Close Cookie Popup
Cookie settings
By clicking “Accept all cookies", you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. See our Cookie Notice for more info.
Accept all cookiesCookie settings
Close Cookie Preference Manager
Cookie settings
By clicking “Accept all cookies", you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. See our Cookie Notice for more info.
Strictly necessary (always active)
Cookies required to enable basic website functionality.
Accept all cookiesSave settings
Cookies Preferences

Rev. Rul. 68-603: Acquiescence to Morris Trust; see § 355(e)

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

Rev. Rul. 68-603: Acquiescence to Morris Trust; see § 355(e)

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

Citations: Rev. Rul. 68-603; 1968-2 C.B. 148

Rev. Rul. 68-603

The Internal Revenue Service will follow the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of Commissioner v. Mary Archer W. Morris Trust , 367 F.2d 794 (1966), to the extent it holds that (1) the active business requirements of section 355(b)(1)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 were satisfied even though the distributing corporation immediately after the spin-off merged into another corporation, (2) the control requirement of section 368(a)(1)(D) of the Code implies no limitation upon a reorganization of the transferor corporation after the distribution of stock of the transferee corporation, and (3) there was a business purpose for the spin-off and the merger.

‍

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. 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. 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. 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