Amount Determined Under Section 956 for Corporate United States Shareholders, 55324-55329 [2018-24140]
Download as PDF
55324
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Column Labeling, and Miscellaneous
Topics.’’ We are issuing the draft
guidance consistent with our good
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR
10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will represent the current
thinking of FDA on this topic. It does
not establish any rights for any person
and is not binding on FDA or the public.
You can use an alternate approach if it
satisfies the requirements of the
applicable statutes and regulations. This
guidance is not subject to Executive
Order 12866.
The draft guidance, when finalized,
will provide questions and answers on
topics related primarily to
implementing two final rules: (1) ‘‘Food
Labeling: Serving Sizes of Foods That
Can Reasonably Be Consumed At One
Eating Occasion; Dual-Column Labeling;
Updating, Modifying, and Establishing
Certain Reference Amounts Customarily
Consumed; Serving Size for Breath
Mints; and Technical Amendments’’ (81
FR 34000 (May 27, 2016)) and (2) ‘‘Food
Labeling: Revision of the Nutrition and
Supplement Facts Labels’’ (81 FR 33742
(May 27, 2016)). This draft guidance
also discusses formatting issues for
dual-column labeling, products that
have limited space for nutrition
labeling, and additional issues dealing
with compliance.
II. The Paperwork Reduction Act
This draft guidance refers to
previously approved collections of
information found in FDA regulations.
These collections of information are
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). The collections
of information in 21 CFR part 101 have
been approved under OMB control
number 0910–0381.
III. Electronic Access
Persons with access to the internet
may obtain the draft guidance at either
https://www.fda.gov/FoodGuidances or
https://www.regulations.gov. Use the
FDA website listed in the previous
sentence to find the most current
version of the guidance.
Dated: October 30, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018–24124 Filed 11–2–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Nov 02, 2018
Jkt 247001
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[REG–114540–18]
RIN 1545–BO88
Amount Determined Under Section 956
for Corporate United States
Shareholders
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
This document contains
proposed regulations that reduce the
amount determined under section 956
of the Internal Revenue Code with
respect to certain domestic corporations.
The proposed regulations affect certain
domestic corporations that own (or are
treated as owning) stock in foreign
corporations.
DATES: Written or electronic comments
and requests for a public hearing must
be received by December 5, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Send submissions to:
CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–114540–18),
Internal Revenue Service, Room 5203,
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–114540–
18), Courier’s Desk, Internal Revenue
Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20224, or sent
electronically via the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov (IRS REG–114540–
18).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Concerning the proposed regulations,
Rose E. Jenkins, (202) 317–6934;
concerning submissions of comments or
requests for a public hearing, Regina
Johnson, (202) 317–6901 (not toll-free
numbers).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Background
I. Section 956
The Revenue Act of 1962 (the ‘‘1962
Act’’), Pub. L. 87–834, sec. 12, 76 Stat.
at 1006, enacted sections 951 and 956 as
part of subpart F of part III, subchapter
N, chapter 1 of the 1954 Internal
Revenue Code (‘‘subpart F’’), as
amended. Subpart F was enacted in
order to limit the use of low-tax
jurisdictions for the purposes of
obtaining indefinite deferral of U.S. tax
on certain earnings that would
otherwise be subject to U.S. federal
income tax. H.R. Rep. No. 1447 at 57
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(1962). Congress enacted subpart F in
part to address taxpayers who had
‘‘taken advantage of the multiplicity of
foreign tax systems to avoid taxation by
the United States on what could
ordinarily be expected to be U.S. source
income.’’ Id. at 58.
Before the 1962 Act, United States
shareholders (as defined in section
951(b)) (‘‘U.S. shareholders’’) of
controlled foreign corporations (as
defined in section 957) (‘‘CFCs’’) were
not subject to U.S. tax on earnings of the
foreign corporations unless and until
earnings of the foreign corporations
were distributed to the shareholders as
a dividend. S. Rep. No. 1881 at 78
(1962). The subpart F regime eliminated
deferral for certain—generally passive or
highly mobile—earnings of CFCs by
subjecting those earnings to immediate
U.S. taxation regardless of whether there
was an actual distribution. Id. at 80.
Earnings that were not subject to
immediate U.S. taxation under the
subpart F regime were generally taxable
only upon repatriation, as those
earnings did not present the same
concerns regarding indefinite tax
deferral compared to earnings subject to
subpart F.
Section 956 was enacted alongside the
subpart F regime in the 1962 Act to
ensure that a CFC’s earnings not subject
to immediate tax when earned (under
the subpart F regime) would be taxed
when repatriated, either through a
dividend or an effective repatriation.
Recognizing that repatriation of foreign
earnings was possible through means
other than a taxable distribution,
Congress enacted section 956 ‘‘to
prevent the repatriation of income to the
United States in a manner which does
not subject it to U.S. taxation.’’ H.R.
Rep. No. 1447 at 58. Congress
determined that the investment by a
CFC of its earnings in United States
property, including obligations of a U.S.
person, ‘‘is substantially the equivalent
of a dividend.’’ See S. Rep. No. 1881 at
88 (1962). See also S. Rep. No. 94–938
at 226 (1976) (‘‘[S]ince the investment
. . . in the stock or debt obligations of
a related U.S. person or its domestic
affiliates makes funds available for use
by the U.S. shareholders, it constitutes
an effective repatriation of earnings
which should be taxed.’’). Accordingly,
Congress enacted section 956 as an antiabuse measure to tax a CFC’s investment
of earnings in United States property in
the same manner as if it had distributed
those earnings to the United States. See
JCS–10–87 at 1081–82 (1987) (‘‘In
general, two kinds of transactions are
repatriations that end deferral and
trigger tax. First, an actual dividend
payment ends deferral. . . . Second, in
E:\FR\FM\05NOP1.SGM
05NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules
the case of a controlled foreign
corporation, an investment in U.S.
property, such as a loan to the lender’s
U.S. parent or the purchase of U.S. real
estate, is also a repatriation that ends
deferral (Code sec. 956).’’). Failure to tax
CFC investments in United States
property would have allowed taxpayers
to circumvent the U.S. system of
deferral by effectively repatriating
earnings without paying U.S. tax on the
substantial equivalent of a taxable
dividend. Section 956 was thus
designed to ensure symmetry between
the tax treatment of repatriations
through dividends and effective
repatriations. See generally Notice
2014–52, 2014–42 I.R.B. 712 (‘‘In the
absence of section 956, a U.S.
shareholder of a CFC could access the
CFC’s funds (untaxed earnings and
profits) in a variety of ways other than
by the payment of an actual taxable
dividend, such that there would be no
reason for the U.S. shareholder to incur
the dividend tax. Section 956 eliminates
this disincentive to pay a dividend by
ensuring parity of treatment for different
ways that CFC earnings can be made
available for use in the United States or
for use by the U.S. shareholder.’’).
Section 951(a)(1)(B) requires a U.S.
shareholder of a CFC to include in gross
income the amount determined under
section 956 (the ‘‘section 956 amount’’)
with respect to the CFC to the extent not
excluded from gross income under
section 959(a)(2) (the inclusion, a
‘‘section 956 inclusion’’). See sections
951(a)(1)(B), 959(a)(2), and 959(f)(1).
Section 951(b) defines a U.S.
shareholder as a United States person
that owns within the meaning of section
958(a), or is considered as owning by
reason of the constructive ownership
rules of section 958(b), 10 percent or
more of the voting power or value of a
foreign corporation. A U.S.
shareholder’s section 956 amount with
respect to a CFC for a taxable year is the
lesser of (1) the excess (if any) of such
shareholder’s pro rata share of the
average of the amounts of United States
property held (directly or indirectly) by
the CFC as of the close of each quarter
of such taxable year, over the amount of
earnings and profits described in section
959(c)(1)(A) with respect to such
shareholder, or (2) such shareholder’s
pro rata share of the applicable earnings
of the CFC. See section 956(a).
Applicable earnings are defined as the
sum of accumulated earnings and
profits (not including deficits) described
in section 316(a)(1) and current earnings
and profits described in section
316(a)(2), reduced by distributions made
during the year and earnings and profits
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Nov 02, 2018
Jkt 247001
described in section 959(c)(1). See
section 956(b)(1). Under section 956(c),
United States property includes tangible
property located in the United States,
stock of a domestic corporation, an
obligation of a United States person, and
any right to use in the United States
certain intangible property. Enacted as
part of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1993, Pub. L. 103–
66, sec. 13232(b), 107 Stat. 312, section
956(e) grants the Secretary of the
Department of Treasury (the
‘‘Secretary’’) the authority to prescribe
‘‘such regulations as may be necessary
to carry out the purposes of this section,
including regulations to prevent the
avoidance of the provisions of this
section through reorganizations or
otherwise.’’
This regulatory authority is not
limited to the adoption of antiavoidance rules, but rather permits the
Secretary to ensure that the application
of section 956 is consistent with the
‘‘purposes of this section’’—chief among
them, to ensure symmetry between the
treatment of actual dividends and
payments which are ‘‘substantially the
equivalent of a dividend.’’ S. Rep. No.
1881 at 88 (1962). Consistent with this
understanding, the Department of
Treasury (the ‘‘Treasury Department’’)
and the IRS have exercised this
regulatory authority to tailor the
application of section 956 to the abuse
that motivated its adoption, ensuring
that the provision applies to the
transactions Congress sought to tax, but
does not extend to transactions the
taxation of which would be inconsistent
with the purpose of section 956.1 For
example, in 1964, shortly after section
956 was first enacted, the Treasury
Department and the IRS issued
regulations containing Treas. Reg.
section 1.956–2(d)(2)(ii), providing that
any debt collected within one year from
1 In addition to authorizing regulations by the
Treasury Department and the IRS, Congress has
acted on occasion to both expand and contract the
scope of section 956 based on an evolving
understanding of the potential means by which
taxpayers could achieve the abusive results that
gave rise to its enactment (that is, the tax-free
effective repatriation of earnings through
transactions that are economically equivalent to a
taxable dividend). Thus, for example, Congress
contracted the scope of section 956 in 1976,
exempting investments in the stock of unrelated
(tested using a 25 percent ownership threshold)
U.S. corporations from the definition of United
States property. See Pub. L. 94–455, sec. 1021, 90
Stat. 1520. Conversely, Congress expanded the
scope of section 956 in the Deficit Reduction Act
of 1984, Pub. L. 98–369, sec. 123(b), 98 Stat. 494,
by adding certain factoring receivables as a type of
United States property because it recognized that
certain ‘‘corporations based in the United States are
using foreign subsidiaries to factor receivables as a
device for repatriating foreign earnings tax-free.’’
H.R. Rep. No. 98–432 at 1305 (1984).
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55325
the time incurred did not constitute an
obligation that could be United States
property. See T.D. 6704, 29 FR 2599,
2603. This short-term loan exception
was removed when the Treasury
Department and the IRS issued
regulations in 1988 regarding the
treatment of factoring receivables as
United States property. See T.D. 8209,
53 FR 22163, 22169. A one-year debt
exception would have been inconsistent
with Congress’s expansion of section
956 in 1984 to reach factoring
receivables, which are often outstanding
for less than one year.
Alongside the removal of the 1964
short-term loan exception in the 1988
regulations, the Treasury Department
and the IRS issued Notice 88–108,
1988–2 C.B. 466, which indicated that
regulations would be issued providing a
narrower exception from the definition
of obligation for purposes of section 956
for obligations collected within 30 days
from the time incurred (the ‘‘30-day
rule’’). However, the notice provided
that the exception would not apply to a
CFC that holds for 60 or more calendar
days during the taxable year obligations
which, without regard to the 30-day
rule, would constitute United States
property. The 30-day rule was expanded
to 60 days in order to facilitate the flow
of funds from foreign subsidiaries
during a financial crisis beginning in
2008, which expansion was also
extended to 2009 and 2010. See Notice
2008–91, 2008–43 I.R.B. 1001; Notice
2009–10, 2009–5 I.R.B. 419; Notice
2010–12, 2010–4 I.R.B. 326. The 30 day
rule was ultimately adopted in final
regulations issued on July 12, 2018, as
Treas. Reg. section 1.956–2(d)(2)(iv). See
T.D. 9834, 83 FR 32524, 32537–38.
Since 1964, Congress has modified
section 956 several times without
addressing Treasury’s short-term debt
exception; indeed, since then Congress
adopted section 956(e) as a positive
grant of regulatory authority in 1993,
and explicitly validated the short-term
debt exception in its legislative history.
See H.R. Rep. 103–111 at 701 (1993)
(‘‘The bill is not intended to change the
measurement of U.S. property that may
apply, for example, in the case of certain
short-term obligations, as provided in
IRS Notice 88–108 (1988–2 C.B. 445),
interpreting present law.’’).
Conversely, the Treasury Department
and the IRS have at times expanded the
scope of section 956 by regulation to
ensure that the provision reaches the
type of transactions intended by
Congress. See, e.g., T.D. 9402, 73 FR
35580, 35582 (adding rules modifying
the basis of property transferred to a
CFC in certain non-recognition
transactions solely for the purposes of
E:\FR\FM\05NOP1.SGM
05NOP1
55326
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules
section 956 and providing that ‘‘[t]he
purpose of this [rule] is to prevent the
effective repatriation of earnings and
profits of a controlled foreign
corporation that acquires United States
property in connection with an
exchange to which this [rule] applies
without a corresponding income
inclusion under section 951(a)(1)(B) by
claiming a basis in the United States
property less than the amount of
earnings and profits effectively
repatriated’’). See also T.D. 9834, 83 FR
32524.
II. Adoption of Participation Exemption
System
On December 22, 2017, Congress
enacted the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,
Public Law 115–97 (the ‘‘Act’’), which
established a participation exemption
system for the taxation of certain foreign
income. Under section 245A(a), in the
case of any dividend received from a
specified 10-percent owned foreign
corporation by a domestic corporation
which is a U.S. shareholder with respect
to such foreign corporation, there is
allowed as a deduction an amount equal
to the foreign-source portion of such
dividend. A specified 10-percent owned
foreign corporation is defined in section
245A(b) as any foreign corporation
(other than certain passive foreign
investment companies) with respect to
which a domestic corporation is a U.S.
shareholder. Section 245A(g) grants the
Secretary authority to prescribe such
regulations or other guidance as may be
necessary or appropriate to carry out the
provisions of section 245A, including
regulations for the treatment of U.S.
shareholders owning stock of a specified
10-percent owned foreign corporation
through a partnership.
Under section 246(c)(1) and (5), a
domestic corporation that is a U.S.
shareholder is not permitted a section
245A deduction in respect of any
dividend on any share of stock of a
specified 10-percent owned foreign
corporation that the domestic
corporation holds for 365 days or less
during the 731-day period beginning on
the date that is 365 days before the date
on which the share becomes exdividend with respect to the dividend.
Under section 246(c)(1)(B), a section
245A deduction is also not allowed to
the extent the domestic corporation is
under an obligation to make related
payments with respect to positions in
substantially similar or related property.
Explanation of Provisions
The Treasury Department and the IRS
have determined that as a result of the
enactment of the participation
exemption system, the current broad
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Nov 02, 2018
Jkt 247001
application of section 956 to corporate
U.S. shareholders would be inconsistent
with the purposes of section 956 and the
scope of transactions it is intended to
address. Congress determined that
certain investments by a CFC of its
earnings in United States property are
‘‘substantially the equivalent of a
dividend’’ and enacted section 956 to
provide similar treatment for dividends
and certain investments in United States
property constituting effective
repatriations. S. Rep. No. 1881 at 88.
Before the Act, section 956 applied
appropriately to domestic corporations
because both dividends from, and
investments in United States property
by, CFCs were included in income by
such domestic corporations. As noted,
the purpose of section 956 is generally
to create symmetry between the taxation
of actual repatriations and the taxation
of effective repatriations, by subjecting
effective repatriations to tax in the same
manner as actual repatriations. Under
the participation exemption system,
however, earnings of a CFC that are
repatriated to a corporate U.S.
shareholder as a dividend are typically
effectively exempt from tax because the
shareholder is generally afforded an
equal and offsetting dividends received
deduction under section 245A. A
section 956 inclusion of a corporate U.S.
shareholder, on the other hand, is not
eligible for the dividends received
deduction under section 245A (because
it is not a dividend). As a result, the
application of section 956 after the Act
to corporate U.S. shareholders of CFCs
that would qualify for section 245A
deductions would result in disparate
treatment of actual dividends and
amounts ‘‘substantially the equivalent of
a dividend’’—a result directly at odds
with the manifest purpose of section
956.
Accordingly, the proposed regulations
continue the Treasury Department and
the IRS’s longstanding practice of
conforming the application of section
956 to its purpose. The proposed
regulations exclude corporate U.S.
shareholders from the application of
section 956 to the extent necessary to
maintain symmetry between the
taxation of actual repatriations and the
taxation of effective repatriations. In
general, under section 245A and the
proposed regulations, respectively,
neither an actual dividend to a
corporate U.S. shareholder, nor such a
shareholder’s amount determined under
section 956, will result in additional
U.S. tax.
To achieve this result, the proposed
regulations provide that the amount
otherwise determined under section 956
with respect to a U.S. shareholder for a
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
taxable year of a CFC is reduced to the
extent that the U.S. shareholder would
be allowed a deduction under section
245A if the U.S. shareholder had
received a distribution from the CFC in
an amount equal to the amount
otherwise determined under section
956. The proposed regulations provide
special rules with respect to indirect
ownership. Due to the broad
applicability of section 245A, in many
cases a corporate U.S. shareholder will
not have a section 956 inclusion as a
result of a CFC holding U.S. property
under the proposed regulations.
Section 956 will continue to apply
without modification to U.S.
shareholders other than corporate U.S.
shareholders, such as individuals, to
ensure that, consistent with the
purposes of section 956, amounts that
are substantially the equivalent of a
dividend will be treated similarly to
actual dividends. This treatment will
apply to individuals regardless of
whether they make an election under
section 962. Because individuals are not
eligible for a dividends received
deduction under section 245A even if
they make an election under section
962, the current application of section
956 to individuals is still necessary to
ensure substantial equivalence between
an actual repatriation and a deemed
repatriation. Similarly, section 956 will
continue to apply without reduction to
regulated investment companies and
real estate investment trusts because
they are not allowed the dividends
received deduction under section 245A.
See sections 852(b)(2)(C) and
857(b)(2)(A).
In addition to carrying out the
purposes of section 956, the proposed
regulations would significantly reduce
complexity, costs, and compliance
burdens for corporate U.S. shareholders
of CFCs. Absent the proposed
regulations, corporate U.S. shareholders
would need to continue to carefully
monitor the application of section 956
to their operations, including provisions
related to loans, guarantees, and
pledges, to ensure that earnings were
repatriated only through actual
dividends, and therefore allowed a
participation exemption, rather than
through a deemed repatriation under
section 956 subject to additional U.S.
tax. Similarly, in the absence of the
proposed regulations, a U.S.-parented
group in many cases would need to
engage in complex and costly
restructuring upon the acquisition of a
foreign corporation that owns domestic
subsidiaries (since the foreign
corporation becomes a CFC and the
stock of its domestic subsidiaries
represents United States property)
E:\FR\FM\05NOP1.SGM
05NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules
solely to avoid a section 956 inclusion.
Absent the proposed regulations,
section 956 could also serve as a ‘‘trap
for the unwary’’ for domestic
corporations that fail to recognize that,
even though they are entitled to the
deduction under section 245A for actual
dividends, their section 956 inclusions
would continue to be fully subject to
U.S. tax.
The proposed regulations also add, in
proposed § 1.956–1(g)(5), the effective
date for § 1.956–1(e)(6) that was
inadvertently deleted in TD 9792,
published in the Federal Register on
November 3, 2016 (81 FR 76497, as
corrected at 81 FR 95470 and 95471).
Conforming Amendments
The Treasury Department and the IRS
intend to make conforming amendments
to the examples throughout the
regulations under section 956 upon
finalization of the proposed regulations.
Applicability Date
These changes are proposed to apply
to taxable years of a CFC beginning on
or after the date of publication of the
Treasury decision adopting these rules
as final regulations in the Federal
Register (the ‘‘finalization date’’), and to
taxable years of a U.S. shareholder in
which or with which such taxable years
of the CFC end. With respect to taxable
years of a CFC beginning before the
finalization date, a taxpayer may rely on
the proposed regulations for taxable
years of a CFC beginning after December
31, 2017, and for taxable years of a U.S.
shareholder in which or with which
such taxable years of the CFC end,
provided that the taxpayer and United
States persons that are related (within
the meaning of section 267 or 707) to
the taxpayer consistently apply the
proposed regulations with respect to all
CFCs in which they are U.S.
shareholders.
Special Analyses
The Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA), Office of Management and
Budget, has waived review of this
proposed rule in accordance with
section 6(a)(3)(A) of Executive Order
12866. OIRA will subsequently make a
significance determination of the final
rule, pursuant to section 3(f) of
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 and the
April 11, 2018, Memorandum of
Agreement between the Department of
Treasury and the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB).
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6), it is hereby
certified that this regulation, if adopted,
will not have a significant economic
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Nov 02, 2018
Jkt 247001
55327
impact on a substantial number of small
entities, although some small entities
that are domestic corporations could be
affected by the regulation and comments
are requested on the application of the
regulation to domestic partnerships.
However, even if a substantial number
of small entities were to be affected by
this regulation, the Treasury Department
and the IRS estimate that the economic
impact on such small entities would not
be significant as the regulation is
expected to marginally reduce
compliance costs for smaller entities.
This is because the Treasury
Department and the IRS believe that the
cost-saving benefits of the proposed
regulations with respect to complex
third-party borrowing arrangements,
internal financial management
structures, and restructurings of
worldwide operations will generally be
available only to large U.S.
multinational corporations with 20 or
more CFCs. The Treasury Department
and the IRS believe that U.S.
multinational corporations with less
than 20 CFCs generally will not have the
types of arrangements in place that
would otherwise need to be structured
and monitored to avoid section 956. The
proposed regulations, if adopted,
generally will not affect small entities
that are not domestic corporations. The
Treasury Department and the IRS invite
comments on the impact of this rule on
small entities.
Pursuant to section 7805(f), this
notice of proposed rulemaking has been
submitted to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration for comment on its
impact on small businesses.
An alternative could be to determine a
domestic partnership’s section 956
amount and section 956 inclusion
without regard to the status of its
partners, but then provide that a
corporate U.S. shareholder partner’s
distributive share of the section 956
inclusion is not taxable. Comments are
also requested with respect to the
maintenance of previously taxed
earnings and profits accounts under
section 959 and basis adjustments under
section 961. Additionally, comments are
requested on the interaction between
the proposed regulations and section
245A(e). All comments will be available
at https://www.regulations.gov or upon
request.
A public hearing will be scheduled if
requested in writing by any person that
timely submits written comments. If a
public hearing is scheduled, notice of
the date, time, and place for the public
hearing will be published in the Federal
Register.
Comments and Requests for Public
Hearing
Before these proposed regulations are
adopted as final regulations,
consideration will be given to any
comments that are submitted timely to
the IRS as prescribed in this preamble
under the ADDRESSES heading. The
Treasury Department and the IRS
request comments on all aspects of the
proposed rules. In particular, comments
are requested as to the appropriate
application of the proposed regulations
to U.S. shareholders that are domestic
partnerships, which may have partners
that are a combination of domestic
corporations, U.S. individuals, or other
persons. For example, one approach
could be to reduce the amount
otherwise determined under section 956
with respect to a domestic partnership
to the extent that a domestic corporate
partner would be entitled to a section
245A deduction if the partnership
received the amount as a distribution.
PART 1—INCOME TAXES
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Drafting Information
The principal author of these
proposed regulations is Joshua G.
Rabon, formerly of the Office of
Associate Chief Counsel (International).
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.
Proposed Amendments to the
Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
Paragraph 1. The authority citation
for part 1 is amended by adding an entry
to read in part as follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *
Section 1.956–1 also issued under 26
U.S.C. 245A(g) and 956(e).
*
*
*
*
*
Par. 2. Section 1.956–1 is amended
by:
1. Revising paragraph (a).
2. In the first sentence of paragraph
(g)(1), removing the language
‘‘Paragraph (a)’’ and adding in its place
‘‘Paragraph (a)(1)’’.
3. Adding paragraphs (g)(4) and (5).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
§ 1.956–1 Shareholder’s pro rata share of
the average of the amounts of United States
property held by a controlled foreign
corporation.
(a) Overview and scope—(1) In
general. Subject to the provisions of
E:\FR\FM\05NOP1.SGM
05NOP1
55328
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules
section 951(a) and the regulations
thereunder, a United States shareholder
of a controlled foreign corporation is
required to include in gross income the
amount determined under section 956
with respect to the shareholder for the
taxable year but only to the extent not
excluded from gross income under
section 959(a)(2) and the regulations
thereunder.
(2) Reduction for certain United
States shareholders—(i) In general. For
a taxable year of a controlled foreign
corporation, the amount determined
under section 956 with respect to each
share of stock of the controlled foreign
corporation owned (within the meaning
of section 958(a)) by a United States
shareholder is the amount that would be
determined under section 956 with
respect to such share for the taxable
year, absent the application of this
paragraph (a)(2) for the taxable year
(such amount, the tentative section 956
amount, and in the aggregate with
respect to all shares owned (within the
meaning of section 958(a)) by the United
States shareholder, the aggregate
tentative section 956 amount), reduced
by the amount of the deduction under
section 245A that the shareholder
would be allowed if the shareholder
received as a distribution from the
controlled foreign corporation an
amount equal to the tentative section
956 amount with respect to such share
on the last day during the taxable year
on which the foreign corporation is a
controlled foreign corporation
(hypothetical distribution).
(ii) Determination of the amount of
the deduction that would be allowed
under section 245A with respect to a
hypothetical distribution. For purposes
of determining the amount of the
deduction under section 245A that a
United States shareholder would be
allowed with respect to a share of stock
of a controlled foreign corporation by
reason of a hypothetical distribution,
the following rules apply—
(A) If a United States shareholder
owns a share of stock of a controlled
foreign corporation indirectly (within
the meaning of section 958(a)(2)), then—
(1) Sections 245A(a) through (d),
246(a), and 959 apply to the
hypothetical distribution as if the
United States shareholder directly
owned (within the meaning of section
958(a)(1)(A)) the share;
(2) Section 245A(e) applies to the
hypothetical distribution as if the
distribution were made to the United
States shareholder through each entity
by reason of which the United States
shareholder indirectly owns such share
and pro rata with respect to the equity
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Nov 02, 2018
Jkt 247001
that gives rise to such indirect
ownership;
(3) To the extent that a distribution
treated as made to a controlled foreign
corporation pursuant to the hypothetical
distribution by reason of paragraph
(a)(2)(ii)(A)(2) of this section would be
subject to section 245A(e)(2), the United
States shareholder is treated as not
being allowed a deduction under
section 245A by reason of the
hypothetical distribution; and
(4) Section 246(c) applies to the
hypothetical distribution by substituting
the phrase ‘‘owned (within the meaning
of section 958(a))’’ for the term ‘‘held’’
each place it appears in section 246(c);
and
(B) Section 246(c) applies to the
hypothetical distribution by substituting
‘‘the last day during the taxable year on
which the foreign corporation is a
controlled foreign corporation’’ for the
phrase ‘‘the date on which such share
becomes ex-dividend with respect to
such dividend’’ in section 246(c)(1)(A).
(3) Examples. The following examples
illustrate the application of paragraph
(a)(2) of this section.
(i) Example 1. (A) Facts. (1) USP, a
domestic corporation, owns all of the
single class of stock of CFC1, which is
treated as equity for U.S. income tax
purposes and under the laws of the
jurisdiction in which CFC1 is organized
and liable to tax as a resident. The stock
of CFC1 consists of 100 shares, and USP
satisfies the holding period requirement
of section 246(c) (as modified by
paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(B) of this section)
with respect to each share of CFC1
stock. CFC1 owns all of the stock of
USS, a domestic corporation. CFC1’s
adjusted basis in the stock of USS is
$0x.
(2) The functional currency of CFC1 is
the U.S. dollar. CFC1 has $100x of
undistributed earnings as defined in
section 245A(c)(2), $90x of which
constitute undistributed foreign
earnings as defined in section
245A(c)(3), and $10x of which are
described in section 245(a)(5)(B) (that is,
earnings attributable to a dividend that
CFC1 received from USS). CFC1 would
not receive a deduction or other tax
benefit with respect to any income, war
profits, or excess profits taxes on a
distribution. None of the earnings and
profits of CFC1 are described in section
959(c)(1) or (2) or are earnings and
profits attributable to income excluded
from subpart F income under section
952(b). CFC1’s applicable earnings (as
defined in section 956(b)(1)) are $100x.
CFC1 also has held an obligation of USP
with an adjusted basis of $120x on every
day during the taxable year that was
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
acquired while all of its stock was
owned by USP.
(B) Analysis. Because USP directly
owns all of the stock of CFC1 at the end
of CFC1’s taxable year, USP’s aggregate
tentative section 956 amount with
respect to CFC1 is $100x, the lesser of
USP’s pro rata share of the average
amounts of United States property held
by CFC1 ($120x) and its pro rata share
of CFC1’s applicable earnings ($100x).
Under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section,
USP’s section 956 amount with respect
to CFC1 is its aggregate tentative section
956 amount with respect to CFC1
reduced by the deduction under section
245A that USP would be allowed if USP
received an amount equal to its
aggregate tentative section 956 amount
as a distribution with respect to the
CFC1 stock. With respect to the
tentative distribution from CFC1 to USP,
USP would be allowed a $90x
deduction under section 245A with
respect to the foreign-source portion of
the $100x hypothetical distribution (that
is, an amount of the dividend that bears
the same ratio to the dividend as the
$90x of undistributed foreign earnings
bears to the $100x of undistributed
earnings). Accordingly, USP’s section
956 amount with respect to CFC1 is
$10x, its aggregate tentative section 956
amount ($100x) with respect to CFC1
reduced by the amount of the deduction
that USP would have been allowed
under section 245A with respect to the
hypothetical distribution ($90x).
(ii) Example 2. (A) Facts. The facts are
the same as in paragraph (A) of Example
1 in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section,
except that all $100x of CFC1’s
undistributed earnings are described in
section 959(c)(2).
(B) Analysis. As in paragraph (B) of
Example 1 in this paragraph (a)(3)(i) of
this section, USP’s aggregate tentative
section 956 amount with respect to
CFC1 is $100x, the lesser of USP’s pro
rata share of the average amounts of
United States property held by CFC1
($120x) and its pro rata share of CFC1’s
applicable earnings ($100x). However,
paragraph (a)(2) of this section does not
reduce USP’s section 956 amount,
because USP would not be allowed any
deduction under section 245A with
respect to the $100x hypothetical
distribution by reason of section 959(a)
and (d). Accordingly, USP’s section 956
amount is $100x. However, under
sections 959(a)(2) and 959(f)(1), USP’s
inclusion under section 951(a)(1)(B)
with respect to CFC1 is $0, because
USP’s section 956 amount with respect
to CFC1 does not exceed the earnings
and profits of CFC1 described in section
959(c)(2) with respect to USP. The
$100x of earnings and profits of CFC1
E:\FR\FM\05NOP1.SGM
05NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules
described in section 959(c)(2) are
reclassified as earnings and profits
described in section 959(c)(1).
(iii) Example 3. (A) Facts. (1) USP, a
domestic corporation, owns all of the
single class of stock of CFC1, and has
held such stock for five years. CFC1 has
held 70% of the single class of stock of
CFC2 for three years. The other 30% of
the CFC2 stock has been held by a
foreign individual unrelated to USP or
CFC1 since CFC2’s formation. All of the
stock of each of CFC1 and CFC2 is
treated as equity for U.S. income tax
purposes and under the laws of the
jurisdiction in which each respective
corporation is organized and liable to
tax as a resident. CFC2 has a calendar
taxable year. On December 1, Year 1,
CFC1 acquires the remaining 30% of the
stock of CFC2 for cash. On June 30, Year
2, CFC1 sells to a third party the 30%
of CFC2 stock acquired in Year 1 at no
gain. CFC2 made no distributions
during Year 1.
(2) The functional currency of CFC1
and CFC2 is the U.S. dollar. CFC2 has
$120x of undistributed earnings as
defined in section 245A(c)(2), all of
which constitute undistributed foreign
earnings. Neither CFC1 nor CFC2 would
receive a deduction or other tax benefit
with respect to any income, war profits,
or excess profits taxes on a distribution.
None of the earnings and profits of
CFC2 are described in section 959(c)(1)
or (2) or are earnings and profits
attributable to income excluded from
subpart F income under section 952(b).
CFC2’s applicable earnings (as defined
in section 956(b)(1)) are $120x. CFC2
has held an obligation of USP with an
adjusted basis of $100x on every day of
Year 1 that was acquired while USP
owned all of the stock of CFC1 and
CFC1 held 70% of the single class of
stock of CFC2.
(B) Analysis. Because USP indirectly
owns (within the meaning of section
958(a)) all of the stock of CFC2 at the
end of Year 1, USP’s aggregate tentative
section 956 amount with respect to
CFC2 for Year 1 is $100x, the lesser of
USP’s pro rata share of the average
amounts of United States property held
by CFC2 ($100x) and its pro rata share
of CFC2’s applicable earnings ($120x).
Under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section,
USP’s section 956 amount with respect
to CFC2 for Year 1 is its aggregate
tentative section 956 amount with
respect to CFC2 reduced by the
deduction under section 245A that USP
would be allowed if USP received an
amount equal to its aggregate tentative
section 956 amount as a distribution
with respect to the CFC2 stock that USP
owns indirectly within the meaning of
section 958(a)(2). For purposes of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Nov 02, 2018
Jkt 247001
determining the consequences of this
hypothetical distribution, under
paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(A)(1) of this section,
USP is treated as owning the CFC2 stock
directly. In addition, under paragraph
(a)(2)(ii)(A)(4) of this section, the
holding period requirement of section
246(c) is applied by reference to the
period during which USP owned
(within the meaning of section 958(a))
the stock of CFC2. Therefore, with
respect to the hypothetical distribution
from CFC2 to USP, USP would satisfy
the holding period requirement under
section 246(c) with respect to the 70%
of the CFC2 stock that USP indirectly
owned for three years through CFC1, but
not with respect to the 30% of the CFC2
stock that USP indirectly owned
through CFC1 for a period of less than
365 days. Accordingly, USP’s section
956 amount with respect to CFC2 for
Year 1 is $30x, its aggregate tentative
section 956 amount ($100x) reduced by
the amount of the deduction that USP
would have been allowed under section
245A with respect to the hypothetical
distribution ($70x).
*
*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(4) Paragraphs (a)(2) and (3) of this
section apply to taxable years of
controlled foreign corporations
beginning on or after the date of
publication of the Treasury decision
adopting paragraphs (a)(2) and (3) of
this section as final regulations in the
Federal Register, and to taxable years of
a United States shareholder in which or
with which such taxable years of the
controlled foreign corporation end.
(5) Paragraph (e)(6) of this section
applies to property acquired in
exchanges occurring on or after June 24,
2011.
Kirsten Wielobob,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2018–24140 Filed 11–1–18; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
BOARD
29 CFR Chapter I
RIN 3142–AA13
The Standard for Determining JointEmployer Status
National Labor Relations Board
Proposed rulemaking; extension
of comment period.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The National Labor Relations
Board (the Board) published a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55329
Register of September 14, 2018, seeking
comments from the public concerning
the standard for determining jointemployer status under the National
Labor Relations Act. The date to submit
responses to the Notice is extended for
30 days.
DATES: The comment period for the
notice of proposed rulemaking
published at 83 FR 46681 is extended.
Comments must be received by the
Board on or before December 13, 2018.
Comments replying to the comments
submitted during the initial comment
period must be received by the Board on
or before December 20, 2018.
Dated: October 31, 2018.
Farah Z. Qureshi,
Associate Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018–24134 Filed 11–2–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 111
[Docket ID: DOD–2016–OS–0116]
RIN 0790–AI99
Transitional Compensation (TC) for
Abused Dependents
Office of the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness,
DoD.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
Transitional compensation is
one of the many resources available to
victims of domestic abuse. The
Transitional Compensation for Abused
Dependents program is a
congressionally-authorized program
which provides temporary monetary
payments and military benefits to
dependents of Service members, when
the member has been separated from the
military due to a dependent-abuse or
child abuse offense. If adopted as final,
this rulemaking would establish
requirements and describes authorized
benefits for an abused spouse and/or
abused children affected by the
separation or forfeiture of pay and
allowances of a military Service
member.
DATES: Comments must be received by
January 4, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket number and/or RIN
number and title, by any of the
following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\05NOP1.SGM
05NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 214 (Monday, November 5, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55324-55329]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-24140]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[REG-114540-18]
RIN 1545-BO88
Amount Determined Under Section 956 for Corporate United States
Shareholders
AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains proposed regulations that reduce the
amount determined under section 956 of the Internal Revenue Code with
respect to certain domestic corporations. The proposed regulations
affect certain domestic corporations that own (or are treated as
owning) stock in foreign corporations.
DATES: Written or electronic comments and requests for a public hearing
must be received by December 5, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Send submissions to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-114540-18), Internal
Revenue Service, Room 5203, 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-
114540-18), Courier's Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224, or sent electronically via the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov (IRS REG-114540-18).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Concerning the proposed regulations,
Rose E. Jenkins, (202) 317-6934; concerning submissions of comments or
requests for a public hearing, Regina Johnson, (202) 317-6901 (not
toll-free numbers).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
I. Section 956
The Revenue Act of 1962 (the ``1962 Act''), Pub. L. 87-834, sec.
12, 76 Stat. at 1006, enacted sections 951 and 956 as part of subpart F
of part III, subchapter N, chapter 1 of the 1954 Internal Revenue Code
(``subpart F''), as amended. Subpart F was enacted in order to limit
the use of low-tax jurisdictions for the purposes of obtaining
indefinite deferral of U.S. tax on certain earnings that would
otherwise be subject to U.S. federal income tax. H.R. Rep. No. 1447 at
57 (1962). Congress enacted subpart F in part to address taxpayers who
had ``taken advantage of the multiplicity of foreign tax systems to
avoid taxation by the United States on what could ordinarily be
expected to be U.S. source income.'' Id. at 58.
Before the 1962 Act, United States shareholders (as defined in
section 951(b)) (``U.S. shareholders'') of controlled foreign
corporations (as defined in section 957) (``CFCs'') were not subject to
U.S. tax on earnings of the foreign corporations unless and until
earnings of the foreign corporations were distributed to the
shareholders as a dividend. S. Rep. No. 1881 at 78 (1962). The subpart
F regime eliminated deferral for certain--generally passive or highly
mobile--earnings of CFCs by subjecting those earnings to immediate U.S.
taxation regardless of whether there was an actual distribution. Id. at
80. Earnings that were not subject to immediate U.S. taxation under the
subpart F regime were generally taxable only upon repatriation, as
those earnings did not present the same concerns regarding indefinite
tax deferral compared to earnings subject to subpart F.
Section 956 was enacted alongside the subpart F regime in the 1962
Act to ensure that a CFC's earnings not subject to immediate tax when
earned (under the subpart F regime) would be taxed when repatriated,
either through a dividend or an effective repatriation. Recognizing
that repatriation of foreign earnings was possible through means other
than a taxable distribution, Congress enacted section 956 ``to prevent
the repatriation of income to the United States in a manner which does
not subject it to U.S. taxation.'' H.R. Rep. No. 1447 at 58. Congress
determined that the investment by a CFC of its earnings in United
States property, including obligations of a U.S. person, ``is
substantially the equivalent of a dividend.'' See S. Rep. No. 1881 at
88 (1962). See also S. Rep. No. 94-938 at 226 (1976) (``[S]ince the
investment . . . in the stock or debt obligations of a related U.S.
person or its domestic affiliates makes funds available for use by the
U.S. shareholders, it constitutes an effective repatriation of earnings
which should be taxed.''). Accordingly, Congress enacted section 956 as
an anti-abuse measure to tax a CFC's investment of earnings in United
States property in the same manner as if it had distributed those
earnings to the United States. See JCS-10-87 at 1081-82 (1987) (``In
general, two kinds of transactions are repatriations that end deferral
and trigger tax. First, an actual dividend payment ends deferral. . . .
Second, in
[[Page 55325]]
the case of a controlled foreign corporation, an investment in U.S.
property, such as a loan to the lender's U.S. parent or the purchase of
U.S. real estate, is also a repatriation that ends deferral (Code sec.
956).''). Failure to tax CFC investments in United States property
would have allowed taxpayers to circumvent the U.S. system of deferral
by effectively repatriating earnings without paying U.S. tax on the
substantial equivalent of a taxable dividend. Section 956 was thus
designed to ensure symmetry between the tax treatment of repatriations
through dividends and effective repatriations. See generally Notice
2014-52, 2014-42 I.R.B. 712 (``In the absence of section 956, a U.S.
shareholder of a CFC could access the CFC's funds (untaxed earnings and
profits) in a variety of ways other than by the payment of an actual
taxable dividend, such that there would be no reason for the U.S.
shareholder to incur the dividend tax. Section 956 eliminates this
disincentive to pay a dividend by ensuring parity of treatment for
different ways that CFC earnings can be made available for use in the
United States or for use by the U.S. shareholder.'').
Section 951(a)(1)(B) requires a U.S. shareholder of a CFC to
include in gross income the amount determined under section 956 (the
``section 956 amount'') with respect to the CFC to the extent not
excluded from gross income under section 959(a)(2) (the inclusion, a
``section 956 inclusion''). See sections 951(a)(1)(B), 959(a)(2), and
959(f)(1). Section 951(b) defines a U.S. shareholder as a United States
person that owns within the meaning of section 958(a), or is considered
as owning by reason of the constructive ownership rules of section
958(b), 10 percent or more of the voting power or value of a foreign
corporation. A U.S. shareholder's section 956 amount with respect to a
CFC for a taxable year is the lesser of (1) the excess (if any) of such
shareholder's pro rata share of the average of the amounts of United
States property held (directly or indirectly) by the CFC as of the
close of each quarter of such taxable year, over the amount of earnings
and profits described in section 959(c)(1)(A) with respect to such
shareholder, or (2) such shareholder's pro rata share of the applicable
earnings of the CFC. See section 956(a). Applicable earnings are
defined as the sum of accumulated earnings and profits (not including
deficits) described in section 316(a)(1) and current earnings and
profits described in section 316(a)(2), reduced by distributions made
during the year and earnings and profits described in section
959(c)(1). See section 956(b)(1). Under section 956(c), United States
property includes tangible property located in the United States, stock
of a domestic corporation, an obligation of a United States person, and
any right to use in the United States certain intangible property.
Enacted as part of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, Pub.
L. 103-66, sec. 13232(b), 107 Stat. 312, section 956(e) grants the
Secretary of the Department of Treasury (the ``Secretary'') the
authority to prescribe ``such regulations as may be necessary to carry
out the purposes of this section, including regulations to prevent the
avoidance of the provisions of this section through reorganizations or
otherwise.''
This regulatory authority is not limited to the adoption of anti-
avoidance rules, but rather permits the Secretary to ensure that the
application of section 956 is consistent with the ``purposes of this
section''--chief among them, to ensure symmetry between the treatment
of actual dividends and payments which are ``substantially the
equivalent of a dividend.'' S. Rep. No. 1881 at 88 (1962). Consistent
with this understanding, the Department of Treasury (the ``Treasury
Department'') and the IRS have exercised this regulatory authority to
tailor the application of section 956 to the abuse that motivated its
adoption, ensuring that the provision applies to the transactions
Congress sought to tax, but does not extend to transactions the
taxation of which would be inconsistent with the purpose of section
956.\1\ For example, in 1964, shortly after section 956 was first
enacted, the Treasury Department and the IRS issued regulations
containing Treas. Reg. section 1.956-2(d)(2)(ii), providing that any
debt collected within one year from the time incurred did not
constitute an obligation that could be United States property. See T.D.
6704, 29 FR 2599, 2603. This short-term loan exception was removed when
the Treasury Department and the IRS issued regulations in 1988
regarding the treatment of factoring receivables as United States
property. See T.D. 8209, 53 FR 22163, 22169. A one-year debt exception
would have been inconsistent with Congress's expansion of section 956
in 1984 to reach factoring receivables, which are often outstanding for
less than one year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In addition to authorizing regulations by the Treasury
Department and the IRS, Congress has acted on occasion to both
expand and contract the scope of section 956 based on an evolving
understanding of the potential means by which taxpayers could
achieve the abusive results that gave rise to its enactment (that
is, the tax-free effective repatriation of earnings through
transactions that are economically equivalent to a taxable
dividend). Thus, for example, Congress contracted the scope of
section 956 in 1976, exempting investments in the stock of unrelated
(tested using a 25 percent ownership threshold) U.S. corporations
from the definition of United States property. See Pub. L. 94-455,
sec. 1021, 90 Stat. 1520. Conversely, Congress expanded the scope of
section 956 in the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984, Pub. L. 98-369,
sec. 123(b), 98 Stat. 494, by adding certain factoring receivables
as a type of United States property because it recognized that
certain ``corporations based in the United States are using foreign
subsidiaries to factor receivables as a device for repatriating
foreign earnings tax-free.'' H.R. Rep. No. 98-432 at 1305 (1984).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alongside the removal of the 1964 short-term loan exception in the
1988 regulations, the Treasury Department and the IRS issued Notice 88-
108, 1988-2 C.B. 466, which indicated that regulations would be issued
providing a narrower exception from the definition of obligation for
purposes of section 956 for obligations collected within 30 days from
the time incurred (the ``30-day rule''). However, the notice provided
that the exception would not apply to a CFC that holds for 60 or more
calendar days during the taxable year obligations which, without regard
to the 30-day rule, would constitute United States property. The 30-day
rule was expanded to 60 days in order to facilitate the flow of funds
from foreign subsidiaries during a financial crisis beginning in 2008,
which expansion was also extended to 2009 and 2010. See Notice 2008-91,
2008-43 I.R.B. 1001; Notice 2009-10, 2009-5 I.R.B. 419; Notice 2010-12,
2010-4 I.R.B. 326. The 30 day rule was ultimately adopted in final
regulations issued on July 12, 2018, as Treas. Reg. section 1.956-
2(d)(2)(iv). See T.D. 9834, 83 FR 32524, 32537-38.
Since 1964, Congress has modified section 956 several times without
addressing Treasury's short-term debt exception; indeed, since then
Congress adopted section 956(e) as a positive grant of regulatory
authority in 1993, and explicitly validated the short-term debt
exception in its legislative history. See H.R. Rep. 103-111 at 701
(1993) (``The bill is not intended to change the measurement of U.S.
property that may apply, for example, in the case of certain short-term
obligations, as provided in IRS Notice 88-108 (1988-2 C.B. 445),
interpreting present law.'').
Conversely, the Treasury Department and the IRS have at times
expanded the scope of section 956 by regulation to ensure that the
provision reaches the type of transactions intended by Congress. See,
e.g., T.D. 9402, 73 FR 35580, 35582 (adding rules modifying the basis
of property transferred to a CFC in certain non-recognition
transactions solely for the purposes of
[[Page 55326]]
section 956 and providing that ``[t]he purpose of this [rule] is to
prevent the effective repatriation of earnings and profits of a
controlled foreign corporation that acquires United States property in
connection with an exchange to which this [rule] applies without a
corresponding income inclusion under section 951(a)(1)(B) by claiming a
basis in the United States property less than the amount of earnings
and profits effectively repatriated''). See also T.D. 9834, 83 FR
32524.
II. Adoption of Participation Exemption System
On December 22, 2017, Congress enacted the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,
Public Law 115-97 (the ``Act''), which established a participation
exemption system for the taxation of certain foreign income. Under
section 245A(a), in the case of any dividend received from a specified
10-percent owned foreign corporation by a domestic corporation which is
a U.S. shareholder with respect to such foreign corporation, there is
allowed as a deduction an amount equal to the foreign-source portion of
such dividend. A specified 10-percent owned foreign corporation is
defined in section 245A(b) as any foreign corporation (other than
certain passive foreign investment companies) with respect to which a
domestic corporation is a U.S. shareholder. Section 245A(g) grants the
Secretary authority to prescribe such regulations or other guidance as
may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of section
245A, including regulations for the treatment of U.S. shareholders
owning stock of a specified 10-percent owned foreign corporation
through a partnership.
Under section 246(c)(1) and (5), a domestic corporation that is a
U.S. shareholder is not permitted a section 245A deduction in respect
of any dividend on any share of stock of a specified 10-percent owned
foreign corporation that the domestic corporation holds for 365 days or
less during the 731-day period beginning on the date that is 365 days
before the date on which the share becomes ex-dividend with respect to
the dividend. Under section 246(c)(1)(B), a section 245A deduction is
also not allowed to the extent the domestic corporation is under an
obligation to make related payments with respect to positions in
substantially similar or related property.
Explanation of Provisions
The Treasury Department and the IRS have determined that as a
result of the enactment of the participation exemption system, the
current broad application of section 956 to corporate U.S. shareholders
would be inconsistent with the purposes of section 956 and the scope of
transactions it is intended to address. Congress determined that
certain investments by a CFC of its earnings in United States property
are ``substantially the equivalent of a dividend'' and enacted section
956 to provide similar treatment for dividends and certain investments
in United States property constituting effective repatriations. S. Rep.
No. 1881 at 88. Before the Act, section 956 applied appropriately to
domestic corporations because both dividends from, and investments in
United States property by, CFCs were included in income by such
domestic corporations. As noted, the purpose of section 956 is
generally to create symmetry between the taxation of actual
repatriations and the taxation of effective repatriations, by
subjecting effective repatriations to tax in the same manner as actual
repatriations. Under the participation exemption system, however,
earnings of a CFC that are repatriated to a corporate U.S. shareholder
as a dividend are typically effectively exempt from tax because the
shareholder is generally afforded an equal and offsetting dividends
received deduction under section 245A. A section 956 inclusion of a
corporate U.S. shareholder, on the other hand, is not eligible for the
dividends received deduction under section 245A (because it is not a
dividend). As a result, the application of section 956 after the Act to
corporate U.S. shareholders of CFCs that would qualify for section 245A
deductions would result in disparate treatment of actual dividends and
amounts ``substantially the equivalent of a dividend''--a result
directly at odds with the manifest purpose of section 956.
Accordingly, the proposed regulations continue the Treasury
Department and the IRS's longstanding practice of conforming the
application of section 956 to its purpose. The proposed regulations
exclude corporate U.S. shareholders from the application of section 956
to the extent necessary to maintain symmetry between the taxation of
actual repatriations and the taxation of effective repatriations. In
general, under section 245A and the proposed regulations, respectively,
neither an actual dividend to a corporate U.S. shareholder, nor such a
shareholder's amount determined under section 956, will result in
additional U.S. tax.
To achieve this result, the proposed regulations provide that the
amount otherwise determined under section 956 with respect to a U.S.
shareholder for a taxable year of a CFC is reduced to the extent that
the U.S. shareholder would be allowed a deduction under section 245A if
the U.S. shareholder had received a distribution from the CFC in an
amount equal to the amount otherwise determined under section 956. The
proposed regulations provide special rules with respect to indirect
ownership. Due to the broad applicability of section 245A, in many
cases a corporate U.S. shareholder will not have a section 956
inclusion as a result of a CFC holding U.S. property under the proposed
regulations.
Section 956 will continue to apply without modification to U.S.
shareholders other than corporate U.S. shareholders, such as
individuals, to ensure that, consistent with the purposes of section
956, amounts that are substantially the equivalent of a dividend will
be treated similarly to actual dividends. This treatment will apply to
individuals regardless of whether they make an election under section
962. Because individuals are not eligible for a dividends received
deduction under section 245A even if they make an election under
section 962, the current application of section 956 to individuals is
still necessary to ensure substantial equivalence between an actual
repatriation and a deemed repatriation. Similarly, section 956 will
continue to apply without reduction to regulated investment companies
and real estate investment trusts because they are not allowed the
dividends received deduction under section 245A. See sections
852(b)(2)(C) and 857(b)(2)(A).
In addition to carrying out the purposes of section 956, the
proposed regulations would significantly reduce complexity, costs, and
compliance burdens for corporate U.S. shareholders of CFCs. Absent the
proposed regulations, corporate U.S. shareholders would need to
continue to carefully monitor the application of section 956 to their
operations, including provisions related to loans, guarantees, and
pledges, to ensure that earnings were repatriated only through actual
dividends, and therefore allowed a participation exemption, rather than
through a deemed repatriation under section 956 subject to additional
U.S. tax. Similarly, in the absence of the proposed regulations, a
U.S.-parented group in many cases would need to engage in complex and
costly restructuring upon the acquisition of a foreign corporation that
owns domestic subsidiaries (since the foreign corporation becomes a CFC
and the stock of its domestic subsidiaries represents United States
property)
[[Page 55327]]
solely to avoid a section 956 inclusion. Absent the proposed
regulations, section 956 could also serve as a ``trap for the unwary''
for domestic corporations that fail to recognize that, even though they
are entitled to the deduction under section 245A for actual dividends,
their section 956 inclusions would continue to be fully subject to U.S.
tax.
The proposed regulations also add, in proposed Sec. 1.956-1(g)(5),
the effective date for Sec. 1.956-1(e)(6) that was inadvertently
deleted in TD 9792, published in the Federal Register on November 3,
2016 (81 FR 76497, as corrected at 81 FR 95470 and 95471).
Conforming Amendments
The Treasury Department and the IRS intend to make conforming
amendments to the examples throughout the regulations under section 956
upon finalization of the proposed regulations.
Applicability Date
These changes are proposed to apply to taxable years of a CFC
beginning on or after the date of publication of the Treasury decision
adopting these rules as final regulations in the Federal Register (the
``finalization date''), and to taxable years of a U.S. shareholder in
which or with which such taxable years of the CFC end. With respect to
taxable years of a CFC beginning before the finalization date, a
taxpayer may rely on the proposed regulations for taxable years of a
CFC beginning after December 31, 2017, and for taxable years of a U.S.
shareholder in which or with which such taxable years of the CFC end,
provided that the taxpayer and United States persons that are related
(within the meaning of section 267 or 707) to the taxpayer consistently
apply the proposed regulations with respect to all CFCs in which they
are U.S. shareholders.
Special Analyses
The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA), Office of Management and Budget, has waived review of
this proposed rule in accordance with section 6(a)(3)(A) of Executive
Order 12866. OIRA will subsequently make a significance determination
of the final rule, pursuant to section 3(f) of Executive Order (E.O.)
12866 and the April 11, 2018, Memorandum of Agreement between the
Department of Treasury and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6), it
is hereby certified that this regulation, if adopted, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
although some small entities that are domestic corporations could be
affected by the regulation and comments are requested on the
application of the regulation to domestic partnerships. However, even
if a substantial number of small entities were to be affected by this
regulation, the Treasury Department and the IRS estimate that the
economic impact on such small entities would not be significant as the
regulation is expected to marginally reduce compliance costs for
smaller entities. This is because the Treasury Department and the IRS
believe that the cost-saving benefits of the proposed regulations with
respect to complex third-party borrowing arrangements, internal
financial management structures, and restructurings of worldwide
operations will generally be available only to large U.S. multinational
corporations with 20 or more CFCs. The Treasury Department and the IRS
believe that U.S. multinational corporations with less than 20 CFCs
generally will not have the types of arrangements in place that would
otherwise need to be structured and monitored to avoid section 956. The
proposed regulations, if adopted, generally will not affect small
entities that are not domestic corporations. The Treasury Department
and the IRS invite comments on the impact of this rule on small
entities.
Pursuant to section 7805(f), this notice of proposed rulemaking has
been submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration for comment on its impact on small businesses.
Comments and Requests for Public Hearing
Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations,
consideration will be given to any comments that are submitted timely
to the IRS as prescribed in this preamble under the ADDRESSES heading.
The Treasury Department and the IRS request comments on all aspects of
the proposed rules. In particular, comments are requested as to the
appropriate application of the proposed regulations to U.S.
shareholders that are domestic partnerships, which may have partners
that are a combination of domestic corporations, U.S. individuals, or
other persons. For example, one approach could be to reduce the amount
otherwise determined under section 956 with respect to a domestic
partnership to the extent that a domestic corporate partner would be
entitled to a section 245A deduction if the partnership received the
amount as a distribution. An alternative could be to determine a
domestic partnership's section 956 amount and section 956 inclusion
without regard to the status of its partners, but then provide that a
corporate U.S. shareholder partner's distributive share of the section
956 inclusion is not taxable. Comments are also requested with respect
to the maintenance of previously taxed earnings and profits accounts
under section 959 and basis adjustments under section 961.
Additionally, comments are requested on the interaction between the
proposed regulations and section 245A(e). All comments will be
available at https://www.regulations.gov or upon request.
A public hearing will be scheduled if requested in writing by any
person that timely submits written comments. If a public hearing is
scheduled, notice of the date, time, and place for the public hearing
will be published in the Federal Register.
Drafting Information
The principal author of these proposed regulations is Joshua G.
Rabon, formerly of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel
(International). 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.
Proposed Amendments to the Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 1--INCOME TAXES
Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 is amended by adding
an entry to read in part as follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *
Section 1.956-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 245A(g) and 956(e).
* * * * *
Par. 2. Section 1.956-1 is amended by:
1. Revising paragraph (a).
2. In the first sentence of paragraph (g)(1), removing the language
``Paragraph (a)'' and adding in its place ``Paragraph (a)(1)''.
3. Adding paragraphs (g)(4) and (5).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 1.956-1 Shareholder's pro rata share of the average of the
amounts of United States property held by a controlled foreign
corporation.
(a) Overview and scope--(1) In general. Subject to the provisions
of
[[Page 55328]]
section 951(a) and the regulations thereunder, a United States
shareholder of a controlled foreign corporation is required to include
in gross income the amount determined under section 956 with respect to
the shareholder for the taxable year but only to the extent not
excluded from gross income under section 959(a)(2) and the regulations
thereunder.
(2) Reduction for certain United States shareholders--(i) In
general. For a taxable year of a controlled foreign corporation, the
amount determined under section 956 with respect to each share of stock
of the controlled foreign corporation owned (within the meaning of
section 958(a)) by a United States shareholder is the amount that would
be determined under section 956 with respect to such share for the
taxable year, absent the application of this paragraph (a)(2) for the
taxable year (such amount, the tentative section 956 amount, and in the
aggregate with respect to all shares owned (within the meaning of
section 958(a)) by the United States shareholder, the aggregate
tentative section 956 amount), reduced by the amount of the deduction
under section 245A that the shareholder would be allowed if the
shareholder received as a distribution from the controlled foreign
corporation an amount equal to the tentative section 956 amount with
respect to such share on the last day during the taxable year on which
the foreign corporation is a controlled foreign corporation
(hypothetical distribution).
(ii) Determination of the amount of the deduction that would be
allowed under section 245A with respect to a hypothetical distribution.
For purposes of determining the amount of the deduction under section
245A that a United States shareholder would be allowed with respect to
a share of stock of a controlled foreign corporation by reason of a
hypothetical distribution, the following rules apply--
(A) If a United States shareholder owns a share of stock of a
controlled foreign corporation indirectly (within the meaning of
section 958(a)(2)), then--
(1) Sections 245A(a) through (d), 246(a), and 959 apply to the
hypothetical distribution as if the United States shareholder directly
owned (within the meaning of section 958(a)(1)(A)) the share;
(2) Section 245A(e) applies to the hypothetical distribution as if
the distribution were made to the United States shareholder through
each entity by reason of which the United States shareholder indirectly
owns such share and pro rata with respect to the equity that gives rise
to such indirect ownership;
(3) To the extent that a distribution treated as made to a
controlled foreign corporation pursuant to the hypothetical
distribution by reason of paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(A)(2) of this section
would be subject to section 245A(e)(2), the United States shareholder
is treated as not being allowed a deduction under section 245A by
reason of the hypothetical distribution; and
(4) Section 246(c) applies to the hypothetical distribution by
substituting the phrase ``owned (within the meaning of section
958(a))'' for the term ``held'' each place it appears in section
246(c); and
(B) Section 246(c) applies to the hypothetical distribution by
substituting ``the last day during the taxable year on which the
foreign corporation is a controlled foreign corporation'' for the
phrase ``the date on which such share becomes ex-dividend with respect
to such dividend'' in section 246(c)(1)(A).
(3) Examples. The following examples illustrate the application of
paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(i) Example 1. (A) Facts. (1) USP, a domestic corporation, owns all
of the single class of stock of CFC1, which is treated as equity for
U.S. income tax purposes and under the laws of the jurisdiction in
which CFC1 is organized and liable to tax as a resident. The stock of
CFC1 consists of 100 shares, and USP satisfies the holding period
requirement of section 246(c) (as modified by paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(B)
of this section) with respect to each share of CFC1 stock. CFC1 owns
all of the stock of USS, a domestic corporation. CFC1's adjusted basis
in the stock of USS is $0x.
(2) The functional currency of CFC1 is the U.S. dollar. CFC1 has
$100x of undistributed earnings as defined in section 245A(c)(2), $90x
of which constitute undistributed foreign earnings as defined in
section 245A(c)(3), and $10x of which are described in section
245(a)(5)(B) (that is, earnings attributable to a dividend that CFC1
received from USS). CFC1 would not receive a deduction or other tax
benefit with respect to any income, war profits, or excess profits
taxes on a distribution. None of the earnings and profits of CFC1 are
described in section 959(c)(1) or (2) or are earnings and profits
attributable to income excluded from subpart F income under section
952(b). CFC1's applicable earnings (as defined in section 956(b)(1))
are $100x. CFC1 also has held an obligation of USP with an adjusted
basis of $120x on every day during the taxable year that was acquired
while all of its stock was owned by USP.
(B) Analysis. Because USP directly owns all of the stock of CFC1 at
the end of CFC1's taxable year, USP's aggregate tentative section 956
amount with respect to CFC1 is $100x, the lesser of USP's pro rata
share of the average amounts of United States property held by CFC1
($120x) and its pro rata share of CFC1's applicable earnings ($100x).
Under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section, USP's section 956 amount
with respect to CFC1 is its aggregate tentative section 956 amount with
respect to CFC1 reduced by the deduction under section 245A that USP
would be allowed if USP received an amount equal to its aggregate
tentative section 956 amount as a distribution with respect to the CFC1
stock. With respect to the tentative distribution from CFC1 to USP, USP
would be allowed a $90x deduction under section 245A with respect to
the foreign-source portion of the $100x hypothetical distribution (that
is, an amount of the dividend that bears the same ratio to the dividend
as the $90x of undistributed foreign earnings bears to the $100x of
undistributed earnings). Accordingly, USP's section 956 amount with
respect to CFC1 is $10x, its aggregate tentative section 956 amount
($100x) with respect to CFC1 reduced by the amount of the deduction
that USP would have been allowed under section 245A with respect to the
hypothetical distribution ($90x).
(ii) Example 2. (A) Facts. The facts are the same as in paragraph
(A) of Example 1 in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section, except that
all $100x of CFC1's undistributed earnings are described in section
959(c)(2).
(B) Analysis. As in paragraph (B) of Example 1 in this paragraph
(a)(3)(i) of this section, USP's aggregate tentative section 956 amount
with respect to CFC1 is $100x, the lesser of USP's pro rata share of
the average amounts of United States property held by CFC1 ($120x) and
its pro rata share of CFC1's applicable earnings ($100x). However,
paragraph (a)(2) of this section does not reduce USP's section 956
amount, because USP would not be allowed any deduction under section
245A with respect to the $100x hypothetical distribution by reason of
section 959(a) and (d). Accordingly, USP's section 956 amount is $100x.
However, under sections 959(a)(2) and 959(f)(1), USP's inclusion under
section 951(a)(1)(B) with respect to CFC1 is $0, because USP's section
956 amount with respect to CFC1 does not exceed the earnings and
profits of CFC1 described in section 959(c)(2) with respect to USP. The
$100x of earnings and profits of CFC1
[[Page 55329]]
described in section 959(c)(2) are reclassified as earnings and profits
described in section 959(c)(1).
(iii) Example 3. (A) Facts. (1) USP, a domestic corporation, owns
all of the single class of stock of CFC1, and has held such stock for
five years. CFC1 has held 70% of the single class of stock of CFC2 for
three years. The other 30% of the CFC2 stock has been held by a foreign
individual unrelated to USP or CFC1 since CFC2's formation. All of the
stock of each of CFC1 and CFC2 is treated as equity for U.S. income tax
purposes and under the laws of the jurisdiction in which each
respective corporation is organized and liable to tax as a resident.
CFC2 has a calendar taxable year. On December 1, Year 1, CFC1 acquires
the remaining 30% of the stock of CFC2 for cash. On June 30, Year 2,
CFC1 sells to a third party the 30% of CFC2 stock acquired in Year 1 at
no gain. CFC2 made no distributions during Year 1.
(2) The functional currency of CFC1 and CFC2 is the U.S. dollar.
CFC2 has $120x of undistributed earnings as defined in section
245A(c)(2), all of which constitute undistributed foreign earnings.
Neither CFC1 nor CFC2 would receive a deduction or other tax benefit
with respect to any income, war profits, or excess profits taxes on a
distribution. None of the earnings and profits of CFC2 are described in
section 959(c)(1) or (2) or are earnings and profits attributable to
income excluded from subpart F income under section 952(b). CFC2's
applicable earnings (as defined in section 956(b)(1)) are $120x. CFC2
has held an obligation of USP with an adjusted basis of $100x on every
day of Year 1 that was acquired while USP owned all of the stock of
CFC1 and CFC1 held 70% of the single class of stock of CFC2.
(B) Analysis. Because USP indirectly owns (within the meaning of
section 958(a)) all of the stock of CFC2 at the end of Year 1, USP's
aggregate tentative section 956 amount with respect to CFC2 for Year 1
is $100x, the lesser of USP's pro rata share of the average amounts of
United States property held by CFC2 ($100x) and its pro rata share of
CFC2's applicable earnings ($120x). Under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this
section, USP's section 956 amount with respect to CFC2 for Year 1 is
its aggregate tentative section 956 amount with respect to CFC2 reduced
by the deduction under section 245A that USP would be allowed if USP
received an amount equal to its aggregate tentative section 956 amount
as a distribution with respect to the CFC2 stock that USP owns
indirectly within the meaning of section 958(a)(2). For purposes of
determining the consequences of this hypothetical distribution, under
paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(A)(1) of this section, USP is treated as owning
the CFC2 stock directly. In addition, under paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(A)(4)
of this section, the holding period requirement of section 246(c) is
applied by reference to the period during which USP owned (within the
meaning of section 958(a)) the stock of CFC2. Therefore, with respect
to the hypothetical distribution from CFC2 to USP, USP would satisfy
the holding period requirement under section 246(c) with respect to the
70% of the CFC2 stock that USP indirectly owned for three years through
CFC1, but not with respect to the 30% of the CFC2 stock that USP
indirectly owned through CFC1 for a period of less than 365 days.
Accordingly, USP's section 956 amount with respect to CFC2 for Year 1
is $30x, its aggregate tentative section 956 amount ($100x) reduced by
the amount of the deduction that USP would have been allowed under
section 245A with respect to the hypothetical distribution ($70x).
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(4) Paragraphs (a)(2) and (3) of this section apply to taxable
years of controlled foreign corporations beginning on or after the date
of publication of the Treasury decision adopting paragraphs (a)(2) and
(3) of this section as final regulations in the Federal Register, and
to taxable years of a United States shareholder in which or with which
such taxable years of the controlled foreign corporation end.
(5) Paragraph (e)(6) of this section applies to property acquired
in exchanges occurring on or after June 24, 2011.
Kirsten Wielobob,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2018-24140 Filed 11-1-18; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P