for purposes of § 1.267A-4(c), BB's hybrid deduction offsets the income attributable to US1's and US2's imported mismatch payments to the same extent as described in paragraph (c)(9)(ii) of this section.
(10) Example 10. Imported mismatch rule—ordering rules and rule deeming certain payments to be imported mismatch payments —(i) Facts. FX holds all the interests of FW, and FW holds all the interests of US1, US2, and FZ. FZ holds all the interests of US3. FX transfers cash to FW in exchange for an instrument that is treated as equity for Country X tax purposes and indebtedness for Country W tax purposes (the FX-FW instrument). FW transfers cash to US1 in exchange for an instrument that is treated as indebtedness for Country W and U.S. tax purposes (the FW-US1 instrument). The FX-FW instrument and the FW-US1 instrument were entered into pursuant to a plan a design of which was for deductions incurred by FW pursuant to the FX-FW instrument to offset income attributable to payments by US1 pursuant to the FW-US1 instrument. In accounting period 1, FW pays $125x to FX pursuant to the FX-FW instrument; the amount is treated as an excludible dividend for Country X tax purposes (by reason of the Country X participation exemption regime) and as interest for Country W tax purposes. Also in accounting period 1, US1 pays $50x to FW pursuant to the FW-US1 instrument; US2 pays $50x to FW pursuant to an instrument treated as indebtedness for Country W and U.S. tax purposes (the FW-US2 instrument); US3 pays $50x to FZ pursuant to an instrument treated as indebtedness for Country Z and U.S. tax purposes (the FZ-US3 instrument); and FZ pays $50x to FW pursuant to an instrument treated as indebtedness for Country W and Country Z tax purposes (FW-FZ instrument). The amounts paid by US1, US2, US3, and FZ are treated as interest for purposes of the relevant tax laws and are included in the income of FW (in the case of US1's, US2's and FZ's payment) or FZ (in the case of US3's payment). Lastly, neither the FW-US2 instrument, the FW-FZ instrument, nor the FZ-US3 instrument was entered into pursuant to a plan or series of related transactions that includes the transaction pursuant to which the FX-FW instrument was entered into.
(ii) Analysis. US1, US2, and US3 are specified parties (but FZ is not a specified party, see § 1.267A-5(a)(17)) and thus deductions for US1's, US2's, and US3's specified payments are subject to disallowance under section 267A. None of the specified payments is a disqualified hybrid amount, nor is any of the payments included or includible in income in the United States. See § 1.267A-4(a)(2)(v). Under § 1.267A-4(a)(2), each of the payments is an imported mismatch payment, US1, US2, and US3 are imported mismatch payers, and FW and FZ (the foreign tax residents that include the imported mismatch payments in income) are imported mismatch payees. The imported mismatch payments are disqualified imported mismatch amounts to the extent that the income attributable to the payments is directly or indirectly offset by FW's $125x hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(a)(1) and (b). Under § 1.267A-4(c)(1), the $125x hybrid deduction directly or indirectly offsets the income attributable to the imported mismatch payments to the extent that the payments directly or indirectly fund the hybrid deduction. Paragraphs (c)(10)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section describe the extent to which the imported mismatch payments directly or indirectly fund the hybrid deduction and are therefore disqualified hybrid amounts for which a deduction is disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(2).
(A) First, the $125x hybrid deduction offsets the income attributable to US1's imported mismatch payment, a factually-related imported mismatch payment that directly funds the hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(2)(i). The entire $50x of US1's payment directly funds the hybrid deduction because FW (the imported mismatch payee) incurs at least that amount of the hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(i). Accordingly, the entire $50x of the payment is a disqualified imported mismatch amount under § 1.267A-4(a)(1).
(B) Second, the remaining $75x hybrid deduction offsets the income attributable to US2's imported mismatch payment, a factually-unrelated imported mismatch payment that directly funds the remaining hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(2)(ii). The entire $50x of US2's payment directly funds the remaining hybrid deduction because FW (the imported mismatch payee) incurs at least that amount of the remaining hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(i). Accordingly, the entire $50x of the payment is a disqualified imported mismatch amount under § 1.267A-4(a)(1).
(C) Third, the remaining $25x hybrid deduction offsets the income attributable to US3's imported mismatch payment, a factually-unrelated imported mismatch payment that indirectly funds the remaining hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(2)(iii). The imported mismatch payment indirectly funds the remaining hybrid deduction to the extent that FZ (the imported mismatch payee) is allocated the remaining hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(ii). FZ is allocated the remaining hybrid deduction to the extent that it directly or indirectly makes a funded taxable payment to FW (the tax resident that incurs the hybrid deduction). See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(iii). The $50x that FZ pays to FW pursuant to the FW-FZ instrument is a funded taxable payment of FZ to FW. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(v). Therefore, because FZ makes a funded taxable payment to FW that is at least equal to the amount of the remaining hybrid deduction, FZ is allocated the remaining hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(iii). Accordingly, $25x of US3's payment indirectly funds the $25x remaining hybrid deduction and, consequently, $25x of US3's payment is a disqualified imported mismatch amount under § 1.267A-4(a)(2).
(iii) Alternative facts—amount deemed to be an imported mismatch payment. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(10)(i) of this section, except that US1 is not a domestic corporation but instead is a body corporate that is only a tax resident of Country E (hereinafter, “FE”) (thus, for purposes of this paragraph (c)(10)(iii), the FW-US1 instrument is instead issued by FE and is the “FW-FE instrument”). In addition, the tax law of Country E contains hybrid mismatch rules and the $50x FE pays to FW pursuant to the FW-FE instrument is subject to disallowance under a provision of the hybrid mismatch rules substantially similar to § 1.267A-4. Pursuant to § 1.267A-4(f)(2), the $50x that FE pays to FW pursuant to the FW-FE instrument is deemed to be an imported mismatch payment for purposes of determining the extent to which the income attributable to an imported mismatch payment is offset by FW's hybrid deduction (a hybrid deduction other than one described in § 1.267A-4(f)(1)). The results are the same as in paragraphs (c)(10)(ii)(B) and (C) of this section. That is, by treating the $50x that FE pays to FW as an imported mismatch payment, and for reasons similar to those described in paragraphs (c)(10)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section, $50x of FW's $125x hybrid deduction offsets income attributable to FE's imported mismatch payment, $50x of the remaining $75x hybrid deduction offsets income attributable to US2's imported mismatch payment, and the remaining $25x hybrid deduction offsets income attributable to US3's imported mismatch payment. Accordingly, the entire $50x of US2's payment is a disqualified imported mismatch amount, and $25x of US3's payment is a disqualified imported mismatch amount.
(iv) Alternative facts—amount deemed to be an imported mismatch payment and “waterfall” approach. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(10)(i) of this section, except that FZ holds all of the interests of US3 indirectly through FE, a body corporate that is only a tax resident of Country E (hereinafter, “FE”), and US3 makes its $50x payment to FE (rather than to FZ); such amount is treated as interest for Country E tax purposes and is included in FE's income. In addition, during accounting period 1, FE pays $50x to FZ pursuant to an instrument; such amount is treated as interest for Country E and Country Z tax purposes, and is included in FZ's income. Further, the tax law of Country E contains hybrid mismatch rules and the $50x FE pays to FZ pursuant to the instrument is subject to disallowance under a provision of the hybrid mismatch rules substantially similar to § 1.267A-4. For purposes of determining the extent to which the income attributable to an imported mismatch payment is directly or indirectly offset by a hybrid deduction, the $50x that FE pays to FZ is deemed to be an imported mismatch payment (and FE and FZ are deemed to be an imported mismatch payer and imported mismatch payee, respectively). See § 1.267A-4(f)(2). With respect to US1 and US2, the results are the same as described in paragraphs (c)(10)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section. No portion of US3's payment is a disqualified imported mismatch amount because, by treating the $50x that FE pays to FZ as an imported mismatch payment, the remaining $25x of FW's hybrid deduction offsets income attributable to FE's imported mismatch payment. This is because the remaining $25x of FW's hybrid deduction is indirectly funded solely by FE's imported mismatch payment (as opposed to also being funded by US3's imported mismatch payment), as FZ (the imported mismatch payee with respect to FE's payment) directly makes a funded taxable payment to FW, whereas FE (the imported mismatch payee with respect to US3's payment) indirectly makes a funded taxable payment to FW. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(ii) through (v) and (vii).
(11) Example 11. Imported mismatch rule—hybrid deduction of a CFC —(i) Facts. FX holds all the interests of US1, and FX and US1 hold 80% and 20%, respectively, of the interests of FZ, a specified party that is a CFC. US1 also holds all the interests of US2, and FX also holds all the interests of FY. FY is an entity established in Country Y, and is fiscally transparent for Country Y tax purposes but is not fiscally transparent for Country X tax purposes. In accounting period 1, US2 pays $100x to FZ pursuant to an instrument (the FZ-US2 instrument). The amount is treated as interest for U.S. tax purposes and Country Z tax purposes, and is included in FZ's income; in addition, for U.S. tax purposes, the amount is foreign personal holding company income of FZ. Also in accounting period 1, FZ pays $100x to FY pursuant to an instrument (the FY-FZ instrument). The amount is treated as interest for U.S. tax purposes and Country Z tax purposes, and none of the amount is included in FX's income. Under Country Z tax law, FZ is allowed a deduction for its entire $100x payment. Under § 1.267A-2(d), the entire $100x of FZ's payment is a disqualified hybrid amount (by reason of being made to a reverse hybrid) and, as a result, a deduction for the payment is disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(1); in addition, if a deduction were allowed for the $100x, it would be allocated and apportioned (under the rules of section 954(b)(5)) to gross subpart F income of FZ. Lastly, the FZ-US2 instrument was not entered into pursuant to a plan or series of related transactions that includes the transaction pursuant to which the FY-FZ instrument was entered into.
(ii) Analysis. US2 is a specified party and thus a deduction for its $100x specified payment is subject to disallowance under section 267A. As described in paragraphs (c)(11)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section, $80x of US2's payment is a disqualified imported mismatch amount for which a deduction is disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(2).
(A) $80x of US2's specified payment is an imported mismatch payment, calculated as $100x (the amount of the payment) less $0 (the disqualified hybrid amount with respect to the payment) less $20 (the amount of the payment that is included or includible in income in the United States). See § 1.267A-4(a)(2)(v). US2 is an imported mismatch payer and FZ (a foreign tax resident that includes the imported mismatch in income) is an imported mismatch payee. See § 1.267A-4(a)(2).
(B) But for § 1.267A-4(b)(2)(iv), the entire $100x deduction allowed to FZ under its tax law would be a hybrid deduction. See §§ 1.267A-2(d) and 1.267A-4(b)(1). However, pursuant to § 1.267A-4(b)(2)(iv), only $80x of the deduction is a hybrid deduction, calculated as $100x (the deduction to the extent that it would be a hybrid deduction but for § 1.267A-4(b)(2)(iv)) less $20x (the extent that FZ's payment giving rise to the deduction is a disqualified hybrid amount that is taken into account for purposes of § 1.267A-4(b)(2)(iv)(A)), less $0 (the extent that FZ's payment giving rise to the deduction is included or includible in income in the United States). See § 1.267A-4(b)(2)(iv). The $20x disqualified hybrid amount that is taken into account for purposes of § 1.267A-4(b)(2)(iv)(A) is calculated as $100x (the extent that FZ's payment is a disqualified hybrid amount) less $80x ($100x, the disqualified hybrid amount to the extent that, if allowed as a deduction, it would be allocated and apportioned to gross subpart F income, multiplied by 80%, the difference of 100% and the percentage of the stock (by value) of FZ that is owned by US1)). See § 1.267A-4(g).
(C) The $80x hybrid deduction offsets the income attributable to US2's imported mismatch payment, an imported mismatch payment that directly funds the hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(2)(ii). The entire $80x of US2's imported mismatch payment directly funds the hybrid deduction because FZ (the imported mismatch payee) incurs at least that amount of the hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(i). Accordingly, the entire $80x of US2's imported mismatch payment is a disqualified imported mismatch amount under § 1.267A-4(a)(1).
(12) Example 12. Imported mismatch rule—application first with respect to certain hybrid deductions, then with respect to other hybrid deductions —(i) Facts. FX holds all the interests of FZ, and FZ holds all the interests of each of US1 and FE. The tax law of Country E contains hybrid mismatch rules. FX holds an instrument issued by FZ that is treated as equity for Country X tax purposes and indebtedness for Country Z tax purposes (the FX-FZ instrument). In accounting period 1, FZ pays $10x to FX pursuant to the FX-FZ instrument. The amount is treated as an excludible dividend for Country X tax purposes (by reason of the Country X participation exemption) and as interest for Country Z tax purposes. Also in accounting period 1, FZ is allowed a $90x notional interest deduction with respect to its equity under Country Z tax law. In addition, in accounting period 1, US1 pays $100x to FZ pursuant to an instrument (the FZ-US1 instrument); the amount is treated as interest for U.S. tax purposes and Country Z tax purposes, and is included in FZ's income. Further, in accounting period 1, FE pays $40x to FZ pursuant to an instrument (the FZ-FE instrument); the amount is treated as interest for Country E and Country Z tax purposes, is included in FZ's income, and is subject to disallowance under a provision of Country E hybrid mismatch rules substantially similar to § 1.267A-4. Lastly, neither the FZ-US1 instrument nor the FZ-FE instrument was entered into pursuant to a plan or series of related transactions that includes the transaction pursuant to which the FX-FZ instrument was entered into.
(ii) Analysis. US1 is a specified party and thus a deduction for its $100x specified payment is subject to disallowance under section 267A. As described in paragraphs (c)(12)(ii)(A) through (D) of this section, $92x of US1's payment is a disqualified imported mismatch amount for which a deduction is disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(2).
(A) The entire $100x of US1's specified payment is an imported mismatch payment. See § 1.267A-4(a)(2)(v). US1 is an imported mismatch payer and FZ (a foreign tax resident that includes the imported mismatch payment in income) is an imported mismatch payee. See § 1.267A-4(a)(2).
(B) FZ has $100x of hybrid deductions (the $10x deduction for the payment pursuant to the FX-FZ instrument plus the $90x notional interest deduction). See § 1.267A-4(b). Pursuant to § 1.267A-4(f)(1), § 1.267A-4 is first applied by taking into account only the $90x hybrid deduction consisting of the notional interest deduction; in addition, for purposes of applying § 1.267A-4 in this manner, FE's $40x payment is not treated as an imported mismatch payment. Thus, the $90x hybrid deduction offsets the income attributable to US1's imported mismatch payment, an imported mismatch payment that directly funds the hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(2)(ii). Moreover, $90x of US1's imported mismatch payment directly funds the hybrid deduction because FZ (the imported mismatch payee) incurs at least that amount of the hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(i).
(C) Section § 1.267A-4 is next applied by taking into account only the $10x hybrid deduction consisting of the deduction for the payment pursuant to the FX-FZ instrument. See § 1.267A-4(f)(2). When applying § 1.267A-4 in this manner, and for purposes of determining the extent to which the income attributable to an imported mismatch payment is directly or indirectly offset by a hybrid deduction, FE's $40x payment is treated as an imported mismatch payment. See § 1.267A-4(f)(2). In addition, US1's imported mismatch payment is reduced from $100x to $10x. See § 1.267A-4(c)(4). But for FE's imported mismatch payment, the entire $10x of US1's imported mismatch payment would directly fund the $10x hybrid deduction because FZ incurred at least that amount of the hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(i). Similarly, but for US1's imported mismatch payment, the entire $40x of FE's imported mismatch payment would directly fund the $10x hybrid deduction because FZ incurred at least that amount of the hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(i). However, because the sum of US1's and FE's imported mismatch payments to FZ ($50x) exceeds the hybrid deduction incurred by FZ ($10x), pro rata adjustments must be made. See § 1.267A-4(e). Thus, $2x of US1's imported mismatch payment is considered to directly fund the hybrid deduction, calculated as $10x (the amount of the hybrid deduction) multiplied by 20% ($10x, the amount of US1's imported mismatch payment to FZ, divided by $50x, the sum of the imported mismatch payments that US1 and FE make to FZ). Similarly, $8x of FE's imported mismatch payment is considered to directly fund the hybrid deduction, calculated as $10x (the amount of the hybrid deduction) multiplied by 80% ($40x, the amount of FE's imported mismatch payment to FZ, divided by $50x, the sum of the imported mismatch payments that US1 and FE make to FZ). Accordingly, $2x of FZ's $10x hybrid deduction offsets income attributable to US1's $10x imported mismatch payment, and $8x of the hybrid deduction offsets income attributable to FE's $40x imported mismatch payment.
(D) Therefore, $92x of US1's imported mismatch payment is a disqualified imported mismatch amount, calculated as $90x (the amount that is a disqualified imported mismatch amount determined by applying § 1.267A-4 in the manner set forth in § 1.267A-4(f)(1)) plus $2x (the amount that is a disqualified imported mismatch amount determined by applying § 1.267A-4 in the manner set forth in § 1.267A-4(f)(2)). See § 1.267A-4(a)(1) and (f).
(iii) Alternative facts—amount deemed to be an imported mismatch payment solely funds hybrid instrument deduction. The facts are the same as in paragraph (c)(12)(i) of this section, except that FZ holds all of the interests of US1 indirectly through FE, and US1 makes its $100x payment to FE (rather than to FZ); such amount is treated as interest for U.S. and Country E tax purposes, and is included in FE's income. Moreover, FE pays $100x to FZ (rather than $40x); such amount is included in FZ's income, and is subject to disallowance under a provision of Country E hybrid mismatch rules substantially similar to § 1.267A-4. As described in paragraphs (c)(12)(iii)(A) through (D) of this section, $90x of US1's payment is a disqualified imported mismatch amount for which a deduction is disallowed under § 1.267A-1(b)(2).
(A) The entire $100x of US1's specified payment is an imported mismatch payment. See § 1.267A-4(a)(2)(v). US1 is an imported mismatch payer and FE (a foreign tax resident that includes the imported mismatch payment in income) is an imported mismatch payee. See § 1.267A-4(a)(2).
(B) FZ has $100x of hybrid deductions. See § 1.267A-4(b). Pursuant to § 1.267A-4(f)(1), § 1.267A-4 is first applied by taking into account only the $90x hybrid deduction consisting of the notional interest deduction; in addition, for purposes of applying § 1.267A-4 in this manner, FE's $100x payment is not treated as an imported mismatch payment. Thus, the $90x hybrid deduction offsets the income attributable to US1's imported mismatch payment, an imported mismatch payment that indirectly funds the hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(2)(iii). The imported mismatch payment indirectly funds the hybrid deduction because FE (the imported mismatch payee) is allocated the deduction, as FE makes a funded taxable payment (the $100x payment to FZ) that is at least equal to the amount of the deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(ii), (iii), and (v).
(C) Section § 1.267A-4 is next applied by taking into account only the $10x hybrid deduction consisting of the deduction for the payment pursuant to the FX-FZ instrument. See § 1.267A-4(f)(2). For purposes of applying § 1.267A-4 in this manner, FE's $100x payment is reduced from $100x to $10x, and similarly US1's imported mismatch payment is reduced from $100x to $10x. See § 1.267A-4(c)(4). Further, FE's $10x payment is treated as an imported mismatch payment. See § 1.267A-4(f)(2). The entire $10x of FE's imported mismatch payment directly funds the hybrid deduction because FZ (the imported mismatch payee with respect to FE's imported mismatch payment) incurs at least that amount of the hybrid deduction. See § 1.267A-4(c)(3)(i). Accordingly, the $10x hybrid deduction offsets the income attributable to FE's imported mismatch payment, and none of the income attributable to US1's imported mismatch payment.
(D) Therefore, $90x of US1's imported mismatch payment is a disqualified imported mismatch amount, calculated as $90x (the amount that is a disqualified imported mismatch amount determined by applying § 1.267A-4 in the manner set forth in § 1.267A-4(f)(1)) plus $0 (the amount that is a disqualified imported mismatch amount determined by applying § 1.267A-4 in the manner set forth in § 1.267A-4(f)(2)). See § 1.267A-4(a)(1) and (f).
§ 1.267A-7   Applicability dates.
(a) General rule. Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, §§ 1.267A-1 through 1.267A-6 apply to taxable years ending on or after December 20, 2018, provided that such taxable years begin after December 31, 2017. However, taxpayers may apply the regulations in §§ 1.267A-1 through 1.267A-6 in their entirety (including by taking into account paragraph (b) of this section) for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, and ending before December 20, 2018. In lieu of applying the regulations in §§ 1.267A-1 through 1.267A-6 (including paragraph (b) of this section), taxpayers may apply the provisions matching §§ 1.267A-1 through 1.267A-6 (including by taking into account the provision matching paragraph (b) of this section) from the Internal Revenue Bulletin (IRB) 2019-03 ( https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-irbs/irb19-03.pdf ) in their entirety for all taxable years ending on or before April 8, 2020.
(b) Special rules. The following special rules apply regarding applicability dates:
(1) Sections 1.267A-2(a)(4) (payments pursuant to interest-free loans and similar arrangements), (b) (disregarded payments), (c) (deemed branch payments), and (e) (branch mismatch transactions), 1.267A-4 (imported mismatch rule), and 1.267A-5(b)(5) (structured payments), except as provided in paragraph (b)(5) of this section, apply to taxable years beginning on or after December 20, 2018.
(2) Section 1.267A-5(a)(20) (defining structured arrangement), as well as the portions of §§ 1.267A-1 through 1.267A-3 that relate to structured arrangements and that are not otherwise described in paragraph (b) of this section, apply to taxable years beginning on or after December 20, 2018. However, in the case of a specified payment made pursuant to an arrangement entered into before December 22, 2017, § 1.267A-5(a)(20), and the portions of §§ 1.267A-1 through 1.267A-3 that relate to structured arrangements and that are not otherwise described in paragraph (b) of this section, apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2020.
(3) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(4) of this section, the rules provided in § 1.267A-5(a)(12)(ii) (swaps with significant nonperiodic payments) apply to notional principal contracts entered into on or after April 8, 2021. However, taxpayers may apply the rules provided in § 1.267A-5(a)(12)(ii) to notional principal contracts entered into before April 8, 2021.
(4) For a notional principal contract entered into before April 8, 2021, the interest equivalent rules provided in § 1.267A-5(b)(5)(ii)(B) (applied without regard to the references to § 1.267A-5(a)(12)(ii)) apply to a notional principal contract entered into on or after April 8, 2020.
(5) Section 1.267A-5(b)(5)(ii)(B) (interest equivalent rules) applies to transactions entered into on or after April 8, 2020.
§ 1.267(a)-1   Deductions disallowed.
(a) Losses. Except in cases of distributions in corporate liquidations, no deduction shall be allowed for losses arising from direct or indirect sales or exchanges of property between persons who, on the date of the sale or exchange, are within any one of the relationships specified in section 267(b). See § 1.267(b)-1.
(b) Unpaid expenses and interest. (1) No deduction shall be allowed a taxpayer for trade or business expenses otherwise deductible under section 162, for expenses for production of income otherwise deductible under section 212, or for interest otherwise deductible under section 163:
(i) If, at the close of the taxpayer's taxable year within which such items are accrued by the taxpayer or at any time within 2 1/2 months thereafter, both the taxpayer and the payee are persons within any one of the relationships specified in section 267(b) (see § 1.267(b)-1); and
(ii) If the payee is on the cash receipts and disbursements method of accounting with respect to such items of gross income for his taxable year in which or with which the taxable year of accrual by the debtor-taxpayer ends; and
(iii) If, within the taxpayer's taxable year within which such items are accrued by the taxpayer and 2 1/2 months after the close thereof, the amount of such items is not paid and the amount of such items is not otherwise (under the rules of constructive receipt) includible in the gross income of the payee.
(2) The provisions of section 267(a)(2) and this paragraph do not otherwise affect the general rules governing the allowance of deductions under an accrual method of accounting. For example, if the accrued expenses or interest are paid after the deduction has become disallowed under section 267(a)(2), no deduction would be allowable for the taxable year in which payment is made, since an accrual item is deductible only in the taxable year in which it is properly accruable.
(3) The expenses and interest specified in section 267(a)(2) and this paragraph shall be considered as paid for purposes of that section to the extent of the fair market value on the date of issue of notes or other instruments of similar effect received in payment of such expenses or interest if such notes or other instruments were issued in such payment by the taxpayer within his taxable year or within 2 1/2 months after the close thereof. The fair market value on the date of issue of such notes or other instruments of similar effect is includible in the gross income of the payee for the taxable year in which he receives the notes or other instruments.
(4) The provisions of this paragraph may be illustrated by the following example:
(c) Scope of section. Section 267(a) requires that deductions for losses or unpaid expenses or interest described therein be disallowed even though the transaction in which such losses, expenses, or interest were incurred was a bona fide transaction. However, section 267 is not exclusive. No deduction for losses or unpaid expenses or interest arising in a transaction which is not bona fide will be allowed even though section 267 does not apply to the transaction.
§ 1.267(a)-2T   Temporary regulations; questions and answers arising under the Tax Reform Act of 1984 (temporary).
(a) Introduction —(1) Scope. This section prescribes temporary question and answer regulations under section 267(a) and related provisions as amended by section 174 of the Tax Reform Act of 1984, Pub. L. No. 98-369.
(2) Effective date. Except as otherwise provided by Answer 2 or Answer 3 in paragraph (c) of this section, the effective date set forth in section 174(c) of the Tax Reform Act of 1984 applies to this section.
(b) Questions applying section 267(a)(2) and (b) generally. The following questions and answers deal with the application of section 267(a)(2) and (b) generally:
Question 1: Does section 267(a)(2) ever apply to defer the deduction of an otherwise deductible amount if the person to whom the payment is to be made properly uses the completed contract method of accounting with respect to such amount?
Answer 1: No. Section 267(a)(2) applies only if an otherwise deductible amount is owed to a related person under whose method of accounting such amount is not includible in income unless paid to such person. Regardless of when payment is made, an amount owed to a contractor using the completed contract method of accounting is includible in the income of the contractor in accordance with § 1.451-3(d) in the year in which the contract is completed or in which certain disputes are resolved.
Question 2: Does section 267(a)(2) ever apply to defer the deduction of otherwise deductible original issue discount as defined in sections 163(e) and 1271 through 1275 (“the OID rules”)?
Answer 2. No. Regardless of when payment is made, an amount owed to a lender that constitutes original issue discount is included in the income of the lender periodically in accordance with the OID rules. Similarly, section 267(a)(2) does not apply to defer an otherwise deductible amount to the extent section 467 or section 7872 requires periodic inclusion of such amount in the income of the person to whom payment is to be made, even though payment has not been made.
Question 3: Does section 267(a)(2) ever apply to defer the deduction of otherwise deductible unstated interest determined to exist under section 483?
Answer 3: Yes. If section 483 recharacterizes any amount as unstated interest and the other requirements of section 267(a)(2) are met, a deduction for such unstated interest will be deferred under section 267.
Question 4: Does section 267(a)(2) ever apply to defer the deduction of otherwise deductible cost recovery, depreciation, or amortization?
Answer 4: Yes, in certain cases. In general, section 267(a)(2) does not apply to defer the deduction of otherwise deductible cost recovery, depreciation, or amortization. Notwithstanding this general rule, if the other requirements of section 267(a)(2) are met, section 267(a)(2) does apply to defer deductions for cost recovery, depreciation, or amortization of an amount owed to a related person for interest or rent or for the performance or nonperformance of services, which amount the taxpayer payor capitalized or treated as a deferred expense (unless the taxpayer payor elected to capitalize or defer the amount and section 267(a)(2) would not have deferred the deduction of such amount if the taxpayer payor had not so elected). Amounts owed for services that may be subject to this provision include, for example, amounts owed for acquisition, development, or organizational services or for covenants not to compete. In applying this rule, payments made between persons described in any of the paragraphs of section 267(b) (as modified by section 267(e)) will be closely scrutinized to determine whether they are made in respect of capitalized costs (or costs treated as deferred expenses) that are subject to deferral under section 267(a)(2), or in respect of other capitalized costs not so subject.
Question 5: If a deduction in respect of an otherwise deductible amount is deferred by section 267(a)(2) and, prior to the time the amount is includible in the gross income of the person to whom payment is to be made, such person and the payor taxpayer cease to be persons specified in any of the paragraphs of section 267(b) (as modified by section 267(e)), is the deduction allowable as of the day on which the relationship ceases?
Answer 5: No. The deduction is not allowable until the day as of which the amount is includible in the gross income of the person to whom payment of the amount is made, even though the relationship ceases to exist at an earlier time.
Question 6: Do references in other sections to persons described in section 267(b) incorporate changes made to section 267(b) by section 174 of the Tax Reform Act of 1984?
Answer 6: Yes. References in other sections to persons described in section 267(b) take into account changes made to section 267(b) by section 174 of the Tax Reform Act of 1984 (without modification by section 267(e)(1)). For example, a transfer after December 31, 1983 (the effective date of the new section 267(b)(3) relationship added by the Tax Reform Act of 1984) of section 1245 class property placed in service before January 1, 1981, from one corporation to another corporation, 11 percent of the stock of which is owned by the first corporation, will not constitute recovery property (as defined in section 168) in the hands of the second corporation by reason of section 168(e)(4) (A)(i) and (D).
(c) Questions applying section 267(a) to partnerships. The following questions and answers deal with the application of section 267(a) to partnerships:
Question 1: Does section 267(a) disallow losses and defer otherwise deductible amounts at the partnership (entity) level?
Answer 1: Yes. If a loss realized by a partnership from a sale or exchange of property is disallowed under section 267(a)(1), that loss shall not enter into the computation of the partnership's taxable income. If an amount that otherwise would be deductible by a partnership is deferred by section 267(a)(2), that amount shall not enter into the computation of the partnership's taxable income until the taxable year of the partnership in which falls the day on which the amount is includible in the gross income of the person to whom payment of the amount is made.
Question 2: Does section 267(a)(1) ever apply to disallow a loss if the sale or exchange giving rise to the loss is between two partnerships even though the two partnerships are not persons specified in any of the paragraphs of section 267(b)?
Answer 2: Yes. If the other requirements of section 267(a)(1) are met, section 267(a)(1) applies to such losses arising as a result of transactions entered into after December 31, 1984 between partnerships not described in any of the paragraphs of section 267(b) as follows, and § 1.267(b)-1(b) does not apply. If the two partnerships have one or more common partners ( i.e., if any person owns directly, indirectly, or constructively any capital or profits interest in each of such partnerships), or if any partner in either partnership and one or more partners in the other partnership are persons specified in any of the paragraphs of section 267(b) (without modification by section 267(e)), a portion of the selling partnership's loss will be disallowed under section 267(a)(1). The amount disallowed under this rule is the greater of: (1) The amount that would be disallowed if the transaction giving rise to the loss had occurred between the selling partnership and the separate partners of the purchasing partnership (in proportion to their respective interests in the purchasing partnership); or (2) the amount that would be disallowed if such transaction had occurred between the separate partners of the selling partnership (in proportion to their respective interests in the selling partnership) and the purchasing partnership. Notwithstanding the general rule of this paragraph (c) Answer 2, no disallowance shall occur if the amount that would be disallowed pursuant to the immediately preceding sentence is less than 5 percent of the loss arising from the sale or exchange.
Question 3: Does section 267(a)(2) ever apply to defer an otherwise deductible amount if the taxpayer payor is a partnership and the person to whom payment of such amount is to be made is a partnership even though the two partnerships are not persons specified in any of the paragraphs of section 267(b) (as modified by section 267(e))?
Answer 3: Yes. If the other requirements of section 267(a)(2) are met, section 267(a)(2) applies to such amounts arising as a result of transactions entered into after December 31, 1984 between partnerships not described in any of the paragraphs of section 267(b) (as modified by section 267(e)) as follows, and § 1.267(b)-1(b) does not apply. If the two partnerships have one or more common partners ( i.e., if any person owns directly, indirectly, or constructively any capital or profits interest in each of such partnerships), or if any partner in either partnership and one or more partners in the other partnership are persons specified in any of the paragraphs of section 267(b) (without modification by section 267(e)), a portion of the payor partnership's otherwise allowable deduction will be deferred under section 267(a)(2). The amount deferred under this rule is the greater of: (1) The amount that would be deferred if the transaction giving rise to the otherwise allowable deduction had occurred between the payor partnership and the separate partners of the payee partnership (in proportion to their respective interests in the payee partnership); or (2) the amount that would be deferred if such transaction had occurred between the separate partners of the payor partnership (in proportion to their respective interests in the payor partnership) and the payee partnership. Notwithstanding the general rule of this paragraph (c) Answer 3, no deferral shall occur if the amount that would be deferred pursuant to the immediately preceding sentence is less than 5 percent of the otherwise allowable deduction.
Question 4: What does the phrase incurred at an annual rate not in excess of 12 percent mean as used in section 267(e)(5)(C)(ii)?
Answer 4: The phrase refers to interest that accrues but is not includible in the income of the person to whom payment is to be made during the taxable year of the payor. Thus, in determining whether the requirements of section 267(e)(5) (providing an exception to certain provisions of section 267 for certain expenses and interest of partnerships owning low income housing) are met with respect to a transaction, the requirement of section 267(e)(5)(C)(ii) will be satisfied, even though the total interest (both stated and unstated) paid or accrued in any taxable year of the payor taxpayer exceeds 12 percent, if the interest in excess of 12 percent per annum, compounded semi-annually, on the outstanding loan balance (principal and accrued but unpaid interest) is includible in the income of the person to whom payment is to be made no later than the last day of such taxable year of the payor taxpayer.
§ 1.267(a)-3   Deduction of amounts owed to related foreign persons.
(a) Purpose and scope. This section provides rules under section 267(a) (2) and (3) governing when an amount owed to a related foreign person that is otherwise deductible under Chapter 1 may be deducted. Paragraph (b) of this section provides the general rules, and paragraph (c) of this section provides exceptions and special rules.
(b) Deduction of amount owed to related foreign person —(1) In general. Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, section 267(a)(3) requires a taxpayer to use the cash method of accounting with respect to the deduction of amounts owed to a related foreign person. An amount that is owed to a related foreign person and that is otherwise deductible under Chapter 1 thus may not be deducted by the taxpayer until such amount is paid to the related foreign person. For purposes of this section, a related foreign person is any person that is not a United States person within the meaning of section 7701(a)(30), and that is related (within the meaning of section 267(b)) to the taxpayer at the close of the taxable year in which the amount incurred by the taxpayer would otherwise be deductible. Section 267(f) defines controlled group for purposes of section 267(b) without regard to the limitations of section 1563(b). An amount is treated as paid for purposes of this section if the amount is considered paid for purposes of section 1441 or section 1442 (including an amount taken into account pursuant to section 884(f)).
(2) Amounts covered. This section applies to otherwise deductible amounts that are of a type described in section 871(a)(1) (A), (B) or (D), or in section 881(a) (1), (2) or (4). The rules of this section also apply to interest that is from sources outside the United States. Amounts other than interest that are from sources outside the United States, and that are not income of a related foreign person effectively connected with the conduct by such related foreign person of a trade or business within the United States, are not subject to the rules of section 267(a) (2) or (3) or this section. See paragraph (c) of this section for rules governing the treatment of amounts that are income of a related foreign person effectively connected with the conduct of a trade or business within the United States by such related foreign person.
(3) Change in method of accounting. A taxpayer that uses a method of accounting other than that required by the rules of this section must change its method of accounting to conform its method to the rules of this section. The taxpayer's change in method must be made pursuant to the rules of section 446(e), the regulations thereunder, and any applicable administrative procedures prescribed by the Commissioner. Because the rules of this section prescribe a method of accounting, these rules apply in the determination of taxpayer's earnings and profits pursuant to § 1.1312-6(a).
(4) Examples. The provisions of this paragraph (b) may be illustrated by the following examples:
(ii) Regardless of its source, the interest owed to FC is an amount to which this section applies. Pursuant to the rules of this paragraph (b), the amount owed to FC by C will not be allowable as a deduction in Year 1. Section 267 does not preclude the deduction of this amount in Year 2.
(ii) The remaining amount of the commission, $y, is classified as exempt foreign trade income under section 923(a)(3) and is treated as income of FSC from sources outside the United States that is not effectively connected income. This amount is one to which the provisions of this section do not apply, since it is an amount other than interest from sources outside the United States and is not effectively connected income. Therefore, a deduction for $y is allowable to RS as of the day on which it accrues the otherwise deductible amount, without regard to section 267 (a)(2) and (a)(3) and the regulations thereunder.
(c) Exceptions and special rules —(1) Effectively connected income subject to United States tax. The provisions of section 267(a)(2) and the regulations thereunder, and not the provisions of paragraph (b) of this section, apply to an amount that is income of the related foreign person that is effectively connected with the conduct of a United States trade or business of such related foreign person. An amount described in this paragraph (c)(1) thus is allowable as a deduction as of the day on which the amount is includible in the gross income of the related foreign person as effectively connected income under sections 872(a)(2) or 882(b) (or, if later, as of the day on which the deduction would be so allowable but for section 267(a)(2)). However, this paragraph (c)(1) does not apply if the related foreign person is exempt from United States income tax on the amount owed, or is subject to a reduced rate of tax, pursuant to a treaty obligation of the United States (such as under an article relating to the taxation of business profits).
(2) Items exempt from tax by treaty. Except with respect to interest, neither paragraph (b) of this section nor section 267 (a)(2) applies to any amount that is income of a related foreign person with respect to which the related foreign person is exempt from United States taxation on the amount owed pursuant to a treaty obligation of the United States (such as under an article relating to the taxation of business profits). Interest that is effectively connected income of the related foreign person under sections 872(a)(2) or 882(b) is an amount covered by paragraph (c)(1) of this section. Interest that is not effectively connected income of the related foreign person is an amount covered by paragraph (b) of this section, regardless of whether the related foreign person is exempt from United States taxation on the amount owed pursuant to a treaty obligation of the United States.
(3) Items subject to reduced rate of tax by treaty. Paragraph (b) of this section applies to amounts that are income of a related foreign person with respect to which the related foreign person claims a reduced rate of United States income tax on the amount owed pursuant to a treaty obligation of the United States (such as under an article relating to the taxation of royalties).
(4) Certain amounts owed to certain controlled foreign corporations. An amount that is income of a related foreign person is exempt from the application of section 267(a)(3)(B)(i) if the related foreign person is a controlled foreign corporation that does not have any United States shareholders (as defined in section 951(b)) that own (within the meaning of section 958(a)) stock of the controlled foreign corporation. However, in this case, the amount is subject to the application of section 267(a)(3)(A) in the same manner as if the related foreign person were a foreign corporation that is not a controlled foreign corporation.
(d) Effective date. The rules of this section are effective with respect to interest that is allowable as a deduction under chapter 1 (without regard to the rules of this section) in taxable years beginning after December 31, 1983, but are not effective with respect to interest that is incurred with respect to indebtedness incurred on or before September 29, 1983, or incurred after that date pursuant to a contract that was binding on that date and at all times thereafter (unless the indebtedness or the contract was renegotiated, extended, renewed, or revised after that date). Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph (d), the regulations in this section issued under section 267 apply to all other deductible amounts that are incurred after July 31, 1989, but do not apply to amounts that are incurred pursuant to a contract that was binding on September 29, 1983, and at all times thereafter (unless the contract was renegotiated, extended, renewed, or revised after that date). Paragraph (c)(2) of this section applies to payments accrued on or after October 22, 2004. For payments accrued before October 22, 2004, see § 1.267(a)-3(c)(2), as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised as of April 1, 2004. Paragraph (c)(4) of this section applies to payments accrued on or after October 1, 2019. For payments accrued before October 1, 2019, a taxpayer may apply paragraph (c)(4) of this section for payments accrued during the last taxable year of a foreign corporation beginning before January 1, 2018, and each subsequent taxable year of the foreign corporation, provided that the taxpayer and United States persons that are related (within the meaning of section 267 or 707) to the taxpayer consistently apply such paragraph with respect to all foreign corporations. For payments accrued before October 22, 2004, see § 1.267(a)-3(c)(4), as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised as of April 1, 2004.
§ 1.267(b)-1   Relationships.
(a) In general. (1) The persons referred to in section 267(a) and § 1.267 (a)-1 are specified in section 267(b).
(2) Under section 267(b)(3), it is not necessary that either of the two corporations be a personal holding company or a foreign personal holding company for the taxable year in which the sale or exchange occurs or in which the expenses or interest are properly accruable, but either one of them must be such a company for the taxable year next preceding the taxable year in which the sale or exchange occurs or in which the expenses or interest are accrued.
(3) Under section 267(b)(9), the control of certain educational and charitable organizations exempt from tax under section 501 includes any kind of control, direct or indirect, by means of which a person in fact controls such an organization, whether or not the control is legally enforceable and regardless of the method by which the control is exercised or exercisable. In the case of an individual, control possessed by the individual's family, as defined in section 267(c)(4) and paragraph (a)(4) of § 1.267 (c)-1, shall be taken into account.
(b) Partnerships. (1) Since section 267 does not include members of a partnership and the partnership as related persons, transactions between partners and partnerships do not come within the scope of section 267. Such transactions are governed by section 707 for the purposes of which the partnership is considered to be an entity separate from the partners. See section 707 and § 1.707-1. Any transaction described in section 267(a) between a partnership and a person other than a partner shall be considered as occurring between the other person and the members of the partnership separately. Therefore, if the other person and a partner are within any one of the relationships specified in section 267(b), no deductions with respect to such transactions between the other person and the partnership shall be allowed:
(i) To the related partner to the extent of his distributive share of partnership deductions for losses or unpaid expenses or interest resulting from such transactions, and
(ii) To the other person to the extent the related partner acquires an interest in any property sold to or exchanged with the partnership by such other person at a loss, or to the extent of the related partner's distributive share of the unpaid expenses or interest payable to the partnership by the other person as a result of such transaction.
(2) The provisions of this paragraph may be illustrated by the following examples:
§ 1.267(c)-1   Constructive ownership of stock.
(a) In general. (1) The determination of stock ownership for purposes of section 267(b) shall be in accordance with the rules in section 267(c).
(2) For an individual to be considered under section 267(c)(2) as constructively owning the stock of a corporation which is owned, directly or indirectly, by or for members of his family it is not necessary that he own stock in the corporation either directly or indirectly. On the other hand, for an individual to be considered under section 267(c)(3) as owning the stock of a corporation owned either actually, or constructively under section 267(c)(1), by or for his partner, such individual must himself actually own, or constructively own under section 267(c)(1), stock of such corporation.
(3) An individual's constructive ownership, under section 267(c) (2) or (3), of stock owned directly or indirectly by or for a member of his family, or by or for his partner, is not to be considered as actual ownership of such stock, and the individual's constructive ownership of the stock is not to be attributed to another member of his family or to another partner. However, an individual's constructive ownership, under section 267(c)(1), of stock owned directly or indirectly by or for a corporation, partnership, estate, or trust shall be considered as actual ownership of the stock, and the individual's ownership may be attributed to a member of his family or to his partner.
(4) The family of an individual shall include only his brothers and sisters, spouse, ancestors, and lineal descendants. In determining whether any of these relationships exist, full effect shall be given to a legal adoption. The term ancestors includes parents and grandparents, and the term lineal descendants includes children and grandchildren.
(b) Examples. The application of section 267(c) may be illustrated by the following examples:
§ 1.267(d)-1   Amount of gain where loss previously disallowed.
(a) General rule. (1) If a taxpayer acquires property by purchase or exchange from a transferor who, on the transaction, sustained a loss not allowable as a deduction by reason of section 267(a)(1) (or by reason of section 24(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939), then any gain realized by the taxpayer on a sale or other disposition of the property after December 31, 1953, shall be recognized only to the extent that the gain exceeds the amount of such loss as is properly allocable to the property sold or otherwise disposed of by the taxpayer.
(2) The general rule is also applicable to a sale or other disposition of property by a taxpayer when the basis of such property in the taxpayer's hands is determined directly or indirectly by reference to other property acquired by the taxpayer from a transferor through a sale or exchange in which a loss sustained by the transferor was not allowable. Therefore, section 267(d) applies to a sale or other disposition of property after a series of transactions if the basis of the property acquired in each transaction is determined by reference to the basis of the property transferred, and if the original property was acquired in a transaction in which a loss to a transferor was not allowable by reason of section 267(a)(1) (or by reason of section 24(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939).
(3) The benefit of the general rule is available only to the original transferee but does not apply to any original transferee (for example, a donee or a person acquiring property from a decedent where the basis of property is determined under section 1014 or 1022) who acquired the property in any manner other than by purchase or exchange.
(4) The application of the provisions of this paragraph may be illustrated by the following examples:
(b) Determination of basis and gain with respect to divisible property —(1) Taxpayer's basis. When the taxpayer acquires divisible property or property that consists of several items or classes of items by a purchase or exchange on which loss is not allowable to the transferor, the basis in the taxpayer's hands of a particular part, item, or class of such property shall be determined (if the taxpayer's basis for that part is not known) by allocating to the particular part, item, or class a portion of the taxpayer's basis for the entire property in the proportion that the fair market value of the particular part, item, or class bears to the fair market value of the entire property at the time of the taxpayer's acquisition of the property.
(2) Taxpayer's recognized gain. Gain realized by the taxpayer on sales or other dispositions after December 31, 1953, of a part, item, or class of the property shall be recognized only to the extent that such gain exceeds the amount of loss attributable to such part, item, or class of property not allowable to the taxpayer's transferor on the latter's sale or exchange of such property to the taxpayer.
(3) Transferor's loss not allowable. (i) The transferor's loss on the sale or exchange of a part, item, or class of the property to the taxpayer shall be the excess of the transferor's adjusted basis for determining loss on the part, item, or class of the property over the amount realized by the transferor on the sale or exchange of the part, item, or class. The amount realized by the transferor on the part, item, or class shall be determined (if such amount is not known) in the same manner that the taxpayer's basis for such part, item, or class is determined. See subparagraph (1) of this paragraph.
(ii) If the transferor's basis for determining loss on the part, item, or class cannot be determined, the transferor's loss on the particular part, item, or class transferred to the taxpayer shall be determined by allocating to the part, item, or class a portion of his loss on the entire property in the proportion that the fair market value of such part, item, or class bears to the fair market value of the entire property on the date of the taxpayer's acquisition of the entire property.
(4) Examples. The application of the provisions of this paragraph may be illustrated by the following examples:
(c) Special rules. (1) Section 267(d) does not affect the basis of property for determining gain. Depreciation and other items which depend on such basis are also not affected.
(2) The provisions of section 267(d) shall not apply if the loss sustained by the transferor is not allowable to the transferor as a deduction by reason of section 1091, or section 118 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, which relate to losses from wash sales of stock or securities.
(3) In determining the holding period in the hands of the transferee of property received in an exchange with a transferor with respect to whom a loss on the exchange is not allowable by reason of section 267, section 1223(2) does not apply to include the period during which the property was held by the transferor. In determining such holding period, however, section 1223(1) may apply to include the period during which the transferee held the property which he exchanged where, for example, he exchanged a capital asset in a transaction which, as to him, was nontaxable under section 1031 and the property received in the exchange has the same basis as the property exchanged.
§ 1.267(d)-2   Effective/applicability dates.
Pursuant to section 7851(a)(1)(C), the regulations prescribed in § 1.267(d)-1, to the extent that they relate to determination of gain resulting from the sale or other disposition of property after December 31, 1953, with respect to which property a loss was not allowable to the transferor by reason of section 267(a)(1) (or by reason of section 24(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939), shall also apply to taxable years beginning before January 1, 1954, and ending after December 31, 1953, and taxable years beginning after December 31, 1953, and ending before August 17, 1954, which years are subject to the Internal Revenue Code of 1939. The provisions of § 1.267(d)-1(a)(3) relating to section 1022 are effective on and after January 19, 2017.
§ 1.267(f)-1   Controlled groups.
(a) In general —(1) Purpose. This section provides rules under section 267(f) to defer losses and deductions from certain transactions between members of a controlled group (intercompany sales). The purpose of this section is to prevent members of a controlled group from taking into account a loss or deduction solely as the result of a transfer of property between a selling member (S) and a buying member (B).
(2) Application of consolidated return principles. Under this section, S's loss or deduction from an intercompany sale is taken into account under the timing principles of § 1.1502-13 (intercompany transactions between members of a consolidated group), treating the intercompany sale as an intercompany transaction. For this purpose:
(i) The matching and acceleration rules of § 1.1502-13 (c) and (d), the definitions and operating rules of § 1.1502-13 (b) and (j), and the simplifying rules of § 1.1502-13(e)(1) apply with the adjustments in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section to reflect that this section—
(A) Applies on a controlled group basis rather than consolidated group basis; and
(B) Generally affects only the timing of a loss or deduction, and not it's attributes ( e.g., its source and character ) or the holding period of property.
(ii) The special rules under § 1.1502-13(f) (stock of members) and (g) (obligations of members) apply under this section only to the extent the transaction is also an intercompany transaction to which § 1.1502-13 applies.
(iii) Any election under § 1.1502-13 to take items into account on a separate entity basis does not apply under this section. See § 1.1502-13(e)(3).
(3) Other law. The rules of this section apply in addition to other applicable law (including nonstatutory authorities). For example, to the extent a loss or deduction deferred under this section is from a transaction that is also an intercompany transaction under § 1.1502-13(b)(1), attributes of the loss or deduction are also subject to recharacterization under § 1.1502-13. See also, sections 269 (acquisitions to evade or avoid income tax) and 482 (allocations among commonly controlled taxpayers). Any loss or deduction taken into account under this section can be deferred, disallowed, or eliminated under other applicable law. See, for example, section 1091 (loss eliminated on wash sale).
(b) Definitions and operating rules. The definitions in § 1.1502-13(b) and the operating rules of § 1.1502-13(j) apply under this section with appropriate adjustments, including the following:
(1) Intercompany sale. An intercompany sale is a sale, exchange, or other transfer of property between members of a controlled group, if it would be an intercompany transaction under the principles of § 1.1502-13, determined by treating the references to a consolidated group as references to a controlled group and by disregarding whether any of the members join in filing consolidated returns.
(2) S's losses or deductions. Except to the extent the intercompany sale is also an intercompany transaction to which § 1.1502-13 applies, S's losses or deductions subject to this section are determined on a separate entity basis. For example, the principles of § 1.1502-13(b)(2)(iii) (treating certain amounts not yet recognized as items to be taken into account) do not apply. A loss or deduction is from an intercompany sale whether it is directly or indirectly from the intercompany sale.
(3) Controlled group; member. For purposes of this section, a controlled group is defined in section 267(f). Thus, a controlled group includes a FSC (as defined in section 922) and excluded members under section 1563(b)(2), but does not include a DISC (as defined in section 992). Corporations remain members of a controlled group as long as they remain in a controlled group relationship with each other. For example, corporations become nonmembers with respect to each other when they cease to be in a controlled group relationship with each other, rather than by having a separate return year (described in § 1.1502-13(j)(7)). Further, the principles of § 1.1502-13(j)(6) (former common parent treated as continuation of group) apply to any corporation if, immediately before it becomes a nonmember, it is both the selling member and the owner of property with respect to which a loss or deduction is deferred (whether or not it becomes a member of a different controlled group filing consolidated or separate returns). Thus, for example, if S and B merge together in a transaction described in section 368(a)(1)(A), the surviving corporation is treated as the successor to the other corporation, and the controlled group relationship is treated as continuing.
(4) Consolidated taxable income. References to consolidated taxable income (and consolidated tax liability) include references to the combined taxable income of the members (and their combined tax liability). For corporations filing separate returns, it ordinarily will not be necessary to actually combine their taxable incomes (and tax liabilities) because the taxable income (and tax liability) of one corporation does not affect the taxable income (or tax liability) of another corporation.
(c) Matching and acceleration principles of § 1.1502-13 —(1) Adjustments to the timing rules. Under this section, S's losses and deductions are deferred until they are taken into account under the timing principles of the matching and acceleration rules of § 1.1502-13(c) and (d) with appropriate adjustments. For example, if S sells depreciable property to B at a loss, S's loss is deferred and taken into account under the principles of the matching rule of § 1.1502-13(c) to reflect the difference between B's depreciation taken into account with respect to the property and the depreciation that B would take into account if S and B were divisions of a single corporation; if S and B subsequently cease to be in a controlled group relationship with each other, S's remaining loss is taken into account under the principles of the acceleration rule of § 1.1502-13(d). For purposes of this section, the adjustments to § 1.1502-13 (c) and (d) include the following:
(i) Application on controlled group basis. The matching and acceleration rules apply on a controlled group basis, rather than a consolidated group basis. Thus if S and B are wholly-owned members of a consolidated group and 21% of the stock of S is sold to an unrelated person, S's loss continues to be deferred under this section because S and B continue to be members of a controlled group even though S is no longer a member of the consolidated group. Similarly, S's loss would continue to be deferred if S and B remain in a controlled group relationship after both corporations become nonmembers of their former consolidated group.
(ii) Different taxable years. If S and B have different taxable years, the taxable years that include a December 31 are treated as the same taxable years. If S or B has a short taxable year that does not include a December 31, the short year is treated as part of the succeeding taxable year that does include a December 31.
(iii) Transfer to a section 267(b) or 707(b) related person. To the extent S's loss or deduction from an intercompany sale of property is taken into account under this section as a result of B's transfer of the property to a nonmember that is a person related to any member, immediately after the transfer, under sections 267(b) or 707(b), or as a result of S or B becoming a nonmember that is related to any member under section 267(b), the loss or deduction is taken into account but allowed only to the extent of any income or gain taken into account as a result of the transfer. The balance not allowed is treated as a loss referred to in section 267(d) if it is from a sale or exchange by B (rather than from a distribution).
(iv) B's item is excluded from gross income or noncapital and nondeductible. To the extent S's loss would be redetermined to be a noncapital, nondeductible amount under the principles of § 1.1502-13, but is not redetermined under paragraph (c)(2) of this section (which generally renders the attribute redetermination rule inapplicable to sales between members of a controlled group), S's loss continues to be deferred. For purposes of this paragraph, stock held by S, stock held by B, stock held by all members of S's consolidated group, stock held by any member of a controlled group of which S is a member that was acquired from a member of S's consolidated group, and stock issued by T to a member of the controlled group must be taken into account in determining whether a loss would be redetermined to be a noncapital, nondeductible amount under the principles of § 1.1502-13. If the loss remains deferred, it is taken into account when S and B (including their successors) are no longer in a controlled group relationship. (If, however, the property is transferred to certain related persons, paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this section will cause the loss to be permanently disallowed.) For example, if S sells all of the T stock to B at a loss (in a transaction that is treated as a sale or exchange for Federal income tax purposes), and T subsequently liquidates in an unrelated transaction that qualifies under section 332, S's loss is deferred until S and B are no longer in a controlled group relationship. Similarly, if S owns all of the T stock and sells 30 percent of T's stock to B at a loss (in a transaction that is treated as a sale or exchange for Federal income tax purposes), and T subsequently liquidates, S's loss on the sale is deferred until S and B (including their successors) are no longer in a controlled group relationship.
(v) Circularity of references. References to deferral or elimination under the Internal Revenue Code or regulations do not include references to section 267(f) or this section. See, e.g., § 1.1502-13(a)(4) (applicability of other law).
(2) Attributes generally not affected. The matching and acceleration rules are not applied under this section to affect the attributes of S's intercompany item, or cause it to be taken into account before it is taken into account under S's separate entity method of accounting. However, the attributes of S's intercompany item may be redetermined, or an item may be taken into account earlier than under S's separate entity method of accounting, to the extent the transaction is also an intercompany transaction to which § 1.1502-13 applies. Similarly, except to the extent the transaction is also an intercompany transaction to which § 1.1502-13 applies, the matching and acceleration rules do not apply to affect the timing or attributes of B's corresponding items.
(d) Intercompany sales of inventory involving foreign persons —(1) General rule. Section 267(a)(1) and this section do not apply to an intercompany sale of property that is inventory (within the meaning of section 1221(1)) in the hands of both S and B, if—
(i) The intercompany sale is in the ordinary course of S's trade or business;
(ii) S or B is a foreign corporation; and
(iii) Any income or loss realized on the intercompany sale by S or B is not income or loss that is recognized as effectively connected with the conduct of a trade or business within the United States within the meaning of section 864 (unless the income is exempt from taxation pursuant to a treaty obligation of the United States).
(2) Intercompany sales involving related partnerships. For purposes of paragraph (d)(1) of this section, a partnership and a foreign corporation described in section 267(b)(10) are treated as members, provided that the income or loss of the foreign corporation is described in paragraph (d)(1)(iii) of this section.
(3) Intercompany sales in ordinary course. For purposes of this paragraph (d), whether an intercompany sale is in the ordinary course of business is determined under all the facts and circumstances.
(e) Treatment of a creditor with respect to a loan in nonfunctional currency. Sections 267(a)(1) and this section do not apply to an exchange loss realized with respect to a loan of nonfunctional currency if—
(1) The loss is realized by a member with respect to nonfunctional currency loaned to another member;
(2) The loan is described in § 1.988-1(a)(2)(i);
(3) The loan is not in a hyperinflationary currency as defined in § 1.988-1(f); and
(4) The transaction does not have as a significant purpose the avoidance of Federal income tax.
(f) Receivables. If S acquires a receivable from the sale of goods or services to a nonmember at a gain, and S sells the receivable at fair market value to B, any loss or deduction of S from its sale to B is not deferred under this section to the extent it does not exceed S's income or gain from the sale to the nonmember that has been taken into account at the time the receivable is sold to B.
(g) Earnings and profits. A loss or deduction deferred under this section is not reflected in S's earnings and profits before it is taken into account under this section. See, e.g., §§ 1.312-6(a), 1.312-7, and 1.1502-33(c)(2).
(h) Anti-avoidance rule. If a transaction is engaged in or structured with a principal purpose to avoid the purposes of this section (including, for example, by avoiding treatment as an intercompany sale or by distorting the timing of losses or deductions), adjustments must be made to carry out the purposes of this section.
(i) [Reserved]
(j) Examples. For purposes of the examples in this paragraph (j), unless otherwise stated, corporation P owns 75% of the only class of stock of subsidiaries S and B, X is a person unrelated to any member of the P controlled group, the taxable year of all persons is the calendar year, all persons use the accrual method of accounting, tax liabilities are disregarded, the facts set forth the only activity, and no member has a special status. If a member acts as both a selling member and a buying member (e.g., with respect to different aspects of a single transaction, or with respect to related transactions), the member is referred as to M (rather than as S or B). This section is illustrated by the following examples.
(b) Matching rule. Under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, S's sale of land to B is an intercompany sale. Under paragraph (c)(1) of this section, S's $30 loss is taken into account under the timing principles of the matching rule of § 1.1502-13(c) to reflect the difference for the year between B's corresponding items taken into account and the recomputed corresponding items. If S and B were divisions of a single corporation and the intercompany sale were a transfer between the divisions, B would succeed to S's $130 basis in the land and would have a $20 loss from the sale to X in Year 3. Consequently, S takes no loss into account in Years 1 and 2, and takes the entire $30 loss into account in Year 3 to reflect the $30 difference in that year between the $10 gain B takes into account and its $20 recomputed loss. The attributes of S's intercompany items and B's corresponding items are determined on a separate entity basis. Thus, S's $30 loss is long-term capital loss and B's $10 gain is ordinary income.
(c) Acceleration resulting from sale of B stock. The facts are the same as in paragraph (a) of this Example 1, except that on July 1 of Year 3 P sells all of its B stock to X (rather than B's selling the land to X). Under paragraph (c)(1) of this section, S's $30 loss is taken into account under the timing principles of the acceleration rule of § 1.1502-13(d) immediately before the effect of treating S and B as divisions of a single corporation cannot be produced. Because the effect cannot be produced once B becomes a nonmember, S takes its $30 loss into account in Year 3 immediately before B becomes a nonmember. S's loss is long-term capital loss.
(d) Subgroup principles applicable to sale of S and B stock. The facts are the same as in paragraph (a) of this Example 1, except that on July 1 of Year 3 P sells all of its S and B stock to X (rather than B's selling the land to X). Under paragraph (b)(3) of this section, S and B are considered to remain members of a controlled group as long as they remain in a controlled group relationship with each other (whether or not in the original controlled group). P's sale of their stock does not affect the controlled group relationship of S and B with each other. Thus, S's loss is not taken into account as a result of P's sale of the stock. Instead, S's loss is taken into account based on subsequent events (e.g., B's sale of the land to a nonmember).
(b) No loss taken into account. Under paragraph (b)(2) of this section, because P and S are not members of a consolidated group, § 1.1502-13(f)(2)(iii) does not apply to cause S to recognize a $30 loss under the principles of section 311(b). Thus, S has no loss to be taken into account under this section. (If P and S were members of a consolidated group, § 1.1502-13(f)(2)(iii) would apply to S's loss in addition to the rules of this section, and the loss would be taken into account in Year 3 as a result of P's sale to X.)
(b) Timing. Under paragraph (b)(2) of this section, S's loss is determined on a separate entity basis. Under paragraph (c)(1) of this section, S's loss is not taken into account before it is taken into account under S's separate entity method of accounting. Thus, although B takes its corresponding gain into account in Year 3, S has no loss to take into account until Year 4. Once S's loss is taken into account in Year 4, it is not deferred under this section because B's corresponding gain has already been taken into account. (If S and B were members of a consolidated group, S would be treated under § 1.1502-13(b)(2)(iii) as taking the loss into account in Year 3.)
(b) Timing and attributes. Under paragraph (a)(3) of this section, S's sale to B is subject to both § 1.1502-13 and this section. Under § 1.1502-13, S's loss is redetermined to be an ordinary loss by reason of B's activities. Under paragraph (b)(3) of this section, because S and B remain in a controlled group relationship with each other, the loss is not taken into account under the acceleration rule of § 1.1502-13(d) as modified by paragraph (c) of this section. See § 1.1502-13(a)(4). Nevertheless, S's loss is redetermined by § 1.1502-13 to be an ordinary loss, and the character of the loss is not further redetermined under this section. Thus, the loss continues to be deferred under this section, and will be taken into account as ordinary loss based on subsequent events (e.g., B's sale of the land to a nonmember).
(c) Resale to controlled group member. The facts are the same as in paragraph (a) of this Example 4, except that P owns 75% of X's stock, and B resells the land to X (rather than P's selling any B stock). The results for S's loss are the same as in paragraph (b) of this Example 4. Under paragraph (b) of this section, X is also in a controlled group relationship, and B's sale to X is a second intercompany sale. Thus, S's loss continues to be deferred and is taken into account under this section as ordinary loss based on subsequent events (e.g., X's sale of the land to a nonmember).
(b) Timing and attributes. Under paragraph (c) of this section, S's $30x loss is taken into account under the timing principles of the matching rule of § 1.1502-13(c) to reflect the difference in each year between B's gain taken into account and its recomputed loss. Under section 453, B takes into account $5x of gain in Year 4 and in Year 5. Therefore, S takes $20x of its loss into account in Year 3 to reflect the $20x difference in that year between B's $0 loss taken into account and its $20x recomputed loss. In addition, S takes $5x of its loss into account in Year 4 and in Year 5 to reflect the $5x difference in each year between B's $5x gain taken into account and its $0 recomputed gain. Although S takes into account a loss and B takes into account a gain, the attributes of B's $10x gain are determined on a separate entity basis, and therefore the interest charge under section 453A(c) applies to B's $10x gain on the installment sale beginning in Year 3.
(b) Timing. Under paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this section, because the partnership is a nonmember that is a related person under sections 267(b) and 707(b), S's $30 loss is taken into account in Year 3, but only to the extent of any income or gain taken into account as a result of the transfer. Under section 721, no gain or loss is taken into account as a result of the transfer to the partnership, and thus none of S's loss is taken into account. Any subsequent gain recognized by the partnership with respect to the property is limited under section 267(d). (The results would be the same if the P group were a consolidated group, and S's sale to B were also subject to § 1.1502-13.)
(b) Loss not deferred. Under paragraph (f) of this section, S takes its $10 loss into account in Year 2. (If the sale were not at fair market value, paragraph (f) of this section would not apply and none of S's $10 loss would be taken into account in Year 2.)
(c) Consolidated group. Assume instead that P owns all of the stock of S and B, and the P group is a consolidated group. In Year 1, S sells to X goods having a basis of $90 for X's $100 note (bearing a market rate of interest in excess of the applicable Federal rate, and providing for payment of principal in Year 5), and S takes into account $10 of income in Year 1. In Year 2, S sells the receivable to B for its $85 fair market value. In Year 3, P sells 25% of B's stock to X. Although paragraph (f) of this section provides that $10 of S's loss (i.e., the extent to which S's $15 loss does not exceed its $10 of income) is not deferred under this section, S's entire $15 loss is subject to § 1.1502-13 and none of the loss is taken into account in Year 2 under the matching rule of § 1.1502-13(c). See paragraph (a)(3) of this section (continued deferral under § 1.1502-13). P's sale of B stock results in B becoming a nonmember of the P consolidated group in Year 3. Thus, S's $15 loss is taken into account in Year 3 under the acceleration rule of § 1.1502-13(d). Nevertheless, B remains in a controlled group relationship with S and paragraph (f) of this section permits only $10 of S's loss to be taken into account in Year 3. See § 1.1502-13(a)(4) (continued deferral under section 267). The remaining $5 of S's loss continues to be deferred under this section and taken into account under this section based on subsequent events (e.g., B's collection of the note or P's sale of the remaining B stock to a nonmember).
(b) Timing. Under paragraph (c) of this section, S's $30 loss ordinarily is taken into account immediately before P's transfer of the S stock, under the timing principles of the acceleration rule of § 1.1502-13(d). Although taking S's loss into account results in a $30 negative stock basis adjustment under § 1.1502-32, because P has no plan or intention to dispose of its X stock, the negative adjustment will not immediately affect taxable income. P's transfer accelerates a loss that otherwise would be deferred, and an adjustment under paragraph (h) of this section is required. Thus, S's loss is never taken into account, and S's stock basis and earnings and profits are reduced by $30 under §§ 1.1502-32 and 1.1502-33 immediately before P's transfer of the S stock.
(c) Nonhistoric assets. Assume instead that, with a principal purpose to accelerate taking into account any further loss that may accrue in the value of the land without disposing of the land outside of the controlled group, P forms M with a $100 contribution on January 1 of Year 1 and S sells the land to M for $100. On December 1 of Year 1, when the value of the land has decreased to $90, M sells the land to B for $90. On July 1 of Year 3, while B still owns the land, P sells all of M's stock to X and M becomes a nonmember. Under paragraph (c) of this section, M's $10 loss ordinarily is taken into account under the timing principles of the acceleration rule of § 1.1502-13(d) immediately before M becomes a nonmember. (S's $30 loss is not taken into account under the timing principles of § 1.1502-13(c) or § 1.1502-13(d) as a result of M becoming a nonmember, but is taken into account based on subsequent events such as B's sale of the land to a nonmember or P's sale of the stock of S or B to a nonmember.) The land is not an historic asset of M and, although taking M's loss into account reduces P's basis in the M stock under § 1.1502-32, the negative adjustment only eliminates the $10 duplicate stock loss. Under paragraph (h) of this section, M's loss is never taken into account. M's stock basis, and the earnings and profits of M and P, are reduced by $10 under §§ 1.1502-32 and 1.1502-33 immediately before P's sale of the M stock.
(b) Timing. Under paragraph (a)(2) of this section, S's loss on the sale of the L stock to P1 is deferred. Under paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section, upon the liquidation of L, to the extent S's loss would be redetermined to be a noncapital, nondeductible amount under the principles of § 1.1502-13, S's loss continues to be deferred. Under the principles of § 1.1502-13, S's loss is not redetermined to be a noncapital, nondeductible amount to the extent of P1's $10 of gain recognized. Accordingly, S takes into account $10 of loss as a result of the liquidation. In determining whether the remainder of S's $20 loss would be redetermined to be a noncapital, nondeductible amount, under paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section, stock held by P1, stock held by M, and stock held by S is taken into account. Accordingly, under the principles of § 1.1502-13, the liquidation of L would be treated as a liquidation qualifying under section 332, and the remainder of S's loss would be redetermined to be a noncapital, nondeductible amount. Thus, under paragraph (c)(1)(iv), S's remaining $20 loss continues to be deferred until S and P1 are no longer in a controlled group relationship.
(b) Timing. Under paragraph (a)(2) of this section, P's loss on the sale of its T stock is deferred. Under paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section, upon the conversion of T, to the extent P's loss would be redetermined to be a noncapital, nondeductible amount under the principles of § 1.1502-13, P's loss continues to be deferred. In determining whether the loss would be redetermined to be a noncapital, nondeductible amount, stock held by FS (which was acquired from T) and stock held by FP (the buyer of the T stock from P and a member of P's controlled group) is taken into account. Accordingly, under the principles of § 1.1502-13 the deemed liquidation of T resulting from the conversion of T would be treated as a liquidation qualifying under section 332, and P's loss would be redetermined to be a noncapital, nondeductible amount. Thus, under paragraph (c)(1)(iv), P's loss continues to be deferred until P and FP are no longer in a controlled group relationship.
(k) Cross-reference. For additional rules applicable to the disposition, deconsolidation, or transfer of the stock of members of consolidated groups, see §§ 1.337(d)-2, 1.1502-13(f)(6), 1.1502-35, and 1.1502-36.
(l) Effective dates —(1) In general. This section applies with respect to transactions occurring in S's years beginning on or after July 12, 1995. If both this section and prior law apply to a transaction, or neither applies, with the result that items are duplicated, omitted, or eliminated in determining taxable income (or tax liability), or items are treated inconsistently, prior law (and not this section) applies to the transaction.
(2) Avoidance transactions. This paragraph (l)(2) applies if a transaction is engaged in or structured on or after April 8, 1994, with a principal purpose to avoid the rules of this section (and instead to apply prior law). If this paragraph (l)(2) applies, appropriate adjustments must be made in years beginning on or after July 12, 1995, to prevent the avoidance, duplication, omission, or elimination of any item (or tax liability), or any other inconsistency with the rules of this section.
(3) Effective/applicability date. Paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section applies to a loss that continues to be deferred pursuant to that paragraph if the event that would cause the loss to be redetermined as a noncapital nondeductible amount under the principles of § 1.1502-13 occurs on or after April 16, 2012.
(4) Prior law. For transactions occurring in S's years beginning before July 12, 1995 see the applicable regulations issued under sections 267 and 1502. See, e.g., §§ 1.267(f)-1, 1.267(f)-1T, 1.267(f)-2T, 1.267(f)-3, 1.1502-13, 1.1502-13T, 1.1502-14, 1.1502-14T, and 1.1502-31 (as contained in the 26 CFR part 1 edition revised as of April 1, 1995).
§ 1.268-1   Items attributable to an unharvested crop sold with the land.
In computing taxable income no deduction shall be allowed in respect of items attributable to the production of an unharvested crop which is sold, exchanged, or involuntarily converted with the land and which is considered as property used in the trade or business under section 1231(b)(4). Such items shall be so treated whether or not the taxable year involved is that of the sale, exchange, or conversion of such crop and whether they are for expenses, depreciation, or otherwise. If the taxable year involved is not that of the sale, exchange, or conversion of such crop, a recomputation of the tax liability for such year shall be made; such recomputation should be in the form of an “amended return” if necessary. For the adjustments to basis as a result of such disallowance, see section 1016(a)(11) and the regulations thereunder.
§ 1.269-1   Meaning and use of terms.
As used in section 269 and §§ 1.269-2 through 1.269-7:
(a) Allowance. The term allowance refers to anything in the internal revenue laws which has the effect of diminishing tax liability. The term includes, among other things, a deduction, a credit, an adjustment, an exemption, or an exclusion.
(b) Evasion or avoidance. The phrase evasion or avoidance is not limited to cases involving criminal penalties, or civil penalties for fraud.
(c) Control. The term control means the ownership of stock possessing at least 50 percent of the total combined voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote, or at least 50 percent of the total value of shares of all classes of stock of the corporation. For control to be “acquired on or after October 8, 1940”, it is not necessary that all of such stock be acquired on or after October 8, 1940. Thus, if A, on October 7, 1940, and at all times thereafter, owns 40 percent of the stock of X Corporation and acquires on October 8, 1940, an additional 10 percent of such stock, an acquisition within the meaning of such phrase is made by A on October 8, 1940. Similarly, if B, on October 7, 1940, owns certain assets and transfers on October 8, 1940, such assets to a newly organized Y Corporation in exchange for all the stock of Y Corporation, an acquisition within the meaning of such phrase is made by B on October 8, 1940. If, under the facts stated in the preceding sentence, B is a corporation, all of whose stock is owned by Z Corporation, then an acquisition within the meaning of such phrase is also made by Z Corporation on October 8, 1940, as well as by the shareholders of Z Corporation taken as a group on such date, and by any of such shareholders if such shareholders as a group own 50 percent of the stock of Z on such date.
(d) Person. The term person includes an individual, a trust, an estate, a partnership, an association, a company or a corporation.
§ 1.269-2   Purpose and scope of section 269.
(a) General. Section 269 is designed to prevent in the instances specified therein the use of the sections of the Internal Revenue Code providing deductions, credits, or allowances in evading or avoiding Federal income tax. See § 1.269-3.
(b) Disallowance of deduction, credit, or other allowance. Under the Code, an amount otherwise constituting a deduction, credit, or other allowance becomes unavailable as such under certain circumstances. Characteristic of such circumstances are those in which the effect of the deduction, credit, or other allowance would be to distort the liability of the particular taxpayer when the essential nature of the transaction or situation is examined in the light of the basic purpose or plan which the deduction, credit, or other allowance was designed by the Congress to effectuate. The distortion may be evidenced, for example, by the fact that the transaction was not undertaken for reasons germane to the conduct of the business of the taxpayer, by the unreal nature of the transaction such as its sham character, or by the unreal or unreasonable relation which the deduction, credit, or other allowance bears to the transaction. The principle of law making an amount unavailable as a deduction, credit, or other allowance in cases in which the effect of making an amount so available would be to distort the liability of the taxpayer, has been judicially recognized and applied in several cases. Included in these cases are Gregory v. Helvering (1935) (293 U.S. 465; Ct. D. 911, C.B. XIV-1, 193); Griffiths v. Helvering (1939) (308 U.S. 355; Ct. D. 1431, C.B. 1940-1, 136); Higgins v. Smith (1940) (308 U.S. 473; Ct. D. 1434, C.B. 1940-1, 127); and J. D. & A. B. Spreckles Co. v. Commissioner (1940) (41 B.T.A. 370). In order to give effect to such principle, but not in limitation thereof, several provisions of the Code, for example, section 267 and section 270, specify with some particularity instances in which disallowance of the deduction, credit, or other allowance is required. Section 269 is also included in such provisions of the Code. The principle of law and the particular sections of the Code are not mutually exclusive and in appropriate circumstances they may operate together or they may operate separately. See, for example, § 1.269-6.
§ 1.269-3   Instances in which section 269(a) disallows a deduction, credit, or other allowance.
(a) Instances of disallowance. Section 269 specifies two instances in which a deduction, credit, or other allowance is to be disallowed. These instances, described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 269(a), are those in which:
(1) Any person or persons acquire, or acquired on or after October 8, 1940, directly or indirectly, control of a corporation, or
(2) Any corporation acquires, or acquired on or after October 8, 1940, directly or indirectly, property of another corporation (not controlled, directly or indirectly, immediately before such acquisition by such acquiring corporation or its stockholders), the basis of which property in the hands of the acquiring corporation is determined by reference to the basis in the hands of the transferor corporation.
(b) Acquisition of control; transactions indicative of purpose to evade or avoid tax. If the requisite acquisition of control within the meaning of paragraph (1) of section 269(a) exists, the transactions set forth in the following subparagraphs are among those which, in the absence of additional evidence to the contrary, ordinarily are indicative that the principal purpose for acquiring control was evasion or avoidance of Federal income tax:
(1) A corporation or other business enterprise (or the interest controlling such corporation or enterprise) with large profits acquires control of a corporation with current, past, or prospective credits, deductions, net operating losses, or other allowances and the acquisition is followed by such transfers or other action as is necessary to bring the deduction, credit, or other allowance into conjunction with the income (see further § 1.269-6). This subparagraph may be illustrated by the following example:
(2) A person or persons organize two or more corporations instead of a single corporation in order to secure the benefit of multiple surtax exemptions (see section 11(c)) or multiple minimum accumulated earnings credits (see section 535(c)(2) and (3)).
(3) A person or persons with high earning assets transfer them to a newly organized controlled corporation retaining assets producing net operating losses which are utilized in an attempt to secure refunds.
(c) Acquisition of property; transactions indicative of purpose to evade or avoid tax. If the requisite acquisition of property within the meaning of paragraph (2) of section 269(a) exists, the transactions set forth in the following subparagraphs are among those which, in the absence of additional evidence to the contrary, ordinarily are indicative that the principal purpose for acquiring such property was evasion or avoidance of Federal income tax:
(1) A corporation acquires property having in its hands an aggregate carryover basis which is materially greater than its aggregate fair market value at the time of such acquisition and utilizes the property to create tax-reducing losses or deductions.
(2) A subsidiary corporation, which has sustained large net operating losses in the operation of business X and which has filed separate returns for the taxable years in which the losses were sustained, acquires high earning assets, comprising business Y, from its parent corporation. The acquisition occurs at a time when the parent would not succeed to the net operating loss carryovers of the subsidiary if the subsidiary were liquidated, and the profits of business Y are sufficient to offset a substantial portion of the net operating loss carryovers attributable to business X (see further Example 3 of § 1.269-6).
(d) Ownership changes to which section 382(l)(5) applies; transactions indicative of purpose to evade or avoid tax —(1) In general. Absent strong evidence to the contrary, a requisite acquisition of control or property in connection with an ownership change to which section 382(l)(5) applies is considered to be made for the principal purpose of evasion or avoidance of Federal income tax unless the corporation carries on more than an insignificant amount of an active trade or business during and subsequent to the title 11 or similar case (as defined in section 382(l)(5)(G)). The determination of whether the corporation carries on more than an insignificant amount of an active trade or business is made without regard to the continuity of business enterprise set forth in § 1.368-1(d). The determination is based on all the facts and circumstances, including, for example, the amount of business assets that continue to be used, or the number of employees in the work force who continue employment, in an active trade or business (although not necessarily the historic trade or business). Where the corporation continues to utilize a significant amount of its business assets or work force, the requirement of carrying on more than an insignificant amount of an active trade or business may be met even though all trade or business activities temporarily cease for a period of time in order to address business exigencies.
(2) Effective date. The presumption under paragraph (d) of this section applies to acquisitions of control or property effected pursuant to a plan of reorganization confirmed by a court in a title 11 or similar case (within the meaning of section 368(a)(3)(A)) after August 14, 1990.
(e) Relationship of section 269 to 11 U.S.C. 1129(d). In determining for purposes of section 269 of the Internal Revenue Code whether an acquisition pursuant to a plan of reorganization in a case under title 11 of the United States Code was made for the principal purpose of evasion or avoidance of Federal income tax, the fact that a governmental unit did not seek a determination under 11 U.S.C. 1129(d) is not taken into account and any determination by a court under 11 U.S.C. 1129(d) that the principal purpose of the plan is not avoidance of taxes is not controlling.
§ 1.269-4   Power of district director to allocate deduction, credit, or allowance in part.
The district director is authorized by section 269(b) to allow a part of the amount disallowed by section 269(a), but he may allow such part only if and to the extent that he determines that the amount allowed will not result in the evasion or avoidance of Federal income tax for which the acquisition was made. The district director is also authorized to use other methods to give effect to part of the amount disallowed under section 269(a), but only to such extent as he determines will not result in the evasion or avoidance of Federal income tax for which the acquisition was made. Whenever appropriate to give proper effect to the deduction, credit, or other allowance, or such part of it which may be allowed, this authority includes the distribution, apportionment, or allocation of both the gross income and the deductions, credits, or other allowances the benefit of which was sought, between or among the corporations, or properties, or parts thereof, involved, and includes the disallowance of any such deduction, credit, or other allowance to any of the taxpayers involved.
§ 1.269-5   Time of acquisition of control.
(a) In general. For purposes of section 269, an acquisition of control occurs when one or more persons acquire beneficial ownership of stock possessing at least 50 percent of the total combined voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote or at least 50 percent of the total value of share of all classes of stock of the corporation.
(b) Application of general rule to certain creditor acquisitions. (1) For purposes of section 269, creditors of an insolvent or bankrupt corporation (by themselves or in conjunction with other persons) acquire control of the corporation when they acquire beneficial ownership of the requisite amount of stock. Although insolvency or bankruptcy may cause the interests of creditors to predominate as a practical matter, creditor interests do not constitute beneficial ownership of the corporation's stock. Solely for purposes of section 269, creditors of a bankrupt corporation are treated as acquiring beneficial ownership of stock of the corporation no earlier than the time a bankruptcy court confirms a plan of reorganization.
(2) The provisions of this section are illustrated by the following example.
§ 1.269-6   Relationship of section 269 to section 382 before the Tax Reform Act of 1986.
Section 269 and §§ 1.269-1 through 1.269-5 may be applied to disallow a net operating loss carryover even though such carryover is not disallowed (in whole or in part) under section 382 and the regulations thereunder. This section may be illustrated by the following examples:
§ 1.269-7   Relationship of section 269 to sections 382 and 383 after the Tax Reform Act of 1986.
Section 269 and §§ 1.269-1 through 1.269-5 may be applied to disallow a deduction, credit, or other allowance notwithstanding that the utilization or amount of a deduction, credit, or other allowance is limited or reduced under section 382 or 383 and the regulations thereunder. However, the fact that the amount of taxable income or tax that may be offset by a deduction, credit, or other allowance is limited under section 382(a) or 383 and the regulations thereunder is relevant to the determination of whether the principal purpose of an acquisition is the evasion or avoidance of Federal income tax.
§ 1.269B-1   Stapled foreign corporations.
(a) Treatment as a domestic corporation —(1) General rule. Except as otherwise provided, if a foreign corporation is a stapled foreign corporation within the meaning of paragraph (b)(1) of this section, such foreign corporation will be treated as a domestic corporation for U.S. Federal income tax purposes. Accordingly, for example, the worldwide income of such corporation will be subject to the tax imposed by section 11. For application of the branch profits tax under section 884, and application of sections 871(a), 881, 1441, and 1442 to dividends and interest paid by a stapled foreign corporation, see §§ 1.884-1(h) and 1.884-4(d).
(2) Foreign owned exception. Paragraph (a)(1) of this section will not apply if a foreign corporation and a domestic corporation are stapled entities (as provided in paragraph (b) of this section) and such foreign and domestic corporations are foreign owned within the meaning of this paragraph (a)(2). A corporation will be treated as foreign owned if it is established to the satisfaction of the Commissioner that United States persons hold directly (or indirectly applying section 958(a)(2) and (3) and section 318(a)(4)) less than 50 percent of the total combined voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote and less than 50 percent of the total value of the stock of such corporation. For the consequences of a stapled foreign corporation becoming or ceasing to be foreign owned, therefore converting its status as either a foreign or domestic corporation within the meaning of this paragraph (a)(2), see paragraph (c) of this section.
(b) Definition of a stapled foreign corporation —(1) General rule. A foreign corporation is a stapled foreign corporation if such foreign corporation and a domestic corporation are stapled entities. A foreign corporation and a domestic corporation are stapled entities if more than 50 percent of the aggregate value of each corporation's beneficial ownership consists of interests that are stapled. In the case of corporations with more than one class of stock, it is not necessary for a class of stock representing more than 50 percent of the beneficial ownership of the foreign corporation to be stapled to a class of stock representing more than 50 percent of the beneficial ownership of the domestic corporation, provided that more than 50 percent of the aggregate value of each corporation's beneficial ownership (taking into account all classes of stock) are in fact stapled. Interests are stapled if a transferor of one or more interests in one entity is required, by form of ownership, restrictions on transfer, or other terms or conditions, to transfer interests in the other entity. The determination of whether interests are stapled for this purpose is based on the relevant facts and circumstances, including, but not limited to, the corporations' by-laws, articles of incorporation or association, and stock certificates, shareholder agreements, agreements between the corporations, and voting trusts with respect to the corporations. For the consequences of a foreign corporation becoming or ceasing to be a stapled foreign corporation ( e.g. , a corporation that is no longer foreign owned) under this paragraph (b)(1), see paragraph (c) of this section.
(2) Related party ownership rule. For purposes of determining whether a foreign corporation is a stapled foreign corporation, the Commissioner may, at his discretion, treat interests that otherwise would be stapled interests as not being stapled if the same person or related persons (within the meaning of section 267(b) or 707(b)) hold stapled interests constituting more than 50 percent of the beneficial ownership of both corporations, and a principal purpose of the stapling of those interests is the avoidance of U.S. income tax. A stapling of interests may have a principal purpose of tax avoidance even though the tax avoidance purpose is outweighed by other purposes when taken together.
(3) Example. The principles of paragraph (b)(1) of this section are illustrated by the following example:
(c) Changes in domestic or foreign status. The deemed conversion of a foreign corporation to a domestic corporation under section 269B is treated as a reorganization under section 368(a)(1)(F). Similarly, the deemed conversion of a corporation that is treated as a domestic corporation under section 269B to a foreign corporation is treated as a reorganization under section 368(a)(1)(F). For the consequences of a deemed conversion, including the closing of a corporation's taxable year, see §§ 1.367(a)-1(e), (f) and 1.367(b)-2(f).
(d) Includible corporation —(1) Except as provided in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, a stapled foreign corporation treated as a domestic corporation under section 269B nonetheless is treated as a foreign corporation in determining whether it is an includible corporation within the meaning of section 1504(b). Thus, for example, a stapled foreign corporation is not eligible to join in the filing of a consolidated return under section 1501, and a dividend paid by such corporation is not a qualifying dividend under section 243(b), unless a valid section 1504(d) election is made with respect to such corporation.
(2) A stapled foreign corporation is treated as a domestic corporation in determining whether it is an includible corporation under section 1504(b) for purposes of applying §§ 1.904(i)-1 and 1.861-11T(d)(6).
(e) U.S. treaties —(1) A stapled foreign corporation that is treated as a domestic corporation under section 269B may not claim an exemption from U.S. income tax or a reduction in U.S. tax rates by reason of any treaty entered into by the United States.
(2) The principles of this paragraph (e) are illustrated by the following example:
(f) Tax assessment and collection procedures —(1) In general. (i) Any income tax imposed on a stapled foreign corporation by reason of its treatment as a domestic corporation under section 269B (whether such income tax is shown on the stapled foreign corporation's U.S. Federal income tax return or determined as a deficiency in income tax) shall be assessed as the income tax liability of such stapled foreign corporation.
(ii) Any income tax assessed as a liability of a stapled foreign corporation under paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this section shall be considered as having been properly assessed as an income tax liability of the stapled domestic corporation (as defined in paragraph (f)(4)(i) of this section) and all 10-percent shareholders of the stapled foreign corporation (as defined in paragraph (f)(4)(ii) of this section). The date of such deemed assessment shall be the date the income tax liability of the stapled foreign corporation was properly assessed. The Commissioner may collect such income tax from the stapled domestic corporation under the circumstances set forth in paragraph (f)(2) of this section and may collect such income tax from any 10-percent shareholders of the stapled foreign corporation under the circumstances set forth in paragraph (f)(3) of this section.
(2) Collection from domestic stapled corporation. If the stapled foreign corporation does not pay its income tax liability that was properly assessed, the unpaid balance of such income tax or any portion thereof may be collected from the stapled domestic corporation, provided that the following conditions are satisfied—
(i) The Commissioner has issued a notice and demand for payment of such income tax to the stapled foreign corporation in accordance with § 301.6303-1 of this Chapter;
(ii) The stapled foreign corporation has failed to pay the income tax by the date specified in such notice and demand;
(iii) The Commissioner has issued a notice and demand for payment of the unpaid portion of such income tax to the stapled domestic corporation in accordance with § 301.6303-1 of this Chapter.
(3) Collection from 10-percent shareholders of the stapled foreign corporation. The unpaid balance of the stapled foreign corporation's income tax liability may be collected from a 10-percent shareholder of the stapled foreign corporation, limited to each such shareholder's income tax liability as determined under paragraph (f)(4)(iv) of this section, provided the following conditions are satisfied—
(i) The Commissioner has issued a notice and demand to the stapled domestic corporation for the unpaid portion of the stapled foreign corporation's income tax liability, as provided in paragraph (f)(2)(iii) of this section;
(ii) The stapled domestic corporation has failed to pay the income tax by the date specified in such notice and demand;
(iii) The Commissioner has issued a notice and demand for payment of the unpaid portion of such income tax to such 10-percent shareholder of the stapled foreign corporation in accordance with § 301.6303-1 of this Chapter.
(4) Special rules and definitions. For purposes of this paragraph (f), the following rules and definitions apply:
(i) Stapled domestic corporation. A domestic corporation is a stapled domestic corporation with respect to a stapled foreign corporation if such domestic corporation and the stapled foreign corporation are stapled entities as described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
(ii) 10-percent shareholder. A 10-percent shareholder of a stapled foreign corporation is any person that owned directly 10 percent or more of the total value or total combined voting power of all classes of stock in the stapled foreign corporation for any day of the stapled foreign corporation's taxable year with respect to which the income tax liability relates.
(iii) 10-percent shareholder in the case of indirect ownership of stapled foreign corporation stock. [Reserved]
(iv) Determination of a 10-percent shareholder's income tax liability. The income tax liability of a 10-percent shareholder of a stapled foreign corporation, for the income tax of the stapled foreign corporation under section 269B and this section, is determined by assigning an equal portion of the total income tax liability of the stapled foreign corporation for the taxable year to each day in such corporation's taxable year, and then dividing that portion ratably among the shares outstanding for that day on the basis of the relative values of such shares. The liability of any 10-percent shareholder for this purpose is the sum of the income tax liability allocated to the shares held by such shareholder for each day in the taxable year.
(v) Income tax. The term income tax means any income tax liability imposed on a domestic corporation under title 26 of the United States Code, including additions to tax, additional amounts, penalties, and interest related to such income tax liability.
(g) Effective dates —(1) Except as provided in this paragraph (g), the provisions of this section are applicable for taxable years that begin after July 29, 2005.
(2) Paragraphs (d)(1) and (f) of this section (except as applied to the collection of tax from any 10-percent shareholder of a stapled foreign corporation that is a foreign person) are applicable beginning on—
(i) July 18, 1984, for any foreign corporation that became stapled to a domestic corporation after June 30, 1983; and
(ii) January 1, 1987, for any foreign corporation that was stapled to a domestic corporation as of June 30, 1983.
(3) Paragraph (d)(2) of this section is applicable for taxable years beginning after July 22, 2003, except that in the case of a foreign corporation that becomes stapled to a domestic corporation on or after July 22, 2003, paragraph (d)(2) of this section applies for taxable years ending on or after July 22, 2003.
(4) Paragraph (e) of this section is applicable beginning on July 18, 1984, except as provided in paragraph (g)(5) of this section.
(5) In the case of a foreign corporation that was stapled to a domestic corporation as of June 30, 1983, which was entitled to claim benefits under an income tax treaty as of that date, and which remains eligible for such treaty benefits, paragraph (e) of this section will not apply to such foreign corporation and for all purposes of the Internal Revenue Code such corporation will continue to be treated as a foreign entity. The prior sentence will continue to apply even if such treaty is subsequently modified by protocol, or superseded by a new treaty, so long as the stapled foreign corporation continues to be eligible to claim such treaty benefits. If the treaty benefits to which the stapled foreign corporation was entitled as of June 30, 1983, are terminated, then a deemed conversion of the foreign corporation to a domestic corporation shall occur pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section as of the date of such termination.
§ 1.270-1   Limitation on deductions allowable to individuals in certain cases.
(a) Recomputation of taxable income. (1) Under certain circumstances, section 270 limits the deductions (other than certain deductions described in subsection (b) thereof) attributable to a trade or business carried on by an individual which are otherwise allowable to such individual under the provisions of chapter 1 of the Code or the corresponding provisions of prior revenue laws. If, in each of five consecutive taxable years (including at least one taxable year beginning after December 31, 1953, and ending after August 16, 1954), the deductions attributable to a trade or business carried on by an individual (other than the specially treated deductions described in paragraph (b) of this section) exceed the gross income derived from such trade or business by more than $50,000, the taxable income computed under section 63 (or the net income computed under the corresponding provisions of prior revenue laws) of such individual shall be recomputed for each of such taxable years.
(2) In recomputing the taxable income (or the net income, in the case of taxable years which are otherwise subject to the Internal Revenue Code of 1939) for each of the five taxable years, the deductions (other than the specially treated deductions described in paragraph (b) of this section with the exception of the net operating loss deduction) attributable to the trade or business carried on by the individual shall be allowed only to the extent of (i) the gross income derived from such trade or business, plus (ii) $50,000. The specially treated deductions described in paragraph (b) of this section (other than the net operating loss deduction) shall each be allowed in full. The net operating loss deduction, to the extent attributable to such trade or business, shall be disallowed in its entirety. Thus, a carryover or a carryback of a net operating loss so attributable, either from a year within the period of five consecutive taxable years or from a taxable year outside of such period, shall be ignored in making the recomputation of taxable income or net income, as the case may be.
(3) The limitations on deductions provided by section 270 are also applicable in determining under section 172, or the corresponding provisions of prior revenue laws, the amount of any net operating loss carryover or carryback from any year which falls within the provisions of section 270 to any year which does not fall within such provisions. Also, in determining under section 172, or the corresponding provisions of prior revenue laws, the amount of any net operating loss carryover from a year which falls within the provisions of section 270 to a year which does not fall within such provisions, the amount of net operating loss is to be reduced by the taxable income or net income, as the case may be (computed as provided in § 1.172-5, or 26 CFR (1939) 39.122-4(c) (Regulations 118), as the case may be and, in the case of any taxable year which falls within the provisions of section 270, determined after the application of section 270), of any taxable year preceding or succeeding the taxable year of the net operating loss to which such loss must first be carried back or carried over under the provisions of section 172(b), or the corresponding provisions of prior revenue laws, even though the net operating loss deduction is not an allowable deduction for such preceding or succeeding taxable year.
(4) If an individual carries on several trades or businesses, the deductions attributable to such trades or businesses and the gross income derived therefrom shall not be aggregated in determining whether the deductions (other than the specially treated deductions) exceed the gross income derived from such trades or businesses by more than $50,000 in any taxable year. For the purposes of section 270, each trade or business shall be considered separately. However, where a particular business of an individual is conducted in one or more forms such as a partnership, joint venture, or individual proprietorship, the individual's share of the profits and losses from each business unit must be aggregated to determine the applicability of section 270. See paragraphs (a)(8)(ii) and (b) of § 1.702-1, relating to applicability of section 270 to a partner. Where it is established that for tax purposes a husband and wife are partners in the same trade or business or that each is participating independently of the other in the same trade or business with his and her own money, the husband's gross income and deductions from that trade or business shall be considered separately from the wife's gross income and deductions from that trade or business even though they file a joint return. Where a taxpayer is engaged in a trade or business in a community property State under circumstances such that the income therefrom is considered to be community income, the taxpayer and his spouse are treated for purposes of section 270 as two individuals engaged separately in the same trade or business and the gross income and deductions attributable to the trade or business are allocated one-half to the taxpayer and one-half to the spouse. Where several business activities emanate from a single commodity, such as oil or gas or a tract of land, it does not necessarily follow that such activities are one business for the purposes of section 270. However, in order to be treated separately, it must be established that such business activities are actually conducted separately and are not closely interrelated with each other. For the purposes of section 270, the trade or business carried on by an individual must be the same in each of the five consecutive years in which the deductions (other than the specially treated deductions) exceed the gross income derived from such trade or business by more than $50,000.
(5) For the purposes of section 270, a taxable year may be part of two or more periods of five consecutive taxable years. Thus, if the deductions (other than the specially treated deductions) attributable to a trade or business carried on by an individual exceed the gross income therefrom by more than $50,000 for each of six consecutive taxable years, the fifth year of such six consecutive taxable years shall be considered to be a part both of a five-year period beginning with the first and ending with the fifth taxable year and of a five-year period beginning with the second and ending with the sixth taxable year.
(6) For the purposes of section 270, a short taxable year required to effect a change in accounting period constitutes a taxable year. In determining the applicability of section 270 in the case of a short taxable year, items of income and deduction are not annualized.
(b) Specially treated deductions. (1) For the purposes of section 270 and paragraph (a) of this section, the specially treated deductions are:
(i) Taxes,
(ii) Interest,
(iii) Casualty and abandonment losses connected with a trade or business deductible under section 165(c)(1) or the corresponding provisions of prior revenue laws,
(iv) Losses and expenses of the trade or business of farming which are directly attributable to drought,
(v) The net operating loss deduction allowed by section 172, or the corresponding provisions of prior revenue laws, and
(vi) Expenditures as to which a taxpayer is given the option, under law or regulations, either ( a ) to deduct as expenses when incurred, or ( b ) to defer or capitalize.
(2) For the purpose of subparagraph (1)(iv) of this paragraph, an individual is engaged in the “trade or business of farming” if he cultivates, operates, or manages a farm for gain or profit, either as owner or tenant. An individual who receives a rental (either in cash or in kind) which is based upon farm production is engaged in the trade or business of farming. However, an individual who receives a fixed rental (without reference to production) is engaged in the trade or business of farming only if he participates to a material extent in the operation or management of the farm. An individual engaged in forestry or the growing of timber is not thereby engaged in the trade or business of farming. An individual cultivating or operating a farm for recreation or pleasure rather than a profit is not engaged in the trade or business of farming. The term farm is used in its ordinarily accepted sense and includes stock, dairy, poultry, fruit, crop, and truck farms, and also plantations, ranches, ranges, and orchards. An individual is engaged in the trade or business of farming if he is a member of a partnership engaged in the trade or business of farming.
(3) In order for losses and expenses of the trade or business of farming to qualify as specially treated deductions under subparagraph (1)(iv) of this paragraph such losses and expenses must be directly attributable to drought conditions and not to other causes such as faulty management or unfavorable market conditions. In general, the following are the types of losses and expenses which, if otherwise deductible, may qualify as specially treated deductions under subparagraph (1)(iv) of this paragraph:
(i) Losses for damages to or destruction of property as a result of drought conditions, if such property is used in the trade or business of farming or is purchased for resale in the trade or business of farming;
(ii) Expenses directly related to raising crops or livestock which are destroyed or damaged by drought. Included in this category are, for example, payments for labor, fertilizer, and feed used in raising such crops or livestock. If such crops or livestock to which the expenditures relate are only partially destroyed or damaged by drought then only a proportionate part of the expenditures is regarded as specially treated deductions; and
(iii) Expenses which would not have been incurred in the absence of drought conditions, such as expenses for procuring pasture or additional supplies of water or feed.
(4) The expenditures referred to in subparagraph (1)(vi) of this paragraph include, but are not limited to, intangible drilling and development costs in the case of oil and gas wells as provided in section 263(c) and the regulations thereunder, and expenditures for the development of a mine or other natural deposit (other than an oil or gas well) as provided in section 616 and the regulations thereunder.
(5) The provisions of section 270(b) do not operate to make an expenditure a deductible item if it is not otherwise deductible under the law applicable to the particular year in which it was incurred. Thus, for example, if it is necessary, pursuant to the provisions of section 270, to recompute the taxable or net income of an individual for the taxable years 1950 through 1954, the individual in making the recomputation may not deduct expenditures paid or incurred in the years 1950 through 1953 which must be capitalized under the law applicable to those years, even though the expenditures are deductible under the Code.
(c) Applicability to taxable years otherwise subject to the Internal Revenue Code of 1939. The net income of a taxable year otherwise subject to the Internal Revenue Code of 1939 shall be recomputed pursuant to section 270 if (i) such taxable year is included in a period of five consecutive taxable years which includes at least one taxable year beginning after December 31, 1953, and ending after August 16, 1954, and (ii) the deductions (other than the specially treated deductions specified in section 270(b)) for each taxable year in such five-year period exceed the $50,000 limitation specified in section 270. As described in paragraph (a)(5) of this section, a taxable year may be part of two or more periods of five consecutive taxable years, one meeting the requirements for recomputation pursuant to section 130 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939 and the other meeting the requirements for recomputation pursuant to section 270 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, then the recomputation for such taxable year shall be made pursuant to section 270. For example, if a calendar year taxpayer sustains a loss from a trade or business for each of the years 1949 through 1954, the years 1950, 1951, 1952, and 1953 may be a part of two such periods of five consecutive taxable years. If, however, a taxable year is part of a period of five consecutive taxable years which meets the requirements for recomputation pursuant to section 130 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, but is not part of a period which meets the requirements for recomputation, pursuant to section 270, then a recomputation of net income for such taxable year must be made pursuant to section 130.
(d) Redetermination of tax. The tax imposed by Chapter 1 of the Code, or by the corresponding provisions of prior revenue laws, for each of the five consecutive taxable years specified in paragraph (a) of this section shall be redetermined upon the basis of the taxable income or net income of the individual, as the case may be, recomputed in the manner described in paragraph (a) of this section. If the assessment of a deficiency is prevented (except for the provisions of Part II (section 1311 and following), Subchapter Q, Chapter 1 of the Code, relating to the effect of limitations and other provisions in income tax cases) by the operation of any provision of law (e.g., sections 6501 and 6502, or the corresponding provisions of prior revenue laws, relating to the period of limitations upon assessment and collection) except section 7122, or the corresponding provisions of prior revenue laws, relating to compromises, or by any rule of law (e.g., res judicata), then the excess of the tax for such year as recomputed over the tax previously determined for such year shall be considered a deficiency for the purposes of section 270. The term tax previously determined shall have the same meaning as that assigned to such term by section 1314(a). See § 1.1314 (a)-1.
(e) Assessment of tax. Any amount determined as a deficiency in the manner described in paragraph (d) of this section in respect of any taxable year of the five consecutive taxable years specified in paragraph (a) of this section may be assessed and collected as if on the date of the expiration of the period of limitation for the assessment of a deficiency for the fifth taxable year of such five consecutive taxable years, one year remained before the expiration of the period of limitation upon assessment for the taxable year in respect of which the deficiency is determined. If the taxable year is one in respect of which an assessment could be made without regard to section 270, the amount of the actual deficiency as defined in section 6211(a) (whether it is greater than, equal to, or less than the deficiency determined under section 270(c)) shall be assessed and collected. However, if the assessment of a deficiency for such taxable year would be prevented by any provision of law (e.g., the period of limitation upon the assessment of tax) except section 7122, or the corresponding provision of prior revenue laws, relating to compromises, or by the operation of any rule of law (e.g., res judicata), then the excess of the tax recomputed as described in paragraph (d) of this section over the tax previously determined may be assessed and collected even though in fact there is no actual deficiency, as defined in section 6211(a), in respect of the given taxable year.
(f) Effective date; cross reference. The provisions of section 270 and this section apply to taxable years beginning before January 1, 1970. Thus, for instance, if the taxpayer had a profit of $2,000 attributable to a trade or business in 1965, section 270 and this section would not apply to the taxable years 1966 through 1970, even though he had losses of more than $50,000 in each of the 5 years ending with 1970. For provisions relating to activities not engaged in for profit applicable to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1969, see section 183 and the regulations thereunder.
§ 1.271-1   Debts owed by political parties.
(a) General rule. In the case of a taxpayer other than a bank (as defined in section 581 and the regulations thereunder), no deduction shall be allowed under section 166 (relating to bad debts) or section 165(g) (relating to worthlessness of securities) by reason of the worthlessness of any debt, regardless of how it arose, owed by a political party. For example, it is immaterial that the debt may have arisen as a result of services rendered or goods sold or that the taxpayer included the amount of the debt in income. In the case of a bank, no deduction shall be allowed unless, under the facts and circumstances, it appears that the bad debt was incurred to or purchased by, or the worthless security was acquired by, the taxpayer in accordance with its usual commercial practices. Thus, if a bank makes a loan to a political party not in accordance with its usual commercial practices but solely because the president of the bank has been active in the party no bad debt deduction will be allowed with respect to the loan.
(b) Definitions —(1) Political party. For purposes of this section and § 1.276-1, the term political party means a political party (as commonly understood), a National, State, or local committee thereof, or any committee, association, or organization, whether incorporated or not, which accepts contributions (as defined in subparagraph (2) of this paragraph) or makes expenditures (as defined in subparagraph (3) of this paragraph) for the purpose of influencing or attempting to influence the election of presidential or vice-presidential electors, or the selection, nomination, or election of any individual to any Federal, State, or local elective public office, whether or not such individual or electors are selected, nominated, or elected. Accordingly, a political party includes a committee or other group which accepts contributions or makes expenditures for the purpose of promoting the nomination of an individual for an elective public office in a primary election, or in any convention, meeting, or caucus of a political party. It is immaterial whether the contributions or expenditures are accepted or made directly or indirectly. Thus, for example, a committee or other group, is considered to be a political party, if, although it does not expend any funds, it turns funds over to another organization, which does expend funds for the purpose of attempting to influence the nomination of an individual for an elective public office. An organization which engages in activities which are truly nonpartisan in nature will not be considered a political party merely because it conducts activities with respect to an election campaign if, under all the facts and circumstances, it is clear that its efforts are not directed to the election of the candidates of any particular party or parties or to the selection, nomination or election of any particular candidate. For example, a committee or group will not be treated as a political party if it is organized merely to inform the electorate as to the identity and experience of all candidates involved, to present on a nonpreferential basis the issues or views of the parties or candidates as described by the parties or candidates, or to provide a forum in which the candidates are freely invited on a nonpreferential basis to discuss or debate the issues.
(2) Contributions. For purposes of this section and § 1.276-1, the term contributions includes a gift, subscription, loan, advance, or deposit, of money or anything of value, and includes a contract, promise, or agreement to make a contribution, whether or not legally enforceable.
(3) Expenditures. For purposes of this section and § 1.276-1, the term expenditures includes a payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or gift, of money or anything of value, and includes a contract, promise, or agreement to make an expenditure, whether or not legally enforceable.
§ 1.272-1   Expenditures relating to disposal of coal or domestic iron ore.
(a) Introduction. Section 272 provides special treatment for certain expenditures paid or incurred by a taxpayer in connection with a contract (hereafter sometimes referred to as a “coal royalty contract” or “iron ore royalty contract”) for the disposal of coal or iron ore the gain or loss from which is treated under section 631(c) as a section 1231 gain or loss on the sale of coal or iron ore. See paragraph (e) of § 1.631-3 for special rules relating to iron ore. The expenditures covered by section 272 are those which are attributable to the making and administering of such a contract or to the preservation of the economic interest retained under the contract. For examples of such expenditures, see paragraph (d) of this section. For a taxable year in which gross royalty income is realized under the contract of disposal, such expenditures shall not be allowed as a deduction. Instead, they are to be added to the adjusted depletion basis of the coal or iron ore disposed of in the taxable year in computing gain or loss under section 631(c). However, where no gross royalty income is realized under the contract of disposal in a particular taxable year, such expenditure shall be treated without regard to section 272.
(b) In general. (1) Where the disposal of coal or iron ore is covered by section 631(c), the provisions of section 272 and this section shall be applicable for a taxable year in which there is income under the contract of disposal. (For purposes of section 272 and this section, the term income means gross amounts received or accrued which are royalties or bonuses in connection with a contract to which section 631(c) applies.) All expenditures paid or incurred by the taxpayer during the taxable year which are attributable to the making and administering of the contract disposing of the coal or iron ore and all expenditures paid or incurred during the taxable year in order to preserve the owner's economic interest retained under the contract shall be disallowed as deductions in computing taxable income for the taxable year. The sum of such expenditures and the adjusted depletion basis of the coal or iron ore disposed of in the taxable year shall be used in determining the amount of gain or loss with respect to the disposal. See § 1.631-3. For special rule in case of loss, see paragraph (c) of this section. Section 272 and this section do not apply to capital expenditures, and such expenditures are not taken into account in computing gain or loss under section 631(c) except to the extent they are properly part of the depletable basis of the coal or iron ore.
(2) The expenditures covered under section 272 and this section are disallowed as a deduction only with respect to a taxable year in which income is realized under the coal royalty contract (or iron ore royalty contract) to which such expenditures are attributable. Where no income is realized under the contract in a taxable year, these expenditures shall be deducted as expenses for the production of income, or as a business expense, or they may be treated under section 266 (relating to taxes and carrying charges) if applicable.
(3) The provisions of section 272 and this section apply to a taxable year in which income from the disposal by the owner of coal or iron ore held by him for more than 1 year (6 months for taxable years beginning before 1977; 9 months for taxable years beginning in 1977) is subject to the provisions of section 631(c) even though the actual mining of coal or iron ore under the coal royalty contract (or iron ore royalty contract) does not take place during the taxable year. Where the right under the contract to mine coal or iron ore for which advance payment has been made expires, terminates, or is abandoned before the coal or iron ore is mined, and paragraph (c) of § 1.631-3 requires the owner to recompute his tax with respect to such payment, the recomputation must be made without applying the provisions of section 272 and this section.
(c) Losses. If, in any taxable year, the expenditures referred to in section 272 and this section plus the adjusted depletion basis (as defined in paragraph (b)(2) of § 1.631-3) of the coal or iron ore disposed of during the taxable year exceed the amount realized under the contract which is subject to section 631(c) during the taxable year, such excess shall be considered under section 1231 as a loss from the sale of property used in the trade or business and, to the extent not availed of as a reduction of gain under that section, shall be a loss deductible under section 165(a) (relating to the deduction of losses generally).
(d) Examples of expenditures. (1) The expenditures referred to in section 272 include, but are not limited to, the following items, if such items are attributable to the making or administering of the contract or preserving the economic interest therein: Ad valorem taxes imposed by State or local authorities, costs of fire protection, costs of insurance (other than liability insurance), costs incurred in administering the contract (including costs of bookkeeping and technical supervision), interest on loans, expenses of flood control, legal and technical expenses, and expenses of measuring and checking quantities of coal or iron ore disposed of under the contract. Whether the interest on loans is attributable to the making or administering of the contract or preserving the economic interest therein will depend upon the use to which the borrowed monies are put.
(2) Any expenditure referred to in this section which is applicable to more than one coal royalty contract or iron ore royalty contract shall be reasonably apportioned to each of such contracts. Furthermore, if an expenditure applies only in part to the making or administering of the contract or the preservation of the economic interest, then only such part shall be treated under section 272. The apportionment of the expenditure shall be made on a reasonable basis. For example, where a taxpayer has other income (such as income from oil or gas royalties, rentals, right of way fees, interest, or dividends) as well as income under section 631(c), and where the salaries of some of its employees or other expenses relate to both classes of income, such expenses shall be allocated reasonably between the income subject to section 631(c) and the other income. Where a taxpayer has more than one coal royalty contract or iron ore royalty contract, expenditures under this section relating to a contract from which no income has been received in the taxable year may not be allocated to income from another contract from which income has been received in the taxable year.
(3) The taxpayer may have expenses which are not attributable even partly to making and administering a coal royalty contract or iron ore royalty contract or to the preservation of the economic interest retained under the contract and, accordingly, are not included in the expenditures described in section 272. These include such items as ad valorem taxes imposed by State or local authorities on property not covered by the contract, salaries, wages, or other expenses entirely incident to the ownership and protection of such property and depreciation of improvements thereon, fire insurance on such property, charitable contributions, and similar expenses unrelated to the making or to the administering of coal royalty contracts or iron ore royalty contracts or preserving the taxpayer's economic interest retained therein.
(e) Nonapplication of section. For purposes of section 543, the provisions of section 272 shall have no application. For example, the taxpayer may, for the purposes of section 543(a)(3)(C) or the corresponding provisions of prior income tax laws, include in the sum of the deductions which are allowable under section 162 an amount paid to an attorney as compensation for legal services rendered in connection with the making of a coal royalty contract or iron ore royalty contract (assuming the expenditure otherwise qualifies under section 162 as an ordinary and necessary expense incurred in the taxpayer's trade or business), even though such expenditure is disallowed as a deduction under section 272.
§ 1.273-1   Life or terminable interests.
(a) In general. Amounts paid as income to the holder of a life or a terminable interest acquired by gift, bequest, or inheritance shall not be subject to any deduction for shrinkage (whether called by depreciation or any other name) in the value of such interest due to the lapse of time. In other words, the holder of such an interest so acquired may not set up the value of the expected future payments as corpus or principal and claim deduction for shrinkage or exhaustion thereof due to the passage of time. For the treatment generally of distributions to beneficiaries of an estate or trust, see Subparts A, B, C, and D (section 641 and following), Subchapter J, Chapter 1 of the Code, and the regulations thereunder. For basis of property acquired from a decedent and by gifts and transfers in trust, see sections 1014, 1015, and 1022, and the regulations thereunder.
(b) Effective/applicability date. The provisions in this section are applicable for taxable years beginning on or after September 16, 1958. The provisions of this section relating to section 1022 are effective on and after January 19, 2017.
§ 1.274-1   Disallowance of certain entertainment, gift and travel expenses.
Section 274 disallows in whole, or in part, certain expenditures for entertainment, gifts and travel which would otherwise be allowable under Chapter 1 of the Code. The requirements imposed by section 274 are in addition to the requirements for deductibility imposed by other provisions of the Code. If a deduction is claimed for an expenditure for entertainment, gifts, or travel, the taxpayer must first establish that it is otherwise allowable as a deduction under Chapter 1 of the Code before the provisions of section 274 become applicable. An expenditure for entertainment, to the extent it is lavish or extravagant, shall not be allowable as a deduction. The taxpayer should then substantiate such an expenditure in accordance with the rules under section 274(d). See § 1.274-5. Section 274 is a disallowance provision exclusively, and does not make deductible any expense which is disallowed under any other provision of the Code. Similarly, section 274 does not affect the includability of an item in, or the excludability of an item from, the gross income of any taxpayer. For specific provisions with respect to the deductibility of expenditures: for an activity of a type generally considered to constitute entertainment, amusement, or recreation, and for a facility used in connection with such an activity, as well as certain travel expenses of a spouse, etc., see § 1.274-2; for expenses for gifts, see § 1.274-3; for expenses for foreign travel, see § 1.274-4; for expenditures deductible without regard to business activity, see § 1.274-6; and for treatment of personal portion of entertainment facility, see § 1.274-7.