31118 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 95 / Tuesday, May 16, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Mombrun of the office of the Assistant

Chief Counsel (Corporate), IRS.

However, other personnel from the IRS

and the Treasury Department

participated in their development.

List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1

Income taxes, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Proposed Amendments to the

Regulations

Accordingly, 26 CFR Part 1 is

proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 1—INCOME TAXES

Paragraph 1. The authority citation

for part 1 continues to read in part as

follows:

Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *.

Par. 2. Section 1.368–2 is amended by

revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as

follows:

§ 1.368–2 Definition of terms.

* * * * *

(b)(1) In order to qualify as a

reorganization under section

368(a)(1)(A), the transaction must be a

merger or consolidation involving two

corporations effected pursuant to the

laws of the United States or a State or

territory, or the District of Columbia. In

addition, by operation of such a merger

law, the transaction must result in one

corporation acquiring the assets of the

merging corporation and the merging

corporation ceasing to exist. Similarly,

by operation of such a consolidation

law, the transaction must result in one

newly formed corporation acquiring the

assets of both consolidating

corporations, and both consolidating

corporations ceasing to exist. Thus, the

merger under state or Federal law of an

entity that is disregarded as an entity

separate from its owner for Federal tax

purposes into an acquiring corporation

in which the owner exchanges its

interest in the disregarded entity for

stock in the acquiring corporation and

the disregarded entity ceases to exist as

a result of the transaction by operation

of the state or Federal merger law is not

a statutory merger qualifying as a

reorganization under section

368(a)(1)(A). Moreover, the merger of a

target corporation into an entity that is

disregarded as an entity separate from

its owner for Federal tax purposes that

does not lose its status as a disregarded

entity as a result of the transaction is not

a statutory merger qualifying as a

reorganization under section

368(a)(1)(A). Examples of entities that

are disregarded as entities separate from

their owners include a qualified REIT

subsidiary (within the meaning of

section 856(i)(2)), a qualified subchapter

S subsidiary (within the meaning of

section 1361(b)(3)(B)), and a business

entity that is not classified as a

corporation and that has a single owner

(as provided in § 301.7701–2(c)(2) of

this chapter). The preceding five

sentences apply to any transaction

occurring on or after [Date These

Regulations Are Published As Final

Regulations In The Federal Register].

* * * * *

Robert E. Wenzel,

Deputy Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

[FR Doc. 00–11902 Filed 5–11–00; 2:30 pm]

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

26 CFR Part 1

[REG–100163–00]

RIN 1545–AX73

Applying Section 197 to Partnerships;

Hearing Cancellation

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS),

Treasury.

ACTION: Cancellation of notice of public

hearing on proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This document provides

notice of cancellation of a public

hearing on proposed regulations relating

to the application of section 197 to

partnerships.

DATES: The public hearing originally

scheduled for Wednesday, May 24,

2000, at 10 a.m., is canceled.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Guy

R. Traynor of the Regulations Unit,

Assistant Chief Counsel (Corporate), at

(202) 622–7180 (not a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice

of proposed rulemaking and notice of

public hearing that appeared in the

Federal Register on January 25, 2000,

(65 FR 3903), announced that a public

hearing was scheduled for May 24,

2000, at 10 a.m., in room 2615, Internal

Revenue Building, 1111 Constitution

Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The

subject of the public hearing is proposed

regulations under section 197 of the

Internal Revenue Code. The deadline for

requests to speak and outlines of oral

comments expired on May 3, 2000.

The notice of proposed rulemaking

and notice of public hearing, instructed

those interested in testifying at the

public hearing to submit a request to

speak and an outline of the topics to be

addressed. As of May 9, 2000, no one

has requested to speak. Therefore, the

public hearing scheduled for May 24,

2000, is canceled.

Cynthia E. Grigsby,

Chief, Regulations Unit, Assistant Chief

Counsel (Corporate).

[FR Doc. 00–12201 Filed 5–15–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

POSTAL SERVICE

39 CFR Part 111

Sack Preparation Changes for

Periodicals Nonletter-Size Pieces and

Periodicals Prepared on Pallets

AGENCY: Postal Service.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would

revise the standards for the preparation

of nonautomation nonletter-size carrier

route Periodicals prepared in sacks and

the preparation of Periodicals packages

and bundles on pallets. For Periodicals

carrier route mail in sacks, the proposed

standards would require carrier route

sacks to contain a minimum of 24 pieces

and would make 5-digit scheme carrier

route sacks a required sack sortation

level. All other sack sortation criteria

would remain unchanged. For

Periodicals prepared in packages and

bundles on pallets, the proposal would

require preparation of 5-digit scheme

pallets.

DATES: Comments on the proposed

standards must be received on or before

June 15, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed or delivered to the Manager,

Mail Preparation and Standards, U.S.

Postal Service, 475 L’Enfant Plaza SW,

Room 6800, Washington, DC 20260–

2405. Copies of all written comments

will be available for inspection and

photocopying at USPS Headquarters

Library, 475 L’Enfant Plaza SW, 11th

Floor N, Washington, DC between 9 a.m.

and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

Copies of comments also may be

requested via fax or email.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel

Walker, 202–268–3340;

jwalke13@email.usps.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Postal

Service and the Periodicals industry are

concerned over recent upward trends in

the costs associated with processing

Periodicals mail and have been studying

ways to reverse these trends. Several

ideas have come out of mutual

discussions that were based on joint

representation from the Postal Service

and the Periodicals industry. Cost

models suggest that we can reduce