Television Broadcasting Services; Fond du Lac, WI, 68124-68125 [2011-28452]

Download as PDF srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 68124 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 213 / Thursday, November 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules described in section 707(a) or section 707(c)) will not be deemed to be engaged in commercial activities solely because it holds an interest as a limited partner in a limited partnership. Nevertheless, pursuant to sections 875, 882, and 892(a)(2)(A)(i), a foreign government member’s distributive share of partnership income will not be exempt from taxation under section 892 to the extent that the partnership derived such income from the conduct of a commercial activity. For example, where a controlled entity described in § 1.892–2T(a)(3) that is not otherwise engaged in commercial activities holds an interest as a limited partner in a limited partnership that is a dealer in stocks, bonds, other securities, commodities, or financial instruments in the United States, although the controlled entity partner will not be deemed to be engaged in commercial activities solely because of its interest in the limited partnership, its distributive share of partnership income derived from the partnership’s activity as a dealer will not be exempt from tax under section 892 because it was derived from the conduct of a commercial activity. (B) Interest as a limited partner in a limited partnership. Solely for purposes of paragraph (d)(5)(iii) of this section, an interest in an entity classified as a partnership for federal tax purposes shall be treated as an interest as a limited partner in a limited partnership if the holder of such interest does not have rights to participate in the management and conduct of the partnership’s business at any time during the partnership’s taxable year under the law of the jurisdiction in which the partnership is organized or under the governing agreement. Rights to participate in the management and conduct of a partnership’s business do not include consent rights in the case of extraordinary events such as admission or expulsion of a general or limited partner, amendment of the partnership agreement, dissolution of the partnership, disposition of all or substantially all of the partnership’s property outside of the ordinary course of the partnership’s activities, merger, or conversion. (iv) Illustration. The following example illustrates the application of this paragraph (d)(5): Example 1. K, a controlled entity of a foreign sovereign, has investments in various stocks and bonds of United States corporations and in a 20% interest in Opco, a limited liability company that is classified as a partnership for federal tax purposes. Under the governing agreement of Opco, K has the authority to participate in the VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:17 Nov 02, 2011 Jkt 226001 management and conduct of Opco’s business. Opco has investments in various stocks and bonds of United States corporations and also owns and manages an office building in New York. Because K has authority to participate in the management and conduct of Opco’s business, its interest in Opco is not a limited partner interest. Therefore, K will be deemed to be engaged in commercial activities because of attribution of Opco’s commercial activity, even if K does not actually make management decisions with regard to Opco’s commercial activity, the operation of the office building. Accordingly, K is a controlled commercial entity, and all of its income, including its distributive share of partnership income from its interest in Opco and its income from the stocks and bonds it owns directly, will not be exempt from tax under section 892. Example 2. The facts are the same as in Example 1, except that Opco has hired a real estate management firm to lease offices and manage the office building. Notwithstanding the fact that an independent contractor is performing the activities, Opco will still be deemed to be engaged in commercial activities. Accordingly, K is a controlled commercial entity, and all of its income, including its distributive share of partnership income from its interest in Opco and its income from the stocks and bonds it owns directly, will not be exempt from tax under section 892. Example 3. The facts are the same as in Example 1, except that K is a member that has no right to participate in the management and conduct of Opco’s business. Assume further that K is not otherwise engaged in commercial activities. Under paragraph (d)(5)(iii) of this section, Opco’s commercial activities will not be attributed to K. Accordingly, K will not be a controlled commercial entity, and its income derived from the stocks and bonds it owns directly and the portion of its distributive share of partnership income from its interest in Opco that is derived from stocks and bonds will be exempt from tax under section 892. The portion of K’s distributive share of partnership income from its interest in Opco that is derived from the operation of the office building will not be exempt from tax under section 892 and § 1.892–3T(a)(1). (e) Effective/applicability date. This section applies on the date these regulations are published as final regulations in the Federal Register. See § 1.892–5(a) as issued under TD 9012 (August 1, 2002) for rules that apply on or after January 14, 2002, and before the date these regulations are published as final regulations in the Federal Register. See § 1.892–5T(a) for rules that apply before January 14, 2002, and § 1.892– 5T(b) through (d) for rules that apply before the date these regulations are published as final regulations in the Federal Register. PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 PART 602—OMB CONTROL NUMBERS UNDER THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT Par. 4. The authority for part 602 continues to read as follows: Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805. Par. 5. In § 602.101, paragraph (b) is amended by adding an entry to the table in numerical order to read as follows: § 602.101 * OMB Control numbers. * * (b) * * * * * CFR part or section where identified and described * * * 1.892–5 ................................. * * * Current OMB Control No. * * 1545–1053 * * Steven T. Miller, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement. [FR Doc. 2011–28531 Filed 11–2–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830–01–P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [MB Docket No. 09–115, RM–11543; DA 11– 1502] Television Broadcasting Services; Fond du Lac, WI Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: In this document, the Commission denies a petition for reconsideration of an August 12, 2009 Report and Order changing the allotted channel for station WWAZ–TV, Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, from channel 44 to channel 5. The petitioner stated that the staff, in granting the original channel change, cited erroneous loss-of-service figures. The petitioner further argues that the primary technical justification for creation of this loss area was not raised until the reply comment stage, and that the record further does not support the technical justification. The order finds that the staff requested a reengineered proposal that would result in the replacement translators covering the projected analog loss area. The document finds that the re-engineered translators sufficiently address any loss of service, and further finds that the public interest is served by substituting channel 5 for channel 44 at Fond du Lac SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\03NOP1.SGM 03NOP1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 213 / Thursday, November 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules because it permitted WLS–TV, an ABC network affiliate in Chicago, Illinois, to move from its post-transition channel 7 to channel 44, resulting in the restoration of ABC network service to numerous viewers that had lost service after the transition of WLS–TV to digital operations. Finally, the document notes that the petitioner’s own engineer had recognized potential technical problems associated with WWAZ–TV’s digital operations on channel 44. ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Office of the Secretary, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS David Brown, david.brown@fcc.gov, Media Bureau, (202) 418–1600. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Memorandum Opinion and Order, MB Docket No. 09–115, adopted September 6, 2011 by the Video Division of the Federal Communications Commission, and released September 8, 2011. For the reasons discussed above, the Federal Communications Commission denies the petition for reconsideration of an order changing the VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:17 Nov 02, 2011 Jkt 226001 allotted channel for station WWAZ–TV, Fond du Lac, Wisconsin. The full text of this document is available for public inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC’s Reference Information Center at Portals II, CY– A257, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. This document will also be available via ECFS (https://www.fcc.gov/ cgb/ecfs/). (Documents will be available electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/ or Adobe Acrobat.) This document may be purchased from the Commission’s duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street SW., Room CY–B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1–(800) 478–3160 or via email https://www.BCPIWEB.com. To request this document in accessible formats (computer diskettes, large print, audio recording, and Braille), send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Commission’s Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432 (TTY). This document does not contain proposed information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104– 13. In addition, therefore, it does not PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 68125 contain any proposed information collection burden ‘‘for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to this proceeding. Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts (other than ex parte presentations exempt under 47 CFR 1.1204(a)) are prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1208 for rules governing restricted proceedings. For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420. Federal Communications Commission. Barbara A. Kreisman, Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. 2011–28452 Filed 11–2–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712–01–P E:\FR\FM\03NOP1.SGM 03NOP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 213 (Thursday, November 3, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68124-68125]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28452]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MB Docket No. 09-115, RM-11543; DA 11-1502]


Television Broadcasting Services; Fond du Lac, WI

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission denies a petition for 
reconsideration of an August 12, 2009 Report and Order changing the 
allotted channel for station WWAZ-TV, Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, from 
channel 44 to channel 5. The petitioner stated that the staff, in 
granting the original channel change, cited erroneous loss-of-service 
figures. The petitioner further argues that the primary technical 
justification for creation of this loss area was not raised until the 
reply comment stage, and that the record further does not support the 
technical justification. The order finds that the staff requested a re-
engineered proposal that would result in the replacement translators 
covering the projected analog loss area. The document finds that the 
re-engineered translators sufficiently address any loss of service, and 
further finds that the public interest is served by substituting 
channel 5 for channel 44 at Fond du Lac

[[Page 68125]]

because it permitted WLS-TV, an ABC network affiliate in Chicago, 
Illinois, to move from its post-transition channel 7 to channel 44, 
resulting in the restoration of ABC network service to numerous viewers 
that had lost service after the transition of WLS-TV to digital 
operations. Finally, the document notes that the petitioner's own 
engineer had recognized potential technical problems associated with 
WWAZ-TV's digital operations on channel 44.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Office of the Secretary, 
445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Brown, david.brown@fcc.gov, 
Media Bureau, (202) 418-1600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Memorandum Opinion 
and Order, MB Docket No. 09-115, adopted September 6, 2011 by the Video 
Division of the Federal Communications Commission, and released 
September 8, 2011. For the reasons discussed above, the Federal 
Communications Commission denies the petition for reconsideration of an 
order changing the allotted channel for station WWAZ-TV, Fond du Lac, 
Wisconsin. The full text of this document is available for public 
inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC's 
Reference Information Center at Portals II, CY-A257, 445 12th Street 
SW., Washington, DC 20554. This document will also be available via 
ECFS (https://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/). (Documents will be available 
electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/or Adobe Acrobat.) This document 
may be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best 
Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, 
DC 20554, telephone 1-(800) 478-3160 or via email https://www.BCPIWEB.com. To request this document in accessible formats 
(computer diskettes, large print, audio recording, and Braille), send 
an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Commission's Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 
(TTY). This document does not contain proposed information collection 
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 
104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any proposed 
information collection burden ``for small business concerns with fewer 
than 25 employees,'' pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief 
Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
    Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply 
to this proceeding. Members of the public should note that from the 
time a Notice of Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no 
longer subject to Commission consideration or court review, all ex 
parte contacts (other than ex parte presentations exempt under 47 CFR 
1.1204(a)) are prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, 
which involve channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1208 for rules governing 
restricted proceedings.
    For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, 
see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

Federal Communications Commission.
Barbara A. Kreisman,
Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2011-28452 Filed 11-2-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.