[ad_1]
In Non-public Letter Ruling 202406001 (Feb. 9, 2024), the taxpayer sought a dedication of the present tax penalties of a capital reorganization. An govt had beforehand shaped a number of trusts and GRATs that owned shares of Inventory A and Inventory B in Firm. A restricted legal responsibility firm was shaped for a sure enterprise function (not described within the PLR). Firm and a disregarded entity wholly owned the LLC. Firm and its Board permitted a share repurchase program whereby executives and the trusts would contribute shares of Inventory A and B to Firm, which might then retire these shares and difficulty new shares of Inventory C to the LLC. As a part of the plan, the chief and the trusts deliberate to signal a contribution settlement beneath which they might contribute a proportionate variety of shares again to Firm. Then, the LLC would use money derived from Inventory C for a enterprise function.
A switch of property by one shareholder of an organization to a company is a present to the opposite shareholders except it’s made within the atypical course of enterprise, which means it’s bona fide, at arm’s size and free from donative intent. In that case, the switch is taken into account to be made for ample and full consideration in cash or cash’s price.
The IRS held that the settlement carried out transfers that met these necessities. First, the entire construction of the settlement was for a enterprise function. Second, the chief and trusts acted in their very own self-interest, and the non-contributing shareholders weren’t associated to the chief or the trusts. So, the oblique transfers ensuing from the share contributions elevated the worth of the non-contributing shareholders however weren’t presents as a result of they had been made within the atypical course of enterprise.
As between the chief and the trusts, the transfers the chief made elevated the worth of the shares held by trusts, however the identical was true for the transfers made by the trusts to the chief. As a result of they contributed an equal proportion of their shares, the worth contributed by every will equal the worth every obtained. Subsequently, these oblique transfers weren’t presents both.
Individually, the IRS held that the alternate of shares didn’t intervene with a GRAT qualifying beneath IRC Part 2702. The query was whether or not the contribution of shares to Firm can be characterised as a switch to the chief annuitant, which might violate the GRAT. The GRAT appropriately prohibits any distributions to the annuitant aside from the certified annuity curiosity. The contribution of the shares to Firm resulted in an oblique switch from the GRAT to the chief (because the annuitant) and an oblique switch to the non-contributing shareholders (because the remaindermen). The IRS held that these transfers had been actually a reinvestment of GRAT property, not an addition to the GRAT or a selected distribution to the annuitant govt.
[ad_2]
