We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 12

Canadian investment in U.S.-based private equity funds: preference for the U.S. limited liability company
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • Canada, USA
  • February 4 2011

Canadians seeking to make investments in US-based private equity funds do face a challenging landscape attributable to the multitude of US taxing authorities, federal, state and local governmental taxing authorities, as well as a somewhat counterintuitive home country tax regime, in reporting their U.S. operations back home in Canada


Reasonable cause to avoid accuracy related penalty based on advice of legal counsel rejected by Tax Court in Canal Corp. and Subsidiaries et al v. Commissioner, 135 T.C. No.9 (2010).
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • February 13 2011

In Canal Corp, supra, the Tax Court recently held that a corporation's 1999 transfer of a wholly owned subsidiary to a joint venture was a disguised sale that required the company to include in capital gain the amount realized in the year of sale on its consolidated federal income tax return


UK telecommunications company Vodafone recently receives favorable ruling from Supreme Court of India
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • India
  • June 26 2012

This past January, the Supreme Court in India ruled in Vodafone International Holdings B.V v. Union of India,Civil Appeal No. 733 of 2012 (arising from S.L.P. (C) No. 26529 of 2010) that the sale of stock of a company that was non-resident in India to another non-resident company was not subject to income tax in India


U.S. and multi-national companies engaged in Canadian business operations through controlled Canadian subsidiaries need to stand on guard for possible legislation on interest stripping and other rules
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • Canada, USA
  • December 6 2012

Many U.S. companies engage in business operations in foreign countries, including Canada, through the use of a controlled or wholly owned subsidiary


Increased foreign investment in United States requires review of the FIRPTA provisions
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • November 9 2011

Under 26 IRC 897, which was adopted into law as part of the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act (“FIRPTA”) in 1980, gain realized by a foreign person with respect to the disposition of an interest in US real property (“USRPI”) is characterized as income effectively connected with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business and subjects the foreign person to U.S. income tax on the net income derived from such gain at normal U.S. income tax rates


IRS releases private letter ruling on dividend impacts of a "foreign sandwich"
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • January 20 2010

PLR 200952031 (12242009) addressed the application of the dividends received deduction (DRD) in the foreign context where a foreign corporation is the parent of a U.S. subsidiary


Selling off a member of a consolidated group: intercompany debt
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • December 3 2009

Typically, the parent corporation of a U.S. based consolidated group of corporations will act as the primary source of capital to members of the group


Recent legislation modifies application of the related party redemption provision contained in Section 304: in the Education Jobs and Medicaid Assistance Act of 2010, p.l. 111-226
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • March 28 2011

Section 304 provides provides generally that, for purposes of 302 and 303, if one or more persons are in control of each of two corporations and one such corporation (the "acquiring corporation") acquires in exchange for property stock of the other corporation (the "issuing corporation") from the person (or persons) so in control, then, unless 304(a)(2) applies, the property is treated as received in redemption of the stock of the acquiring corporation


Anticipated up-tick in merger and acquisition activity; don't forget about the change of control provision, Section 280G
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • August 23 2010

Congress enacted 280G in 1984 over concern that contracts between a corporation and its employees providing golden parachutes directly (or indirectly) attributable to a takeover of a target company would have an adverse effect on takeover activity in general, elevate the concerns of the management of the target company beyond permitted boundaries, including the deflection of shareholder value from the target's shareholders to key management and control shareholders of the target company


Service recently issues favorable continuity of business interest private letter ruling on R&D activities
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • August 17 2010

One of the various requirements to qualify an acquisitive transaction as a tax-free reorganization is the continuity of business enterprise requirement