Posts

Factual Basis & Tax Planning | International Tax Lawyer & Attorney

/in , /by

In a previous article, I discussed the necessity of balancing international tax planning priorities in order to obtain an optimal tax result. In this article, I will explain why international tax planning should be based on a carefully-studied factual basis.

Factual Basis as the Foundation for International Tax Planning

Young inexperienced lawyers often come up with a particular tax strategy and then they try to implement it independent of the actual facts on the ground. Irrespective of how brilliant such a strategy would be in the abstract, it is almost always doomed to become a failure.

Why? The answer is very simple: these lawyers turn international tax planning on its head. They build the second level of a house without ever building a foundation for it. No matter how well they plan out a strategy, it will fall apart almost immediately when it comes in conflict with the facts – how the business is run, its capital structure, its needs, its goals, its cash flow source, its operating model, its E&P, its foreign tax credit and numerous other important considerations.

Hence, the starting point of any tax planning should be a careful factual study of the business.

Studying Factual Basis as a Way to Uncover Potential Opportunities

In my practice, I have found that a careful study of a business may generate a number of potential planning opportunities that may have otherwise been ignored. For example, during a study of a company’s loan structure, one can sometimes find opportunities to treat these loans as equity investments and utilize much better currency exchange rates to build up the client’s basis in the company (potentially even resulting in a reversal of an entire capital gain upon the sale of this company).

Factual Basis: Four Most Important Components

While an attorney should study all relevant facts, there are four main components that he must cover. The components are: (1) organizational chart and capital structure; (2) operating model; (3) tax status and characteristics; and (4) analysis of financial statements. Let’s analyze each component in more detail.

Factual Basis Components: Organizational Chart and Capital Structure

You should start your factual analysis by building the organizational chart of the business and understanding its capital structure. What you need to do is to understand each entity within the corporate structure and the place it occupies in the overall business structure, identify the tax status of each business, understand the sources of cash and where it is used, create a diagram of debt and equity instruments (including whether these are related or unrelated party instruments), study how the business operates across the entire corporate structure, uncover which currencies are used in business (as well as any currency hedging) and review the withholding tax exposure/compliance.

This first component is likely to help you to identify the tax inefficiencies of the existing corporate structure and seek structural alternatives. I recommend that at this stage you plan for creating a more tax-efficient financing of foreign affiliates to maximize foreign country deductions, minimize tax imposed on interest income, reduce withholding tax and assure sufficient cash flow throughout the structure.

Factual Basis Components: Operating Model

The second component of your factual analysis (though it will probably come at about the same time as you start working on the first component) is the operating model of the business. In other words, what type of a business is it: manufacturing, sales, services or IP (development, ownership and/or usage of IP)? How does the business operate: local country manufacturing, local distributing/franchising, global service contracts, et cetera?

I recommend that you especially focus here (as a goal of your tax planning strategy) on: tax-efficient structuring of current and anticipated foreign operations to maximize tax deferral, tax-efficient financing of capital needs and development of strategy concerning IP development and licensing.

Factual Basis Components: Tax Characteristics

The third component is the one that tax attorneys are likely to like the most, because it is very close to their training and professional interest – the study of the tax characteristics of the corporate structure: income/losses, NOL, AMT, foreign tax credit position (carryovers), E&P, transfer pricing, local tax position and PTI (previously taxed income through Subpart F, 965 tax, GILTI tax, et cetera).

The focus of your tax planning goals here are centered around foreign tax credit, repatriation of earnings, minimizing Subpart F income and transfer pricing (i.e. allocation of profits between the US head office and its foreign affiliate companies).

Factual Basis Components: Financial Statements

Finally, the fourth component of your factual basis study consists of the financial statement analysis. You need to carefully review the financial statement with the focus on: Effective Tax Rate (“ETR”) reconciliation, deferred tax analysis, reinvestment, valuation and foreign currency. The focus of your tax planning goals here should be on low-tax deferral structures (for example, through indefinite reinvestment outside of the United States at a lower tax rate) and the most optimal foreign tax credit utilization.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help With International Tax Planning

If your US company conducts business outside of the United States, contact Sherayzen Law Office for professional help with your international business tax planning. We have helped companies plan their inbound and outbound transactions for US and foreign companies, and we can help you!

International Tax Planning Lawyers: Importance of Business Purpose Doctrine

/in , , /by

It is surprising how often international tax planning lawyers ignore the importance of business purpose doctrine to international tax planning. It seems that a lot of U.S. accountants and, to a smaller degree, attorneys have been limited to the parochial view of the application of the doctrine within the borders of the United States, whereas they seem to lose caution in the context of international business transactions. In this article, I urge the readers to consider the very important role of the business purpose doctrine to international tax planning.

International Tax Planning Lawyers: Business Purpose Doctrine; Combination with the Economic Substance Doctrine

This short writing does not pretend to do justice to the complex analysis of the history, development and interpretation of the business purpose doctrine. I will merely attempt to broadly sketch some important points and the general meaning of the doctrine to provide the necessary background to the discussion below.

The Business Purpose Doctrine (“the Doctrine”) is often cited to have originated in the old Supreme Court case Gregory v. Helvering, 293 U.S. 465 (1935) (even though, upon detailed consideration, it appears that this case stands for a much more limited proposition than the current Doctrine). In reality, the modern Doctrine received a much broader development in the seminal case of Goldstein v. Commissioner, 364 F.2d 734 (2d Cir. 1966), which incorporates the economic substance doctrine into the Doctrine.

The combined effect of both legal developments can be summarized as a two-prong test which says that the IRS will respect a business transaction if: (1) the transaction has objective economic substance (i.e. whether transaction affected the taxpayer’s financial position in any way); and/OR (2) the taxpayer has a subjective non-tax business purpose for conducting the transaction (i.e. whether the transaction was motivated solely by tax avoidance considerations to such a degree that the business purpose is no more than a facade). Notice, the capital “OR” – there is a disagreement among the courts on whether the both, subjective (business purpose doctrine) and objective (economic substance doctrine) prongs should be satisfied, or is it enough that one of them is satisfied.

International Tax Planning Lawyers: the Doctrine is Relevant to International Tax Planning

The application of the Doctrine has been extremely important to International Tax Planning, and international tax planning lawyers should take care to make sure that their tax plans are not merely done for tax avoidance purposes, but reflect the real business purpose behind engaging into the transaction. Moreover, the international tax planning lawyers should impress upon their clients this understanding of importance of the Doctrine to the tax consequences of their business transactions.

A recent IRS victory stand as a stark reminder of the importance of the Doctrine and why international tax planning lawyers must not ignore it. In Chemtech Royalty Associates , L.P. v. United States of America (February of 2013), the federal district court in Louisiana rejected two separate tax shelter transactions entered into by The Dow Chemical Company (“Dow Chemical”) that purported to create approximately $1 billion in tax deductions.

The first transaction rejected by Chief Judge Jackson was created by Goldman Sachs and basically allowed Dow Chemical to claim royalty expense deductions on its own patent through a scheme called Special Limited Investment Partnerships (“SLIPs”). The basic idea behind SLIPs is to create a tax shelter known as a “lease-strip” – the U.S. taxable income is stripped away to a non-US partnership. In the process, some small Swiss tax was paid, but only minor U.S. tax consequences were triggered on Dow Chemical’s US tax return.

The second transaction that was rejected by Chief Judge Jackson involved depreciation by Dow Chemical of a chemical plan asset that had already, for the most part, been fully depreciated. The second scheme (created by King & Spalding) arose due to changes in U.S. tax law which made the first transaction unprofitable from the tax standpoint.

While the economic substance was not the only doctrine discussed by court (the Sham Partnership Doctrine played a large role in the decision as well), it certainly occupied the central role in the decision.

The end result for Dow Chemical – disallowance of $1 billion of deductions and an imposition of 20% penalty (i.e. $200 million) plus interest. As the readers can see, it is highly important for international tax planning lawyers to pay attention to the Doctrine.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help with International Tax Planning

While the precedent-setting cases usually involve large corporations, international tax planning concerns any company that does business internationally. Equally important for all companies is to make sure that they comply with all of the numerous complex U.S. tax reporting requirements concerning international business transactions.

If you have a substantial ownership interest in or an officer of a small or mid-size company that does business internationally, contact Sherayzen Law Office for professional help with international tax planning and compliance. Attorney Eugene Sherayzen will thoroughly analyze your case, create an ethical business tax plan to make sure that you do not over-pay taxes under the Internal Revenue Code provisions, and prepare all of the tax and legal documents that are required for your U.S. tax compliance.

Contact Us to Schedule a Confidential Consultation NOW!