Rev. Rul. 57-311: Cross-chain transfer treated as a split-off

In Rev. Rul. 99-6, the IRS provides that certain transfers of partnership interests cause termination of a partnership.

Rev. Rul. 57-311: Cross-chain transfer treated as a split-off

In Rev. Rul. 99-6, the IRS provides that certain transfers of partnership interests cause termination of a partnership.

Citations: Rev. Rul. 57-311; 1957-2 C.B. 243

Rev. Rul. 57-311

Advice has been requested with respect of the tax consequences of a series of steps by which certain assets and liabilities of a corporation were transferred to a new corporation and one of the shareholders of the transferor corporation terminated his interest in such corporation and acquired all of the stock of the new corporation.

Corporation X , at the time of the transaction in question, had been engaged for more than five years in the active conduct of a business in City M and in the active conduct of a separate business in City O . Approximately 14 percent of the stock of Corporation X was owned by the vice-president, B , who managed and directed the business in City M , and the remainder of the stock was owned by the president, who managed and directed the business in City O .

For bona fide business purposes, it was decided that Corporation X would discontinue operations in City M , and that B would terminate his interest in Corporation X and separately conduct the business in City M through a new corporation.

To carry out these aims, B and Corporation X entered into an agreement, pursuant to which the following steps were taken: (1) Corporation Y was organized; (2) Corporation X redeemed all of B's X stock by distributing to him an amount of cash equal to about ten percent of the value of his shares; (3) the cash distributed to B by X Corporation was in turn transferred by him to Corporation Y in exchange for all of the stock of Y; and (4) Corporation X transferred the operating assets (subject to the liabilities) of the City M business, without consideration, to Corporation Y . The value of the stock of Corporation Y owned by B after the completion of the above-described steps was substantially equivalent to the value of the stock of Corporation X surrendered by him.

After the separation had been effected, Corporation Y actively conducted the business in City M and Corporation X continued the active conduct of the business in City O .

It has been established in a long line of cases that the component steps of a single transaction cannot be treated separately for Federal income tax purposes. See Prairia Oil & Gas Co. v. Motter , 66 Fed.(2d) 309; West Texas Refining & Development Co. v. Commissioner , 68 Fed.(2d) 77; Bassick v. Commissioner , 85 Fed.(2d) 8. It is the opinion of the Internal Revenue Service that, under the rule of these cases, the steps carried out in pursuance of the agreement between B and Corporation X were a single integrated transaction by which Corporation X , in substance and effect, transferred a portion of its assets (including the cash transferred to B and by him transferred to Corporation Y ) to Corporation Y in exchange for all of the stock of Y , and then distributed the stock of Corporation Y to B in exchange for his stock in Corporation X .

In view of the above, the Service holds as follows:

(1) The transfer by Corporation X of a portion of its assets (subject to certain of its liabilities) to Corporation Y in exchange for all of the stock of Corporation Y , followed by the distribution of the Y stock to B , constitutes a reorganization as defined in section 368(a)(1)(D) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. No gain or loss is recognized to either Corporation X or Corporation Y . Section 361(a) and 1032(a). Under the provisions of section 362(b) of the Code, the basis to Corporation Y of the assets thus acquired is the same as their basis to Corporation X .

(2) Pursuant to the provisions of section 355(a), no gain or loss is recognized to (and no amount is includible in the income of) B as a result of the receipt by him of all of the stock of Corporation Y in exchange for his stock of Corporation X . Under the provisions of section 358(a), the basis to B of the Y stock received in the exchange is the same as his basis of the X stock surrendered.

(3) The accumulated earnings and profits of Corporation X should be allocated between it and Corporation Y in accordance with the provisions of section 312(i) of the Code.

‍

Product heading

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

Get Started

Related Diagrams

10 Min Read

Rev. Rul. 70-224: Cause to be directed; § 368(a)(2)(C)

Rev. Rul. 70-224: It is held that the transaction in the instant case is an acquisition by X, solely in exchange for its voting stock and the assumption of Z's liabilities, of substantially all of the properties of Z, and is, therefore, a reorganization within the meaning of section 368(a)(1)(C) and section 368(a)(2)(C) of the Code. The fact that all the assets of Z were transferred directly to Y rather than through X to Y does not affect the reorganization.

Explore Diagrams
10 Min Read

Rev. Rul. 82-150: Deep-in-the-money options

In Rev. Rul. 82-150, the IRS holds that a sale of a deep-in-the-money option was, in substance, not an option but a completed sale of the referenced stock for purposes of the foreign personal holding company rules.

Explore Diagrams
10 Min Read

Rev. Rul. 2001-46, Sit. 2: Acquisition merger & upstream merger collapsed

Rev. Rul. 2001-46, Sit. 2: Under the facts presented, if, pursuant to an integrated plan, a newly formed wholly owned subsidiary of an acquiring corporation merges into a target corporation, followed by the merger of the target corporation into the acquiring corporation, the transaction is treated as a single statutory merger of the target corporation into the acquiring corporation that qualifies as a reorganization under section 368(a)(1)(A).

Explore Diagrams