Partner's Distributive Share, 76380-76382 [2012-31155]
Download as PDF
76380
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 249 / Friday, December 28, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
LIST OF COMMENTERS*—Continued
Commenter
Short name or acronym
7 Monitoring Analytics, LLC, Potomac Economics, Ltd, Internal Market Monitor for ISO—New England, Market
Monitoring and Analysis for Southwest Power Pool, Inc., Market Assessment and Compliance for Independent
Electricity System Operator, Market Surveillance Administrator.
8 PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. and Southwest Power Pool, Inc ...................................................................................
9 Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission .....................................................................................................................
10 Powerex Corp ...........................................................................................................................................................
11 Ronald Rattey ...........................................................................................................................................................
12 Southern California Edison Company ......................................................................................................................
13 Southern Company Services, Inc .............................................................................................................................
14 Western Electricity Coordinating Council .................................................................................................................
Market Monitors**
PJM/SPP
Pa Commission
Powerex
Ronald Rattey
SoCal Edison
Southern
WECC
* In addition, Public Service Electric and Gas Company and PSEG Energy Resources & Trade LLC filed a motion to intervene without comments.
** Market Monitors filed motion for leave to file reply comments and reply comments in support of access to e-Tags by Reliability Coordinators
comparable to that for Commission and MMUs. Reply comments were also filed by the North American Energy Standards Board.
[FR Doc. 2012–31087 Filed 12–27–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[TD 9607]
RIN 1545–BJ37
Partner’s Distributive Share
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Final regulations.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document contains final
regulations regarding the application of
the substantiality de minimis rule. In
the interest of sound tax administration,
this rule is being made inapplicable.
These final regulations affect
partnerships and their partners.
DATES: Effective Date: The final
regulations are effective on December
28, 2012.
Applicability Date: The final
regulations under § 1.704–
1(b)(2)(iii)(e)(1) are applicable for
partnership taxable years beginning
after May 19, 2008 and beginning before
December 28, 2012. The final
regulations under § 1.704–
1(b)(2)(iii)(e)(2)(i) are applicable
beginning on or after December 28,
2012, and the final regulations under
§ 1.704–1(b)(2)(iii)(e)(2)(ii) are
applicable for partnership taxable years
beginning on or after December 28,
2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rebecca Kahanel, at (202) 622–3050 (not
a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:32 Dec 27, 2012
Jkt 229001
Background
These final regulations contain
amendments to the Income Tax
Regulations (26 CFR Part 1) under
section 704 of the Internal Revenue
Code (Code). On October 25, 2011, the
Treasury Department and the IRS
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (REG–109564–10) (the
proposed regulations) in the Federal
Register to remove the de minimis rule
in § 1.704–1(b)(2)(iii)(e) (the de minimis
partner rule). The proposed regulations
provide that the final regulations are
effective on the date they are published
in the Federal Register.
The Treasury Department and the IRS
did not hold a public hearing because
there were no requests to speak at a
hearing. However, the Treasury
Department and the IRS received
comments in response to the proposed
regulations.
rules provide.’’ In response to this
request, some of the commenters
requested that future guidance in
regulations amend the current de
minimis partner rule, and other
commenters suggested alternative
approaches for de minimis partners and
look-through partners. These alternative
approaches are discussed in Part 2.a
through 2.e of this preamble.
Explanation of Provisions and
Summary of Comments
After consideration of the comments,
the final regulations adopt the proposed
regulations as modified by this Treasury
decision. The comments are discussed
in this preamble.
One commenter suggested adopting a
‘‘reasonable assumptions rule’’ for de
minimis partners and indirect partners.
This commenter noted that a
partnership must know the tax
attributes of its partners in order to
determine whether a partnership’s
allocations are substantial. However,
this commenter also explained that
many partnerships are comprised of
partners that are passthrough entities
and it is difficult for these partnerships
to obtain information about the tax
attributes of their ultimate partners.
Thus, this commenter recommended
that the Treasury Department and the
IRS permit a partnership to make
reasonable assumptions about: (1) The
tax attributes of any partner that owns
(directly, indirectly, and through
attribution) not more than a 5 percent
interest in the capital or profits of the
partnership (each, a de minimis
partner); and (2) the identity and tax
attributes of any person that owns an
interest in the partnership indirectly
1. Elimination of the Current De
Minimis Partner Rule
Commenters generally agreed that the
current de minimis partner rule is too
broad, is easily abused, and/or is
inconsistent with sound tax policy. The
Treasury Department and the IRS agree
with these commenters that the current
de minimis partner rule should no
longer be applicable.
2. Alternative Approaches
The preamble to the proposed
regulations requests comments on ‘‘how
to reduce the burden of complying with
the substantial economic effect rules,
with respect to look-through partners,
without diminishing the safeguards the
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
a. Modification of Current De Minimis
Partner Rule
A commenter suggested amending the
current de minimis partner rule by
providing that the de minimis partner
rule applies only if: (i) de minimis
partners own less than a specified
aggregate percentage (for example, 25
percent, 50 percent, or 80 percent) of the
partnership; and (ii) the partnership has
at least two non-de minimis partners.
b. Reasonable Assumptions Approach
E:\FR\FM\28DER1.SGM
28DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 249 / Friday, December 28, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
through one or more ‘‘look-through
entities’’ (within the meaning of
§ 1.704–1(b)(2)(iii)(d)(2)) other than
disregarded entities (each, an indirect
partner). Under this approach, if a
partnership makes reasonable inquiries
regarding the tax attributes of all de
minimis partners and indirect partners
but is unable to obtain the necessary
information, then the partnership would
be permitted to make reasonable
assumptions about the tax attributes of
those partners, but only if, in the
aggregate, those de minimis partners
and indirect partners do not own more
than a 30 percent interest in the profits
and capital of the partnership.
This commenter further explained
that, provided the partnership’s
assumptions are reasonable, allocations
that would be substantial on the basis of
those reasonable assumptions would be
respected even if those assumptions
later are determined to have been
incorrect. According to this commenter,
whether a partnership’s assumptions are
reasonable should be determined based
on all of the facts and circumstances.
This commenter provided several
examples of reasonable and
unreasonable assumptions (for example,
if a partner is identifiable (by its name
or otherwise) as a charitable
organization or educational institution,
it would be unreasonable for a
partnership to assume that the partner is
a fully taxable individual or
corporation).
Similarly, another commenter
suggested that the IRS establish
‘‘reasonable presumptions’’ as to the tax
attributes of the owners of certain lookthrough entity partners. According to
this commenter, these presumptions
should be limited to situations in which
the partnership does not know or have
reason to know of the tax attributes of
the owner of the look-through entity
partner.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
c. Safe Harbor Presumptions
Another commenter recommended
that the Treasury Department and the
IRS establish safe harbor presumptions
for the tax attributes of de minimis
partners that do not qualify for the de
minimis partner rule and partners that
own, directly or indirectly, through a
look-through entity, less than 10 percent
of the capital and profits of the
partnership and are allocated less than
10 percent of each partnership item. The
commenter proposed several safe harbor
presumptions regarding the relevant tax
attributes of such a partner based on the
type of partner (for example, if the
partner is a nonresident alien) and the
type of income the partnership earns
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:32 Dec 27, 2012
Jkt 229001
(for example, if the partnership earns
effectively connected income).
d. Deemed Satisfaction of Section 704(b)
in Limited Situations
Another commenter suggested
amending the section 704(b) regulations
to provide that in a limited number of
situations, the partnership would be
deemed to satisfy the partnership
allocation regulations. According to this
commenter, deemed satisfaction would
apply to partnerships that qualify, for
the current tax year and all prior tax
years, as pro rata partnerships, de
minimis service partnerships, or de
minimis partnerships with de minimis
partners. A partnership would be
considered a pro rata partnership if all
contributions to the partnership are
cash; all items of partnership income,
gain, loss, deduction, and credit are
allocated pro rata based on the partners’
relative contributions; all partnership
liabilities are shared pro rata based on
the partners’ relative contributions; and
all partnership distributions are made
pro rata based on the partners’ relative
contributions. A partnership would
qualify as a de minimis service
partnership if the partnership has gross
receipts of $5 million or less in each
taxable year, 95 percent of the
partnership’s gross receipts is derived
from services, and all partners are
individuals who materially participate
in the services of the partnership within
the meaning of section 469(h). A
partnership would be considered a de
minimis partnership with de minimis
partners if the aggregate fair market
value (net of partnership liabilities) or
tax basis of partnership property is $5
million or less at all times during the
partnership taxable year, the
partnership has gross receipts of $5
million or less in each taxable year, and
no partner is allocated more than 10
percent of any partnership item.
e. Other Alternative Approaches
Commenters offered other alternative
approaches, including lowering the de
minimis percentage interest threshold
and the income allocation threshold;
providing a limitation or threshold on
the amount of net taxable income that
is reasonably expected to be earned by
the partnership or allocated to the de
minimis partner each year; prohibiting
reliance on the de minimis partner rule
if the partnership knows (or has reason
to know) of the relevant tax attributes of
the de minimis partner and such
attributes would cause the allocations
not to have substantial economic effect;
or promulgating separate de minimis
partner rules for large and small
partnerships.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76381
The Treasury Department and the IRS
believe that the alternative approaches
to reduce the burden of complying with
the substantial economic effect rules
described in Part 2.a through 2.e of this
preamble require further consideration
due to the issues raised by the
complexity of the substantiality rules.
Although commenters suggested that
removal of the de minimis rule without
providing other administrative relief
would result in undue burden, the
Treasury Department and the IRS have
determined that tax administration is
best served by providing in the final
regulations that the current de minimis
rule will no longer be applicable. The
Treasury Department and the IRS may
address alternative approaches in future
guidance, and will consider the
comments on alternative approaches at
that time.
3. Effective/Applicability Date
Whether an allocation is considered
to be substantial is generally determined
at the time the allocation becomes part
of the partnership agreement. The final
regulations provide that the de minimis
partner rule does not apply to
allocations that become part of the
partnership agreement on or after
December 28, 2012.
With respect to existing allocations,
one commenter suggested that the de
minimis partner rule was sufficiently
flawed that it should be promptly
removed, and that it should not
continue to apply to allocations that
became part of the partnership
agreement prior to its removal. The
Treasury Department and the IRS agree
with this comment. Accordingly, these
final regulations are effective, and
therefore the de minimis partner rule of
§ 1.704–1(b)(2)(iii)(e) is no longer
applicable, for all partnership taxable
years beginning on or after December
28, 2012, regardless of when the
allocation became part of the
partnership agreement. Thus, the
substantiality of all partnership
allocations, regardless of when they
became part of the partnership
agreement, must be retested without the
benefit of the de minimis partner rule.
For allocations in existing partnership
agreements, the retest has to be as of the
first day of the first partnership taxable
year beginning on or after December 28,
2012.
Special Analyses
It has been determined that this
Treasury decision is not a significant
regulatory action as defined in
Executive Order 12866, as
supplemented by Executive Order
13563. Therefore, a regulatory
E:\FR\FM\28DER1.SGM
28DER1
76382
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 249 / Friday, December 28, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
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, these
regulations have been submitted to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration for comment
on its impact on small business, and no
comments were received.
Drafting Information
The principal author of these final
regulations is Michala Irons, Office of
the Associate Chief Counsel
(Passthroughs and Special Industries).
However, other personnel from the
Treasury Department and the IRS
participated in their development.
List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1
Income taxes, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Adoption of Amendments to the
Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is
amended as follows:
(b)(2)(iii)(d)(6) of this section for the
definition of indirect ownership.
(2) Nonapplicability of de minimis
rule. (i) Allocations that become part of
the partnership agreement on or after
December 28, 2012. Paragraph
(b)(2)(iii)(e)(1) of this section does not
apply to allocations that become part of
the partnership agreement on or after
December 28, 2012.
(ii) Retest for allocations that become
part of the partnership agreement prior
to December 28, 2012. If the de minimis
partner rule of paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(e)(1)
of this section was relied upon in testing
the substantiality of allocations that
became part of the partnership
agreement before December 28, 2012,
such allocations must be retested on the
first day of the first partnership taxable
year beginning on or after December 28,
2012, without regard to paragraph
(b)(2)(iii)(e)(1) of this section.
Steven T. Miller
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
Approved: December 19, 2012.
Mark J. Mazur,
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax
Policy).
[FR Doc. 2012–31155 Filed 12–21–12; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
PART 1—INCOME TAXES
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Paragraph 1. The authority citation
for part 1 continues to read in part as
follows:
■
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Parts 1, 53, and 602
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *
■ Par. 2. Section 1.704–1(b)(2)(iii)(e) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 1.704–1
RIN 1545–BG31; 1545–BL38
Partner’s distributive share.
*
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
[TD 9605]
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) * * *
(e) De minimis rule—(1) Partnership
taxable years beginning after May 19,
2008 and beginning before December 28,
2012. Except as provided in paragraph
(b)(2)(iii)(e)(2) of this section, for
purposes of applying this paragraph
(b)(2)(iii), for partnership taxable years
beginning after May 19, 2008 and
beginning before December 28, 2012, the
tax attributes of de minimis partners
need not be taken into account. For
purposes of this paragraph
(b)(2)(iii)(e)(1), a de minimis partner is
any partner, including a look-through
entity that owns, directly or indirectly,
less than 10 percent of the capital and
profits of a partnership, and who is
allocated less than 10 percent of each
partnership item of income, gain, loss,
deduction, and credit. See paragraph
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:32 Dec 27, 2012
Jkt 229001
Payout Requirements for Type III
Supporting Organizations That Are Not
Functionally Integrated
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Final and temporary
regulations.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document contains both
final regulations and temporary
regulations regarding the requirements
to qualify as a Type III supporting
organization that is operated in
connection with one or more supported
organizations. The regulations reflect
changes to the law made by the Pension
Protection Act of 2006. The regulations
will affect Type III supporting
organizations and their supported
organizations. The text of the temporary
regulations also serves as the text of the
proposed regulations set forth in the
Proposed Rules section in this issue of
the Federal Register.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Effective Date: These regulations
are effective on December 28, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Preston J. Quesenberry at (202) 622–
6070 (not a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Paperwork Reduction Act
The collection of information
contained in the final regulations has
been reviewed and approved by the
Office of Management and Budget in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3507(d)) under control number 1545–
2157. The collection of information in
the final regulations is in § 1.509(a)–
4(i)(2) and § 1.509(a)–4(i)(6)(v). The
collection of information under
§ 1.509(a)–4(i)(2) flows from section
509(f)(1)(A) of the Internal Revenue
Code (Code), which requires a Type III
supporting organization to provide to
each of its supported organizations such
information as the Secretary may
require to ensure that the Type III
supporting organization is responsive to
the needs or demands of its supported
organization(s). The collection of
information under § 1.509(a)–4(i)(6)(v)
is required only if a Type III supporting
organization that is not functionally
integrated wishes for certain amounts
set aside for a specific project to count
toward the distribution requirement
imposed by § 1.509(a)–4(i)(5)(ii). The
likely recordkeepers are Type III
supporting organizations and certain of
their supported organizations.
Estimated total annual reporting
burden: 15,122 hours.
Estimated average annual burden
hours per recordkeeper: 2 hours.
Estimated number of recordkeepers:
7,556.
Estimated frequency of collection of
such information: Annual.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a valid control
number assigned by the Office of
Management and Budget.
Books or records relating to a
collection of information must be
retained as long as their contents may
become material in the administration
of any internal revenue law. Generally,
tax returns and return information are
confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C.
6103.
Background
This document contains amendments
to the Income Tax Regulations (26 CFR
part 1) and Foundation Excise Tax
Regulations (26 CFR part 53) regarding
organizations described in section
E:\FR\FM\28DER1.SGM
28DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 249 (Friday, December 28, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76380-76382]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-31155]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[TD 9607]
RIN 1545-BJ37
Partner's Distributive Share
AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
ACTION: Final regulations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains final regulations regarding the
application of the substantiality de minimis rule. In the interest of
sound tax administration, this rule is being made inapplicable. These
final regulations affect partnerships and their partners.
DATES: Effective Date: The final regulations are effective on December
28, 2012.
Applicability Date: The final regulations under Sec. 1.704-
1(b)(2)(iii)(e)(1) are applicable for partnership taxable years
beginning after May 19, 2008 and beginning before December 28, 2012.
The final regulations under Sec. 1.704-1(b)(2)(iii)(e)(2)(i) are
applicable beginning on or after December 28, 2012, and the final
regulations under Sec. 1.704-1(b)(2)(iii)(e)(2)(ii) are applicable for
partnership taxable years beginning on or after December 28, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Kahanel, at (202) 622-3050
(not a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
These final regulations contain amendments to the Income Tax
Regulations (26 CFR Part 1) under section 704 of the Internal Revenue
Code (Code). On October 25, 2011, the Treasury Department and the IRS
published a notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-109564-10) (the proposed
regulations) in the Federal Register to remove the de minimis rule in
Sec. 1.704-1(b)(2)(iii)(e) (the de minimis partner rule). The proposed
regulations provide that the final regulations are effective on the
date they are published in the Federal Register.
The Treasury Department and the IRS did not hold a public hearing
because there were no requests to speak at a hearing. However, the
Treasury Department and the IRS received comments in response to the
proposed regulations.
Explanation of Provisions and Summary of Comments
After consideration of the comments, the final regulations adopt
the proposed regulations as modified by this Treasury decision. The
comments are discussed in this preamble.
1. Elimination of the Current De Minimis Partner Rule
Commenters generally agreed that the current de minimis partner
rule is too broad, is easily abused, and/or is inconsistent with sound
tax policy. The Treasury Department and the IRS agree with these
commenters that the current de minimis partner rule should no longer be
applicable.
2. Alternative Approaches
The preamble to the proposed regulations requests comments on ``how
to reduce the burden of complying with the substantial economic effect
rules, with respect to look-through partners, without diminishing the
safeguards the rules provide.'' In response to this request, some of
the commenters requested that future guidance in regulations amend the
current de minimis partner rule, and other commenters suggested
alternative approaches for de minimis partners and look-through
partners. These alternative approaches are discussed in Part 2.a
through 2.e of this preamble.
a. Modification of Current De Minimis Partner Rule
A commenter suggested amending the current de minimis partner rule
by providing that the de minimis partner rule applies only if: (i) de
minimis partners own less than a specified aggregate percentage (for
example, 25 percent, 50 percent, or 80 percent) of the partnership; and
(ii) the partnership has at least two non-de minimis partners.
b. Reasonable Assumptions Approach
One commenter suggested adopting a ``reasonable assumptions rule''
for de minimis partners and indirect partners. This commenter noted
that a partnership must know the tax attributes of its partners in
order to determine whether a partnership's allocations are substantial.
However, this commenter also explained that many partnerships are
comprised of partners that are passthrough entities and it is difficult
for these partnerships to obtain information about the tax attributes
of their ultimate partners. Thus, this commenter recommended that the
Treasury Department and the IRS permit a partnership to make reasonable
assumptions about: (1) The tax attributes of any partner that owns
(directly, indirectly, and through attribution) not more than a 5
percent interest in the capital or profits of the partnership (each, a
de minimis partner); and (2) the identity and tax attributes of any
person that owns an interest in the partnership indirectly
[[Page 76381]]
through one or more ``look-through entities'' (within the meaning of
Sec. 1.704-1(b)(2)(iii)(d)(2)) other than disregarded entities (each,
an indirect partner). Under this approach, if a partnership makes
reasonable inquiries regarding the tax attributes of all de minimis
partners and indirect partners but is unable to obtain the necessary
information, then the partnership would be permitted to make reasonable
assumptions about the tax attributes of those partners, but only if, in
the aggregate, those de minimis partners and indirect partners do not
own more than a 30 percent interest in the profits and capital of the
partnership.
This commenter further explained that, provided the partnership's
assumptions are reasonable, allocations that would be substantial on
the basis of those reasonable assumptions would be respected even if
those assumptions later are determined to have been incorrect.
According to this commenter, whether a partnership's assumptions are
reasonable should be determined based on all of the facts and
circumstances. This commenter provided several examples of reasonable
and unreasonable assumptions (for example, if a partner is identifiable
(by its name or otherwise) as a charitable organization or educational
institution, it would be unreasonable for a partnership to assume that
the partner is a fully taxable individual or corporation).
Similarly, another commenter suggested that the IRS establish
``reasonable presumptions'' as to the tax attributes of the owners of
certain look-through entity partners. According to this commenter,
these presumptions should be limited to situations in which the
partnership does not know or have reason to know of the tax attributes
of the owner of the look-through entity partner.
c. Safe Harbor Presumptions
Another commenter recommended that the Treasury Department and the
IRS establish safe harbor presumptions for the tax attributes of de
minimis partners that do not qualify for the de minimis partner rule
and partners that own, directly or indirectly, through a look-through
entity, less than 10 percent of the capital and profits of the
partnership and are allocated less than 10 percent of each partnership
item. The commenter proposed several safe harbor presumptions regarding
the relevant tax attributes of such a partner based on the type of
partner (for example, if the partner is a nonresident alien) and the
type of income the partnership earns (for example, if the partnership
earns effectively connected income).
d. Deemed Satisfaction of Section 704(b) in Limited Situations
Another commenter suggested amending the section 704(b) regulations
to provide that in a limited number of situations, the partnership
would be deemed to satisfy the partnership allocation regulations.
According to this commenter, deemed satisfaction would apply to
partnerships that qualify, for the current tax year and all prior tax
years, as pro rata partnerships, de minimis service partnerships, or de
minimis partnerships with de minimis partners. A partnership would be
considered a pro rata partnership if all contributions to the
partnership are cash; all items of partnership income, gain, loss,
deduction, and credit are allocated pro rata based on the partners'
relative contributions; all partnership liabilities are shared pro rata
based on the partners' relative contributions; and all partnership
distributions are made pro rata based on the partners' relative
contributions. A partnership would qualify as a de minimis service
partnership if the partnership has gross receipts of $5 million or less
in each taxable year, 95 percent of the partnership's gross receipts is
derived from services, and all partners are individuals who materially
participate in the services of the partnership within the meaning of
section 469(h). A partnership would be considered a de minimis
partnership with de minimis partners if the aggregate fair market value
(net of partnership liabilities) or tax basis of partnership property
is $5 million or less at all times during the partnership taxable year,
the partnership has gross receipts of $5 million or less in each
taxable year, and no partner is allocated more than 10 percent of any
partnership item.
e. Other Alternative Approaches
Commenters offered other alternative approaches, including lowering
the de minimis percentage interest threshold and the income allocation
threshold; providing a limitation or threshold on the amount of net
taxable income that is reasonably expected to be earned by the
partnership or allocated to the de minimis partner each year;
prohibiting reliance on the de minimis partner rule if the partnership
knows (or has reason to know) of the relevant tax attributes of the de
minimis partner and such attributes would cause the allocations not to
have substantial economic effect; or promulgating separate de minimis
partner rules for large and small partnerships.
The Treasury Department and the IRS believe that the alternative
approaches to reduce the burden of complying with the substantial
economic effect rules described in Part 2.a through 2.e of this
preamble require further consideration due to the issues raised by the
complexity of the substantiality rules. Although commenters suggested
that removal of the de minimis rule without providing other
administrative relief would result in undue burden, the Treasury
Department and the IRS have determined that tax administration is best
served by providing in the final regulations that the current de
minimis rule will no longer be applicable. The Treasury Department and
the IRS may address alternative approaches in future guidance, and will
consider the comments on alternative approaches at that time.
3. Effective/Applicability Date
Whether an allocation is considered to be substantial is generally
determined at the time the allocation becomes part of the partnership
agreement. The final regulations provide that the de minimis partner
rule does not apply to allocations that become part of the partnership
agreement on or after December 28, 2012.
With respect to existing allocations, one commenter suggested that
the de minimis partner rule was sufficiently flawed that it should be
promptly removed, and that it should not continue to apply to
allocations that became part of the partnership agreement prior to its
removal. The Treasury Department and the IRS agree with this comment.
Accordingly, these final regulations are effective, and therefore the
de minimis partner rule of Sec. 1.704-1(b)(2)(iii)(e) is no longer
applicable, for all partnership taxable years beginning on or after
December 28, 2012, regardless of when the allocation became part of the
partnership agreement. Thus, the substantiality of all partnership
allocations, regardless of when they became part of the partnership
agreement, must be retested without the benefit of the de minimis
partner rule. For allocations in existing partnership agreements, the
retest has to be as of the first day of the first partnership taxable
year beginning on or after December 28, 2012.
Special Analyses
It has been determined that this Treasury decision is not a
significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563. Therefore, a regulatory
[[Page 76382]]
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, these regulations have been submitted to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for
comment on its impact on small business, and no comments were received.
Drafting Information
The principal author of these final regulations is Michala Irons,
Office of the Associate Chief Counsel (Passthroughs and Special
Industries). However, other personnel from the Treasury Department and
the IRS participated in their development.
List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1
Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Adoption of Amendments to the Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is amended as follows:
PART 1--INCOME TAXES
0
Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read in
part as follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *
0
Par. 2. Section 1.704-1(b)(2)(iii)(e) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1.704-1 Partner's distributive share.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) * * *
(e) De minimis rule--(1) Partnership taxable years beginning after
May 19, 2008 and beginning before December 28, 2012. Except as provided
in paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(e)(2) of this section, for purposes of
applying this paragraph (b)(2)(iii), for partnership taxable years
beginning after May 19, 2008 and beginning before December 28, 2012,
the tax attributes of de minimis partners need not be taken into
account. For purposes of this paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(e)(1), a de minimis
partner is any partner, including a look-through entity that owns,
directly or indirectly, less than 10 percent of the capital and profits
of a partnership, and who is allocated less than 10 percent of each
partnership item of income, gain, loss, deduction, and credit. See
paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(d)(6) of this section for the definition of
indirect ownership.
(2) Nonapplicability of de minimis rule. (i) Allocations that
become part of the partnership agreement on or after December 28, 2012.
Paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(e)(1) of this section does not apply to
allocations that become part of the partnership agreement on or after
December 28, 2012.
(ii) Retest for allocations that become part of the partnership
agreement prior to December 28, 2012. If the de minimis partner rule of
paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(e)(1) of this section was relied upon in testing
the substantiality of allocations that became part of the partnership
agreement before December 28, 2012, such allocations must be retested
on the first day of the first partnership taxable year beginning on or
after December 28, 2012, without regard to paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(e)(1)
of this section.
Steven T. Miller
Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement.
Approved: December 19, 2012.
Mark J. Mazur,
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax Policy).
[FR Doc. 2012-31155 Filed 12-21-12; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P