Disregarded entities.On Jan. 30, 2006, the AICPA AICPA See American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). asked the IRS An abbreviation for the Internal Revenue Service, a federal agency charged with the responsibility of administering and enforcing internal revenue laws. to withdraw proposed regulations on the treatment of disregarded dis·re·gard tr.v. dis·re·gard·ed, dis·re·gard·ing, dis·re·gards 1. To pay no attention or heed to; ignore. 2. To treat without proper respect or attentiveness. n. entities in allocating partnership liabilities under Sec. 752. Under the proposed regulations (issued in August 2004), when determining economic risk of loss for Sec. 752 purposes, a disregarded entity's payment obligation should be taken into account only to the extent of the entity's net value. According to according to prep. 1. As stated or indicated by; on the authority of: according to historians. 2. In keeping with: according to instructions. 3. the AICPA, however, the proposal, in application, will "create significant compliance burdens for taxpayers" and will "result in inconsistent treatment" for different entities. There may be situations in which partnership interests are held through disregarded entities for nontax considerations. Under the current regulations, it is assumed that all partners with obligations to make payments intend to actually perform those obligations (regardless of their actual net worth); if the facts and circumstances indicate a plan to circumvent cir·cum·vent tr.v. cir·cum·vent·ed, cir·cum·vent·ing, cir·cum·vents 1. To surround (an enemy, for example); enclose or entrap. 2. To go around; bypass: circumvented the city. or avoid the obligation, a partner's obligation may be disregarded. Under the proposed regulations, however, this "intent element" is removed, leaving a regime that apples a net value standard when a disregarded entity holds a partnership interest while an intent standard is used in all other situations. Rather than this proposal, the AICPA believes that the existing ant-abuse rule should be expanded, to make clear that the rule addresses the concerns at which the proposed regulations are aimed. Lesli S. Laffie, J.D., LL.M LL.M Legum Magister (Master of Laws) . |
|
||||||||||||||||

Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion