DIEBOLD and the Not so Beautiful: Transferee Liability Trumps Tax Shelter

Dana L. Mark, Jeffrey A. Galant
{"title":"DIEBOLD and the Not so Beautiful: Transferee Liability Trumps Tax Shelter","authors":"Dana L. Mark, Jeffrey A. Galant","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2396972","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Second Circuit Court of Appeals, in Diebold v. Commissioner, describes the requirements for finding transferee liability under Section 6901 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, here specifically under New York law, as state law predominates the determination of whether a person will be liable for federal taxes as a transferee. This case involved a so-called “Midco” transaction, whereby the goal was to avoid the corporate level taxes on the disposition of the assets of a C corporation. A sale by the shareholders of their C corporation stock and a sale by the C corporation of its assets were recharacterized as a sale by the C corporation of its assets and then a liquidating distribution of the sale proceeds to the shareholders of the C corporation. This recharacterization allowed the Second Circuit to hold that the C corporation's shareholders had transferee liability under New York law with respect to the tax liability recognized by the C corporation on the sale of its assets. A remand to the Tax Court concerns whether such recharacterization satisfies federal law.","PeriodicalId":171289,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Law: Corporate Governance Law eJournal","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Law: Corporate Governance Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2396972","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals, in Diebold v. Commissioner, describes the requirements for finding transferee liability under Section 6901 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, here specifically under New York law, as state law predominates the determination of whether a person will be liable for federal taxes as a transferee. This case involved a so-called “Midco” transaction, whereby the goal was to avoid the corporate level taxes on the disposition of the assets of a C corporation. A sale by the shareholders of their C corporation stock and a sale by the C corporation of its assets were recharacterized as a sale by the C corporation of its assets and then a liquidating distribution of the sale proceeds to the shareholders of the C corporation. This recharacterization allowed the Second Circuit to hold that the C corporation's shareholders had transferee liability under New York law with respect to the tax liability recognized by the C corporation on the sale of its assets. A remand to the Tax Court concerns whether such recharacterization satisfies federal law.
迪堡和不那么美丽:受让人责任胜过避税
第二巡回上诉法院在Diebold诉Commissioner一案中,描述了根据1986年《国内税收法典》第6901条(经修订)确定受让人责任的要求,在此特别根据纽约州法律,因为州法律在确定一个人是否应作为受让人承担联邦税方面占主导地位。该案涉及一项所谓的“Midco”交易,其目的是避免对C公司的资产处置征收公司税。C公司股东出售其股份和C公司出售其资产被重新定义为C公司出售其资产,然后将出售收益清算分配给C公司的股东。这种重新定性使得第二巡回法院认为,根据纽约法律,C公司的股东对C公司在出售其资产时所承认的纳税义务负有受让责任。对税务法院的一项发回的判决涉及到这种重新定义是否符合联邦法律。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信