Tax Notes logo

IRS Attacks More Shelters

AUG. 11, 2000

Notice 2000-44; 2000-36 IRB 1

DATED AUG. 11, 2000
DOCUMENT ATTRIBUTES
Citations: Notice 2000-44; 2000-36 IRB 1

 

=============== SUMMARY ===============

 

The Service has attacked (Notice 2000-44) more tax shelter schemes that are similar to the BOSS tax shelter that it shut down with Notice 99-59, 1999-52 IRB 761. (For a summary of Notice 99-59, see Tax Notes, Dec. 13, 1999, p. 1383; for the full text, see Doc 1999-38713 (4 original pages), 1999 TNT 231-1 Database 'Tax Notes Today 1999', View '(Number', or H&D, Dec. 10, 1999, p. 2833.)

The shelter in Notice 99-59 involved an arrangement that applied the rules on corporate distributions of encumbered property to create artificially high basis in the corporate stock that would produce deductible losses on the later disposition of the stock by shareholders. In Notice 2000-44, the IRS identifies similar arrangements involving partnership interests that create artificially high basis in partnership interests that result in deductible losses on the later disposition of the partnership interests by the partners.

In one version of the partnership variation of the shelter, a taxpayer borrows at a premium and contributes the cash to a partnership and the partnership assumes liability for the debt. For example, the taxpayer may receive $3,000 in cash under a loan agreement that provides an inflated stated rate of interest and a stated principal of only $2,000. The taxpayer contributes the $3,000 to a partnership and the partnership assumes the debt. The taxpayer later sells the partnership interest.

The partner takes the position under sections 705(a)(2), 722, and 752(b) that his basis in his partnership interest is $1,000. The partner argues that the amount of the liability that the partnership has assumed under section 752(b) is $2,000, so that, under section 705(a)(2), his basis in his partnership interest should be reduced to $1,000. The partner can sell his partnership interest for a nominal amount and claim a $1,000 capital loss.

In another variation, offsetting assets and liabilities are also present, but the taxpayer takes the position that the partnership has not assumed any liability. The taxpayer purchases a call option and simultaneously writes an offsetting call option. The taxpayer then contributes both options to a partnership. The partner takes the position that his basis in his partnership interest is the same as his positive basis in the purchased call option, unreduced by the liability associated with the written call option. That is, the partner takes the position that the partnership did not assume any liability when it took responsibility for the written call option. The partner uses this artificially high basis to claim a capital loss on the sale of his partnership interest.

The Service emphasizes that the purported losses do not represent bona fide losses reflecting actual economic consequences as required for a deduction under section 165. The Service also emphasizes that penalties may be imposed on participants in the transactions or on those that promote or report them. Also, the Service states that the transactions are listed transactions for purposes of the tax shelter registration requirements.

The Service also notes that some persons who have promoted the transactions described in Notice 2000-44 have encouraged individuals to participate in them as a way to avoid reporting large capital gains from unrelated transactions. The promoters have recommended that the individuals use grantor trusts to participate and to use the same grantor trusts to realize the capital gains. Any person, warns the IRS, who willfully conceals the amount of capital gains and losses in that way, or who willfully advises that concealment, may be guilty of criminal offenses.

 

=============== FULL TEXT ===============

 

Part III -- Administrative, Procedural, and Miscellaneous

Tax Avoidance Using Artificially High Basis

[1] In Notice 99-59, 1999-52 I.R.B. 761, the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Department described certain transactions that were being marketed to taxpayers for the purpose of generating artificial tax losses. This notice concerns other similar transactions that purport to generate tax losses for taxpayers.

[2] As stated in Notice 99-59, a loss is allowable as a deduction for federal income tax purposes only if it is bona fide and reflects actual economic consequences. An artificial loss lacking economic substance is not allowable. See ACM Partnership v. Commissioner, 157 F.3d 231, 252 (3d Cir. 1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1017 (1999) ("Tax losses such as these . . . which do not correspond to any actual economic losses, do not constitute the type of 'bona fide' losses that are deductible under the Internal Revenue Code and regulations."); Scully v. United States, 840 F.2d 478, 486 (7th Cir. 1988) (to be deductible, a loss must be a "genuine economic loss"); Shoenberg v. Commissioner, 77 F.2d 446, 448 (8th Cir. 1935) (to be deductible, a loss must be "actual and real"); section 1.165- 1(b) of the Income Tax Regulations ("Only a bona fide loss is allowable. Substance and not mere form shall govern in determining a deductible loss.").

[3] Notice 99-59 describes an arrangement that purported to give rise to deductible losses on disposition of stock by applying the rules relating to distributions of encumbered property to shareholders in order to create artificially high basis in the stock. The Service and the Treasury have become aware of similar arrangements that have been designed to produce noneconomic tax losses on the disposition of partnership interests. These arrangements purport to give taxpayers artificially high basis in partnership interests and thereby give rise to deductible losses on disposition of those partnership interests.

[4] One variation involves a taxpayer's borrowing at a premium and a partnership's subsequent assumption of that indebtedness. As an example of this variation, a taxpayer may receive $3,000X in cash from a lender under a loan agreement that provides for an inflated stated rate of interest and a stated principal amount of only $2,000X. The taxpayer contributes the $3,000X to a partnership, and the partnership assumes the indebtedness. The partnership thereafter engages in investment activities. At a later time, the taxpayer sells the partnership interest.

[5] Under the position advanced by the promoters of this arrangement, the taxpayer claims that only the stated principal amount of the indebtedness, $2,000X in this example, is considered a liability assumed by the partnership that is treated as a distribution of money to the taxpayer that reduces the basis of the taxpayer's partnership interest under section 752 of the Internal Revenue Code. Therefore, disregarding any additional amounts the taxpayer may contribute to the partnership, transaction costs, and any income realized or expenses incurred at the partnership level, the taxpayer purports to have a basis in the partnership interest equal to the excess of the cash contributed over the stated principal amount of the indebtedness, even though the taxpayer's net economic outlay to acquire the partnership interest and the value of the partnership interest are nominal or zero. In this example, the taxpayer purports to have a basis in the partnership interest of $1,000X (the excess of the cash contributed ($3,000X) over the stated principal amount of the indebtedness ($2,000X)). On disposition of the partnership interest, the taxpayer claims a tax loss with respect to that basis amount, even though the taxpayer has incurred no corresponding economic loss.

[6] In another variation, a taxpayer purchases and writes options and purports to create substantial positive basis in a partnership interest by transferring those option positions to a partnership. For example, a taxpayer might purchase call options for a cost of $1,000X and simultaneously write offsetting call options, with a slightly higher strike price but the same expiration date, for a premium of slightly less than $1,000X. Those option positions are then transferred to a partnership which, using additional amounts contributed to the partnership, may engage in investment activities.

[7] Under the position advanced by the promoters of this arrangement, the taxpayer claims that the basis in the taxpayer's partnership interest is increased by the cost of the purchased call options but is not reduced under section 752 as a result of the partnership's assumption of the taxpayer's obligation with respect to the written call options. Therefore, disregarding additional amounts contributed to the partnership, transaction costs, and any income realized and expenses incurred at the partnership level, the taxpayer purports to have a basis in the partnership interest equal to the cost of the purchased call options ($1,000X in this example), even though the taxpayer's net economic outlay to acquire the partnership interest and the value of the partnership interest are nominal or zero. On the disposition of the partnership interest, the taxpayer claims a tax loss ($1,000X in this example), even though the taxpayer has incurred no corresponding economic loss.

[8] The purported losses resulting from the transactions described above do not represent bona fide losses reflecting actual economic consequences as required for purposes of section 165. The purported losses from these transactions (and from any similar arrangements designed to produce noneconomic tax losses by artificially overstating basis in partnership interests) are not allowable as deductions for federal income tax purposes. The purported tax benefits from these transactions may also be subject to disallowance under other provisions of the Code and regulations. In particular, the transactions may be subject to challenge under section 752, or under section 1.701-2 or other anti-abuse rules. In addition, in the case of individuals, these transactions may be subject to challenge under section 165(c)(2). See Fox v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. 1001 (1984). Furthermore, tax losses from similar transactions designed to produce noneconomic tax losses by artificially overstating basis in corporate stock or other property are not allowable as deductions for federal income tax purposes.

[9] Appropriate penalties may be imposed on participants in these transactions or, as applicable, on persons who participate in the promotion or reporting of these transactions, including the accuracy-related penalty under section 6662, the return preparer penalty under section 6694, the promoter penalty under section 6700, and the aiding and abetting penalty under section 6701.

[10] Transactions that are the same as or substantially similar to the transactions described in this Notice 2000-44 are identified as "listed transactions" for the purposes of section 1.6011-4T(b)(2) of the Temporary Income Tax Regulations and section 301.6111-2T(b)(2) of the Temporary Procedure and Administration Regulations. See also section 301.6112-1T, A-4. It should be noted that, independent of their classification as "listed transactions" for purposes of sections 1.6011-4T(b)(2) and 301.6111-2T(b)(2), the transactions described in this Notice 2000-44 may already be subject to the tax shelter registration and list maintenance requirements of sections 6111 and 6112 under the regulations issued in February 2000 (sections 301.6111-2T and 301.6112-1T, A-4), as well as the regulations issued in 1984 and amended in 1986 (sections 301.6111-1T and 301.6112-1T, A-3). Persons required to register these tax shelters who have failed to register the shelters may be subject to the penalty under section 6707(a) and to the penalty under section 6708(a) if the requirements of section 6112 are not satisfied.

[11] In addition, the Service and the Treasury have learned that certain persons who have promoted participation in transactions described in this notice have encouraged individual taxpayers to participate in such transactions in a manner designed to avoid the reporting of large capital gains from unrelated transactions on their individual income tax returns (Form 1040). Certain promoters have recommended that taxpayers participate in these transactions through grantor trusts and use the same grantor trusts as vehicles to realize the capital gains. Further, although each separate capital gain and loss attributable to a portion of a trust that is treated as owned by a grantor under the grantor trust provisions of the Code (section 671 and following) is properly reported as a separate item on the grantor's individual income tax return (see section 1.671-2(c) and the Instructions to Form 1041, U.S. Income Tax Return for Estates and Trusts), the Service and the Treasury understand that these promoters have advised that the capital gains and losses from these transactions may be netted, so that only a small net capital gain or loss is reported on the taxpayer's individual income tax return. In addition to other penalties, any person who willfully conceals the amount of capital gains and losses in this manner, or who willfully counsels or advises such concealment, may be guilty of a criminal offense under sections 7201, 7203, 7206, or 7212(a) or other provisions of federal law.

[12] The principal authors of this notice are David A. Shulman of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Passthroughs and Special Industries) and Victoria S. Balacek of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Financial Instruments and Products). For further information regarding this notice, contact Mr. Shulman at (202) 622-3080 or Ms. Balacek at (202) 622-3930 (not toll free calls).

DOCUMENT ATTRIBUTES
Copy RID