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 139

Lack of income tax deduction for payment of breakup fees
  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • USA
  • July 1 2010

As the country moves out of the recession, M&A activity is bound to heat up


Convertible preferred equity certificates
  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • Luxembourg, USA
  • July 13 2011

Instruments may be treated as debt for foreign income tax purposes but as equity or U.S. tax purposes


Sections 305 and 306 and tracking stock
  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • USA
  • February 25 2013

LTR 201308001 rules on sections 305 and 306 are bread and butter subchapter C provisions that were designed for "tax shelters" that are so quaint and


N.C. forced combination bill
  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • USA
  • June 9 2011

The elements of the bill are as follows:


IRS may apply economic substance doctrine to securities lending transactions entered to avoid U.S. withholding tax
  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • USA
  • January 15 2013

In generic legal advice released in November 2012 (AM 2012-009), the Chief Counsel's Office, applying the economic substance doctrine, disregarded a


Foreign patent commercialization
  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • USA
  • June 1 2011

Corp. A licensed certain technology to G (called Agreement A) in the past


CFC’S Subpart F earnings not qualified dividends
  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • USA
  • December 15 2011

On December 7, 2011, The U.S. Tax Court ruled that inclusions in U.S. residents’ gross income that were required under the Subpart F provisions with respect to their controlled foreign corporation’s investments in U.S. property did not constitute qualified dividend income under Section 1(h) (11


Avoiding the section 338 consistency rules
  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • USA
  • April 9 2012

LTRS 201213013 and 201214012 are the same ruling, evidently issued to a buyer and a seller, in the common scenario where the seller consolidated group wants to sell subsidiary stock and the buyer wants to buy assets and obtain a cost basis; both taxpayers got what they wanted, including placing the target corporation into the buying consolidated group, without having a qualified stock purchase and thereby avoiding the consistency rules


Section 304 games
  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • USA
  • October 23 2013

Since the repeal of the collapsible corporation rules, section 304 has been the most confusing corporate tax section in the domestic context. Its


Tax reform update
  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • USA
  • December 1 2013

Tax reform has been in the offing ever since the 2008 elections. It took a back seat to more pressing national problems for a few years, but calls