Company: CCIXW
Filing Date: 2025-12-05
Form Type: S-4/A
Source: 0001193125-25-309933
Chunk: 359

Company: Churchill Capital Corp IX/Cayman
Filing Date: 2025-12-05
Form: S-4/A
Chunk 359
---
For purposes of this discussion, a “PlusAI Non-U.S. Holder” is a beneficial owner (not including a partnership) of PlusAI Class A common stock that for U.S. federal income tax purposes is, or is treated as: • a non-resident alien individual, other than certain former citizens and residents of the U.S. subject to U.S. tax as expatriates; • a foreign corporation; or • an estate or trust that is not a U.S. Holder. but does not include an individual who is present in the U.S. for 183 days or more in the taxable year of disposition. If you are such an individual, you should consult your tax advisor regarding the U.S. federal income tax consequences of a Merger and whether you are treated as a resident for U.S. federal income tax purposes. ALL HOLDERS SHOULD CONSULT THEIR OWN TAX ADVISORS WITH RESPECT TO THE APPLICATION OF THE U.S. FEDERAL INCOME TAX LAWS TO THEIR PARTICULAR SITUATIONS AS WELL AS ANY TAX CONSEQUENCES OF THE MERGER ARISING UNDER THE U.S. FEDERAL ESTATE OR GIFT TAX LAWS OR UNDER THE LAWS OF ANY STATE, LOCAL OR NON-U.S. TAXING JURISDICTION OR UNDER ANY APPLICABLE INCOME TAX TREATY. General Each of PlusAI and CCIX intends for the Merger, taken together as an integrated transaction, to qualify as a single “reorganization” pursuant to Section 368(a) of the Code. PlusAI and CCIX cannot guarantee that the IRS will not challenge the intended tax treatment of the Merger, and that such a challenge will not be successful. None of PlusAI, CCIX, Merger Sub I, or Merger Sub II intend to obtain a ruling from the IRS with respect to the tax consequences of the Merger. Further, the closing of the Merger is not conditioned upon obtaining an opinion from counsel that the Merger will qualify as a reorganization. Accordingly, no assurance can be given that the IRS will not challenge the Merger’s qualification as a “reorganization” within the meaning of Section 368(a) of the Code or that a court would not sustain such a challenge. The following discussion assumes that the Earnout Right will be treated as consideration that can be received on a tax-deferred basis under the reorganization provisions of the Code, as opposed to taxable “boot.” If the Earnout Right is treated as taxable “boot,” the tax consequences described