Source: https://www.mtfn.com/article-Adam-Tutaj-Structuring-Techniques-Existing-Employer-Identification-Number-Cross-Species-Mergers-Conversions.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 09:05:15+00:00

Document:
Choice-of-entity literature is replete with commentary on the differences between entity forms and the substantive tax effects of moving between these forms. However, the seemingly ministerial consideration of Employer Identification Number (EIN) retention can also be a major issue. Having to change an EIN is certain to bring at least some level of administrative headache and cost, just by virtue of the payroll tax mechanics alone. Nevertheless, for some businesses, this can be a much bigger concern with real economic significance. Nowhere is this more keenly felt than on the “provider” side of the professional medical and allied health fields, where the regulation and mechanics of billing and collecting for services has caused the EIN to take on a significance almost on par with the form of entity itself.
When billing Medicare or Medicaid, a medical practice must include its tax identification number—usually an EIN—as well as a separate 10-digit unique identification number for medical billing purposes (the “National Provider Identifier”). Similarly, most private insurers require a practice to include its EIN as part of the medical claims process. Any change in a practice’s EIN may cause significant delay in the processing of claims reimbursement, or confusion as to payments that results in costly and time-consuming audits and reviews. Moreover, many private insurers rightly or wrongly—regard a change in EIN as tantamount to a change of the practice itself; so much so, that they may even use this event as an opportunity to require the practice to enter into a new provider contract for reimbursement (which may not be as favorable going forward). Accordingly, a practice with a number of decent provider agreements in place is going to be loath to upset its arrangements by having to change its EIN.
Additionally, apart from the usual liability and tax concerns that largely govern initial and subsequent choice of entity decisions, medical practices are often subject to a variety of regulatory considerations at the state level—particularly the so-called “corporate practice of medicine” rules—that may limit the entity forms available to them and, sometimes, may compel a change of entity form if they were not organized correctly at the outset. For example, in some states physician practices are constrained to use “professional corporations” or forms of professional partnerships in which each of the shareholders or partners remain personally liable for their own malpractice. Relatively newer entity forms, such as LLCs, may not be permitted.
This column will review the formal guidance—and some of the administrative folkways—associated with changing and maintaining EINs in a couple of the most common types of choice-of-entity transitions. In this regard, it is assumed that the decision to change entity forms has already been made—or compelled—based on ordinary business and tax considerations. Thus, the focus is simply on the mechanics by which the transition can be made so as to preserve an existing EIN that is a significant concern.
The partnership terminates under Code Sec. 708(b)(1)(B). A partnership shall be considered terminated if within a 12-month period there is a sale or exchange of at least 50% of the total interest in partnership capital and profits to another partner. If the purchaser and remaining partners immediately contribute the properties to a new partnership, they can retain the old partnership EIN.
A few of the scenarios described in this form guidance as requiring a new EIN are subject to a number of (unstated) qualifications, exceptions and folkways in this post-“check-the-box” era of cross-species mergers and conversions. Indeed, the breadth of expression in these “general rules” could be quite misleading if they are relied upon uncritically. We will explore now a couple of fairly common transition scenarios where an entity can structure its transition in a manner that will allow it to retain its existing EIN—namely, those instances where (i) a corporation becomes a partnership or disregarded entity; or (ii) a partnership incorporates or becomes a disregarded entity.
The “check-the-box” regulations, and their interplay with the IRS’s other guidance in the areas of tax-free reorganizations and formless conversions, appear to offer a means by which a corporation can become a partnership, or a disregarded entity, and still retain its original EIN—seemingly contrary to the general rule as broadly stated in Publication 1635.
To begin, Reg. §301.6109-1(h)(1) provides that “[a]ny entity that has an employer identification number (EIN) will retain that EIN if its federal tax classification changes under §301.7701-3” (emphasis added). With this clear statement as a starting point, the next question is whether a corporation can be an entity eligible to make an election under the “check-the-box” regulations.
Only a business entity that is not classified as a “corporation” under Reg. §301.7701-2(b)(1), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7) or (8) (an “eligible entity” ) can elect its federal tax classification under the “check-the-box” regulations.3 This would exclude any entity formed as a corporation under state law.4 Importantly, however, this list of ineligible entities does not include entities that are classified as a “corporation” solely by virtue of Reg. §301.7701-2(b)(2) — i.e. an association (as determined under Reg. §301.7701-3). This means that an LLC that has elected to be taxed as an association should remain an eligible entity (assuming that the applicable state law under which the LLC is organized does not otherwise describe the entity in such a way as to trip the application of a different exclusion).5 This possibility of a “check-the-box” election creates some structural alternatives that—while clearly adding additional transaction cost—may be worth it for the clear retention of the EIN that Reg. §301.6109-1(h)(1) affords. This is where the IRS’s guidance on tax-free reorganizations comes into play.
In Rev. Rul. 73-526, the IRS ruled that a corporation’s previously assigned EIN should be used by the surviving corporation in a statutory merger or reincorporation qualifying as an “F” reorganization.6 In reaching this conclusion, the IRS noted the broad language of Code Sec.
6011(b) and Code Sec. 6109(a), by which Congress granted the IRS discretionary authority to require the use of whatever identifying number is deemed necessary or helpful for the proper identification of a taxpayer, employer, employee or other person.
This same result was extended, in LTR 200528021,7 to a situation in which an S corporation proposed to convert to an LLC. The new LLC then proposed to make an election, under Reg. §301.7701-3, to be treated as an association taxable as a corporation for federal tax purposes effective as of the date of conversion. Against this background, the IRS ruled that the conversion qualified as an “F” reorganization and, per Rev. Rul. 73-526, the resulting LLC would retain the EIN of the converted corporation.
A. Form a new LLC and elect (via Form 8832) to be taxed as an association effective as of the date of formation.
B. Merge the corporation into the new LLC in a manner that would qualify as an “F” reorganization—with the new LLC as the surviving entity. Per Rev. Rul. 73-526, the surviving LLC should be permitted to retain the EIN of the original corporation merged or converted.
Here again, the mechanics of the “check-the-box” regulations appear to create an exception to the broadly stated general rule of Publication 1635 that the incorporation of a partnership, or operation of a partnership as a “sole proprietorship,” requires the resulting business to get a new EIN.
The IRS has ruled that the conversion of an existing “non-LLC” partnership (i.e., a general partnership, limited partnership or LLP) into an LLC also classified as a partnership does not require the resulting LLC to get a new EIN.13 Once the partnership takes the LLC form, a couple further options become available.
The new procedures for the re-assignment of EINs under the Internal Revenue Manual §3.13.2.25 suggest that there may be a fair bit of flexibility in practice that is not readily apparent from the published authority. However, where a business contemplating a change in entity form finds itself in circumstances where the preservation of its EIN is a critical consideration, it is still comforting to know that there are structural alternatives with authority behind them. In all events, it is important to have a solid record with the IRS that the EIN has, in fact, been transferred. In this regard, the use of the Form 8832 may be preferable to any “deemed” elections available through the expedient of formless conversion, for the simple reason that the business will ordinarily get some confirmation back showing this to be so.
1 See Publication 1635 at p. 5. See also “Do You Need a New EIN?” www.irs.gov/Businesses/Small-Businesses-&-Self-Employed/Do-You-Need-a-New-EIN (last updated May 19, 2014).
2 See Publication 1635 at p. 6. See also “Do You Need a New EIN?” www.irs.gov/Businesses/Small-Businesses-&-Self-Employed/Do-You-Need-a-New-EIN (last updated May 19, 2014).
5 Reg. §301.7701-2(b)(1) or (3).
6 Rev. Rul. 73-526 , 1973-2 CB 404 (Jan. 1, 1973).
7 LTR 200528021 (Apr. 9, 2005).
11 See, e.g., Revised Uniform Limited Liability Company Act (2006) at §1046(a).
12 See Decision Chart at I.R.M. §3.13.2.25 at Examples (e)(1)-(4).
13 See Rev. Rul. 95-37, 1995-1 CB 130 (Apr. 24, 1995).
14 Here again, the IRS’s folkways may be even more flexible. See, e.g., Decision Chart at I.R.M. §3.13.2.25 at Example (k) (authorizing assignment of LLC or partnership EIN to resulting corporation in a conversion upon receipt of documentation of the conversion under state law—without regard to Form 8832).
15 See Rev. Rul. 2001-61, 2001-2 CB 573 (Dec. 16, 2001). Where a non-LLC partnership reduces to one partner, it must obtain a new EIN—therefore, the interpolation of a new LLC is necessary in order for it to maintain the prior EIN (if only for employment tax purposes). See Decision Chart at I.R.M. §3.13.2.25 at Example (h).
This article is reprinted with the publisher’s permission from the JOURNAL OF PASSTHROUGH ENTITIES, a bi-monthly journal published by CCH, a Wolters Kluwer business. Copying or distribution without the publisher’s permission is prohibited. To subscribe to the JOURNAL OF PASSTHROUGH ENTITIES or other CCH Journals please call 800-449-8114 or visit www.CCHGroup.com. All views ex pressed in the articles and columns are those of the author and not necessarily those of CCH or any other person. All Rights Reserved.
© 2016 CCH Incorporated and its affiliates. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission from the Journal of Passthrough Entities.

References: §301
 §301
 §301
 §301
 §301
 §301
 §301
 §3
 §301
 §1046
 §3
 §3
 §3