Liabilities Recognized as Recourse Partnership Liabilities Under Section 752, 69282-69291 [2016-23388]
Download as PDF
69282
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 5, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[TD 9788]
RIN 1545–BM84
Liabilities Recognized as Recourse
Partnership Liabilities Under Section
752
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Final and temporary
regulations.
AGENCY:
This document contains final
and temporary regulations concerning
how liabilities are allocated for
purposes of section 707 of the Internal
Revenue Code (Code) and when certain
obligations are recognized for purposes
of determining whether a liability is a
recourse partnership liability under
section 752. These regulations affect
partnerships and their partners. The text
of these temporary regulations serves as
part of the text of proposed regulations
(REG–122855–15) published in the
Proposed Rules section in this issue of
the Federal Register.
DATES: Effective date: These regulations
are effective on October 5, 2016.
Applicability dates: For dates of
applicability, see §§ 1.707–9T(a)(4) and
1.752–2T(l)(2).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Concerning the final and temporary
regulations, Caroline E. Hay or Deane M.
Burke, (202) 317–5279.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
addition to these final and temporary
regulations, the Treasury Department
and the IRS are publishing in the Rules
and Regulations section in this issue of
the Federal Register, final regulations
under section 707 concerning disguised
sales and under section 752 regarding
the allocation of excess nonrecourse
liabilities of a partnership to a partner,
and, in the Proposed Rules section in
this issue of the Federal Register,
proposed regulations (REG–122855–15)
that incorporate the text of these
temporary regulations, withdraw a
portion of a notice of proposed
rulemaking (REG–119305–11) to the
extent not adopted by the final
regulations, and contain new proposed
regulations addressing (1) when certain
obligations to restore a deficit balance in
a partner’s capital account are
disregarded under section 704 and (2)
when partnership liabilities are treated
as recourse liabilities under section 752.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES2
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:06 Oct 04, 2016
Jkt 241001
Paperwork Reduction Act
The collection of information related
to these final and temporary regulations
under section 752 is reported on Form
8275, Disclosure Statement, and has
been reviewed in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3507) and approved by the Office of
Management and Budget under control
number 1545–0889.
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.
For further information concerning
this collection of information, and
where to submit comments on the
collection of information and the
accuracy of the estimated burden, and
suggestions for reducing this burden,
please refer to the preamble to the crossreferencing notice of proposed
rulemaking published in the Proposed
Rules section in this issue of the Federal
Register.
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 tax return information
are confidential, as required by section
6103.
Background
1. Overview
This Treasury decision contains final
and temporary regulations that amend
the Income Tax Regulations (26 CFR
part 1) under sections 707 and 752 of
the Code. On January 30, 2014, the
Treasury Department and the IRS
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking in the Federal Register
(REG–119305–11, 79 FR 4826) to amend
the then existing regulations under
section 707 relating to disguised sales of
property to or by a partnership and
under section 752 concerning the
treatment of partnership liabilities (the
2014 Proposed Regulations). The 2014
Proposed Regulations provided certain
technical rules intended to clarify the
application of the disguised sale rules
under section 707 and also contained
rules regarding the sharing of
partnership recourse and nonrecourse
liabilities under section 752.
A public hearing on the 2014
Proposed Regulations was not requested
or held, but the Treasury Department
and the IRS received written comments.
Based on a comment received on the
2014 Proposed Regulations requesting
that guidance provided under section
752 regarding a partner’s share of
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
partnership liabilities apply instead
solely for disguised sale purposes, the
Treasury Department and the IRS have
reconsidered the rules under § 1.707–
5(a)(2) of the 2014 Proposed Regulations
for determining a partner’s share of
partnership liabilities for purposes of
section 707. Accordingly and as
recommended by that commenter, this
Treasury decision contains temporary
regulations under section 707 (the 707
Temporary Regulations) that require a
partner to apply the same percentage
used to determine the partner’s share of
excess nonrecourse liabilities under
§ 1.752–3(a)(3) (with certain limitations)
in determining the partner’s share of
partnership liabilities for disguised sale
purposes. This Treasury decision also
contains temporary regulations under
section 752 (the 752 Temporary
Regulations) providing guidance on the
treatment of ‘‘bottom dollar payment
obligations.’’ Cross-referencing
proposed regulations providing
additional opportunity for comment are
contained in the related notice of
proposed rulemaking (REG–122855–15)
published in the Proposed Rules section
in this issue of the Federal Register. The
Summary of Comments and Explanation
of Provisions section of the preamble of
this Treasury decision discusses the
changes for determining a partner’s
share of partnership liabilities for
disguised sale purposes and also the
rules relating to certain ‘‘bottom dollar
payment obligations.’’
The Treasury Department and the IRS
are also publishing final regulations
under section 707 (the 707 Final
Regulations) in a separate Treasury
decision (TD 9787) published in the
Rules and Regulations section in this
issue of the Federal Register that adopt
the remaining provisions of the 2014
Proposed Regulations under section
707. That Treasury decision also
contains final regulations under section
752 (the 752 Final Regulations)
concerning the allocation of a
partnership’s excess nonrecourse
liabilities as explained in the Summary
of Comments and Explanation of
Provisions sections of that Treasury
decision.
Finally, after considering comments
on the 2014 Proposed Regulations under
section 752, the Treasury Department
and the IRS are withdrawing proposed
§ 1.752–2 and are issuing new proposed
regulations (the 752 Proposed
Regulations) contained in the related
notice of proposed rulemaking (REG–
122855–15) published in the Proposed
Rules section in this issue of the Federal
Register.
E:\FR\FM\05OCR2.SGM
05OCR2
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 5, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
2. Summary of Applicable Law
In determining a partner’s share of a
partnership liability for disguised sale
purposes, the existing regulations under
section 707 prescribe separate rules for
a partnership’s recourse liability and a
partnership’s nonrecourse liability.
Under § 1.707–5(a)(2)(i), a partner’s
share of a partnership’s recourse
liability equals the partner’s share of the
liability under section 752 and the
regulations thereunder. A partnership
liability is a recourse liability under
section 707 to the extent that the
obligation is a recourse liability under
§ 1.752–1(a)(1). Under § 1.707–
5(a)(2)(ii), a partner’s share of a
partnership’s nonrecourse liability is
determined by applying the same
percentage used to determine the
partner’s share of the excess
nonrecourse liability under § 1.752–
3(a)(3). Generally, a partner’s share of
the excess nonrecourse liability is
determined in accordance with the
partner’s share of partnership profits
taking into account all facts and
circumstances relating to the economic
arrangement of the partners. A
partnership liability is a nonrecourse
liability under section 707 to the extent
that the obligation is a nonrecourse
liability under § 1.752–1(a)(2). In
addition, the existing regulations under
section 707 provide that a partnership
liability is a recourse or nonrecourse
liability to the extent the liability would
be recourse under § 1.752–1(a)(1) or
nonrecourse under § 1.752–1(a)(2),
respectively, if the liability was treated
as a partnership liability for purposes of
section 752 (§ 1.752–7 contingent
liabilities).
Section 1.752–1(a)(1) provides that a
partnership liability is a recourse
liability to the extent that a partner or
related person bears the economic risk
of loss (EROL) for that liability under
§ 1.752–2. Section 1.752–2(a) provides
that a partner’s share of a recourse
partnership liability equals the portion
of the liability, if any, for which the
partner or related person bears the
EROL. Section 1.752–1(a)(2) provides
that a partnership liability is a
nonrecourse liability to the extent that
no partner or related person bears the
EROL for that liability under § 1.752–2.
A partner generally bears the EROL for
a partnership liability if the partner or
related person has an obligation to make
a payment under § 1.752–2(b). A partner
generally has an obligation to make a
payment to the extent that the partner
or related person would have to make a
payment if, upon a constructive
liquidation of the partnership, the
partnership’s assets were worthless and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:06 Oct 04, 2016
Jkt 241001
the liability became due and payable
(constructive liquidation test). Section
1.752–2(b)(6) presumes partners and
related persons will satisfy their
payment obligations irrespective of their
net worth, unless the facts and
circumstances indicate a plan to
circumvent or avoid the obligation.
Summary of Comments and
Explanation of Provisions
1. Partner’s Share of Partnership
Liabilities for Purposes of Section 707
The withdrawn portions of the 2014
Proposed Regulations included
proposed changes to § 1.752–2 that were
intended to ensure that only genuine
commercial payment obligations,
including guarantees and indemnities,
affected the allocation of partnership
liabilities. Although the 2014 Proposed
Regulations received some unfavorable
comments, one commenter expressed
support for the overall objective of those
proposed rules. According to the
commenter, the clear effect of the 2014
Proposed Regulations under section 752
was to make it more likely that
liabilities would be treated as
nonrecourse liabilities, and thus
allocable under § 1.752–3. The
commenter noted that such an effect
seems appropriate as an economic
matter, because, contrary to the
constructive liquidation test in § 1.752–
2(b)(1), lenders, borrowers, and credit
support providers generally do not
expect that the assets of the partnership
will become worthless. Rather, lenders,
borrowers and credit support providers
generally expect borrowers (including
partnerships) to satisfy their obligations
(in the case of a partnership, with
partnership profits). However, the
commenter expressed concerns with the
proposed section 752 rules. The
commenter suggested that the
regulations adopt a more narrowly
tailored approach that treats all
liabilities as nonrecourse liabilities for
section 707 disguised sale purposes
only.
Other commenters also suggested that
changes to the liability allocation rules
be limited to the context of disguised
sales under section 707 to specifically
address the abuses that concern the
Treasury Department and the IRS. One
abuse relating to disguised sales within
the meaning of § 1.707–3 concerns the
debt-financed distribution exception
under § 1.707–5(b). Under this
exception, a distribution of money to a
partner by a partnership is not taken
into account for purposes of § 1.707–3 to
the extent that the distribution is
traceable to a partnership borrowing and
the amount of the distribution does not
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69283
exceed the partner’s allocable share of
the liability incurred to fund the
distribution. The legislative history to
section 707, upon which the debtfinanced distribution exception in
§ 1.707–5(b) is based, contemplates a
contributing partner borrowing through
the partnership rather than engaging in
a disguised sale when the partner, in
substance, retains liability for
repayment of the borrowed amounts.
See H.R. Rep. No. 861, 98th Cong., 2d
Sess. 859 (1984). This exception,
however, has been abused through
leveraged partnership transactions in
which the contributing partners or
related persons enter into payment
obligations that are not commercial
solely to achieve an allocation of the
partnership liability to the partner, with
the objective of avoiding a disguised
sale. See, for example, Canal Corp. v.
Commissioner, 135 T.C. 199, 216 (2010)
(‘‘We have carefully considered the facts
and circumstances and find that the
indemnity agreement should be
disregarded because it created no more
than a remote possibility that [the
indemnitor] would actually be liable for
payment.’’).
After considering the comments on
the 2014 Proposed Regulations
suggesting that the regulations be
narrowly tailored to address abuse
concerns relating to disguised sales, the
Treasury Department and the IRS have
concluded that, for disguised sale
purposes only, it is appropriate for
partners to determine their share of any
partnership liability, whether recourse
or nonrecourse under section 752, in the
manner in which excess nonrecourse
liabilities are allocated under § 1.752–
3(a)(3), as limited for disguised sale
purposes in the 752 Final Regulations.
For purposes of the disguised sale rules,
this allocation method reflects the
overall economic arrangement of the
partners more accurately than the
current regulations or the 2014
Proposed Regulations. In most cases, a
partnership will satisfy its liabilities
with partnership profits, the
partnership’s assets do not become
worthless, and the payment obligations
of partners or related persons are not
called upon. This is true whether: (1) A
partner’s liability is assumed by a
partnership in connection with a
transfer of property to the partnership or
by a partner in connection with a
transfer of property by the partnership
to the partner; (2) a partnership takes
property subject to a liability in
connection with a transfer of property to
the partnership or a partner takes
property subject to a liability in
connection with a transfer of property
E:\FR\FM\05OCR2.SGM
05OCR2
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES2
69284
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 5, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
by the partnership to the partner; or (3)
a liability is incurred by the partnership
to make a distribution to a partner under
the debt-financed distribution exception
in § 1.707–5(b). Accordingly, under the
707 Temporary Regulations, a partner’s
share of any partnership liability for
disguised sale purposes is the same
percentage used to determine the
partner’s share of the partnership’s
excess nonrecourse liabilities under
§ 1.752–3(a)(3), as limited for disguised
sale purposes under the 752 Final
Regulations.
Commenters also suggested that a
partner’s share of a partnership liability
for disguised sale purposes should not
include any portion of the liability for
which another partner bears the EROL,
as these liabilities would not be
allocated to a partner without EROL
under general principles of subchapter
K. The Treasury Department and the IRS
agree with the commenter that this
change should not create a liability
allocation not otherwise allowed under
general subchapter K principles.
Therefore, the 707 Temporary
Regulations provide that a partner’s
share of a partnership liability for
disguised sale purposes does not
include any amount of the liability for
which another partner bears the EROL
for the partnership liability under
§ 1.752–2.
The liability allocation approach for
disguised sale purposes in the 707
Temporary Regulations does not conflict
with Congress’s directive relating to
section 752, which had been raised as
a potential concern by some
commenters with respect to the 2014
Proposed Regulations. Section 79 of the
Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 (Pub. L.
98–369) overruled the decision in
Raphan v. United States, 3 Cl. Ct. 457
(1983) (holding that a guarantee by a
general partner of an otherwise
nonrecourse liability of the partnership
did not require the partner to be treated
as personally liable for that liability)
and directed the Secretary of the
Treasury to amend the regulations
under section 752 to reflect the
overruling of the Raphan decision. At
issue in the Raphan case was debt
allocation under section 752;
accordingly, Congress’s directive related
to regulations under section 752 only.
As noted, the 707 Temporary
Regulations treat all partnership
liabilities, whether recourse or
nonrecourse, as nonrecourse liabilities
solely for purposes of section 707. Thus,
the approach adopted in the 707
Temporary Regulations does not conflict
with the approach directed by Congress
after the Raphan case.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:31 Oct 04, 2016
Jkt 241001
Finally, in addition to the rule for
determining a partner’s share of a
§ 1.752–1(a) partnership liability for
disguised sale purposes, the 707
Temporary Regulations reserve with
respect to the treatment of § 1.752–7
contingent liabilities for disguised sale
purposes. The 2014 Proposed
Regulations proposed removing the
‘‘would be treated’’ language in § 1.707–
5(a)(2)(i) and (ii) of the existing
regulations relating to contingent
liabilities. The 707 Temporary
Regulations replace the proposed
provisions with the previously
discussed rule for determining a
partner’s share of a partnership liability
as defined in § 1.752–1(a). Because the
2014 Proposed Regulations would have
removed language relating to § 1.752–7
contingent liabilities, some commenters
suggested that the regulations
specifically clarify how contingent
liabilities are treated for purposes of the
disguised sale rules. The Treasury
Department and the IRS agree that
clarification of the treatment of § 1.752–
7 contingent liabilities for disguised sale
purposes is warranted.
In many cases, § 1.752–7 contingent
liabilities may constitute qualified
liabilities that would not be taken into
account for purposes of determining a
disguised sale. However, some
commenters noted that there may be
circumstances in which certain transfers
of § 1.752–7 contingent liabilities to a
partnership may be abusive. Thus, the
Treasury Department and the IRS will
continue to study the issue of the effect
of contingent liabilities with respect to
section 707, as well as other sections of
the Code, in connection with future
guidance projects.
2. Determining Whether a Liability Is a
Recourse Liability of a Partnership
The 752 Temporary Regulations
amend § 1.752–2 to address certain
payment obligations of a partner or
related person. The Treasury
Department and the IRS continue to
have concerns that partners and related
persons are entering into payment
obligations that are not commercial
solely to achieve an allocation of a
partnership liability.
Under the 2014 Proposed Regulations,
a partner’s or related person’s payment
obligation with respect to a partnership
liability would not have been
recognized under § 1.752–2(b)(3) unless
seven factors (recognition factors) were
satisfied. Two of the seven recognition
factors imposed certain additional
requirements on contractual obligations
outside a partnership agreement, such
as guarantees, indemnifications,
reimbursement agreements, and other
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
obligations running directly to creditors,
other partners, or to the partnership
(guarantee and indemnity recognition
factors). In the case of a guarantee or
similar arrangement, the 2014 Proposed
Regulations would have required the
partner or related person to be liable up
to the full amount of such partner’s or
related person’s payment obligation, if,
and to the extent that, any amount of the
partnership liability is not otherwise
satisfied. In the case of an indemnity,
reimbursement agreement, or similar
arrangement, the 2014 Proposed
Regulations would have required the
partner or related person to be liable up
to the full amount of such partner’s or
related person’s payment obligation if,
and to the extent that, any amount of the
indemnitee’s or other benefited party’s
payment obligation is satisfied. The
terms of the guarantee, indemnity, or
reimbursement agreement would be
treated as modified by any right of
indemnity, reimbursement agreement,
or similar arrangement. However, a right
of proportionate contribution running
between partners or related persons who
were co-obligors with respect to a
payment obligation for which each of
them was jointly and severally liable
would not modify a guarantee,
indemnity, or reimbursement
agreement. If the partner’s or related
person’s payment obligation failed to
satisfy any of the recognition factors, the
payment obligation was not recognized
and the partner would not bear EROL
for the partnership liability. In addition
to the guarantee and indemnity
recognition factors, a partner’s or related
person’s payment obligation with
respect to a partnership liability would
not be recognized under an anti-abuse
rule in the 2014 Proposed Regulations if
the facts and circumstances indicated
that the partnership liability was part of
a plan or arrangement involving the use
of tiered partnerships, intermediaries, or
similar arrangements to convert a single
liability into multiple liabilities with a
principal purpose of circumventing the
guarantee and indemnity recognition
factors.
The Treasury Department and the IRS
continue to believe that certain
obligations, such as certain so-called
‘‘bottom-dollar guarantees,’’ should
generally not be recognized as payment
obligations under § 1.752–2(b)(3)
because they generally lack a significant
non-tax commercial business purpose.
No commenters suggested that bottomdollar guarantees were relevant to loan
risk underwriting. Accordingly, the 752
Temporary Regulations retain the
E:\FR\FM\05OCR2.SGM
05OCR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 5, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES2
restriction on certain guarantees and
indemnities and provide that these
payment obligations are not recognized
under § 1.752–2(b)(3). In addition, these
regulations remove the Example in
§ 1.752–2(j)(4) to comport with the
provisions in the 752 Temporary
Regulations relating to bottom dollar
payment obligations. However, after
considering the comments received on
the 2014 Proposed Regulations, the 752
Temporary Regulations provide for an
exception as well as an anti-abuse rule
to address arrangements that are not
intended to be subject to this rule.
A. General Rule: Bottom Dollar Payment
Obligations
Although the 752 Temporary
Regulations retain the restriction
relating to certain guarantees and
indemnities, these temporary
regulations refine the description of
non-commercial obligations in response
to comments. Commenters expressed
concerns with the 2014 Proposed
Regulations’ description of so-called
‘‘bottom-dollar guarantees and
indemnities.’’ Commenters thought the
language was confusing. In addition,
with respect to the anti-abuse rule in the
2014 Proposed Regulations, one
commenter believed that ‘‘tranches’’ of
debt could be used to effect
arrangements that are economically
similar to ‘‘bottom-dollar guarantees’’
and recommended that the regulations
strengthen the anti-abuse rule. This
commenter suggested that two or more
liabilities be treated as a single liability
if: (1) The liabilities are incurred
pursuant to a common plan, as part of
a single transaction, or as part of a series
of related transactions; (2) the liabilities
have the same counterparty or
counterparties (or substantially the same
group of counterparties); or (3) the
guarantee or similar arrangement would
fail the guarantee recognition factor if
the liabilities were treated as a single
liability; and (4) multiple liabilities
(rather than a single liability) were
incurred with a principal purpose of
avoiding the guarantee recognition
factor.
In response to comments, the 752
Temporary Regulations clarify the
description of so-called ‘‘bottom-dollar
guarantees and indemnities’’ by
consolidating these non-commercial
obligations under one term: Bottomdollar payment obligations. In addition,
instead of having an anti-abuse rule to
address arrangements that use tiered
partnerships, intermediaries, senior and
subordinate liabilities, or similar
arrangements, the 752 Temporary
Regulations define these arrangements
as bottom dollar payment obligations if
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:06 Oct 04, 2016
Jkt 241001
certain factors, taking into account the
commenter’s suggestion, exist.
Therefore, under the 752 Temporary
Regulations, the term ‘‘bottom dollar
payment obligation’’ includes (subject to
certain exceptions): (1) Any payment
obligation other than one in which the
partner or related person is or would be
liable up to the full amount of such
partner’s or related person’s payment
obligation if, and to the extent that (A)
any amount of the partnership liability
is not otherwise satisfied in the case of
an obligation that is a guarantee or other
similar arrangement, or (B) any amount
of the indemnitee’s or benefited party’s
payment obligation is satisfied in the
case of an obligation which is an
indemnity or similar arrangement; and
(2) an arrangement with respect to a
partnership liability that uses tiered
partnerships, intermediaries, senior and
subordinate liabilities, or similar
arrangements to convert what would
otherwise be a single liability into
multiple liabilities if, based on the facts
and circumstances, the liabilities were
incurred (A) pursuant to a common
plan, as part of a single transaction or
arrangement, or as part of a series of
related transactions or arrangements,
and (B) with a principal purpose of
avoiding having at least one of such
liabilities or payment obligations with
respect to such liabilities being treated
as a bottom dollar payment obligation.
Any payment obligation under § 1.752–
2, including an obligation to make a
capital contribution and to restore a
deficit capital account upon liquidation
of the partnership as described in
§ 1.704–1(b)(2)(ii)(b)(3), may be a bottom
dollar payment obligation if it meets the
requirements set forth above.
The preamble of the 2014 Proposed
Regulations requested comments on
whether and under what circumstances
regulations should permit recognition of
a payment obligation for a portion,
rather than 100 percent, of each dollar
of a partnership liability to which the
payment relates (a ‘‘vertical slice’’ of a
partnership liability). The commenters
believed that regulations under section
752 should recognize a vertical slice of
a partnership liability because these
payment obligations represent the same
economic risk as a guarantee, for
example, of the entire partnership
liability.
The Treasury Department and the IRS
agree with the commenters that certain
obligations, including a vertical slice of
a partnership liability, should not cause
a payment obligation to be a bottom
dollar payment obligation and, thus, not
recognized under § 1.752–2(b)(3). In
addition, the Treasury Department and
the IRS have determined that, as long as
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69285
a partner or related person is or would
be liable for the full amount of a
payment obligation, such obligation is
not a bottom dollar payment obligation
merely because a maximum amount is
placed on the partner’s or related
person’s obligation. Accordingly, the
752 Temporary Regulations specifically
except certain payment obligations
within those parameters, including
obligations with joint and several
liability, from being treated as bottom
dollar payment obligations.
B. Exception From Treatment as a
Bottom Dollar Payment Obligation
In addition to comments relating to
the description of ‘‘bottom-dollar
guarantees’’ and the anti-abuse rule in
the 2014 Proposed Regulations,
commenters expressed concerns that the
guaranty and indemnity recognition
factors would deprive a partner from
being allocated a liability even in
situations where there is real EROL. One
commenter described the 2014 Proposed
Regulations as prejudging all payment
obligations to be remote and fictitious if
the obligations did not cover 100
percent of any shortfall in repayment.
The commenter believed EROL could
exist even if 100 percent of the liability
was not covered.
Another commenter appreciated the
merits of a bright-line rule that would
look to every dollar of a liability, but
thought that the 100 percent threshold
was too high. This commenter
recommended that a payment obligation
should be respected if a partner or
related person (i) is or would be liable
up to the full amount of such partner’s
or related person’s payment obligation
if, and to the extent that, less than 80
percent of the partnership liability is not
otherwise satisfied and (ii) either (A) the
taxpayer or the IRS clearly establishes
that the credit support materially
decreased the partnership’s borrowing
costs with respect to the liability or
materially enhanced the other terms of
the borrowing, or (B) the partners (or
persons related to one or more of the
partners), in the aggregate, are or would
be liable up to the full amount of their
payment obligations if, and to the extent
that, any amount of the partnership
liability is not otherwise satisfied. The
commenter believed that this lower
threshold incorporates the idea that a
person may have meaningful risk with
respect to the underlying liability, while
protecting the legitimate interests of the
government in ensuring that the lower
threshold is not abused by taxpayers.
The Treasury Department and the IRS
recognize that, in certain circumstances,
it might be appropriate to treat a partner
as bearing EROL with respect to a
E:\FR\FM\05OCR2.SGM
05OCR2
69286
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 5, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES2
payment obligation that would be
characterized as a bottom dollar
payment obligation under the general
rule. What otherwise would be a bottom
dollar payment obligation can be
distinguished in a situation where the
partners have allocated the risk among
themselves, and the person making the
bottom dollar payment obligation is
liable for at least 90 percent of the
person’s payment obligation (because
the person is not entitled to
indemnification or reimbursement for
more than 10 percent of the person’s
payment obligation). For example, if one
partner (Partner A) guarantees 100
percent of a partnership liability and
another partner (Partner B) indemnifies
Partner A for the first one percent of
Partner A’s obligation, Partner A’s
obligation would be characterized as a
bottom dollar payment obligation under
the general rule because Partner A
would not be liable to the full extent of
the guarantee if any amount of the
partnership liability is not otherwise
satisfied (because Partner A would be
reimbursed due to Partner B’s
indemnity). To address this concern, the
752 Temporary Regulations provide an
exception if a partner or related person
has a payment obligation that would be
recognized (initial payment obligation)
under § 1.752–2T(b)(3) but for the effect
of an indemnity, reimbursement
agreement, or similar arrangement. Such
bottom dollar payment obligation is
recognized under § 1.752–2T(b)(3) if,
taking into account the indemnity,
reimbursement agreement, or similar
arrangement, the partner or related
person is liable for at least 90 percent of
the initial payment obligation. This
obligation, like any other payment
obligation, must otherwise be
recognized under § 1.752–2, including
under the anti-abuse rules in § 1.752–
2(j).
C. Anti-Abuse Rule
Some commenters noted that partners
could manipulate contractual
arrangements to achieve a federal
income tax result that is not consistent
with the economics of an arrangement.
For example, a partner could
deliberately fail one of the recognition
factors in the 2014 Proposed
Regulations (including the guarantee or
indemnity recognition factor) to cause a
partnership liability to be treated as
nonrecourse even when one partner has
true EROL. Just as the 752 Temporary
Regulations provide an exception for
certain obligations that meet the
definition of a bottom dollar payment
obligation but give rise to EROL, the 752
Temporary Regulations also provide an
anti-abuse rule in § 1.752–2T(j)(2) that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:06 Oct 04, 2016
Jkt 241001
the Commissioner may apply to ensure
that if a partner actually bears EROL for
a partnership liability, partners may not
agree among themselves to create a
bottom dollar payment obligation so
that the liability will be treated as
nonrecourse.
Section 1.752–2(j)(2) of the existing
regulations currently provides that,
irrespective of the form of a contractual
obligation, a partner is considered to
bear the EROL with respect to a
partnership liability, or a portion
thereof, to the extent that: (A) The
partner or related person undertakes one
or more contractual obligations so that
the partnership may obtain a loan; (B)
the contractual obligations of the
partner or related person eliminate
substantially all the risk to the lender
that the partnership will not satisfy its
obligations under the loan; and (C) one
of the principal purposes of using the
contractual obligations is to attempt to
permit partners (other than those who
are directly or indirectly liable for the
obligation) to include a portion of the
loan in the basis of their partnership
interests. The 752 Temporary
Regulations expand § 1.752–2(j)(2) to
include situations in which a partner is
considered to bear the EROL
irrespective of a bottom dollar payment
obligation.
D. Disclosure Requirement
The 752 Temporary Regulations
require the partnership to disclose to the
IRS all bottom dollar payment
obligations with respect to a partnership
liability on a completed Form 8275,
Disclosure Statement, attached to the
partnership return for the taxable year
in which the bottom dollar payment
obligation is undertaken or modified.
That disclosure must identify the
payment obligation with respect to
which disclosure is made including the
amount of the payment obligation and
the parties to the payment obligation. If
a bottom dollar payment obligation
meets the exception, the partnership
must also disclose to the IRS on Form
8275 the facts and circumstances that
clearly establish that a partner or related
person is liable for up to 90 percent of
the partner’s or related person’s initial
payment obligation and, but for an
indemnity, reimbursement agreement,
or similar arrangement, the partner’s or
related person’s payment obligation
would have been recognized.
Effective/Applicability Date
With respect to changes under
§ 1.707–5, the 707 Temporary
Regulations apply to any transaction
with respect to which all transfers occur
on or after January 3, 2017. In addition,
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
with respect to the changes under
§ 1.752–2, the 752 Temporary
Regulations apply to liabilities incurred
or assumed by a partnership and
payment obligations imposed or
undertaken with respect to a
partnership liability on or after October
5, 2016, other than liabilities incurred or
assumed by a partnership and payment
obligations imposed or undertaken
pursuant to a written binding contract
in effect prior to that date.
The 2014 Proposed Regulations
provided for an effective date similar to
the one in these final and temporary
regulations. A commenter
recommended that partnerships be
permitted to elect to apply all, but not
less than all, of the provisions of the
final regulations to all of its liabilities
and payment obligations with respect to
its liabilities after the effective date of
the final regulations. These 752
Temporary Regulations adopt that
change; therefore, partnerships may
apply all the provisions contained in the
752 Temporary Regulations to all of
their liabilities as of the beginning of the
first taxable year of the partnership
ending on or after October 5, 2016.
Commenters on the 2014 Proposed
Regulations also recommended that
partnership liabilities or payment
obligations that are modified or
refinanced continue to be subject to the
provisions of the existing regulations to
the extent of the amount and duration
of the pre-modification (or refinancing)
liability or payment obligation. The 752
Temporary Regulations do not adopt
this recommendation as the terms of the
partnership liabilities and payment
obligations could be changed, which
would affect the determination of
whether or not an obligation is a bottom
dollar payment obligation.
The 752 Temporary Regulations do,
however, provide transition relief for
any partner whose allocable share of
partnership liabilities under § 1.752–2
exceeds its adjusted basis in its
partnership interest on the date the
temporary regulations are finalized.
Under this transitional relief, the
partner can continue to apply the
existing regulations under § 1.752–2
with respect to a partnership liability for
a seven-year period to the extent that
the partner’s allocable share of
partnership liabilities exceeds the
partner’s adjusted basis in its
partnership interest on October 5, 2016.
The amount of partnership liabilities
subject to transitional relief will be
reduced for certain reductions in the
amount of liabilities allocated to that
partner under the transition rules and,
upon the sale of any partnership
property, for any tax gain (including
E:\FR\FM\05OCR2.SGM
05OCR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 5, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Adoption of Amendments to the
Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is
amended as follows:
section 704(c) gain) allocated to the
partner less that partner’s share of
amount realized.
Special Analyses
Certain IRS regulations, including this
one, are exempt from the requirements
of Executive Order 12866, as
supplemented and reaffirmed by
Executive Order 13563. Therefore, a
regulatory impact assessment is not
required. It also has been determined
that section 553(b) of the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does
not apply to these regulations.
Although the temporary regulations
under sections 707 and 752 respond to
comments received in response to the
2014 Proposed Regulations, the
Treasury Department and the IRS have
determined that the regulations would
benefit from additional notice and
comment instead of being published as
final regulations. In addition, decisions
made in the final regulations under
section 707 contained in a separate
Treasury decision (TD 9787) published
in the Rules and Regulations section in
this issue of the Federal Register
interact with the changes in the 707
Temporary Regulations regarding how
liabilities are allocated for disguised
sale purposes. Finally, pursuant to
authority under section 7805(b) of the
Code, the temporary regulations under
sections 707 and 752 are necessary to
address particular abuses as described
in the Summary of Comments and the
Explanation of Provisions section of the
preamble of this Treasury decision. For
these reasons, good cause also exists
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to issue
temporary regulations.
For applicability of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, please refer to the crossreferencing notice of proposed
rulemaking published in the Proposed
Rules section in this issue of the Federal
Register. 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.
Paragraph 1. The authority citation
for part 1 continues to read in part as
follows:
■
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *
Sections 1.707–2 through 1.707–9 also
issued under 26 U.S.C. 707(a)(2)(B).
Par. 2. Section 1.707–5 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(2) and Examples
2, 3, 7, and 8 in paragraph (f) to read as
follows:
■
§ 1.707–5 Disguised sales of property to
partnership; special rules relating to
liabilities.
(a) * * *
(2) [Reserved]. For further guidance,
see § 1.707–5T(a)(2).
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
Example 2. [Reserved]. For further
guidance, see § 1.707–5T(f) Example 2.
Example 3. [Reserved]. For further
guidance, see § 1.707–5T(f) Example 3.
*
*
*
*
*
Example 7. [Reserved]. For further
guidance, see § 1.707–5T(f) Example 7.
Example 8. [Reserved]. For further
guidance, see § 1.707–5T(f) Example 8.
*
*
*
*
*
Par. 3. Section 1.707–5T is added to
read as follows:
■
§ 1.707–5T Disguised sales of property to
partnership; special rules relating to
liabilities (temporary).
List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1
(a)(1) [Reserved]. For further
guidance, see § 1.707–5(a)(1).
(2) Partner’s share of liability—(i) In
general. For purposes of § 1.707–5, a
partner’s share of a liability of a
partnership, as defined in § 1.752–1(a)
(whether a recourse liability or a
nonrecourse liability) is determined by
applying the same percentage used to
determine the partner’s share of the
excess nonrecourse liability under
§ 1.752–3(a)(3) (as limited in its
application to this paragraph (a)(2)),
without including in such partner’s
share any amount of the liability for
which another partner bears the
economic risk of loss for the partnership
liability under § 1.752–2.
(ii) Partner’s share of § 1.752–7
liability. [Reserved].
(a)(3) through (e) [Reserved]. For
further guidance, see § 1.707–5(a)(3)
through (e).
(f) Example 1 [Reserved]. For further
guidance, see § 1.707–5(f) Example 1.
Income taxes, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Example 2. Partnership’s assumption of
recourse liability encumbering transferred
Drafting Information
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES2
PART 1—INCOME TAXES
The principal authors of these
regulations are Caroline E. Hay and
Deane M. Burke of the Office of the
Associate Chief Counsel (Passthroughs
& Special Industries), IRS. However,
other personnel from the Treasury
Department and the IRS participated in
their development.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:31 Oct 04, 2016
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69287
property. (i) C transfers property Y to a
partnership in which C has a 50 percent
interest. At the time of its transfer to the
partnership, property Y has a fair market
value of $10,000,000 and is subject to an
$8,000,000 liability that C incurred and
guaranteed, immediately before transferring
property Y to the partnership, in order to
finance other expenditures. Upon the transfer
of property Y to the partnership the
partnership assumed the liability
encumbering that property. Under section
752 and the regulations thereunder,
immediately after the partnership’s
assumption of the liability encumbering
property Y, the liability is a recourse liability
of the partnership and C’s share of that
liability is $8,000,000.
(ii) Under the facts of this example, the
liability encumbering property Y is not a
qualified liability. Accordingly, the
partnership’s assumption of the liability
results in a transfer of consideration to C in
connection with C’s transfer of property Y to
the partnership. Notwithstanding C’s share of
the liability for section 752 purposes, for
disguised sale purposes, C’s share of the
liability immediately after the partnership’s
assumption is $4,000,000 (50 percent of
$8,000,000) under paragraph (a)(2) of this
section (which determines a partner’s share
of a liability using the percentage under
§ 1.752–3(a)(3)). Therefore, the amount of
consideration to C is $4,000,000 (the excess
of the liability assumed by the partnership
($8,000,000) over C’s share of the liability for
purposes of § 1.707–5(a) immediately after
the assumption ($4,000,000)). See § 1.707–
5(a)(1) and paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
Example 3. Subsequent reduction of
transferring partner’s share of liability. (i)
The facts are the same as in Example 2. In
addition, property Y is a fully leased office
building, the rental income from property Y
is sufficient to meet debt service, and the
remaining term of the liability is ten years.
It is anticipated that, three years after the
partnership’s assumption of the liability, C’s
share of the liability under paragraph (a)(2)
of this section will be reduced to $2,000,000
because of a shift in the allocation of
partnership profits pursuant to the terms of
the partnership agreement which provide
that C’s share of the partnership profits will
be 25 percent at that time. Under the
partnership agreement, this shift in the
allocation of partnership profits is dependent
solely on the passage of time.
(ii) Under § 1.707–5(a)(3), if the reduction
in C’s share of the liability was anticipated
at the time of C’s transfer, was not subject to
the entrepreneurial risks of partnership
operations, and was part of a plan that has
as one of its principal purposes minimizing
the extent of sale treatment under § 1.707–3
(that is, a principal purpose of allocating a
larger percentage of profits to C in the first
three years when profits were not likely to be
realized was to minimize the extent to which
C’s transfer would be treated as part of a
sale), C’s share of the liability immediately
after the partnership’s assumption is treated
as equal to C’s reduced share of $2,000,000.
Therefore, the amount of consideration to C
is $6,000,000 (the excess of the liability
assumed by the partnership ($8,000,000) over
E:\FR\FM\05OCR2.SGM
05OCR2
69288
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 5, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
C’s share of the liability for purposes of
§ 1.707–5(a) immediately after the
assumption ($2,000,000)), taking into account
the anticipated reduction in C’s share of the
liability pursuant to the terms of the
partnership agreement. See § 1.707–5(a)(1)
and (3) and paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES2
Examples 4 through 6 [Reserved]. For
further guidance, see § 1.707–5(f)
Examples 4 through 6.
Example 7. Partnership’s assumptions of
liabilities encumbering properties transferred
pursuant to a plan. (i) Pursuant to a plan, G
and H transfer property 1 and property 2,
respectively, to an existing partnership in
exchange for a one-third interest each in the
partnership. At the time the properties are
transferred to the partnership, property 1 has
a fair market value of $10,000 and an
adjusted tax basis of $6,000, and property 2
has a fair market value of $10,000 and an
adjusted tax basis of $4,000. At the time
properties 1 and 2 are transferred to the
partnership, a $6,000 nonrecourse liability
(liability 1) is secured by property 1 and a
$9,000 recourse liability of H (liability 2) is
secured by property 2. Properties 1 and 2 are
transferred to the partnership, and the
partnership takes property 1 subject to
liability 1 and assumes liability 2. After the
transfer of liability 2 to the partnership, H
bears the economic risk of loss for the entire
amount of liability 2 under § 1.752–2. G and
H incurred liabilities 1 and 2 immediately
prior to transferring properties 1 and 2 to the
partnership and used the proceeds for
personal expenditures. The liabilities are not
qualified liabilities. For disguised sale
purposes, assume that G’s and H’s share of
liability 1 is $2,000 each in accordance with
paragraph (a)(2) of this section (which
determines a partner’s share of a liability
using the percentage under § 1.752–3(a)(3)
without including in such partner’s share any
amount of the liability for which another
partner bears the economic risk of loss for the
liability under § 1.752–2). Also, in
accordance with paragraph (a)(2) of this
section, G’s share of liability 2 is zero and H’s
share of liability 2 is $3,000.
(ii) G and H transferred properties 1 and 2
to the partnership pursuant to a plan.
Accordingly, pursuant to § 1.707–5(a)(1) and
(4), the partnership’s taking property 1
subject to liability 1 is treated as a transfer
of only $4,000 of consideration to G (the
amount by which liability 1 ($6,000) exceeds
G’s share of liabilities 1 and 2 ($2,000)), and
the partnership’s assumption of liability 2 is
treated as a transfer of only $4,000 of
consideration to H (the amount by which
liability 2 ($9,000) exceeds H’s share of
liabilities 1 and 2 ($5,000)). Under the rule
in § 1.707–3, G is treated as having sold
$4,000 of the fair market value of property 1
in exchange for the partnership’s taking
property 1 subject to liability 1, and H is
treated as having sold $4,000 of the fair
market value of property 2 in exchange for
the partnership’s assumption of liability 2.
Example 8. Partnership’s assumption of
liability pursuant to a plan to avoid sale
treatment of partnership assumption of
another liability. (i) The facts are the same
as in Example 7, except that—
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:31 Oct 04, 2016
Jkt 241001
(A) Liability 2 is a nonrecourse liability;
(B) H transferred the proceeds of liability
2 to the partnership; and
(C) H incurred liability 2 in an attempt to
reduce the extent to which the partnership’s
taking of property 1 subject to liability 1
would be treated as a transfer of
consideration to G (and thereby reduce the
portion of G’s transfer of property 1 to the
partnership that would be treated as part of
a sale).
(ii) Because the partnership assumed
liability 2 with a principal purpose of
reducing the extent to which the
partnership’s taking of property 1 subject to
liability 1 would be treated as a transfer of
consideration to G, liability 2 is ignored in
applying § 1.707–5(a)(1). See § 1.707–5(a)(4).
Accordingly, the partnership’s taking of
property 1 subject to liability 1 is treated as
a transfer of $4,000 of consideration to G (the
amount by which liability 1 ($6,000) exceeds
G’s share of liability 1 ($2,000)). Under
§ 1.707–5(d), the partnership’s assumption of
liability 2 is not treated as a transfer of any
consideration to H because the amount of
liability 2 that the partnership is treated as
assuming is reduced by the money H
transferred to the partnership ($9,000).
Examples 9 through 13 [Reserved].
For further guidance, see § 1.707–5(f)
Examples 9 through 13.
(g) Expiration date. This section
expires on October 4, 2019.
■ Par. 4. Section 1.707–9 is amended by
adding paragraphs (a)(4) and (5) to read
as follows:
§ 1.707–9
rules.
Effective dates and transitional
(a) * * *
(4) Section 1.707–5(a)(2) and (f)
Examples 2, 3, 7, and 8. Section 1.707–
5(a)(2) and (f) Examples 2, 3, 7, and 8,
as contained in 26 CFR part 1 revised as
of April 1, 2016, apply to any
transaction with respect to which any
transfers occur before January 3, 2017.
For any transaction with respect to
which all transfers occur on or after
January 3, 2017, see § 1.707–9T(a)(5).
(5) [Reserved]. For further guidance,
see § 1.707–9T(a)(5).
*
*
*
*
*
■ Par. 5. Section 1.707–9T is added to
read as follows:
§ 1.707–9T Effective dates and transitional
rules (temporary).
(a)(1) through (a)(4) [Reserved]. For
further guidance, see § 1.707–9(a)(1)
through (4).
(5) Section 1.707–5T(a)(2) and (f)
Examples 2, 3, 7, and 8. Section 1.707–
5T(a)(2) and (f) Examples 2, 3, 7, and 8
apply to any transaction with respect to
which all transfers occur on or after
January 3, 2017. For any transaction
with respect to which any transfers
occur before January 3, 2017, see
§ 1.707–5(a)(2) and (f) Examples 2, 3, 7,
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
and 8 as contained in 26 CFR part 1,
revised as of April 1, 2016.
(b) [Reserved]. For further guidance,
see § 1.707–9(b).
(c) Expiration date. This section
expires on October 4, 2019.
■ Par. 6. Section 1.752–2 is amended
by:
■ 1. Revising paragraph (b)(3).
■ 2. Adding Examples 9, 10, and 11 to
paragraph (f).
■ 3. Revising paragraph (j)(2).
■ 4. Removing paragraph (j)(4).
■ 5. Redesignating paragraph (l) as (l)(1)
and revising the heading to paragraph
(l).
■ 6. Adding paragraphs (l)(2) and (3).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
§ 1.752–2 Partner’s share of recourse
liabilities.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(3) [Reserved]. For further guidance,
see § 1.752–2T(b)(3).
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
Example 9. [Reserved].
Example 10. [Reserved]. For further
guidance, see § 1.752–2T(f) Example 10.
Example 11. [Reserved]. For further
guidance, see § 1.752–2T(f) Example 11.
*
*
*
*
*
(j) * * *
(2) [Reserved]. For further guidance,
see § 1.752–2T(j)(2).
*
*
*
*
*
(l) Effective/applicability dates. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(2) [Reserved]. For further guidance,
see § 1.752–2T(l)(2).
(3) [Reserved]. For further guidance,
see § 1.752–2T(l)(3).
■ Par. 7. Section 1.752–2T is added to
read as follows:
§ 1.752–2T Partner’s share of recourse
liabilities (temporary).
(a) through (b)(2) [Reserved]. For
further guidance, see § 1.752–2(a)
through (b)(2).
(3) Obligations recognized—(i) In
general. The determination of the extent
to which a partner or related person has
an obligation to make a payment under
§ 1.752–2(b)(1) is based on the facts and
circumstances at the time of the
determination. To the extent that the
obligation of a partner or related person
to make a payment with respect to a
partnership liability is not recognized
under this paragraph (b)(3), § 1.752–2(b)
is applied as if the obligation did not
exist. All statutory and contractual
obligations relating to the partnership
liability are taken into account for
purposes of applying this section,
including—
E:\FR\FM\05OCR2.SGM
05OCR2
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 5, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(A) Contractual obligations outside
the partnership agreement such as
guarantees, indemnifications,
reimbursement agreements, and other
obligations running directly to creditors,
to other partners, or to the partnership;
(B) Obligations to the partnership that
are imposed by the partnership
agreement, including the obligation to
make a capital contribution and to
restore a deficit capital account upon
liquidation of the partnership as
described in § 1.704–1(b)(2)(ii)(b)(3)
(taking into account § 1.704–
1(b)(2)(ii)(c)); and
(C) Payment obligations (whether in
the form of direct remittances to another
partner or a contribution to the
partnership) imposed by state or local
law, including the governing state or
local law partnership statute.
(ii) Special rules for bottom dollar
payment obligations—(A) In general.
For purposes of § 1.752–2, a bottom
dollar payment obligation (as defined in
paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C) of this section) is
not recognized under this paragraph
(b)(3).
(B) Exception. If a partner or related
person has a payment obligation that
would be recognized under this
paragraph (b)(3) (initial payment
obligation) but for the effect of an
indemnity, reimbursement agreement,
or similar arrangement, such bottom
dollar payment obligation is recognized
under this paragraph (b)(3) if, taking
into account the indemnity,
reimbursement agreement, or similar
arrangement, the partner or related
person is liable for at least 90 percent of
the partner’s or related person’s initial
payment obligation.
(C) Definition of bottom dollar
payment obligation—(1) In general.
Except as provided in paragraph
(b)(3)(ii)(C)(2) of this section, a bottom
dollar payment obligation is a payment
obligation that is the same as or similar
to a payment obligation or arrangement
described in this paragraph
(b)(3)(ii)(C)(1).
(i) With respect to a guarantee or
similar arrangement, any payment
obligation other than one in which the
partner or related person is or would be
liable up to the full amount of such
partner’s or related person’s payment
obligation if, and to the extent that, any
amount of the partnership liability is
not otherwise satisfied.
(ii) With respect to an indemnity or
similar arrangement, any payment
obligation other than one in which the
partner or related person is or would be
liable up to the full amount of such
partner’s or related person’s payment
obligation, if, and to the extent that, any
amount of the indemnitee’s or benefited
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:06 Oct 04, 2016
Jkt 241001
party’s payment obligation that is
recognized under this paragraph (b)(3) is
satisfied.
(iii) An arrangement with respect to a
partnership liability that uses tiered
partnerships, intermediaries, senior and
subordinate liabilities, or similar
arrangements to convert what would
otherwise be a single liability into
multiple liabilities if, based on the facts
and circumstances, the liabilities were
incurred pursuant to a common plan, as
part of a single transaction or
arrangement, or as part of a series of
related transactions or arrangements,
and with a principal purpose of
avoiding having at least one of such
liabilities or payment obligations with
respect to such liabilities being treated
as a bottom dollar payment obligation as
described in paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C)(1)(i)
or (ii) of this section.
(2) Exceptions. A payment obligation
is not a bottom dollar payment
obligation merely because a maximum
amount is placed on the partner’s or
related person’s payment obligation, a
partner’s or related person’s payment
obligation is stated as a fixed percentage
of every dollar of the partnership
liability to which such obligation
relates, or there is a right of
proportionate contribution running
between partners or related persons who
are co-obligors with respect to a
payment obligation for which each of
them is jointly and severally liable.
(3) Benefited party defined. For
purposes of § 1.752–2, a benefited party
is the person to whom a partner or
related person has the payment
obligation.
(D) Disclosure of bottom dollar
payment obligations. A partnership
must disclose to the Internal Revenue
Service a bottom dollar payment
obligation (including a bottom dollar
payment obligation that is recognized
under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B) of this
section) with respect to a partnership
liability on a completed Form 8275,
Disclosure Statement, or successor form,
attached to the return of the partnership
for the taxable year in which the bottom
dollar payment obligation is undertaken
or modified, that includes all of the
following information:
(1) A caption identifying the
statement as a disclosure of a bottom
dollar payment obligation under section
752.
(2) An identification of the payment
obligation with respect to which
disclosure is made.
(3) The amount of the payment
obligation.
(4) The parties to the payment
obligation.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69289
(5) A statement of whether the
payment obligation is treated as
recognized for purposes of this
paragraph (b)(3).
(6) If the payment obligation is
recognized under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B)
of this section, the facts and
circumstances that clearly establish that
a partner or related person is liable for
up to 90 percent of the partner’s or
related person’s initial payment
obligation and, but for an indemnity,
reimbursement agreement, or similar
arrangement, the partner’s or related
person’s initial payment obligation
would have been recognized under this
paragraph (b)(3).
(iii) Special rule for indemnities and
reimbursement agreements. An
indemnity, reimbursement agreement,
or similar arrangement will be
recognized under this paragraph (b)(3)
only if, before taking into account the
indemnity, reimbursement agreement,
or similar arrangement, the indemnitee’s
or other benefited party’s payment
obligation is recognized under this
paragraph (b)(3), or would be recognized
under this paragraph (b)(3) if such
person were a partner or related person.
(b)(4) through (e) [Reserved]. For
further guidance, see § 1.752–2(b)(4)
through (e).
(f) Examples 1 through 9 [Reserved].
For further guidance, see § 1.752–2(f)
Examples 1 through 9.
Example 10. Guarantee of first and last
dollars. (i) A, B, and C are equal members of
a limited liability company, ABC, that is
treated as a partnership for federal tax
purposes. ABC borrows $1,000 from Bank. A
guarantees payment of up to $300 of the ABC
liability if any amount of the full $1,000
liability is not recovered by Bank. B
guarantees payment of up to $200, but only
if the Bank otherwise recovers less than $200.
Both A and B waive their rights of
contribution against each other.
(ii) Because A is obligated to pay up to
$300 if, and to the extent that, any amount
of the $1,000 partnership liability is not
recovered by Bank, A’s guarantee is not a
bottom dollar payment obligation under
paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C) of this section.
Therefore, A’s payment obligation is
recognized under paragraph (b)(3) of this
section. The amount of A’s economic risk of
loss under § 1.752–2(b)(1) is $300.
(iii) Because B is obligated to pay up to
$200 only if and to the extent that the Bank
otherwise recovers less than $200 of the
$1,000 partnership liability, B’s guarantee is
a bottom dollar payment obligation under
paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C) of this section and,
therefore, is not recognized under paragraph
(b)(3)(ii)(A) of this section. Accordingly, B
bears no economic risk of loss under § 1.752–
2(b)(1) for ABC’s liability.
(iv) In sum, $300 of ABC’s liability is
allocated to A under § 1.752–2(a), and the
remaining $700 liability is allocated to A, B,
and C under § 1.752–3.
E:\FR\FM\05OCR2.SGM
05OCR2
69290
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 5, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES2
Example 11. Indemnification of
guarantees. (i) The facts are the same as in
Example 10, except that, in addition, C
agrees to indemnify A up to $100 that A pays
with respect to its guarantee and agrees to
indemnify B fully with respect to its
guarantee.
(ii) The determination of whether C’s
indemnity is recognized under paragraph
(b)(3) of this section is made without regard
to whether C’s indemnity itself causes A’s
guarantee not to be recognized. Because A’s
obligation would be recognized but for the
effect of C’s indemnity and C is obligated to
pay A up to the full amount of C’s indemnity
if A pays any amount on its guarantee of
ABC’s liability, C’s indemnity of A’s
guarantee is not a bottom dollar payment
obligation under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C) of
this section and, therefore, is recognized
under paragraph (b)(3) of this section. The
amount of C’s economic risk of loss under
§ 1.752–2(b)(1) for its indemnity of A’s
guarantee is $100.
(iii) Because C’s indemnity is recognized
under paragraph (b)(3) of this section, A is
treated as liable for $200 only to the extent
any amount beyond $100 of the partnership
liability is not satisfied. Thus, A is not liable
if, and to the extent, any amount of the
partnership liability is not otherwise
satisfied, and the exception in paragraph
(b)(3)(ii)(B) of this section does not apply. As
a result, A’s guarantee is a bottom dollar
payment obligation under paragraph
(b)(3)(ii)(C) of this section and is not
recognized under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(A) of
this section. Therefore, A bears no economic
risk of loss under § 1.752–2(b)(1) for ABC’s
liability.
(iv) Because B’s obligation is not
recognized under paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this
section independent of C’s indemnity of B’s
guarantee, C’s indemnity is not recognized
under paragraph (b)(3)(iii) of this section.
Therefore, C bears no economic risk of loss
under § 1.752–2(b)(1) for its indemnity of B’s
guarantee.
(v) In sum, $100 of ABC’s liability is
allocated to C under § 1.752–2(a) and the
remaining $900 liability is allocated to A, B,
and C under § 1.752–3.
(g) through (j)(1) [Reserved]. For
further guidance, see § 1.752–2(g)
through (j)(1).
(2) Arrangements tantamount to a
guarantee—(i) In general. Irrespective of
the form of a contractual obligation, the
Commissioner may treat a partner as
bearing the economic risk of loss with
respect to a partnership liability, or a
portion thereof, to the extent that—
(A) The partner or related person
undertakes one or more contractual
obligations so that the partnership may
obtain or retain a loan;
(B) The contractual obligations of the
partner or related person significantly
reduce the risk to the lender that the
partnership will not satisfy its
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:06 Oct 04, 2016
Jkt 241001
obligations under the loan, or a portion
thereof; and
(C) With respect to the contractual
obligations described in paragraphs
(j)(2)(i)(A) and (B) of this section—
(1) One of the principal purposes of
using the contractual obligations is to
attempt to permit partners (other than
those who are directly or indirectly
liable for the obligation) to include a
portion of the loan in the basis of their
partnership interests; or
(2) Another partner, or a person
related to another partner, enters into a
payment obligation and a principal
purpose of the arrangement is to cause
the payment obligation described in
paragraphs (j)(2)(i)(A) and (B) of this
section to be disregarded under
paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
(ii) Economic risk of loss. For
purposes of this paragraph (j)(2),
partners are considered to bear the
economic risk of loss for a liability in
accordance with their relative economic
burdens for the liability pursuant to the
contractual obligations. For example, a
lease between a partner and a
partnership that is not on commercially
reasonable terms may be tantamount to
a guarantee by the partner of the
partnership liability.
(j)(3) through (l)(1) [Reserved]. For
further guidance, see § 1.752–2(j)(3)
through (l)(1).
(2) Paragraph (b)(3), paragraph (f)
Examples 10 and 11, and paragraph
(j)(2) of this section apply to liabilities
incurred or assumed by a partnership
and payment obligations imposed or
undertaken with respect to a
partnership liability on or after October
5, 2016, other than liabilities incurred or
assumed by a partnership and payment
obligations imposed or undertaken
pursuant to a written binding contract
in effect prior to that date. Partnerships
may apply paragraph (b)(3), paragraph
(f) Examples 10 and 11, and paragraph
(j)(2) of this section to all of their
liabilities as of the beginning of the first
taxable year of the partnership ending
on or after October 5, 2016. The rules
applicable to liabilities incurred or
assumed (or subject to a written binding
contract in effect) prior to October 5,
2016 are contained in § 1.752–2 in effect
prior to October 5, 2016 (see 26 CFR
part 1 revised as of April 1, 2016).
(3) If a partner has a share of a
recourse partnership liability under
§ 1.752–2(a) as a result of bearing the
economic risk of loss under § 1.752–2(b)
immediately prior to October 5, 2016
(Transition Partner), the partnership
(Transition Partnership) may choose not
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
to apply paragraph (b)(3), paragraph (f)
Examples 10 and 11, and paragraph
(j)(2)(i)(C)(2) of this section to the extent
the amount of the Transition Partner’s
share of liabilities under § 1.752–2(a) as
a result of bearing the economic risk of
loss under § 1.752–2(b) immediately
prior to October 5, 2016 exceeds the
amount of the Transition Partner’s
adjusted basis in its partnership interest
as determined under § 1.705–1 at such
time (Grandfathered Amount). A
Transition Partner that is a partnership,
S corporation, or a business entity
disregarded as an entity separate from
its owner under section 856(i) or
1361(b)(3) or §§ 301.7701–1 through
301.7701–3 of this chapter ceases to
qualify as a Transition Partner if the
direct or indirect ownership of that
Transition Partner changes by 50
percent or more. The Transition
Partnership may continue to apply the
rules under § 1.752–2 in effect prior to
October 5, 2016, with respect to a
Transition Partner for payment
obligations described in § 1.752–2(b) to
the extent of the Transition Partner’s
adjusted Grandfathered Amount for the
seven-year period beginning October 5,
2016. The termination of a Transition
Partnership under section 708(b)(1)(B)
and applicable regulations does not
affect the Grandfathered Amount of a
Transition Partner that remains a
partner in the new partnership (as
described in § 1.708–1(b)(4)), and the
new partnership is treated as a
continuation of the Transition
Partnership for purposes of this
paragraph (l)(3). However, a Transition
Partner’s Grandfathered Amount is
reduced (not below zero), but never
increased by—
(i) Upon the sale of any property by
the Transition Partnership, an amount
equal to the excess of any gain allocated
for federal income tax purposes to the
Transition Partner by the Transition
Partnership (including amounts
allocated under section 704(c) and
applicable regulations) over the product
of the total amount realized by the
Transition Partnership from the
property sale multiplied by the
Transition Partner’s percentage interest
in the partnership; and
(ii) An amount equal to any decrease
in the Transition Partner’s share of
liabilities to which the rules of this
paragraph (l)(3) apply, other than by
operation of paragraph (l)(3)(i) of this
section.
(m) Expiration date. This section
expires on October 4, 2019.
E:\FR\FM\05OCR2.SGM
05OCR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 5, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
John Dalrymple,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
Approved: August 29, 2016.
Mark J. Mazur,
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax
Policy).
[FR Doc. 2016–23388 Filed 10–4–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[TD 9787]
RIN 1545–BK29
Section 707 Regarding Disguised
Sales, Generally
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Final regulations.
AGENCY:
This document contains final
regulations under sections 707 and 752
of the Internal Revenue Code (Code).
The final regulations under section 707
provide guidance relating to disguised
sales of property to or by a partnership
and the final regulations under section
752 provide guidance relating to
allocations of excess nonrecourse
liabilities of a partnership to partners for
disguised sale purposes. The final
regulations affect partnerships and their
partners.
DATES: Effective date: These regulations
are effective on October 5, 2016.
Comment date: Comments will be
accepted until January 3, 2017.
Applicability dates: For dates of
applicability, see §§ 1.707–9(a)(1) and
1.752–3(d).
ADDRESSES: Send submissions to:
CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–122855–15), Room
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–122855–
15), Courier’s Desk, Internal Revenue
Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC, or sent electronically,
via the Federal eRulemaking Portal site
at https://www.regulations.gov (indicate
IRS and REG–122855–15).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Deane M. Burke or Caroline E. Hay at
(202) 317–5279 (not a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
addition to these final regulations, the
Treasury Department and the IRS are
publishing temporary regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES2
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:06 Oct 04, 2016
Jkt 241001
concerning a partner’s share of
partnership liabilities for purposes of
section 707 (the 707 Temporary
Regulations) and the treatment of
certain payment obligations under
section 752 (the 752 Temporary
Regulations) in the Rules and
Regulations section in this issue of the
Federal Register, and, in the Proposed
Rules section in this issue of the Federal
Register, proposed regulations (REG–
122855–15) that incorporate the text of
the temporary regulations, withdraw a
portion of a notice of proposed
rulemaking (REG–119305–11) to the
extent not adopted by the final
regulations, and contain new proposed
regulations (the 752 Proposed
Regulations) addressing (1) when
certain obligations to restore a deficit
balance in a partner’s capital account
are disregarded under section 704 and
(2) when a partnership’s liabilities are
treated as recourse liabilities under
section 752.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The collection of information
contained in these final regulations has
been reviewed in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3507) and approved by the Office of
Management and Budget under control
number 1545–0889.
The collection of information in these
final regulations under section 707 is in
§ 1.707–5(a)(7)(ii) (regarding a liability
incurred within two years prior to a
transfer of property) and is reported on
Form 8275, Disclosure Statement. This
information is required by the IRS to
ensure that section 707(a)(2)(B) of the
Code and applicable regulations are
properly applied to transfers between a
partner and a partnership.
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 tax return information
are confidential, as required by section
6103.
Background
1. Overview
This Treasury decision contains
amendments to the Income Tax
Regulations (26 CFR part 1) under
sections 707 and 752 of the Code related
to a notice of proposed rulemaking
published on January 30, 2014 in the
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69291
Federal Register (REG–119305–11, 79
FR 4826) to amend regulations under
sections 707 and 752 (the 2014
Proposed Regulations). A public hearing
on the 2014 Proposed Regulations was
not requested or held, but the Treasury
Department and the IRS received
written comments. After full
consideration of the comments, the final
regulations contained in this Treasury
decision substantially adopt the 2014
Proposed Regulations under section 707
with revisions to certain proposed rules
in response to comments. The revisions
to the 2014 Proposed Regulations under
section 707 adopted in these final
regulations are discussed in the
Summary of Comments and Explanation
of Revisions section of this preamble. In
addition, after considering comments on
the 2014 Proposed Regulations under
section 752, this Treasury decision
adopts as final regulations provisions of
the 2014 Proposed Regulations that
amend § 1.752–3, revised in response to
the comments received. Finally, these
final regulations adopt provisions of the
2014 Proposed Regulations revising
§ 1.704–2(d)(2)(ii) and (m) Example 1, to
comport with the provisions in the 752
Proposed Regulations and the 752
Temporary Regulations relating to
‘‘bottom dollar payment obligations.’’
However, based on a comment
received on the 2014 Proposed
Regulations requesting that guidance
regarding a partner’s share of
partnership liabilities apply solely for
disguised sale purposes, the Treasury
Department and the IRS have
reconsidered the rules under § 1.707–
5(a)(2) of the 2014 Proposed Regulations
for determining a partner’s share of
partnership liabilities for purposes of
section 707. Accordingly, in a separate
Treasury decision (TD 9788), the
Treasury Department and the IRS are
also publishing the 707 Temporary
Regulations that require a partner to
apply the same percentage used to
determine the partner’s share of excess
nonrecourse liabilities under § 1.752–
3(a)(3) (with certain limitations) in
determining the partner’s share of
partnership liabilities for disguised sale
purposes. That Treasury decision also
contains the 752 Temporary Regulations
providing guidance on the treatment of
‘‘bottom dollar payment obligations.’’
Cross-referencing proposed regulations
providing additional opportunity for
comment are contained in the related
notice of proposed rulemaking (REG–
122855–15) published in the Proposed
Rules section in this issue of the Federal
Register.
Finally, after considering comments
on the 2014 Proposed Regulations under
section 752, the Treasury Department
E:\FR\FM\05OCR2.SGM
05OCR2
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 193 (Wednesday, October 5, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 69282-69291]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23388]
[[Page 69281]]
Vol. 81
Wednesday,
No. 193
October 5, 2016
Part IV
Internal Revenue Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Food and Drug Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
26 CFR Part 1
Liabilities Recognized as Recourse Partnership Liabilities Under
Section 752; Disguised Sales; Final Rules and Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 81 , No. 193 / Wednesday, October 5, 2016 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 69282]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[TD 9788]
RIN 1545-BM84
Liabilities Recognized as Recourse Partnership Liabilities Under
Section 752
AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
ACTION: Final and temporary regulations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains final and temporary regulations
concerning how liabilities are allocated for purposes of section 707 of
the Internal Revenue Code (Code) and when certain obligations are
recognized for purposes of determining whether a liability is a
recourse partnership liability under section 752. These regulations
affect partnerships and their partners. The text of these temporary
regulations serves as part of the text of proposed regulations (REG-
122855-15) published in the Proposed Rules section in this issue of the
Federal Register.
DATES: Effective date: These regulations are effective on October 5,
2016.
Applicability dates: For dates of applicability, see Sec. Sec.
1.707-9T(a)(4) and 1.752-2T(l)(2).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Concerning the final and temporary
regulations, Caroline E. Hay or Deane M. Burke, (202) 317-5279.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In addition to these final and temporary
regulations, the Treasury Department and the IRS are publishing in the
Rules and Regulations section in this issue of the Federal Register,
final regulations under section 707 concerning disguised sales and
under section 752 regarding the allocation of excess nonrecourse
liabilities of a partnership to a partner, and, in the Proposed Rules
section in this issue of the Federal Register, proposed regulations
(REG-122855-15) that incorporate the text of these temporary
regulations, withdraw a portion of a notice of proposed rulemaking
(REG-119305-11) to the extent not adopted by the final regulations, and
contain new proposed regulations addressing (1) when certain
obligations to restore a deficit balance in a partner's capital account
are disregarded under section 704 and (2) when partnership liabilities
are treated as recourse liabilities under section 752.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The collection of information related to these final and temporary
regulations under section 752 is reported on Form 8275, Disclosure
Statement, and has been reviewed in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507) and approved by the Office of Management
and Budget under control number 1545-0889.
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.
For further information concerning this collection of information,
and where to submit comments on the collection of information and the
accuracy of the estimated burden, and suggestions for reducing this
burden, please refer to the preamble to the cross-referencing notice of
proposed rulemaking published in the Proposed Rules section in this
issue of the Federal Register.
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
tax return information are confidential, as required by section 6103.
Background
1. Overview
This Treasury decision contains final and temporary regulations
that amend the Income Tax Regulations (26 CFR part 1) under sections
707 and 752 of the Code. On January 30, 2014, the Treasury Department
and the IRS published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (REG-119305-11, 79 FR 4826) to amend the then existing
regulations under section 707 relating to disguised sales of property
to or by a partnership and under section 752 concerning the treatment
of partnership liabilities (the 2014 Proposed Regulations). The 2014
Proposed Regulations provided certain technical rules intended to
clarify the application of the disguised sale rules under section 707
and also contained rules regarding the sharing of partnership recourse
and nonrecourse liabilities under section 752.
A public hearing on the 2014 Proposed Regulations was not requested
or held, but the Treasury Department and the IRS received written
comments.
Based on a comment received on the 2014 Proposed Regulations
requesting that guidance provided under section 752 regarding a
partner's share of partnership liabilities apply instead solely for
disguised sale purposes, the Treasury Department and the IRS have
reconsidered the rules under Sec. 1.707-5(a)(2) of the 2014 Proposed
Regulations for determining a partner's share of partnership
liabilities for purposes of section 707. Accordingly and as recommended
by that commenter, this Treasury decision contains temporary
regulations under section 707 (the 707 Temporary Regulations) that
require a partner to apply the same percentage used to determine the
partner's share of excess nonrecourse liabilities under Sec. 1.752-
3(a)(3) (with certain limitations) in determining the partner's share
of partnership liabilities for disguised sale purposes. This Treasury
decision also contains temporary regulations under section 752 (the 752
Temporary Regulations) providing guidance on the treatment of ``bottom
dollar payment obligations.'' Cross-referencing proposed regulations
providing additional opportunity for comment are contained in the
related notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-122855-15) published in the
Proposed Rules section in this issue of the Federal Register. The
Summary of Comments and Explanation of Provisions section of the
preamble of this Treasury decision discusses the changes for
determining a partner's share of partnership liabilities for disguised
sale purposes and also the rules relating to certain ``bottom dollar
payment obligations.''
The Treasury Department and the IRS are also publishing final
regulations under section 707 (the 707 Final Regulations) in a separate
Treasury decision (TD 9787) published in the Rules and Regulations
section in this issue of the Federal Register that adopt the remaining
provisions of the 2014 Proposed Regulations under section 707. That
Treasury decision also contains final regulations under section 752
(the 752 Final Regulations) concerning the allocation of a
partnership's excess nonrecourse liabilities as explained in the
Summary of Comments and Explanation of Provisions sections of that
Treasury decision.
Finally, after considering comments on the 2014 Proposed
Regulations under section 752, the Treasury Department and the IRS are
withdrawing proposed Sec. 1.752-2 and are issuing new proposed
regulations (the 752 Proposed Regulations) contained in the related
notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-122855-15) published in the Proposed
Rules section in this issue of the Federal Register.
[[Page 69283]]
2. Summary of Applicable Law
In determining a partner's share of a partnership liability for
disguised sale purposes, the existing regulations under section 707
prescribe separate rules for a partnership's recourse liability and a
partnership's nonrecourse liability. Under Sec. 1.707-5(a)(2)(i), a
partner's share of a partnership's recourse liability equals the
partner's share of the liability under section 752 and the regulations
thereunder. A partnership liability is a recourse liability under
section 707 to the extent that the obligation is a recourse liability
under Sec. 1.752-1(a)(1). Under Sec. 1.707-5(a)(2)(ii), a partner's
share of a partnership's nonrecourse liability is determined by
applying the same percentage used to determine the partner's share of
the excess nonrecourse liability under Sec. 1.752-3(a)(3). Generally,
a partner's share of the excess nonrecourse liability is determined in
accordance with the partner's share of partnership profits taking into
account all facts and circumstances relating to the economic
arrangement of the partners. A partnership liability is a nonrecourse
liability under section 707 to the extent that the obligation is a
nonrecourse liability under Sec. 1.752-1(a)(2). In addition, the
existing regulations under section 707 provide that a partnership
liability is a recourse or nonrecourse liability to the extent the
liability would be recourse under Sec. 1.752-1(a)(1) or nonrecourse
under Sec. 1.752-1(a)(2), respectively, if the liability was treated
as a partnership liability for purposes of section 752 (Sec. 1.752-7
contingent liabilities).
Section 1.752-1(a)(1) provides that a partnership liability is a
recourse liability to the extent that a partner or related person bears
the economic risk of loss (EROL) for that liability under Sec. 1.752-
2. Section 1.752-2(a) provides that a partner's share of a recourse
partnership liability equals the portion of the liability, if any, for
which the partner or related person bears the EROL. Section 1.752-
1(a)(2) provides that a partnership liability is a nonrecourse
liability to the extent that no partner or related person bears the
EROL for that liability under Sec. 1.752-2. A partner generally bears
the EROL for a partnership liability if the partner or related person
has an obligation to make a payment under Sec. 1.752-2(b). A partner
generally has an obligation to make a payment to the extent that the
partner or related person would have to make a payment if, upon a
constructive liquidation of the partnership, the partnership's assets
were worthless and the liability became due and payable (constructive
liquidation test). Section 1.752-2(b)(6) presumes partners and related
persons will satisfy their payment obligations irrespective of their
net worth, unless the facts and circumstances indicate a plan to
circumvent or avoid the obligation.
Summary of Comments and Explanation of Provisions
1. Partner's Share of Partnership Liabilities for Purposes of Section
707
The withdrawn portions of the 2014 Proposed Regulations included
proposed changes to Sec. 1.752-2 that were intended to ensure that
only genuine commercial payment obligations, including guarantees and
indemnities, affected the allocation of partnership liabilities.
Although the 2014 Proposed Regulations received some unfavorable
comments, one commenter expressed support for the overall objective of
those proposed rules. According to the commenter, the clear effect of
the 2014 Proposed Regulations under section 752 was to make it more
likely that liabilities would be treated as nonrecourse liabilities,
and thus allocable under Sec. 1.752-3. The commenter noted that such
an effect seems appropriate as an economic matter, because, contrary to
the constructive liquidation test in Sec. 1.752-2(b)(1), lenders,
borrowers, and credit support providers generally do not expect that
the assets of the partnership will become worthless. Rather, lenders,
borrowers and credit support providers generally expect borrowers
(including partnerships) to satisfy their obligations (in the case of a
partnership, with partnership profits). However, the commenter
expressed concerns with the proposed section 752 rules. The commenter
suggested that the regulations adopt a more narrowly tailored approach
that treats all liabilities as nonrecourse liabilities for section 707
disguised sale purposes only.
Other commenters also suggested that changes to the liability
allocation rules be limited to the context of disguised sales under
section 707 to specifically address the abuses that concern the
Treasury Department and the IRS. One abuse relating to disguised sales
within the meaning of Sec. 1.707-3 concerns the debt-financed
distribution exception under Sec. 1.707-5(b). Under this exception, a
distribution of money to a partner by a partnership is not taken into
account for purposes of Sec. 1.707-3 to the extent that the
distribution is traceable to a partnership borrowing and the amount of
the distribution does not exceed the partner's allocable share of the
liability incurred to fund the distribution. The legislative history to
section 707, upon which the debt-financed distribution exception in
Sec. 1.707-5(b) is based, contemplates a contributing partner
borrowing through the partnership rather than engaging in a disguised
sale when the partner, in substance, retains liability for repayment of
the borrowed amounts. See H.R. Rep. No. 861, 98th Cong., 2d Sess. 859
(1984). This exception, however, has been abused through leveraged
partnership transactions in which the contributing partners or related
persons enter into payment obligations that are not commercial solely
to achieve an allocation of the partnership liability to the partner,
with the objective of avoiding a disguised sale. See, for example,
Canal Corp. v. Commissioner, 135 T.C. 199, 216 (2010) (``We have
carefully considered the facts and circumstances and find that the
indemnity agreement should be disregarded because it created no more
than a remote possibility that [the indemnitor] would actually be
liable for payment.'').
After considering the comments on the 2014 Proposed Regulations
suggesting that the regulations be narrowly tailored to address abuse
concerns relating to disguised sales, the Treasury Department and the
IRS have concluded that, for disguised sale purposes only, it is
appropriate for partners to determine their share of any partnership
liability, whether recourse or nonrecourse under section 752, in the
manner in which excess nonrecourse liabilities are allocated under
Sec. 1.752-3(a)(3), as limited for disguised sale purposes in the 752
Final Regulations. For purposes of the disguised sale rules, this
allocation method reflects the overall economic arrangement of the
partners more accurately than the current regulations or the 2014
Proposed Regulations. In most cases, a partnership will satisfy its
liabilities with partnership profits, the partnership's assets do not
become worthless, and the payment obligations of partners or related
persons are not called upon. This is true whether: (1) A partner's
liability is assumed by a partnership in connection with a transfer of
property to the partnership or by a partner in connection with a
transfer of property by the partnership to the partner; (2) a
partnership takes property subject to a liability in connection with a
transfer of property to the partnership or a partner takes property
subject to a liability in connection with a transfer of property
[[Page 69284]]
by the partnership to the partner; or (3) a liability is incurred by
the partnership to make a distribution to a partner under the debt-
financed distribution exception in Sec. 1.707-5(b). Accordingly, under
the 707 Temporary Regulations, a partner's share of any partnership
liability for disguised sale purposes is the same percentage used to
determine the partner's share of the partnership's excess nonrecourse
liabilities under Sec. 1.752-3(a)(3), as limited for disguised sale
purposes under the 752 Final Regulations.
Commenters also suggested that a partner's share of a partnership
liability for disguised sale purposes should not include any portion of
the liability for which another partner bears the EROL, as these
liabilities would not be allocated to a partner without EROL under
general principles of subchapter K. The Treasury Department and the IRS
agree with the commenter that this change should not create a liability
allocation not otherwise allowed under general subchapter K principles.
Therefore, the 707 Temporary Regulations provide that a partner's share
of a partnership liability for disguised sale purposes does not include
any amount of the liability for which another partner bears the EROL
for the partnership liability under Sec. 1.752-2.
The liability allocation approach for disguised sale purposes in
the 707 Temporary Regulations does not conflict with Congress's
directive relating to section 752, which had been raised as a potential
concern by some commenters with respect to the 2014 Proposed
Regulations. Section 79 of the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 (Pub. L.
98-369) overruled the decision in Raphan v. United States, 3 Cl. Ct.
457 (1983) (holding that a guarantee by a general partner of an
otherwise nonrecourse liability of the partnership did not require the
partner to be treated as personally liable for that liability) and
directed the Secretary of the Treasury to amend the regulations under
section 752 to reflect the overruling of the Raphan decision. At issue
in the Raphan case was debt allocation under section 752; accordingly,
Congress's directive related to regulations under section 752 only. As
noted, the 707 Temporary Regulations treat all partnership liabilities,
whether recourse or nonrecourse, as nonrecourse liabilities solely for
purposes of section 707. Thus, the approach adopted in the 707
Temporary Regulations does not conflict with the approach directed by
Congress after the Raphan case.
Finally, in addition to the rule for determining a partner's share
of a Sec. 1.752-1(a) partnership liability for disguised sale
purposes, the 707 Temporary Regulations reserve with respect to the
treatment of Sec. 1.752-7 contingent liabilities for disguised sale
purposes. The 2014 Proposed Regulations proposed removing the ``would
be treated'' language in Sec. 1.707-5(a)(2)(i) and (ii) of the
existing regulations relating to contingent liabilities. The 707
Temporary Regulations replace the proposed provisions with the
previously discussed rule for determining a partner's share of a
partnership liability as defined in Sec. 1.752-1(a). Because the 2014
Proposed Regulations would have removed language relating to Sec.
1.752-7 contingent liabilities, some commenters suggested that the
regulations specifically clarify how contingent liabilities are treated
for purposes of the disguised sale rules. The Treasury Department and
the IRS agree that clarification of the treatment of Sec. 1.752-7
contingent liabilities for disguised sale purposes is warranted.
In many cases, Sec. 1.752-7 contingent liabilities may constitute
qualified liabilities that would not be taken into account for purposes
of determining a disguised sale. However, some commenters noted that
there may be circumstances in which certain transfers of Sec. 1.752-7
contingent liabilities to a partnership may be abusive. Thus, the
Treasury Department and the IRS will continue to study the issue of the
effect of contingent liabilities with respect to section 707, as well
as other sections of the Code, in connection with future guidance
projects.
2. Determining Whether a Liability Is a Recourse Liability of a
Partnership
The 752 Temporary Regulations amend Sec. 1.752-2 to address
certain payment obligations of a partner or related person. The
Treasury Department and the IRS continue to have concerns that partners
and related persons are entering into payment obligations that are not
commercial solely to achieve an allocation of a partnership liability.
Under the 2014 Proposed Regulations, a partner's or related
person's payment obligation with respect to a partnership liability
would not have been recognized under Sec. 1.752-2(b)(3) unless seven
factors (recognition factors) were satisfied. Two of the seven
recognition factors imposed certain additional requirements on
contractual obligations outside a partnership agreement, such as
guarantees, indemnifications, reimbursement agreements, and other
obligations running directly to creditors, other partners, or to the
partnership (guarantee and indemnity recognition factors). In the case
of a guarantee or similar arrangement, the 2014 Proposed Regulations
would have required the partner or related person to be liable up to
the full amount of such partner's or related person's payment
obligation, if, and to the extent that, any amount of the partnership
liability is not otherwise satisfied. In the case of an indemnity,
reimbursement agreement, or similar arrangement, the 2014 Proposed
Regulations would have required the partner or related person to be
liable up to the full amount of such partner's or related person's
payment obligation if, and to the extent that, any amount of the
indemnitee's or other benefited party's payment obligation is
satisfied. The terms of the guarantee, indemnity, or reimbursement
agreement would be treated as modified by any right of indemnity,
reimbursement agreement, or similar arrangement. However, a right of
proportionate contribution running between partners or related persons
who were co-obligors with respect to a payment obligation for which
each of them was jointly and severally liable would not modify a
guarantee, indemnity, or reimbursement agreement. If the partner's or
related person's payment obligation failed to satisfy any of the
recognition factors, the payment obligation was not recognized and the
partner would not bear EROL for the partnership liability. In addition
to the guarantee and indemnity recognition factors, a partner's or
related person's payment obligation with respect to a partnership
liability would not be recognized under an anti-abuse rule in the 2014
Proposed Regulations if the facts and circumstances indicated that the
partnership liability was part of a plan or arrangement involving the
use of tiered partnerships, intermediaries, or similar arrangements to
convert a single liability into multiple liabilities with a principal
purpose of circumventing the guarantee and indemnity recognition
factors.
The Treasury Department and the IRS continue to believe that
certain obligations, such as certain so-called ``bottom-dollar
guarantees,'' should generally not be recognized as payment obligations
under Sec. 1.752-2(b)(3) because they generally lack a significant
non-tax commercial business purpose. No commenters suggested that
bottom-dollar guarantees were relevant to loan risk underwriting.
Accordingly, the 752 Temporary Regulations retain the
[[Page 69285]]
restriction on certain guarantees and indemnities and provide that
these payment obligations are not recognized under Sec. 1.752-2(b)(3).
In addition, these regulations remove the Example in Sec. 1.752-
2(j)(4) to comport with the provisions in the 752 Temporary Regulations
relating to bottom dollar payment obligations. However, after
considering the comments received on the 2014 Proposed Regulations, the
752 Temporary Regulations provide for an exception as well as an anti-
abuse rule to address arrangements that are not intended to be subject
to this rule.
A. General Rule: Bottom Dollar Payment Obligations
Although the 752 Temporary Regulations retain the restriction
relating to certain guarantees and indemnities, these temporary
regulations refine the description of non-commercial obligations in
response to comments. Commenters expressed concerns with the 2014
Proposed Regulations' description of so-called ``bottom-dollar
guarantees and indemnities.'' Commenters thought the language was
confusing. In addition, with respect to the anti-abuse rule in the 2014
Proposed Regulations, one commenter believed that ``tranches'' of debt
could be used to effect arrangements that are economically similar to
``bottom-dollar guarantees'' and recommended that the regulations
strengthen the anti-abuse rule. This commenter suggested that two or
more liabilities be treated as a single liability if: (1) The
liabilities are incurred pursuant to a common plan, as part of a single
transaction, or as part of a series of related transactions; (2) the
liabilities have the same counterparty or counterparties (or
substantially the same group of counterparties); or (3) the guarantee
or similar arrangement would fail the guarantee recognition factor if
the liabilities were treated as a single liability; and (4) multiple
liabilities (rather than a single liability) were incurred with a
principal purpose of avoiding the guarantee recognition factor.
In response to comments, the 752 Temporary Regulations clarify the
description of so-called ``bottom-dollar guarantees and indemnities''
by consolidating these non-commercial obligations under one term:
Bottom-dollar payment obligations. In addition, instead of having an
anti-abuse rule to address arrangements that use tiered partnerships,
intermediaries, senior and subordinate liabilities, or similar
arrangements, the 752 Temporary Regulations define these arrangements
as bottom dollar payment obligations if certain factors, taking into
account the commenter's suggestion, exist. Therefore, under the 752
Temporary Regulations, the term ``bottom dollar payment obligation''
includes (subject to certain exceptions): (1) Any payment obligation
other than one in which the partner or related person is or would be
liable up to the full amount of such partner's or related person's
payment obligation if, and to the extent that (A) any amount of the
partnership liability is not otherwise satisfied in the case of an
obligation that is a guarantee or other similar arrangement, or (B) any
amount of the indemnitee's or benefited party's payment obligation is
satisfied in the case of an obligation which is an indemnity or similar
arrangement; and (2) an arrangement with respect to a partnership
liability that uses tiered partnerships, intermediaries, senior and
subordinate liabilities, or similar arrangements to convert what would
otherwise be a single liability into multiple liabilities if, based on
the facts and circumstances, the liabilities were incurred (A) pursuant
to a common plan, as part of a single transaction or arrangement, or as
part of a series of related transactions or arrangements, and (B) with
a principal purpose of avoiding having at least one of such liabilities
or payment obligations with respect to such liabilities being treated
as a bottom dollar payment obligation. Any payment obligation under
Sec. 1.752-2, including an obligation to make a capital contribution
and to restore a deficit capital account upon liquidation of the
partnership as described in Sec. 1.704-1(b)(2)(ii)(b)(3), may be a
bottom dollar payment obligation if it meets the requirements set forth
above.
The preamble of the 2014 Proposed Regulations requested comments on
whether and under what circumstances regulations should permit
recognition of a payment obligation for a portion, rather than 100
percent, of each dollar of a partnership liability to which the payment
relates (a ``vertical slice'' of a partnership liability). The
commenters believed that regulations under section 752 should recognize
a vertical slice of a partnership liability because these payment
obligations represent the same economic risk as a guarantee, for
example, of the entire partnership liability.
The Treasury Department and the IRS agree with the commenters that
certain obligations, including a vertical slice of a partnership
liability, should not cause a payment obligation to be a bottom dollar
payment obligation and, thus, not recognized under Sec. 1.752-2(b)(3).
In addition, the Treasury Department and the IRS have determined that,
as long as a partner or related person is or would be liable for the
full amount of a payment obligation, such obligation is not a bottom
dollar payment obligation merely because a maximum amount is placed on
the partner's or related person's obligation. Accordingly, the 752
Temporary Regulations specifically except certain payment obligations
within those parameters, including obligations with joint and several
liability, from being treated as bottom dollar payment obligations.
B. Exception From Treatment as a Bottom Dollar Payment Obligation
In addition to comments relating to the description of ``bottom-
dollar guarantees'' and the anti-abuse rule in the 2014 Proposed
Regulations, commenters expressed concerns that the guaranty and
indemnity recognition factors would deprive a partner from being
allocated a liability even in situations where there is real EROL. One
commenter described the 2014 Proposed Regulations as prejudging all
payment obligations to be remote and fictitious if the obligations did
not cover 100 percent of any shortfall in repayment. The commenter
believed EROL could exist even if 100 percent of the liability was not
covered.
Another commenter appreciated the merits of a bright-line rule that
would look to every dollar of a liability, but thought that the 100
percent threshold was too high. This commenter recommended that a
payment obligation should be respected if a partner or related person
(i) is or would be liable up to the full amount of such partner's or
related person's payment obligation if, and to the extent that, less
than 80 percent of the partnership liability is not otherwise satisfied
and (ii) either (A) the taxpayer or the IRS clearly establishes that
the credit support materially decreased the partnership's borrowing
costs with respect to the liability or materially enhanced the other
terms of the borrowing, or (B) the partners (or persons related to one
or more of the partners), in the aggregate, are or would be liable up
to the full amount of their payment obligations if, and to the extent
that, any amount of the partnership liability is not otherwise
satisfied. The commenter believed that this lower threshold
incorporates the idea that a person may have meaningful risk with
respect to the underlying liability, while protecting the legitimate
interests of the government in ensuring that the lower threshold is not
abused by taxpayers.
The Treasury Department and the IRS recognize that, in certain
circumstances, it might be appropriate to treat a partner as bearing
EROL with respect to a
[[Page 69286]]
payment obligation that would be characterized as a bottom dollar
payment obligation under the general rule. What otherwise would be a
bottom dollar payment obligation can be distinguished in a situation
where the partners have allocated the risk among themselves, and the
person making the bottom dollar payment obligation is liable for at
least 90 percent of the person's payment obligation (because the person
is not entitled to indemnification or reimbursement for more than 10
percent of the person's payment obligation). For example, if one
partner (Partner A) guarantees 100 percent of a partnership liability
and another partner (Partner B) indemnifies Partner A for the first one
percent of Partner A's obligation, Partner A's obligation would be
characterized as a bottom dollar payment obligation under the general
rule because Partner A would not be liable to the full extent of the
guarantee if any amount of the partnership liability is not otherwise
satisfied (because Partner A would be reimbursed due to Partner B's
indemnity). To address this concern, the 752 Temporary Regulations
provide an exception if a partner or related person has a payment
obligation that would be recognized (initial payment obligation) under
Sec. 1.752-2T(b)(3) but for the effect of an indemnity, reimbursement
agreement, or similar arrangement. Such bottom dollar payment
obligation is recognized under Sec. 1.752-2T(b)(3) if, taking into
account the indemnity, reimbursement agreement, or similar arrangement,
the partner or related person is liable for at least 90 percent of the
initial payment obligation. This obligation, like any other payment
obligation, must otherwise be recognized under Sec. 1.752-2, including
under the anti-abuse rules in Sec. 1.752-2(j).
C. Anti-Abuse Rule
Some commenters noted that partners could manipulate contractual
arrangements to achieve a federal income tax result that is not
consistent with the economics of an arrangement. For example, a partner
could deliberately fail one of the recognition factors in the 2014
Proposed Regulations (including the guarantee or indemnity recognition
factor) to cause a partnership liability to be treated as nonrecourse
even when one partner has true EROL. Just as the 752 Temporary
Regulations provide an exception for certain obligations that meet the
definition of a bottom dollar payment obligation but give rise to EROL,
the 752 Temporary Regulations also provide an anti-abuse rule in Sec.
1.752-2T(j)(2) that the Commissioner may apply to ensure that if a
partner actually bears EROL for a partnership liability, partners may
not agree among themselves to create a bottom dollar payment obligation
so that the liability will be treated as nonrecourse.
Section 1.752-2(j)(2) of the existing regulations currently
provides that, irrespective of the form of a contractual obligation, a
partner is considered to bear the EROL with respect to a partnership
liability, or a portion thereof, to the extent that: (A) The partner or
related person undertakes one or more contractual obligations so that
the partnership may obtain a loan; (B) the contractual obligations of
the partner or related person eliminate substantially all the risk to
the lender that the partnership will not satisfy its obligations under
the loan; and (C) one of the principal purposes of using the
contractual obligations is to attempt to permit partners (other than
those who are directly or indirectly liable for the obligation) to
include a portion of the loan in the basis of their partnership
interests. The 752 Temporary Regulations expand Sec. 1.752-2(j)(2) to
include situations in which a partner is considered to bear the EROL
irrespective of a bottom dollar payment obligation.
D. Disclosure Requirement
The 752 Temporary Regulations require the partnership to disclose
to the IRS all bottom dollar payment obligations with respect to a
partnership liability on a completed Form 8275, Disclosure Statement,
attached to the partnership return for the taxable year in which the
bottom dollar payment obligation is undertaken or modified. That
disclosure must identify the payment obligation with respect to which
disclosure is made including the amount of the payment obligation and
the parties to the payment obligation. If a bottom dollar payment
obligation meets the exception, the partnership must also disclose to
the IRS on Form 8275 the facts and circumstances that clearly establish
that a partner or related person is liable for up to 90 percent of the
partner's or related person's initial payment obligation and, but for
an indemnity, reimbursement agreement, or similar arrangement, the
partner's or related person's payment obligation would have been
recognized.
Effective/Applicability Date
With respect to changes under Sec. 1.707-5, the 707 Temporary
Regulations apply to any transaction with respect to which all
transfers occur on or after January 3, 2017. In addition, with respect
to the changes under Sec. 1.752-2, the 752 Temporary Regulations apply
to liabilities incurred or assumed by a partnership and payment
obligations imposed or undertaken with respect to a partnership
liability on or after October 5, 2016, other than liabilities incurred
or assumed by a partnership and payment obligations imposed or
undertaken pursuant to a written binding contract in effect prior to
that date.
The 2014 Proposed Regulations provided for an effective date
similar to the one in these final and temporary regulations. A
commenter recommended that partnerships be permitted to elect to apply
all, but not less than all, of the provisions of the final regulations
to all of its liabilities and payment obligations with respect to its
liabilities after the effective date of the final regulations. These
752 Temporary Regulations adopt that change; therefore, partnerships
may apply all the provisions contained in the 752 Temporary Regulations
to all of their liabilities as of the beginning of the first taxable
year of the partnership ending on or after October 5, 2016.
Commenters on the 2014 Proposed Regulations also recommended that
partnership liabilities or payment obligations that are modified or
refinanced continue to be subject to the provisions of the existing
regulations to the extent of the amount and duration of the pre-
modification (or refinancing) liability or payment obligation. The 752
Temporary Regulations do not adopt this recommendation as the terms of
the partnership liabilities and payment obligations could be changed,
which would affect the determination of whether or not an obligation is
a bottom dollar payment obligation.
The 752 Temporary Regulations do, however, provide transition
relief for any partner whose allocable share of partnership liabilities
under Sec. 1.752-2 exceeds its adjusted basis in its partnership
interest on the date the temporary regulations are finalized. Under
this transitional relief, the partner can continue to apply the
existing regulations under Sec. 1.752-2 with respect to a partnership
liability for a seven-year period to the extent that the partner's
allocable share of partnership liabilities exceeds the partner's
adjusted basis in its partnership interest on October 5, 2016. The
amount of partnership liabilities subject to transitional relief will
be reduced for certain reductions in the amount of liabilities
allocated to that partner under the transition rules and, upon the sale
of any partnership property, for any tax gain (including
[[Page 69287]]
section 704(c) gain) allocated to the partner less that partner's share
of amount realized.
Special Analyses
Certain IRS regulations, including this one, are exempt from the
requirements of Executive Order 12866, as supplemented and reaffirmed
by Executive Order 13563. Therefore, a regulatory impact assessment is
not required. It also has been determined that section 553(b) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply to
these regulations.
Although the temporary regulations under sections 707 and 752
respond to comments received in response to the 2014 Proposed
Regulations, the Treasury Department and the IRS have determined that
the regulations would benefit from additional notice and comment
instead of being published as final regulations. In addition, decisions
made in the final regulations under section 707 contained in a separate
Treasury decision (TD 9787) published in the Rules and Regulations
section in this issue of the Federal Register interact with the changes
in the 707 Temporary Regulations regarding how liabilities are
allocated for disguised sale purposes. Finally, pursuant to authority
under section 7805(b) of the Code, the temporary regulations under
sections 707 and 752 are necessary to address particular abuses as
described in the Summary of Comments and the Explanation of Provisions
section of the preamble of this Treasury decision. For these reasons,
good cause also exists pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to issue temporary
regulations.
For applicability of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, please refer
to the cross-referencing notice of proposed rulemaking published in the
Proposed Rules section in this issue of the Federal Register. 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.
Drafting Information
The principal authors of these regulations are Caroline E. Hay and
Deane M. Burke of the Office of the Associate Chief Counsel
(Passthroughs & Special Industries), IRS. 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 * * *
Sections 1.707-2 through 1.707-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C.
707(a)(2)(B).
0
Par. 2. Section 1.707-5 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) and
Examples 2, 3, 7, and 8 in paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 1.707-5 Disguised sales of property to partnership; special
rules relating to liabilities.
(a) * * *
(2) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec. 1.707-5T(a)(2).
* * * * *
(f) * * *
Example 2. [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec. 1.707-
5T(f) Example 2.
Example 3. [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec. 1.707-
5T(f) Example 3.
* * * * *
Example 7. [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec. 1.707-
5T(f) Example 7.
Example 8. [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec. 1.707-
5T(f) Example 8.
* * * * *
0
Par. 3. Section 1.707-5T is added to read as follows:
Sec. 1.707-5T Disguised sales of property to partnership; special
rules relating to liabilities (temporary).
(a)(1) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec. 1.707-5(a)(1).
(2) Partner's share of liability--(i) In general. For purposes of
Sec. 1.707-5, a partner's share of a liability of a partnership, as
defined in Sec. 1.752-1(a) (whether a recourse liability or a
nonrecourse liability) is determined by applying the same percentage
used to determine the partner's share of the excess nonrecourse
liability under Sec. 1.752-3(a)(3) (as limited in its application to
this paragraph (a)(2)), without including in such partner's share any
amount of the liability for which another partner bears the economic
risk of loss for the partnership liability under Sec. 1.752-2.
(ii) Partner's share of Sec. 1.752-7 liability. [Reserved].
(a)(3) through (e) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec.
1.707-5(a)(3) through (e).
(f) Example 1 [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec. 1.707-
5(f) Example 1.
Example 2. Partnership's assumption of recourse liability
encumbering transferred property. (i) C transfers property Y to a
partnership in which C has a 50 percent interest. At the time of its
transfer to the partnership, property Y has a fair market value of
$10,000,000 and is subject to an $8,000,000 liability that C
incurred and guaranteed, immediately before transferring property Y
to the partnership, in order to finance other expenditures. Upon the
transfer of property Y to the partnership the partnership assumed
the liability encumbering that property. Under section 752 and the
regulations thereunder, immediately after the partnership's
assumption of the liability encumbering property Y, the liability is
a recourse liability of the partnership and C's share of that
liability is $8,000,000.
(ii) Under the facts of this example, the liability encumbering
property Y is not a qualified liability. Accordingly, the
partnership's assumption of the liability results in a transfer of
consideration to C in connection with C's transfer of property Y to
the partnership. Notwithstanding C's share of the liability for
section 752 purposes, for disguised sale purposes, C's share of the
liability immediately after the partnership's assumption is
$4,000,000 (50 percent of $8,000,000) under paragraph (a)(2) of this
section (which determines a partner's share of a liability using the
percentage under Sec. 1.752-3(a)(3)). Therefore, the amount of
consideration to C is $4,000,000 (the excess of the liability
assumed by the partnership ($8,000,000) over C's share of the
liability for purposes of Sec. 1.707-5(a) immediately after the
assumption ($4,000,000)). See Sec. 1.707-5(a)(1) and paragraph
(a)(2) of this section.
Example 3. Subsequent reduction of transferring partner's share
of liability. (i) The facts are the same as in Example 2. In
addition, property Y is a fully leased office building, the rental
income from property Y is sufficient to meet debt service, and the
remaining term of the liability is ten years. It is anticipated
that, three years after the partnership's assumption of the
liability, C's share of the liability under paragraph (a)(2) of this
section will be reduced to $2,000,000 because of a shift in the
allocation of partnership profits pursuant to the terms of the
partnership agreement which provide that C's share of the
partnership profits will be 25 percent at that time. Under the
partnership agreement, this shift in the allocation of partnership
profits is dependent solely on the passage of time.
(ii) Under Sec. 1.707-5(a)(3), if the reduction in C's share of
the liability was anticipated at the time of C's transfer, was not
subject to the entrepreneurial risks of partnership operations, and
was part of a plan that has as one of its principal purposes
minimizing the extent of sale treatment under Sec. 1.707-3 (that
is, a principal purpose of allocating a larger percentage of profits
to C in the first three years when profits were not likely to be
realized was to minimize the extent to which C's transfer would be
treated as part of a sale), C's share of the liability immediately
after the partnership's assumption is treated as equal to C's
reduced share of $2,000,000. Therefore, the amount of consideration
to C is $6,000,000 (the excess of the liability assumed by the
partnership ($8,000,000) over
[[Page 69288]]
C's share of the liability for purposes of Sec. 1.707-5(a)
immediately after the assumption ($2,000,000)), taking into account
the anticipated reduction in C's share of the liability pursuant to
the terms of the partnership agreement. See Sec. 1.707-5(a)(1) and
(3) and paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
Examples 4 through 6 [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec.
1.707-5(f) Examples 4 through 6.
Example 7. Partnership's assumptions of liabilities encumbering
properties transferred pursuant to a plan. (i) Pursuant to a plan, G
and H transfer property 1 and property 2, respectively, to an
existing partnership in exchange for a one-third interest each in
the partnership. At the time the properties are transferred to the
partnership, property 1 has a fair market value of $10,000 and an
adjusted tax basis of $6,000, and property 2 has a fair market value
of $10,000 and an adjusted tax basis of $4,000. At the time
properties 1 and 2 are transferred to the partnership, a $6,000
nonrecourse liability (liability 1) is secured by property 1 and a
$9,000 recourse liability of H (liability 2) is secured by property
2. Properties 1 and 2 are transferred to the partnership, and the
partnership takes property 1 subject to liability 1 and assumes
liability 2. After the transfer of liability 2 to the partnership, H
bears the economic risk of loss for the entire amount of liability 2
under Sec. 1.752-2. G and H incurred liabilities 1 and 2
immediately prior to transferring properties 1 and 2 to the
partnership and used the proceeds for personal expenditures. The
liabilities are not qualified liabilities. For disguised sale
purposes, assume that G's and H's share of liability 1 is $2,000
each in accordance with paragraph (a)(2) of this section (which
determines a partner's share of a liability using the percentage
under Sec. 1.752-3(a)(3) without including in such partner's share
any amount of the liability for which another partner bears the
economic risk of loss for the liability under Sec. 1.752-2). Also,
in accordance with paragraph (a)(2) of this section, G's share of
liability 2 is zero and H's share of liability 2 is $3,000.
(ii) G and H transferred properties 1 and 2 to the partnership
pursuant to a plan. Accordingly, pursuant to Sec. 1.707-5(a)(1) and
(4), the partnership's taking property 1 subject to liability 1 is
treated as a transfer of only $4,000 of consideration to G (the
amount by which liability 1 ($6,000) exceeds G's share of
liabilities 1 and 2 ($2,000)), and the partnership's assumption of
liability 2 is treated as a transfer of only $4,000 of consideration
to H (the amount by which liability 2 ($9,000) exceeds H's share of
liabilities 1 and 2 ($5,000)). Under the rule in Sec. 1.707-3, G is
treated as having sold $4,000 of the fair market value of property 1
in exchange for the partnership's taking property 1 subject to
liability 1, and H is treated as having sold $4,000 of the fair
market value of property 2 in exchange for the partnership's
assumption of liability 2.
Example 8. Partnership's assumption of liability pursuant to a
plan to avoid sale treatment of partnership assumption of another
liability. (i) The facts are the same as in Example 7, except that--
(A) Liability 2 is a nonrecourse liability;
(B) H transferred the proceeds of liability 2 to the
partnership; and
(C) H incurred liability 2 in an attempt to reduce the extent to
which the partnership's taking of property 1 subject to liability 1
would be treated as a transfer of consideration to G (and thereby
reduce the portion of G's transfer of property 1 to the partnership
that would be treated as part of a sale).
(ii) Because the partnership assumed liability 2 with a
principal purpose of reducing the extent to which the partnership's
taking of property 1 subject to liability 1 would be treated as a
transfer of consideration to G, liability 2 is ignored in applying
Sec. 1.707-5(a)(1). See Sec. 1.707-5(a)(4). Accordingly, the
partnership's taking of property 1 subject to liability 1 is treated
as a transfer of $4,000 of consideration to G (the amount by which
liability 1 ($6,000) exceeds G's share of liability 1 ($2,000)).
Under Sec. 1.707-5(d), the partnership's assumption of liability 2
is not treated as a transfer of any consideration to H because the
amount of liability 2 that the partnership is treated as assuming is
reduced by the money H transferred to the partnership ($9,000).
Examples 9 through 13 [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec.
1.707-5(f) Examples 9 through 13.
(g) Expiration date. This section expires on October 4, 2019.
0
Par. 4. Section 1.707-9 is amended by adding paragraphs (a)(4) and (5)
to read as follows:
Sec. 1.707-9 Effective dates and transitional rules.
(a) * * *
(4) Section 1.707-5(a)(2) and (f) Examples 2, 3, 7, and 8. Section
1.707-5(a)(2) and (f) Examples 2, 3, 7, and 8, as contained in 26 CFR
part 1 revised as of April 1, 2016, apply to any transaction with
respect to which any transfers occur before January 3, 2017. For any
transaction with respect to which all transfers occur on or after
January 3, 2017, see Sec. 1.707-9T(a)(5).
(5) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec. 1.707-9T(a)(5).
* * * * *
0
Par. 5. Section 1.707-9T is added to read as follows:
Sec. 1.707-9T Effective dates and transitional rules (temporary).
(a)(1) through (a)(4) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec.
1.707-9(a)(1) through (4).
(5) Section 1.707-5T(a)(2) and (f) Examples 2, 3, 7, and 8. Section
1.707-5T(a)(2) and (f) Examples 2, 3, 7, and 8 apply to any transaction
with respect to which all transfers occur on or after January 3, 2017.
For any transaction with respect to which any transfers occur before
January 3, 2017, see Sec. 1.707-5(a)(2) and (f) Examples 2, 3, 7, and
8 as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised as of April 1, 2016.
(b) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec. 1.707-9(b).
(c) Expiration date. This section expires on October 4, 2019.
0
Par. 6. Section 1.752-2 is amended by:
0
1. Revising paragraph (b)(3).
0
2. Adding Examples 9, 10, and 11 to paragraph (f).
0
3. Revising paragraph (j)(2).
0
4. Removing paragraph (j)(4).
0
5. Redesignating paragraph (l) as (l)(1) and revising the heading to
paragraph
(l).
0
6. Adding paragraphs (l)(2) and (3).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 1.752-2 Partner's share of recourse liabilities.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec. 1.752-2T(b)(3).
* * * * *
(f) * * *
Example 9. [Reserved].
Example 10. [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec. 1.752-
2T(f) Example 10.
Example 11. [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec. 1.752-
2T(f) Example 11.
* * * * *
(j) * * *
(2) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec. 1.752-2T(j)(2).
* * * * *
(l) Effective/applicability dates. * * *
* * * * *
(2) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec. 1.752-2T(l)(2).
(3) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec. 1.752-2T(l)(3).
0
Par. 7. Section 1.752-2T is added to read as follows:
Sec. 1.752-2T Partner's share of recourse liabilities (temporary).
(a) through (b)(2) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec.
1.752-2(a) through (b)(2).
(3) Obligations recognized--(i) In general. The determination of
the extent to which a partner or related person has an obligation to
make a payment under Sec. 1.752-2(b)(1) is based on the facts and
circumstances at the time of the determination. To the extent that the
obligation of a partner or related person to make a payment with
respect to a partnership liability is not recognized under this
paragraph (b)(3), Sec. 1.752-2(b) is applied as if the obligation did
not exist. All statutory and contractual obligations relating to the
partnership liability are taken into account for purposes of applying
this section, including--
[[Page 69289]]
(A) Contractual obligations outside the partnership agreement such
as guarantees, indemnifications, reimbursement agreements, and other
obligations running directly to creditors, to other partners, or to the
partnership;
(B) Obligations to the partnership that are imposed by the
partnership agreement, including the obligation to make a capital
contribution and to restore a deficit capital account upon liquidation
of the partnership as described in Sec. 1.704-1(b)(2)(ii)(b)(3)
(taking into account Sec. 1.704-1(b)(2)(ii)(c)); and
(C) Payment obligations (whether in the form of direct remittances
to another partner or a contribution to the partnership) imposed by
state or local law, including the governing state or local law
partnership statute.
(ii) Special rules for bottom dollar payment obligations--(A) In
general. For purposes of Sec. 1.752-2, a bottom dollar payment
obligation (as defined in paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C) of this section) is
not recognized under this paragraph (b)(3).
(B) Exception. If a partner or related person has a payment
obligation that would be recognized under this paragraph (b)(3)
(initial payment obligation) but for the effect of an indemnity,
reimbursement agreement, or similar arrangement, such bottom dollar
payment obligation is recognized under this paragraph (b)(3) if, taking
into account the indemnity, reimbursement agreement, or similar
arrangement, the partner or related person is liable for at least 90
percent of the partner's or related person's initial payment
obligation.
(C) Definition of bottom dollar payment obligation--(1) In general.
Except as provided in paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C)(2) of this section, a
bottom dollar payment obligation is a payment obligation that is the
same as or similar to a payment obligation or arrangement described in
this paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C)(1).
(i) With respect to a guarantee or similar arrangement, any payment
obligation other than one in which the partner or related person is or
would be liable up to the full amount of such partner's or related
person's payment obligation if, and to the extent that, any amount of
the partnership liability is not otherwise satisfied.
(ii) With respect to an indemnity or similar arrangement, any
payment obligation other than one in which the partner or related
person is or would be liable up to the full amount of such partner's or
related person's payment obligation, if, and to the extent that, any
amount of the indemnitee's or benefited party's payment obligation that
is recognized under this paragraph (b)(3) is satisfied.
(iii) An arrangement with respect to a partnership liability that
uses tiered partnerships, intermediaries, senior and subordinate
liabilities, or similar arrangements to convert what would otherwise be
a single liability into multiple liabilities if, based on the facts and
circumstances, the liabilities were incurred pursuant to a common plan,
as part of a single transaction or arrangement, or as part of a series
of related transactions or arrangements, and with a principal purpose
of avoiding having at least one of such liabilities or payment
obligations with respect to such liabilities being treated as a bottom
dollar payment obligation as described in paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C)(1)(i)
or (ii) of this section.
(2) Exceptions. A payment obligation is not a bottom dollar payment
obligation merely because a maximum amount is placed on the partner's
or related person's payment obligation, a partner's or related person's
payment obligation is stated as a fixed percentage of every dollar of
the partnership liability to which such obligation relates, or there is
a right of proportionate contribution running between partners or
related persons who are co-obligors with respect to a payment
obligation for which each of them is jointly and severally liable.
(3) Benefited party defined. For purposes of Sec. 1.752-2, a
benefited party is the person to whom a partner or related person has
the payment obligation.
(D) Disclosure of bottom dollar payment obligations. A partnership
must disclose to the Internal Revenue Service a bottom dollar payment
obligation (including a bottom dollar payment obligation that is
recognized under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B) of this section) with respect
to a partnership liability on a completed Form 8275, Disclosure
Statement, or successor form, attached to the return of the partnership
for the taxable year in which the bottom dollar payment obligation is
undertaken or modified, that includes all of the following information:
(1) A caption identifying the statement as a disclosure of a bottom
dollar payment obligation under section 752.
(2) An identification of the payment obligation with respect to
which disclosure is made.
(3) The amount of the payment obligation.
(4) The parties to the payment obligation.
(5) A statement of whether the payment obligation is treated as
recognized for purposes of this paragraph (b)(3).
(6) If the payment obligation is recognized under paragraph
(b)(3)(ii)(B) of this section, the facts and circumstances that clearly
establish that a partner or related person is liable for up to 90
percent of the partner's or related person's initial payment obligation
and, but for an indemnity, reimbursement agreement, or similar
arrangement, the partner's or related person's initial payment
obligation would have been recognized under this paragraph (b)(3).
(iii) Special rule for indemnities and reimbursement agreements. An
indemnity, reimbursement agreement, or similar arrangement will be
recognized under this paragraph (b)(3) only if, before taking into
account the indemnity, reimbursement agreement, or similar arrangement,
the indemnitee's or other benefited party's payment obligation is
recognized under this paragraph (b)(3), or would be recognized under
this paragraph (b)(3) if such person were a partner or related person.
(b)(4) through (e) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec.
1.752-2(b)(4) through (e).
(f) Examples 1 through 9 [Reserved]. For further guidance, see
Sec. 1.752-2(f) Examples 1 through 9.
Example 10. Guarantee of first and last dollars. (i) A, B, and
C are equal members of a limited liability company, ABC, that is
treated as a partnership for federal tax purposes. ABC borrows
$1,000 from Bank. A guarantees payment of up to $300 of the ABC
liability if any amount of the full $1,000 liability is not
recovered by Bank. B guarantees payment of up to $200, but only if
the Bank otherwise recovers less than $200. Both A and B waive their
rights of contribution against each other.
(ii) Because A is obligated to pay up to $300 if, and to the
extent that, any amount of the $1,000 partnership liability is not
recovered by Bank, A's guarantee is not a bottom dollar payment
obligation under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C) of this section. Therefore,
A's payment obligation is recognized under paragraph (b)(3) of this
section. The amount of A's economic risk of loss under Sec. 1.752-
2(b)(1) is $300.
(iii) Because B is obligated to pay up to $200 only if and to
the extent that the Bank otherwise recovers less than $200 of the
$1,000 partnership liability, B's guarantee is a bottom dollar
payment obligation under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C) of this section
and, therefore, is not recognized under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(A) of
this section. Accordingly, B bears no economic risk of loss under
Sec. 1.752-2(b)(1) for ABC's liability.
(iv) In sum, $300 of ABC's liability is allocated to A under
Sec. 1.752-2(a), and the remaining $700 liability is allocated to
A, B, and C under Sec. 1.752-3.
[[Page 69290]]
Example 11. Indemnification of guarantees. (i) The facts are
the same as in Example 10, except that, in addition, C agrees to
indemnify A up to $100 that A pays with respect to its guarantee and
agrees to indemnify B fully with respect to its guarantee.
(ii) The determination of whether C's indemnity is recognized
under paragraph (b)(3) of this section is made without regard to
whether C's indemnity itself causes A's guarantee not to be
recognized. Because A's obligation would be recognized but for the
effect of C's indemnity and C is obligated to pay A up to the full
amount of C's indemnity if A pays any amount on its guarantee of
ABC's liability, C's indemnity of A's guarantee is not a bottom
dollar payment obligation under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C) of this
section and, therefore, is recognized under paragraph (b)(3) of this
section. The amount of C's economic risk of loss under Sec. 1.752-
2(b)(1) for its indemnity of A's guarantee is $100.
(iii) Because C's indemnity is recognized under paragraph (b)(3)
of this section, A is treated as liable for $200 only to the extent
any amount beyond $100 of the partnership liability is not
satisfied. Thus, A is not liable if, and to the extent, any amount
of the partnership liability is not otherwise satisfied, and the
exception in paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B) of this section does not apply.
As a result, A's guarantee is a bottom dollar payment obligation
under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C) of this section and is not recognized
under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(A) of this section. Therefore, A bears no
economic risk of loss under Sec. 1.752-2(b)(1) for ABC's liability.
(iv) Because B's obligation is not recognized under paragraph
(b)(3)(ii) of this section independent of C's indemnity of B's
guarantee, C's indemnity is not recognized under paragraph
(b)(3)(iii) of this section. Therefore, C bears no economic risk of
loss under Sec. 1.752-2(b)(1) for its indemnity of B's guarantee.
(v) In sum, $100 of ABC's liability is allocated to C under
Sec. 1.752-2(a) and the remaining $900 liability is allocated to A,
B, and C under Sec. 1.752-3.
(g) through (j)(1) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec.
1.752-2(g) through (j)(1).
(2) Arrangements tantamount to a guarantee--(i) In general.
Irrespective of the form of a contractual obligation, the Commissioner
may treat a partner as bearing the economic risk of loss with respect
to a partnership liability, or a portion thereof, to the extent that--
(A) The partner or related person undertakes one or more
contractual obligations so that the partnership may obtain or retain a
loan;
(B) The contractual obligations of the partner or related person
significantly reduce the risk to the lender that the partnership will
not satisfy its obligations under the loan, or a portion thereof; and
(C) With respect to the contractual obligations described in
paragraphs (j)(2)(i)(A) and (B) of this section--
(1) One of the principal purposes of using the contractual
obligations is to attempt to permit partners (other than those who are
directly or indirectly liable for the obligation) to include a portion
of the loan in the basis of their partnership interests; or
(2) Another partner, or a person related to another partner, enters
into a payment obligation and a principal purpose of the arrangement is
to cause the payment obligation described in paragraphs (j)(2)(i)(A)
and (B) of this section to be disregarded under paragraph (b)(3) of
this section.
(ii) Economic risk of loss. For purposes of this paragraph (j)(2),
partners are considered to bear the economic risk of loss for a
liability in accordance with their relative economic burdens for the
liability pursuant to the contractual obligations. For example, a lease
between a partner and a partnership that is not on commercially
reasonable terms may be tantamount to a guarantee by the partner of the
partnership liability.
(j)(3) through (l)(1) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see Sec.
1.752-2(j)(3) through (l)(1).
(2) Paragraph (b)(3), paragraph (f) Examples 10 and 11, and
paragraph (j)(2) of this section apply to liabilities incurred or
assumed by a partnership and payment obligations imposed or undertaken
with respect to a partnership liability on or after October 5, 2016,
other than liabilities incurred or assumed by a partnership and payment
obligations imposed or undertaken pursuant to a written binding
contract in effect prior to that date. Partnerships may apply paragraph
(b)(3), paragraph (f) Examples 10 and 11, and paragraph (j)(2) of this
section to all of their liabilities as of the beginning of the first
taxable year of the partnership ending on or after October 5, 2016. The
rules applicable to liabilities incurred or assumed (or subject to a
written binding contract in effect) prior to October 5, 2016 are
contained in Sec. 1.752-2 in effect prior to October 5, 2016 (see 26
CFR part 1 revised as of April 1, 2016).
(3) If a partner has a share of a recourse partnership liability
under Sec. 1.752-2(a) as a result of bearing the economic risk of loss
under Sec. 1.752-2(b) immediately prior to October 5, 2016 (Transition
Partner), the partnership (Transition Partnership) may choose not to
apply paragraph (b)(3), paragraph (f) Examples 10 and 11, and paragraph
(j)(2)(i)(C)(2) of this section to the extent the amount of the
Transition Partner's share of liabilities under Sec. 1.752-2(a) as a
result of bearing the economic risk of loss under Sec. 1.752-2(b)
immediately prior to October 5, 2016 exceeds the amount of the
Transition Partner's adjusted basis in its partnership interest as
determined under Sec. 1.705-1 at such time (Grandfathered Amount). A
Transition Partner that is a partnership, S corporation, or a business
entity disregarded as an entity separate from its owner under section
856(i) or 1361(b)(3) or Sec. Sec. 301.7701-1 through 301.7701-3 of
this chapter ceases to qualify as a Transition Partner if the direct or
indirect ownership of that Transition Partner changes by 50 percent or
more. The Transition Partnership may continue to apply the rules under
Sec. 1.752-2 in effect prior to October 5, 2016, with respect to a
Transition Partner for payment obligations described in Sec. 1.752-
2(b) to the extent of the Transition Partner's adjusted Grandfathered
Amount for the seven-year period beginning October 5, 2016. The
termination of a Transition Partnership under section 708(b)(1)(B) and
applicable regulations does not affect the Grandfathered Amount of a
Transition Partner that remains a partner in the new partnership (as
described in Sec. 1.708-1(b)(4)), and the new partnership is treated
as a continuation of the Transition Partnership for purposes of this
paragraph (l)(3). However, a Transition Partner's Grandfathered Amount
is reduced (not below zero), but never increased by--
(i) Upon the sale of any property by the Transition Partnership, an
amount equal to the excess of any gain allocated for federal income tax
purposes to the Transition Partner by the Transition Partnership
(including amounts allocated under section 704(c) and applicable
regulations) over the product of the total amount realized by the
Transition Partnership from the property sale multiplied by the
Transition Partner's percentage interest in the partnership; and
(ii) An amount equal to any decrease in the Transition Partner's
share of liabilities to which the rules of this paragraph (l)(3) apply,
other than by operation of paragraph (l)(3)(i) of this section.
(m) Expiration date. This section expires on October 4, 2019.
[[Page 69291]]
John Dalrymple,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement.
Approved: August 29, 2016.
Mark J. Mazur,
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax Policy).
[FR Doc. 2016-23388 Filed 10-4-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P