Modifications of Certain Derivative Contracts; Hearing Cancellation, 66011-66012 [2011-27573]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 25, 2011 / Proposed Rules
evidence that documents your type of Down
syndrome that is consistent with prior
karyotype analysis (for example, reference to
a diagnosis of ‘‘trisomy 21’’) and (ii) that you
have the distinctive facial or other physical
features of Down syndrome. We do not
require a detailed description of the facial or
other physical features of the disorder.
However, we will not find that your disorder
meets 110.06B if we have evidence—such as
evidence of functioning inconsistent with the
diagnosis—that indicates that you do not
have non-mosaic Down syndrome.
b. If we do not have evidence of prior
karyotype analysis (you did not have testing,
or you had testing but we do not have
information from a physician about the test
results), we will find that your disorder
meets 110.06C if we have: (i) a physician’s
report stating that you have the distinctive
facial or other physical features of Down
syndrome and (ii) evidence that your
functioning is consistent with a diagnosis of
non-mosaic Down syndrome. This evidence
may include medical or nonmedical
information about your physical and mental
abilities, including information about your
development, education, work history, or the
results of psychological testing. However, we
will not find that your disorder meets
110.06C if we have evidence—such as
evidence of functioning inconsistent with the
diagnosis—that indicates that you do not
have non-mosaic Down syndrome.
D. What are catastrophic congenital
disorders? Some catastrophic congenital
disorders, such as anencephaly, cyclopia,
chromosome 13 trisomy (Patau syndrome or
trisomy D), and chromosome 18 trisomy
(Edwards’ syndrome or trisomy E) are usually
expected to result in early death. Others such
as cri du chat syndrome (chromosome 5p
deletion syndrome) and the infantile onset
form of Tay-Sachs disease interfere very
seriously with development. We evaluate
catastrophic congenital disorders under
110.08. The term ‘‘very seriously’’ in 110.08
has the same meaning as in the term
‘‘extreme’’ in § 416.926a(e)(3) of this chapter.
E. What evidence do we need under
110.08?
We need one of the following to determine
if your disorder meets 110.08A or B:
1. A laboratory report of the definitive test
that documents your disorder (for example,
genetic analysis or evidence of biochemical
abnormalities) signed by a physician.
2. A laboratory report of the definitive test
that documents your disorder that is not
signed by a physician and a report from a
physician stating that you have the disorder.
3. A report from a physician stating that
you have the disorder with the typical
clinical features of the disorder and that you
had definitive testing that documented your
disorder. In this case, we will find that your
disorder meets 110.08A or B unless we have
evidence that indicates that you do not have
the disorder.
4. If we do not have the definitive
laboratory evidence we need under E1, E2, or
E3, we will find that your disorder meets
110.08A or B if we have: (i) a report from a
physician stating that you have the disorder
and that you have the typical clinical features
of the disorder, and (ii) other evidence that
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:38 Oct 24, 2011
Jkt 226001
supports the diagnosis. This evidence may
include medical or nonmedical information
about your development and functioning.
5. For obvious catastrophic congenital
anomalies that are expected to result in early
death, such as anencephaly and cyclopia, we
need evidence from a physician that
demonstrates that the infant has the
characteristic physical features of the
disorder. In these rare cases, we do not need
laboratory testing or any other evidence that
confirms the disorder.
F. How do we evaluate mosaic Down
syndrome and other congenital disorders that
affect multiple body systems?
1. Mosaic Down syndrome. Approximately
2 percent of children with Down syndrome
have the mosaic form. In mosaic Down
syndrome, there are some cells with an extra
copy of chromosome 21 and other cells with
the normal two copies of chromosome 21.
Mosaic Down syndrome can be so slight as
to be undetected clinically, but it can also be
profound and disabling, affecting various
body systems.
2. Other congenital disorders that affect
multiple body systems. Other congenital
disorders, such as congenital anomalies,
chromosomal disorders, dysmorphic
syndromes, inborn metabolic syndromes, and
perinatal infectious diseases, can cause
deviation from, or interruption of, the normal
function of the body or can interfere with
development. Examples of these disorders
include both the juvenile and late-onset
forms of Tay-Sachs disease, trisomy X
syndrome (XXX syndrome), fragile X
syndrome, phenylketonuria (PKU), caudal
regression syndrome, and fetal alcohol
syndrome. For these disorders and other
disorders like them, the degree of deviation,
interruption, or interference, as well as the
resulting functional limitations and their
progression, may vary widely from child to
child and may affect different body systems.
3. Evaluating the effects of mosaic Down
syndrome or another congenital disorder
under the listings. When the effects of mosaic
Down syndrome or another congenital
disorder that affects multiple body systems
are sufficiently severe we evaluate the
disorder under the appropriate affected body
system(s), such as musculoskeletal, special
senses and speech, neurological, or mental
disorders. Otherwise, we evaluate the
specific functional limitations that result
from the disorder under our other rules
described in 110.00G.
G. What if your disorder does not meet a
listing? If you have a severe medically
determinable impairment(s) that does not
meet a listing, we will consider whether your
impairment(s) medically equals a listing. See
§ 416.926 of this chapter. If your
impairment(s) does not meet or medically
equal a listing, we will consider whether it
functionally equals the listings. See
§§ 416.924a and 416.926a of this chapter. We
use the rules in § 416.994a of this chapter
when we decide whether you continue to be
disabled.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
66011
110.01 Category of Impairments,
Congenital Disorders That Affect Multiple
Body Systems
110.06 Non-mosaic Down syndrome
(chromosome 21 trisomy or chromosome 21
translocation), documented by:
A. A laboratory report of karyotype
analysis signed by a physician, or both a
laboratory report of karyotype analysis not
signed by a physician and a statement by a
physician that the child has Down syndrome
(see 110.00C1).
OR
B. A physician’s report stating that the
child has chromosome 21 trisomy or
chromosome 21 translocation consistent with
karyotype analysis with the distinctive facial
or other physical features of Down syndrome
(see 110.00C2a).
OR
C. A physician’s report stating that the
child has Down syndrome with the
distinctive facial or other physical features
and evidence demonstrating that the child is
functioning at the level of a child with nonmosaic Down syndrome (see 110.00C2b).
110.08 A catastrophic congenital disorder
(see 110.00D and 110.00E) with:
A. Death usually expected within the first
months of life.
OR
B. Very serious interference with
development or functioning.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2011–27357 Filed 10–24–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4191–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[REG–109006–11]
RIN 1545–BK13
Modifications of Certain Derivative
Contracts; Hearing Cancellation
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Cancellation of notice of public
hearing on notice of proposed
rulemaking by cross-reference to
temporary regulations.
AGENCY:
This document cancels a
public hearing on notice of proposed
rulemaking by cross-reference to
temporary regulations relating to
whether an exchange for purposes of
§ 1.1001–1(a) occurs for the
nonassigning counterparty when there
is an assignment of certain derivative
contracts.
DATES: The public hearing, originally
scheduled for October 27, 2011 at 10
a.m., is cancelled.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard A. Hurst of the Publications and
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\25OCP1.SGM
25OCP1
66012
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 25, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Regulations Branch, Legal Processing
Division, Associate Chief Counsel
(Procedure and Administration), at
Richard.A.Hurst@irscounsel.treas.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice
of proposed rulemaking by crossreference to temporary regulations and a
notice of public hearing that appeared
in the Federal Register on Friday, July
22, 2011 (76 FR 43957), announced that
a public hearing was scheduled for
October 27, 2011, beginning at 10 a.m.
in the auditorium of the Internal
Revenue Building, 1111 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The
subject of the public hearing is under
section 1001 of the Internal Revenue
Code.
The public comment period for a
notice of proposed rulemaking by crossreference to temporary regulations
expired on October 20, 2011. Outlines of
topics to be discussed at the hearing
were due on October 20, 2011. A notice
of propose rulemaking by crossreference to temporary regulations and
notice of public hearing instructed those
interested in testifying at the public
hearing to submit an outline of the
topics to be addressed. As of Friday,
October 21, 2011, no one has requested
to speak. Therefore, the public hearing
scheduled for October 27, 2011 is
cancelled.
LaNita Van Dyke,
Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch,
Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief
Counsel, Procedure and Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011–27573 Filed 10–24–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[REG–109564–10]
RIN 1545–BJ37
Partner’s Distributive Share
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
This document contains
proposed regulations removing § 1.704–
1(b)(2)(iii)(e) (the de minimis partner
rule) because the rule may have resulted
in unintended tax consequences. The
proposed regulations affect partnerships
and their partners.
DATES: Written or electronic comments
and requests for a public hearing must
be received by January 23, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Send submissions to:
CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–109564–10), Room
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:38 Oct 24, 2011
Jkt 226001
5203, Internal Revenue Service, P.O.
Box 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–109564–
10), Courier’s Desk, Internal Revenue
Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC; or sent electronically,
via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov (IRS REG–
109564–10).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Concerning the proposed regulations,
Michala Irons, at (202) 622–3050;
concerning submission of comments, or
requests for a public hearing, Richard
Hurst, at (202) 622–2949 (TDD
Telephone) (not toll free numbers) and
his e-mail address is
Richard.A.Hurst@irscounsel.treas.gov.
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 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
partners’ interests 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 that is made as of the end of the
partnership taxable year to which the
allocation relates. First, the allocation
must have economic effect within the
meaning of § 1.704–1(b)(2)(ii). Second,
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
burden that corresponds to the
allocation, the partner to whom the
allocation is made must receive such
economic benefit or bear such economic
burden. See § 1.704–1(b)(2)(ii).
Generally, an allocation of income, gain,
loss, or deduction (or item thereof) to a
partner will have 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 criterion, the
partnership may satisfy the qualified
income offset rules set forth in § 1.704–
1(b)(2)(ii)(d).
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. This
section further provides that, even if the
allocation affects substantially the dollar
amounts, 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.
E:\FR\FM\25OCP1.SGM
25OCP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 206 (Tuesday, October 25, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66011-66012]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27573]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[REG-109006-11]
RIN 1545-BK13
Modifications of Certain Derivative Contracts; Hearing
Cancellation
AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
ACTION: Cancellation of notice of public hearing on notice of proposed
rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document cancels a public hearing on notice of proposed
rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations relating to
whether an exchange for purposes of Sec. 1.1001-1(a) occurs for the
nonassigning counterparty when there is an assignment of certain
derivative contracts.
DATES: The public hearing, originally scheduled for October 27, 2011 at
10 a.m., is cancelled.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard A. Hurst of the Publications
and
[[Page 66012]]
Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel
(Procedure and Administration), at
Richard.A.Hurst@irscounsel.treas.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-
reference to temporary regulations and a notice of public hearing that
appeared in the Federal Register on Friday, July 22, 2011 (76 FR
43957), announced that a public hearing was scheduled for October 27,
2011, beginning at 10 a.m. in the auditorium of the Internal Revenue
Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The subject of
the public hearing is under section 1001 of the Internal Revenue Code.
The public comment period for a notice of proposed rulemaking by
cross-reference to temporary regulations expired on October 20, 2011.
Outlines of topics to be discussed at the hearing were due on October
20, 2011. A notice of propose rulemaking by cross-reference to
temporary regulations and notice of public hearing instructed those
interested in testifying at the public hearing to submit an outline of
the topics to be addressed. As of Friday, October 21, 2011, no one has
requested to speak. Therefore, the public hearing scheduled for October
27, 2011 is cancelled.
LaNita Van Dyke,
Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division,
Associate Chief Counsel, Procedure and Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011-27573 Filed 10-24-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
