Loading…
Tax Court Reversal: Rev. Proc. 99-32 A/C Receivable Are Not Section 965 Related-Party Debt
The Tax Court held in Analog Devices, 147 TC No. 15 (Nov 22, 2016), that an account receivable established to repatriate a transfer pricing adjustment under Rev. Proc. 99-32, 1999-2 CB 296, does not constitute related-party indebtedness (RPI) for purposes of the Section 965(b)(3) related-party debt...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of International Taxation 2017-02, Vol.28 (2), p.18 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | The Tax Court held in Analog Devices, 147 TC No. 15 (Nov 22, 2016), that an account receivable established to repatriate a transfer pricing adjustment under Rev. Proc. 99-32, 1999-2 CB 296, does not constitute related-party indebtedness (RPI) for purposes of the Section 965(b)(3) related-party debt rule. Under that rule, the amount qualifying for the one-time Section 965 dividends- received deduction is reduced by increased RPI. The decision is a reversal of the court's position in BMC Software, Inc (BMC Software I), 141 TC 224 (2013), which itself was reversed by the Fifth Circuit, 780 F.3d 669 (CA-5, 2015). This decision will obviously be of benefit to companies that took advantage of the Section 965 repatriation incentive and also took (or plan to take) advantage of Rev. Proc. 99-32. In general, the practice of establishing and paying Rev. Proc. 99-32 receivables is becoming more common as taxpayers' transfer pricing arrangements are subject to increasingly intense scrutiny and adjustment by the IRS and other tax authorities. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1049-6378 |