Partner's Distributive Share, 69919-69922 [05-22281]
Download as PDF
69919
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 70, No. 222
Friday, November 18, 2005
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[REG–144620–04]
RIN 1545–BD70
Partner’s Distributive Share
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
and notice of public hearing.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The proposed regulations
provide rules for testing the
substantiality of an allocation under
section 704(b) where the partners are
look-through entities or members of a
consolidated group, provide additional
guidance on the effect of other
provisions, such as section 482, upon
the tax treatment of a partner with
respect to the partner’s distributive
share under section 704(b), and revise
the existing rules for determining the
partners’ interests in a partnership. The
proposed regulations affect partnerships
and their partners. This document also
provides notice of a public hearing on
these proposed regulations.
DATES: Written or electronic comments
must be received by January 25, 2006.
Outlines of topics to be discussed at the
public hearing scheduled for February
15, 2006, at 10 a.m., must be received
by January 25, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Send submissions to:
CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–144620–04), room
5203, Internal Revenue Service, POB
7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington,
DC 20044. Submissions may be handdelivered Monday through Friday
between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.
to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–144620–04),
Courier’s Desk, Internal Revenue
Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC, or sent
electronically, via the IRS internet site
at https://www.irs.gov/regs or via the
Federal eRule making Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov (IRS REG–144620–
04). The public hearing will be held in
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:27 Nov 17, 2005
Jkt 208001
the Auditorium, Internal Revenue
Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Concerning the proposed regulations,
Timothy J. Leska, (202) 622–3050;
concerning submissions and the hearing
LaNita Van Dyke, (202) 622–7180 (not
toll-free numbers).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Subchapter K is intended to permit
taxpayers to conduct joint business
activities through a flexible economic
arrangement without incurring an
entity-level tax. To achieve this goal of
a flexible economic arrangement,
partners are generally permitted to
decide among themselves how a
partnership’s items will be allocated.
Section 704(a) of the Internal Revenue
Code (Code) provides that a partner’s
distributive share of income, gain, loss,
deduction, or credit shall, except as
otherwise provided, be determined by
the partnership agreement.
Section 704(b) places a significant
limitation on the general flexibility of
section 704(a). Specifically, section
704(b) provides that a partner’s
distributive share of income, gain, loss,
deduction, or credit (or item thereof)
shall be determined in accordance with
the partner’s interest in the partnership
(determined by taking into account all
facts and circumstances) if the
allocation to a partner under the
partnership agreement of income, gain,
loss, deduction, or credit (or item
thereof) does not have substantial
economic effect. Thus, the statute
provides that partnership allocations
either must have substantial economic
effect or must be in accordance with the
partner’s interest in the partnership.
Section 1.704–1(b)(2)(i) provides that
the determination of whether an
allocation of income, gain, loss, or
deduction to a partner has substantial
economic effect involves a two-part
analysis. First, the allocation must have
economic effect within the meaning of
§ 1.704–1(b)(2)(ii). Second, the
economic effect of the allocation must
be substantial within the meaning of
§ 1.704–1(b)(2)(iii).
For an allocation to have economic
effect, it must be consistent with the
underlying economic arrangement of the
partners. This means that, in the event
that there is an economic benefit or
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
burden that corresponds to the
allocation, the partner to whom the
allocation is made must receive such
economic benefit or bear such economic
burden. § 1.704–1(b)(2)(ii)(a). Under
§ 1.704–1(b)(2)(ii)(b), an allocation of
income, gain, loss, or deduction (or item
thereof) to a partner generally has
economic effect if, and only if,
throughout the full term of the
partnership, the partnership agreement
provides: (1) For the determination and
maintenance of the partners’ capital
accounts in accordance with § 1.704–
1(b)(2)(iv); (2) for liquidating
distributions to the partners to be made
in accordance with the positive capital
account balances of the partners; and (3)
for each partner to be unconditionally
obligated to restore the deficit balance
in the partner’s capital account
following the liquidation of the
partner’s partnership interest. In lieu of
satisfying the third requirement, the
partnership may satisfy the qualified
income offset rules set forth in § 1.704–
1(b)(2)(ii)(d). An allocation also may be
deemed to have economic effect if it
satisfies the economic effect equivalence
rules of § 1.704–1(b)(2)(ii)(i).
Section 1.704–1(b)(2)(iii)(a) provides
as a general rule that the economic
effect of an allocation (or allocations) is
substantial if there is a reasonable
possibility that the allocation (or
allocations) will affect substantially the
dollar amounts to be received by the
partners from the partnership,
independent of tax consequences.
Notwithstanding the previous sentence,
the economic effect of the allocation (or
allocations) is not substantial if, at the
time the allocation (or allocations)
becomes part of the partnership
agreement, (1) the after-tax economic
consequences of at least one partner
may, in present value terms, be
enhanced compared to such
consequences if the allocation (or
allocations) were not contained in the
partnership agreement, and (2) there is
a strong likelihood that the after-tax
economic consequences of no partner
will, in present value terms, be
substantially diminished compared to
such consequences if the allocation (or
allocations) were not contained in the
partnership agreement. In determining
the after-tax economic benefit or
detriment to a partner, tax consequences
that result from the interaction of the
allocation with such partner’s tax
E:\FR\FM\18NOP1.SGM
18NOP1
69920
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 222 / Friday, November 18, 2005 / Proposed Rules
attributes that are unrelated to the
partnership will be taken into account.
If the partnership agreement provides
for an allocation of income, gain, loss,
deduction or credit to a partner that
does not have substantial economic
effect, then the partner’s distributive
share of that item is determined in
accordance with the partner’s interest in
the partnership. References in section
704(b) or § 1.704–1 to a partner’s
interest in the partnership, or to the
partners’ interests in the partnership,
signify the manner in which the
partners have agreed to share the
economic benefit or burden (if any)
corresponding to the income, gain, loss,
deduction, or credit (or item thereof)
that is allocated, taking into account all
facts and circumstances relating to the
economic arrangement of the partners.
Section 1.704–1(b)(3)(i) provides that
all partners’ interests are presumed to be
equal (determined on a per capita basis).
However, this presumption may be
rebutted by the taxpayer or the IRS by
establishing facts and circumstances
that show that the partners’ interests in
the partnership are otherwise.
Section 1.704–1(b)(1)(iii) provides
that an allocation that is respected
under section 704(b) nevertheless may
be reallocated under other provisions,
such as section 482, section 704(e)(2),
section 706(d) (and related assignment
of income principles), and § 1.751–
1(b)(2)(ii).
On April 21, 2004, temporary
regulations (TD 9121) relating to the
proper allocation of partnership
expenditures for foreign taxes were
published in the Federal Register (69
FR 21405). In the preamble to those
regulations, the IRS and the Treasury
Department indicated a concern that
some partnerships are taking the
position that, in determining if the
economic effect of a partnership
allocation is substantial, they need not
consider the tax consequences to an
owner of the partner that result from the
allocation. This position is inconsistent
with the policies underlying the
substantial economic effect rules,
because it would allow a partnership to
make tax-advantaged allocations if the
tax advantages of the allocations accrue
to an owner of a partner, rather than to
the partner itself.
Explanation of Provisions
These proposed regulations provide
that the interaction of a partnership
allocation with the tax attributes of
owners of look-through entities must be
taken into account when testing the
substantiality of the allocation to a
partner that is a look-through entity. For
this purpose, look-through entities
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:27 Nov 17, 2005
Jkt 208001
include partnerships, S corporations,
trusts, certain controlled foreign
corporations, and entities that are
disregarded for federal tax purposes,
such as qualified subchapter S
subsidiaries under section 1361(b)(3),
entities that are disregarded under
§§ 301.7701–1 through 301.7701–3 of
the Procedure and Administration
Regulations, or qualified real estate
investment trusts (REIT) subsidiaries
within the meaning of section 856(i)(2).
In general, look-through entities are
entities that flow certain tax
consequences through to their owners.
Although regulated investment
companies (RICs) and REITs have
certain flow-through characteristics, the
regulations do not include them in the
list of look-through entities, because the
Treasury Department and the IRS
believe that the burdens of a rule
requiring taxpayers to look through
these entities in determining the
substantiality of partnership allocations
generally would outweigh the benefits
of such a rule. However, if necessary,
RICs and REITs or other look-through
entities may be added to the list of lookthrough entities in future guidance.
Comments are requested regarding the
treatment of controlled foreign
corporations as look-through partners
for purposes of § 1.704–1(b)(2)(iii)(a)(2)
of these proposed regulations.
Specifically, comments are requested
concerning whether the rule should be
limited to those situations in which the
controlled foreign corporation owns
greater than a threshold minimum
percentage interest in the partnership,
or only by taking into account the tax
attributes of those U.S. shareholders of
the controlled foreign corporation
owning above a threshold percentage of
the stock of the controlled foreign
corporation.
The regulations also provide that the
interaction of a partnership allocation
with the tax attributes of the
consolidated group must be taken into
account when testing the substantiality
of the allocation to a partner that is a
member of a consolidated group. A
member of a consolidated group is a
member of a group filing (or required to
file) consolidated returns for the tax
year. See § 1.1502–1(h).
The proposed regulations clarify that
for purposes of § 1.704–1(b)(2)(iii)(a)(1),
the after-tax economic consequences of
a partner resulting from an allocation or
allocations must be compared to the
after-tax economic consequences to that
partner if the allocation or allocations
were made in accordance with the
partners’ interests in the partnership.
The proposed regulations also remove
the per capita presumption in § 1.704–
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1(b)(3)(i), which reaches the correct
result in very few cases. Finally, the
regulations include an example
illustrating a fact pattern to which, apart
from the application of section 704(b),
other sections may apply.
Proposed Effective Date
These regulations are generally
proposed to apply for partnership
taxable years beginning on or after the
date on which final regulations are
published in the Federal Register. No
inference is intended as to the tax
consequences of partnership allocations
made in taxable years beginning before
the effective date of these regulations.
Special Analyses
It has been determined that this notice
of proposed rulemaking is not a
significant regulatory action as defined
in Executive Order 12866. Therefore, a
regulatory assessment is not required. It
has also been determined that section
553(b) of the Administrative Procedure
Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply
to these regulations, and because the
regulation does not impose a collection
of information on small entities, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
chapter 6) does not apply. Pursuant to
section 7805(f) of the Code, this notice
of proposed rulemaking will be
submitted to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration for comment on its
impact on small business.
Comments and Public Hearing
Before these proposed regulations are
adopted as final regulations,
consideration will be given to any
written (a signed original and eight (8)
copies) or electronic comments that are
submitted timely to the IRS. The IRS
and Treasury Department request
comments on the clarity of the proposed
rules and how they can be made easier
to understand. All comments will be
available for public inspection and
copying.
A public hearing has been scheduled
for February 15, 2006, at 10 a.m. in the
Auditorium, Internal Revenue Building,
1111 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC. Because of access
restrictions, visitors will not be
admitted beyond the immediate
entrance area more than 30 minutes
before the hearing starts. For
information about having your name on
the building access list to attend the
hearing, see the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT portion of this
preamble.
The rules of 26 CFR 601.601(a)(3)
apply to the hearing. Persons who wish
to present oral comments must submit
E:\FR\FM\18NOP1.SGM
18NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 222 / Friday, November 18, 2005 / Proposed Rules
written or electronic comments by
January 25, 2006, and an outline of the
topics to be discussed and the time to
be devoted to each topic (a signed
original and eight (8) copies) by January
25, 2006. A period of 10 minutes will
be allotted to each person for making
comments. An agenda showing the
scheduling of the speakers will be
prepared after the deadline for receiving
outlines has passed. Copies of the
agenda will be available free of charge
at the hearing.
Drafting Information
The principal author of this regulation
is Timothy J. Leska, Office of the
Associate Chief Counsel (Passthroughs
& Special Industries). However, other
personnel from the IRS and Treasury
Department participated in its
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 1.704–1 is amended as
follows:
1. Paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(a) is amended
by adding a sentence at the end of the
paragraph.
2. Paragraph (b)(1)(iii) is amended by
revising the first three sentences and
adding a new fourth sentence.
3. Paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(a) is
redesignated as paragraph
(b)(2)(iii)(a)(1) and revised.
4. A new paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(a)(2) is
added.
5. The last two sentences of paragraph
(b)(3)(i) are removed.
6. Paragraph (b)(5) Example 29 and
Example 30 are added.
The additions and revisions read as
follows:
§ 1.704–1
Partner’s distributive share.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) Effective dates. (a)* * *
Paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(a)(2) and paragraph
(b)(5) Example 30 of this section apply
to taxable years beginning on or after the
date on which final regulations are
published in the Federal Register.
(iii) Effect of other sections. The
determination of a partner’s distributive
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:27 Nov 17, 2005
Jkt 208001
share of income, gain, loss, deduction,
or credit (or item thereof) under section
704(b) and this paragraph (b) is not
conclusive as to the tax treatment of a
partner with respect to such distributive
share. For example, an allocation of loss
or deduction to a partner that is
respected under section 704(b) and this
paragraph (b) may not be deductible by
such partner if the partner lacks the
requisite motive for economic gain (see,
e.g., Goldstein v. Commissioner, 364
F.2d 734 (2d. Cir. 1966)), or may be
disallowed for that taxable year (and
held in suspense) if the limitations of
section 465 or section 704(d) are
applicable. Similarly, an allocation that
is respected under section 704(b) and
this paragraph (b) nevertheless may be
reallocated under other provisions, such
as section 482, section 704(e)(2), section
706(d) (and related assignment of
income principles), and § 1.751–
1(b)(2)(ii). See paragraph (b)(5) Example
29 of this section. * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) Substantiality—(a) In general—(1)
Fundamental principles. Except as
otherwise provided in this paragraph
(b)(2)(iii), the economic effect of an
allocation (or allocations) is substantial
if there is a reasonable possibility that
the allocation (or allocations) will affect
substantially the dollar amounts to be
received by the partners from the
partnership, independent of tax
consequences. Notwithstanding the
preceding sentence, the economic effect
of an allocation (or allocations) is not
substantial if, at the time the allocation
(or allocations) becomes part of the
partnership agreement, the after-tax
economic consequences of at least one
partner may, in present value terms, be
enhanced compared to such
consequences if the allocation (or
allocations) were not contained in the
partnership agreement (and, thus, the
allocation or allocations were allocated
among the partners in accordance with
the partners’ interests in the
partnership), and there is a strong
likelihood that the after-tax economic
consequences of no partner will, in
present value terms, be substantially
diminished compared to such
consequences if the allocation (or
allocations) were not contained in the
partnership agreement (and, thus, the
allocation or allocations were allocated
among the partners in accordance with
the partners’ interests in the
partnership). In determining the aftertax economic benefit or detriment to a
partner, tax consequences that result
from the interaction of the allocation
with such partner’s tax attributes that
are unrelated to the partnership will be
taken into account. See paragraph (b)(5)
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69921
Examples 5 and 9 of this section. The
economic effect of an allocation is not
substantial in the two situations
described in paragraphs (b)(2)(iii)(b) and
(c) of this section. However, even if an
allocation is not described therein, its
economic effect may be insubstantial
under the general rules stated in this
paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(a). References in
this paragraph (b)(2)(iii) to allocations
include capital account adjustments
made pursuant to paragraph (b)(2)(iv)(k)
of this section.
(2) Partners that are look-through
entities or members of a consolidated
group—(i) Rule. For purposes of this
paragraph (b)(2)(iii), in determining the
after-tax economic benefit or detriment
to any partner that is a look-through
entity, the tax consequences that result
from the interaction of the allocation
with the tax attributes of any person that
owns an interest in such a partner,
whether directly or indirectly through
one or more look-through entities, must
be taken into account, and, in
determining the after-tax economic
benefit or detriment to any partner that
is a member of a consolidated group
(within the meaning of § 1.1502–1(h)),
the tax consequences that result from
the interaction of the allocation with the
tax attributes of the consolidated group
and with the tax attributes of another
member with respect to a separate
return year must be taken into account.
See paragraph (b)(5) Example 30 of this
section.
(ii) Definition. For purposes of this
paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(a)(2), a lookthrough entity means—
(A) A partnership;
(B) A subchapter S corporation;
(C) A trust;
(D) An entity that is disregarded for
Federal tax purposes, such as a qualified
subchapter S subsidiary under section
1361(b)(3), an entity that is disregarded
as an entity separate from its owner
under §§ 301.7701–1 through 301.7701–
3 of this chapter, or a qualified REIT
subsidiary within the meaning of
section 856(i)(2).
(E) A controlled foreign corporation,
as defined in section 957(a), but only
with respect to allocations of items of
income, gain, loss, or deduction that
enter into the corporation’s computation
of subpart F income or would enter into
that computation if such items were
allocated to the corporation
(collectively, subpart F items). For
purposes of this paragraph
(b)(2)(iii)(a)(2)(ii)(E), the rule in
paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(a)(2)(i) of this
section shall apply only by taking into
account the tax attributes of a person
that is a United States shareholder of the
controlled foreign corporation the
E:\FR\FM\18NOP1.SGM
18NOP1
69922
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 222 / Friday, November 18, 2005 / Proposed Rules
amount of whose inclusions of gross
income under section 951(a) are affected
by the partnership’s allocations of
subpart F items (or would be affected if
such items were allocated to the
corporation).
*
*
*
*
*
(5) Examples. * * *
Example 29. (i) B, a domestic corporation,
and C, a controlled foreign corporation, form
BC, a partnership organized under the laws
of country X. B and C each contribute 50
percent of the capital of BC. B and C are
wholly-owned subsidiaries of A, a domestic
corporation. Substantially all of BC’s income
would not be subpart F income if earned
directly by C. The BC partnership agreement
provides that, for the first fifteen years, BC’s
gross income will be allocated 10 percent to
B and 90 percent to C, and BC’s deductions
and losses will be allocated 90 percent to B
and 10 percent to C. The partnership
agreement also provides that, after the initial
fifteen year period, BC’s gross income will be
allocated 90 percent to B and 10 percent to
C, and BC’s deductions and losses will be
allocated 10 percent to B and 90 percent to
C.
(ii) Apart from the application of section
704(b), the Commissioner may reallocate or
otherwise not respect the allocations under
other sections. See paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this
section. For example, BC’s allocations of
gross income, deductions, and losses may be
evaluated and reallocated (or not respected),
as appropriate, if it is determined that the
allocations result in the evasion of tax or do
not clearly reflect income under section 482.
Example 30. PRS is a partnership with
three partners, A, B, and C. A is a corporation
that is a member of a consolidated group
within the meaning of § 1.1502–1(h). B is a
subchapter S corporation that is whollyowned by D, an individual. C is a partnership
with two partners, E, an individual, and F,
a corporation that is member of a
consolidated group within the meaning of
§ 1.1502–1(h). For purposes of paragraph
(b)(2)(iii) of this section, in determining the
after-tax economic benefit or detriment of an
allocation to A, the tax consequences that
result from the interaction of the allocation
to A with the tax attributes of the
consolidated group in which A is a member
must be taken into account. In determining
the after-tax economic benefit or detriment of
an allocation to B, the tax consequences that
result from the interaction of the allocation
with the tax attributes of D must be taken
into account. In determining the after-tax
economic benefit or detriment of an
allocation to C, the tax consequences that
result from the interaction of the allocation
with the tax attributes of E and the
consolidated group in which F is a member
must be taken into account.
Mark E. Matthews,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 05–22281 Filed 11–17–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:27 Nov 17, 2005
Jkt 208001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[FRL–7998–7]
Massachusetts: Extension of Interim
Authorization of State Hazardous
Waste Management Program Revision
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to
extend the expiration date from January
1, 2006 to January 1, 2011 for the
interim authorization under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act, of the Massachusetts program for
regulating Cathode Ray Tubes (‘‘CRTs’’).
Massachusetts was granted interim
authorization to assume the
responsibility under the Toxicity
Characteristics Rule (‘‘TC Rule’’) for
regulating CRTs on November 15, 2000,
with an expiration date of January 1,
2003. This expiration date was
subsequently extended until January 1,
2006. As this interim authorization is
soon due to expire, an extension is
needed for the reasons explained
elsewhere in today’s Federal Register.
In the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section
of this Federal Register, EPA is
publishing a rule to authorize the
extension without a prior proposal
because we believe this action is not
controversial and do not expect
comments that oppose it. Unless we get
written comments which oppose this
extension during the comment period,
the decision to extend the interim
authorization will take effect. If we get
comments that oppose this action, we
will publish a document in the Federal
Register withdrawing this rule before it
takes effect and this separate document
in this proposed rules section of this
Federal Register will serve as the
proposal to authorize the changes. We
will then respond to public comments
in a later final rule based on this
proposal. You may not have another
opportunity for comment. If you want to
comment on this action, you must do so
at this time.
DATES: Send your written comments by
December 19, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send any written comments
to Robin Biscaia, EPA New England,
One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CHW),
Boston, MA 02114–2023; telephone:
(617) 918–1642. Documents related to
EPA’s previous decision to grant interim
authorization (regarding regulation of
CRTs) and the materials which EPA
used in now considering the extension
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(the ‘‘Administrative Record’’) are
available for inspection and copying
during normal business hours at the
following locations: Massachusetts
Department of Environmental
Protection, Business Compliance
Division, One Winter Street—8th Floor,
Boston, MA 02108, business hours: 9
a.m. to 5 p.m., telephone: (617) 556–
1096; or EPA New England Library, One
Congress Street—11th Floor, Boston,
MA 02114–2023, business hours: 10
a.m. to 3 p.m., Monday through
Thursday, telephone: (617) 918–1990.
Comments may also be submitted
electronically or through hand delivery/
courier; please follow the detailed
instructions in the ADDRESSES section of
the immediate final rule which is
located in the Rules section of this
Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robin Biscaia, Hazardous Waste Unit,
Office of Ecosystems Protection, EPA
New England, One Congress Street,
Suite 1100 (CHW), Boston, MA 02114–
2023, telephone: (617) 918–1642.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For
additional information, please see the
immediate final rule published in the
‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this
Federal Register.
Dated: November 9, 2005.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 05–22892 Filed 11–17–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018–AG23
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Proposed Endangered
Status for 12 Species of Hawaiian
Picture-Wings
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of
comment period.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), pursuant to
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act), announce the reopening
of the comment period on the proposal
to list 12 species of Hawaiian picturewings as endangered to allow peer
reviewers and all interested parties
another opportunity to submit
comments on the rule.
E:\FR\FM\18NOP1.SGM
18NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 222 (Friday, November 18, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69919-69922]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22281]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 222 / Friday, November 18, 2005 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 69919]]
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[REG-144620-04]
RIN 1545-BD70
Partner's Distributive Share
AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and notice of public hearing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The proposed regulations provide rules for testing the
substantiality of an allocation under section 704(b) where the partners
are look-through entities or members of a consolidated group, provide
additional guidance on the effect of other provisions, such as section
482, upon the tax treatment of a partner with respect to the partner's
distributive share under section 704(b), and revise the existing rules
for determining the partners' interests in a partnership. The proposed
regulations affect partnerships and their partners. This document also
provides notice of a public hearing on these proposed regulations.
DATES: Written or electronic comments must be received by January 25,
2006. Outlines of topics to be discussed at the public hearing
scheduled for February 15, 2006, at 10 a.m., must be received by
January 25, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Send submissions to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-144620-04), room
5203, Internal Revenue Service, POB 7604, Ben Franklin Station,
Washington, DC 20044. Submissions may be hand-delivered Monday through
Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-
144620-04), Courier's Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, or sent electronically, via the IRS
internet site at https://www.irs.gov/regs or via the Federal eRule
making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov (IRS REG-144620-04). The
public hearing will be held in the Auditorium, Internal Revenue
Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Concerning the proposed regulations,
Timothy J. Leska, (202) 622-3050; concerning submissions and the
hearing LaNita Van Dyke, (202) 622-7180 (not toll-free numbers).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Subchapter K is intended to permit taxpayers to conduct joint
business activities through a flexible economic arrangement without
incurring an entity-level tax. To achieve this goal of a flexible
economic arrangement, partners are generally permitted to decide among
themselves how a partnership's items will be allocated. Section 704(a)
of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) provides that a partner's
distributive share of income, gain, loss, deduction, or credit shall,
except as otherwise provided, be determined by the partnership
agreement.
Section 704(b) places a significant limitation on the general
flexibility of section 704(a). Specifically, section 704(b) provides
that a partner's distributive share of income, gain, loss, deduction,
or credit (or item thereof) shall be determined in accordance with the
partner's interest in the partnership (determined by taking into
account all facts and circumstances) if the allocation to a partner
under the partnership agreement of income, gain, loss, deduction, or
credit (or item thereof) does not have substantial economic effect.
Thus, the statute provides that partnership allocations either must
have substantial economic effect or must be in accordance with the
partner's interest in the partnership.
Section 1.704-1(b)(2)(i) provides that the determination of whether
an allocation of income, gain, loss, or deduction to a partner has
substantial economic effect involves a two-part analysis. First, the
allocation must have economic effect within the meaning of Sec. 1.704-
1(b)(2)(ii). Second, the economic effect of the allocation must be
substantial within the meaning of Sec. 1.704-1(b)(2)(iii).
For an allocation to have economic effect, it must be consistent
with the underlying economic arrangement of the partners. This means
that, in the event that there is an economic benefit or burden that
corresponds to the allocation, the partner to whom the allocation is
made must receive such economic benefit or bear such economic burden.
Sec. 1.704-1(b)(2)(ii)(a). Under Sec. 1.704-1(b)(2)(ii)(b), an
allocation of income, gain, loss, or deduction (or item thereof) to a
partner generally has economic effect if, and only if, throughout the
full term of the partnership, the partnership agreement provides: (1)
For the determination and maintenance of the partners' capital accounts
in accordance with Sec. 1.704-1(b)(2)(iv); (2) for liquidating
distributions to the partners to be made in accordance with the
positive capital account balances of the partners; and (3) for each
partner to be unconditionally obligated to restore the deficit balance
in the partner's capital account following the liquidation of the
partner's partnership interest. In lieu of satisfying the third
requirement, the partnership may satisfy the qualified income offset
rules set forth in Sec. 1.704-1(b)(2)(ii)(d). An allocation also may
be deemed to have economic effect if it satisfies the economic effect
equivalence rules of Sec. 1.704-1(b)(2)(ii)(i).
Section 1.704-1(b)(2)(iii)(a) provides as a general rule that the
economic effect of an allocation (or allocations) is substantial if
there is a reasonable possibility that the allocation (or allocations)
will affect substantially the dollar amounts to be received by the
partners from the partnership, independent of tax consequences.
Notwithstanding the previous sentence, the economic effect of the
allocation (or allocations) is not substantial if, at the time the
allocation (or allocations) becomes part of the partnership agreement,
(1) the after-tax economic consequences of at least one partner may, in
present value terms, be enhanced compared to such consequences if the
allocation (or allocations) were not contained in the partnership
agreement, and (2) there is a strong likelihood that the after-tax
economic consequences of no partner will, in present value terms, be
substantially diminished compared to such consequences if the
allocation (or allocations) were not contained in the partnership
agreement. In determining the after-tax economic benefit or detriment
to a partner, tax consequences that result from the interaction of the
allocation with such partner's tax
[[Page 69920]]
attributes that are unrelated to the partnership will be taken into
account.
If the partnership agreement provides for an allocation of income,
gain, loss, deduction or credit to a partner that does not have
substantial economic effect, then the partner's distributive share of
that item is determined in accordance with the partner's interest in
the partnership. References in section 704(b) or Sec. 1.704-1 to a
partner's interest in the partnership, or to the partners' interests in
the partnership, signify the manner in which the partners have agreed
to share the economic benefit or burden (if any) corresponding to the
income, gain, loss, deduction, or credit (or item thereof) that is
allocated, taking into account all facts and circumstances relating to
the economic arrangement of the partners.
Section 1.704-1(b)(3)(i) provides that all partners' interests are
presumed to be equal (determined on a per capita basis). However, this
presumption may be rebutted by the taxpayer or the IRS by establishing
facts and circumstances that show that the partners' interests in the
partnership are otherwise.
Section 1.704-1(b)(1)(iii) provides that an allocation that is
respected under section 704(b) nevertheless may be reallocated under
other provisions, such as section 482, section 704(e)(2), section
706(d) (and related assignment of income principles), and Sec. 1.751-
1(b)(2)(ii).
On April 21, 2004, temporary regulations (TD 9121) relating to the
proper allocation of partnership expenditures for foreign taxes were
published in the Federal Register (69 FR 21405). In the preamble to
those regulations, the IRS and the Treasury Department indicated a
concern that some partnerships are taking the position that, in
determining if the economic effect of a partnership allocation is
substantial, they need not consider the tax consequences to an owner of
the partner that result from the allocation. This position is
inconsistent with the policies underlying the substantial economic
effect rules, because it would allow a partnership to make tax-
advantaged allocations if the tax advantages of the allocations accrue
to an owner of a partner, rather than to the partner itself.
Explanation of Provisions
These proposed regulations provide that the interaction of a
partnership allocation with the tax attributes of owners of look-
through entities must be taken into account when testing the
substantiality of the allocation to a partner that is a look-through
entity. For this purpose, look-through entities include partnerships, S
corporations, trusts, certain controlled foreign corporations, and
entities that are disregarded for federal tax purposes, such as
qualified subchapter S subsidiaries under section 1361(b)(3), entities
that are disregarded under Sec. Sec. 301.7701-1 through 301.7701-3 of
the Procedure and Administration Regulations, or qualified real estate
investment trusts (REIT) subsidiaries within the meaning of section
856(i)(2). In general, look-through entities are entities that flow
certain tax consequences through to their owners. Although regulated
investment companies (RICs) and REITs have certain flow-through
characteristics, the regulations do not include them in the list of
look-through entities, because the Treasury Department and the IRS
believe that the burdens of a rule requiring taxpayers to look through
these entities in determining the substantiality of partnership
allocations generally would outweigh the benefits of such a rule.
However, if necessary, RICs and REITs or other look-through entities
may be added to the list of look-through entities in future guidance.
Comments are requested regarding the treatment of controlled foreign
corporations as look-through partners for purposes of Sec. 1.704-
1(b)(2)(iii)(a)(2) of these proposed regulations. Specifically,
comments are requested concerning whether the rule should be limited to
those situations in which the controlled foreign corporation owns
greater than a threshold minimum percentage interest in the
partnership, or only by taking into account the tax attributes of those
U.S. shareholders of the controlled foreign corporation owning above a
threshold percentage of the stock of the controlled foreign
corporation.
The regulations also provide that the interaction of a partnership
allocation with the tax attributes of the consolidated group must be
taken into account when testing the substantiality of the allocation to
a partner that is a member of a consolidated group. A member of a
consolidated group is a member of a group filing (or required to file)
consolidated returns for the tax year. See Sec. 1.1502-1(h).
The proposed regulations clarify that for purposes of Sec. 1.704-
1(b)(2)(iii)(a)(1), the after-tax economic consequences of a partner
resulting from an allocation or allocations must be compared to the
after-tax economic consequences to that partner if the allocation or
allocations were made in accordance with the partners' interests in the
partnership. The proposed regulations also remove the per capita
presumption in Sec. 1.704-1(b)(3)(i), which reaches the correct result
in very few cases. Finally, the regulations include an example
illustrating a fact pattern to which, apart from the application of
section 704(b), other sections may apply.
Proposed Effective Date
These regulations are generally proposed to apply for partnership
taxable years beginning on or after the date on which final regulations
are published in the Federal Register. No inference is intended as to
the tax consequences of partnership allocations made in taxable years
beginning before the effective date of these regulations.
Special Analyses
It has been determined that this notice of proposed rulemaking is
not a significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order
12866. Therefore, a regulatory assessment is not required. It has also
been determined that section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act
(5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply to these regulations, and because
the regulation does not impose a collection of information on small
entities, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) does not
apply. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Code, this notice of proposed
rulemaking will be submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration for comment on its impact on small
business.
Comments and Public Hearing
Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations,
consideration will be given to any written (a signed original and eight
(8) copies) or electronic comments that are submitted timely to the
IRS. The IRS and Treasury Department request comments on the clarity of
the proposed rules and how they can be made easier to understand. All
comments will be available for public inspection and copying.
A public hearing has been scheduled for February 15, 2006, at 10
a.m. in the Auditorium, Internal Revenue Building, 1111 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. Because of access restrictions, visitors
will not be admitted beyond the immediate entrance area more than 30
minutes before the hearing starts. For information about having your
name on the building access list to attend the hearing, see the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT portion of this preamble.
The rules of 26 CFR 601.601(a)(3) apply to the hearing. Persons who
wish to present oral comments must submit
[[Page 69921]]
written or electronic comments by January 25, 2006, and an outline of
the topics to be discussed and the time to be devoted to each topic (a
signed original and eight (8) copies) by January 25, 2006. A period of
10 minutes will be allotted to each person for making comments. An
agenda showing the scheduling of the speakers will be prepared after
the deadline for receiving outlines has passed. Copies of the agenda
will be available free of charge at the hearing.
Drafting Information
The principal author of this regulation is Timothy J. Leska, Office
of the Associate Chief Counsel (Passthroughs & Special Industries).
However, other personnel from the IRS and Treasury Department
participated in its 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 1.704-1 is amended as follows:
1. Paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(a) is amended by adding a sentence at the
end of the paragraph.
2. Paragraph (b)(1)(iii) is amended by revising the first three
sentences and adding a new fourth sentence.
3. Paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(a) is redesignated as paragraph
(b)(2)(iii)(a)(1) and revised.
4. A new paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(a)(2) is added.
5. The last two sentences of paragraph (b)(3)(i) are removed.
6. Paragraph (b)(5) Example 29 and Example 30 are added.
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 1.704-1 Partner's distributive share.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) Effective dates. (a)* * * Paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(a)(2) and
paragraph (b)(5) Example 30 of this section apply to taxable years
beginning on or after the date on which final regulations are published
in the Federal Register.
(iii) Effect of other sections. The determination of a partner's
distributive share of income, gain, loss, deduction, or credit (or item
thereof) under section 704(b) and this paragraph (b) is not conclusive
as to the tax treatment of a partner with respect to such distributive
share. For example, an allocation of loss or deduction to a partner
that is respected under section 704(b) and this paragraph (b) may not
be deductible by such partner if the partner lacks the requisite motive
for economic gain (see, e.g., Goldstein v. Commissioner, 364 F.2d 734
(2d. Cir. 1966)), or may be disallowed for that taxable year (and held
in suspense) if the limitations of section 465 or section 704(d) are
applicable. Similarly, an allocation that is respected under section
704(b) and this paragraph (b) nevertheless may be reallocated under
other provisions, such as section 482, section 704(e)(2), section
706(d) (and related assignment of income principles), and Sec. 1.751-
1(b)(2)(ii). See paragraph (b)(5) Example 29 of this section. * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) Substantiality--(a) In general--(1) Fundamental principles.
Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph (b)(2)(iii), the
economic effect of an allocation (or allocations) is substantial if
there is a reasonable possibility that the allocation (or allocations)
will affect substantially the dollar amounts to be received by the
partners from the partnership, independent of tax consequences.
Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, the economic effect of an
allocation (or allocations) is not substantial if, at the time the
allocation (or allocations) becomes part of the partnership agreement,
the after-tax economic consequences of at least one partner may, in
present value terms, be enhanced compared to such consequences if the
allocation (or allocations) were not contained in the partnership
agreement (and, thus, the allocation or allocations were allocated
among the partners in accordance with the partners' interests in the
partnership), and there is a strong likelihood that the after-tax
economic consequences of no partner will, in present value terms, be
substantially diminished compared to such consequences if the
allocation (or allocations) were not contained in the partnership
agreement (and, thus, the allocation or allocations were allocated
among the partners in accordance with the partners' interests in the
partnership). In determining the after-tax economic benefit or
detriment to a partner, tax consequences that result from the
interaction of the allocation with such partner's tax attributes that
are unrelated to the partnership will be taken into account. See
paragraph (b)(5) Examples 5 and 9 of this section. The economic effect
of an allocation is not substantial in the two situations described in
paragraphs (b)(2)(iii)(b) and (c) of this section. However, even if an
allocation is not described therein, its economic effect may be
insubstantial under the general rules stated in this paragraph
(b)(2)(iii)(a). References in this paragraph (b)(2)(iii) to allocations
include capital account adjustments made pursuant to paragraph
(b)(2)(iv)(k) of this section.
(2) Partners that are look-through entities or members of a
consolidated group--(i) Rule. For purposes of this paragraph
(b)(2)(iii), in determining the after-tax economic benefit or detriment
to any partner that is a look-through entity, the tax consequences that
result from the interaction of the allocation with the tax attributes
of any person that owns an interest in such a partner, whether directly
or indirectly through one or more look-through entities, must be taken
into account, and, in determining the after-tax economic benefit or
detriment to any partner that is a member of a consolidated group
(within the meaning of Sec. 1.1502-1(h)), the tax consequences that
result from the interaction of the allocation with the tax attributes
of the consolidated group and with the tax attributes of another member
with respect to a separate return year must be taken into account. See
paragraph (b)(5) Example 30 of this section.
(ii) Definition. For purposes of this paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(a)(2),
a look-through entity means--
(A) A partnership;
(B) A subchapter S corporation;
(C) A trust;
(D) An entity that is disregarded for Federal tax purposes, such as
a qualified subchapter S subsidiary under section 1361(b)(3), an entity
that is disregarded as an entity separate from its owner under
Sec. Sec. 301.7701-1 through 301.7701-3 of this chapter, or a
qualified REIT subsidiary within the meaning of section 856(i)(2).
(E) A controlled foreign corporation, as defined in section 957(a),
but only with respect to allocations of items of income, gain, loss, or
deduction that enter into the corporation's computation of subpart F
income or would enter into that computation if such items were
allocated to the corporation (collectively, subpart F items). For
purposes of this paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(a)(2)(ii)(E), the rule in
paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(a)(2)(i) of this section shall apply only by
taking into account the tax attributes of a person that is a United
States shareholder of the controlled foreign corporation the
[[Page 69922]]
amount of whose inclusions of gross income under section 951(a) are
affected by the partnership's allocations of subpart F items (or would
be affected if such items were allocated to the corporation).
* * * * *
(5) Examples. * * *
Example 29. (i) B, a domestic corporation, and C, a controlled
foreign corporation, form BC, a partnership organized under the laws
of country X. B and C each contribute 50 percent of the capital of
BC. B and C are wholly-owned subsidiaries of A, a domestic
corporation. Substantially all of BC's income would not be subpart F
income if earned directly by C. The BC partnership agreement
provides that, for the first fifteen years, BC's gross income will
be allocated 10 percent to B and 90 percent to C, and BC's
deductions and losses will be allocated 90 percent to B and 10
percent to C. The partnership agreement also provides that, after
the initial fifteen year period, BC's gross income will be allocated
90 percent to B and 10 percent to C, and BC's deductions and losses
will be allocated 10 percent to B and 90 percent to C.
(ii) Apart from the application of section 704(b), the
Commissioner may reallocate or otherwise not respect the allocations
under other sections. See paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section. For
example, BC's allocations of gross income, deductions, and losses
may be evaluated and reallocated (or not respected), as appropriate,
if it is determined that the allocations result in the evasion of
tax or do not clearly reflect income under section 482.
Example 30. PRS is a partnership with three partners, A, B, and
C. A is a corporation that is a member of a consolidated group
within the meaning of Sec. 1.1502-1(h). B is a subchapter S
corporation that is wholly-owned by D, an individual. C is a
partnership with two partners, E, an individual, and F, a
corporation that is member of a consolidated group within the
meaning of Sec. 1.1502-1(h). For purposes of paragraph (b)(2)(iii)
of this section, in determining the after-tax economic benefit or
detriment of an allocation to A, the tax consequences that result
from the interaction of the allocation to A with the tax attributes
of the consolidated group in which A is a member must be taken into
account. In determining the after-tax economic benefit or detriment
of an allocation to B, the tax consequences that result from the
interaction of the allocation with the tax attributes of D must be
taken into account. In determining the after-tax economic benefit or
detriment of an allocation to C, the tax consequences that result
from the interaction of the allocation with the tax attributes of E
and the consolidated group in which F is a member must be taken into
account.
Mark E. Matthews,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 05-22281 Filed 11-17-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P