What Is a Single Family Office? Managing Wealth Effectively


As wealth grows in scale, management becomes more complex, which requires more sophisticated approaches.

Traditional financial services often involve coordinating with multiple third parties. This can lead to more risk, even more complications, more cost, and less control over private information.

That’s why many ultra-high-net-worth families turn to single family office (SFO) providers.

An effective single family office structure is built around the family’s values, vision, and unique financial goals—no cookie-cutter templates.

At Asena Advisors, proper wealth management goes beyond numbers. It’s about protecting a family’s wealth, growing it wisely, and preparing to pass it on to the next generation—seamlessly and securely.

Here’s why families choose Asena Advisors:

  • Over 10 years of experience helping private clients, global families, and businesses navigate complex financial landscapes with clarity and confidence.
  • Specialization in cross-border investments and intergenerational wealth transfers.
  • Direct access to a trusted team of advisors through a secure, private, centralized system.
  • Streamlined communication where relationships are personal and confidentiality is never compromised.

Whether clients are building a new family office from the ground up or improving an existing structure, Asena Advisors provides support with the right people and the right systems.

Asena Advisors’ SFO solutions include:

  • Personalized wealth management
  • Transparent financial reporting
  • Comprehensive tax advisory
  • Administrative support
  • Regulatory and compliance guidance

Reasons to Set Up a Single Family Office

Reports show that an increasing number of wealthy families are choosing single family offices—and for a good reason. They make life easier and come with several compelling benefits for ultra-high-net-worth individuals and families.

Find out below why setting one up could be a smart move in financial management:

Benefits

For families serious about long-term wealth and legacy, a single family office may be an excellent option. Here’s what makes it so valuable:

  • Tailored wealth management: Get financial solutions like investment planning and accounting that cater to the family’s assets.
  • Expert guidance: Partner with a dedicated team of professionals who work to protect and grow wealth.
  • Personalized attention: Enjoy a one-on-one service that aligns everything with the family’s values and vision for the future.
  • Smooth generational transition: Transfer the family’s wealth to the next generation with minimal disruption and maximum clarity.
  • Centralized system: Consolidate all financial activities under one roof for greater efficiency, oversight, and peace of mind.
  • Family collaboration: Experience open communication and joint decision-making across generations, keeping everyone on the same page.

In short, a single family office involves more than just financial management—it’s a long-term partner in building and preserving legacy.

What Is a Single Family Office?

A single family office is a customized wealth management setup that focuses entirely on the financial affairs of one affluent family.

It offers a direct and intimate relationship between a family and a team of experts—like investment advisors, lawyers, and accountants—who tailor their services to fit the client’s unique needs.

This model also allows for a high level of confidentiality with strategies designed around the family’s specific goals, values, and financial landscape.

At Asena Advisors, a single family office helps manage, protect, and grow wealth across generations, ensuring that the legacy is handled exactly as the family intends.

Single Family Office Structure

A single family office wealth management firm is like a financial headquarters, where every service is personalized to meet the unique needs of each client.

This structure promotes close, direct communication between families and their advisors, fostering strong, lasting relationships.

From managing investments to handling taxes and estate planning, our single office firm provides solutions built around the client’s specific requirements.

At the heart of an SFO is an organizational structure built for privacy, control, and seamless wealth planning and management.

Let’s break down the key roles of an SFO:

  • Chief Executive Officer (CEO): Guides the overall direction of the family office and leads strategic planning.
  • Chief Investment Officer (CIO): Develops and manages the family’s investment strategy, ensuring the portfolio aligns with long-term goals.
  • Chief Financial Officer (CFO): Oversees accounting, tax planning, and financial reporting to keep everything smooth and transparent.
  • Chief Operating Officer (COO): Manages daily operations, internal processes, and team coordination.

The executive team collaborates closely with the family or a board of representatives to make sure every move supports the family’s goals.

The size of an SFO team can vary widely.

Smaller SFOs might operate with just a core executive team. Larger ones, particularly those managing billions in assets, often have multiple divisions and a broader team of specialists.

Single Family Office Categories

Single family offices aren’t all built the same. They can take on different shapes depending on the family’s setup, resources, and goals.

Understanding the different categories can help in picking the most effective structure to manage one’s wealth.

Whether a single family office is virtual or embedded, it all comes down to how involved clients want to be and what kind of support they need.

Read on to learn more about the main types of SFOs.

The Virtual Family Office

A virtual family office (VFO) provides wealth management services without being tied to a physical location.

It brings together a network of independent experts who work remotely to support a family’s financial needs.

Pros:

  • Tech-driven efficiency: Enhanced data security, better organization and tracking of financial data, and faster communication and decision-making.
  • Cost savings: No need to pay for physical office space, equipment, or full-time, in-house staff.
  • Global accessibility: Easy collaboration for family members and advisors, no matter where they are in the world.

Cons:

  • Limited personal interaction: Less face-to-face engagement, which may not suit families who value in-person relationships.
  • Heavy tech dependence: Greater risk of hacking or system outages.
  • Privacy and security issues: Sensitive financial data is stored and shared online, increasing the need for strong cybersecurity measures.
  • Coordination difficulties: Time zone differences and remote collaboration can complicate scheduling and communication.

The Private Investment Office

Think of private investment offices as standalone firms where, in some cases, the expert team co-invests alongside clients.

Structured as partnerships, these firms offer tailored investment advice and innovative strategies designed to grow and protect one’s wealth.

It’s all about making money work harder—whether that’s through private equity, real estate, hedge funds, or direct deals.

The Embedded Family Office

Embedded family offices (EFOs) operate within a family’s business, with employees often serving both the company and the family.

While this setup can be efficient, poor structuring comes with risks:

  • Legal liability: Creating a legal entity helps shield personal assets by establishing a “corporate veil.” Blurring personal and business finances without the proper legal structure can pierce the corporate veil, putting personal assets at risk.
  • Audit risk: Mixing personal and business expenses can raise red flags with tax authorities, increasing the chance of audits, fines, and financial scrutiny.

Here are some solutions to get the structure right:

  • Track expenses carefully, keeping separate records of personal and business costs.
  • Ask for advice from lawyers, tax specialists, and financial advisors before making any major decisions.

The bottom line is that there’s no perfect type of single family office—just the one that best fits a family’s needs, goals, and level of complexity.

How Single Family Offices Are Balancing Tradition and Transformation

Today, there’s a fast-changing landscape of SFOs—driven by economic, social, and geopolitical evolution.

Hence, it’s essential for modern family offices to strike a balance between tradition and change to stay strong and future-ready.

Wealth and Regulation

Shifting wealth and regulatory fields are reshaping family office strategies, requiring greater agility than ever.

For instance, jurisdictions are evolving fast in terms of global tax and transparency policies. Hence, SFOs follow them to address broader economic and social goals.

Digital Transformation

Digital transformation is becoming a top priority for SFOs—not just internally but across family businesses.

From boosting efficiency with automation to strengthening cybersecurity, many SFOs are embracing a “digital first” approach to stay ahead and manage risk.

Risk and Reputation

SFOs are adopting more advanced risk and reputation models as the definition of value expands to include environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors.

With shifting multi-generational priorities and growing ESG trends, this area is becoming a key focus for long-term legacy planning.

Strategy and Governance

Prominent families and SFOs are taking a more strategic approach to family governance—creating clear, dual structures that separate but align business and family oversight.

This setup could be beneficial in helping ensure clarity, smoother execution, and more substantial alignment across all stakeholders.

Asena Advisors brings the best of both worlds—time-tested practices and a fresh, forward-looking approach—for single family office needs.

Its team of specialists is equipped with technical proficiency and industry-specific experience, providing insightful recommendations and actionable plans for a client’s financial life.

Multi-Family Office vs. Single Family Office Structure

When it comes to managing substantial wealth, selecting the proper family office structure is key.

The two primary models are single family office (SFO) and multi-family office (MFO). Each comes with unique benefits, depending on a family’s priorities, resources, and long-term goals.

A multi-family office serves several unrelated ultra-high-net-worth families, delivering tailored wealth management strategies while sharing the cost of expert services with other clients.

This structure gives families access to seasoned professionals, tailored strategies, and the benefits of collaboration and shared insights.

In contrast, a single family office focuses solely on one wealthy family, offering complete control, privacy, and a customized approach.

Both single and multi-family offices strive to manage the majority of services in-house, minimizing the need for outsourcing wherever possible.

What Are Family Offices?

A family office refers to a team of specialists, whether integrated with a family business or operating independently.

For instance, Asena Advisor’s family office firm delivers professional and personal services to a family.

These services can include day-to-day operations, such as travel organization or asset management.

In addition, a family office oversees accounting, tax planning, legal affairs, estate planning, philanthropy, investments, and general administration.

The Many Disciplines of a Family Office

A family office brings together different disciplines and expertise to meet the complex and evolving needs of the families it serves.

The services often include:

  • Investment management: Building and managing portfolios across a variety of assets to hit long-term financial goals.
  • Tax planning: Staying on top of tax strategies while keeping everything compliant.
  • Estate planning: Designing efficient ways to transfer wealth across future generations with minimal tax impact.
  • Risk management: Anticipating and reducing exposure to financial risks like market swings.
  • Philanthropic services: Guiding charitable giving and overseeing foundations or nonprofit initiatives.
  • Legal and compliance: Keeping the family’s financial activities aligned with legal and regulatory requirements.
  • Concierge services: Taking care of everyday financial tasks, such as bill payments and staffing needs.
  • Reporting and Performance Tracking: Delivering regular updates on financial performance and outcomes.

By covering all these areas and bringing together these key offerings, family office services ensure that every aspect of a client’s financial life is strategically positioned for long-term success.

Financial Jobs of a Family Office Structure

Behind every successful family office is a range of specialized financial roles—ensuring the coordination of overall wealth stewardship.

Let’s take a closer look at the key financial roles inside a family office:

Legal Division

Laws and regulations vary by country and region. They affect areas such as investment, taxation, privacy, and succession planning.

Understanding the local legal environment is essential for proper family office operations.

That’s where the legal division steps in.

This division plays a crucial role in navigating complex regulations. It ensures that the family’s financial activities are fully compliant with the law.

A strong family office begins with close collaboration with seasoned legal advisors, accountants, and other trusted counsel.

Back Office Support

The back office is where the bulk of the work is done. It handles the day-to-day operations that keep the family office running smoothly.

This support can include teams such as:

  • Finance and accounting: Manages the company’s finances from bookkeeping and taxes to investments and long-term financial planning.
  • Human resources (HR): Handles hiring, employee development, benefits, and record-keeping.
  • Information technology (IT): Oversees and supports a family office’s tech systems, software, and digital tools.

Real Estate Division

Commercial real estate—like office spaces, retail centers, or residential complexes—is a go-to investment strategy for many family offices.

It offers steady rental income along with the potential for long-term value growth. Family offices may choose to invest directly in properties or diversify through real estate funds or real estate investment trusts (REITs).

Private Equity and Venture Capital

Family offices often invest in private equity and venture capital to grow their wealth.

Private equity investment focuses on established private companies that offer strong returns over the long term. However, it’s less liquid.

Venture capital, on the other hand, targets early-stage startups with high growth potential. These investments are riskier but can offer substantial rewards if the companies succeed.

With the right financial professionals on board, a family office does more than support day-to-day needs. It becomes a safety net for a family’s wealth.

History of Family Offices

Family offices aren’t a new concept. They’ve evolved alongside the growth of the US and have been around for quite a while.

Here’s a quick look at the timeline:

  • 1800s: The Industrial Revolution gave rise to America’s first prominent business moguls.
  • 1838: John Pierpont, popularly known as JP Morgan, and his family set up the House of Morgan to handle their assets.
  • 1882: John D. Rockefeller is believed to have established the first full-service single family office. His wealth was valued at $1.4 billion when he passed away in 1937, equivalent to approximately $255 billion in today’s currency.
  • 1900s: Wealthy families like the Carnegies and Vanderbilts began establishing their own family offices, following Rockefeller’s lead.
  • 1970s: Customized private banking grew, and multi-family offices emerged.
  • 1990s: Retiring post-World War II business owners sparked a surge in new family offices to manage family wealth.
  • 2000s: The tech boom generated a new wave of multimillionaires, many of whom went on to launch their own family offices.
  • Present: Family offices are acknowledged as a specialized industry with trade groups, dedicated events, and financial firms customizing their services to meet clients’ unique needs.

The Modern Family Office

Family offices have come a long way from their traditional role as private wealth management hubs.

Today, they operate as sophisticated organizations navigating a constantly shifting landscape of legal, regulatory, financial, and reputational challenges.

As the number of ultra-high-net-worth families grows, so does the demand for modern wealth strategies that prioritize digital presence, reputation protection, privacy, and strong risk management.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About Single Family Office

  1. How much money do clients need to have a family office?

    The actual cost of starting a family office varies greatly depending on the structure and services involved. Typically, a minimum net worth of approximately $50 million is required.

  2. What is the minimum amount of assets under the management of an SFO?

    Affluent individuals and families with at least $100 million in investable assets can establish their own single family office. A dedicated wealth management entity handles every aspect of a client’s financial affairs and personal capital.

  3. What do single family offices invest in?

    Single family offices are stepping beyond the usual investment playbook. Instead of sticking to traditional asset classes, they can dive into direct and co-investments.

Think of private companies, startups, and real estate ventures—where they can have more control and potentially bigger upside.

At the same time, they’re doubling down on alternative investments like private equity, venture capital, real estate, and hedge funds.

Perhaps they’ve seen the potential of these strategies not only to diversify portfolios but also to open the door to higher returns outside the public markets.

Key Takeaways

Asena Advisor’s family office firm centralizes a client’s financial life—think of it as a one-stop shop for personalized wealth management.

With a carefully gathered top-tier team of financial advisors, tax specialists, and lawyers for single family offices, Asena Advisors aims to protect, manage, and preserve a family’s wealth wisely.

Connect with Asena Advisors for a free consultation by filling out the contact form.

Family Office Vlog Series: Ep. 12 – Family Office Wealth Management

In our 12th episode of the Family Office Vlog Series, Asena CEO Peter Harper comments on how wealth management plays a central and critical role within a family office.

 

 

Transcript:

Peter Harper: Hey guys. Peter Harper, Managing Director and CEO of the Asena Family Office. For those of you who are not familiar with the business, we advise foreign founders, private clients, and family offices on U.S. direct investments and mergers & acquisitions.

Peter Harper: So, today, in the next installment of the Family Office Series, I wanted to talk about family office wealth management. So, in the previous vlogs, you’ve seen me talk about the role and structure of a family office, what it is, and why it’s a meaningful structure. Today, I wanted to hone in on one very specific element of a family office, being Family Office Wealth Management.

Peter Harper: So, just to recap, a single-family office is a structure established by a family of significant means, whether that’s a family that has intergenerational wealth transference happening or where an individual has realized a substantial amount of liquidity, post-transactional liquidity, and they are looking to establish a framework whereby they consolidate all the things they need to run the financial and non-financial aspects of their life. So, generally, you will see some sort of C-Suite infrastructure: so CEO, CFO, CIO, maybe Chief Legal Officer, and then administrative staff to support the vision of the family, which may be economic or altruistic. It also will deal with all of the administration associated with sort of non-core financial assets; so, operating assets like, you know, expensive cars, boats, planes, etc.

Peter Harper: A multi-family office, which is what the Asena Family Office is, is a fractional offering over a single-family office. So, a business whereby we offer fractional investment, legal, accounting, tax, and estate management services for families that are either not at sufficient scale to warrant a single-family office; so the overhead associated with all those things, or have just elected they don’t want the operational complexity of running a massive team to look after their wealth.

Peter Harper: In the context of wealth management and family offices generally, the investment aspects of a family office, so the wealth management aspect; that’s just a vertical; a need of the family, right? They will have a stated financial objective, right, and they will have internal investment folks to help run and manage that, or they’ll engage with outside people. So, independent wealth management businesses like the Asena Family Office to manage that aspect on their behalf.

Peter Harper: So, the major difference between a family office is that it will be broader in its service offering or functionality and focus not only on financial aspects but all the non-financial aspects the family needs to run its life and account for its life. Whereas, within a pure wealth management business or if someone is offering pure wealth management services to family offices, it is that it’s simply looking to advise the family on their core public and private investments. Right, guys; hope this is helpful. Cheers.

 

Do you have questions about Family Office Wealth Management? Contact one of our Asena consultants for more information.

Peter Harper

Family Office Vlog Series: Ep. 11 – Family Office Financial Services

Asena CEO Peter Harper comments on how family offices are established to assist global family offices with the allocation of capital in our 11th episode of the Family Office Vlog Series.

 

Transcript:

Peter Harper: Hey guys. Peter Harper, Managing Director and CEO of the Asena Family Office. For those of you who are not familiar with the business, we’re a multi-family office that advises foreign family offices and private clients on U.S. direct investments and mergers & acquisitions.

Peter Harper: So today, in the next vlog in our family office series, we wanted to touch on Family Office Financial Services. What do we mean by that? So, in prior vlogs, we’ve walked through what it means to be a single-family office and then fractional family offices, and we’ve talked about the anchor point to which a family office really organizes itself and its family affairs, right?

Peter Harper: So, just touching on that again, a single-family office is an organization established when a family of significance has either a material liquidity event or they inherit a substantial amount of money, and they look to corporatize their investment and administrative operations, right? So, they would ordinarily establish a C-Suite; so, a CEO, CIO, head of legal, and CFO, and they would build out a team that are specialists in organizing an administrative, really complex, global admin. So, you know, multiple personal use assets like homes, boats, cars, and planes around the world, right?

Peter Harper: A multi-family office is the same concept but on a fractional basis. So, where a family says either we do not have the capital right to establish a single-family office or we don’t want the headache of managing the complexity of the people associated with such a big team. We will pay someone like the Asena Family Office on an outsourced basis, on a fractional basis, to look after all these different things on our behalf. So, you know, manage our money, look at our internal estate succession and legal issues, advise us on deals, and then manage admin and compliance on the back end, right?

Peter Harper: So, in the last 20 years (15 – 20 years), and principally since the financial crisis in 2008, there has been a massive amount of capital that has transitioned out of traditional wealth management businesses into family offices and a recent report that was released by Goldman Sachs tipped that amount as of, you know, last year to be roughly 50%. So, roughly 50% of the world’s capital today is held in private structures as opposed to being managed by independent wealth managers, right? So, there has been a massive increase in the space of what is, you know, family office financial services, right, and they are all the folks, you know, like the Asena Family Office that are established to facilitate and help global family offices allocate capital. Hope this is helpful. Cheers.

 

If you would like more information about Family Office Financial Services,

reach out via the Contact Us section to the right.

Peter Harper

Family Office Vlog Series: Ep. 10 – Family Office Fee Structures

In our 10th episode of the Family Office Vlog Series, Asena CEO Peter Harper comments on the relevancy of fee structures in both single-family and multi-family offices.

Transcript:

Peter Harper: Hey guys. Peter Harper, Managing Director and CEO of the Asena family office. For those of you who are not familiar with business, we advise foreign family offices and private clients on U.S. direct investments and mergers and acquisitions.

Peter Harper: So, today is the next video in our Family Office Series, and we wanted to touch on family office fee structures. But, before we do that, I think it’s, you know, useful to kind of recap on, you know, what a family office is and why there is such a massive uptick in family offices being created today.

Peter Harper: So, family offices are an, you know, organizational structure established by families of significant wealth to support, you know, their economic and private endeavors, right? So, you know, think about when, you know, families had a massive liquidity event or huge inheritance event, extraordinary amounts of capital, and there is a need to stand up some form of organizational infrastructure to manage the capital and manage non-income producing assets. So, that means that might mean establishing a C-Suite so the CEO, chief investment officer (COO), and CFO to manage investments and non-investment costs. So, private assets like houses, cars, boats, planes, and then all of the, you know, infrastructure and employee issues that are associated with that. A multi-family office is that on a fractional basis. So, either a family doesn’t have the means – doesn’t have the wealth to justify a single family office, or they just don’t want the complexity – they don’t want the operational complexity of having to manage, you know, a team at the level that you have to run your own family office.

Peter Harper: So, you know, the fee structure we’re going to talk about is largely, probably more relevant, to a multi-family office setting because in a single-family office, a lot of this stuff might be done in-house by people that, you know, employees that are on, you know, real P&L costs, right? Just to put it into context, you know, for a single-family office normally to run, you know, in-house overhead, you’re looking at sort of 7 to 10 million per annum to run that for most minimum, for most family offices.

Peter Harper: So, you know, the fractional support is the right way to go for most of the market, right, and how does that charge? The most customary is, effectively, a fee based on assets under management. So, a percentage of the funds under management or assets under management looked after by the multi-family office that will be sufficient to cover all services within the business. So, tax accounting, wealth management, estate planning, and any other ancillary services that might be relevant to the particular client’s needs.

Peter Harper: Some family offices of scale might still prefer, rather than having a fund model, to have some sort of fixed fee arrangement or hourly-based arrangement like that you would in any other sort of professional services model, but that’s not as customary because the biggest thing that you want is when you think about the multi-family experience, you want to feel – even though these people are external to you – you want to feel like they really are part of your internal team, right, and in order to do that you need to make sure that you’ve got the sort of, you’ve got less variability around your overhead and fixed costs to make sure the multi-family office can support capable people to support your needs. Thank you.

 

If you are a family office or a business owner in need of assistance,

reach out to one of our advisors via the Contact Us section to the right.

Peter Harper

Family Office Vlog Series: Ep. 9 – Virtual Family Office

In our 9th episode of the Family Office Vlog Series, Asena CEO Peter Harper focuses on the phenomenon of a virtual family office.

Transcript:

Peter Harper: Hey guys. Peter Harper, Managing Director and CEO of the Asena Family Office. For those of you who are not familiar with the business, we’re a multi-family office that focuses on U.S. direct investments in mergers and acquisitions for foreign family offices and private clients.

Peter Harper: So today, we wanted to, again, it’s the next video within our family office series. In prior vlogs, we’ve talked about what is a single-family office versus a multi-family office, the various components that require consideration when making a decision to establish a single-family office or a multi-family office, and why that’s important for families of significant wealth.

Peter Harper: Today, we wanted to touch on this more recent phenomenon of a virtual family office. It really is, in my opinion, a bit of a marketing spin, but I think it’s important for people to understand what it is because it’s often referred to more widely today than it may have been five years ago.

Peter Harper: So, just to recap, a single-family office is an organization that’s established by family of significant means that has either experienced a substantial change in their liquid net worth through the sale of a major asset or there has been a major wealth transference event from another generation, and they need infrastructure to not only manage the liquidity (manage the capital that they’ve either earned or inherited) and they need a bunch of sophisticated administrative services to manage both the financial and non-financial aspects of the family, right? So, in the normal course, this looks like in an office of the chief investment officer. So, someone who’s focused on, you know, portfolio development and managing the capital on behalf of the family based on their goals and objectives, and then the rest of it really made up of people that you would expect to see inside a normal C-Suite. So, legal counsel, CFO, the CEO to someone that’s both focused on, you know, the operational aspects of the family that may be anchored around investment or also might be anchored around, you know, private assets (sort of non-investment assets; such as your houses boats planes, etc.

Peter Harper: The multi-family office is a structure whereby a family says that they do not need the full infrastructure of a single-family office, so all of those people, right? On their own, you know, their own sort of P & L, they feel that they could be better served if they were obtaining the services of those types of people on a fractional basis, right? This is determined based on two things: 1. It can be determined based on the scale of wealth; they do not have the financial liquidity to justify the full expense of a single-family office; 2. The other piece can be that they just don’t want the complexity, right? Because there’s a lot of management that goes into building a full staff and managing them.

Peter Harper: The virtual family office is really this concept of a multi-family office but on a purely virtual basis. Now, I say it’s a bit of a marketing ploy because, since the whole dynamic of COVID,  you know, and really over the last 20 or 30 years, this notion that if you’re a multi-family office client you were still going into a physical office to engage with all the fractional components of your world was highly unlikely; it’s an outdated concept. You know, COVID maybe accelerated that. So, you know, people who are multi-family clients are quite happy being in an environment where all of those different services are dealt with remotely, right? Which I think is really quite common.

Peter Harper: So yeah, in the multi-world, the distinction between multi-family office and virtual family office – I’m like, okay, is there a major distinction? I’m not sure I see it, but it’s a term that’s become far more common today, right? So, as the term denotes, a virtual family office is really this notion that you’re receiving fractional services as a multi-family office, and all of those services are being delivered on a virtual basis, right? A lot of folks are saying, “Hey, future of family.” Well, no, this is the future of what I think of every business. So, to say, “Okay, this is unique.” This is a unique issue as it pertains to family offices or multi-family offices, which I think is slightly off. I think this is a dynamic that we’re going to see, and we’re going to continue to see across, you know, all parts of the financial services ecosystem.

Peter Harper: Just one sort of final practical thing as far as recapping. You know, we talked before about who’s who in the zoo as far as who are the people you would expect to see in a family office, in a multi-family office. As far as what they are doing, right? On a monthly basis, right? As I said, they’re deploying capital, so they’re working out –  what is the financial objectives of the family and managing risk, as far as investment risk, on behalf of the family to meet the goals and objectives; they’re thinking about the longevity of the family and family governance, right? So, how do they ensure that every member of the family is dialed in and engaged with the family objectives? Now, that can be a bit more challenging theoretically on a virtual basis, and they’re thinking about, you know, coordinating the financial and non-financial objectives with a broader list of service providers,  you know, but all the same challenges that you would expect to see, right?

Peter Harper: And this is where the one part of this piece that you probably just cannot do on a virtual basis is the engagement of the family – the sort of human element; the human context too well – What is a multi-family and the family sort of investment dynamics. You know, all of that still, in my experience, needs to happen in person, right? So even if everyone’s living in different places, we’ve got remote service providers, you know, periodically the family’s getting together to look at the family mission statement, think about the family council, you know, talk about investment policy. Talk about risk management. And then think about how they’re all communicating with each other, right? Obviously, they’re going to be leveraging technology on a pretty substantial basis, but as I said, I think this is in line with every other business on the planet that’s, you know, that was impacted pre-COVID, and they’re going to be relying very heavily on, you know, someone to implement and organize all this, right?

Peter Harper: So, I think really the virtual family office is just really a further extension of the new paradigm around what a multi-family office is, right? It’s more of a hybrid-type environment where, yes, you’ve got all these service deliveries happening on a virtual basis, but if you are periodically engaging, whether it’s monthly or quarterly, as a family to work through all the various items that you need to, depending on how complex the infrastructure needs are as a family, right, and how big the family is. That’s it. Cheers, guys.

 

To find out more about our Family Office services,

reach out to us via the Contact Us section to the right.

Peter Harper

Family Office Vlog Series: Ep. 8 – Family Office vs. Hedge Fund

In our 8th episode of the Family Office Vlog Series, Asena CEO Peter Harper will elaborate on our most recent blog post: Family Office vs. Hedge Fund.

Transcript:

Peter Harper: Hey guys. Peter Harper, Managing Director and CEO of the Asena Family Office. For those of you who are not familiar with the business, we’re a multi-family office and we advise foreign family offices and private clients on U.S. direct investments in mergers and acquisitions.

Peter Harper: So, today’s the next video in our family office series. In prior videos, we’ve talked extensively around, you know, the idea of what a family office is; trends around the growth of family offices, and why there’s been such a massive uptick in family offices over the last decade; and this sort of general comparison of where family offices sit in the current wealth management financial services landscape.

Peter Harper: Today, we wanted to talk about the comparison between a family office and a hedge fund. What is a family office? What is a hedge fund? Why are they different, and why do we sometimes hear about the two vehicles, the two structures in the context of one another, right? So, as we have talked about previously, a family office is an operating structure established by a family who has significant capital or recent liquidity to manage all aspects of their life, right? So, this notion of running a family, a family investment mandate like a business. So, they’ll have generally, depending on the size, they might have a full C-Suite. They’ll have capital deployed under a wealth management strategy across public equities and alternative investments such as private equity, hedge funds, fixed income, and venture capital, and then they’ll have a team of folks that manage what we like to think of as complex admin, right? So, all of the issues associated with owning complex non-income producing private assets such as planes, boats, houses, across multiple geographies, and then all of the different elements and things that sort of come with that, with a broader family group, right? So, you know, who do you need as far as specialists to manage those assets? What type of insurance do you need? How do you manage their use and maintenance? And then, you know, circling back to the C-Suite; what are all the ancillary things, you know, to make sure that the wealth is protected and it’s managed in accordance with the long-term objectives of the family.

Peter Harper: I had mentioned that you know, comparatively, I’d mentioned that a hedge fund is a vehicle that a lot of family offices invest in, right? And that’s the major distinction. Whereas a family office is really a single vehicle normally set up for a single family to manage their wealth, a hedge fund is a private investment vehicle whereby an asset manager, an investment manager, executes on a specific, sort of non-regulated investment strategy for a number of sophisticated investors, right? So, it’s the aggregation of unrelated parties’ capital to execute on a particular strategy. Oftentimes, a hedge fund manager, because most of them are very successful and wealthy, will have a significant amount of their own wealth and their own strategy. And the reason why you hear about hedge funds and family offices side by side is because when a hedge fund manager decides they don’t want to continue to manage capital on behalf of external third parties, they just want to run their own money, often as it relates to sort of SEC regulation, they will transition from a hedge fund to a family office, right, because there’s less regulatory oversight. That’s the major distinction between the two. I hope this has been helpful. Cheers, guys.

 

If you have questions about Family Office vs. Hedge Funds, reserve a consultation

with one of our advisors via the Contact Us section to the right.

Peter Harper

Family Office Vlog Series: Ep. 7 – Family Office Investment Strategy – Do You Have One?

In our 7th episode of the Family Office Vlog Series, Asena CEO Peter Harper focuses on the topic of Family Office Investment Strategies.

Transcript:

Peter Harper: Hey guys. Peter Harper, Managing Director and CEO of the Asena Family Office. For those of you who are not familiar with the business, we’re a multi-family office advising foreign family offices and founders on U.S. direct investments in mergers and acquisitions.

Peter Harper: So, in the last few updates, we’ve delved heavily into the topic of what is a family office and why do I need to know about it. We’ve touched on briefly the type of investments that family offices make in their role, but today we really want to focus on the topic of family office investment strategies. We will backpedal a little bit just to recap on some of the things, I think the key issues that, you know, people need to be aware of about family offices, so we don’t, you don’t have to delve back into other videos to get on top of that, but that’s going to be the focus – family office investment strategies. So, by way of recap, you know, a family office is, you know, effectively an investment office or investment business that has been established to run a family’s money and to administer all the back office and support services that a family needs to operate, right? So, if families of material wealth that have a great degree of complexity need to build effectively a C-Suite team of folks to make decisions around how they should allocate their capital, right, to develop, to generate income, and then how they should manage, so how they should manage, you know, active income-producing assets, and how they should manage assets that are not income producing, that also can have a lot of complexity. So, that’s the boats, cars, houses, planes, etc., right, and the complexity comes with running assets like that, and how to account for, ensure, and protect those things for the broader family, right? So, why don’t folks set that one up? So, for a lot of people that have gone through a material liquidity event, so, that they’ve built a business and sold it, or they’ve inherited a material amount of money, the risk profile, or the issues that they face before and after that event is drastically different, right?  There’s complexity that would exist, will exist in their life that they may not have ever experienced, right? So, there’s this very important need to create infrastructure to adequately support folks who go through that process, right? So, you know, over the last 50 years, and really the last 20 years, has been a massive increase in the amount of family offices that have been established globally, and, you know, part of that has been driven because, you know, previously what would happen when folks would have a material exit event they would ordinarily who have allocated the bulk of their capital to a major money manager to manage that on behalf of the family.

Peter Harper: You know, as the markets became more challenging post the financial crisis, a lot of capital found its way into private markets. So, what’s widely known as Alts; so, private equity, hedge funds, venture capital, and more recently, directs, to try and drive greater investment returns. The returns were not created in the public markets, and so in order to attract higher returns, private capital was looking at stuff that was sort of non-listed private deals. So, that’s the reason people where there’s been this massive increase in family offices. There was a cap; there was a financial motivator for this, but along with that, there was a recognition that okay, if you’ve got a lot of administrative complexity around your private life, so around your non-income producing assets, you need a team of folks that understand how to how to manage those things. For a lot of people, they don’t want the complexity of a single-family office, right, because there is a huge amount of work in just running it, right? Depending on the scale of your wealth, a family may choose to engage a business like the Asena Family Office, which is a multi-family office, so, a business that is designed to manage the complexity of a family’s wealth and assets on a fractional basis to do that on their behalf, right? So, outsource money management and outsource back-office support. Whether that’s because they feel that economically, that they don’t have the capital to support the overhead of a single-family office that, you know, can be five, ten, fifteen million to run just the overhead of a single-family office or because they don’t want the complexity of managing that themselves, right? they prefer to outsource it.

Peter Harper: So, we’ve, again, we’ve done a refresher on what a family office is, what a multi-family office is, and why someone would set one up.  I then wanted to talk a little bit about, you know, the importance of strategy, purpose, and goals when developing an investment strategy. So, for a lot of families that are kind of new to this process and, you know, maybe they’ve been running a business, and all of a sudden, and they’ve always had this sort of private investment approach outside of their business where there was no real rigor to that process, right? So, they invested in whatever they wanted to invest in, right? Because they had liquidity to support that, building that out on a strategic basis from within a family actually requires a huge amount of discipline, right? Because, you’re setting systems and processes and values framework within the family, right? Ordinarily, you’re then building and establishing an investment committee to execute on that, right, and you’re really trying to run the family office consistent with those vision, values, and goals. So, establishing what they are and setting a framework around them is really, really critical.

Peter Harper: So, you know, what are they? What’s different things for different people, but the most important thing at the start is a family understanding how they think and feel about different things, right? You know, these kinds of talk to a couple of trends we’re seeing in the area of family investment strategies. You know, sustainability or impact investing has been a massive increase over the last 20 years in families starting to be very focused around, you know, this notion that not every dollar of income is equal, right? When you’re a family of significant wealth, you can leave an impact both on the family legacy and future generations by investing in a sustainable way. So, you know, how do we feel about climate change; how do we feel about, you know, gambling; how do we feel about the different assets that might invest in, you know, alcohol or whatever else. It’s different people for different things, but it’s very important, it’s very important the family are reliant on how they think about impact. You know, having a rigor around manager selection is really key. So, you know, regardless of whether, if you’re a single-family office and you’re going to invest through money management, you’re going to invest in public and private markets, right? Even if you’re going to largely outsource the investment management function of your family office, right, because you’ve got to appoint external money managers to do that. You have to have a level of sophistication and rigor to be able to assess, to be able to select who’s a good manager, right? So, what’s their track record look like? Are they successful? You know, and then you have to have a system and process to critique them, whether that’s on a quarterly bi-annual, or annual basis, right? And there are businesses out there that, you know, fund the funds with the sole responsibility is just critiquing an entire, you know, a significant number of sorts of active managers in it with various specializations, right? So, having the internal systems and processes to select managers and then review them as far as an investment strategy is very key when you’ve got a significant amount of capital in the market. The second piece that’s really important is that if you if a family office, does intend to invest in Alts, so venture capital, hedge funds, and the product is a little different because it still goes back to that manager selection, right? Whether you’re choosing a manager to run equities or you’re choosing effectively a private equity manager to do deals, it’s the same process. But, on directs, you know, directs and co-invests which are currently the single biggest growth area for family offices, you need to have a system and team in place to source deals in accordance with your values and your investment strategy, underwrite the deals, so determine whether they’re a good deal and whether they fit within your strategy, and then be actively involved in the execution of those deals, right? And that’s, you know, that’s really where Asena plays a really active role in engaging with its clients because that ability to execute on a direct deal requires a huge amount of, sort of, active skill sets, right? Legal, tax, financial, to both source, underwrite, and execute.

Peter Harper: And then, you know, the final thing is just understanding. You know, just understanding five reasons why family offices are focusing on directs, right? It’s a massive focus for us, right? And, you know, this is the main reason why a lot of folks are focusing on directs and why we continue to be bullish on them as a space to, you know, allocate in private markets is because there’s a greater degree of control and decision-making ability, right? You tend to find better value in interest alignment as far as return, right? So, if you do care about impact or various other things, your ability to influence a lot of direct deals is far more substantial than it would be, you know, in a fund or some of the form of structure, there’s reduced fees and expenses. It also allows you to really heavily leverage the strength of a family office network. So really, in my opinion, the single biggest value of a well-established and integrated family office is the ability to leverage the substantial networks that exist that’s around, you know, private capital inside of family offices on a global scale. So, that’s sharing deals, co-investing, and forming alignment as far as areas where there’s shared interest. And then finally, as I said earlier, making an impact. When you are directing an opportunity and you’re investing in something that you think can change the process, impact, you know, impact is key. Cheers.

 

Do you have questions about Family Office Investment Strategies? Get in touch with one of our Asena consultants for more information.

–Peter Harper

Family Office Vlog Series: Ep. 6 – Family Office Direct Investing

Find out more about Family Office Direct Investing in our sixth episode of the Family Office Vlog Series with Asena CEO Peter Harper.

Transcript:

Peter Harper: Hey, guys. Peter Harper, managing director and CEO of the Asena Family Office. For those of you who are not familiar with the business, we are a multi-family office that is focused on U.S. direct investments in mergers and acquisitions for private clients and family offices.

Peter Harper: So, in the last video, we touched on the intersection between family offices and private equity, and the rise of family offices. You know, we talked about the rise of family offices over the last decade. Throughout that process, we, you know, we really touched on or partially touched on the notion of family office direct investment, right? So, why family offices have really grown to prominence, particularly in more recent times?

Peter Harper: So, today we wanted to address, at a deeper level, the idea of family office direct investing. So, what is it? How do family offices think about it? What are the risks associated with it, right, and why should you care about it, okay? So, you know, for those of you who are new to the family office world, the way in which families think about asset allocation really stems across, you know, six different areas. They’re looking at investing in public equities, fixed income, you know, traditional real estate, whether that’s into a direct asset or in through some sort of fund structure. They’re probably looking at hedge funds, definitely looking at private equity, and they are almost definitely looking at direct investment. So, that is investing directly in either a privately owned business or in some form of real estate structure.

Peter Harper: So, direct investment has really grown to prominence as a primary tool of investing for family offices because of the perceived inefficiency associated with investing by fund vehicles where family offices don’t have as much control to the underlying investment. So, what’s triggering this is just the sheer volume of capital that has been injected into this area; into this space over the last decade. A recent report by Goldman Sachs put that it currently something to the tune of 50 percent of the world’s private capital is now allocated through private or by private family offices into a private market or alternative investments. The reason for this is because you know when you invest by a fund vehicle or indirectly, there can be layers and layers of fees, so that it ultimately will reduce the return on the investment and, if you have the right team in place, if you’re going via fund vehicle, you’re getting less control you know over the investment, right? So, the rationale for direct investment is overall better efficiencies, so higher returns, and more control and involvement in the investment process. So, less surprises, right?

Peter Harper: There can also be a lot of tax benefits. You know, any time that there is one less layer of structural complexity between the capital and the asset, you’re generally going to see operating efficiencies and so, you know, both returns and tax can play a role in why the family offices are more attracted to directs.

Peter Harper: So, how are family offices today sourcing direct opportunities, right? So, you know, personal networks often they’re relying very heavily on their personal networks to source deals. However, you know, as a firm who specializes in private market deal sourcing, you know, I can say that there’s a huge amount of work that goes into creating, you know, adequate scale around a personal network to source deals; (1) you need to look at a lot of different deals, right? You need to be very clear around what it is that you want to invest in and what you don’t want to invest in, and then (2) you need to have the internal skills within your organization to underwrite, you know, whether the investment should happen, right? So, the biggest one is personal networks. A lot of folks are still going via investment, you know, maybe sourcing deal opportunities via investment bankers or brokers, right? Maybe it’s less common for family offices today because, for a lot of families, they’re either looking to build out the internal skills to underwrite and find opportunities on their own or they’re working with a fractional family office like the Asena Family Office to make that, to do that work. The larger families might have, you know, that are in the business of doing deals, might have pretty sophisticated direct outreach programs, right, to find opportunities, but I think, for the most part, it’s going to come through professional networks, right, and being out in market telling folks that, “Hey we want to do deals and we’re ready to invest.”

Peter Harper: So, what are the risks, right? A lot of opportunities, better returns, and more efficient structures. What are the risks? There are a number of risks: (1) The biggest one is probably or most common we thought of is probably Liquidity Risk: Direct investments normally come with a longer-term investment time horizon, right? The reason why a lot of folks like direct investment over fund structures is fund structures tend to have a lot limited lifespan, or it might be five, seven, or ten years. At some point, regardless of how an asset is performing, they might trade it. Whereas, if you’re directly in the opportunity as a family, right, and you like it, but it’s just not going the direction you want to go at the same time horizon, then you opt to stay in it regardless of where things are at. But still, you’re in an investment that might be heavily liquid so trading out of it can be challenging; (2) Concentration Risk: Normally, the reason folks are investing via fund vehicles is because they want to be diversified across a bunch of different assets that might have the same sort of thematic. If you’re direct into a deal, so you’re more heavily concentrated into your one opportunity rather than a basket of opportunities then you’ve got concentration risk – if the deal doesn’t, you might get bigger returns, but if the deal doesn’t work out, you’re potentially going to lose more money; (3) Operational Risk: When you’re going direct into a deal, it really is about up buying into an operating asset. So, that’s either an operating business, right, where your management team, the success of the management team, is the success of the deal or it’s, you know, a piece of operating real estate. So, the same outcome with a piece of operating real estate, you’re only as good as the folks that are running the asset; and then the final point we just had here was around (4) Valuation Risk: With illiquid assets, again it’s a lot more difficult to understand where the valuation of an asset might be at any given time, right? So, you need to have these systems in place to be able to ascertain that relatively efficiently at the right moments in time.

Peter Harper: I wanted to just touch on a little bit about this sort of interaction of direct and co-investing, right? So, ideally, I think a lot of family offices would be not investing in fund vehicles and would do primarily directs unless the families are at a massive scale. Certain family offices get to a particular size where going direct just becomes inefficient because they cannot efficiently get the capital to work, right, but for most families, one of the attractions to investing in funds today is because they’ll also then get an opportunity to co-invest, right, side by side with the fund. So, if they got a big enough check to the fund, the fund says, “Yeah, I’ll let you go directly into the deal with extra money”, so they’re going to ink out a better return because, on that direct co-invest, there’s likely not going to be any fees, right? So, for family offices, the ability to co-invest alongside a very sophisticated private equity firm that may have done all the underwriting of a transaction, right, is of significant value, right, because it can de-risk capital that’s being deployed on a substantial scale. So, benefits; obviously you are increasing your diversification. So, rather than just being concentrated in one asset, part of your capital is still going to go into a fund vehicle and get into a bunch of different assets. You’re going to access significant expertise inside of the private equity firm that may be more sophisticated than your in-house folks. You’re sharing the risk with another investor that’s got a significant balance sheet normally, and then you’re getting access to exclusive opportunities; a lot of deals that are coming that are being sourced for. You know, the more exclusive and better-performing private equity firms are harder to access, right? So, if you can get access to them, then it’s a far more efficient process.

Peter Harper: Finally, I just wanted to touch on, you know, some of what I’ve thought of as direct investment strategies for family offices, and some of this might seem pretty straightforward, but these are the things that family offices are thinking about. They are thinking about whether they should be doing a sector or asset class focus. So, some families are just saying, “Hey listen, we’re only going to invest in real estate; we’re only going to invest in a subsection of operational real estate, venture capital, private equity. Most of them have a long-term focus, right? Because they’re going direct, they’re more focused on the long-term benefits of being in direct deals. They’re active owners, right, so by investing on a direct basis, they want to get integrated with the board. They want to be closer to the operations of what’s happening, so they can keep a closer eye on their investment. As we talked about before, you know, if there is an opportunity to go into a fund vehicle and co-invest, right, they look at that as a very valuable tool to tighten up execution risk, right? And, then some folks are in all of this would just prefer to lend directly to an organization rather than invest equity: (1) It might give them senior rights in the capital stack; and (2) They’re generally going to get superior returns; getting superior returns to what they might be getting in the equity with a lower degree of risk. And then finally, for the larger families, they are very geographically dispersed as far as their focus, right? They’re looking at opportunities all around the world because they understand when it comes to diversification, it shouldn’t just be asset focused, and then having a diversified approach that considers the impact of varied geographies is important.

Peter Harper: So, then how does one get into the game, right? Families need to divest an investment policy statement, you know, what is their protocol for getting into directs. It’s a really, really critical document, right? You need to think through what makes sense; you know, a clear framework for investment decision-making needs to be set. You need to bolster your network and how your network thinks about you as far as, you know, sourcing high-quality deal framework on your ability to execute on those deals, and then you need to be prepared for long-term commitments, right? Being direct is not designed for those who need short-term liquidity. Okay, thanks, guys.

 

If you would like more information about Family Office Direct Investing, you can connect to our team in the Contact Us section.

–Peter Harper

The 3 Pillars Podcast: Brain Habits – The Science of Subconscious Success


In our latest episode of the 3 Pillars Podcast: Wealth Management Series, host Peter Harper and special guest author Phillip Campbell discuss Brain Habits – The Science of Subconscious Success.

To listen to the podcast, click the play button below:

 

Transcript TL;DR

Peter Harper: Hello and welcome to the Three Pillars podcast. I’m Peter Harper, the managing director and CEO of Asena Advisors. If you’re not familiar with the business, we’re a multifamily office advising foreign family offices and private clients on US direct investments in mergers and acquisitions.

Peter Harper: So, folks, welcome. Thanks for joining today. We’re here with Philip Campbell, the author of Brain Habits – The Science of Subconscious Success. Philip, thanks very much for joining.

Phillip Campbell: Yeah. Great to be with you, Peter, and excited to do this podcast with you. So yes, it was really interesting writing the Brain Habits book for anybody who’s looking at doing it does take you longer than you think. So, budget the extra time. And look, the reason behind it is that I’ve got a cognitive science background which looks at the way the brain and mind works. And there’s been a lot of research in cognitive science and neuroscience to lift the capability and performance of people. We work with everybody from one-man band up to some of the largest organizations, such as the Boston Consulting Group in New York, et cetera. And people said, this is so new and so different, you’ve got to get this down into a book format. So that’s exactly what I look to do because we just to give a little bit of cognitive science 101; the brain’s made up of two hemispheres. So, the left hemisphere is what we call deals with Routinization. So, it’s where language is, it’s serial processing, it’s where we store our past experience. It’s our subject matter, expertise, and crystallized knowledge. Whereas the right hemisphere deals with novelty, and it’s nonverbal, it’s parallel processing. It’s where you adapt, learn new things, and are pretty agile. And most of our training, coaching, etcetera, is focused on left hemisphere language based. And what that does is it improves your comprehension of a topic. But what we’ve found is somebody can comprehend a topic but not necessarily turn that new knowledge into capability and capacity to put it into action as leaders of an organization. So, we work on that right hemisphere, that fluid thinking, which is the ability to solve new and novel problems that you’ve never faced before. And there’s just so much change going on in business these days that unless your brain’s at the top of its game on fluid thinking, you’re always going to be playing catch up. So that’s the reason or the catalyst for writing the book there, Peter.

Peter Harper:  Yeah, fantastic. I’m sure that, you know, I know that you’re someone who loves statistics and data, some stuff that you can measure. What type of increase of optimization of someone’s brain are we looking at by, you know, or increase capabilities by learning to train or rewire your subconscious with respect to these items?

Phillip Campbell: Yeah. No, it’s interesting because you’re right; we’re very quantitatively based. So, the first thing we do is to do an actual assessment, which is a test, and you get answers right or wrong, or you get somebody done in a period of time, unlike so many assessments which are. Peter So tell me, do you think you’re an introvert or an extrovert, you know, which is all about your self-perception? So, this is actually a scientifically based test. And what we can do is test things like what’s the ability of a person or executive to control their attention and their focus. Now, this is really, really important for any executive because The Economist magazine did a report back in 2020 on the cost of distraction and lost focus. And they found that 28% of a working day, a person is distracted by other things rather than their key priorities. And you imagine what difference it makes to a person if they can focus much better and for much longer. And we’ve had clients give us feedback. We tested their focus thinking. Interestingly, 90% of people have low to moderate focus thinking. So, they come in, they look at the emails, and instead of answering just the key ones, all of a sudden, they’re answering most of them, and three-quarters of an hour’s gone, and somebody says, “Hey, Peter, can I have half an hour of your time or five minutes of your time?” and you go “Oh yeah, yeah, I’ll give you five minutes of my time.” Before you know it, you’ve spent an hour, and you’ve outsourced your priorities to somebody who interrupted you and distracted you. So, our clients, when we get that improved, they get we commonly get feedback, they get an hour back in their day, their productivity goes up, they’re less doing less, wandering down the rabbit hole and then wondering where did the day go? Three-quarters of the day’s gone, and I’m not even halfway through my key priority. So that’s one example. And there are other examples if you’d like me to give you those.

Peter Harper: Oh, sure. I mean, for those listeners I’ve been going through the process with Philip. And one of the things that kind of was, really apparent to me as I went through it was think as humans, we tell ourselves at some stage in our development there are certain things we can’t do just because we think we’re not good at it. but the reality is a lot of that is driven by education methodologies, development at a particular point in our life, right? But then there be some sort of gap in our brains that’s been wired in as far as why we think we’re bad at certain things, right? Interestingly when working with Phil, I was saying to him, listen, I’m a terrible test taker at certain things, so I had to go through and do this stuff, which was a story I told myself. But having gone through the process and full disclosure, I didn’t probably stick to it at the level that I should have, but it really did help with the comprehension side of things. So, I think, Phil, bringing this through to listeners, folks that are exposed to family offices, family businesses, that are thinking, okay, this is interesting, but where is the relevance? I think for me, the part of this that was so impactful for me was it was a mindset change, right? It was this process where I went, no, that’s some story I’ve told myself around my inability to do things. I’m a smart individual. You just need to have the tools to be able to do it right. So, what do you think about that?

Phillip Campbell: Yeah, no, I think that’s a great summary, Peter. And it’s actually more than just a mindset. So, if you do things repeatedly in a particular way and you tell yourself things repeatedly in a different way if you do that action over and over again, you’re actually coding, if you like, your brain’s mini-computer programs, right? Once you code them in. That’s why the book’s called Subconscious Success, their subconscious. And it’s very hard, if not impossible to change it just with conscious thinking. So, for example, on that focus thinking, we might say, well, I know I get distracted, but I’m going to be really focused today. It’ll last ten minutes because you’re talking about a Pavlovian computer brain program. Once that gets triggered, the distraction comes, and that’s what happens. So, what we do and where it’s relevant to family companies is we literally recode that brain habit of focused thinking or analytical thinking or strategic thinking so that things were tough and hard and took a lot of mental energy and avoided. It was just due to the way the person’s brain is wired, right? So, we test those. The effectiveness and efficiencies of those ten individual mini subconscious thinking habits and then we recode them by doing deliberate practice and doing things harder and harder again. And where it pertains to the family companies is that often what can happen is a company can go through good growth, and then it plateaus. And then the issue is, well, if you want to go have additional growth.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Phillip Campbell: Like Einstein says, you need to change your thinking to change your world. So, what we do is change that thinking so they’re much more strategic that communication is better, their delegation is better because again, for family companies, it’s not just a company, it’s part of who they are. Sometimes it’s hard to let go. And unless you rewire the brain to improve that strategic thinking communication delegation style, it’s like a speed truck limiter. You know, the speed truck limiter is 60mph. You can put your foot down harder and harder, but it’ll still only go 60 miles an hour. And that’s what we do. So, we rewire, we increase it to bring it up to 80 or 100km an hour, but also using much less mental energy. So that’s the way that it works. And also, what we’re finding is it can help with succession planning. So, a lot of family companies leave the succession planning way too late. And the thing is, they might have some family members or close people, and they’ve already put them in a box. You know, they got good potential, they’ve got moderate, and they’ve got low potential. But what we’ve found is that we can actually improve a person’s potential by rewiring the subconscious thinking habits. And the better your people and potential successors have got their subconscious thinking habits working, the more value they’re going to be able to add to the company and help take it to the next level.

Peter Harper: Yeah, Phil, it’s massively impactful. I mean, for everyone, as I said, I went through a process with Phil, and part of mine was around test taking, and a certain format of tests that I’ve just never liked. And the most recent one I took was a dramatic difference. Right. and it was really the way in which the framework that Phil had set out in the way in which I was processing the questions, right? Again, it was stopping myself from repeating a certain format that I’d always done in the past. And so, when I see this in the context of succession planning, I totally get it. I mean, we tell ourselves certain things, you know, this is as truth, whether that’s come from, our own education or family reinforcement, you know, situation, particularly within sort of family businesses and family offices, right? If your objective from a legacy perspective is to give whoever is taking over the best chance of success, then they’ve got to find a way to overcome those challenges. And I think this is a great tool to kind of start that process, right? Where it’s like if your belief system and whether the belief system, you know, again, there’s science in the belief system. But when people understand that the belief system can be recoded, that’s a pretty powerful message.

Phillip Campbell: Yeah. And it’s both the belief system and the capability system. Right. And I’ll give you a couple of examples of what I mean by that. So, one of the family companies, there’s a person going to do an MBA. And part of what we test when we test these ten subconscious thinking habits is we can do a read on how on somebody’s learning agility. So how easy is it for them to learn and then apply the knowledge? And this person had a couple of areas which were significantly holding back their ability to learn, and they were doing an MBA, and we worked with them to get that learning agility up. And, like you said, it was like chalk and cheese. What I did in the past with the way my brain was wired, it took me a long time, took a lot of energy, and was very mentally tiring. And once we upgraded the computer brain habits, they were able to do the whole MBA a lot quicker, get better marks, but more importantly, they understood the concepts much better, and they were able to apply them to the business much better. There’s a lot of people can get an MBA but not take it back to the business and add value to it because again, it’s due to these subconscious thinking capability habits.

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

Phillip Campbell: And then the other example, Peter, was one thing about fluid thinking. It’s like an upside-down u; a bell curve. So, fluid thinking, that ability to change and adapt to new situations peaks at young adulthood. And then what happens is as the brain ages, it drops off. And that’s why you get people that, you know, in their 90s or something like that, they just hate change because their brain’s not able to cope with them. And so, we’ve worked with the most senior members of family companies to upgrade their fluent thinking to higher than it was even when they were a young adult. And the phrase I love best is the number of times I’ve heard I didn’t think you could teach an old dog new tricks and it gives them a new lease on the way they want a lease on life and the way they want to lead the company and encourage and build succession, etcetera. So, it applies at both levels there, Peter.

Peter Harper: Yeah. I can understand and appreciate that. Right. and I use this language when I say, it’s kind of like retooling it. there’s a scientific element of this where you are actually delivering change to the brain and how it processes and how it thinks. Right, which is extremely powerful. So, even if you don’t understand that if someone doesn’t understand the science behind that. Right. I think there’s a lot out there in the current environment where folks are talking about this as something where we should be focusing on. But I think everyone can appreciate this notion of limited thinking, right? Or some type of limits through their past where they’ve told themselves, hey, I just can’t do this. I’m not good at this. Right. when I think about the power of this, that kind of mind shift change and what you were just talking about with these more senior family members, when people finally do understand that the scientific role that this can play to change the way people perceive limitations, I think that’s where the power is. it’s a pretty dramatic shift.

Phillip Campbell: Yeah, no, I would agree with you. And again, what we’re talking about here is the way the brain is wired. We’re not talking about psychology. No, sure when we do the program, because I think it’s important to explain that.

Peter Harper: So, I think about it from a psychology perspective. This is why I say science and psychology maybe because I think most people that don’t have Phil’s experience and they come to this, I know I’m processing this in that kind of context, but it’s a very important point. this is a scientifically proven process.

Phillip Campbell: Yeah. And the way we differentiate it is if you’re talking psychology, you’re generally talking with somebody about something, and you’re very conscious and aware of what’s going on. When we talk subconscious thinking habits, we’re talking below the conscious threshold. So, we’re having a conversation and the brain you have today is predominantly driven by the activities and games you or any person did as they were growing up because that’s how the brain codes it. So, if you did lots of games, whether it was problem-solving, you’d probably be good at analytical thinking and conceptual thinking. And if you might work on a farm, you might be pretty good at innovative thinking because you had to. You couldn’t always have, you know, all of the instruments and the tools. Et cetera. There. So, you had to brainstorm; how can I fix this? So, what I want to make clear to people, the brain they have today is an accidentally designed brain developed in an ad hoc manner by what they did. And they shouldn’t.

Peter Harper: Unless we’ve got very intentional parents from a young age. it is like Andre Agassi, giving an example. Well, yeah.

Phillip Campbell: Well, yeah. No, and that’s a physical skill, and we’re talking gun-in-the-brain skills there. But I do appreciate that.

Peter Harper: But isn’t this relevant with the brain skill? Right. As far as the subconscious thinking, you think about really amazing athletes; a lot of their talent is subconscious, right? Because they’ve learned that through repetition.

Phillip Campbell: Yeah, it is, absolutely. they talk about muscle memory, but it’s really, you know, wired in; it’s the practice; it’s so often that they can do it without thinking, and that’s what we do on these mental habits. So let me give you an example of, I don’t know, if you recall when you first went to learn how to drive a car, your brain goes into cognitive overload because you’ve got to kind of look forward, you’ve got to look to the side mirrors, you’ve got to look to the rear vision mirror. And if you’re lucky enough to learn to drive in a manual car, you have to do the clutch. And there’s just too much cognitive processing going on in the conscious mind, and it gets overwhelming. And then what happens is you move into an area of deliberate practice, so you get a professional driving instructor who shows the technique of driving. And then you go out with family members, and you practice the driving. And that’s what we do in our thing. We kind of like that. Professional driving instructors show you the techniques and how to apply it, and then you have to do the practice. And then what happens? The more you practice, the more you’re putting it into the subconscious autonomic part of your brain.

Phillip Campbell: And then one day you’re driving the car, you’re looking out at the beautiful view. You’ve got the radio on, and you’re talking to your friends and the car’s almost driving itself, right? That’s the experience that we give to people. So, people have a lot of difficulty analyzing detailed pieces of data and making sense of it. We had one client that said, I can’t believe it. The numbers are just jumping off the page and talking to me. I’ve never had this experience before, right? So, what we do is we do the program takes about eight sessions over a couple of months because what we’re doing is we’re doing fun and challenging fluid thinking exercises that get harder and harder. And that’s the way the brain rewires itself. So, we don’t even need to kind of analyze why something’s a strength or why something’s interference factor. We just deal with all the things that are slowing you down or interference factors. This is the way we work with them, so you can become much more effective, much quicker, and much better at leading and dealing with all the changing environment that the world’s continuing to experience at the moment. Right? Does that explain it, Peter?

Peter Harper: Yeah, that’s great. That’s great. Well, Phil, where do people get your book?

Phillip Campbell: Uh, yeah. If you go onto Amazon and type in Brain Habits, The Science of Subconscious Success, you’ll be able to get the e-book there, and the paperback will be coming out soon. And also, what we’ve done, Peter, is if people want to get a flavor of how we test these ten subconscious thinking habits, they can test their own fluid thinking.

Peter Harper: Is that on the website?

Phillip Campbell: Yeah, it’s just at ww.enigma.com/focustest, and it’ll take you to our site. They click a link, and they get a free one and then if they want to test the whole ten subconscious thinking habits then that’s just an investment for them to do that. But it gives them a chance to try before they buy. And then if people are interested in the program, they can just send me an email at info at Enigmafit.com, and I’ll send that information through to you as well.

Peter Harper: Yeah, great. And we’ll have all of this information will be posted with the podcast on our site. Well, Phillip, thanks. Thanks very much for joining as always. It’s a fascinating topic, and it was great to learn more about the book. Congratulations. It’s a huge milestone. Anytime anyone finishes a book, it’s a credit. So, so great work, and thanks for joining.

Phillip Campbell: Thanks, Peter. Appreciate you having me on. And I’ve enjoyed that. And hopefully, we’ve been able to share some new success habits with your colleagues there.

Peter Harper: Thanks, Bill.

Phillip Campbell: Okay.

 

Contact Us if you would like more information about Phillip Campbell, his book, or this topic.

Peter Harper

Australian Federal Budget Summary 2023-24

Australian Federal Budget Summary 2023-24

On Tuesday, 9th of May, Treasurer Jim Chalmers delivered a budget surplus of $4.2 billion while at the same time predicting far less enthusiasm in the coming years. Cost-of-living relief was high on the priority list, and there were some historic investments in both Medicare, PBS, NDIS and the care economy broadly.

Summary:

Taxation

• Personal tax rates for 2023-2024 unchanged (Noting the expiry of Low & Middle Income Tax Offset at 30 June 2022).
• Stage 3 personal tax for 2024-2025 unchanged
• Foreign Resident’s tax rate for 2023-2024 unchanged
• Medicare levy low-income thresholds for 2022-23 will increase

Superannuation

• Non-arm’s length income (NALI)
• Super account balances above $3 million
• Super guarantee (SG)- Pay day
• Pension drawdowns – removal of SO% reduction in minimum from 1st July 2023 (FY24)

Cost of living relief

• Cheaper Childcare
• Changes to the Paid Parental Leave scheme
• Cheaper medicine
• Fee-Free TAFE and funding for Higher Education
• Energy price relief
• Increase to base rate of social security
• Increased rent assistance
• Improving Aged Care Support, home care, and funding model

Business

• Small businesses instant asset write-off threshold changes to maximum $20,000
• Small Business Energy Incentive
• Small Business lodgement penalty amnesty program
• PA VG and GST instalment uplift factor
• Part IVA: scope of the general anti-avoidance rules
• FBT rules for electric vehicles (EVs): the eligibility of plug-in hybrid electric cars

Note: These changes are proposals only and may or may not be made law

Full Summary

Taxation

Personal tax rates unchanged for 2023-2024

The personal income tax cuts proposed in the FY2022 budget remain the same going forward

Low-income tax offset for 2023-24 (unchanged)

Low and middle-income taxpayers remain entitled to the low income tax offset (LITO). No changes were made to the LITO in the 2023-24 Budget. The LITO will continue to apply for the 2023-24 income year and beyond.

Low & Middle Income tax Offset (LMITO)

The temporary LMITO was introduced in the 2018-19 budget, extended during the pandemic, and then increased by the Morrison government (and supported by the then­ opposition) during its pre-election March 2022 budget for a single year.

Neither Labor nor the Coalition had ever planned for it to be retained for 2022-23 or beyond and as such the offset has expired.

Increase to Medicare Levy low-income thresholds for 2022·23

Superannuation

Non-Arm’s Length Income Changes

The government will amend the non-arm’s length income (NALI) provisions which apply to expenditure incurred by superannuation funds by:

• limiting income of self-managed superannuation funds (SIVISF) and small Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) regulated funds that are taxable as NALI to twice the level of a general expense. Additionally, fund income taxable as NALI will exclude contributions
• exempting large APRA regulated funds from the NALI provisions for both general and specific expenses of the fund
• exempting expenditure that occurred prior to the 2018-19 income year.

Superannuation Guarantee (SG) and investing in SG compliance, increasing the payment frequency to align with the pay cycle.

From l July 2026, employers will be required to pay their employees’ SG entitlements on the same day that they pay salary and wages. Currently, employers are only required to pay their employees ‘ SG on a quarterly basis. By increasing the payment frequency of superannuation to align with the payment of salary and wages, this measure will both ensure employees have greater visibility over whether their entitlements have been paid and better enable the ATO to recover unpaid superannuation. Increased frequency of payment will also support better retirement outcomes.

Better Targeted Superannuation Concessions

As announced in March, the Government will reduce the tax concessions available to individuals with a total superannuation balance exceeding $3 million from l July 2025.

Individuals with a total superannuation balance of less than $3 million will be fine.

It will bring the headline tax rate to 30 percent, up from 15 percent, for earnings corresponding to the proportion of an individual’s total superannuation balance that is greater than $3 million. Earnings relating to assets below the $3 million threshold will continue to be taxed at 15 percent, or zero percent if held in a retirement pension account.

Cost of living relief – Families, Social Security and Aged Care

Cheaper childcare

Commences from July this year, the Government is delivering Cheaper Child Care, cutting the cost of care for around 1.2 million families. It will make it easier for parents and carers, particularly women, to participate in the workforce and means more children can access the benefits of early education.

• Lifting the maximum CCS rate to 90% for families earning $80,000 or less
• Increasing CCS rates for around 96% of families with a child in care earning under $530,000
• Investing $33.? million to increase subsidized ECEC to a minimum of 36 hours per fortnight for families with First Nations children

Changes to the Paid Parental Leave Scheme

The October Budget committed $531.6 million to deliver a more flexible and generous Paid Parental Leave scheme. From l July this year, Parental Leave Pay and Dad and Partner Pay will combine into a single 20-week payment. A new family income test of $350,000 per annum will see nearly 3,000 additional parents become eligible for the entitlement each year. The Government has committed to increase Paid Parental Leave to 26 weeks by 2026.

Cheaper medicine

The Government will support more than 300 Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme medicines to be dispensed in greater amounts, phased in from l September 2023. Some patients will be able to get 2 months ‘ worth of the medicine they need for a stable, chronic health condition, cutting the number of visits to a pharmacy and GP each year and saving $1.6 billion in out-of-pocket costs over 4 years.

General patients will be able to save up to $180 a year per medicine if prescribed for 60 days, and concession card holders up to $43.80 a year per medicine.

For at least 6 million Australians this will cut the cost of medicines by up to half and will come on top of the $12.50 decrease in the PBS co-payment for general scripts that came in on l January 2023.

Fee- Free TAFEs and Higher Education

The Government is funding 300,000 TAFE and vocational education training places to become fee-free.

The Government is delivering the second tranche of its commitment for 20,000 additional supported university places in 2023 and 2024.
• Additional funding of $18.7m over 4 years from 2023-24 (and $4.7m per year ongoing)
to extend and expand existing higher education student support programs.

Energy Price Relief Plan

The Government will allocate $1.5 billion over two years from 2023-24 to establish the Energy Bill Relief fund. This fund will support targeted energy bill relief to eligible households and small business customers, which includes pensioners, Commonwealth Seniors Health Card holders, family Tax Benefit A and B recipients, and small business customers of electricity retailers.

Increase to the base rate of social security

The Government will increase support for people receiving working age payments including the JobSeeker Payment. This measure will:

• Increase the base rate of working age and student payments by $40 per fortnight. This increase applies to the JobSeeker Payment, Youth Allowance, Parenting Payment (Partnered), Austudy, ABSTUDY, Disability Support Pension (Youth), and Special Benefit. It will commence on 20 September 2023
• Extend eligibility for the existing higher single JobSeeker Payment rate for recipients
aged 60 years and over, to recipients aged 55 years and over who are on the payment for 9 or more continuous months.
• The increased support for recipients aged 55 years and over, the majority of whom are women, acknowledges the additional challenges older Australians face in re­ entering the workforce, such as age discrimination or poor health.

Increased Support for Commonwealth Rent Assistance Recipients

The Government will increase the maximum rates of the Commonwealth Rent Assistance (CRA) allowances by 15 percent to help address rental affordability challenges for CRA recipients.

Improving Aged Care Support, home care, and funding model

The Government will introduce a new hoteling supplement of $10.80 per resident per day by separating out the existing hoteling component of the Australian National Aged Care Classification (AN-ACC) price (the $10 Basic Daily Fee Supplement) starting l July 2023. The Government will also adjust the care minute allocations within the AN-ACC funding model from l October 2023 to better align care minutes with resident needs. The Government will provide:

• $487.0 million over 4 years from 2023-24 (and $133.6 million ongoing) to extend, and make ongoing, the Disability Support for Older Australians Program.
• $41.3 million over 4 years from 2023-24 (including $11.9 million in capital funding from 2022-23) to build a new place assignment system, allowing older Australians to select their residential aged care provider.
• additional funding to improve the in-home aged care system, including $166.8 million in 2023-24 to release an additional 9,500 Home Care Packages.

Business

$20,000 Instant Asset Write-off

Small businesses with annual turnover of less than $10m will be able to immediately deduct eligible assets costing less than $20,000 from l July 2023 until 30 June 2024. The $20,000 threshold applies on a per asset basis, so small business can instantly write off multiple assets (there is no cap on the total amount that can be instantly written off). Assets valued at
$20,000 or more can continue to be placed into the small business simplified depreciation pool and depreciated at 15 percent in the first income year and 30 percent each income year thereafter.

Small Business Energy Incentive

To help small and medium businesses electrify and save on their energy bills, this incentive will provide tax relief and support to businesses making investments like electrifying their heating and cooling systems, installing batteries, and upgrading to high-efficiency electrical goods. Businesses with annual turnover of less than $50m will have access to a bonus 20 percent tax deduction for eligible assets supporting electrification and more efficient use of energy from l July 2023 until 30 June 2024. Up to $100,000 of total expenditure will be eligible for the incentive, with the maximum bonus tax deduction being $20,000 per business.

Small Business lodgement penalty amnesty program

A failure-to-lodge penalty (FTLP) amnesty for small business with aggregate turnover of less than $10M. For outstanding tax statements that were originally due in the period l December 2019 to 29 February 2022. The amnesty will remit FTLPs if the outstanding statements are lodged in the period l June 2023 to 31 December 2023.

Improving small business cash flow – PAVG and GST

The Government is providing eligible small businesses with cashflow relief by halving the increase in their quarterly tax instalments for GST (businesses with turnovers up to $10M) and income tax (businesses with turnovers up to $50M) in 2023-24. Instalments will only increase by 6 percent instead of 12 percent, allowing small businesses to manage cash flow given the current economic conditions.

Scope of Pt IV A to expand to catch two additional types of schemes

The Government will expand the scope of the general anti-avoidance provisions in Pt IVA of the ITAA 1936 so that they can apply to:
• Schemes that reduce tax paid in Australia by accessing a lower withholding tax rate on income paid to foreign residents. Part IVA already applies to schemes that produce a tax benefit by not having any withholding tax liability in respect of an amount paid to a foreign resident
• Schemes that achieve an Australian income tax benefit, even where the dominant purpose was to reduce foreign income tax.

This measure will apply to income years commencing on or after l July 20 24, regardless of whether the scheme was entered into before that date.

FBT rules for Electric Vehicles – Rules for plug-in hybrids to sunset

The Budget papers state that the Government will sunset the eligibility of plug-in hybrid electric cars from the FBT exemption for eligible electric cars. This change will apply from l April 2025. Arrangements involving plug-in hybrid electric cars entered into between l July 2022 and 31 March 2025 remain eligible for the Electric Car Discount.

 

– Liza Janakievski, Managing Director + Head of Asset Management, (Giles Wade Private Wealth)

–Peter Harper

 

Family Office Vlog Series: Ep. 5 – Family Office Private Equity

In our fifth episode of the Family Office Vlog Series, Asena CEO Peter Harper talks about the cross-section of Family Offices and Private Equity.

Transcript:

Peter Harper: Peter Harper, managing director and CEO of the Asena Family Office. For those of you who are not familiar with the business, we are a multi-family office that advises foreign family offices and founders on U.S. direct investments, and mergers and acquisitions.

Peter Harper: So guys, today I wanted to touch on the cross-section of family offices and private equity. Right, so I think for people that aren’t familiar with the two and hear about, you know, this idea of direct investing, you know, it can be a little confusing, right? So, you know, when we talk about direct investing versus indirect investing, we’re talking about when an investor invests directly into an asset. So, if it’s a private company or public company, they’re buying the shares. If it’s a piece of real estate – maybe they’re buying a fractional piece of the real estate or the structure – the direct structure that owns the real estate. Indirect is when they’re allocating, when you’re allocating via a fund, right? You might be investing into a basket of assets, right?

Peter Harper: So, over the last 20 or 30 years, there has been a massive uplift in direct investment, and that has been largely attributed to the challenges that, you know, larger firms or money managers have had with overcharging on fees or this notion that an investor is charging, you know, fees on fees which a lot of folks are still dealing with today, right? If you’re investing into a fund and then the funds allocating into some other form of investment, there can be multiple layers of fees, right, and it can be very difficult for an individual investor to actually understand what is the return I’m receiving net of fees, right, and so the more sophisticated the investor, so, you know, with family offices you’re talking very sophisticated investors; people have had large liquidity events, major capital exits, now have the ability to set up their own private investment office effectively or to a team of investment personnel to run their private investment office.That’s one of the things they look for. They look, okay, how do we, if we’ve got really smart people on a team, how do we reduce the layers so we get closer to the source, right? Surely it’s the same investment product, and we’re going to get a better return if we’ve got less people trying to pig out on the opportunity, right? So, that is the thematic. As a result of that, you know, as more sophisticated folks have seen family offices as a way to be more involved in the investment process, so right, they look at large institutional investors and say, okay, we don’t think what you’re doing is absolutely that crash- hot, we think we can find good deals, underwrite them, and invest ourselves plus we don’t have to pay all these bozos a bunch of fees. There has been a massive amount of capital over the last, you know, 20 to 30 years flow into family offices and, as a result of that, private equity, deals that would have been holistically the domain of private equity have started to see more competition from family offices.

Peter Harper: Now there is still a mutually exclusive framework by which private equity firms and family offices, you know, invest together, right, because a lot of family offices with the world’s best managers, they’re investing in their funds because they want to get access; the best managers are crushing it, so okay, we’re still going to give you money, but a lot of them do that on the basis they get this concept of a co-invest; okay I’ll invest in your fund but you’ve got to also let me side-by-side invest in some of the deals on a reduced fee basis in some of the deals you see, right, but there will be certain sections where, you know, where there are families that are effectively, you know, effectively going, you know, side-by-side on deals like, I think I one day go, 20-30 years ago, with a guy like Elon Musk who’s extended his years on other, you know, deals like Tesla and SpaceX; being able to be deploying to a deal like Twitter, right, and would that have just been the domain historically solely of private equity? Probably, right? So, the, you know, there is this dynamic where the two kind of, I think they’re found symbiosis, right? There’s a symbiotic relationship between private equity and family offices, but there are moments where they are competitive, right? I think family offices are still heavily major investors into private equity, but the dynamics have shifted. Historically, they invested because they had no access, right? Now they invest because they say, hey, we’re going to give you this money, but we do have access, and, by the way, if you don’t also give us co-investment opportunities, we won’t come back, right?

Peter Harper: So, I know we’ve jumped ahead a bit, but just to recap, we talk about this in each video; you know, for those of you who are not familiar with what a family office is, in the U.S., there’s an SSC definition there’s a financial service definition of what a family office is. Everywhere else in the world – that’s not necessarily the case, but a family office is really the private investment vehicle for a family of material wealth. In some cases, it’s purely financially driven; in other cases, there’s a lot of operational infrastructure behind the scenes to support all other aspects of the family – whether it’s, you know, shared services, asset management – when I say asset management I mean private asset management like boats, planes, you know, etc, and then all, any other need of the family that’s considered important.

Peter Harper: One thing that really does tie and differentiate a family office from a family business is where they have really thought through the legacy aspects of what it is they’re doing – okay, how do we make the business stick around for multiple generations; for three years; for more than three years; like 100 years, like if you get a 100-year plan, how do we execute on that? Well, the main way that a family office executes on that is they need to make sure all family members believe in the family vision, buy into it, and are good representatives of the family vision and values.

Peter Harper: This, you know, this kind of really leads into all of, you know, what the industry and the challenges that kind of, known challenges of dealing with a family office, with a lot of family offices, a lot of people, what can happen is they have a large ex, they go, oh I want a family office because they’re cool like you’ve made it when you’ve had a family office. The challenge with that is that you have a lot of people that might be very sophisticated from a business perspective, but they go through this and set up a family office, and they don’t have the right framework, and they torch a bunch of cash up front, right, because there is no point setting up a family office if you really don’t care about the legacy aspects, right, if you don’t, if you aren’t bought into the vision that you need to keep your wealth around for multiple generations, right, and that, when we talk about organizational structure in the context of family offices, we actually mean that it’s setting up a family office organizational infrastructure and then ensuring that everyone follows it for multiple generations, like they’re just not like, okay the patriarch’s dead, let’s dismantle this stuff, the people, the family, needs to believe it and they need to follow it.

Peter Harper: You know, we think that the future is bright for family offices. We don’t see that this is a trend; like a decade ago, it was a trend. We don’t; it’s not a trend. This is, people understand that if you really want to keep money together for a long period of time, you need to have strong systems, and people need to believe in those, you know, in their purpose, right, and if you don’t do that, you’re not going to be successful.

Peter Harper: Final sort of things, you know, I wanted to talk about was, you know, what is the, you know, what is the attraction; what are the attractions between, you know, family offices and their interplay with private equity. I think probably 10, 15 years ago, there was private equity relatively concern, right, because they would have seen larger families starting to show up and compete on deals. If the family wasn’t as locked down as far as their system, maybe they’re a bit looser on price, right, so there’s more competition in the market with people that may not as be as sophisticated when it comes to deals, sometimes that’s good, sometimes that’s bad. It’s normally, it’s normally tough in a bull market, maybe it’s better now, but I think that now, the two, family offices and private equity, have really found that they’ve got a symbiotic relationship, right? They understand the needs of each other, and they’re focused around it.

Peter Harper: So you know, the one, you know, one big thing that I think that people when I hear people talk about this and they really don’t, they really don’t matter, they understand conceptually okay, we do this, we go direct, we do all this stuff, theoretically there are less fees, but unless they’ve actually run a funds management business or an investment management business where they have gone through the rigor of underwriting a lot of deals in various environments, then you know, they may be better regardless of the size just investing in a fund right, because it it’s a huge amount of work; it’s a huge undertaking, and really what you’re doing if you’re saying you want to build the infrastructure around a direct investment house within a family office is you’re saying you want to build a financial services business, right, and I don’t think that’s what a lot of folks have when they’re thinking through the establishment of a family office. But listen, if you can do it and you can do it well, there are massive benefits, right? You’re getting access to better flows, you’re getting access to better information, you’re co-investing side by side, and you know, the only other alternative to all that is if, hey, you don’t want to invest by funds, you don’t want to run your own directs, is you partner up with a firm like the Asena Family Office who is fractional, right, and what we focus on is a cohort; very sophisticated investors that want to invest side by side directly with the support of a fractional family office like our, like us, to make direct investments together, right? So it’s, you’re not doing it on your own, you’re doing it with a cohort, but you’re not just throwing into a fund and hoping that the managers got it right.

Peter Harper: Alright guys, peace.

 

If you would like more information about Family Office Private Equity, reach out via the Contact Us section to the right.

–Peter Harper

Family Office Vlog Series: Ep. 4 – Family Office Investment Management

In our fourth episode of the Family Office Vlog Series, Asena CEO Peter Harper explains the difference between family office investment management and traditional wealth management.

Transcript:

Peter Harper: Hey, guys. (This is) Peter Harper, Managing Director, and CEO of The Asena Family Office. So, today we’re going to talk about family office investment management and, principally, how it can be different or is different from traditional wealth management.

 

Peter Harper: I’m going to start today by stepping through, you know as a kind of a recap, you know, previously you’ve heard me talk about, you know, the basics of the family office, what is the family office, what is one, what does it do, the difference between a multi-family office and a single-family office, and then we’ll step back into some of the deeper issues around, you know the core differences of family office investment management when compared to traditional wealth management and, you know, why they’re different and why they’re so important.

 

Peter Harper: So, basically, what does the family office do? Really, a family office is a tool for high-net-worth families and ultra-high-net-worth families that are looking for a solution to support all aspects of their family. So, across, you know, wealth management, tax, accounting, legal, asset management in the context of personal assets, so houses, cars, planes, boats, and asset management as far as wealth, financial asset management, so Wealth Management, right? The major difference right, and I’ve been asked this before, you know okay what is a family office really anyway, and why isn’t it just different from a traditional relationship? In a traditional relationship where you’re dealing with a patriarch or a matriarch; a single person that’s made money, and you’re supporting them and their family, really all you’re concerned about is the attitudes and the needs of the principal, right? Everything else is, as an advisor, everything else is irrelevant. A major distinction of family office is when it’s, you know, multi-gen or it’s being set up to be multi-gen, is that you do care about the input and the thoughts of every family member. Well, not every family member, but the key decision makers, and you’re doing that in light of the fact that you want to build a legacy, right? You want the family office or the family wealth to be around in multiple generations. You don’t want the money to be wasted. So, that’s the core reason that most people set up a family office.

 

Peter Harper: How much money do you need to start a family office? This is a question that we get a lot. It ranges a great deal, but the key focal point that we always think is, okay, based on what you think you want to set up as far as a family office structure and the complexity of the asset base that you’ve got to manage, and the people; the number of family members this thing’s got to support; well, really the core focus should be around the infrastructure costs. Who are the people you need to run this successfully and sustain the family needs, and can you do that with the capital base that you have, right? So, it’s less about, particularly, how much money you need. It’s more about – can the asset base support the needs of the family? Another issue is when thinking about family offices, when you are looking at this and saying, hey this is a legacy item, this is something that we want to sustain for multiple Generations – not 20 or 30 years, but 100 to 200 years – you really do need a very strong governing board, right? You’re bringing the same sort of governance items that you would bring to bear in a successful business to within the family office. So, what does that look like? You’re going to have, you know, you’re going to have an official board; family members may be involved in that, but there should be some level of independence, right? There should be fiduciaries in place that are helping the family execute on the strategy and vision of the family, right? So, it’s ensuring; Hey listen, we’ve determined that we want to set up a family office, we have a vision that’s focused around the future legacy of the family, and we’re going to keep family members on track and accountable to those, right? And, that sort of comes into the goals and complexity of the family office, right? Again, depending on the size of the capital, the number of folks involved, and the objectives, like how long you want the family office to stick around for, and how you want it to succeed. That’s really where the complexity sits within the family office infrastructure. And then, you know, the sort of final point around the basics is there’s just many disciplines. When people think about, you know, a family office, a lot of the time they focus on the wealth aspects or the finance aspects of the family, right? Yes, you know, those aspects are very important to the continued longevity of the family, but it’s that it’s often the non-financial aspects or the non-money generating, so either the philanthropic and the support functions; they impact every part of the family, right, and without them the family would not stick together, right? So, when you’re thinking about the family office, it shouldn’t just be; Hey listen, yes, wealth management, money management, that’s the thing, that sort of, right, it’s the core that starts the family office, that sets up the family office, but it’s not the only, it’s not necessarily the single most critical aspect.

 

Peter Harper: Okay, so we’ve got the basics down. Now, what a family office is, we understand the services that are involved, we understand the capital needs of a family, we understand what a family office is, right? To recap, a single-family office is a family office where one family says that they want to invest in the infrastructure solely to support their needs and their investment objectives. A multi-family office is when a family says, we don’t want to have all this stuff in-house; we want it on a fractional basis. So, they engage a business like Asena Family Office to support them in that respect. You know, I’m often asked about what’s given to the recent rise of family offices, right? It feels like it’s a relatively new thing. It’s not a new thing. I mean, family offices have been around in some shape or form for, you know, an extremely long time, but the most recent rise I think, definitely in North America, can be largely attributed to a bunch of changes that happened post the financial crisis where folks understood that due to changes in banking laws and regulations, maybe it was better for more of the wealth decisions to be made outside of large financial institutions and internally within a family, right? Also, a lot of families because of the growth options available within, you know, post the financial crisis, we’re not really there in traditional markets, they had to look to alternatives, so private market opportunities where to get the same returns, a lot more capital started to flow into private equity and private market opportunities.

 

Peter Harper: You know, I’ve got a point here on the process of interfacing with family offices. I think it’s really important for any advisor or any person, whether it’s external, is to really understand, you know, the needs and objectives of the family, and I know this goes to say with any client, but when family infrastructure has been set up to serve the goals and objectives of the family , whether they be philanthropic, general support or capital growth, it’s really important that advisors understand that, right? A lot of the time, these folks are thinking about this with a very long-term perspective, right, and so your traditional attitudes around that may not always be helpful.


Peter Harper: And, this goes back to the next point where I’ve made a note here around the challenges of dealing with family offices, and you know, the ones that I’ve always seen. You know, the family offices that have been the most successful, has been that it’s all been around organization, right, proper organization, operational organizational efficiency.

 

Have questions about Family Office Investment Management? Get in touch using our Contact Us section to the right.

–Peter Harper

Chaos Creates Opportunity – Focus on Execution

A great deal has been made of the failure of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank over the last few days. The President has spoken, and it seems that everyone is back to business as usual. Which seems nuts. Nothing to see here. If Monetary Policy was the Fast and the Furious Franchise, it would have looked a little like this: FF 1 – QE Covid ‘Where is the Nitros’; FF2 – QT Post Covid ‘I Think We Used Too Much Nitros’, FF3 – QE Infinity ‘Does Ukraine Need Nitros’; FF4 – QE The Final Solution, ‘Banks Fail From Too Much Nitros, Lets Guarantee Deposits So They Can Manufacture More Nitros?’ Is it crazy to suggest some form of significant financial crisis was inevitable?! It seems in today’s world, any entrepreneur and investor needs to thrive in chaos.

In our next video, Asena CEO Peter Harper sets out why we think we made it here and when we expect to see opportunities in the short to medium term.

TRANSCRIPT:

Peter Harper: Hey, guys. Peter Harper, managing director and CEO of the Asena Family Office. For those of you who are not familiar with the business, we advise foreign family offices and founders on U.S. direct investments, and mergers and acquisitions.

Peter Harper: So, what a start to the year. It’s kind of been pretty nuts, albeit not totally unexpected, right? You know, as we’re thinking about the current shape of the global economy and how it’s, you know, impacting our clients and the decisions we’re making, it’s kind of interesting to look back at the timeline of events, right?

Peter Harper: So, in 2020, for the Q1 for 2020, when the Covid pandemic was really kind of getting started and launching, a lot of folks prior to that were saying the world was generally due for a slowdown; due for a technical recession, right? This was largely missed because so much fiscal stimulus was pumped into the system. You know, record amounts of money, easy money, washing around, facilitating these crazy economic growth numbers for a lot of businesses, and further facilitating excess debt binges in all sectors, not just technology, right?

Peter Harper: Come through to 2022, as that stimulus starts being unraveled due to the war in Ukraine, and the global economy is running too hot, and inflation being out of control, the Federal Reserve and countries around the world were going to start a process of quantitative tightening, right? So, you know, pretty simply, you’ll put a lot of fuel in the system; we’re now going to start taking it out because we need to slow the Juggernaut down, you know, which is what started happening. Interest rates started going up, right? Everyone clearly understood that inflation was not transitory. Inflation was there, and reserve banks around the world consistently moved to squash that with the main lever they have in their arsenal, which is interest rates.

Peter Harper: So, you know, 2022 was a pretty rocky year for a lot of folks like growth was hard, right? Some people were still making money, but as we entered in Q4, it felt different, right? Everyone was still; there were kind of lagging indicators where a lot of folks were still employing folks that were anchored toward the technology sector. Maybe there was, you know, we’re seeing a lot more sort of layoffs there than everyone, but I think that was really also an opportunity for a lot of people to make decisions around inefficient hiring that maybe had happened during Covid, right, and conditions were changing. So, leading into the end of the year, there are a number of factors that we’re starting to point towards, you know, a major slowdown.

Peter Harper: Coming into q1 of this year, if you were to look at the numbers being reported for service-based businesses, service-based businesses are, in many situations, kind of perceived as a canary in the coal mine. There are a lot of factors that are pointing to a major slowdown. M & A activity had kind of evaporated, interest rates were continuing to go up, and this notion of a soft landing just seemed like total nonsense, right? And, you know, when I think about, you know, this state of the economy today, and when you think about history and go back to 2008; the financial crisis and the flow and effect from that, I mean I think a lot of people probably have, you know, this kind of a permabear way of thinking, like, okay, what’s going to be the next thing, right? Well, you put a huge amount of capital, excess capital, into liquid private equity and venture capital markets, right, at zero interest rates. So, you go, okay, these are generally high-risk investments anyway. Let’s chuck a bunch of leverage on it, right, and maybe in businesses where, quite frankly, you know, excess leverage, it doesn’t make any sense because there’s enough risk in there. In an environment where there’s no read to mark to market those investments, right? It felt like that was always going to be, you know, the point for the next or the baseline for the next crisis, right? You know, which it’s turning out to be, right?

Peter Harper: I think the big thing in the discussions that we’re having with a lot of our clients, I think, that kind of rings true is, like, you never let a good crisis go to waste, right? I think, you know, I felt this way during Covid, you know? Asset prices have been out of control, and competition has been fierce. You know, people that maybe shouldn’t be in business because they’re, you know, not the best at their game, we’re able to make it through the laissez-faire of the government, right, and that should change, right? It should change, right? We need there to be some form of economic slowdown for asset prices to get under control and for people to get back in the market to buy and sell stuff at reasonable prices, right? Hopefully, that happens in the next six months. You’re going to be kind of “strap yourself in” type of stuff because it’s going to be pretty crazy. The biggest kind of an outlier in all this is, you know, is the Fed is going to underwrite deposits, you know, all deposits for a period of time within the U.S., right? Because if it is, all it’s going to do is make the inflationary issue even worse, right? We underwrite and say we’re going to guarantee deposits. What are those banks going to do? Those regional banks; they’re just going to go out and lend more, right? So, we probably need less liquidity in the market to get asset prices under control. That’s going to be a really crazy dynamic for a lot of folks if it happens. I hope that happens, right, because I feel like we need a reset, and I think that long term, that’s better for everyone, but let’s see. I mean, that’s what people should be thinking about. If the government does, you know, again puts on the quantitative easing spigot again to resolve this issue, you know, various investments are going to look better than others. If it doesn’t, it should be, you know, it’s time to go to work. It’s time to do the work and look at stuff in your business and in the market that makes sense in that environment. Asset prices will come down. There should be good deals out there if you’re on the hunt and you’re doing the work, right?

Peter Harper: So, we’re, you know, we’re concerned about the market, but we’re excited because, you know, with all these different things, you know, awesome opportunities should present themselves. Cheers.

Got questions? Speak with one of our consultants at Asena Advisors.

–Peter Harper

Family Office Vlog Series: Ep. 3 – Setting Up A Family Office

Learn more about the steps to consider when setting up a family office in our third episode of the Family Office Vlog Series with Asena CEO Peter Harper.

Transcript:

Peter Harper: Hey Guys. (This is) Peter Harper, Managing Director and CEO of Asena Family Office. For those of you who are not familiar with the business: We are a multi-family office, and we advise foreign families and private clients on U.S. direct investments and mergers & acquisitions.

 

Peter Harper: So, today we are going to talk about setting up a family office. For those that aren’t familiar with what a family office is, it is born out of a family or a founder having a material liquidity event or inheriting a large amount of money and really trying to organize their affairs so that there is the same sort of operational structure and infrastructure you’d expect to see in a high performing business within the family’s private assets. So, what does that actually mean? You’ve got in the marketplace: there’s a lot largely regarded that you’ve got two types of family offices, where you’ve got this concept of a single-family office, right? So, this is when a family probably has a larger amount of liquidity or more significant complexity in their life where they feel they need to have their own infrastructure rather than shared infrastructure for supporting the family’s investments. That look like a full c-suite across CEO investments, tax, accounting, legal, and general sort of infrastructure management compared with what’s called a multi-family office where a family says, “Hey, listen, we don’t think we need to have our own single-family office where we’ve got all of these people on staff. We think we can manage that on a fractional basis. So, they’ll work with a firm like the Asena Family office, who can go out and support them on a fractional basis across accounting, tax, legal, estate planning, wealth management, and deal support.

 

Peter Harper: The key things that determine whether someone should be oscillating between a single-family office first and a multi-family office really comes down to three factors: The size of a family’s wealth and the support; the number of people they think they need to support (that’s a number of family members supported); and then professional support. It’s the complexity; if someone’s got the largest balance here on the planet, but they actually don’t have any investments because all the liquidity is sitting in cash, they don’t have a whole lot of complexity, and maybe they don’t need the complexity of a family office. Whereas, even if someone has less liquidity, less wealth, but they’ve got a whole bunch of complexity in their life like a larger family that they’ve got to support or a very complex asset base across jurisdictional asset base, then that might be a driving factor for their choice to have a family office. Then the final point is the autonomy of the family office. Whether they’re expecting for folks in a fiduciary capacity to effectively run their lives, so run all their investments and manage all the back-office stuff with minimal influence and minimal impact to the family, or whether they want to be actively engaged in the family, where they’re like yes we’ve got a family office, but a family member wants to be the CEO of the family office.

 

Peter Harper: So, let’s break down those things a bit more. Besides your wealth, at what size should someone be contemplating for a family office? I think if you ask a lot of people this question, you’ll get many, many different answers, but we’re of the view that you normally wouldn’t be thinking about a single-family office if you have less wealth than you know, probably a quarter of a billion. You probably wouldn’t be thinking about a multi-family office unless you had a net worth of less than 50 million. That can vary for different people. It really comes down to the cost. When you’re trying to run a full c-suite in the infrastructure around that, the costs of that are going to range from three to ten million dollars per annum. So, unless you’ve got the wealth to sustain the income that, therefore, can sustain the overhead, it’s just not going to make any economic sense.

 

Peter Harper: The second point is the complexity of your life. Like I mentioned before, we deal with some people sometimes that have immense wealth but really do not have complex lives. They’ve intentionally structured their affairs that way because they want simplicity. Then we have other folks, other families that have immense complexity on a global basis or a domestic basis, and that can come down to how they like to invest, but maybe there’s a lot of liquid investments; it’s cross-jurisdictional. Maybe it’s just the sheer number of family members that are expected to be supported out of the family office, depending on where they are. They might be in different countries. So to me, probably the biggest issue that drives choice around a family office is complexity. Obviously there needs to be a materiality point with wealth where that makes sense, but complexity is what’s going to drive whether you need someone to run this stuff on your behalf.

 

Peter Harper: And then the final point is around the priorities of the family. There’s a lot of great literature out there that talks about values construction within a family and how you avoid family wealth going from shirt sleeves to shirt sleeves within three generations. Various cultures around the planet have a similar concept. It’s just consistently the data supports that families that don’t have a plan are going to wind up in a position where the money doesn’t last a huge amount of time. So, a lot of the time, the priority of the families is that is all about how important is the wealth that they have today. How important is it to them, is the wealth that they have today, is it there for future Generations, right? So, really that construction around the purpose of the family office and how that’s supposed to be managed for future generations will dictate whether it makes sense to have one. Because really, they’re all about multi-gen. It’s primarily a plan for, a tool for multi-gen planning.

 

Peter Harper: So, I’m often asked by people that are interested in setting up a family office, “Well, okay, what questions, if you’re in my shoes and you were about to embark on setting up a family office, what questions would you be asking someone like yourself right?” So again, some of this is repetitive, but I’d be going through the process; I’d be starting, sitting there, and saying, “Okay, what is the objective of the family office? What is the purpose? Why are you doing this, right?” As I mentioned before, family offices that are not set up with a long-term framework in place where they’re thinking about this for generations that do not exist today are rarely successful. I’d be asking about the scope of their family office. I’d be asking myself, “Okay, what is this? Is it going to be set up solely as an investment vehicle, right?” So, the term family office is really not a correct term. Maybe it qualifies as a family office in the minds of the SCC, but that doesn’t mean that it’s a real family office. Family offices are all about engaging with generations to ensure longevity of wealth. So, what is the purpose? Is it investments? Is it estate planning? Is it managing other items for the broader family? Is it asset management across real estate where we’re saying, “Hey, listen, these are legacy items that we want to keep for future generations?” That’s defining that scope, then articulating that plan, and having a family kind of buy into that plan is very critical.

 

Peter Harper: I’d be asking again, you know, if you’ve determined what the role of family offices is, asking, “Well, what skills are then needed to run the family office, right?” And, I think it sounds cool; the idea of having a family office; to a lot of people, it sounds cool. But then, when you realize the role and work that can go into managing a single-family office which can be significant. You need to know what skills do I have? Do you have the skills to be actively involved, or is this something that where you should be setting it up and passing fiduciary responsibility of the family to a group of professionals that have the skills to do that, right? So, the skills are needed. You need someone that has been able to run a private enterprise. You need someone that’s adept in investments. You need someone that’s adept in managing complex, familiar relationships and then all of the administrative support services that you would ordinarily expect to have around the back of a business.

 

Peter Harper: In many cases, a lot of the times, there’s a real center around investments so probably the biggest cost that’s going to be is the chief investment officer. I’d be asking: “How are future decisions going to be made?” You know, I’ve talked about previously the framework of a family office is; really, you’re dictating the rule book or the constitution for the broader family and how they should interact when dealing with whatever the assets of the family are, right? And so again, there’s a lot of literature out there. If you read up on the oldest family offices and how they’ve been so successful, they’ve been so successful because they’ve had very well-thought-out rules and what it means to be engaged in the family, to participate in the family office, right? For me, this is actually one of the more critical facets of a family office, right? It’s once you get a framework around investments and what this thing is going to do to make money; it’s how do you ensure the capital you have today is still there for future generations? For me, if I was going through this process of saying, “ok, this seems like a lot because it is, it’s like establishing a startup; getting these people in place; setting up KPIs and who’s going to manage them. Are you going to manage them, is the family going to manage them? Is it one person? Who’s doing reviews on these people to make sure they’re doing the right thing and how’s proper incentives kind of established around that? Or, do you want to work with someone like Asena Family Office on a fractional basis, right?” Where you say, “Hey listen, yes we need all this stuff, but we want to outsource it to people, folks that have the ability to manage this stuff on our behalf through some form of professional partnership right? And, you know, if you, for every client I’ve had that’s come in and said, “Hey listen, yes, help us set up a family office,” many of those folks have come through a process where they’ve determined, after learning the lessons the hard way, to say “Okay, okay, we’re either closing the family office, or we’re substantially limiting the roles and responsibilities of the family office because it’s more efficient just to do this stuff on an outsourced basis.”

 

Peter Harper: I’d be asking, “At what asset levels does this make sense? When does it cease to make sense, right? Again, you know, having a clear understanding of the costs, what you expect the expected revenue of the family office is going to be, and the likely overhead. It’s a business decision why this still kind of makes sense. It is really critical, depending on the family. I mean, if they’ve got a very sort of benevolent framework and they’re giving a lot of money away with philanthropy, or they’re giving a lot of money away to family members, there might just come a time where the asset base is such that it doesn’t make sense to keep the family office in place. So, being aware of all that stuff up front is super important.

 

Peter Harper: I would also be thinking about the services. What services are, am I thinking about, in the construct of, and this is why I think it is helpful to go through sort of a review of: If I was to have a single-family office, what would that look like, right? Because when you’ve done that and you’ve kind of architected out your own life, and you go, okay, these are the people that we would need to run a single-family office. I think it’s also then easier to establish well what you can outsource right? So, maybe you’re only having a certain part of that in-house, and the rest of it’s going to be provided by external professionals, but you need to have a clear sense of what gaps; what it makes sense to have on staff and then external, and then what you can afford as far as a budget to pay those people. Because running a single family office, as I’ve indicated before, it can be very costly particularly if you’re trying to get market-leading people to support you in areas such as investments.

 

Peter Harper: I think the other point is, that a good question would be about client service. I mean, I think it’s like anything else, when you’re used to dealing with something that’s a luxury product, or you’ve had luxury interactions, there’s a certain sort of client standard that you would expect. Sometimes when some of this stuff is managed internally or through a single-family office, it’s harder to maintain the quality level. Whereas, it might be actually easier to do it up on an outsource basis through a multi-family framework. So, I think it’s really important to sort of ask yourself the question about how important that sort of service standard is. Then also, I would also be asking the question around the sustainable operating model because this, to set up a single-family office to effectively incubate a new business. The purpose of which is to generate profit to sustain the needs of the family; whatever that is; whether that’s just operating costs, so whatever they need to run their lives or to deliver on philanthropic goals, right, or to have free capital to continue to grow the wealth for future generations, right? In order to be sustainable, it needs the infrastructure to be put in place in a way that you know makes money or is at least cost-neutral to be sustainable like it would be with any business.

 

Peter Harper: Then I would be asking the question about time, right? That it’s one thing to spend a bunch of time setting up a family office, even if you have a bunch of independent folks that are absolute experts running these things for you. They still need to be managed, right, and that takes time. There’s a level of sophistication that may need to exist to have that, so, you know, the biggest thing when again making a choice around it, “Do I set up a single-family office or a multi-family office?” This is a really important question right, because it may be the case that you don’t have the time or the desire to manage people, so an outsourced, fractional option is the best way to go.

 

Peter Harper: And then, leading on the back of that, it’s time, and then it flows into involvement, likte how involved do you want to be, investment decisions or allocation of capital, right? Because I find sometimes with this notion of single-family office, if it’s going to be a completely fiduciary type deal where it’s going to get set up, maybe you’re stepping in for a quarterly board meeting or something, but you’re really not actively engaged at all. What’s the purpose of doing it in such a way where you’ve got all this infrastructure right? If you’re effectively trying to set this up so you’re out of the picture completely, who is holding who accountable? If you get strong people that you know operate and exist in the fiduciary world, like independent trustees, you can have, put all that stuff in place, but it requires work; continued work. So, being real about how much time you’re going to connect to this process up front is really important.

 

Peter Harper: So, you know we’ve talked about what is a family office, right? We’ve talked about the three important things that drive the decision whether to have a single-family office and a multi-family office. Then we’ve talked through a whole bunch of questions that I would look at and ask if I was thinking about setting up a family office, right? So practically, how do I start the process, right? So, again going up the front, you’ve got to go out and work with someone to determine the objectives and the purpose of the family office. The second is you got to determine the importance of client service and whether you want to have the headache of managing people within a single-family office. You’ve got to ask yourself, “Am I ready to start and run a business because family, a single-family office, is just that, right? It’s a business, right? It might be framed around investments but it’s still a business. And then, you’ve got to answer that question. And then, finally, you’ve got to determine what your investment philosophy is going to be, and how you are going to approach investments.

 

Peter Harper: So, you know, I’ll close out with some tips; what I think are helpful for thinking through the establishment of the family office. The first one is, you know, understanding your capital, right? What are your capital needs of the family? What are your investment goals? How much risk are you willing to take on, and how long do you expect your capital to sustain the family? Two. I’d get really clear about the delegation of responsibilities, right? What are things that you’re happy to do and get involved in/get involved with, and where are you going to expect to be supported by a professional? Setting up a single-family office is just like setting up any other business. It’s a mammoth undertaking, and without a really, really strong team in many cases, it can just create more headaches for a family than the issues it solves. I’d be really clear around your vision for investment. If you don’t have a vision for investment, make sure you’re getting with your financial advisors and wealth team to kind of work that out at the start.

 

Peter Harper: Determining the longevity of the investment strategy and how that should play out is really important. So, about evaluating what your investment horizon is and then what are your short-term capital needs is important. And then, take a proactive approach to succession. For me, the most critical value of a family office is around legacy planning and the longevity of the investment office. I don’t honestly see the value of implementing a family office if this is something that’s not going to exist outside of the founder’s lifetime. For me it’s all about legacy and ensuring that the family vision and values survive and thrive for multiple generations. So, you know, take your proactive view on succession and engage with family on that really, really early.

 

Peter Harper: Cheers guys. Hope it was helpful.

 

Have questions about setting up a Family Office? Contact one of our Asena consultants to get started.

–Peter Harper

Family Office Vlog Series: Ep. 2 – What is a Multi-Family Office?

Learn why family clients are looking to start a multi-family office in our second episode of the Family Office Vlog Series with Asena CEO Peter Harper.

Transcript:

Peter Harper: Hey, guys. Peter Harper, Managing Director and CEO of Asena Family Office. For those of you who are not familiar with our business, we advise foreign families and private clients on U.S. direct investments in mergers and acquisitions.

Peter Harper: So today, I wanted to talk about the definition of a multi-family office (and) what is it? The term “family office” has become more ubiquitous over the last decade as the transference of money, of significant private money, away from major institutions into the hands of private family managers continues to grow. So in my last video where I talked about what it was to be a family office, right, a multi-family office is just that on a fractional basis.

So, to recap, in a typical family office, (especially a) single family office, you’ll have a C suite. Not unlike you would have in an operational business that covers tax, accounting, finance, and legal wealth management, investments, (and so on). So (then) general admin for the family.

Peter Harper: In a multi-family office, it’s simply that on a fractional basis. A family may not have the wealth to be able to sustain the full C suite. And for a lot of single family offices, it can cost $3 to $10 million just to run the executive infrastructure for the family.

Peter Harper: So they may not have the wealth that can sustain that type of costs or to run it. So they say, “We want someone on an outsource basis to fractually manage all these things for us as a family.” Right? Obviously, when you’re doing it fractual, there’s going to be some reduction in the cost for doing that, or they simply don’t want the headache of managing all those people internally.

Peter Harper: So this is the core of what Asena as a business does. We provide fractional support for families that either choose not to run their own C-suite or run their own service lines because they don’t have the wealth to sustain that or because they don’t want the headache of that. And we do that across tax, accounting, estate planning, wealth management, M&A advisory, and legal.

Peter Harper: So if you want to know more about family offices or you need help with your family office, please reach out.

Peter Harper: Cheers.

 

Want to start your multi-family office? Stay tuned for more expert tips or get in touch with one of our Asena consultants to get started.

–Peter Harper

Family Office Vlog Series: Ep. 1 – Intro to Family Offices

In the premiere episode of our new Family Office Vlog Series, Peter Harper (CEO and Managing Director) will introduce us into what a family office is and why it is vital for private clients looking to secure the management and legacy of their wealth.

Transcript:

Peter Harper: Hey, guys. (This is) Peter Harper, Managing Director and CEO of the Asena Family Office. For those of you who are not familiar with the business or a multi-family office, we advise foreign family offices and private clients on US direct deals and mergers and acquisitions.

Peter Harper: So today, I wanted to just touch on the definition of a family office. And the reason why I wanted to revisit this is (that) recently, I was on a call with another advisor. The opportunity was referred to through me from one of the top US private banks, you know, (as) we get a bunch of referrals from banking referral partners. And the question was posed quite cynically, I might add, is, “What is a family office anyway?” Right? 

Peter Harper: And I think whenever I hear that question, my immediate reaction is that the person I’m speaking to is kind of threatened by or has had no meaningful interaction with the family office to truly understand what it means to be one, right? And there are multiple facets as to what one means today.

Peter Harper: And the two more important things (are as followed): the first, which is probably more obvious for a lot of folks, is an individual who’s had material success needs a team of people to drive their private investments; (overall), to manage and drive their private investments. So what that looks like is how you would approach a normal business: you’d have a C-suite, a team of people across tax accounting, legal investments, (and) people management to go off and execute on the founder or family success, right? So the normal sort of economic business apparatus to drive the family forward.

Peter Harper: But in my opinion, the most integral piece, right, because in that same question, “What is a family office?”, you know, (conjures the image of) a traditional trusted advisor who is sitting next to a patriarch or an individual. So that one person would say, “Well, all that individual needs is a good advisor, one person to help them drive that forward.”

Peter Harper: The thing that that person’s missing is that without the right framework for a family office apparatus, (then) we feel it’s almost guaranteed that the family money is going to be dispersed on the demise of that individual, right? And the reason for that is there is no family buy-in for future generations to actually help the founder or the patriarch/matriarch build a long-term legacy.

Peter Harper: So, in my opinion, the single most important thing that defines a family office is how they think about legacy, how they think about the concentration and management and value of wealth across multiple generations. So across 100 to 200 years, right?

Peter Harper: And the only way that families can sustain a family office for a long period of time is if future generations care about things other than just money. They care about the family, and they understand why it’s important to keep the family together and flourish and grow as a family. 

Peter Harper: Cheers, guys.

 

Want to learn more? Follow us same time next week for our next episode, sign up for our newsletter for updates, or schedule your consultation with one of our advisors.

Peter Harper

Family Office Structure

Family Office Structure

After covering business entities and formations such as LLCs and C corporations, let’s look into the growing industry of family offices, how they are formed, and why.

What is a Family Office?

A family office is any collection of dedicated professionals, whether separate from a family business or not, which provide personal and professional services to a family. This usually includes a broad diversification of services where one individual could manage the operational aspects of the family; for example, travel arrangements and asset collections. Other services, such as professional staff managing accounting, estate planning, tax, legal, philanthropic, investment, and administrative matters, are also rendered. 

The size of a family office can consist of as little as only two people or as many as 300 or more.

What is the Purpose of a Family Office?

Families have the ability to create a family office that can support their overall financial needs after a significant liquidity event, such as the sale of a family business. Every family office must reflect the unique component as s the family it serves.

It can provide a wide range of services, including:

  • Investment strategy and management;
  • Tax planning;
  • Estate planning;
  • Philanthropic planning;
  • Family education & multi-generational planning; and
  • Lifestyle management services.

Historical Family Office Structuring

Before 2018, most family offices could not implement their structures particularly tax-efficiently. Family offices used to be structured as limited partnerships or limited liability companies (“LLCs “) and can provide financial services such as tax, investment management, accounting, and concierge services for family members and various family members entities. 

Often, the family members and entities would pay the family office (collectively, the “Family Clients “) through management fees. 

These management fees were, however, deductible by a Family Client only to the point where the fees exceeded 2% of the Client’s adjusted gross income (“AGI “) for the tax year. Deductions for operating expenses, including salaries, office rentals, and payments to any third-party vendors, were likewise limited for many family offices. 

If structured properly, some family offices often avoided most limitations on deductions by claiming status as an active trade or business, thereby taking their deductions in full. However, taking such a position was seen by the IRS as aggressive tax planning to avoid tax, and the IRS had often challenged attempts by single family offices trying to claim that they were a trade or business.

Sections 212 and 162

Historically, expenses incurred by family offices have been deducted under one of the two provisions of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) listed as:

Section 162 and Section 212
      • Section 162 deductions are applicable toward any active trade or business. Those said deductions taken under Section 162 are most often permitted in full, as the IRS traditionally views the active trade or business requirement strictly. The IRS requires that entities that claim the deduction must be engaged in a for-profit business through the provision of goods or services toward third parties. In the 1930s, the family office working for Eugene Higgins, who was the wealthy heir to a business fortune, had tried to claim all expenses from managing his fortune as either business or trade deductions. From this, the government successfully challenged Higgins’ family office’s position by arguing that the management of one’s wealth cannot be a valid business or trade. 
      • In response to the claim by the government, Congress enacted Section 212, which recognizes that expenses related to managing and enhancing one’s wealth would be legitimate and must be deductible to an extent. The Code put a limit on those deductions towards amounts that went over 2% of AGI. As seen in the government’s historical dislike for family offices operating as a business or trade, most family offices hadn’t been willing to risk an IRS challenge. Instead, they decided to claim any of their deductions solely under Section 212, resulting in many family office owners and their Family Clients being unable to fully deduct expenses.
Important Developments in 2017

Resulting from two key developments occurring by the end of 2017, traditional family office structures had become less viable. Still, at the same time, new structures provide opportunities for much greater tax efficiency. 

The first significant development was due to case law. It involved the case of Lender Management v. Commissioner, where the Tax Court had ruled that a family office had the option to be treated as a business as long as it met specific criteria. The second included the passage from the 2017 Jobs and Tax Cut Act, which disallowed deductions that fall under Code Section 212 and reduced the national corporate tax rate by 14% (35% to 21%).

Lender v. Commissioner

In the case of Lender’s Bagels, the taxpayer’s role belonged to a family office that gave management services to a collection of investment LLCs owned by the family business’s children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren (Lender’s Bagels).

When determining whether the family office had engaged in a business or trade (therefore fully deducting its expenses), the court noted large amounts of scrutiny if a family relationship had existed between the family office owners and the LLC owners. Despite this, the court had found that the family office could be considered a trade or business. The decision was backed up by several factors that had differentiated the Lender Management operation from other activities conducted by an investor to manage and monitor their own investments:

When reviewing all of the gathered facts that the court discussed (and had led the court ruling in favor of Lender Management), some recommended practices to best treat a Family Office as a business or trade are set out below:

      • The family office must be owned in different percentages and by different people or entities than the assets being managed.
      • The family office manager should be qualified to act as an investment advisor and devote their full time and focus when working for the family office.
      • The family office must continuously operate to make a profit.
      • The family office must always employ full-time employees who are not members of the family, as well as maintain a physical workplace space.
      • Family members must be treated as clients. This includes written client advisory agreements needing to set forth the services to be later rendered and the means of compensation that needs to be executed.
      • The family office must always hold regular meetings with clients and provide transparency during said meetings, including accountings of the office’s investments and other activities.
The Jobs and Tax Cut Act of 2017

Since 2017, The Jobs and Tax Cut Act (also known as the “Tax Act “) has significantly reorganized the federal income tax system for corporations and individuals. For corporations, the income tax rate decreased from 35% to 21%, and for individuals, an enormous number of changes were imposed. Still, the most significant deduction for this discussion and mentioned above was eliminating deduction for expenses that fall under Code Section 212. 

As a result, clients’ payment of management fees towards a family office is no longer considered deductible. Family offices unable to meet Code Section 212’s sufficient criteria will be categorized as a business or trade. They will be given the unappealing inability to receive any deductions for their expenses, even if said expenses are over the 2% of the AGI floor.

Using C Corporations

The corporate tax rate’s recent change has made using a C corporation serving as a family office much more appealing to families. Unlike other optional entities, C corporations are considered to conduct a business or trade as a primary function of its structure. C corporations are able to deduct their expenses if they are under Code Section 162, so long as they are considered necessary expenses from running the corporation as predicted, with no notable additions. As a result, many families consider converting their family office to a C corporation.

As noted earlier, there are two ways in which deductions are no longer permitted concerning family offices: 

      • The payment towards management fees to the family office by the Family Clients; and 
      • The payment towards expenses by the family office if it is not a trade or business. 

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

How to Build a Family Office

Now that we’ve looked at what a family office is and its past structure, let’s examine standard methods for building your own family office today.

The Two Types of Family Offices

There are two main kinds of family offices that entrepreneurs choose from for various reasons that best suit their financial goals as a company. They are:

‘Single Family Office’ or a ‘Multi-Family Office’?

Single Family office – Wealth owners who possess investable assets exceeding $100 million can choose to form their own wealth management business, known as a single-family office, which oversees all aspects of their financial and human wealth.

Multi-Family Office – A multi-family office (also known as an MFO) is a wealth management firm that provides integrated and highly customized services towards a limited quantity of clients. Participating families with an MFO will have access to a wide array of integrated services.

Steps to Creating a Family Office

The first and most vital step when creating a family office structure is to state the goals of an individual or multiple family members. A family office formation is similar to forming a regular business entity, where developing an organizational structure is the first move.

The next step would be to determine whether you want to establish the family office in-house or have a third party form the structure, hire personnel, and provide/maintain all essential services the family office offers.

Once that evaluation and decision are made, the third step is to choose which assets shall be managed by the family office or be managed by one or more family members. 

Scope and Costs of a Family Office

Like any other new entity, the family office operation and associated costs will need to be assessed before confirming your next step to opening one. Sizes of family offices range from small to very large, depending on the amount of wealth required for management (such as asset management, risk management, wealth management, investment management, etc.) and the types and diversity of assets the money is invested in.

A small family office usually requires six employees and costs anywhere from $1 to $2 million to operate on an annual basis. 

A medium-sized family office often requires 15 people to best operate, with an annual operating budget of $3 to $4 million minimum. 

On the other hand, a large family office would require about 25 employees with an annual budget of $8 to $10 million. When considering a large family office, however, you’d be talking about 40 to 50 employees, along with an operating budget ideally of $14 to $20 million.

What is a Family Office Structure?

Depending on jurisdiction and purpose, a family office’s legal structure can take various forms. The most popular legal structure for a family office in the US is an LLC, then an S Corp, and 3rd a C Corp. A Private Trust company is the least popular structure used. 

When Does It Make Sense to Create a Family Office?

Families who want to start a family office will need at least $100M in investable assets and have the goal to: 

        • Maintain control over assets and the overall decision-making process;
        • Benefit from the overall buying power of the family’s combined assets;
        • Preserve their privacy;
        • Keep the family together;
        • Possess a dedicated team that is devoted to giving key services to achieve long-term goals.
Finding Qualified Advisors Who Work with Family Offices

Advisors are key components to any family office as they provide the expertise that is not available internally in a family office.

Services most utilized by family clients are:

        • Accounting;
        • Investment planning; and
        • Integrated planning.

Interestingly, these three most utilized services are provided jointly by the family office and any external providers.

Selecting the ideal advisor team who will understand your unique needs and be able to support your family always needs careful due diligence on the part of the family.

The Importance of a Family Office Governing Board

A governing board is ideal when driving a company’s success. A family governing board is necessary and mandatory for operating a family office and essential for the family enterprise’s preservation.

Wealthy families sometimes need to comprehend the role and need for a financial services board when managing their wealth, assets, net worth, etc. However, there has been an increased awareness of the importance of such a board in the past few years.

What Should I Consider When Setting Up a Family Office?

Working in wealth management often involves more than just hiring money managers to invest the proceeds of the sale. Preserving wealth requires owners to consider the wealth management process a shared family business. 

What is the Objective of Your Family Office?

Managing a family’s wealth successfully is a complex and unique undertaking, so understanding which financial services to look for or provide for that unique case is necessary before moving forward. 

The job of a family wealth manager is to establish a professional structure for private work to best grow and protect a family’s assets for later generations. Examples of success include asset protection and growth and the peaceful transition of control over assets and wealth from one generation to the next. This can be done by a cohesive group of cousins who are collaboratively managing the original family member’s charitable wishes.

Whatever the measures are for the family wealth manager to execute, the work that comes from managing the family wealth can never be underestimated without negative cost to the family and their family office. That is the reason why many families decide to form a dedicated family office, as it means having a professional way to address the challenges that financial families often encounter.

What is the Scope of Your Family Office?

Individual family requirements will dictate the scale and scope of all operations. Principals are also encouraged to use the following functions to inventory what is carried out today on their behalf, as well as what new or expanded procedures might be carried out in the future. This list of typical basic and advanced functions serves only as a guideline.

What is the Family Office’s Role and What Skills are Needed?

A family office’s most basic yet necessary duty is handling wealth, net worth, and investment management for wealthy families or individuals. Such is a common and most often successful way to grow the wealth already created, as well as transferring the wealth across multiple generations through succession planning.

Aside from the necessary technical credentials of a family office (investment, legal, accounting, etc.) and experience that will be required in the family office role, it is essential to have the following professional characteristics when starting and throughout the family office’s time:

        • Privacy
        • Lack of Ego
        • Teamwork
        • Integrity
        • Communication 
How Will Future Decisions About the Family Office Be Made?

Most governing boards for a family office require an average of four members of the family and one member who is not. Families often include independent, non-family members on their board to either provide the professional experience they need or act as an objective party who supports the execution of the family’s vision and strategy.

What Do You Want in a Partner?

Below are seven vital components that your future partner must have or aspires to achieve before you enter a legal agreement with them:

        • To provide a formal structure for the management and governance of the family’s wealth;
        • To promote the family’s legacy, vision, and values;
        • To coordinate, integrate, and consolidate customized services for the family;
        • To manage economic and personal risks for the family
        • To capitalize on economies of scale gained from consolidated family wealth;
        • To accumulation, such as preferential investment access and lower fee rates; and
        • To maintain confidentiality and privacy of family affairs.

A Framework For Evaluating Family Office Options

After answering the questions above and better comprehending what your family office will look like, it’s time to examine current and future contributions to ensure everything can happen in the formation process.

Step 1: Evaluate Current Expenses (Financial Benefit of New Structure)

Families should quantify and evaluate their current costs, including staff, retained legal/accounting services, direct and indirect investment expenses, technology, infrastructure, and others. They should further review their current effective tax rate and then look at how the effective rate could change under a Lender-like structure. State taxes are essential to examine as well.

This first step should help a number of families quickly decide. Every family is different, but when aggregate expenses are less than $1 million, often it may not make financial sense to form or restructure a family office—and for such families, the outsourcing option may now be more attractive than it was a few years ago. Additionally, families that already have operating businesses may find that the incremental deductions are insufficient to justify a change.

Step 2: Evaluate Family’s Fact Pattern (Feasibility of New Structure)

If the tax savings under a Lender-like structure would be compelling, the next step is determining if such a structure is practical or feasible. There are several hurdles to clear. 

First, does the family’s situation require the family office structure to have a logical basis? A model similar to Lender will make sense for a family with multiple branches, each containing various generations. It is essential to have independent advice for different family members and outside investors within the family office.

There are additional hurdles to qualification as a “trade or business.” For example, it is only sometimes feasible to compensate staff based on a profits interest in the family office. Further, the ideal structure may come at a cost. Finally, the structure may require new or different management skills, and it is crucial for families to know whether that talent is available at a reasonable cost.

Step 3: Evaluate Likelihood of Success (Durability of New Structure)

Finally, a structure similar to Lender appears both financially and practically attractive and achievable to a family. In that case, the members must still take an honest look at how the office and its structure will likely impact their day-to-day lives and determine whether they are comfortable with adhering to new rules over time. Any new family office structure, as mentioned, will likely require new costs, as well as require new staff and leadership to operate it properly. The extra time to review, hire, and go over financial goals with the office can lead to family members needing to be more entirely unified in taking on these additional requirements. In addition to the new burdens, managing and calculating all the family office’s profits interest is also complicated and may create tension amongst the family. Any changes in how the family members will meet and interact with the family office/each other going forward may also require adjustments.

No two families are financially identical, as every family will react differently to a present or upcoming change in how their investment assets are managed and to any downstream adjustments that will be required to adjust to a new management structure. In every case, a complete understanding of the anticipated changes is necessary for the office’s long-term success.

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

5 Rules for Building a Solid Family Office Structure

Now that you’ve built an overall sense of how to build a family office and ideas of what yours would look like, we must go over the five key rules that come to family office formation listed below. Checking off each throughout your company’s process and final stages will help ensure that the structure is stable and can handle a growing number of unique cases.

When a Mistake Can Cost Millions, Developing a Strong Family Structure is Crucial

Below are common company decisions that are avoidable with ways to secure your new system:

Build a Solid Foundation for the Family Office Structure

A successful family office must be formed through close consultation with experienced legal accountants, advisors, and other counsel. Based on various investments, including private equity, debt finance, venture capital, and real estate, a family office will need to address all legal needs and tax strategies. The office should also work closely with tax experts and transactional attorneys so that structure will handle most investments, analyze and negotiate all terms and conditions surrounding an opportunity, as well as minimizing any adverse tax consequences.

Every factor, such as the company’s mission, goals, role, scope, and lines of accountability of the family office, must always be defined at the moment of formation, followed by being incorporated into the structure of the family office, even if it will be changed later on to meet evolving purposes.

Insulate Wealth

A successful family office is required to manage significant traditional assets and, in many cases with Family Clients, oversee unique assets (ex: residential and vacation real estate, hedge funds, fine art, luxury items (e.g., investment vehicles such as cars, boats, planes, and helicopters), and collectibles). The assets must also be insulated from potential liabilities. 

Cultivate Sustainable Wealth

Every successful family office must be responsible for cultivating sustainable wealth for the family’s future generations. Their unique structure needs to accommodate the utilization of significant financial possibilities such as direct private equity-style investments, generation-skipping trusts for real estate purchases, and other alternative investments that would deploy long-term capital. 

Establishment and Utilization of a Management Company

A management company must employ staff to best provide an array of services for their Client (i.e., the family office and their Family Clients). To perform this expectation, said management company will need to administer the operations, execute and/or oversee all of the professional and consulting services, and handle many other matters that the family office will require.

Family Office Compliance

Most importantly, a family office is required always be vigilant about compliance. That way, it can insulate each entity from other holdings incurring any liabilities. Compliance also includes required filing and maintaining all books and records for every family member and any related entities.

With a team of experienced advisors, a successful family office will be able to create and maintain a financial structure that can maximize any short and long-term investment possibilities with little to no exposure to extraordinary liabilities, so family wealth is safeguarded.

Organizational Structure of Single Family Offices

Typical roles within single family offices include:

Executive Team at Our Single Family Office Organizational Chart

Usually, the core team of a single family office consists of a few partners in key positions. A Chief Executive Officer (CEO) leads the whole investment firm, a Chief Investment Officer (CIO) is responsible for investment decisions, a Chief Financial Officer (CFO) is responsible for tax and financial topics, and a Chief Operating Officer (COO) who is responsible for daily operations. The partners are directly in touch with family members or a representative family board. Smaller single family offices even only consist of the executive team, while larger SFOs with billions of assets under management have several sub-divisions. 

Investment Teams at Single Family Offices

Usually, the specialized investment teams are led by directors who have already served in leading positions at investment firms for many years. They are, in turn, working together with a few talented investment associates and analysts. The Chief Investment Officer (or CEO, depending on the size and structure of the SFO) supervises the investment teams and is in steady exchange with them. Investment decisions are either made or brought to the family investment committee/investment board when the deal size is more extensive.

Which investment teams exist and how they are structured heavily depends on the investment focus of the family office. Very often, the following teams exist:

        • Financial Investments;
        • Real Estate;
        • Private Equity and Venture Capital; and
        • Other Investment Teams – Many more possible asset classes have their own investment teams: renewables, arts, impact investing, etc.
Back Office: Functions at Single Family Offices: Accounting, Public Relations, etc.

The back office supports the family’s daily work and necessary operational functions. Possible teams are:

        • Accounting, Tax, and Risk Management;
        • HR and Operations;
        • Public Relations;
        • Portfolio Management; and
        • IT

FAQs

Let’s reiterate a couple of important family office structure need-to-knows:

How Much Does a Family Office Cost?

The cost of each family office will be dependent on many vital variables, such as the size of the family, the quantity of staff, and the nature of the family’s overall investments.

The complexity of said office is the key predictor of cost for a family office. Receiving an “all in” cost of wealth management must have detailed consideration surrounding the family office’s costs, the fees paid towards ideal advisory firms (e.g., accountants, attorneys, etc.), and towards investment costs (e.g., outsourced CIO, custody, investment management fees, investment consultant, etc.). 

What are Critical Issues to Consider in Managing a Family Office?
        • Balanced leadership and governance;
        • Effective communication;
        • Board oversight;
        • Succession and contingency planning; and
        • Continuous operational improvements.

People Also Want to Know…

How Much Money Do You Need to Have a Family Office?

The recommended starting amount for families who want is at least $100M via investable assets.

What is the Purpose of a Family Office?

Families can create an office to support all of their overall financial needs after a significant liquidity event, with every family office being unique as the family it serves.

How is a Family Office Formed?

Opening and operating a family office, or expanding upon the financial services of an existing family office, requires careful consideration and planning to properly manage and protect a family’s wealth so it can flourish over time. As with any organization, a family office’s relative success or failure relies on effective governance.

 

 

To learn more about family offices, reserve your consultation with one of our advisors, as well as joining us starting next week for the first episode of our Family Office Vlog Series…

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Generational Skip Trust

Generational Skip Trust

With previous discussions of estate planning and grantor trust, let’s examine another common practice within financial planning: generation-skipping trust.

What is a Generation-Skipping Trust?

A generation-skipping trust is a trust where the settlor or grantor of the trust transfers assets to recipients who are two or more generations younger than them. Therefore, the settlor can bypass a generation when leaving assets to their heirs and eliminate one round of estate tax.

How a Generation-Skipping Trust Works

A generation-skipping trust allows the grantor to leave an inheritance (either in the form of money or assets) to his grandchild, great-niece, great-nephew, or any other natural person who is at least 37.5 years younger than the grantor. The trust’s beneficiaries cannot, however, be the spouse or ex-spouse of the grantor.

The trust created will also be regarded as irrevocable, meaning that the trust cannot be changed or revoked. The fact that the trust will be irrevocable does not mean that the grantor relinquishes all of their power and can still insert provisions that allow them to determine how the assets are distributed and how the estate is invested.

The tax on generation-skipping trusts is also separate from estate and gift tax. 

No regulations prevent the grantor’s children (the skip person) from participating in the income earned on the assets held in the trust as long as the original assets are not distributed. 

Who Needs a Generation-Skipping Trust?

A generational skipping trust may only be suitable for some. It should be noted that it should last the lifetime federal GST exemption of $12.06 million per individual (this increases to $24.12 million for a couple). If this is possible, the grantor may be subject to GST and estate taxes.

As the skipped generation will only be able to benefit from the income earned and generated from the trust assets, it may not be suitable for smaller estates where the assets need to pass directly to the next generation (children/spouses).  

Who Gets the Income from a Generation-Skipping Trust?

The income generated and earned from assets held in the trust can be paid to the children/spouse of the grantor as long as the assets are not physically distributed to them. The income will be taxed accordingly; however, the assets will be kept separate from their own estate.

Passing Assets to Grandchildren Through a Generation-Skipping Trust

A grandparent can ensure that assets and inheritance can be passed to grandchildren by forming a generation-skipping trust during the grantor’s lifetime or by transferring the assets directly to the grandchildren in the grandparent’s wills. 

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

How to Create a Generation-Skipping Trust

Creating a generation-skipping trust is complicated, and the exact details of the trust will depend on the specific goals of the grantor. Two transferring strategies are available to grantors, and these are as follows:

Generation-Skipping Transfers:

Assets are placed in a trust using the GST exemption. The trust can then pay any income earned from the assets in the trust to the skip person and/or skipped generation (children/spouses), while the remaining assets in the trust pass outside of the grantor’s estate to future generations after the death of your child/spouse.

Direct Generation Skip

The grantor will bypass their own children and give the assets qualifying for the GST exemption amount directly to your grandchildren or place them in a trust for their benefit or the benefit of future generations.

Generation-Skipping Trusts & Taxes

Much like other financial trusts, a generation-skipping trust will often have taxes attached to it. Who, what, and how are listed as:

Who Has to Pay Estate Taxes?

Estate taxes are owed on any estate exceeding the federal estate tax exemption of $12.06 million. This lifetime exemption changes annually to adjust for inflation (it should be noted that should Congress not intervene, the exemption amount will revert to a $5 million baseline, adjusted for inflation, in 2026). In some states, the estate tax exemption is the same as the federal exemption; in others, this may be less than $1 million.

Gift Tax

An individual is allowed to give gifts during their lifetime without paying taxes as long as the value of the gifts does not exceed your lifetime exclusion which is the same as your estate tax exemption.

There is an annual gift exclusion of $15,000.00. However, should you grant a gift worth more than the annual exclusion, your lifetime exclusion decreases by the excess value of the gift.

Generation-Skipping Transfer Tax

The GST tax applies when someone gives direct gifts of money or other assets to someone at least 37.5 years younger than them. A flat tax rate of 40% on the transfer value exceeds the GST exemption, and GST tax can also be referred to as GSTT or simply as a transfer tax.

Benefits of Generation Skipping Trusts

The following three most common benefits are:

  • GST is a great planning tool for larger estates as you can ensure that your family legacy is maintained for at least two generations. It enables your own children to benefit and ensures that your grandchildren will also be supported.
  • GST allows the grantor to skip a round of federal estate taxes, as the federal estate taxes will only be assessed when the property is distributed to the beneficiaries of the trust. Should the assets be passed to the children of the grantor, the family legacy would have been subjected to tax twice.
  • GST assets are not included in your child’s estate, which effectively protects their estate. They can also retain complete control of their own trust during their lifetime.

Drawbacks of Generation-Skipping Trusts

When considering a GST, the following drawbacks need to be considered:

  • GST was established to ensure that families cannot escape federal estate taxes over multiple generations. If the estate’s value exceeds the GST tax exemption, it will be subject to both GST and estate taxes at a rate of 40%.
  • Trusts may be powerful estate planning tools that allow families to minimize their estate’s exposure to probate. However, there is a very high administrative burden of running a trust. As trusts require a lot of thought, resources, and energy, it is best to work with an estate planning professional to assist with setting up a trust that will best suit your family’s needs.
  • With a large enough estate, your children may still benefit from the profits generated from the assets held in trust. Suppose there is a need to support your children financially. In that case, an evaluation needs to be done to ascertain that the income produced by the GST will be substantial enough to cover their expenses and lifestyle.

Can a Generation-Skipping Trust be Broken or Dissolved?

It may be possible to dissolve a generation-skipping trust as the trust is an irrevocable trust. This means the trust cannot be broken, modified, revoked, or dissolved; however, it may be possible to modify or terminate the trust judicially, depending on the State.

Can a Generation-Skipping Trust be Contested?

A GST can be contested; however, this cannot purely be done on the basis that an individual or family member does not agree to the terms. It will need to be proven that the trust is not legally valid for the contention to be valid. Here are some valid reasons for a GST to be contested:

Mental Incapacity

The grantor needs to be ‘sound of mind’ when the trust is created, meaning the grantor needs mental awareness of what they are doing. The trust can be invalid if it is possible to prove that they were not.

Undue Influence

If a third party coerced the grantor to create the trust or name a specific beneficiary/fiduciary, the validity of the trust can be challenged. The level of pressure the grantor faces must be so severe that their own free will must be overwhelmed.

Fraud or Forgery

If a trust document was obtained through fraud, it could be contested and thrown out. This can occur when the grantor is tricked into signing the trust when they are under the impression that they are signing another document.

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

Who can Contest a Generation-Skipping Trust? 

A trust litigation attorney can be approached to contest the GST. The aggrieved party will submit a motion or oral application to a High Court.

Do I Need A Trust Litigation Attorney To Contest A Generation Skipping Trust?

Some states, such as California, do not require a trust litigation attorney to contest the validity of a GST. However, it would be most beneficial for the person challenging the trust to employ one. Other states do require a Trust litigation attorney to be appointed by the aggrieved party or family members to submit a motion or oral application to a High Court.

Is a GST Trust Revocable or Irrevocable?

A GST is an irrevocable trust; however, the grantor can still make decisions regarding the investments made in the trust and the distributions made from the trust.

Protect against the Generation-Skipping Transfer Tax

In order to protect against the GST Tax, it is crucial to consider the most tax-efficient planning tools. As the lifetime exemption applies to an individual, it is possible to put an estate plan in place which may allow each spouse to apply for their GST tax exemption either during their lifetime or at the time of their death when the trust is created.

Common Transfer Strategies for You to Discuss with Your Tax and Legal Advisors

Bring up options for GST as an irrevocable trust to your tax or legal advisor, as they will best recommend options that are unique to your case and circumstances. The same can be done for tools to protect against the GST tax discussed above.

How to Use a Lifetime Exemption from GST

Lifetime exemption from GST can be used during the grantor’s lifetime or at the time of their death when the assets are inherited outright by the next generation or transferred into the trust. During the lifetime of the grantor, all applicable transfers of wealth made are automatically applied to the lifetime GST exemption unless elected otherwise. Also taken into consideration is that it’s also possible to employ the annual gift tax exclusion to ensure that not too much of the GST exemption is used up during the course of the grantor’s lifetime. For transfers at death, the exemption may be allocated as directed in the will of the grantor or as directed by the executors if not explicitly mentioned in their wills.

 

Speak with an Asena consultant to learn more about your generational skip trust case.

Jean-Dré Tombisa

Peter Harper

U.S. Expats in Australia Taxes

U.S. Expats in Australia Taxes

Whether you’re a U.S. citizen or a green card holder living in Australia, you need to be aware of your tax obligations as a U.S. expatriate in Australia, which can be a complex issue without guidance.

To navigate these complexities effectively, many expatriates find it beneficial to consult with an Australian expat tax accountant.

As a general rule of thumb, a U.S. expat working or living in Australia should assume they have a tax obligation in both the U.S. and Australia.

How U.S. Taxes Work for American Expats in Australia

Working as a U.S. expatriate in Australia can impact your U.S. tax obligations even if your stay in Australia was short-term. 

For instance, if you earn income while on a short-term assignment in Australia, you are required to report that and any other income earned in Australia on your U.S. taxes. 

The longer you reside in Australia and establish closer economic ties you’ll have even more consideration towards your American tax filing.

You may also need to report any foreign financial accounts and assets acquired during your stay. Generally, U.S. taxpayers in Australia with more than $10,000 in a foreign bank or financial accounts (for example, superannuation accounts) are bound by FBAR filing and reporting requirements. You can also be subject to FATCA reporting requirements if you have assets that are valued at $200,000 or higher.

There Are an Estimated 105,000 Americans Living in Australia

All citizens and green card holders from the U.S. whose worldwide income exceeds the IRS’ current minimum thresholds will be required to file a U.S. federal tax return and to pay any taxes to the IRS, no matter where they live or whose income is generated.

Australia’s Taxes at a Glance

You should know a few things about Australia’s taxation process. The essential need-to-know is:

Tax Rates for Australia

Like the U.S., Australia uses a marginal tax rate that is based on a progressive tax system; for example, tax rates for an individual increase as one’s income rises. The present highest marginal tax rate for residents is set at 45%, but that is not without an additional 2% Medicare levy. Differently from the U.S., income taxes in Australia are most often imposed at the federal level but not at levels relating to state or local.

Also, similar to the U.S., all Australian taxpayers are required by tax law to file an income tax return annually with the Australian Tax Office (or ATO). The Australian tax year ends on June 30, unlike the U.S.’s on December 31. Also, Australia’s individual income tax return is required to be “lodged” (i.e., filed) by October 31; in the case of emergencies and such, extensions are available.

Australia has a progressive tax system; the more your income is, the more you will have to pay.

You can also earn up to $18,200 in a financial year and not have to pay taxes. This is known as the tax-free threshold, after which the tax rates kick in.

The lowest rate is 19%, and the highest rate is 45%, which is only charged on income over $180,000. Most Australians sit in the middle bracket.

For the 2022/2023 tax year, all Australian residents shall expect to be taxed on all income over $18,200, no matter where it’s earned.

Non-residents are taxed on all Australian-sourced income, with some exceptions.

What Types of Taxation Does Australia Have?

With everything mentioned above, let’s get into the various kinds of taxes to expect or keep in mind.

Australian Resident Income Tax Rates

The income tax rates for residents are different from that of a non-resident. 

Similar to US taxes, the percentage of tax you pay increases as your income increases. However, the rate ranges are steeper for non-residents, as shown below.

Resident Tax Rates 2022-2023
Tax Rate Income
0% 0-A$18,200
19% A$18,201-A$45,000
A$5,092 with an additional 32.5% A$45,001-A$120,000
A$29,467 with an additional 37% A$120,001-A$180,000
A$51,667 with an additional 45% A$180,001 and up
Foreign Resident Tax Rates

Tax rates for foreign residents for the 2021/22 and the 2022/23 year are:

Taxable income $

Tax payable $
0 – 120,000 32.5%
120,001 – 180,000 39,000 + 37% of excess over 120,000
180,001+ 61,200 + 45% of excess over $180,000
Capital Gains Tax

Capital gains are taxed in Australia but are considered part of the standard income tax instead of a separate category. Because of that, capital gains are therefore taxed at the same rates as one’s income. 

However, Australia’s capital gains tax does not apply to assets received through an estate transference, and capital gains can only be incurred if you sell the asset you acquired later on. 

Goods and Services Tax

The Goods and Services Tax (also known as GST) is a value-added tax that can be applied to most goods and services transactions, even if relating to goods and services and can be applied at a flat rate of 10%. 

Corporate Tax

In Australia, domestic companies don’t always have to be incorporated, so they can be considered as a corporation to reach specific tax purposes. All that is necessary from the company is that it carries out business in Australia, along with Australian ownership or control. 

All companies in Australia are also subject to a federal tax rate of 30% upon their taxable income. The exception would be for ‘small or medium business’ companies, usually subjected to a reduced tax rate of 25%. 

Social Security

Let’s examine the following key points surrounding the basics of Australian Social Security:

Do I Need to Pay Social Security in Australia?
      • If a U.S. company has assigned you to work in Australia for less than five years, you will pay into U.S. Social Security;
      • If the assignment timeline goes over five years, you will need to pay towards the Australian social security; and
      • If you are working for an Australian employer located in Australia, you will pay towards the Australian social security (contact your local AOT) for information).
Australia’s Social Security Agreement with the United States

Like the U.S., Australia has a social security system so that it can best provide for its citizens and residents. Even a secured system can still confuse expatriates over which system they should contribute to while residing in Australia. Fortunately, the U.S.-Australia totalization agreement establishes rules for social security contributions. 

Self-employed Americans living abroad in Australia may choose to contribute to either social security system. 

Superannuation

Defined as a payment by an employee towards a fund that can evolve in the future as a pension, superannuation can serve Australian taxation for the purposes listed below.

Superannuation Reporting is Important

Superannuation funds can make filing expatriate taxes extra complicated. Anyone who has control over these funds will encounter additional IRS reporting requirements. 

How to treat Australian superannuation contributions for your expat tax return?

The IRS treats these funds as grantor or employee benefit trusts, so they are not recognized qualified retirement plans, though they operate very similarly to a 401(k). 

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Living as an Expat in Australia

Moving to Australia but still having tax residency/citizenship status in another country (including the United States) can lead to questions about filing for both. Let’s look at the overall question below:

Do I Need to File 2 Income Tax Returns – Both US and Australia?

If you’re an American working or residing in Australia for some time (short or permanent), you should assume you have an income tax return obligation in both the U.S. and Australia. 

If you’re an American working in Australia, you may also have to file Australian taxes based on your residency and domicile status. Where Australian taxes are concerned, your domicile is generally where you have your permanent home, and your tax residency is where you spend most of your time. You can be a resident in more than one country, but you can only have one domicile.

How do U.S. Expat Taxes Work While You Live and Work in Australia?

Here is what American expatriates can expect from both U.S. and Australian tax laws about living and working in Australia:

Americans Who Are Self-Employed in Australia

It is required by Australia’s tax law to file a U.S. income tax return in the case that you have net earnings worth $400 or more from self-employment, regardless of age. You are required to pay self-employment tax onto your self-employment income, no matter if it can be excludable as foreign earned income in figuring your income tax. 

Does Australia tax foreign income?

The Australian income tax system taxes its residents based on their worldwide income (i.e., whether the income is earned within or outside Australia). 

Generally, non-resident individuals are only required to pay tax to the ATO on an Australian-sourced income. However, unlike the U.S., individuals that have become residents in Australia for a short time may be eligible for a temporary resident tax exemption on their foreign income and capital gains.

What is the Income Tax Rate in Australia Compared to the U.S.?

Current Australian income tax rates are relatively high compared to the U.S., which is 37%. Australian tax rates vary depending on your taxable income and between 0% – 45%, 

When is My Australian Income Tax Return Due?

Australia’s tax year starts on July 1 each year and ends the following year on June 30. The deadline to lodge (file) your taxes is October 31.

U.S. Taxes – What You Need to Know

If you earned over U.S. $12,550 (per individual) in 2021 (or $12,400 in 2020), have $400 of self-employment income, or only have a minimum of $5 of any income if you are married to (but happen to be filing separately) from a foreigner, it is a requirement to file Form 1040. While taxes owed are due on April 15, expats are able to get an automatic filing extension until the deadline of June 15, which can be extended further online on request until October 15.

If you have foreign assets valued at over U.S. $200,000 (per person, excluding your home if it is owned under your name), you must also file a Form 8938 to declare them.

If you had over U.S. $10,000 in one or multiple foreign bank accounts during the tax year at any time, it would be necessary for you to file FinCEN form 114, also known as an FBAR (Foreign Bank Account Report).

If you are paying any income tax in Australia, several IRS provisions allow you to avoid paying double tax onto the same income in the U.S. 

The two primary provisions are the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion, as it lets you exclude the first US$110,000 income earned from U.S. tax, and the Foreign Tax Credit. This gives you a U.S. tax credit to offset the tax you already have paid in Australia. 

The Foreign Tax Credit is a more beneficial option for American expats who find themselves paying more tax in Australia than they would in the U.S. They can carry any excess U.S. tax credits forward for any future use. No matter if you don’t owe any tax in the U.S., you will still have to file if your income exceeds the IRS minimum thresholds.

Does the U.S. Have a Tax Treaty with Australia?

Yes, the U.S.-Australia Income Tax Treaty was signed in late 1982 and later entered into force a year later in 1983

The U.S. – Australia Tax Treaty

However, the U.S. – Australia Tax Treaty doesn’t prevent U.S. expats living in Australia from having to file U.S. expat taxes. It contains provisions that can benefit some U.S. expats in Australia, such as students and individuals who will be given retirement income.

Most kinds of income are set out in the Treaty for U.S. expats so that they can avoid double taxation of their income arising in Australia. One way is to claim U.S. tax credits towards the same value as Australian taxes that have already been paid on their income by claiming the IRS Foreign Tax Credit.

If they have income arising in the U.S., U.S. expats in Australia can claim Australian tax credits against any U.S. income tax paid to the IRS when they file their Australian tax return.

The Treaty also covers any corporation taxation, stating that a company shall only be taxed in the country which it is registered under. An exception would be a ‘permanent establishment’ (an office, branch, factory, etc.) in another country. In that case, the permanent establishment’s profits shall be taxed within the country where it is located.

It’s also worth mentioning that the Treaty contains a clause that allows the two countries to share tax information; in other words, the IRS can see the Australian taxes U.S. expats currently residing in Australia are paying and vice versa. 

Australian banks also share their U.S. account holders’ contact and balance info with the U.S. Treasury.

To claim a provision in the Tax Treaty (besides claiming U.S. tax credits), expats should use IRS form 8833.

What are Australia’s Taxes Like for U.S. Expats?

For the 2022/2023 tax year, all Australian residents are expected to be taxed on all income over $18,200, regardless of where it’s earned. Also, non-residents are taxed on all Australian-sourced income, with some exceptions.

Australian Pension Plans

Superannuation is considered to be Australia’s version of a pension system, as superannuation is partly mandatory and voluntary. Excluding salary and wages, the government has minimums employers and employees must meet to fulfill superannuation requirements. The current rate is 9.5%, which will increase to 12% by 2025. 

Employee investments are both funded and vested. 

Superannuation funds can make filing U.S. expat taxes extra complicated. The IRS treats these funds as grantor or employee benefit trusts, so they are not considered to be qualified retirement plans; they also operate similarly to a 401(k). Anyone who has authority over these funds will encounter additional IRS reporting requirements. 

The U.S.-Australia Totalization Agreement

This agreement influences most tax payments and benefits under their respective social security systems due to it being designed to eliminate dual social security taxation. This situation occurs when a worker from one country relocates (digitally or in-person) to another country to work and is required to pay social security taxes to both countries (IRS and ATO) on the same earnings. It’s also good to fill gaps in benefit protection for all workers who have divided their careers between the United States and Australia.

What Tax Forms do Americans Living in Australia Have to File?

The most common forms to file as a U.S. expat include the following:

  • Foreign Bank and Financial Account Report (FBAR): it should not be considered a tax form and is not filed with the IRS. Instead, it is an informational form submitted to the U.S. Treasury Department. Any U.S. account holder (either person or entity) with a financial interest in or has signature power over one or more foreign financial accounts with more than $10,000 in aggregate value in a calendar year must file the FBAR annually with the Treasury Department.
  • Form 8938, Statement of Specified Foreign Financial Assets (FATCA Reporting): If you reside outside the U.S. and have a bank account or investment income account with a foreign financial institution, you will be required to include FATCA Form 8938 along with your U.S. federal income tax return if you meet certain monetary thresholds.
U.S. Tax Forms for Expats in Australia
    • FinCEN Form 114: Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR)
    • Form 1040: Individual Income Tax Return 
    • IRS Form 8938: Statement of Specified Foreign Financial Assets (FATCA) 
U.S. Tax Reporting Considerations

U.S. expats who possess accounts or other overseas assets can be subject to several specific filing requirements in the structure of informational forms. Some forms need to be submitted to the IRS as attachments onto the personal income tax return (Form 1040), while others can be submitted to other governmental departments. Failing to file any of the proceeding forms will result in severe civil penalties, such as a $10,000 per form per year. Additionally, criminal penalties, including fines and incarceration, may apply in certain extreme cases if the reporting delinquency is shown to be willful.

Australia Expat Income Taxes

There are a few standard expectations when paying taxes for Australian-sourced income, such as:

Who is Liable for Income Taxes in Australia? 

For the 2022/2023 tax year, all Australian residents are expected to be taxed on all income over $18,200, no matter where it’s earned. Non-residents are taxed on all Australian-sourced income, with some exceptions.

Who is an Australian Tax Resident

You can qualify as an Australian resident if you’re domiciled in Australia or spent more than half of the tax year without a permanent home residing elsewhere. Additionally, you also may be a resident if you happen to be an “eligible employee” of a superannuation fund.

Tax Year in Australia and Tax Filing and Payment Rules

Unlike in the U.S., the Australian tax year starts on July 1 and ends on June 30 of the following calendar year. The official deadline for filing an Australian income tax return is October 31, after the end of the country’s tax year. 

Extensions are available for taxpayers in certain situations for exceptional and unforeseen circumstances, such as those affected by natural disasters or even those who volunteered to aid victims of natural disasters. 

If you hire a registered tax agent before October 31, the filing deadline is automatically extended to June 5 of the following year. 

Expat Tax Withholding in Australia

When U.S. Expats start working as an employee in Australia, they pay income tax on payments received from their employers. The U.S. Expats’ employers deduct tax from your pay and send those amounts to us.

As an expat your employer withholds tax on your behalf from your salary or wages. Your employer will use your TFN declaration to work out how much taxes will be withheld from your pay.

Who Qualifies for a Resident of Australia?

If you’re domiciled in Australia, you qualify as a permanent resident of Australia or spent more than half of the tax year without a permanent home elsewhere. Additionally, permanent residents may be “eligible employees” of a superannuation fund.

What is the Implication of Being a Self-Employed American in Australia?

All U.S. expats are required to file a U.S. income tax return if your net earnings are $400 or more from self-employment, regardless of age. You must also pay self-employment tax onto your self-employment income, no matter if it is excludable as a foreign-earned income when calculating your income tax. Any net earnings from self-employment include the income earned in Australia and the United States.

What You Need to Know about Living and Working in Australia for Your U.S. Expat Tax Return

Along with standard expectations, some common dos and don’ts come with being an Australia-residing expatriate are:

Common Mistake

Of particular importance is that U.S. expats, more often than not, mistakenly assume that once they have moved abroad, any U.S. tax obligations will cease to exist.

So much so that, as a basic rule, all U.S. citizens, even those residing outside the United States, will be recognized as U.S. residents for tax purposes. Therefore, they are subject to U.S. tax reporting on their worldwide income and can be held towards tax liability if unable to report all current tax information. 

Australia Foreign Bank Account

Suppose you reside outside the U.S. and possess a bank account or investment account in a foreign financial institution. In that case, it is necessary to have FATCA Form 8938 included with your U.S. federal income tax return so you can meet certain monetary thresholds.

Additional Child Tax Credit for American Families in Australia

American expatriate families living in Australia should know the benefits they can receive from the Additional Child Tax Credit.

Australia is a country that has a higher income tax rate than the U.S., so Americans residing abroad in Australia can use the Foreign Tax Credit way instead of the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion. They can also then receive up to $1,400 per qualified child per year.

A qualifying child must be dependent on you, is under 17 years old, and has a valid Social Security Number.

We have met families who made up for lost years of tax filing through our Streamlined Procedure and were surprised to receive up to $3,000 of refunds every year when they claim the child tax credit.

What Tax Deductions are Available for Expats Living in Australia?

Because of the Treaty, most Americans residing in Australia already have an exemption from double taxation. However, the IRS can also provide several other beneficial tax credits and deductions for expats, such as: 

Most expats who apply these tax credits are able to erase their U.S. tax debt entirely.

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

How to Deal with the Different Tax Year in Australia in Your U.S. taxes?

Filing your U.S. tax return is due on June 15 – the automatic, 2-month filing extension for expats. However, you may need to file for the October 15 deadline because Australia has a different tax year.

When you report income as a U.S. citizen in Australia, you cannot use the same tax year in Australia as in the U.S. Both countries have different tax years. Therefore, for filing a U.S. tax return as an expat, you’ll need to calculate your worldwide income according to the U.S. tax year. This tax year is January 1 – December 31.

Due to this, it is recommended to use monthly payslips so you know how much income you receive every month. That way, you can translate what you earned from the Australian tax year to the U.S. tax year.

You `must report your worldwide income and file a U.S. tax return by June 15 every year as an American living abroad in Australia. However, if you are waiting for your second Australia income statement, that may come after the U.S. expatriate filing deadline. 

Should I Take the FTC over the FEIE if I Live and Work in Australia?

While Australia’s top marginal rate is at 45%, the U.S. instead charges 37%. And the Australian maximum marginal tax rate starts much earlier. That way, you will be better off ignoring the FEIE but still claiming a full foreign tax credit. 

But exercise caution, as you can only claim a new FEIE if six full years have passed since you had last rejected an FEIE. The sole exception for this scenario is if you receive permission from the Internal Revenue Service in order to change back earlier. 

You may carry any qualifying unclaimed foreign tax credits for one year and then carry them forward for ten years. However, you can only claim these against other foreign income, so if you return to the States and still have excess foreign tax credits, you can’t use these against U.S.-sourced income.

Use the Foreign Tax Credit to Prevent Double Taxation

If you’d like to avoid double taxation, American expatriates in Australia can apply and use the Foreign Tax Credit. That way, whatever amount of taxes that is owed will be paid in Australia by you and can be applied to your U.S. tax return. That way, you will only have to pay taxes once. 

Filing Requirements and U.S. Tax Deadlines

Suppose you are a U.S. citizen or resident, and your tax home and your abode are outside either the United States and/or Puerto Rico upon the regular due date of your return. In that case, you will be automatically granted an extension for June 15 to file your return and pay any tax due. You do not have to file a particular form to receive this extension, and you must attach a statement to your tax return when you file it, showing that you are eligible for this automatic extension.

Qualified Dividends in Australia for your Foreign Corporation or Investment

Resident shareholders in foreign companies can receive credits on distributions. If you happen to own shares within an Australian company and receive a grossed-up dividend report of profits, the company has already paid any and all taxes on a portion of those dividends (as of this posting, the rate is 30%). Australian residents can also receive a rebate (also known as franking or imputation credit) on the tax that has been paid and distributed by that company. Depending on your Australian tax bracket, receiving the entire credit or a portion of the credit is possible.

Selling Your Home in Australia

You need to be aware of some tax implications if you are planning on selling your home in the U.S. or Australia as a U.S. citizen abroad.

As an expat in Australia, you have the ability to claim Section 121 Exclusion and exclude up to $250,000 of profit from U.S. taxation if you file taxes separately (e.g., if your spouse is a non-U.S. citizen). But if filing jointly with another U.S. citizen, you individually can exclude a U.S. $500,000 maximum.

As long as you are qualified under Section 121 Exclusion and its protocols and have lived in your primary house for either two out of five years or owned it for two out of five years, you have the ability to exclude up to $250,000 on your U.S. tax return.

If not, and if the profit when selling the house comes to an estimated $300,000, then $50,000 will be taxable by the IRS. You need to make sure all your tax documents are on a cost basis. The house purchase price includes the cost of renovations, home improvements, etc., so your profit number goes down. Unless you make a significant profit on your home, it is unlikely you will owe U.S. tax for selling your home.

U.S. Tax Benefits are Available to You

Now that we’ve covered the financial and legal aspects that come with being an Australian-residing expatriate, here are some benefits for you to consider:

Foreign Earned Income Exclusion

The Foreign Earned Income Exclusion permits you the ability to exclude your wages from your U.S. taxes. However, this option is only available to those who meet specific time-based residency requirements.

Foreign Housing Exclusion/Deduction

Along with the FEIE, you can also claim a foreign housing deduction or exclusion (applied through Form 2555) for any housing expenses, with the exception of the base housing amount. This exclusion applies to housing paid for with employer-provided amounts similar to a salary, while the deduction can apply to housing that is paid for through self-employment.

Your housing expenses are your reasonable expenses incurred, limited to 30% of your maximum FEIE. High-cost localities like Melbourne, Perth, or Sydney have a higher limit listed in the Instructions for Form 2555. Housing expenses do not include the cost of buying a property, making improvements, or incurring other expenses to increase its value. And your housing expenses can also be within your total foreign-earned income.

The base housing amount is usually 16% of your FEIE. 

Foreign Tax Credits

The Foreign Tax Credit permits you to claim a credit for any income taxes that have been paid to a non-domestic government.

Bilateral Agreements

There are two bilateral agreements to be aware of for future research and consideration. They are:

    • Double Tax Treaty – U.S./Aus
    • Social Security Totalization Agreements

Reach of U.S. Government

Because of FATCA and its Supporting International Agreements have made the U.S. Income Tax Reach more comprehensive than ever before.

FATCA, also recognized as the “Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act,” FATCA is a relatively new tax law enacted in 2010 as an addition to the HIRE Act. The objective behind FATCA since then has been to combat all offshore tax evasion by requiring U.S. citizens to report their holdings residing in foreign financial accounts and any foreign assets to the IRS annually. As part of FATCA’s implementation since the 2011 tax season, it is an IRS requirement that certain U.S. citizens must report (on Form 8938) the total value of any of their “foreign financial assets.”

Starting January 1, 2014, to further enforce FATCA reporting, foreign financial institutions (also known as “FFIs,” which include just about every investment house, foreign bank, and even some foreign insurance companies) must report all account balances held by U.S. citizen customers. To date, several large foreign banks have required that all U.S. citizens who have maintained accounts with them (the large foreign banks) to provide a Form W-9 (a form to declare their status as U.S. citizens) and to sign a confidentiality waiver agreement where they grant permission to the bank to provide the IRS all information about their account. There are cases where foreign banks have closed the accounts of U.S. expats who refuse to cooperate with the requirements.

This renewed effort by the U.S. government to combat offshore tax evasion through FATCA has led to a recent surge in tax compliance efforts by U.S. expats.

Recently, the IRS announced that the United States had signed a so-called competent authority arrangement (“CAA”) with Australia in furtherance of a previously signed intergovernmental agreement (“IGA”) with Australia. This agreement is designed to promote the implementation of the FATCA tax law requiring financial institutions (mainly banks and investment houses) outside the U.S. to report information on financial accounts held by their U.S. customers to the IRS.

Suppose you are a U.S. expatriate living in Australia. In that case, you must remain compliant with your continuing U.S. tax obligations and contact your local ATO for tax services and questions.

 

Our experts at Asena Family Office are available to help you understand your U.S. tax filing requirements and assist you with your U.S. tax compliance needs.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

 

Multi-Member LLC

Multi-Member LLC

In our previous articles, we have discussed the single-member LLC and the advantages and disadvantages of owning and operating such an entity, not to mention its default tax treatment. Today, we will be discussing what it means to form and control a multi-member LLC (MMLLC), which is simply a limited liability company with more than one member. 

Understanding Multi-Member LLCs?

While there are similarities between a single-member LLC (SMLLC) and an MMLLC, there are also many differences. But before we elaborate on the details and differences between the two, it may be beneficial to talk more about the history of this entity type. 

History of Multi-Member LLC

Even though the first state to authorize the creation of the LLC was Wyoming in 1977, it was in 1996 that all 50 states in the U.S. had LLC statutes. Through Revenue Ruling 88-76, the IRS decided in 1988 that Wyoming LLCs were taxable as partnerships. And even today, this is the default tax treatment of an LLC with more than one member – a partnership. 

What is a Multi-Member LLC?

This type of LLC has two or more owners ( or members) that share control of the company. Unless electing S Corporation tax treatment, there can be an unlimited quantity of members within a multi member LLC. The LLC may also decide on how (and what percentage of) profits and losses shall be distributed among its members, customarily done through its operating agreement.

Who Can Form a Multi-Member LLC?

Members can be either individuals, corporations, or even other LLCs. 

How Multi-Member LLCs Work

Now that we have discussed a bit about the history of this entity type and what it is, it is time to explain how such entities work. 

Ownership

This LLC is comprised of two or more owners ( or members) that share control over the company. The LLC is its own legal entity that is separate from its owners. Unless it decides to elect for S Corporation tax treatment, there could be an unlimited number of members within an MMLLC. The LLC may decide on how (and what percentage of) profits and losses shall be distributed among its members.

Personal Asset Protection

An MMLLC offers asset protection for the owners’ personal assets because it is a separate legal structure. Indeed, the biggest reason why many people form an MMLLC is the limited liability that it offers its owners. Specifically, the owners’ personal assets cannot be appropriated to pay the debts of the LLC. Owners may, however, be held personally responsible within certain situations (such as when they “pierce the corporate veil”), and in this scenario, they would potentially incur personal liability. 

Profit Distribution to Owners

MMLLC owners are entitled to a distributive share of the profits in the entity, and typically, these profits are in proportion to the percentage interest each owner has in the company. Using this example, if one member owns 70 percent of a multi-member LLC and another member owns 30 percent, then the first person will be entitled to 70 percent of the company’s profits, and the second person will be entitled to 30 percent of the company’s profits. Since the LLC is a flexible entity structure, you can divide profits and losses by way of a particular allocation using something other than the percentage of membership interest. In this scenario, each member might be entitled to a percentage of profits that is different from their percentage of ownership in the business. However, again, this should be clearly stated. While an LLC is not required to distribute profits to its owners, the entity’s owners will still be on the hook for reporting their share of the LLC profits and then paying tax on these profits. 

Income Tax Treatment

The default tax treatment of an MMLLC is similar to that of an SMLLC in that it is a pass-through entity, with the profits being allocated to the owners and thus flowing through to their personal tax returns. How it is different is that instead of the income, expenses, and profits being reported on a Schedule C (as for an SMLLC), the income, expenses, and profits are reported on Form 1065 (partnership tax return), and each member of the LLC receives a Schedule K-1 (and must then report this information on their personal return) reporting their share of the LLC’s profit or loss. 

Federal Income Taxes and the Multi-Member LLC

A multi-member LLC’s default federal tax treatment is that of a partnership. And, just like a single-member LLC, an MMLLC does not pay taxes on its business profits. Instead, the owners (members) individually pay tax, which is based on their share of the profits, on their personal returns. As stated in the previous section, an MMLLC is required to file a Form 1065 (partnership return), and each member receives a K-1, on which they will see their profits or losses associated with the partnership. Finally, each member must then report the profits on Schedule E of their personal return Form 1040. In terms of taxes payable, members will need to pay not only federal taxes but also (Social Security and Medicare) on their share of the LLC’s earnings.

You may then decide that you like that an MMLLC is a pass-through entity but that you hate paying so much self-employment tax. In this scenario, the owners could file Form 2553 for the MMLLC to be taxed as an S Corporation, whereby the profits and losses are still passed through to members’ individual returns (filed via Schedule E of Form 1040). However, the difference here is that the owners must only pay a self-employment tax on their wages and salaries, not on their profit distributions. Typically, the owners would pay themselves a salary, and then whatever profit was left over would flow through to their personal returns. 

However, an MMLLC’s owners may decide to have the entity not be treated as a partnership. In this scenario, members can elect to have their business taxed as a C-Corp, so the entity will no longer be a pass-through entity. It will pay corporate tax on its profits (presently, the federal corporate tax rate is 21%). To do this, owners must file Form 8832 to change the default tax treatment of the entity. 

State Income Taxes and the Multi-Member LLC

This is where things can vary quite a bit. At the state level, tax laws can vary for LLCs. For instance, some states levy fees on LLCs, such as a minimum or franchise tax. Contrary to its name, a franchise tax is not assessed against a business operating as a franchise. A franchise tax is charged to LLCs, corporations, and partnerships into the form of a fee for the concession to form and conduct business in that state. 

Who Manages a Multi-Member LLC?

What is excellent about this entity structure is its flexibility. Members of an MMLLC get to decide how it is structured and who manages the entity. Some MMLLCs elect one or more members, or even a third party, to manage the business. This type of MMLLC is called a manager-managed MMLLC. On the other hand, if the LLC members are running the entity equally, the entity is called a member-managed MMLLC. 

Involvement

If two or more individuals are managing the company, then you should be able to demonstrate that each manager is involved with the company’s business decisions and operations. 

Formation

Multi-member LLC members can be individuals (whether they are Americans or not, and whether they live in the U.S. or not), corporations, or other LLCs. It is important to note that LLCs have organized on a state level, not the federal level.  

Compliance

MMLLCs are required to file Form 1065 (unless they elected to be taxed as an S Corporation, which requires a Form 1120-S filing, or a C Corporation, which requires a Form 1120 filing) as well as potentially a state return. 

Bankruptcy

When an individual declares bankruptcy, the court possesses the power to seize a large quantity of assets, including those related to the LLC. However, if the LLC is multi-member, the court cannot seize company assets without the unanimous agreement of other LLC members, as this would result in the court taking one person’s assets because of another’s misconduct.

Divorce

There are scenarios in which spouses own a multi-member LLC. Thus, couples often meet in court to divide their assets when a divorce occurs. It is good practice to stipulate how much of the company each member owns (or spouse, in this case). In this scenario, the court may rule that each spouse will retain the share stated in the operating agreement.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

 

Management Options

Again, one of the best things about an LLC is its flexibility. Thus, with an MMLLC, you can decide how the business is managed.

Member-Managed LLC vs. Manager-Managed LLC

As described previously, in a member-managed LLC, the members participate in running the business. As such, when making big decisions, such as entering into contracts or purchasing expensive equipment, the majority approval of all its members is necessary.  

In a manager-managed LLC, on the other hand, the members are able to agree on electing a manager, either one particular LLC member or members, or even a third party, to whom they grant authority to manage the business’ day-to-day decisions and operations. 

Basic Steps to Form a Multi Member LLC

While every entity is different, and you may take slightly different steps in forming an entity, the below are best practices and should be followed at a minimum. 

Choose a Business Name.

The new LLC name needs to be distinguishable from all other registered entities for tax purposes. You can start searching on the Secretary of State’s business search tool.

Apply for an EIN (Employer Identification Number).

As LLCs are pass-through entities, an application for a new EIN number needs to be obtained if the LLC will be multi-member or if the election is made by its members to be taxed as a corporation.

File Your LLC’s Articles of Organization.

While it may differ from state to state, this document needs to meet articles of organization, such as detailing the name and address of the LLC, the contact details and names of the owners, the application date, and a description of the new business.

Create an Operating Agreement.

This internal document needs to be drafted by members and will set out the rules for ownership and management of the newly formed LLC. It will detail what will happen if additional members are introduced to the LLC, if the LLC will be liquidated, or if members leave the LLC.

Apply for the Necessary Business Licenses and Permits.

Suppose the nature of the business requires the LLC to obtain business licenses or permits to operate. In that case, the relevant agencies need to be contacted to ensure that the licenses or permits are transferred from the sole proprietor to the newly formed LLC.

Open a Separate Bank Account for Your Business.

A bank account for any new business needs to be opened in the name of your LLC to ensure a clear separation between the LLC funds and the members’ personal funds. This also eases the management of assets and allows for more accurate recordkeeping.

Ongoing Compliance Obligations

As with any business entity, owning a multi-member LLC means that there are certain obligations that its members must adhere to. Some of those include renewing any licenses or permits (if required), paying state franchise fees, filing entity tax returns, updating the state the LLC is organized in if there are significant changes, filing an annual report, and so forth.

What are the Benefits of a Multi-Member LLC?

There are numerous benefits to owning an MMLLC. One is limited liability, as an LLC is considered a separate entity from its members. Subsequently, members are not personally liable for the business’s debts and other legal liabilities (i.e., they have limited liability protection). Further, members of LLCs include the business profits in their individual returns because the LLC is classified as a pass-through entity. Additionally, members may be able to apply the 20% pass-through deduction to business profits.

What are the Drawbacks of a Multi-Member LLC?

At the same time, there can be a few drawbacks to having such an entity. Members of LLCs receive units in proportion to their contribution/LLC agreement, and these units are more challenging to transfer than stocks in a corporation. This difficulty in transferring ownership is one of the reasons that external investors/venture capitalists prefer investing in corporations over LLCs.

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

 

Why Should I Have a Multi-Member Operating Agreement?

It could be argued that any entity should have one. Still, it becomes crucial for a multi-member LLC to have an LLC operating agreement, if for no other reason than to avoid ambiguity in the ownership and management structure, profit distribution, and even what happens when/if the company is liquidated or its members leave. 

What Should a Multi-Member Operating Agreement Include?

Certain sections are crucial to include. Those include the following:

Article I: Company Formation

This section deals with the formation of the company itself, and it should include information on the list of members and the company’s ownership structure. In addition, it should outline whether the members have equal or different amounts of ownership.

Article II: Capital Contributions

This section covers each member’s initial capital contribution in starting the LLC, whether the contribution is in cash or other assets that are contributed to the business. The total value of the contributions should be clearly listed. 

Article III: Profits, Losses, and Distributions

This section describes how profits and losses are allocated (whether they are ownership percentages or some special allocation) and whether the profit distributions are on an annual basis or more often. 

Article IV: Management

This section addresses managing the company (whether the firm is member-managed or manager-managed) and how each member will vote, with a transparent system of appointing managers and how individual members will be assigned other specific duties. 

Article V: Compensation

This section discusses the topic of compensation. For instance, if the LLC is to be taxed as a corporation, any members can receive a salary for the labor they have performed in the business, along with profit distributions. If the LLC is to be taxed as a partnership, members receive distributions on the basis of their ownership interest in the company.

Article VI: Bookkeeping

The agreement should be clear on whether and which LLC member/members can check the LLC’s books and records, such as financial documents and board meeting minutes.

Article VII: Transfers

This section discusses removing or adding new members to the LLC. Additionally, it states if and when members of the LLC can transfer their ownership in the company. Finally, this section should also clearly specify what happens in the event of death, bankruptcy, or divorce. It cannot be expressed enough on the importance of accounting for these types of scenarios, as, despite everyone’s best efforts, business and life are unpredictable, and in order to protect each member’s share and business interests, these situations and how to handle them should be stated in this document. 

Article VIII: Bank Account

This is something that gets overlooked often but is quite apparent. As stated previously, this is essential for any new business to ensure a clear separation between the LLC funds and the members’ personal funds. Additionally, this eases the management of assets and allows for more accurate recordkeeping.

Article IX: Dissolution

This section explains the circumstances if the LLC may be dissolved, and if so, the process of terminating the LLC should all the members vote to end it. 

How are Multi-Member LLCs and Their Owners Taxed?

What is the tax status for an MMLLC? A domestic LLC possessing at least two members is usually classified as a partnership for federal tax reasons unless it decides to file Form 8832 to be elected for treatment as a corporation. Each partner must pay taxes separately on the grounds of their operating agreement. Most agreements favor having the taxes corresponding to the membership interest. This means that each LLC member is required to pay taxes on their share of the LLC’s profits whether or not they receive their share of those profits. Unlike a corporation, even if a member or members have the need to leave profits in their LLC for any tax purposes, they can be liable for any income tax for their proportionate share of the LLC’s income. However, as discussed previously, the LLC that is classified as a partnership will be required to file Form 1065, U.S. Return of Partnership Income, with the IRS, as well as provide their members with a K-1 (a breakdown of each member’s profits and losses), and can be subjected to the same filing and reporting requirements as partnerships. Each state could use different tax regulations for an LLC, and the income derived by the LLC and be attributed towards a member or members can be taxed at the state level if it is sourced or derived from that state.

How Do I Pay Myself from a Multi-Member LLC?

You do not get paid a salary as the member/owner of an MMLLC. Instead, you pay yourself by withdrawing the profits made by the LLC as and when needed. This is also referred to as an owner’s draw.  

Single-Member vs. Multi-Member LLC

There are numerous differences between an SMLLC and an MMLLC. Some of those differences are discussed below.

LLC taxes

The default tax treatment of an SMLLC is that the owner must report the business’s profits and losses onto a Schedule C of IRS Form 1040 as personal income, and the small business itself does not report or pay taxes independently (nor does it file its own tax return). The LLC owner must also make payments onto self-employment taxes (Social Security and Medicare) on any and all taxable income coming from the business. 

An MMLLC, on the other hand, is required to file a return (Form 1065) and provide its members a Schedule K-1 form, which contains information the members will need to file their personal returns. Like with an SMLLC, business owners are subject to federal income tax, FICA taxes, and possibly even state income tax. 

Liability protections

Both SMLLCs and MMLLCs have liability protection by default. 

Multi-Member LLC vs. Partnership

Even though the default tax treatment for an MMLLC is for it to be taxed as a partnership, there remain differences between an MMLLC versus other entities that may also have more than one member.

Multi-Member LLC vs. LLP

While individuals can own MMLLCs, corporations, and other LLCs, a limited liability partnership (LLP) can only be owned by individuals. Further, in many states, an LLP can only be formed by certain professions, such as doctors and attorneys. On the other hand, multi-member LLCs can be created by and for nearly any profession. Finally, an LLP cannot change its tax classification, whereas MMLLCs can elect to be taxed as a partnership or corporation. 

Multi-Member LLC vs. LP

In a limited partnership (LP), general partners have unlimited liability and are personally liable for the business, whereas limited partners receive liability protection. In an MMLLC, all members have liability protection. Further, in an LP, only general partners can manage the business, whereas, in an MMLLC, all members can manage the business. 

Is it Better to be a Multi-Member LLC?

Generally speaking, it is more advantageous to be structured as an MMLLC than as an LLP or LP, for the reasons stated in the previous section. However, your needs (or the requirements set forth by your state for your industry/profession) may require you to go with something other than an MMLLC.

Which One is Right for Your Business?

This is a difficult question to answer within the confines of an article. You will have to consider your business’s unique goals, business structure, industry, and profit margin, among other things, to determine which entity type is best. However, this article hopefully elucidates many advantages of a multi-member LLC. 

Multi-Member LLC FAQ

Here are some quick additional facts about MMLLCs you should consider:

Does a Multi-Member LLC Need an EIN?

Yes, it does. The entity will need an EIN to do things such as file an income tax return. 

Can a Multi-Member LLC become a Single-Member LLC?

Yes, it can. The only official condition is the sale of the membership interest surronding the leaving member(s) towards the remaining member, as well as the filing of a new tax election form. 

How Do You Dissolve a Multi-Member LLC?

There are numerous steps you must take in order to ensure that your LLC is properly dissolved. Most MMLLCs will have to perform actions such as:

    • voting by members to dissolve the LLC;
    • filing a final return;
    • filing an Articles of Dissolution with the state the entity is doing business in;
    • settling any outstanding debts; and
    • distributing assets to LLC owners/members. 
For more advice on starting your own multi-member LLC, reserve a consultation with one of our advisors in our Contact Us section to the right.

Arin Vahanian

Peter Harper

#IndiaU.S.TaxTreaty Ep. 2: Article 4 – Residence


We have heard “a dollar saved is a dollar earned,” and given the current economic environment, my readers have a few common questions like “what is the cost to save that dollar?” or “what is the tax impact if I move to the U.S. or out of the U.S.?” 

In the language of tax, the answer is your tax cost depends on the country of your “residence.” The determination is primarily in how the domestic tax legislation defines “residence.” Still, where you are a resident of two or more countries, tie-breaker rules under the tax treaty apply to determine your country of residence. The relevance is that the country of your residence generally has the right to tax you on your worldwide income; therefore, you should consult an advisor.  

If domestic tax legislation defines “residence,” what is the relevance of tax treaties?

Before dwelling directly on the India-U.S. DTA, let’s read the definition of “residence” under the Indian and U.S. federal tax legislation.

Definition: Indian Tax Legislation

Section 6 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, states about residence in India. An individual is an Indian resident if the below conditions are satisfied during the financial year (i.e., from 1st April to 31st March of the following year):

  1. stays for 182 days or more in India; or
  2. stays for 365 days or more in four years preceding the financial year.

The above clause (b) substitutes “365 days or more” to “60 days or more” where:

  • an Indian citizen leaves India for employment purposes outside India or as a member of the crew of an Indian ship (as defined in clause (18) of section 3 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958). 
  • an Indian citizen or someone of Indian origin (POI) visits India.

Please note that beginning 1st April 2021, an Indian citizen (who is not liable to tax in any other country because of their domicile or residence or other criteria of a similar nature) and earns Indian sourced income exceeding INR 1.5 million (~USD 18,000) is considered to be an Indian resident. 

An individual is ‘not ordinarily resident’ of India in a financial year where they have been:

  • a non-resident in India for either 9 out of 10 previous financial years preceding the financial year under consideration.
  • stayed for 729 days or less during the 7 financial years preceding the financial year under consideration.
  • an Indian citizen or POI who stays in India for 120 days or more but less than 182 days and earns an Indian-sourced income exceeding INR 1.5 million (~USD 18,000).

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

 

Definition: U.S. Federal Tax Legislation

Section 7701(a)(30) of the Internal Revenue Code considers an individual to be a ‘U.S. Person’ where such an individual is either a U.S. citizen or a U.S. resident. An individual born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to its jurisdiction is a U.S. citizen. Any individual who isn’t a U.S. citizen is a resident if they:

  • passes the substantial presence test; or
  • holds a U.S. green card; 
  • elects to be taxed as a resident 

An individual automatically becomes a U.S. resident upon becoming a U.S. green card holder. There are peculiarities concerning the ‘start date’ of individuals moving to the U.S. to become green card holders; discussing this with your advisor is essential.

An individual will be regarded as a resident alien in terms of the substantial presence test (SPT) if they meet the following requirements:

  • such an individual was present in the U.S. on at least 31 days during the calendar year; and
  • the sum of the number of days on which such an individual was present in the U.S. during the present year and the 2 preceding calendar years (the year before the current year x 1/3 + 2 years before the current year x 1/6) equals or exceeds 183 days.

The regulations further clarify certain peculiar aspects to determine an individual’s residency. Further, where an individual resides in the U.S., residency should also be determined under the applicable State tax legislation.  

Definition: India-U.S. DTA

A tax treaty, in general, intends to benefit the taxpayers of the countries entering into such a convention or agreement. The manner to avail of the benefit is often stated under the domestic tax legislation of a country and might be self-executive or need additional action for its application. The objective of the tax treaties is the elimination of double taxation. Article 1 of the India-U.S. DTA identifies citizens or permanent residents of India or the U.S. whose obligations are affected by the tax treaty application.

Article 4 of the India-U.S. DTA defines an individual as a ‘resident’ of a country under domicile, citizenship, residence, place of management, place of incorporation, or any other criterion of a similar nature and limits its application concerning income sourcing rules in a country. It further contains tie-breaker regulations to be applied where an individual is a resident of both the U.S. and India. The tie-breaker test is used as under:

  • an individual who is deemed as a resident of the country in which they have a permanent home available to them; 
  • if there is a permanent home is available in both States, then they shall be deemed as a resident of the country with which their personal and economic relations are closer (center of vital interests);
  • if the country in which they have a center of vital interests cannot be determined, or if they do not have a permanent home available in either country, then they shall be recognized as a resident of the country in which they have a habitual abode;
  • if they have a habitual abode in both countries or neither of them, they shall be recoginzed as a resident of the country of which they are a national;
  • if they are a national of both countries or neither, the Contracting States’ competent authorities will settle the question by mutual agreement.

It further limits or restricts the source country to tax certain income and requires an individual’s country of residence to provide tax relief either by way of a foreign tax credit or an exemption for the foreign-source income.

In understanding the terms “permanent home,” “habitual abode,” and “personal or economic relations” to establish a closer connection, reference is drawn from the OECD Model Tax Convention and UN Double Tax Model Convention.  

Albeit the above residency rules under the India-U.S. DTA, the ‘saving clause’ under Paragraph 3 of Article 1 of the India-U.S. DTA preserves India and the U.S. with a right to tax its citizens and permanent residents as if there is no tax treaty benefit. Therefore, once an individual becomes a U.S. citizen or permanent resident, the tax treaty benefit is unavailable.  

The interpretation of the “residency” rules under the India-U.S. DTA requires deep analysis, and a cross-border tax advisor should be consulted with applying the tax treaty to the facts and circumstances of your situation.

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

 

What to ask and provide your advisor in determining your residence?

#

Questions

Basic information to be shared with your advisor

1. Whether domestic tax legislation determines residency based on a number of days, citizenship, holding a green card, domicile, or any other manner?  Provide your advisor with the following:

  • country(ies) of your citizenship;
  • countries where you have traveled or stayed during a tax year;
  • your visa status, if not a citizen of a country where you are employed or doing business;
  • your latest I-94 arrival/departure record (if in the U.S.); 
  • your passport with immigration stamps to support the entry and exit. 
2. What is the residency’ start date’ if I obtained U.S. green card during the year?  Provide your advisor with the following:

  • the issue date of your green card;
  • the date you first entered the U.S. to become a green card holder;
  • the number of days in which you were present in current and prior tax years before the issue of your green card.
3. Does the “saving clause” under the DTA cover me? Inform your advisor if you are a citizen or a U.S. green card holder.
4. What is the manner of determining residency if you are a resident of more than one country? Provide your advisor with the below details to apply tie-breaker rules under the tax treaty:

  • the details of where you own a permanent home or leased premises;
  • the country where your family stays;
  • the country where you earn your income.
5. What compliance do you need to do if you are a resident of more than one country? Provide your advisor with the following:

  • details of the income earned;
  • details of any taxes paid or withheld in earning the income;
  • details concerning your business interest.
  • requirement to report any additional information like international bank accounts.
6. Whether you can file a treaty-based return? Provide your advisor with the details mentioned in (3) above and ask how it impacts your residency.

Note: See our blog on U.S. Expatriation Tax for more details.

7. What is my residence status if I travel on a student, trainee, teacher, or similar visa status to the U.S.?  Inform your advisor about your visa status because there are preferential rules to determine your residence in the U.S. for specific visa categories.

 

Our team of international tax specialists at Asena Advisor has in-depth knowledge of interpreting international tax treaties and ascertaining their applicability to your specific circumstances. Please contact Janpriya Rooprai, Head of the US-India Tax Desk, for more information.

Janpriya Roopari

Peter Harper

IRC 677


To build upon our previous discussions on foreign grantor trusts, today’s topic concerns Section 677 of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC). Specifically, this section of the IRC discusses a foreign trust’s grantor’s ability to receive income from the trust. This topic is essential for anyone who owns assets in foreign trusts and is moving to the U.S. or facing a liquidity event. Furthermore, this topic is also necessary for those who wish to take steps to avoid having their trust activate a grantor trust status. 

IRC 677

What is IRC Section 677? Simply put, any rev. rul under it states that a grantor of a trust shall be recognized and treated in the role of the owner of any portion of a trust with an income that is distributed towards the grantor or their spouse, held, or has been accumulated for future distribution towards the grantor or their spouse. This also will apply to the payment of life insurance policies on the life of the grantor or their spouse.

Income for Benefit of Grantor

The grantor shall be recognized and treated as the owner if the income from the trust is or may, at the grantor’s discretion (or a nonadverse party), be:

  • Accumulated for future distribution towards the grantor or their spouse;
  • Distributed to the grantor or their spouse; or
  • Applied towards the life insurance payment on the life of the grantor or their spouse.

IRC Section 677 – General Rule

This section of the Internal Revenue Code and all rev. rul provides that the grantor of a trust will be granted ownership and taxation upon any portion of the trust whose income is at the discretion of the grantor, their spouse, or any nonadverse person without the consent or approval of an adverse party, either:

  • Accumulated for future distribution towards the grantor or their spouse
  • Distributed to the grantor or towards the grantor’s spouse
  • Applied to pay premiums on life insurance policies for the grantor or their spouse
  • Applied or distributed in order to support or put towards maintenance of beneficiaries whom the grantor or their spouse is legally obligated to support or maintain

Definitions Relevant to Section 677

Various definitions relevant to this section of the code are basic yet essential to explain.

What is Income?

For the purposes of this subpart, under any rev. rul under Internal Revenue Code 677, income refers to taxable income (and not fiduciary accounting income), such as ordinary income or capital gains income. 

Who is a Spouse?

For the purposes of this subpart, a person is considered the spouse of a grantor solely during the period of the marriage to the grantor. Therefore, if the grantor and the spouse divorce, the grantor would cease to be taxed as the trust’s owner for income distributions or accumulations that benefit the former spouse.

Who is an Adverse Party?

For the purposes of this subpart, an adverse party can be defined as someone who holds a substantial beneficial interest in the trust and would be negatively affected by the exercise (or lack of exercise) of the power the person possesses concerning the trust.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

What is a Grantor Trust?

According to the IRS, grantor trust status is activated when the grantor retains control over the trust’s income and assets. 

What Grantor Trusts Are Used For

There are various reasons for an individual to set up a grantor trust, but the five most common reasons are: 

  • Asset protection and wealth preservation;
  • Credit protection;
  • Avoiding probate;
  • Reduce or eliminate estate taxes and gift tax; and 
  • To gain any possible tax benefits or tax deferral benefits.

Who is the Grantor?

Also known as the owner, settlor, or trustor, it is a general rule that this person contributes property (such as real estate or estate planning), other funds, or even a trust instrument such as life insurance to the trust. According to the grantor trust reg, the property and the grantor’s funds become part of the trust corpus (in other words, the trust assets). It is crucial to note that a trust can have more than one grantor. If more than one taxpayer had funded a grantor trust, they will each be treated as a grantor in proportion to the cash or property’s value they transferred to the trust, according to the terms of the trust. 

The grantor is someone who retains the power to direct or control the trust’s income or assets, including estate planning under the trust. This is crucial to understand, especially when dealing with a foreign trust and the income tax treatment surrounding this trust instrument. Pulling from one of our previous articles, the grantor can also be any taxpayer who creates a trust and either directly or indirectly contributes a gratuitous transfer of property towards a trust. If someone creates or funds a trust on behalf of another, they are treated as the trust’s grantors. 

Income for Benefit of Grantor

The grantor shall be treated as owner if the income from their trust is or may, at the discretion of the grantor, be:

  • Distributed towards the grantor or to the grantor’s spouse, not in a fiduciary manner;
  • Accumulated for future distribution towards the grantor or their spouse; or
  • Applied towards the insurance policies’ payment on the life of the grantor or their spouse.
Constructive Distribution

Under Section 677, the grantor shall be recognized and treated in the role of the owner of any portion of a trust if they retain interest. And, without the approval/consent of an adverse party, the grantor can be enabled to have their income from the portion of the trust distributed to themselves at some time, either actually or constructively. The grantor shall also be treated as the owner if they have granted or retained any interest which might be distributed to the spouse (whether actually or constructively). Again, this action can be done without the approval or consent of an adverse party to enable their spouse to have the income from the portion at any time, even if it is not within the grantor’s lifetime. In this case, constructive distribution includes payment on behalf of the grantor or their spouse to another in obedience to their direction and payment of premiums upon life insurance policies on the grantor’s life or their spouse’s life.

Discharge of Legal Obligation of Grantor or His Spouse

The grantor shall be recognized and treated as owner of the trust if that trust income is or able to be applied towards the discharge of a legal obligation belonging to the grantor or the grantor’s spouse.  

Exception for Certain Discretionary Rights Affecting Income

A grantor should not be recognized or treated as the owner of a trust when a discretionary right can only impact the income’s beneficial enjoyment of a trust that is received after a period of time during which the grantor would not be recognized or treated as an owner if the power were a reversionary interest. 

Accumulation of Income

The grantor shall be recognized and treated as owner of a trust if any income has been accumulated for future distribution towards the grantor or their spouse without the consent of an adverse party. The grantor will be taxed in the current year, even if they must wait for an extended amount before accessing the accumulated income. Suppose that income is accumulated as a tax liability for future distribution towards the grantor or their spouse during any taxable year. In that case, the grantor shall be considered the owner for that taxable year.

Income Distributed to or on Behalf of the Grantor or Grantor’s Spouse

Section 677 applies when the grantor or their spouse is entitled to or can demand trust income. Further, it also applies when a nonadverse trustee has the discretion to distribute trust income to either the grantor or their spouse without the consent of an adverse party. Therefore, even the mere possibility that the grantor or their spouse will receive income is sufficient to trigger the application of Section 677. For income tax purposes, the grantor shall be taxed on all income that could be distributed, even if it is not distributed. 

Income Accumulated for Future Distribution to Grantor or Grantor’s Spouse

According to the grantor trust reg, a grantor is recognized and treated as owner of a trust whose income is or may be at the discretion of the grantor, their spouse, or a nonadverse party, currently accumulated for future distribution towards the grantor or their spouse, even without an adverse party’s consent. Therefore, this income would be taxable to the grantor in this scenario. 

Deferred Right to Distribution or Accumulations

Section 677 does not result in a grantor being taxed on a trust’s income when a discretionary power to apply the income of the trust for the grantor or their spouse’s benefit may occur only after a period of time that would not cause the grantor to be treated as an owner if the discretionary power were what is called a reversionary interest. 

Income Applied to Pay Premiums on Life Insurance Policies on the Life of the Grantor or Grantor’s Spouse

For income tax purposes, the grantor is taxed on any taxable income (and not fiduciary income) used to pay premiums on life insurance policies on the life of the grantor or their spouse. 

Income Applied or Distributed in Satisfaction of the Grantor’s or Grantor’s Spouse’s Legal

For possible income tax purposes, the income of a trust is not taxable to the grantor merely because trust income may be distributed or applied for the support or maintenance of a trust beneficiary whom the grantor or their spouse is legally obligated to support or maintain. The discretion of another person or the grantor acting as trustee must be applied in this scenario.

Obligation of Support for a Trust Beneficiary

With the statement above, however, any trust income distributed or used to satisfy the grantor’s or their spouse’s legal obligation of support for beneficiaries will cause the grantor to be taxed on such income. 

Divestiture of Powers Triggering Section 677

Suppose the grantor and/or their spouse have any interest in a trust that triggers the grantor trust status. In that case, they may be able to evade the application of Section 677 if they divest themselves of every interest that could cause the grantor to be taxed under Section 677. 

Taxable Portion Under Section 677

A grantor with only an income interest in the trust is taxed on ordinary items of income, and a grantor with only an interest in the trust’s principal is taxed on capital gains items.

Estate, Gift, and Generation Skipping Transfer Tax Implications of Section 677

The three most common transfer taxes under this section of the code (gift tax, estate tax, and generation skipping tax) under IRC 677 usually depend on the existing status of a person involved with the trust. For instance, the federal estate tax can be applied to the transfer of property or other kinds of items of income upon or following death. The gift tax also applies to transfers made only if a person is still living. Additionally, the generation skipping transfer tax is a supplemental tax on a transfer of a trust property or other items of income that skips a generation. However, intention and power under this section of the code over that transfer may impact if one of these taxes is imposed for your case. For example, a gift tax can only be imposed if complete dominion, including interest, over the gift, as the gift will be recognized as a trust property, thus triggering the gift tax.

How is an Irrevocable Grantor Trust Taxed?

An irrevocable trust can trigger grantor trust status if the trust fulfills any one of the following requirements as set out in Internal Revenue Code § 673-679:

  • The Grantor Maintains A Reversionary Interest
    • If a grantor holds a ‘reversionary interest’ within a trust greater than 5% of the trust income or principal, the trust may trigger the grantor trust status in terms of IRC § 673m.
  • The Grantor Has The Power To Control Beneficial Enjoyment
    • If a grantor can control the ‘beneficial enjoyment’ of trust assets or income, the trust may trigger the grantor trust status in terms of IRC § 674.
  • The Grantor Maintains Administrative Control
    • If the grantor can maintain administrative control over their trust that is able to be exercised for their own benefit, the trust may trigger the grantor trust status in IRC § 675.
  • The Grantor Maintains Revocation Powers
    • If the trust allows the grantor to revoke any portion of the trust, followed by reclaiming or taking back the trust assets, the trust may trigger the grantor trust status in terms of IRC § 676.
  • The Trust Distributes Income To The Grantor
    • If the trust distributes any income towards the grantor, the trust can, in terms of IRC § 677(a), trigger the grantor trust status.

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

Is an ILIT a Grantor Trust?

An ILIT, also known at length as an irrevocable life insurance trust, is an optional irrevocable trust that contains provisions designed to facilitate the ownership over one or more life insurance policies. In other words, an ILIT is a trust designed primarily to hold life insurance. Because it is irrevocable, the grantor cannot change or terminate it. It is important to note that in this scenario, the ILIT is both the owner and beneficiary of the life insurance policy and that it insures the grantor’s life. But to answer the question in this section, an ILIT is not necessarily a grantor trust. For a trust to trigger grantor trust status, specific provisions or powers that can lead the grantor of the trust to be recognized and treated as the owner over the trust’s assets under reg have to be in place. An ILIT is also subject under Grantor Trust Rule §677(a)(3) if the income of the trust may be applied towards the premium payments on policies that insure the grantor’s life (or the grantor’s spouse’s life). Again, for income tax purposes, the grantor will need to report all income of the ILIT towards the grantor’s income tax return. That way, the ILIT will use the grantor’s Social Security number as its primary tax identification number. This grantor trust option is usually referred to as an Intentionally Defective Grantor Trust (IDGT”).

What Makes an Insurance Trust a Grantor Trust?

The grantor will be treated as the trust’s owner if its income is, or in the owner’s direction, distributed to the owner or the grantor’s spouse. It will also accumulate for any future distribution to the grantor or their spouse or to be applied to payment of insurance policies on either the life of the grantor or their spouse.

Can a Non-Grantor Trust Own Life Insurance?

Yes, for instance, through private placement life insurance or PPLI. PPLI provides the ability for a foreign non-grantor trust to make investments into assets deemed to generate U.S.-sourced income and avoid U.S. taxation to the non-grantor trust.

An increasingly utilized technique to either eliminate or reduce U.S. income taxation towards U.S.-sourced income-generating assets to the foreign non-grantor trust is all for the trust to be making those investments inside a U.S. tax-compliant PPLI contract.

Inside a PPLI transaction, the insurance company will become the underlying beneficial owner over the assets in exchange for a policy whose value is tied to the asset’s value as held by the insurance company. Therefore, the trust would have ownership over a U.S. tax-compliant life insurance policy that includes a tax deferral on the build-up of cash value. It will not own the income tax-generating U.S.-sourced income assets, as those assets would be considered to be owned by the insurance company.

If the U.S.-sourced income-generating assets are held until the insured’s death within a PPLI policy, the death benefit is tax-free by the trust. In effect, having the U.S.-sourced income-generating assets that are held along with the policy should permit all the growth within the assets to escape U.S. income taxation while also being held and then sold at the insured’s death as they are changed into a death benefit.

However, once the current taxable year’s distribution exceeds the trust’s distributable net income, it is treated under reg as being paid from prior years’ undistributed income (also known as an accumulation distribution). This throwback to an accumulated distribution is taxed at the highest income tax rate that would have been applied if the income had been distributed to the beneficiaries in the year it was received. To make matters worse, any accumulated long-term capital gain loses its favorable character and is taxed at the higher ordinary income tax rate for a higher total tax liability. Further, the beneficiaries are also subject to a non-deductible interest charge on the accumulation distribution based on how long the trust retained it.

 

Speak with one of our specialists to learn more about IRC 677 and how it can help your case.

Arin Vahanian

Peter Harper

IRC 674

After covering Section 675 of the Internal Revenue Code, or IRC, in our previous article, let’s go into the next section that clients want to learn more about: IRC Section 674.

What is a Grantor Trust?

Before we begin, let’s start with a simple understanding of what a grantor trust is before going into how financial processes such as IRC can apply to it. Every grantor trust begins with a grantor, defined as any person who either creates a trust, i.e. the settlor, or directly or indirectly makes an excessive property transfer to a trust. A grantor is, therefore, the person with administrative powers to make a gratuitous transfer of their trust property, whether it is the grantor’s estate, trust assets, items of income, or capital gains from an investment. 

Hence, a grantor trust is a trust where the grantor has control over the trust to the extent that they will be recognized as the owner/taxpayer of all or any part of the trust for possible federal income tax purposes. That way, they are directly taxed on the income and any other tax attributes belonging to the trust as if it did not exist. The IRS disregards the trust for federal income tax purposes and treats the grantor/primary taxpayer as the deemed owner of the trust assets and trust property included. 

What Grantor Trusts Are Used For

Grantor trusts have mainly been used for estate and gift planning purposes to avoid an income tax, gift tax, or estate tax, as well as to best reg trust assets according to the grantor’s wishes. These trusts are sometimes called Intentionally Defective Grantor Trusts (IDGT). 

See below for some of the grantor trust methods used by estate planners to reduce and minimize taxes:

    • In the case of a revocable grantor trust, probate can be avoided;
    • However, an irrevocable trust cannot be changed unless given consent from the beneficiaries involved. The purpose is to reduce or eliminate taxes after the grantor passes, though some, including gift tax if a gift exceeds $15,000;
    • As a “leveraging” tool to grow the impact of giving to designated donees such as using a Grantor Retained Annuity Trust (GRAT);
    • As a protection structure for trust assets, providing adequate security for particular business interests such as possible creditors or claimants (if the circumstances involve business succession planning).
Funding The Grantor Trust – Who is the Grantor? 

Essentially, a trust’s grantor is that trust’s settlor (or ‘notional settlor’). They are defined as any person who either creates a trust, i.e., the settlor, or directly or indirectly will make a gratuitous transfer of a trust property or items of income (grantor’s estate, capital gains, etc.) to a trust and is regarded as the primary funder.

Provisions Triggering Grantor Trust Status

The rules within the Internal Revenue Code’s Subchapter J, Subpart E govern when the trust income is taxable under a grantor trust status to the grantor or another person who is deemed to be the substantial owner of the trust (and, therefore, the primary taxpayer). This rule was designed primarily for federal income tax purposes instead of the trust itself or its beneficiary. Thus, they are granted administrative powers over the trust when the said grantor trust status is recognized and finalized by the IRS.

These provisions for grantor trust status are also contained in IRC 671-679:

  • IRC 671 – Sets forth the overall principle that if the grantor is recognized as the owner of the trust, then they must include the trust’s income when calculating their taxable income and income tax;
  • IRC 672 – Sets forth the definitions and rules when applying the grantor trust provisions to a subordinate party;
  • IRC 673 – 678 sets out the rules to decide when the trust’s existence can be ignored for federal income tax purposes, including if a grantor can reacquire corpus if they substitute the trust corpus with property or asset of similar value, adequate interest, and adequate security;
  • IRC 679 – sets out the rules to determine when a foreign trust will be regarded under grantor trust status with or without income tax applied.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

IRC Section 674 – Power to Control Beneficial Enjoyment

Now that we understand the general provisions for a grantor trust and what may trigger a status, let’s look more closely at what Section 674 can do for you.

IRC Section 674 General Rule

IRC §674(a) puts forward the general rule for power to control beneficial enjoyment that the grantor will be recognized as the owner of any trust portion concerning the corpus or income’s beneficial enjoyment. Therefore, they are liable to a power of disposition used by either the grantor or a nonadverse party (or, in unique cases, both) without any adverse party’s consent or approval.

Exceptions for Certain Powers

This particular section of the Internal Revenue Code allows certain powers not only for the grantor but for a subordinate party and or the items of interest within a trust, such as beneficiaries, the will, income, and corpus:

Power to Apply Income to Support of a Dependent

Any power to distribute trust income to support a beneficiary the grantor has been deemed or deems themselves legally obligated to support does not automatically trigger the trust as a grantor trust unless it is used for other beneficial interest purposes. This exception applies even if the grantor or the grantor’s spouse holds this power. Support for a beneficiary that may not be included includes premiums and gifts over $15,000, which can be subject to a gift tax. However, the grantor may be exempt from income tax under IRC 677(b).

Power Affecting Beneficial Enjoyment Only After Occurrence of Event

A grantor won’t be recognized as the owner of any portion of the trust established by a such power to affect the trust’s beneficial enjoyment if that power is not exercisable for an extended period of time. Such a period of time should be long enough that, had the postponed power been a reversionary interest stipulated in IRC 673, it would not have triggered grantor trust status (most common periods used are by taxable year). Therefore, control over beneficial enjoyment will not trigger a grantor trust status if the grantor can’t exert it for a period of time. If the power had become a reversionary interest at any point, the trust should have a value of less than 5%. If this happens and to decide if this criterion was met, it is mandatory to determine the prevailing and adequate interest rate and check the applicable IRS Tables under the treasury regulations for confirmation. However, after the expiration of a stated time has occurred, and the power instantly becomes exercisable, the grantor will be recognized as the owner only if they have not relinquished the power earlier. 

Power Exercisable Only by Will

A grantor shall not be recognized as a trust’s owner based on a power to alter beneficial interest and enjoyment if they possess a power exercisable only by a will. The only exception is for a power of appointment to accumulated income of the trust by the will if the trust allows the grantor or a nonadverse party to provide mandatory or discretionary accumulation of trust income.

Power to Allocate Among Charitable Beneficiaries

A grantor shall not be recognized as the owner of any portion belonging to a trust if they have the power to decide the beneficial enjoyment of the trust income or trust corpus when the income or corpus is irrevocably payable for a philanthropic purpose by one or more charitable beneficiaries as defined in IRC §170(c). 

Power to Distribute Corpus

A grantor shall not be recognized as the owner of a trust based on if they have the power to distribute corpus to beneficiaries of the trust. In contrast, the grantor’s power to dispense the corpus has been subjected to a reasonably definite standard outlined in the trust instrument. 

Powers of Distribution Primarily Affecting Only One Beneficiary

The principal and income must be paid to the said beneficiary (or such beneficiary’s estate and any estate tax attached) or to appointees designated by the beneficiary.

Powers of Distribution Affecting More Than One Beneficiary

The principal and income are distributed to such beneficiaries following their respective shares.

Power to Withhold Income Temporarily

A grantor shall not be recognized as the owner of any portion belonging to a trust if they have the power to distribute or apply the trust income to any present beneficiary or to accumulate the trust income if the accrued income and income tax must be paid eventually to one of the following individuals:

      • The beneficiary whom the income was withheld from;
      • The beneficiary’s estate and any estate tax attached;
      • The beneficiary’s designatees;
      • The present income beneficiaries are within one or multiple shares fixed by the trust instrument. 
Power to Withhold Income During Disability of a Beneficiary

The grantor shall not be recognized as the trust’s owner merely because they (or a nonadverse party) hold power to distribute income and accumulate and reg income before adding it to a principal during a period of time in which the income beneficiary possesses a legal disability. Furthermore, any income withheld during such periods does not need to be ultimately payable to the income beneficiary or to their estate and any estate tax attached. It may be payable to whomever the trust declares as the recipient of the trust principal.

Power to Allocate Between Corpus and Income

IRC §674(c) catalogs powers that shall not trigger a grantor trust status if they are to or are being held by an independent trustee, who may be given relatively broad powers over beneficial interest and enjoyment without triggering the grantor to be treated as owner. 

Some examples are as listed:

      • Power to divide and provide income amongst particular income beneficiaries;
      • Power to build accumulated income without needing to pay the income to a beneficiary whom it was withheld from at any time;
      • Power to invade corpus for particular beneficiaries (including persons who aren’t income beneficiaries).
Exception for Certain Powers of Independent Trustees

An independent trustee can be given broad powers over beneficial enjoyment without triggering owner recognition towards the grantor unless they cannot due to nonfiduciary capacity. Examples are:

    • Power over diving and sharing income amongst particular income beneficiaries;
    • Power to build accumulated income without needing to pay the income to a beneficiary whom it was withheld from at any time;
    • Power to invade corpus for particular beneficiaries (including persons who aren’t income beneficiaries).
Power to Allocate Income If Limited by a Standard

The grantor rules mustn’t be applied to a power solely exercisable (without the consent of any adverse party) by a trustee or trustees who are not the grantor or their spouse (who must still be living with the said grantor. Power to distribute, accumulate, or apportion income for or to one or more beneficiaries, or from, within, or to a class of beneficiaries (even if the conditions of Subsection (b), paragraphs (6) or (7) are satisfied), is restricted by a reasonably definite and external standard that is presented by the trust instrument. However, a power cannot fall within the powers described above if any person uses it to add to two or more beneficiaries or a class of beneficiaries to receive the corpus or income. One exception would be where such an action is to provide for after the adoption or birth of children.

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

 

Commonly Used Exceptions by Practitioners

The above powers and exemptions are pursuant to understanding the benefits and setbacks IRC 674 can provide for individuals surrounding a trust. However, exceptions can affect how much an individual within a specific role can receive their distribution, whether because of limitations due to income tax purposes, the number of roles involved, or if a role is deemed a nonadverse party possesses nonfiduciary capacity within the trust. 

Hems

The trustee’s power to make distributions are restricted because of an understandable and absolute standard like health, maintenance, support, or education (HEMS) (IRC Section 674(b)(5)(A));  

Single Beneficiary

There is only one current beneficiary belonging to a trust, and the principal and income must be paid to the said beneficiary (or such beneficiary’s estate and any estate tax attached to it) or to any appointees that the beneficiary has decided (IRC Section 674(b)(6)); 

Pro Rata Shares

The trust possesses two or more beneficiaries, but the principal and income have been distributed to those said beneficiaries based on their relevant shares (IRC Section 674(b)(5)(B));

No Real Control

The grantor nor the grantor’s spouse do not serve as the trust trustee, and less than one-half of trustees are subordinate or related to the grantor (IRC Section 674(c));

Identity of Trustees

Careful consideration should be taken by advisors and estate planners when drafting the trust deed for clients when it comes to rules for any portion of the trust. The central point of this article isn’t just an analysis of typical powers around a grantor trust status. Still, it is also a careful exploration of the identity of the trustees. For instance, if the grantor’s spouse has the co-trustee role, the trust will trigger and become a grantor trust unless an adverse party is a co-trustee. While grantor trust status has many taxable advantages and grants the power of appointment, under the latest tax regime, taxpayers may increasingly prefer to have non-grantor trusts. Careful planning is critical in preventing inadvertent and potentially harmful income tax consequences.

Think that IRC 674 may be for you? Speak with one of our consultants to learn how to proceed forward.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

International Estate Planning

A short time ago, we had touched on the common pitfalls and necessary strategies a high-ultra networth individual residing in the United States would need to know when starting or in the middle of the U.S. estate planning process. Continuing onto that, we will be expanding the topic on a global scale and all the rules on taxation, residency, and succession that come with it.

International Estate Planning

International estate planning (or IEP) is a set of strategies and tactics applied to the U.S. and foreign clients to obtain the following objectives:

The first and most important objective is maintaining control and ownership of all wealth and property that the client has acquired in life and will be given upon their death. To determine said ownership and control, there are a few key factors to consider, such as:

  • The true domicile of the client and their beneficiaries;
  • The nature of the ownership rights of the client, their beneficiaries, and any political entities within which the property resides;
  • The tax jurisdiction between states based on local and international tax treaties to ensure efficiency when considering transfer taxes;
  • Transfers of control and ownership through trusts, contracts, and probate.

Another crucial objective is to the ability to provide absolute financial security for the client and their descendants that will last for multiple generations. As cash flow is an important way to leverage the behavior of family members, it is imperative to project the cash flow from the current assets and estimate the costs of winding up the estate. Financial security should also be ensured when the client is unwilling or unable to remain competent, as this can result in property, investments, and other financial assets to either be seized, lose monetary value, or be lost due to mishandling.

When is International Estate Planning Triggered?

There are several ways for international estate planning to be triggered when a U.S./Foreign client (with assets in the U.S.) either:

  • Accumulates or transfers a significant amount of wealth during their lifetime;
  • Probates, owns, or divides a significant amount of property (it should be noted that due to ‘FATCA’ and other reporting requirements, any amount above $100,000.00 is now considered “significant”).

Reporting and Confidentiality

Financial security is not the only concern for IEP clients when it comes to efficient tax planning. The confidentiality of their personal tax and account information may rank higher on the list of importance, as international estate planning will require much financial accuracy and scrutiny in order to complete the process efficiently. 

Unfortunately, with the implementation of the OECS’s CRS framework and the U.S. FATCA legislation, reporting on the client’s financial and tax information is no longer optional. It is mandatory for all tax history and current finances to be present not only at the beginning of inheriting or purchasing an international estate but throughout the entire operation in the case of changes or situations that could arise. It is critical to know precisely the kind of information the client needs to disclose in the various jurisdictions and the consequences of non-compliance in order to avoid the latter.

Who Does International Estate Planning Affect?

There are two specific client groups that are most often affected by international estate planning within the U.S.:

  • Any U.S. citizen or non-resident aliens living in the U.S. who own assets or have family members residing outside of the USA;
  • Non-US resident individuals who own interest in property located within the U.S. 

These two groups of clients share having a connection, whether familial or business-related, to the U.S. For those looking into other countries, it is vital to research the laws, tax treaties, and such that their specific country requires for international estate planning. For example, some countries, such as Britain, may impose a global inheritance tax on beneficiaries for estates that meet or exceed a specific monetary value, while others, like Portugal, do not.

International Estate Planning: Five Key Issues to Consider

It is of utmost importance for global families (especially families with U.S. expats) to create an international estate plan which considers the succession, domicile, generation-skipping transfer, succession, and gift tax laws in each jurisdiction where distributions may occur and/or assets are held at the time of the client’s death.

The U.S. imposes gift and estate taxes based on citizenship and domicile, which is more common in other countries, making planning for the U.S. expat particularly complex. To avoid the negative implications and consequences when the multi-jurisdictional estate plan is drawn up, the five factors below need to be considered for U.S. expats, green card holders, and/or other U.S.-connected persons.

Review The Basics of U.S. Estate and Gift Tax Law

The U.S. government imposes income and estate/gift taxes primarily based on citizenship. The maximum rate at which federal estate and gift taxes may be levied is 40%. There are tax exemptions and credits that Treasury amends on an annual basis, which typically excludes many U.S. citizens – due to this, many U.S. citizens are not concerned with estate tax planning.

Non-resident aliens may face estate tax on U.S. situs property (including shares and real estate in companies established or expanded into the United States). If the country in which the non-resident alien resides has an estate tax treaty, the jurisdiction where they are resident may have favored gift tax and estate treatment. If there is no estate tax treaty, there may be a cap on the tax exemption on their U.S. situs assets.

For individuals with a joint asset can bypass probate, with married holders adding 50% in value to their asset in the instance that one passes away. For more information, please read our article on issues to consider with joint assets to consider when doing international estate planning.

Understand the Jurisdiction in which The Decedent and Assets Are Situated

The United States offers generous gift tax and estate exemptions for U.S. citizens. However, other countries may have lower thresholds. A simple domestic estate plan may not address the complex issues which may arise if the client has assets in multiple jurisdictions.

The most significant difference is that of inheritance tax rules versus estate tax rules. Inheritance tax is typically paid by the person receiving the asset, while the estate pays estate tax. 

Succession laws also differ globally as many civil law countries in Europe, South America, and Asia have restrictions on who may receive assets at death – this is called forced heirship. The E.U. Succession Regulation (EU650/2012) alleviated some aspects of forced heirship. However, individuals may not assume they can proceed assets to any individual they want when residing within a civil law country.

Pay Attention to Nationality, Residency, Domicile, and Situs Rules

If multi-jurisdictional assets are considered, residency, nationality, and domiciled issues must be closely considered and understood. 

The estate tax for U.S. immigrants is imposed based on domicile. For estate tax purposes, a person is domiciled in the U.S. if they live within the U.S. and have no present intention of leaving. A Green Card may be a key indicator of their choice to remain in the U.S. and establish a domicile.

Other countries have codified requirements of when someone is resident and/or domiciled. European countries focus on how many days have been spent in the country when determining when worldwide assets will be subject to their local tax law. Multiple countries may consider the individual a domiciliary and/or subject certain assets to estate and gift taxes. In this instance, the special tie-breaker clauses in the tax treaties would need to be considered to avoid double taxation and determine legal domicile.

How certain types of property will transfer is subject to situs rules. Situs refers to a property’s physical location for legal purposes. The general guidelines for assets typically forming part of situs assets for non-resident aliens include:

    • Real Property (Structures, Land, Fixtures, and renovations/improvements located in the U.S.);
    • Tangible Personal Property (property physically in the U.S., including physical currency);
    • Intangible Personal Property (depends on the nature and character of the investment);
    • Business Investment Funds (funds used in connection with a U.S. business or trade and then held in a brokerage or bank account – this includes the U.S. branches of foreign banks);
    • Personal Investment Funds (Checking/Saving accounts; qualified retirement plans; stock; bonds; life insurance, and annuities).

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Check Relevant U.S. Estate Tax Treaties

Bilateral estate and gift tax treaties provide clarity on international transfer taxes. The U.S. has signed estate/gift tax treaties with sixteen foreign countries, with each treaty altering the rules regarding the applications of the estate and gift taxes between the two countries.

The content and protections afforded in each treaty may be vastly different while also providing a framework to determine the situs of the property, the domicile of the decedents, and the application of the relevant tax credits in order to avoid double taxation.

The benefit of the tax treaties for non-U.S. citizens is to alleviate the estate tax on U.S. situs assets, thus saving money while still preserving the value of the estate.

Regularly Update an International Estate Plan

Reviewing and updating a draft in estate planning is vital when acquiring assets in different jurisdictions or moving across borders. Structuring an estate plan in a single country may create unforeseen and undesirable consequences when the estate is being executed in another country. Reviewing the domicile and residency of someone at the time of their death is crucial for the functionality of the estate plan.

Individuals can cement the fulfillment of their wishes after their passing by approaching legal counsel to adopt a Last Will and Testament, which meets the requirements of the United States and any other foreign country to facilitate the distribution of their estate.

Reviewing any trusts that the individual may have is as important as executing a professional international Will. When trustees and settlors of trusts move between jurisdictions, it is imperative to be examining the treatment of trusts in the new jurisdiction for new requirements that will call for financial redocumentation or applying for a form, service, or taxation status.

Some countries, such as the U.K. and New Zealand, may impose entry and exit tax on trust assets, while others (mostly European countries) do not recognize trusts due to their definition and structure of laws surrounding inheritance (common law vs. civic law).

However, it is possible for trusts to be moved internationally, though it would have to be done without the full knowledge of foreign financial and tax laws. In some cases, this can be done unknowingly by actions of a trustee or a settlor, and this may create unforeseen consequences. Trustees or settlors of trusts are advised to seek specialist tax advice before relocating to a new country to accommodate the changes in their international estate plan.

Cross Border Issues That Amplify The Complexity of Estate Tax Planning

As with any transglobal purchase, any expat looking to purchase property in another country must be aware of the following issues that appear often:

U.S. Estate Tax Basics

U.S. transfer taxes can be applied to a U.S. citizen no matter where they are residing, the location of gifts property, or if they have died. U.S. expats are entitled to benefit from income tax relief in the form of foreign-earned income exclusion since there is no such benefit where transfer taxes are concerned.

U.S. expats should expect The United States Treasury to impose estate tax upon their worldwide assets at the moment of their death. These assets will include proceeds from personal property, retirement assets, life insurance policies, real estate, and other assets. 

Treasury may also levy an estate tax on certain assets which may have been transferred to others within a specified period before the time of the individual passing or in the case where the decedent/beneficiary retains an interest in the property after the death of the cedent.

Changes to the recent estate tax law have increased the threshold for federal estate and gift tax lifetime exclusion to very high thresholds. During the 2022 financial year, the exclusions are as follows:

    • $12.06M personal lifetime exemption;
    • Interspousal transfers: transfers between spouses are unlimited (during the lifetime of the spouses or after death as long as the transfer happens to a citizen spouse);
    • The unused portion of the exemption from the first dying spouse’s estate can be carried over to the estate of the last surviving spouse. This will, therefore, increase the threshold for the last surviving spouse’s estate as long as an election is made on the first dying spouse’s estate tax return.

Should a U.S. citizen transfer any funds during their lifetime to a non-US citizen spouse, there may be a reduction in the U.S. citizen spouse’s estate; however, the annual marital gift allowance is reduced from unlimited to an amount of $164,000.00 in 2022.

A Brief Overview of Contrasting International Transfer Tax Regimes

U.S. laws surrounding estate tax can be found in numerous states, with each possessing either similar or different criteria to be met critical differences, especially regarding state taxation and population, such as New York to Illinois. However, these differences are insignificant compared to the rest of the world. Most U.S. states make use of English common law, while other countries may make use of civil law systems. And as of October 2020, less than half of all American states and territories had ratified the International Wills Treaty and adopted the Annex.

Current civil law has been modeled after Roman law, resulting in statutes being longer, more detailed, and with less discretion and interpretive power to the court. 

Common law has more concise constitutions and statutes which afford more discretion and interpretive power to the courts when laws are applied to particular facts and circumstances.

As a common law country, the U.S. allows individuals more control and discretion in terms of distributing their wealth to their heirs. This is done by drafting a legal Will that provides specific instructions for the bequeathing of their wealth using the probate system.

Trusts can be used as vehicles to bypass probate and to avoid/defer estate tax. The estate is typically taxed before the distribution of wealth is made to the heirs. If a valid Will is not in place, state intestacy laws will determine how the decedent’s property should be distributed.

Due to the fundamental differences in common and civil law countries, it is possible for the existing estate plan that the family may have in place to become outdated, ineffective, and perhaps very counter-productive. This is especially the case if the family relocates overseas. 

Concepts of Citizenship, Residency, and Domicile

Along with cross-border taxation and laws, another critical factor in any international estate planning process is how one’s residency, citizenship, or domicile. These concepts have crucial significance in determining the transfer taxes to which the individuals could be exposed.

To understand how they are or could be taxed, expats need to understand any requirements and definitions under the laws of the countries where they live, work, and own assets. The likelihood that the effectiveness of an existing estate plan may deteriorate is dependent on where the family relocates and how much their existing assets integrate into their new country of residence as well. The duration of how long they are in the new jurisdiction is also a component an individual must consider before starting the process.

U.S. tax residency is determined using two tests: The first is the substantial presence test which measures the number of days an individual physically spends in the country. The second is based on the individual’s permanent residency – i.e., as soon as the individual becomes a green card holder, they are deemed to be a U.S. tax resident. Let’s also distinguish that a U.S. citizen is always considered a resident for income tax purposes.

Transfer taxes, however, do not consider the individual’s tax residency. Instead, it will focus on the concept of domicile. Domicile is established by determining the jurisdiction in which an individual resides without the intention of leaving permanently at some time in the future. 

Should the individual meet the requirements to be regarded as a tax resident in the U.S. but does not have the intention to remain in the country permanently, a domicile has not been created. However, once domicile has been established in a country, the only way to sever it would be actually to move outside the country/emigrate. Immigrants may be able to obtain estate tax residency if a green card is obtained and they intend to remain in the U.S. permanently.

 

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

Transfer Tax Situs Rules, Tax Treaties, And Foreign Tax Credits

Now that we have gone over general key information and issues to be aware of let’s dive into strategies, credits, and other rules surrounding global taxation for IEP.

Tax Planning Strategies: Cross-Border Pitfalls and Considerations

The transfer tax implications for expats and other non-US person’s property will depend on the following:

    • The character and nature of the assets;
    • The physical location of the assets;
    • Whether there is an estate tax treaty between the country of domicile/citizenship or residence and the U.S.;
    • Whether there are any tax credits available in the U.S. and the relevant jurisdiction should there be an overlapping of any taxes which need to be imposed.
Understanding The Role Of Situs In International Transfer Taxation

As discussed above, situs is the Latin word for “position” or “site.” In legal terminology, it refers to the property’s location.

Federal estate taxes are levied on the worldwide assets of U.S. citizens and residents. For non-residents, the situs rule is that any tangible asset physically located in the U.S. will become subjected to federal estate tax. The rules for intangible property and assets are more complicated. It is possible for an asset to be considered a non-situs asset for U.S. gift taxes but may be considered to be a situs asset for U.S. estate taxes.

The Interplay of Tax Treaties Are Foreign Tax Credits On Cross-Border Estates

The U.S. currently has estate and gift tax treaties with fifteen other jurisdictions. The tax treaties serve important roles when determining the transfer tax consequences of the assets which may form part of the cross-border estate. The treaty may provide a meaningful reduction in estate taxes employing mitigating discriminatory tax treatments and double taxation.

The treaty determines the country of the donor/decedent’s domicile and the country where the property is deemed to be located. Once this determination has been made, the treaty controls which countries can assess transfer taxes.

Some treaties relieve some of the burdens which may occur when a surviving spouse of the estate is non-resident upon the passing of a US-domiciled spouse. This is done by increasing the marital deduction for non-resident spouses. If both countries have claimed to levy estate taxes, a tax credit regime may be in place to at least reduce or eliminate double taxation.

When preparing the international estate plan for clients, the interplay between the relevant transfer tax regime and the relevant treaty. This is to ensure that the impact of domicile and citizenship is also considered in addition to not only the nature of the location and the property. The filer must also specify any benefit which has been claimed under the treaty in their actual tax filings. Otherwise, the presumed benefit may be lost. Unlike the tax treaties, the U.S. does not make any special claims to negate the treaty on the basis of the heir or decedent’s citizenship.

Tie-breaker clauses are key factors in these tax treaties. How the tie-breaker rules operate depends on whether the newer or older situs rules are followed in the estate tax treaties. 

The most recently ratified estate tax treaties follow the rules based on the domicile-based approach. The treaty rules prioritize determining the jurisdiction where the decedent is domiciled. The domiciliary country can tax any and all transfers of property within the estate, while the non-domiciliary country may only tax situs property. Foreign transfer tax credits will then be provided to the non-domiciliary country by the domiciliary country for taxes paid.

The older treaties follow the more elaborate character/nature rules discussed above for non-resident aliens owning U.S. situs assets. The foreign jurisdiction’s situs rules will apply to the portion of the U.S. person’s estate in the foreign country. These treaties are not uniform; some eliminate double taxation better than others. Generally, provision for primary and secondary credits may be applied to reduce any potential double taxation. The non-situs country will grant a primary credit against the tax imposed on the situs country. Secondary credits may be issued where the individual situs laws of the countries determine that the property has situs in both or even neither country. 

Where there is no tax treaty, there is an increase in the probability of double taxation. Foreign transfer tax credits may still be able to provide a form of relief from double tax taxation, and the availability of same in the U.S. will hinge on the following:

  • Is the property situated in a foreign country?
  • Is the property subject to estate/inheritance taxes?; and
  • Does the property form part of the gross estate of the decedent?

U.S. Internal Revenue Code §2014 elaborates on the credit for foreign death taxes. It should also be noted that the potential foreign tax credits could be unavailable by Presidential proclamation if the foreign country does not provide a reciprocal tax credit to U.S. citizens.

Can Non-US Citizens Inherit Property?

Noncitizens are able to inherit property just as citizens can. One common example of special rules can apply to spouses when one of them is a non-US citizen. When the spouse who is set to inherit property from the estate is a non-US citizen, the marital deduction is no longer unlimited, even if the spouse happens to be a permanent U.S. resident. The rationale is to ensure that a non-US citizen does not inherit a large sum of money tax-free and then return to their native land. On the other hand, if the non-US citizen spouse were to pass away first, the assets left to the U.S. citizen would qualify for the unlimited marital deduction.

Just as the marital deduction is not unlimited to a non-U.S. resident spouse, the special tax-free treatment of gifts given to spouses during their lifetime is also subject to a limit of $164,000 annually. The amount is indexed for inflation and is subject to change annually.

Can U.S. Trust Own Foreign Assets?

Yes, it is possible for a U.S. trust to own foreign assets. However, it should be noted that certain countries or jurisdictions do not recognize trusts, which can result in higher taxes when or obstacles when transferring foreign assets. A possible reason is that the country or jurisdiction utilizes a civil law system rather than a common law system, with the latter allowing clients to use trusts for inheritance.

Look into whether the country you wish to engage in international estate planning operates on either a civil law or a common law system before beginning the process. If not, consult with your client or advisor to determine possibilities for you to meet civil law regulations and additional tax laws with little to no room for complications.

What is an International Will?

An International Will is intended to take effect in more than one country or jurisdiction. It can also be referred to as an Offshore Will and specifically deals with assets located in a foreign country or jurisdiction, whether from family, friends, or business-related reasons. Should it be intended for the Will to deal with the individual’s worldwide assets, it may be referred to as a ‘Worldwide Will.’

How an International Will is produced and finalized depends on the country or jurisdiction it originates from, but in many cases, it requires to be handwritten and witnessed by at least two individuals. Most countries with a common law system are accepting of a Will from the United States and vice versa, as well as recognizing if the Will was executed in the United States and vice versa. And with any of these cases, a Will can be written in a language of the writer’s choosing.

Are Foreign Assets Subject to Estate Tax?

Citizens and permanent residents of the U.S. who are domiciled within the U.S. can be subjected to estate tax on their worldwide assets, including any foreign ones they have acquired at any point in time. Should there be a tax treaty with the jurisdiction where the assets are located, this needs to be considered when determining if foreign estate tax credits may be applicable. That way, you can either reduce incoming taxation or to avoid double taxation. Which solution, or another, that may apply to your case must be consulted with professional advisors before moving forward in order to avoid filing with inaccurate information and other legal consequences.

Our consultants can help you with your international estate planning case. Contact us to set up an appointment in the “Have a question?” section to the right.

Jean-dré Tombisa

Peter Harper

Peter Harper on US Tax – American Kleptocracy

Asena Advisors is proud to present an episode of US Tax, the podcast for Australian accountants with US clients. CEO Peter Harper dives with host Heide Robson into how the United States has become the most popular offshore haven with illicit finances.

Transcript:

Peter Harper: As far as how did a lot of these island nations and tax havens get into trouble, it had nothing to do with their tax rules. Their tax rules in of themselves were completely fine. It was the way that they managed those tax rules in conjunction with their secretive banking practices to effectively hide and laundered by.

[introductory music plays]

Narrator: You’re listening to US Tax; the podcast for Australian accountants with US clients.

Heide Robson: Welcome to Update 33 of US Tax. This is Heide Robson. So now we are back to publishing content that is unique to this podcast here, US Tax. So this podcast, this episode was not published previously somewhere else.

Heide Robson: When I was talking with Peter Harper of Asena Advisors during the last three updates, I asked him about a book. The book is called American Kleptocracy by Casey Mitchell. The full title is American Kleptocracy: How the US Created the World’s Greatest Money Laundering Scheme in History. Amazon quotes the book, “An explosive investigation into how the United States of America built one of the largest illicit offshore finance systems in the world.”

Heide Robson: So I wanted to get Peter’s input on this. And at the time I (had) asked Peter about this book, neither Peter nor I had read it. In fact, the question was unplanned. I didn’t know I was going to ask Peter this (because) my mind sometimes goes off on a tangent. So neither Peter nor I had read the book and we don’t really discuss the book. What had triggered my question to Peter was the blurb on the back of the book. I had read the blurb and let’s just quickly read the beginning of the blurb. It’s quite long, so let’s just read the first one and a half paragraphs and skip some bits to make it shorter.

[transitional music plays]

Narrator: “For years, one country has acted as the greatest offshore haven in the world, attracting hundreds of billions of dollars in illicit finance (that has been) tied directly to corrupt regimes, extremist networks, and the worst the world has to offer. And this one country is the United States of America. American Kleptocracy examines just how the United States’ implosion into a center of global offshoring took place. How states such as Delaware and Nevada perfected the art of the anonymous shell company.”

Heide Robson: So that’s part of the blurb. So this is what triggered my question to Pete, and bear in mind that Peter hadn’t read the blurb. And my question to Peter is, “Do LLCs just help to hide assets, or do they also help to avoid tax? And if the latter, how does that work? How can you avoid tax using an LLC? Is that what this is about?”

[transitional music plays]

Heide Robson: Before we start, please let me just quickly play you the legal disclaimer that Peter Harper has recorded for you.

Peter Harper: So we talk about those complex questions. I want to caution listeners that each case that may come before them will be unique, and it is vital that they consult with someone that has US expertise in order to handle delicate matters. These topics are not simplistic and need experience and proficiency to tackle. So please reach out to us to address any issues that your clients may bring up with the diligence they deserve.

[transitional music plays]

Heide Robson: Here’s Peter’s answer:

Peter Harper: If you’re a conspiracy theorist, which, in every conspiracy theory, there is some truth. But this is the reality of what happened: the US went out with fat (finger) error, and through all this stuff that happened in Switzerland with UBS, and then in Asia with HSBC, you know, the offshore stuff, and applied these very draconian empirical financial laws.

Peter Harper: The US has gone around and set up all these mutual disclosure regimes around extracting information and information sharing, all that type of stuff. But its states, in itself, are not actually bound by those jurisdictions. And then, you’re quite right, the structure of the LLC is kind of hiding in plain sight, right? Because if you’re generating non-US sourced income and you’re a non-US owner, it’s not subject to US taxation.

Heide Robson: So you basically have three buckets: in the first one, you have EFTP. In the second one, you have ECI. And then in the third bucket, you have income that is neither EFTP nor ECI, and this third bucket does not get taxed in the US if you are not a resident of the US. And so you are referring to this third bucket that is not taxed in the US if it flies through an LLC.

Peter Harper: Yeah, correct. So this is the thing: when you think about a US LLC, and this took me a while to wrap my head around, I spent a lot of time thinking through this. I’m like, “Oh, well, you know, there’s automatically got to be this notion or presumption of a US LLC having a US trade or business,” because my first exposure to an LLC and a lot of people is they go, “Ah, it’s a partnership.” And that is true. When you add multiple people together in a US LLC like it is in Australia, there is this presumption when you have a partnership in Australia that it is two people in business with a view of profit, right, that creates this nexus sort of business. In the US, that’s conceptually true, but it’s not guaranteed. In the context of a single-member LLC, categorically, it’s really straightforward; if you don’t have US-sourced income, so (like) you don’t have a US tradeable business with effectively connected income and you’re not generating US FDAP income, there’s no US tax.

Heide Robson: To just kind of guess what structure they are aiming at, it would be a single-member LLC that is then held by a multilayer structure of international shell companies in tax havens. So you would have a single-member LLC that is held by a tiered structure of companies in tax havens. Most likely then, also, with not even a registered shareholder, but just holding certificates, so that it’s very difficult to work out who is actually owning these assets in the LLC, correct?

Peter Harper: Yeah, correct. So what then happened when all these tax havens got hit through the last round, again, the money always looks around the world. And obviously getting bank accounts and all that type of stuff is very different, right? Because you’ve got to go through and deal with anti-monetary (laundering), or AML, policies and all that type of stuff. But just that process of having a legal structure where you’re not concerned about getting access to US banking. And this is where a lot of the European nations and other countries have since kind of paid the heavy price. (And what) really pushed back at America is America’s willingness and desire to regulate the rest of the world, but its unwillingness to let the rest of the world regulate it, right? And I think when you’re the biggest economic gorilla in the room, you get to push a different agenda. But that is absolutely the truth when it comes to wealth structuring that’s driven by confidentiality today.

Heide Robson: So we identified how it might be structured, but the question is what income could actually flow through it. Because I think the main income that is in this third bucket where it’s neither EFTP nor ECI is when you have product businesses selling products from outside the US into the US. Because then you don’t have a US trade or business, you don’t have an FDAP, hence you are in this third bucket.

Heide Robson: But I think as a vehicle for major tax avoidance, I can’t see how it works. Because, for example, if you set up an LLC that is then held by a multi-tiered structure in tax havens and multiple tax havens scattered across the globe. If you have passive income running through that LLC, you have FDAP, hence it’s taxable in the US. Unless, of course, you’re aiming at capital gains, yes. So it would be mainly capital gains then because they would be-

Peter Harper: FDAP has still got to be coming from a US source. Really where, I think, this has gone, right, it should be very, very clear. This is something I can see how it resulted like this, but we’re not in the business of helping this stuff happen is… I think it’s really (that) a lot of this is driven by folks that have got money that may not have paid (the) proper tax. That may have some issues around how it was derived. And so the only way this kind of works as being a tax haven, it’s a tax haven in the sense that you can have non-U.S. sourced income flow into a US structure and flow out of a US structure.

Peter Harper: What the US gives these clients is (that) they give a really high level of confidentiality that they probably used to have in places such as Switzerland and in Hong Kong that they don’t enjoy anymore. And that’s really it. Because if you think about tax havens, if you really think about most tax havens as they used to exist for many, many years, there’s been really strong anti-avoidance provisions that have existed in most major city nations across the world. But so the ability to maintain substantial amounts of capital in offshore tax havens without attribution, you know, it’s not impossible, but it’s been extremely limited over the course of the last 10 to 20 years. So then the people that are storing money there are just… They’re doing it by being dishonest as far as compliant with the rules.

Peter Harper: So I think why a lot of people are saying, you know, they go (and) say, “Is [the] US a tax haven?” They’re thinking about it in the context where they’re saying, “Okay, you’ve got an LLC, you’ve got a foreign owner, you’ve got income coming into an LLC that’s foreign-sourced (and) that’s flowing back out to a foreign owner. Therefore there’s no US taxation.” Now Americans sometimes jam up and say, you know, “Tax haven.” I’m like, “Okay, well, Australia has a whole bunch of rules. They like to take the conduit, foreign income rules. You got foreign-sourced income flowing through a foreign holding company back out to a foreign owner. There’s no Australian tax.”

Peter Harper: So this notion that it’s really a tax haven automatically on its own, I think, just by virtue of the fact you’ve got income flowing out and not being taxed, that’s a bit of a rich statement. I think what is a fair statement is it is that coupled with the rules that each of these states has implemented around confidentiality. And to me, that’s a bigger issue. The confidentiality (and) the rules they have around confidentiality are more of an issue than the tax rules in of themselves. And some of these rules are not too dissimilar from places like the Cook Islands.

Heide Robson: Yes. Now I’m with you, Peter, because I couldn’t see the tax avoidance, because when you have FDAP, for example, you have withholding tax. Yes, the capital gains would not be taxed in the US and hence would be taxed probably nowhere if the whole structure is held in a tax haven. But I agree with you. It’s really the privacy rules that are around these LLCs by the different states who establish these LLCs. That’s really where you can then hide assets; it’s more about hiding assets than avoiding tax, correct?

Peter Harper: Yeah, correct. And I think, really, if you actually survey a lot of the most recent (years), particularly over the last 30 years, as far as how did a lot of these island nations and tax havens get into trouble. It had nothing to do with their tax rules. Their tax rules in of themselves were completely fine. It was the way that they managed those tax rules in conjunction with their secretive banking practices to effectively hide and launder money, right? And I think the concern with America is, “Hey, guys! You guys went around with a sledgehammer and smashed up the whole offshore tax world.” Right, which is fair enough. You think that’s bad guys doing bad things, anti-money laundering basics. But then at the same time, you’re happy with some of your really more Republican-in-nature states to say that, “Come and put your cash over here or your assets over here and no one can know about it.” It was just one of those things, I think that you know, a lot of people, particularly in Europe, feel that it was a very sort of unfair thing.

[transitional music plays]

Heide Robson: Welcome back. So the criticism leveled at US LLCs is not about tax evasion, because when you have assets in the US that earn US-sourced income, usually for FDAP, you pay tax in the US. Not you, but the LLC which holds those assets pay tax in the US.

Heide Robson: So LLCs in this web of illicit finance are not about evading tax, but are about hiding assets. So if you are a dictator or an oligarch or a corrupt official or a money launderer or a drug or illegal weapons dealer, in short, if you have assets that you shouldn’t have, then US LLCs allow you to hide those assets. So your LLC will still be paying tax in the US, but folks back home can’t see where your assets are. So when you look at offshore tax havens, LLCs, and the lot, distinguish between tax evasion and the hiding of assets, tax evasion has become a lot harder with FATCA, the U.S. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, and the Common Reporting Standard, CIS, (which is) the equivalent to FATCA for non-U.S. countries. So tax evasion has become a lot harder with FATCA and CIS, but you can still hide assets. And one way to do that is a US LLC.

Heide Robson: So that’s all for today. The next episode will come out soon. We don’t have a set schedule or rhythm for US Tax. It just would get too much to publish each week on Tax Talks, as well as US Tax. Apologies. So we just publish US updates here as they come.

Heide Robson: Thank you for listening. Bye for now and see you in the next update.

[closing music plays]

 

Got more questions? Speak with one of our consultants at Asena Advisors.

Peter Harper

IRC 675

IRC 675

Following our previous articles on grantor trusts, we will cover the first of the three main IRCs: Section 675.

What is an IRC Section 675?

IRC 675 of the Internal Revenue Code, or IRC, involves, under treasury guidelines, the administrative powers of a foreign grantor trust. To be more precise, it states that the grantor of any foreign trust shall be treated as the owner of the foreign trust. This is only true if, under the instruments’ terms of the trust, that specific administrative control can be exercised primarily for the benefit of the grantor instead of the benefit of the beneficiaries. 

Additionally, suppose the owner of the foreign trust has the power to amend the administrative provisions of the trust instrument, which would result in him, her, or they becoming the trust owner. If that were to happen, the grantor would be treated as the owner of the trust

Now that we know the basic understanding of what IRC 675 is, let’s explain its various powers, such as what may cause a foreign trust to become a grantor trust, who the owner of a grantor trust is, and how to toggle grantor trust status. 

Sec. 675’s Administrative Powers

The administrative powers under IRC 675 include several different authorities related to administrative duties; notable examples to take note of include voting powers and directing the investment of trust funds, borrowing funds, and the ability to deal with trust income and funds for less than adequate consideration, as well as not having sufficient interest or security. 

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

General Powers of Administration

When we refer to a general power of administration, this will commonly include the following: 

  • The power to vote or direct voting of a trust’s stock or other securities, where holdings belonging to the grantor or the trust are significantly essential from the viewpoint of voting control. 
  • The power to control the funds’ investment by directing or vetoing proposed any trust investment or reinvestment. Of course, this is only to the extent that the funds consist of corporation stocks or securities, in which the grantor and trust’s holdings are significant from a voting control viewpoint.
  • The power to reacquire the trust corpus, also known as the sum of money or trust property set aside to produce income of the trust for beneficiaries by substituting other property of an equivalent value. 

To summarize our three points above, the perspective through which we need to assess whether a grantor has these powers has to do with controlling funds and assets within a trust. 

Borrowing of the Trust Funds

Another power a grantor can possess is the ability to borrow trust funds. For example, we should consider a scenario where the owner can directly or indirectly borrow the corpus or trust’s income and wouldn’t be expected to completely repay any loan, including any interest, before the beginning of the taxable year.

Power to Deal for Less than Adequate and Full Consideration

This particular power is exercisable by the grantor in a nonfiduciary capacity without the approval or consent of another party. It enables the grantor to purchase, exchange, or otherwise deal with or dispose of the corpus or the trust’s income for less than adequate consideration in money or its monetary worth. Specifically, it could allow a grantor to remove assets from the trust for a small amount of deliberation, thus resulting in the grantor being able to terminate that trust completely. 

Power to Borrow Without Adequate Interest or Security

This power enables the grantor to borrow the corpus or income, directly or indirectly, without sufficient interest or adequate interest or security except where a trustee, if under a general lending power, is authorized to create loans for any person without regard to said adequate interest or security.

What Are The Grantor Trust Powers?

To summarize the definitions and examples above, here are the most common and vital powers a grantor can have over a trust and its process:

  • To change or add the beneficiaries of the trust. 
  • To borrow from the trust or a portion of the trust without adequate security. 
  • To use income from the trust in order to pay life insurance premiums.
  • To change the trust’s composition by substituting assets of equal value.

What Causes Grantor Trust Status?

Now that we know several types of powers a grantor can have, let’s look into what causes a trust to be considered a grantor trust. There are various criteria, but among the most relevant are the following:

  • IRC § 673(a): the grantor maintains a reversionary interest, meaning that the grantor holds a ‘reversionary interest’ in a trust greater than 5% of the trust principal or income.
  • IRC § 674: the grantor can control the ‘beneficial enjoyment’ of trust income or assets.
  • IRC § 675: the grantor maintains administrative control over the trust that can be exercised for his benefit rather than for the trust’s beneficiaries.
  • IRC § 676: the trust allows the grantor (or a nonadverse party) to revoke any part belonging to a trust and reclaim or take back the trust’s assets later. 
  • IRC § 677(a): if the trust distributes income to the grantor, the trust may be regarded as a grantor trust.
    • The grantor will also be treated as the trust’s owner if its income is, or in the owner’s direction, distributed to the owner or the grantor’s spouse. It will also accumulate for any future distribution to the grantor or the grantor’s spouse, or to be applied to payment of insurance policies on either the life of the grantor or the grantor’s spouse.

Additionally, it’s crucial to note that a grantor trust is considered a disregarded entity by the IRS for federal income tax purposes. This will mean that the grantor’s income tax return will include any taxable income or deduction earned by that trust. For the taxpayer’s convenience, the IRS will allow a grantor trust to employ the grantor’s Social Security number (SSN) rather than having a separate tax ID number (TIN).

Also, when discussing what causes grantor trust status, a vital topic to always consider is what grantor trusts’ advantages and disadvantages are. The primary benefit of estate planning is the potential to preserve wealth while minimizing taxes for one’s beneficiaries. That way, beneficiaries will have a lowered tax rate and better prioritization of any estate tax inclusion that may be available. However, a major concern is an assumption that the grantor, as a taxpayer, will have the funds to pay income tax obligations on trust assets and possible interest for the income of the trust during their lifetime. These implications for income tax purposes may cause a grantor to toggle grantor trust status so that the trust is no longer treated as a grantor trust (discussed later in this article). Further, the gift tax is also a concern, so the taxpayer must consider gift tax considerations and tax consequences when creating the trust. 

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

Who Is Considered the Owner of a Grantor Trust?

The grantor, also known as the owner, settlor, or trustor, is typically the person who creates the trust and contributes property (such as real estate), other funds, or even trust instruments, such as life insurance, to that trust. The trust property and the owner’s funds become part of the trust corpus (in other words, the trust’s assets). 

Personal or familial trusts often have only one grantor, but can, along with business trusts, have two or more. For example, if more than one person had funded a grantor trust, each one will be treated as a grantor in proportion to the cash or property value they transferred to. 

Suppose a resident of a foreign country is treated as the owner of the trust under the grantor trust rules. In contrast, that specific trust has a domestic civilian or resident as a beneficiary. In that case, the beneficiary will be treated as the trust’s grantor to the extent that the beneficiary made gifts (directly or indirectly) to the foreign owner, irrespective of gift tax applying. 

Bear in mind that the grantor is the person who retains the power to control or direct the trust’s income or assets, and is allowed full discretionary protection as the grantor. It’s crucial to understand, especially when dealing with a foreign trust and the income tax consequences surrounding this instrument. Moreover, the owner can also be any person who creates a trust directly or indirectly and makes a gratuitous property transfer to a trust.

How Do I Toggle Grantor Trust Status?

One common question received when looking at IRC 675 is how to toggle a grantor trust status so that the trust will no longer be treated as a grantor trust.. 

Why would a grantor want to do this? Given that there are implications for income tax purposes of a foreign grantor trust, the grantor may deem it too burdensome to be liable for tax on the income attributable to the trust, year after year. Other common motives include keeping up with the tax rate that comes with their specific grantor trust, or for their own discretionary reasons. Therefore, to terminate the grantor trust status or toggle it off, the powers we explored above (which are often used to create the grantor trust status) must be released or terminated. 

How is this done? One possibility this can be accomplished is by transferring power to a specific trustee or a third party, such as a trust protector.

Similarly, to turn the grantor trust status back on after it has been released, the powers released previously must be brought back and given to the previous grantor. This can be done by amending the trust instrument. However, it’s important to remember that a grantor or trustee should never approach this toggling of status flippantly and that professional advice and assistance should be engaged when going down this path. 

New Responsibilities With Incorporation

If the grantor trust status terminates during the grantor’s lifetime, and the trust ceases to be a grantor trust, then the grantor is deemed to have transferred the assets to the trust at that time for federal income tax purposes. The question then becomes, does the grantor recognize a taxable transaction or a gain? Assume the trust has non-recourse liabilities to a third party secured by the trust’s assets. If that is true, the grantor will recognize the gain because the grantor will be deemed to have transferred the secured assets to the trust in exchange for a release of liability. In another scenario, the grantor may also recognize capital gain where the trust owes the debt to the grantor because the trust can be received the secured asset from the grantor in exchange for the promissory note to the grantor as of the date that the grantor trust status terminated. However, based on numerous court cases and tax law examples, there appears to be no gain recognized by either the trust or the grantor’s estate at the grantor’s death for income tax purposes. 

We will be discussing more on the responsibilities within incorporation in later articles, such as gift tax implications, estate tax inclusion, and creating an irrevocable trust, and where the trust deed is drafted to trigger a certain status intentionally (such as an IDGT, which is an irrevocable trust set up by the owner for this particular purpose).  

Speak with one of our consultants to see how IRC 675 can help your financial case.

Arin Vahanian

Peter Harper

#IndiaU.S.TaxSeries Ep. 1: What are Tax Treaties?

This refreshing entry of the #AsenaTaxBlog series on tax treaties focuses on the US and India tax treaty framework. The first blog presents a brief history that might interest my readers, who are curious to learn about the application of tax treaties and their interplay with domestic legislation to determine how beneficial provisions impact their cross-border tax planning needs. In doing so, there is a list of questions that you should discuss with your advisor to ensure your tax compliance is in order. 

Background

A tax treaty is an agreement or a convention between two countries. For instance, an income tax treaty is an agreement primarily concerning the taxation of income, prevention of double tax, and evasion. There can be various reasons for a country to negotiate and enter a tax treaty with another country.  

Post the First World War, the League of Nations began developing model tax conventions, which were taken over by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and later the United Nations. The United Nations was essential in establishing the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) to address the needs of the developing countries to formulate a model tax convention promulgating the manner to negotiate a tax treaty that is focused on addressing the sourcing country’s taxing. In 2003, the United Nations’ Department of Economic and Social Affairs published a revised edition of the Manual for the Negotiation of Bilateral Tax Treaties between Developed and Developing Countries. It noted that “the twin goals of a tax treaty are, firstly, to encourage economic growth by mitigating international double taxation and other barriers to cross-border trade and investment, and secondly, to improve tax administration in the two Contracting States by reducing opportunities for international tax evasion.”  

US Tax Treaty Framework

In the US Constitution’s Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 confers the President to make treaties and lays out how to enforce a treaty. The US has signed the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Vienna Convention) but considers many of its provisions concerning the application of international law to the law of treaties

The US has entered into income tax treaties with several foreign countries. The US concluded the first income tax treaty with China in 1932 to foster trade relations between the US and France. As more developing countries seek to achieve foreign investments, the bilateral income tax treaties could be a guidance tool for taxation of income, avoidance of double taxation, and evasion of taxes.  

The US has below types of treaties dealing with tax matters:

  1. Double tax avoidance income tax treaties;
  2. Estate and gift tax treaties; 
  3. Tax information exchange agreements (TEIAs); 
  4. Social security agreements or Totalization agreements; and 
  5. Multilateral Convention on Mutual Assistance in Tax Matters.

The list of countries with which the US has an income tax treaty is provided on the IRS’s official website. Countries included are Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Georgia, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Moldova, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, Trinidad, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), United Kingdom, United States Model, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, and Vietnam.

India Tax Treaty Framework

Article 253 of the Indian Constitution confers the Parliament of India to make treaties and lays out how to enforce a treaty. However, India is not an official signatory to the Vienna Convention. Still, how the courts (Ram Jethmalani v. Union of India (2011) 8 SCC 1 and various high courts in India) have acknowledged and embraced the customary international law provisions is a small step towards encouraging an integrated framework. 

India has below types of treaties dealing with tax matters:

  1. Double tax avoidance income tax treaties including comprehensive, limited bilateral, limited multilateral, and other agreements (DTAs);
  2. Tax information exchange agreements (TEIAs); 
  3. Social security agreements (SSAs); and 
  4. Multilateral Convention on Mutual Assistance in Tax Matters.

India has entered into 96 comprehensive and eight limited bilateral income tax treaties. These include Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Korea, Kuwait, Kyrgyz Republic, Libya, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritius, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Philippines, Poland, Portuguese Republic, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Singapore, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Sweden, Swiss Confederation, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, UAR (Egypt), Uganda, United Kingdom, Ukraine, United Mexican States, United States of America, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, and Zambia. 

The Indian tax legislation prescribes the availability of tax treaty benefits subject to certain procedural compliance and poses a challenge for taxpayers. For example, a non-resident Indian (NRI) is required to obtain a Tax Residency Certificate (TRC) from the tax authorities of a country of which he/she/they are a resident, in addition to filling out a self-declaration form. 

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

India-US Income Tax Treaty Framework

Forms of tax treaty agreements between India and the US: India and the US have only two bilateral tax agreements, namely:

  1. The Convention Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of India was made for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion concerning taxes on income 1989, which came into effect on 1 January 1989 (India-US DTA), and the protocol and technical explanation to guide for that.  
  2. The Agreement between the Government of the Republic of India and the Government of the United States of America for improving the international tax compliance and to implement the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). This agreement was entered on 9 July 2015 in terms of Article 28 relating to the exchange of information for tax purposes on an automatic basis and put into effect from the period beginning 1 January 2017.

There is no gift, inheritance, nor estate tax treaty between India and the US. Therefore, a taxpayer is required to be governed and comply with the domestic tax legislation of the country where the citizenship/residence/domicile is established at the time of the taxing event.

Snapshot of the Articles covered under the India-US DTA

Broadly, the articles under the India-US DTA can be categorized as under:

Category

Article

Scope and Taxes Covered Article 1: General scope;

Article 2: Taxes covered;

Article 30: Entry into force;

Article 31: Termination

Definition Article 3: General definition;

Article 4: Residence;

Article 9: Associated enterprises

Individual Income  Article 6: Income from immovable property;

Article 10: Dividends;

Article 11: Interest;

Article 12: Royalties and fees for technical services;

Article 13: Gains; Article 15: Business personnel services;

Article 16: Dependent personnel services

Article 17: Director’s fees;

Article 18: Income earned by entertainers, and athletes;

Article 21: Payments received by students. and apprentices;

Article 22: Payments received by professors, teachers, and research scholars;

Article 23: Other income;

Article 29: Diplomatic agents, and consular officers

Business Income Article 5: Permanent establishment;

Article 7: Business profits;

Article 8:  Shipping and air transport;

Article 14: Permanent establishment tax

Pension Income Article 19: Remuneration and pensions in respect of government services;

Article 20: Private pensions, annuities, alimony, and child support

Other Provisions Article 24: Limitation on benefits;

Article 25: Relief from double taxation;

Article 26: Non-discrimination;

Article 27: Mutual agreement procedure;

Article 28: Exchange of information and administrative assistance

The interpretation of the articles covered under the India-US DTA needs deep analysis, and a cross-border tax advisor should be consulted to apply the tax treaty to the facts and circumstances of your situation.

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

Key Questions to Discuss with Your Advisor Concerning the DTA While Tax Planning or Compliance: 

  1. Whether the DTA is effective or in force?
  2. What is the nature of the DTA in force – comprehensive or limited?
  3. Does the scope of the DTA cover me?
  4. What is the basis for determining my residential status under the DTA?  
  5. Does the “saving clause” under the DTA apply to me?
  6. What types of income are covered under the DTA?
  7. Does my business activity in a country establish a “permanent establishment” status?
  8. Do I have an option between applying the DTA and domestic tax legislation? 
  9. Is the application of the DTA more beneficial than domestic tax legislation? How do they interact? 
  10. What are the relevant provisions for the elimination of double taxation?
Our team of international tax specialists at Asena Advisor has in-depth knowledge of interpreting international tax treaties and ascertaining their applicability to your specific circumstances. Please contact Janpriya Rooprai, Head of the US-India Tax Desk, for more information.

Janpriya Rooprai

Peter Harper

Entity Classification Election

Entity Classification Election

Following our previous discussion about entity changes with check-the-box regulations, let’s go into another process that entrepreneurs and executives are likely to consider with the tax season fast approaching: the entity classification election.

What is the Purpose of Entity Classification Election?

The purpose of the entity classification election is to enable business entities to avoid the default tax classification applied by the IRS for federal income tax purposes. Business entities receive a default tax classification, which can result in paying for more federal taxes than necessary. If your entity is eligible to use the entity classification election form, you can change your tax election status and potentially lower your tax liability.

For example, a U.S. corporation can avoid double taxation by using the CTB regulations, and it also benefits foreign eligible entities by avoiding potential double taxation. For example, an entity in India could be classified and taxed differently in the U.S. than in India, such as a tax treaty or an income tax treaty. The CTB rules, therefore, provide the entity in India to elect its entity classification for U.S. tax purposes with that said tax treaty. 

The entity set up in India can also use the tax treaty, along with any treaty benefits included, to qualify for lower dividend withholding taxes if it elects to be taxed as a corporation in the U.S. 

A Parent company in the U.S. can also use the CTB rules to benefit from the tax treaty with India and avoid double taxation. 

What Is A Business Entity Classification?

A business entity is any entity that is recognized for federal tax purposes that is not correctly classified as a trust under Regulations section 301.7701-4 or otherwise subject to special treatment under the Code regarding the entity’s classification. A business entity is classified as either a C-Corporation, partnership, or disregarded entity for federal tax purposes. 

Here is how you can remember:

Association – For purposes of the CTB regulations, an association can be an eligible entity that’s taxable as a corporation by election or under the default rules for foreign eligible entities, as discussed below.

Business entity – A business entity is any entity recognized for federal tax purposes that is not accurately classified as a trust under Regulations section 301.7701-4. Or they are otherwise subject to special treatment under the Code regarding the entity’s classification. 

Corporation – For federal tax purposes, a corporation is any of the following: 

    • A business entity is organized under a federal or state statute or a federally recognized Indian tribe statute if that same statute describes or refers to the entity as incorporated or as a corporation, body corporate, or body politic. 
    • An association.
    • A business entity is organized under a state statute if the statute describes or refers to the entity as a joint-stock company or joint stock association. 
    • An insurance company. 
    • A state-chartered business entity that is conducting banking activities, if any of its deposits are insured under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act or a similar federal statute. 
    • A business entity that is wholly owned by a state or any political subdivision or is wholly owned by any entity described in Regulations section 1.892-2T, such as a foreign government.
    • A business entity that can be taxable as a corporation under a provision of the Code other than section 7701(a)(3). 
    • A foreign business entity as listed on page 7 of Form 8832
    • An entity is created or organized under tax laws of more than one jurisdiction (an example can be a business entity that has multiple charters) if the entity will be treated as a corporation with respect to any of the jurisdictions. For examples, see Regulations section 301.7701-2(b)(9).

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

What is an Entity Classification Form?

This federal tax form allows certain businesses to select whether they want to be taxed as a corporation, partnership, or disregarded entity for future tax purposes and protected under tax law. 

What is IRS Form 8832?

You can use IRS form 8832 to choose to have:

      • A corporation with more than one owner is treated as a partnership for tax purposes.
      • A corporation with a single owner is treated as a ‘disregarded entity for tax purposes.
      • A partnership is treated as a corporation for tax purposes.
      • A ‘disregarded entity is treated as a corporation for tax purposes.

Which Businesses Can Use Form 8832?

Only businesses that are considered eligible entities can use Form 8832. The following are regarded as eligible entities:

      • Partnerships
      • Single-member LLCs
      • Multi-member LLCs; and
      • Certain types of foreign entities

Not every type of business can use Form 8832 to change their business’s tax classification. The following can be considered businesses eligible for filing Form 8832:

      • Partnerships
      • Single-member LLCs
      • Multi-member LLCs
      • Explicit types of foreign entities (Page 5, Form 8832)

The above entities can use Form 8832 to elect to be taxed as a C corporation, partnership, or sole proprietorship.

If you’re currently a limited liability company (LLC) taxed as a corporation, you can use Form 8832 to revert to a previous tax classification.

Eligible businesses that don’t fill out the form will be taxed based on their default tax status. If you are content with your current or default tax classification, do not fill out Form 8832.

Remember that your business can only change its tax classification once every five years.

Who is Not Eligible to File Form 8832?

Sole proprietors, domestic corporations, and foreign corporations are listed in IRS Regulations 301.7701-2(b)(8). 

How Do You Fill Out Form 8832?

Form 8832 is a straightforward form to fill out and only requires the entity’s name, address, and tax identification number, followed by making an election by checking the relevant box and the signature of the entity’s eligible owner, member, partner, or officer.

Before you begin filling out your form, you need to gather some information. Take a look at what to have handy for Form 8832:

      • Business name, address, and phone number
      • Employer Identification Number (EIN)
      • Owner’s name and Social Security number (if the business only has one owner)

There are two parts to the form: Election Information (Part I) and Late Election Relief (Part II). Part I asks a series of questions on your tax status election. Depending on your answers, you may be able to skip some lines.

Part II is for businesses seeking late election relief only. To be eligible for late election relief, all of the following must apply:

      • The IRS denied a previous Form 8832 filing because you didn’t file on time.
      • You haven’t filed your taxes because the deadline hasn’t yet passed, or you’ve filed your taxes on time.
      • You have reasonable cause for not filing your form on time.
      • It has been less than three years and 75 days from your requested effective date.

Is Form 8832 Complicated?

No. The required information you need to know is: 

        • The name of your business
        • The phone number and address of your business
        • The employer identification number (EIN)

Who Must File Form 8832?

Keep in mind that it is not a mandatory form at all. It provides eligible entities the option to change their default classification should they wish. 

What Information is Required?

        • The name of your business
        • The phone number and address of your business
        • The employer identification number (EIN)
        • Owner’s name and Social Security number if the business only has a single owner

Where Should It Be Filed?

        • The form can not be filed electronically. 
        • If you are living as either a resident or non-resident in the U.S., you will have to mail it to the appropriate IRS office in your state.
        • If you are a resident or non-resident in a foreign country, you will need to mail the form to the Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Services, Ogden, UT 84201-0023.

Where Do You Send the Form?

This will depend on the location your entity is residing in a domestic or foreign location:

        • If you live in the U.S., you’ll mail it to the appropriate IRS office in your state.
        • If you live in a foreign country as a resident or non-resident, you will need to mail the form to the Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Services, Ogden, UT 84201-0023.

Once your specific office receives your form, they will notify you immediately whether it has or hasn’t been accepted. A final determination notice of the election change will be sent to you within 60 days of the acceptance decision.

What’s the Form 8832 deadline?

Because Form 8832 is not mandatory, it doesn’t have a deadline per se. It can be filed at any point by an eligible entity. There are, however, specific but basic rules to take note of. When you file the form, you can include the date the change will take effect. 

Broadly, an election specifying an eligible entity’s classification will not take effect more than 75 days before the election is filed, nor can it take effect later than 12 months after the election is filed. However, an eligible entity may be able to apply for an exemption and receive a late election relief in certain circumstances.

How Long Does It Take to Prepare?

The IRS estimates that 17 minutes are required to prepare the form. However, this doesn’t take into account the time it will take to learn and understand the applicable tax law.

What Else Should I Know About Form 8832?

It is essential to know the difference between Form 8832 and Form 2553. Both forms allow certain businesses to request a new tax classification. However, the major difference is the type of tax classification you request.

Form 8832 authorizes businesses to request to be taxed as a corporation, partnership, or sole proprietorship, whereas Form 2553 is the form corporations and LLCs use to elect S-Corp tax status. 

The check-the-box regulations authorize entities to elect to change their U.S. tax classification, though a change in tax classification, no matter how achieved, has tax consequences. This applies to U.S. and International business owners.

Essentially there are three ways to accomplish a classification change:

        • An elective classification change by filing IRS Form 8832.
        • An automatic classification change, wherein an entity’s default classification changes as a result of a change in the number of owners.
        • An actual conversion, wherein an entity merges into, or liquidates and forms, an entity that has the desired classification.

Suppose a corporation elects to be classified as a partnership. In that case, it will be deemed to have distributed all its assets and liabilities to shareholders in liquidation. The shareholders are considered to contribute all the distributed assets and liabilities immediately after that to a newly formed partnership. An entity will be deemed to have liquidated under §331 or §332, and the deemed liquidation will be treated like it were an actual liquidation for tax purposes.  

An entity not regarded as eligible will first need to convert into an eligible entity before making the check-the-box election. 

Lastly, an actual conversion can be implemented.

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

Why to Use Form 8832

Businesses receive a default tax classification, which can result in paying more business taxes than necessary. If you’re eligible to utilize the entity classification election form, you can change your tax election status and potentially lower your liability on a tax return, saving you money and building more tax credit.

Why Comply?

Even though this form is not mandatory, this will be an advantage for some taxpayers to decide whether their entity will be taxed as a partnership (one with multiple owners), as a corporation, or disregarded for tax purposes (single owner entity) and taxed like a proprietorship.

What is the Best Tax Classification for an LLC?

An ideal tax classification for a limited liability company (LLC) will depend on if you’d like your business profits should be taxed at your personal income tax or corporate tax rates. If you would rather use your personal tax rates instead, you can classify it as a disregarded entity or as a partnership. If not, you can classify it as a corporation instead.

An LLC can be taxed in several ways for the business and its owner to save on taxes. Below are ways how an LLC can be taxed, how your business can benefit from being taxed as an S corporation or as a corporation, and how you can elect this tax option:

An LLC can be considered as a disregarded entity, similar to the way sole proprietorships are treated, or can be taxed as a partnership if it has multiple members. Those are the most usual classification for LLCs, with each case having the profits ultimately taxed as a part of every member’s personal income.

It’s also possible for an LLC to be considered a corporation. If so, the entity will have to pay corporate taxes instead of passing profits through to each member’s personal income tax return.

To be taxed as a corporation, use the entity classification election or IRS Form 8832. The election for being taxed as a new entity will go into effect on the date entered on line 8 of Form 8832. However, the election cannot take effect over 75 days before the date the election is filed, nor will it take effect any later than 12 months after it is filed.

The form includes a consent statement that may be signed by all or one member on behalf of all other members. If one member does sign, there needs to be some record in a company membership meeting that all members have approved this specific election.

For single-member LLCs, you will need to provide the name(s) and owners’ Social Security number. The same will be applied for multi-member LLCs, but with an Employer ID Number instead of Social Security number. 

You can fill out an IRS Form 2553 in order to be taxed as an S corporation, also known as an election by a Small Business Corporation. To start a new tax classification for a year, you will need to file by March 15, which will be effective for the entire year. You must also include all necessary information about each shareholder: name and address, Social Security number, the date the owner’s tax year ends, shares that they owned, and a consent statement.

For any change to a corporation, you must note the following: when your election to corporate status goes into effect, the IRS will determine that any and all liabilities and assets from the previous business (whether it was a partnership or a sole proprietorship) will be added to the corporation in exchange for shares of the corporate stock.

By default, the IRS can tax a multi-member LLC as a partnership since LLCs don’t have a separate IRS tax category.

If you want to convert your LLC’s tax status from a partnership to a corporation while not changing the LLC’s legal form, you will only need to file an IRS Form 8832 (taxed as a C corporation) or an IRS Form 2553 (to be taxed as an S corporation). 

Note that once an LLC has elected to change its classification, it cannot elect again to change its classification for the 60 months after the election’s effective date. 

Any election for changing a partnership classification to a corporation shall be treated like the partnership provided all of its liabilities and assets to the corporation in exchange for stock. The partnership is then immediately liquidated by distributing the stock to its partners.

IRS Form 8832: Q&As

If you have any further questions about Form 8832 and if this is the best decision for your business, please feel free to contact us at Asena Advisor for a private consultation or check out the IRS’ entity classification election page, which will have a digital copy of the form. Click here to check the latter.

Speak with one of our consultants to learn more about how Entity Classification Election can help you.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Check-The-Box Regulations

Check-The-Box Regulations

Also known as the Regulations, the Check-The-Box regulations (CTB) is a classification process that allows an entity, if they so choose for U.S. tax purposes, to be recognized as a corporation or partnership. Entities that can be considered for CTB are those that have already been incorporated under federal or state law, associations, insurance companies, joint stock companies, state-owned entities, banks, publicly traded partnerships, and certain foreign entities.

When Did Check-The-Box Regulations Come Out?

The IRS declared in Notice 95-14 its intention to simplify the entity classification process. Final entity classification regulations under Internal Revenue Code 7701 and treasury regulations sections 301.7701-1 through 301.7701-3, also known as Check-the-Box or CTB regulations, went into effect on January 1, 1997, for all, whether they are domestic or foreign eligible entity. The regulations allow a qualified (or not automatically classified as a corporation) entity to be classified as a corporate (association) or a flow-through (partnership or an entity disregarded from its owner (DRE)) for U.S. income tax purposes if they wish so.

What Is A “Check-The-Box” Election (IRS Form 8832)?

A CTB election is an entity classification election for federal tax purposes made on Form 8832 – Entity Classification Election. The process can be relatively straightforward; you will need to select the appropriate box and the date that the election will become effective. 

What Is The Effect Of A Check The Box Election?

Regulations under a Check-The-Box election allow an eligible (i.e., not automatically classified as a corporation) entity to be classified as a corporation (association) or as a flow-through (a partnership or entity that is disregarded from its owner (DRE)) for U.S. federal tax purposes.

The CTB regulations permit U.S. investors to create limited liability partnerships (LLP) or companies to incorporate business entities in foreign countries, particularly civil law countries. That way, all members would enjoy limited liability, which would be treated as a corporation under foreign limited liability and could be treated as a partnership or disregarded entity under U.S. tax law. 

However, the entity cannot change its classification again for five years, with this limitation applying only to changes made by an election. Accordingly, a new eligible entity that elects from its default classification may change its classification by election at any time. 

The Benefits Of The US Check-The-Box Regulations

Now that we have defined what the CTB is, let’s go into more detail about the benefits that come with it:

Benefits Of Check-The-Box Regulations For Entities With Two Or More Members

In a domestic entity with two or more members, the default classification (if no CTB election is made) is that of a partnership. 

Some of the benefits of making a CTB election are:

    • A corporation, such as C Corporations, is considered a separate legal entity and continues in perpetuity. 
    • As a U.S. corporation, it can benefit from various Double Tax Treaties the U.S. has in force. 
Benefits Of Check-The-Box Regulations For Entities With One Member

The Default classification of a domestic entity with a single member is that it will be treated as a disregarded entity and, therefore, as a sole proprietorship. The same benefits will apply if an election is made to be taxed as a corporation.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Considerations On Whether To Check-The-Box For Foreign Subsidiaries

Following the benefits of CTB, the following are factors to take into mind before making a final decision:

Deferral And Timing Of Income

Due to U.S. taxpayers being taxed on a worldwide basis, U.S. owners of a transparent foreign entity are not able to defer or time the amount of U.S. tax on their foreign income. U.S. tax is payable when the income is earned, regardless of whether they repatriate the cash. 

Making a CTB election for your foreign subsidiary to be classified as a corporation gives the U.S. shareholder more flexibility on whether and when they want to receive a dividend from the foreign subsidiary. U.S. tax is only payable once the cash is distributed to the U.S. owner. 

Rate Differential

Suppose you decide to treat a foreign eligible entity as transparent. In that case, the U.S. owner is considered to be earning the entity’s income directly and, therefore, taxable at the U.S. owner’s marginal rate, which could be as high as 37%.

If you make an election to treat the foreign subsidiary as a corporation and separate entity, the tax rate would be 21% in the U.S. 

There are various tax planning opportunities available.

Use Of Foreign Losses

A US taxpayer may prefer a transparent entity initially to realize the current tax savings that foreign losses can provide.

Foreign Tax Credit Regime

This regime prevents U.S. taxpayers from paying U.S. tax on income that a foreign jurisdiction already has taxed. 

U.S. citizens and domestic corporations may credit income taxes paid to foreign countries (subject to limitations). Generally, a U.S. person may only claim a credit for the foreign income tax if they paid. 

However, Section. 902 allows domestic corporations to claim a credit for taxes paid by underlying foreign corporations as if the U.S. taxpayer paid these taxes directly. U.S. shareholders will then claim this deemed-paid credit in the same year the undistributed income is taxed. 

Can An LLC Check-The-Box?

Yes, an LLC can apply CTB regulations. Limited Liability Companies have the advantage of the flexibility and limited liability for their owners. However, from a tax and accounting perspective, it will take on the complexity of the box it checks. An LLC can therefore make a CTB election.

New Check-The-Box Rules Simplify Entity Classification

The new regulations simplify entity classification. These new rules divide business entities into three groups:

  • Those automatically classified as corporations – such as insurance companies, banking organizations, state-owned companies, and specific listed organizations formed outside of the U.S.
  • Those that may elect to be classified as partnerships or corporations – include all other business entities with at least two members.
  • Those that may elect to be classified as corporations or be disregarded for tax purposes – entities that may elect to be classified as corporations or be disregarded, include all business entities not in the group automatically classified as corporations with only a single owner.

Classifying Business Entities Under The Check-The-Box Regulations

If you already have a business, whether an LLC or Corporation, here are some ways to determine if it falls under CTB regulations.

Determining If a Separate Entity Exists

U.S. Federal tax laws are applied to determine whether a separate entity (S.E.). Local law will not be the determining factor. 

If a business entity, for example, has more than a single member, and if participants were to carry on a trade, financial operation, business, or venture, followed by dividing the resulting profits, an S.E. is considered to exist (even if one is or isn’t considered to exist under an applicable state law). A mere expense-sharing collaboration or mere co-ownership of an asset, however, does not create an S.E.

Automatic Classification as Corporation

Below are the following entities that are automatically classified as corporations:

    • A business entity is arranged under federal or state statute (or under the statute of a federally recognized Indian tribe) if that said statute should describe or refer to the entity as incorporated or a corporation, body corporate, or body politic. 
    • An association as determined under Regs. Sec. 301.7701-3, where an unincorporated entity that elects to be taxed as a corporation.
    • A business entity is arranged under a state statute if that same statute describes or refers to the entity as a joint-stock association or company.
    • A business entity is taxable as an insurance company.
    • A state-chartered business entity that is conducting banking activities, if any of its deposits are insured under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act. It is also amended or a similar federal statute.
    • A business entity that is completely owned by a state or political subdivision. Also, a business entity is completely owned by a foreign government.
    • Any business entity that can be taxable as a corporation under a provision of the Code other than Sec. 7701(a)(3). For example, include a publicly traded partnership, real estate investment trust, tax-exempt entity, or regulated investment company.
    • A foreign entity designated explicitly as a corporation (see Regs. Sec. 301.7701-2(b)(8) for a list).
    • A business entity with multiple charters and is treated as a corporation in any one of the jurisdictions.
Classifying unincorporated domestic single-owner entities

A newly formed domestic single-owner entity that cannot be automatically classified as a corporation — including a single-member limited liability company or an LLP is, by default, classified as a disregarded.

Classifying unincorporated domestic multi-owner entities

A newly formed domestic entity that has two or more owners, which is an eligible entity, is classified by default rules as a partnership.

The IRS ruled in Rev. Rul. 2004-77 that if an eligible entity has two members under local law. Still, suppose one of the members is a disregarded entity owned by the other member. In that case, the eligible entity cannot be classified as a partnership and be taxed as a disregarded entity or also elect to be taxed as a corporation.

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

Beware Of Tax Consequences Of Classification Changes

Taxpayers need to understand the tax treatment when an entity’s classification changes. If that entity changes its classification from a corporation to a partnership or a disregarded entity, the resulting tax consequence of that transaction will often be treated as a taxable liquidation.

Although it may be straightforward to file Form 8832 to change the classification of an entity, the tax exposure can be significant and immense.  

What Does It Mean When an LLC Checks The Box?

The IRS provides the following summary regarding the default rule:

  • A Limited Liability Company is an entity created by state statute.
  • Depending on elections made by Limited liability companies and the quantity of members, an LLC will be treated by the IRS as either a corporation, partnership, or a piece of the owner’s tax return (as a “disregarded entity”).
  • A domestic LLC that has, at minimum, two members is classified as a partnership for federal income tax purposes. That would apply unless the members decide to file Form 8832 and elects to be treated as a corporation.
  • For income tax purposes, limited liability companies that have a singular member will be treated as an entity that isn’t separate from its owner unless it files Form 8832 and affirmatively elects to be treated as a corporation. However, an LLC that only has a singular member is still considered a separate entity for employment tax and certain excise taxes.
For any more information on Check-The-Box regulations, contact Asena Advisors.

 

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

How to Avoid the Net Investment Income Tax

How to Avoid the Net Investment Income Tax

Ever since the net investment income tax, or NIIT, was introduced by the IRS, taxpayers have tried to understand this tax and at the same time try to avoid it. What follows is an introduction of what this tax entails, how it is triggered, the types of income that are and are not included, how to calculate it and, strategies for how to avoid or minimize it. 

What Is The Net Investment Income Tax?

This is a tax that is not widely understood by many people, but is a very important concept to learn about, especially if a large part of one’s income is derived from investments. 

Simply put, the NIIT is a 3.8 percent tax that is applied on certain investment income. For the purposes of calculating net investment income (NII), the IRS looks at income derived from investments (before any applicable taxes are applied) such as bonds, stocks, mutual funds, annuities, and loans (minus properly allocable expenses). 

The other way to think about this tax is that it is a surtax imposed on certain unearned income. The tax equals 3.8 percent of the lesser of the taxpayer’s NIIT, or the excess of the taxpayer’s modified gross income (MAGI) over a certain threshold (discussed later in this article). 

The tax applies to estates, trusts, families and individuals. However, certain income thresholds need to be met before the tax takes effect. 

When Did The Net Investment Income Tax Take Effect?

As is the case with all taxes, the main purpose for including NIIT as part of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, was to raise revenue. In this case, this surtax was used to help pay for the Affordable Care Act. The official name of this tax is actually “Unearned Income Medicare Contribution Tax,” which would logically imply that it is used to fund Medicare. However, this is not the case. The surtax is effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2012.

What Triggers Net Investment Income Tax?

In the case of individual taxpayers, section 1411(a)(1) of the tax code imposes a tax (in addition to any other tax imposed by subtitle A) for each taxable year equal to a tax rate of 3.8 percent of the lesser of the individual’s NII for that tax year, or the excess (if any) of the individual’s MAGI for that tax year, over the threshold amount. We will discuss the calculations behind this tax, later in this article.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

What Counts As Net Investment Income?

Net Investment Income Includes:

For the purposes of calculating this tax, net investment income includes short and long-term capital gains (as well as gains from the sale of investment real estate, and gains from the sale of interests in partnerships and S corporations to the extent the partner or shareholder was a passive owner), taxable interest income, rental and royalty income, qualified and non-qualified dividends, passive income from investments, business income from trading financial instruments or commodities, and taxable portion of non-qualified annuity payments (for example, Roth IRAs). 

It Doesn’t Include:

In general, NII does not include wages, unemployment income, operating business income from a non-passive activity, Social Security Benefits, alimony, tax-exempt interest, self-employment income, municipal bonds, Alaska Permanent Fund Dividends and distributions from certain qualified plans (those described in sections 401(a), 403(a), 403(b), 408, 408A or 457(b) of the tax code), such as qualified annuities.

What Is Exempt From NIIT?

The NIIT does not apply to any portion of a gain that is excluded from regular income tax. Therefore, gains from sale of a principal residence are excluded from the NIIT unless the gain exceeds the principal residence exclusion amount of $250,000 (for a single filer) or $500,000 (if filing jointly with your spouse).

In addition, non-resident aliens (NRAs), who are individuals that are neither U.S. citizens nor U.S. residents, are not subject to this tax. The U.S. Treasury regulations state that in the case of a U.S. citizen or resident who is married to a non-resident alien individual, the spouses will be treated as married filing separately for purposes of section 1411. The U.S. citizen or resident spouse will be subject to the threshold amount for a married taxpayer filing a separate return, and the non-resident alien spouse will not be subject to the NIIT.

Who’s Subject To The Net Investment Income Tax?

All individuals who file tax returns, except NRAs, are subject to NIIT if they have NII and MAGI over the aforementioned taxable income thresholds. 

Trusts and estates that have undistributed NII and an AGI greater than the highest tax bracket applicable will be subject to this tax. 

Is Your MAGI Greater Than The Threshold?

For the purposes of meeting the threshold to be subject to this tax, the MAGI amounts are:

  • Married filing jointly — $250,000
  • Married filing separately — $125,000
  • Single or head of household — $200,000 or
  • Qualifying widow(er) with a child — $250,000

How To Calculate The NIIT?

The tax itself is computed on Form 8960 of one’s U.S. tax return. Individual filers report and pay the tax on Form 1040, while trusts and estates report and pay this tax on Form 1041. 

For purposes of calculating NII, modified adjusted gross income is a household’s AGI, with certain deductions and tax-exempt interest payments, such as contributions from individual retirement accounts (IRAs), included again. The relevant deductions for purposes of AGI are listed on Schedules 1, 2, and 3 of Form 1040. If your MAGI is higher than the thresholds for your filing status, you will need to pay NIIT.

The next step is to calculate your NII based on the included income stated above. Before you can calculate your NII, however, you first need to ascertain what your gross investment income is. This is the amount prior to considering any eligible deductions (which are discussed later in this article). 

Once you arrive at the gross investment income, it will be reduced by deductions allowed against the income tax which are properly allocable to those items of gross income or net gain to arrive at the NII. 

Finally, the amount that will be subject to NIIT at a rate of 3.8 percent will therefore vary as follows: 

  • If your NII is higher than the amount by which MAGI surpasses the threshold, the tax applies to your MAGI
  • If your NII is lower than the amount by which MAGI surpasses the threshold, the tax applies to your NII

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

Will I Have To Pay Both The 3.8% Net Investment Income Tax And The Additional .9% Medicare Tax?

You may be subject to both taxes, but not on the same type of income, as these two taxes apply to different types of income. The 0.9 percent additional Medicare tax applies to individuals’ wages, compensation, and self-employment income over certain thresholds, but it does not apply to income items included in NII.

Can Tax Credits Reduce My NIIT Liability?

Indeed, any tax credit that is allowed to offset a tax liability imposed by subtitle A of the tax code may be used to offset the NII. However, if the tax credit is only allowed to be offset against tax imposed by Chapter 1 of the tax code, such as regular income tax, that credit may not reduce the NIIT. For instance, foreign tax credits may not be used to reduce NIIT exposure in the U.S., as they are only allowed to offset a tax liability on regular income tax. Further, foreign tax credits are only allowed against taxes imposed by IRC Chapter 1. 

Strategies To Avoid Or Reduce The Tax

There are various strategies and planning opportunities to either reduce your NII or reduce your MAGI, which will result in reduced taxable income. No blanket strategy or planning tool exists, and due to the complex nature of the NIIT, it is advisable to consult professionals such as your tax advisor or CPA on possible mitigation. The IRS will not be lenient if these regulations are willfully avoided. This is why it is so important to get advice from a tax advisor who has experience dealing with these sorts of matters.

Tips For Managing Your Investments

As stated previously, no blanket strategy or planning tool exists, due to the complex nature of this tax. However, if you do have investment income and if you think you will be subject to this tax, there may be deductions available for you to take advantage of.

Some examples of deductions which may be properly allocable to gross investment income include brokerage fees, investment advisory fees, tax preparation fees, fiduciary expenses (which only apply to estates and trusts), interest expense, investment advisory fees, expenses incurred in relation to royalty and rental income, and state and local income taxes. 

If the deductions are not properly allocable to gross investment income, then they will not be allowed. For instance, brokerage fees that are not properly allocable will not be allowed as a deduction. The instructions to Form 8960 provide examples of deductions that are not deductible for NII purposes; for example, deductions for contributions to IRAs or other qualified plans. 

Additionally, special rules apply for traders of financial instruments and commodities regarding the deduction of expenses in relation to self-employment income.

 

If you have further questions or want to begin the process, reach out to one of our Asena consultants.

Arin Vahanian

Peter Harper

Sole Proprietorship vs LLC

Sole Proprietorship Vs. LLC: What’s The Difference?

It is most likely for individuals and small business owners to structure their businesses as either sole proprietorships or LLCs. Suitability of structuring your business as one or the other arises because of slight differences in formations and protections of each entity.

Sole Proprietorship
  • The easiest business structure is the sole proprietorship, as it has minimal startup costs for entrepreneurs. The set-up of a formal structure is not required.
  • They are run by a single individual who owns all the business assets and is responsible for all the liabilities.
  • The IRS automatically considers a business structure operating in a natural person’s name as a sole proprietorship. 
  • A sole proprietorship’s owner is personally liable for any financial losses and debts that may arise during trading.
Limited Liability Company (‘LLC’)
  • An LLC is a business entity that can have one or more owners. A formal structure is required as owners must file articles of organization with the secretary of state to form the LLC.
  • An LLC provides its owners (referred to as members) with limited liability, meaning members are not personally liable for business debts and claims.
  • An LLC is a pass-through entity; by default, the IRS classifies single-member LLCs as sole proprietorships and multimember LLCs as partnerships for tax purposes. The members may also elect to have the LLCs taxed as S-Corporations or C-Corporations by filing the necessary forms with the IRS.
  • An LLC can be member-managed, or an election can be made to have third parties manage the entity.

Why Change or Convert a Sole Proprietorship to an LLC

Changing and converting your business from a sole proprietorship to an LLC may be worthwhile if you’d like to grow your business and to engage in more risk than before. LLCs provide members with limited liability protection, which does not apply to sole proprietorships. 

Multiple owners can also own LLCs, while individuals may be more willing to invest in an LLC than a sole proprietorship as they will be entitled to some share of the business profits.

The Pros And Cons Of Each Business Structure

Sole Proprietorship
Pros of Sole Proprietorships
      • Forming a sole proprietorship is less expensive and requires less paperwork. (Licenses and permits could still be mandatory depending on the nature of the business)
      • The net business income of the sole proprietorship is included in the owner’s personal income tax returns. The tax rate applied to the business profits depends on the owner’s individual tax rate.
      • The owner of a sole proprietorship is solely responsible for all management decisions and responsibilities. Therefore, board/member resolutions are not required when any decisions regarding the business need to be made.
Cons of Sole Proprietorships 
      • Owners have personal liability for all debts and claims of the company, and their personal assets may be at risk to settle unpaid debts and other legal liabilities of the business.
      • Owners of sole proprietorships will be required to use their own resources (capital or credit facilities) to fund their startups, as they cannot provide external investors with any securities in the form of stocks.
Limited Liability Company (LLC)
Pros of an LLC 
      • An LLC is considered as a separate entity from its members. Subsequently, members are not personally liable for the business’s debts and other legal liabilities (i.e., they have limited liability protection). 
      • Members of LLCs include the business profits in their individual tax returns because the LLC is classified as a pass-through entity. Furthermore, members may be able to apply the 20% pass-through deduction to business profits.
      • LLCs may have fewer state-imposed filing requirements than corporations.
Cons of an LLC 
      • Forming an LLC is more expensive than setting up a sole proprietorship, and depending on the state requirements, ongoing fees may be imposed annually.
      • Members of LLCs receive units in proportion to their contribution/LLC agreement. These units are not as easy to transfer as stocks in a corporation. This difficulty in transferring ownership is one of the reasons that external investors/venture capitalists prefer investing in corporations over LLCs.

 

Where should I form my LLC?

An LLC typically forms in the state in which the business activities of the entity will be conducted. It is possible to create the LLC in a different state; however, the LLC will then be classified as a Foreign LLC, which may lead to additional filing requirements with the secretary of state and higher administrative costs in most states. The IRS has special rules for foreign LLCs and must be considered if this option is elected.

Responsibilities As An LLC Owner

The members’ responsibilities will be decided in the LLC operating agreement. This will detail whether the owners have elected to have the LLC be member-managed or manager-managed. If the LLC is member-managed, the members will be responsible for the day-to-day management of the LLC. If the LLC is manager-managed, the members are responsible for electing suitable individuals to make management decisions and oversee the entity’s operations. 

Members also need to ensure that the business complies with the formalities and filing requirements of the relevant state to ensure that the LLC does not lose its limited liability protections.

How To Transition A Sole Proprietorship To An LLC

Dissolving or canceling any registered Fictitious Business Names or Doing Business As (DBAs)

If the sole proprietorship was trading under a different name, the necessary documentation must be filed with the state to dissolve or withdraw the current DBA. After that, you can use the same name to register your LLC if the name is not already registered to another LLC.

Choosing a business name

The new LLC name needs to be distinguishable from all other registered entities. You can start searching on the state’s business search tool.

Selecting a registered agent

A registered agent is an individual or company who will be responsible for receiving legal correspondence and documentation on behalf of the company. It may be one of the members or an attorney/accountant.

Filing Articles of Organization

While it may differ from state to state, this document needs to detail the name and address of the LLC, the contact details and names of the owners, the application date, and a description of the new business.

Drafting an operating agreement

The operating agreement is an internal document that needs to be drafted by members and will set out the rules for ownership and the management of the newly formed LLC. It will detail what will happen if additional members are introduced to the LLC, if the LLC will be liquidated, or if members leave the LLC.

Applying for an Employer Identification Number (EIN)

As LLCs are pass-through entities, an application for a new EIN number needs to be obtained if the LLC will be multimember or if the election is made by its members to be taxed as a corporation.

Opening a bank account

A bank account for any new business needs to be opened in the name of your LLC to ensure a clear separation between the LLC funds and the members’ personal funds. This also eases the management of assets and allows for more accurate recordkeeping.

Contacting licensing agencies

Suppose the nature of the business requires the LLC to obtain business licenses or permits to operate. In that case, the relevant agencies need to be contacted to ensure that the licenses or permits are transferred from the sole proprietor to the newly formed LLC.

Updating business information

Inform clients and other stakeholders of the new business to ensure they issue invoices and payments to the newly formed LLC and no longer to the sole proprietor. Insurance companies must be advised of the change from a sole proprietorship to an LLC to advise if a new business insurance policy may be required.

Reviewing your current contracts

Please review the current contracts between the sole proprietorship and its clients to ensure they can be transferred to the newly formed LLC. These contracts need to be updated between clients and your LLC and are no longer the personal name of the owner of the sole proprietorship.

Necessary Documents

Documents required for the transition from a sole proprietorship to an LLC include (but may not be limited to in some states):

  • Articles of Organization 
  • Operating Agreement
  • Form 8832 if the members elect to change the default classification of the IRS.

Stop using your Sole Proprietorship

Ensure that all the payments and checks have cleared and close the bank account of the sole proprietorship. Update all existing contracts and insurance policies to include the newly formed LLC, not the sole proprietorship.

Maintaining Your Limited Liability Protections

Members of the LLC need to ensure that they do not pierce the corporate veil by providing that business assets do not get mixed with their personal assets. Should this be the case, your LLC risks losing its limited liability protection.

 

If you would like a consultation on which is best for you, contact Asena Family Office.

Jean-dré Tombisa

Peter Harper

Grantor vs Trustee

Grantor vs. Trustee

When dealing with a grantor trust, given the legal, tax, and financial implications, it is essential to have a clear understanding of the various roles within a trust, as well as the duties and responsibilities of each role. Indeed, you may be surprised to know that good teamwork, even within the confines of a trust, often means the difference between everything going smoothly and, on the other hand, friction and outcomes that are not necessarily desirable.

While this article is not an exhaustive resource, it explains the differences between a grantor, trustee, and beneficiary, and the trustee’s duties. There are multiple types of trusts and many terms bandied about, such as a revocable trust or irrevocable trust (and a grantor trust can be either of these) or a revocable living trust. However, we will only discuss the general aspects of trust roles. In addition, as there are many questions surrounding the concept of probate, and while estate planning is a vital topic on its own (not to mention the implications of estate tax), we will not discuss those in this article. Still, we will hopefully lay the groundwork for a better understanding of these topics in future articles. 

What Is The Definition Of A Grantor?

Also commonly referred to as the owner, settlor, or trustor, this person contributes property (such as real estate), other funds, or even instruments such as life insurance to the trust. The property and the grantor’s funds become part of the trust corpus (in other words, the trust’s assets). It is crucial to note that a trust can have more than one grantor. For instance, if more than one person funded a grantor trust, they will each be treated as a grantor in proportion to the value of the cash or property they transferred to the trust. 

We should also note that the grantor is the person who retains the power to control or direct the trust’s income or assets. This is crucial to understand, especially when dealing with a foreign trust and the income tax treatment surrounding this instrument. Pulling from one of our previous articles, the grantor can also be any person who creates a trust or directly or indirectly makes a gratuitous transfer of property to a trust. If someone creates or funds a trust on behalf of another, they are treated as the trust’s grantors. It’s not only imperative to understand for estate planning but also as it relates to estate tax and, of course, probate, which is a scenario that individuals attempt to avoid by creating an instrument such as a revocable living trust.  

What Is The Definition Of A Trustee?

A trustee is a person or entity appointed to administer assets or property for the benefit of a third party, in this case, for a trust. The grantor must designate a trustee to administer the wishes outlined in the trust that will best exercise said grantor’s wishes and maintain asset protection to completion of the transferral or otherwise. As we will discuss later, the grantor and the trust can be the same person. 

Difference Between Grantor And Trustee

The differences between the grantor vs the trustee are numerous. Still, it is essential to point out that trustees are individuals or companies that will be holding and managing assets for a trust and its beneficiaries when the grantor dies. In contrast, the grantor is the person who owns the trust and who appoints the trustee, who specifies the terms of the trust document. As well as someone who has ideally created the trust for purposes such as appropriate financial and tax planning and avoiding probate (which can be accomplished with a revocable trust or irrevocable trust). 

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

There Are Three Elements To The “Trust” Document

While trust documents vary in length and scope, certain elements exist in every basic trust document.

The “Grantor”

As mentioned previously, this is the person who creates the trust. They will contribute assets to the trust and, with the help of an attorney, write up the trust agreement that will govern the administration of the trust.

The “Trustee”

The trustee is the person or entity charged with administering the trust in accordance with the terms of the agreement, as set forth by the grantor. The trustee acts as the legal owner of trust assets and is responsible for handling any assets held in a trust. The trustee also typically handles tax filings for the trust and distributes the assets according to the trust document. Whether or not a trustee is paid for their work, they must act prudently in the management of trust property and trust income. If not, they will be liable for breach of trust for failing to exercise proper care, which can lead to the trust fund suffering a loss due to their negligence. Therefore, it is essential to take great care in appointing a trustee, as this is not something they should do flippantly. If a trustee dies or becomes incapacitated, a successor trustee will generally take over this role. 

Accountability of trustee

Although a trustee has far-reaching powers, they may not simply do whatever they want. The law enforces strict obligations and rules for a trustee to follow, such as accounting for any benefits they might have acquired from a trust, whether directly or indirectly. This goes even beyond fraudulent abuse of position by a trustee. 

Duty of Trustee is to obey trust document for benefit of beneficiaries

Building upon the previous point, we must never forget that a trustee is required to obey the stipulations of the grantor trust document for the specific benefit of the beneficiaries. A trustee’s responsibilities are often disclosed in the trust document, and any power not explicitly given cannot be exercised, with certain narrow exceptions. Again, that the trustee has a duty to carry out the trust following its exact terms.

Fiduciary relationship of trustee

We often hear the term “fiduciary” when discussing estates and trusts. In this case, the role of fiduciary means that one is held to high standards in protecting a trust’s investments and distribution. Specifically, the trustee has to obey the directions of the trust document for the benefit of the beneficiaries. 

The Trustee Can Have No Private Advantage

What do we mean by “private advantage” here? Simply put, a trustee may not derive any advantage, directly or indirectly, from a trust unless expressly permitted by the trust. For instance, in a case where a trustee is a professional trustee, and the trust specifically provides a right to make reasonable charges for services rendered, the trustee may do so. However, fully disclosure of the basis and amount of charges will be required. Another aspect of private advantage is that a trustee is not permitted to use or deal with trust assets for private direct or indirect advantage. Courts have held trustees personally liable to account for breaches of the trustee’s obligations. If appointed as a trustee, they must always remember this crucial point. 

The Trustee Must Have The Best Interests Of The Beneficiaries

It seems very obvious to mention that trustees must exercise all their powers in the best interests of the trust’s beneficiaries. The trustee is obligated to have the highest duty of loyalty to the beneficiaries in order to administer the trust solely with the best of intentions, putting aside their own personal gain. At no point can there be conflicts of interest, and if there are any to arise, it must be fully disclosed immediately.

The Trustee Must Act Prudently And Is Under Fiduciary Duty To Do So

Related to the previous point, the trustee has a duty to protect and preserve the trust property. They must also defend the grantor trust and the beneficiaries against anyone who would challenge the trust’s validity or seek to appropriate the trust’s assets. Something also important to mention, but may not be self-evident, is that the trustee must make the trust’s assets productive. What does this mean? The trustee must act prudently or sensibly when investing, acquiring, selling, and managing the trust’s assets. Therefore, as mentioned previously, the trustee is also generally responsible for handling the tax return for the trust. Therefore, appropriate income tax planning for both the trust and the beneficiaries is one of a trustee’s responsibilities. It is clear that a trustee’s duties are numerous and, given their great importance, should not be taken lightly. 

The “Beneficiaries”

While we have mentioned beneficiaries many times in this article, the general definition of a beneficiary is the individual who will receive distributions from the trust, whether they are a family member or a fellow corporation member of the grantor. 

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

Who Is Considered The Grantor Of A Trust?

After everything we’ve learned about this role, the trust grantor will usually be regarded by the IRS as the person who funds and/or possesses control of the trust.

Can A Trust Grantor Be The Trustee?

Note that the grantor can act as the trustee while they are still alive and of sound mind to maintain total control of the resources.

How Do The Trust, Grantor, Trustee and Beneficiary All Work Together?

Like any good sports team, there has to be good communication, cooperation, and a mutual understanding of the shared goals between the grantor, trustee, and beneficiary, for the orders of the trust document to be correctly applied. In this scenario, the grantor designates who the trustee will be, and the trustee, in turn, will manage the trust’s assets per the terms of the trust document. As a beneficiary, while the trustee cannot withhold trust assets from you (unless specified within the trust document), the grantor sets forth the stipulations for distribution and can give the trustee the power to decide when you receive the payments. Therefore, all parties involved must maintain a good relationship with each other and buy into the understanding that the outcomes specified by the trust document can only become a reality if everyone is working together toward the end goal.

 

 Contact Asena Family Office for a detailed understanding of Single Member LLC Taxes.

Arin Vahanian

Peter Harper

Estate Planning For Ultra High Net Worth


A common process that any person will need to prepare for is estate planning. Covering the transfer of assets after your passing, this final action involves both professional advisors who are familiar with your family and/or business structure to best hand off your property and monetary values to appointed beneficiaries according to your wishes.

Those with high net worths, especially ultra-high net worth, should be especially engaged into estate planning, as having assets that are larger in both quantity and quality than most others requires extensive protection from pitfalls and complications due to your unique position. 

Why Is Estate Planning Important For High Net Worth Families And Individuals?

Estate planning is essential for high net worth families and individuals because of the risk that an estate will be liable for estate tax on the death of the decedent and because without an estate plan, family members may fight about the distribution of wealth to the next generation.

What Net Worth Is Considered High Net Worth?

Great question. It depends on who you ask: high net worth is considered to be someone with at least $1M in liquid assets, and an Ultra high net worth individual has a net worth of at least $30M, including their home. For most institutions today, a client is high net worth if they have a net worth of $5M or more and ultra-high net worth if they have a net worth of $50M or more.

Is Estate Planning For The Rich?

Estate tax planning may be for the rich, but estate planning is for everyone. If you are concerned about how your assets or wealth will be distributed when you die, you need an estate plan. 

At What Point Are You Or Your Family Considered High Net Worth?

When your net worth reaches $30M to $50M, translating to, in the real world, having enough capital to sustain your family without the need to work.

10 Estate Planning Strategies For Ultra High Net Worth Families

Preparing for the future is unique for each individual and their families, as mentioned earlier. Considering your overall assets, estate, financial protections, and any income taxes that your beneficiaries will be handling on your behalf, I would recommend these strategies that are flexible to best provide to your wishes:

Save Through Gifting

The net estate of a decedent is liable for estate tax at the Marginal rates of 18% to 40% after the current estate tax and gift tax exemption of $11.7M (I.e., the unified tax credit) if a donor has not previously utilized the uniform credit to exempt gifts made during their lifetime from gift tax. For this reason, gifting is considered an effective planning tool for Ultra High Net Worth Families looking to reduce their exposure to estate tax or gift tax; this is a pre-eminent estate planning strategy. It is also a mechanism to defer capital gains tax, and for this reason, we like to point out that the benefit of gifting is just as valuable in capital gains tax as in estate tax and gift tax.

Gifting can happen by a direct gift of an asset from a donor to a beneficiary, or in some form of trust such as a Grantor Retained Annuity Trust, an Intentionally Defective Irrevocable Trust, or some other form of an irrevocable trust.

This use of the unified tax credit is something that you should discuss with your CPA on an annual basis. CPAs that do not track this do not understand the difficulties that may exist if you do not plan sufficiently. There is a chance that it negatively impacts your estate plan in the long term.

Split Family Income

The movement of assets from an individual’s name to some form of structure will allow the family the flexibility to split income across a broader range of beneficiaries and assets while simultaneously protecting them from risk and maintaining control. An estate plan can split the rights of beneficiaries into multiple classes and categories and ensure that beneficiaries have the appropriate rights that fit a donor’s objectives.

Charitable Giving

Charitable giving is another way of removing assets from the estate of an Ultra High Net Worth Family who wishes to move wealth outside the estate of a decedent and reduce the risk of applying estate tax.

Life Insurance

The maintenance of life insurance can be a critical estate planning strategy. Life insurance can be term or permanent, ‘whole of life’ insurance. By maintaining an insurance policy, a family can use it to protect against estate tax risk. Death benefits paid from life insurance are tax-free, so they can be a valuable tool to fund estate tax. However, to ensure that the death benefit is not part of the decedent’s estate, it is critical to ensure that the beneficial owner is not the decedent.

Establish A Family Limited Partnership

A family can substantially reduce the value of assets that are being transferred to children by establishing a Family Limited Partnership and contributing assets to that partnership. Partnership interests with certain restrictions that result in them not being easily marketable can reduce the valuation of such interest under US estate tax laws. This is why Family Limited Partnerships are one of the most pre-eminent structures for Ultra High Net Worth Families that are conducting US estate planning.

Plan For Business Succession

Business succession planning happens to be one of the most crucial estate planning strategies of any advanced estate plan. It involves an owner determining who would own, control, and manage a business in the event of the death or disability of the patriarch or matriarch. 

In many cases, business succession planning is committed to writing. Then the business owner codifies the plan through an appropriately drafted partnership agreement (for an LLC) or constitution or shareholders agreement (for a Corporation).

Pass On Vacation Property

Some families have a sentimental attachment to places where they spend their summers as children. Usually, this signifies that they have obtained the real estate in a more peaceful location within the US or abroad. For this reason, when the families think about legacy and longevity, they think about the way they could perverse the use of a vacation home for future generations.

The transfer and maintenance of properties for multiple generations are not without challenges. Not all family members will think about the property the same way, nor will their spouses. A lot of challenges can tend to result from families not leaving sufficient capital to fund the maintenance of the property.

For this reason, families need to consider the optimal structure for the ownership of a vacation home. Is it in a trust or some form of family partnership? As has been outlined for the Family Limited Partnerships, there may be some estate tax benefits if the ownership of the property is structured in such a way that the interests have limited marketability.

Consolidate Assets

Any estate plan should be structured and focus on consolidating assets. Removing complexity is key to ensuring that the family can run the family assets like a business, which can be, for many Ultra High Net Worth families, the birthplace of their family’s family office. 

Incapacitation Planning

Any estate plan should consider how affairs will be managed if the decedent dies or if they because incapacitated. In the US, these issues may grant the executor of your estate power of attorney and/or a living will.

Instill Financial Responsibility

For Ultra High Net Worth Families, the single most significant risk that the family will go shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves within three generations is the failure of the patriarch or matriarch to educate their family on what it means to be financially responsible. 

The idea of the family office really shines in this scenario. It is a framework by which a family establishes minimum criteria for a family to share in the fruits of a family’s labor. 

It is evident when a family has not invested in their children’s education. There is an unhealthy amount of competition between the parents and their children. If the parents are the first generation, there is a sense that they had to struggle, so their children need to figure it out. If the parents are the second generation, in many cases, it is a failure of the parents to understand their role as custodians of family wealth.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Learning The Tax Laws In Your State

The Estate Tax laws of each state are not identical to the federal laws. Any person that is drafting an estate plan needs to understand the estate tax laws in the state where they live and the state in which they expect to die.

Estate Planning Pitfalls To Avoid

The biggest pitfall to avoid is not having a will or not having a valid will. Ultra High Net Worth individuals need to understand where they are domiciled and the laws by which their assets will be governed if they die. Different countries have different requirements for the witnessing and authentication of wills, how they are witnessed, how they are signed, the process for probating the will, and how assets pass under a will, and how individuals under the will must transfer tax remaining from you. In some countries, getting married will invalidate a will predating that marriage. 

The second biggest pitfall for non-US citizen Ultra High Net Worth individuals does not understand whether or not you are domiciled in the US. Your status as a US domiciliary or non-domiciliary can significantly impact your ability to make nontaxable gifts during your lifetime or transfer nontaxable assets on your death. 

These issues should be discussed in detail with an estate planning attorney specializing in drafting comprehensive estate plans.

Retirement Planning For High-Income Earners

Retirement Planning is important for any individual regardless of whether they are Ultra High Net Worth. It is less about the investments chosen to grow or preserve capital but more about understanding the extent of an individual’s needs and whether the capital allocated for use upon retirement is sufficient to meet an individual’s after-tax (I.e., earnings net of income tax) objectives.

Should I Hire A Wealth Management Firm?

Wealth Management Firms are a crucial component of determining an individual’s estate plan, but they are one of a number of advisors critical to a successful result. 

The most important thing is the effectiveness of a strategic holistic financial and estate plan, and investment selection will be a natural progression of the success of that process. 

High Net Worth Estate Planning is Complex

High Net Worth Estate Planning for international clients connected with the US is extremely complex. You need to consider tax, trust, and probate laws in multiple countries. 

We strongly recommend that clients think through the strategic objectives of their estate plan in the first instance and then engage a team of experts on these issues and their application to their individual circumstances.

Additional Issues For High Net Worth Estate Planning

Though estate planning can be beneficial, additional issues or questions can arise while deciding if this is for you.

High Net Worth Estate Planning Is Complex

From choosing the right advisors to learning which financial laws/taxes are applied to your unique assets, all and more can be difficult to navigate for yourself and your loved ones when deciding how to plan for the future, especially with any loopholes, pitfalls, or surprises that might occur along the way. However, complex doesn’t have to mean difficult when paired with accurate information and expert advice on what is best for your legacy.

Why Plan When It Will Only Benefit After You Die?

While estate planning does affect after your passing, preparing all your assets before this will help finalize all legal and tax planning procedures with your active participation, giving you and others peace of mind before your time comes.

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

FAQ

  1. How much money do you need for ultra-high net worth? 
  2. Is estate planning for the rich? 
    • No. Individuals from any economic background can start estate planning if they wish to pass on their assets to family, friends, companies, etc.
  3. What net worth is considered high net worth? 

 

If you have any questions about estate planning or ultra-high net worths, please reach out to Asena for more in-depth advice. 

Peter Harper

Convert LLC to C Corp

Can You Convert An LLC To A Corporation?

Yes, you can convert your Limited Liability Company (LLC) to a corporation. However, understanding the income tax consequences of such a conversion is essential.

Why Should You Consider Converting Your LLC To A C-Corp?

Some of the reasons to convert an LLC to a C-Corp are listed below:

  • Corporations can implement share option agreements making it easier to offer employees equity with share options as incentives; 
  • Most investors prefer investing in corporations due to receiving equity in return and thus attractive for potential investors;
  • Ownership of shares is more straightforward to transfer than interests held in an LLC; and
  • Certain states, such as Delaware, provide corporations with additional tax benefits.

LLCs And Corporations: Similarities And Differences 

LLCs and Corporations both provide their owners with limited liability protection, and each can own assets and take on obligations.

Management Complexity

LLC owners are referred to as “members” and can elect member management, or third parties can be brought in to manage the day-to-day operations. This option provides members with more flexibility. Some states may require the filing of annual reports.

Corporation management is more rules bound and includes appointing a board of directors who must have regular meetings, create minutes, ensure record-keeping and file annual reports. State laws may require filing annual reports, including detailed financial information of the corporation.

Taxes

By default, an LLC is taxed as a pass-through entity, meaning that the owner/s file and pay taxes on the LLC profits in their personal tax returns. Members could choose to be taxed as a corporation; however, such an election is not a common practice due to the double taxation of a C-Corp.

C-Corps are not disregarded for tax purposes; therefore, a taxpayer is separate from its shareholders. The C-Corp pays corporate tax on the business profits made, and if dividends are declared to the shareholders, dividends tax applies. (This double tax may not be applicable for Delaware corporations where the shareholders live outside of Delaware).

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

S Corporations vs. C Corporations

Similarities
  • Both entities are created by filing Articles of Incorporation with the relevant state agency and provide their owners with limited liability protection. 
  • They are owned by shareholders who appoint directors and corporate officers.
  • They are required to file annual reports, have annual meetings and pay annual fees.
  • Both require bylaws.
Differences
  • The pass-through laws apply when taxing an S-Corp, meaning that the shareholders pay tax on business profits in their personal capacity. For a C-Corp, the business profits are subject to corporate tax, while the distributions made to shareholders are further subject to dividends tax. Effectively, corporate profits are double taxed.
  • S-Corps have additional restrictions imposed regarding ownership. There may only be a maximum of 100 shareholders, and these individual shareholders must be US persons. 
  • S-Corps may only issue one class of shares, while a C-Corp is permitted to issue multiple classes of shares – e.g., ordinary and preferred shares.

Understanding The Different Types Of Conversions

The methods to convert your LLC are briefly described below.

Statutory Conversions

This method is relatively new and is available in most states. 

LLC members must file a few forms with the secretary of state’s office requesting approval for the conversion. 

All assets and liabilities of an LLC are transferred to the newly formed corporation, and the conversion occurs by operation of law rather than through formal agreements and additional filings – a significant difference between this method and others.

Statutory Merger

A statutory merger requires the registration of a new corporation, drafting additional agreements, and filing additional forms.

Non-Statutory Merger

Perhaps the most expensive and complex type of conversion, assets and liabilities of the LLC are not allowed to be automatically transferred to the newly formed corporation. Multiple special agreements may be required to affect this transfer and exchanges.

Advantages Of Converting To A C Corporation

  • LLCs cannot issue stock to its members, and therefore c-corps are more attractive investment opportunities for venture capitalists, corporation accelerators, and other investors looking to invest in startups via equity;
  • Stocks can be reserved to be issued to employees as performance benefits;
  • C-Corps can continuously offer equity to investors when capital injections are required.

Disadvantages Of Converting To A C-Corporation

  • Corporate tax and dividends tax;
  • Conversion costs could be expensive;
  • Corporations may have additional annual filing requirements and fees.

Qualifications Needed For Switching From An LLC To A Corporation

To qualify for the conversion of an LLC to a corporation, the ownership restrictions should be considered. This is especially the case when the LLC elects to be taxed as an S-Corp.

How To Convert An LLC Into A Corporation? 

The following are three major directions to consider when transitioning an LLC into a corporation:

Statutory Conversion
    • LLC members need to prepare and approve a conversion plan;
    • Submission of a certificate of conversion and an LLC certificate along with other legally required documentation
Statutory Merger
    • Form a new corporation with the LLC members as corporation shareholders;
    • The LLC members will vote to approve the merger – both in their capacity as LLC members and corporation shareholders;
    • The LLC members will formally exchange their membership rights for shares in the new corporation;
    • A certificate of merger is filed along with other legally required documentation; and
    • Formally liquidate and dissolve the LLC by submitting the necessary forms
Non-Statutory Conversion
    • Form a new corporation;
    • The assets and liabilities belonging to the LLC are to be formally transferred to the new corporation;
    • Arrange for the formal exchange of the membership interests of the LLC for the shares in the corporation; and
    • Formally liquidate and dissolve the LLC by submitting the necessary forms.
    • The following methods described by the IRS in Revenue Ruling 84-111 need to be considered as well, namely:
      • “Assets-over” conversion: 
        • The LLC assets are transferred to the corporation for all the authorized stock. Terminate the LLC by distributing all the stock in the corporation to the members.
      • “Assets-up” conversion: 
        • The LLC is terminated by distributing all the assets and liabilities to the members. The authorized stock in the new corporation is then transferred to the members in exchange for the assets. 
        • The corporation will also assume all the liabilities previously adopted by the members.
      • “Interest-over” conversion: 
        • The LLC members transfer their interests in the LLC in exchange for all the corporation’s authorized shares. The corporation will then hold the assets and liabilities, and the LLC will be terminated.

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

When Should You Convert LLC To C Corp?

The conversion from an LLC to a C-Corp would be most advantageous in the following circumstances:

You are a startup and are interesting in joining an accelerator:

Incorporation is an additional selling point for accelerators or incubators who might purchase equity in the company.

You’d like to attract venture capital:

Venture capitalists and angel investors favor investing in corporations as they will receive equity in exchange for their investment (statistically, venture capitalists prefer Delaware C-Corps).

You want to give your employees some equity:

The ownership structure of LLCs does not permit them to incentivize employees with share options without the employees becoming partners/members – this is possible with a corporation as shares can be reserved for employee share options.

Do You Need A New EIN When Converting LLC To C Corp?

Since an LLC is created utilizing state statute, the IRS has not established an income tax classification for these entities. 

However, you will be required to obtain a new EIN if any of the following statements are true.

You will not be required to obtain a new EIN if any of the following statements are true.

Tax Consequences From Changing An LLC To A Corporation

When converting an LLC to a corporation, it is crucial to understand what type of tax status already exists in the LLC. The tax status of the LLC determines how the company will be converted. 

A conversion of an LLC to a corporation can have significant tax consequences based on the transactions deemed to occur due to your conversion.

Suppose an election is made in terms of Form 8832 to change classification from a disregarded entity to a corporation. In that case, it’ll be considered as if the disregarded entity’s owner provided all assets and liabilities to the corporation in exchange for stock.

When a business entity experiences a transition in elective classification status from a disregarded entity to a corporation, the change ought to be treated as a transfer of all assets and liabilities kept by the owner of a former disregarded entity to a newly formed corporation. The disregarded entity’s owner will also be treated as the transferor, potentially resulting in unforeseen tax implications. 

Changing The LLC’s Tax Status

As LLCs are not recognized as taxable entities, single-member LLCs are taxed as sole proprietors, and multimember LLCs are taxed as partnerships by default. 

Members can elect to change the tax status of LLCs by using the “check-the-box” classification. LLCs are eligible entities, and IRS Form 2553 needs to be filed to be taxed as an S-Corporation, while an IRS Form 8832 needs to be filed to be taxed as a C-Corporation.

The instructions on the forms need to be followed, completed, and submitted to the IRS. The election is effective from the date specified on the forms. The effective date cannot be more than 75 days prior, too, and not more than 12 months after the election is filed.

The change in tax status from a multimember LLC can trigger a taxable gain if the liabilities transferred to the corporation exceed the assets. 

New Responsibilities With Incorporation

When considering the conversion of the LLC to a Corporation, the following actions need to be taken to ensure that the newly formed corporation complies with the statutory requirements: 

  • Corporate bylaws need to be created;
  • The shareholders need to appoint a board of directors and corporate officers;
  • Hold an initial board meeting;
  • Share certificates need to be issued to each shareholder

FAQ

  • When should you convert LLC to C Corp? 
    • You should convert LLC to a C Corp when considering share options as incentives for employees or when there is a need to raise capital.
  • Can I switch from an LLC to a corporation? 
    • Yes, it is possible to convert an LLC to a corporation.
  • Do you need a new EIN when converting LLC to C Corp? 
    • It depends on the type and method of conversion used. If a new corporation was formed due to a statutory merger, the corporation would need to apply for a new EIN. 
  • How does an LLC elect as C Corp? 
    • The LLC can complete Form 8832 and follow the steps on the form. The tax implications of the election need to be considered carefully due to the different tax treatment of a C-Corp.

 

To find out if this conversion is suitable for you, contact us.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Peter Harper on Tax Talks: US – AU Tax Questions (Ep. 357)

In the final installment of our collaboration with TaxTalks, the number-one podcast for Accountants, CEO Peter Harper breaks down the six most common questions entrepreneurs face when taxes in both the United States and Australia. From debt vs equity to corporate tax residency, Peter and host Heide Robson have the answers for you.

Catch up on the first two installments of our three-parter series now with episodes 1 and 2.

Click play below to listen:

Transcript:

Peter Harper: Probably the single biggest area of risk, I think, for Australians that own US LLCs is around Australian residency risks for US LLCs, where you have a single member LLC; so one owner, (and) they’re also the manager, so the director or equivalent. And in that scenario, what else can you be but essentially manage and control from Australia? If it’s generating US-sourced income, you’ve got this situation where you don’t have the foreign tax, (and) the FITOs don’t flow through, right? You get a FITO mismatch, and you’re effectively going to be treated as though you’re paying an untracked dividend after an Australian shareholder, which can result in an effective tax rate in the sort of early sixties.

Announcer: You’re listening to Australia’s podcast for accountants: TaxTalks, the podcast to grow your firm.

Heide Robson: Welcome to Episode 357 of TaxTalks. This is Heide Robson, and thank you to Class for sponsoring this episode.

Heide Robson: In this episode, Peter Harper of Asena Advisors in New York will cover six US Australian tax questions with you that have come up. Should you use debt or equity funding when expanding into the US? How’s withholding tax treated when the borrower assumes the withholding tax debt as part of the contract? And what about LLCs with ECI in the US, but CMC in Australia?

Heide Robson: These are just some of the questions we recover in this episode. And again, it focuses on the US, but the questions will also apply to cross-border structures with other countries, and the answers from the Australian tax side will most likely be the same. And so I’m hoping that even if you don’t have any US clients, but you have international clients elsewhere in the world, that you still find this episode helpful.

Heide Robson: Before we start, please let me just quickly play you the legal disclaimer that Peter Harper has recorded for you.

Peter Harper: So (while) we talk about these complex questions, I want to caution listeners that each case that may come before them will be unique, and it is vital that they consult with someone that has US expertise in order to handle delicate matters. These topics are not simplistic and need experience and proficiency to tackle, so please reach out to us to address any issues that your clients may bring up with the diligence they deserve.

Heide Robson: So now to six US Australian tax questions. Here is Peter Harper of Asena Advisors in New York, California, and Florida.

Announcer: Question One: Debt or equity?

Heide Robson: Let’s assume the US operation needs a loan from Australia. How would you structure this loan, and also would you send a loan, or would you send equity?

Peter Harper: It really depends. I mean, the biggest thing with debt versus equity is (the) US, like Australia, has in-capitalization rules around that limit (or) the amount of debt deductibility, and the value of that for an US operation. But in the context of a business that’s expanding into the US (for) the substantial majority of folks that we advise, they might be very established in a foreign market, but this is effectively a start-up.

Peter Harper: So, invariably, what that looks like, at least in the first number of years, you’ve got losses, substantial capital outflows, and significant losses. So the benefit of having a debt funding something is that you have the ability to more efficiently repatriate profit. The downside of debt is that you’ve got to pay market rates and interest to qualify under Australian transfer pricing guidelines.

Peter Harper: So I think the single biggest thing on the debt-to-equity scenario that we focus on initially is what’s the payback period. Because, you know, you’ve got this situation where you can see an Australian business that’s lending a substantial amount of cash to America or America is not making enough money to cover its costs, and then you’ve got tax leakage because you’ve got an obligation to pay interest back. And so it’s a matter of understanding how much pressure, if any, during that period of time is that circularity or that tax leakage going to put on the business, if any, and then kind of manage the cash flow. And it’s different for every business.

Heide Robson: Yes. So if the payback period is quite short, you can do debt because you then don’t have this leakage through interest for a long time. If the payback period is quite long, you would do capital.

Peter Harper: Correct. And then the only other point to note on that (is) the downside of capital is if payback does turn out being quick and you wish to repatriate funds back to Australia, that’s got to go out via dividends until such time, as you have no retained profits in the US, and only after that can you do a return of capital through like a share buyback or something like that. So it’s far more efficient to repatriate invested capital through debt over equity. It’s just a question of how, as you rightly flagged, what is the payback period.

Heide Robson: Okay, so if you pay back capital, you can’t return capital until all retained earnings have been paid out via dividends?

Peter Harper: Correct.

Heide Robson: Okay. But that is if you have a C Corp. If we have an LLC, then does it also apply to an LLC that hasn’t made in a corporate election?

Peter Harper: It depends on the position with respect to your basis. If it’s a partnership (with) multiple owners, every partner has (a) basis. So if there is…

Heide Robson: The cost base.

Peter Harper: Cost base. And so what happens (is) when you operate at a loss, that reduces your cost basis in the partnership. And so there can be a similar outcome in the sense that by the time you actually have some degree of funds that might be sufficient to repatriate, there’s no basis if you’ve run up a big loss at the start because that’s been converted. Effectively, what happens is under the US loss limitation rules, when you operate a partnership at a loss, the percentage of your basis gets converted to the loss and reduced concurrently. So yes, to answer your question, yes, but it just depends on the nature of what each individual investors or owners of basis-es in the partnership.

Heide Robson: So it really would be best if the US operation could stand on its own feet quite quickly, because (in) other scenarios alone that comes with strings attached with a loan, you need to make sure that the interest is at market rates for it to be accepted in the US and Australia. And for equity, you have the problem that you first need to distribute retained earnings before you can distribute capital.

Peter Harper: Correct.

Announcer: Question Two: Loan to blocker or direct.

Heide Robson: If you have a scenario where you have a C corp blocker holding an LLC, would you lend to the C corp blocker that then on-lends to the LLC, or would you lend directly to the LLC from Australia?

Peter Harper: You know, you just (lend) directly to the LLC because from a US perspective, they would deem that as being lent effectively to the branch.

Heide Robson: Which is the LLC?

Peter Harper: Yep.

Heide Robson: So you might as well pay it directly to the LLC because the US will just treat it as being made to the LLC anyway.

Peter Harper: Yep.

Heide Robson: Okay, good.

Announcer: Question Three: Can withholding tax become accessible income?

Heide Robson: Withholding tax. If Australia loans money to a US entity, and the US entity then agrees to bear the withholding tax, is that possible? How is this treated?

Heide Robson: First of all, is it possible to do that? And then how is this treated in the US and Australia? Does the Australian entity then have (an) assessable income of interest plus withholding tax, or can the interest just arrive in Australia without any tax considerations? So let’s say Australia lends $10 million to the US and then receives $500,000 each year as interest at 5%. And the US entity agrees to pay the withholding tax, which let’s assume is, I think at interest is 10%, isn’t it? The withholding tax for interest is usually 10%, correct?

Peter Harper: That’s correct, yeah. So what’s basically happening is the interest is FDAP income. So it’s US-sourced income. And so what’s happening is when you have this obligation, you’ve got an Australian company lending to a US taxpayer, it is paying interest back to Australia that is considered FDAP income, so it’s caught up in the US sourcing net. So then, given that the Australian company doesn’t have any connection to the US, the US government wants the US borrower to collect the tax on its behalf. So it would normally be able to go to collect 30%, but because of the treaty, that’s reduced to 10%.

Peter Harper: The lender will have to complete a form called a W-8 BEN, where it references the relevant treaty number that reduces the article, that reduces the rate of withholding to 10%, then submits that to the borrower. The borrower completes a particular form and submits that to the IRS. And then on the Australian side, the lender is getting a FITO for the withholding tax that’s been paid. And then to the extent of any shortfall, as far as tax that would be otherwise due on the interest, it’ll pay for the tax.

Heide Robson: Okay. So if you assume the interest is $500,000, the withholding tax would be $50,000. The US entity pays the $50,000 to the IRS with the form, which is most likely a W-8 BEN-E, correct? Because with an E at the end, if the Australian entity is a company or a trust, correct?

Peter Harper: Correct.

Heide Robson: And then the Australian entity wouldn’t have (an) interest income of $500,000; it actually would have (an) interest income of $550,000 and would then receive a FITO of $50,000. So it’s actually not possible to circumvent this whole issue of withholding tax by having the payer pay it.

Peter Harper: No, correct. No.

Heide Robson: Good. So that means the Australian entity still then has the issue that they have to pay tax on the $50,000 that (was) used to pay the withholding tax, and they will lose the FITO when it’s paid out unless they structured it in a different way. But if it’s just a plain Australian Propriety Ltd having done this, then they pay tax on the withholding tax and don’t get a FITO ultimately down to the owners, correct?

Peter Harper: Yeah. Correct.

Announcer: Question Four: Tax treaty relevant or not?

Heide Robson: If you sell inventory into the US that was produced outside of the US, it’s not US-sourced, it’s foreign sourced. And hence, you don’t even need the treaty, correct?

Peter Harper: Correct. Yeah, and this is the biggest thing in the Internet world and you’ve taken this example, you’re sending stuff in. But for a lot of people, treaties aren’t relevant because if a transaction is happening on a server that sits in Dubai or sits in some other location, right, and you don’t have any physical footprint in another jurisdiction, then you’re not going to have any US sourced income.

Heide Robson: Fair point.

Announcer: Question Five: State versus federal taxes.

Heide Robson: General question: Do you only cover federal tax or do you also look at state tax? And if you also look at state tax, do you cover all states, or are there certain states that feature much heavier in your work than others?

Peter Harper: We have offices in California, Florida, but most folks that are working in this space… I mean, the tax software is so strong these days that a lot of the state tax rules are kind of automated into the platform. This is as far as tax preparation goes, and there is a certain level of harmonization with respect to the state rules. The jurisdictions that we do most of our work in Florida, New York, California, (and) Texas, it’s just by virtue of where that’s where most of the Australians jurisdictions, (or) most of the Australians are.

Heide Robson: Yes. Going back to the three scenarios we had, the three types of businesses being e-commerce, software, or an actual business in the US; for the first two, federal tax doesn’t really matter so much because it’s not taxable in the US because you don’t have ECI or FDAP, so federal tax is usually zero where, really, the music is playing a state tax. Do you agree?

Peter Harper: 100%. So this is the biggest area, and we don’t actually get involved very regularly with e-commerce businesses or with businesses that are not going to have some physical footprint just because there can be a huge amount of risk around state income tax and definitely around state sales tax.

Peter Harper: So that state income tax still has a lot of more industrial-type components when it comes to determining whether you have nexus to a particular state. But state sales tax is very much driven by where the customer is based. There was a very substantial case called Equal Weight Fair a number of years back, which really sort of set the benchmark for this. And it’s actually the single biggest tax issue that we see pre-transaction when folks are selling businesses, right, where they haven’t properly or adequately complied with their sales tax obligations, which can subsequently result in discounts to market values under tax warranties.

Heide Robson: So you’re saying of the two main state taxes, which are income tax and sales tax, sales tax is usually the much bigger issue.

Peter Harper: Correct.

Heide Robson: And income tax is often not such a big issue because of this public law, 86 to 72. So as long as you don’t have a physical presence and you just sell your product, be it a physical product or software, etc., then you’re usually exempt from income tax. Is that why?

Peter Harper: Yeah, correct.

Heide Robson: So beware the sales tax.

Peter Harper: Beware of the sales tax. That’s right.

Announcer: Question Six: Corporate tax residency.

Heide Robson: Tax residency in the US seems to only be a word for individuals, but for entities, that doesn’t really seem to be this concept of tax residency, correct?

Peter Harper: It is the case. So under the US law, a corporation will only be a resident of the US if it’s incorporated in the US. The only way a foreign entity can be taxed in America is if it has a permanent establishment and effectively connected income, or if it’s not from a treaty country, it’s got a US trade or business. So yeah, the notion of a central management and control that you have in Australia is not something that’s a readily understood notion for US corporate tax advisors.

Announcer: Question Seven: Single member LLC with ECI.

Peter Harper: One other thing I think that’s really critical here that I’d seen that (I) just kind of made notes on it, because you’d asked about it, is this: the biggest area where we see the residency question, and actually probably the single biggest area of risk I think for Australians that own US LLCs, is around residency risk, (or) Australian residency risk for US LLCs.

Peter Harper: So what’s often the case? Someone will send me some documentation; they’ve got a US LLC, the single member LLC. So one owner, they’re also the manager, so the director or equivalent. And in that scenario, what else can you be but essentially manage a control from Australia? It’s beyond question. And so the impact of that is if it’s a resident of Australia, it’s not a hybrid for the purpose of Division 770.

Heide Robson: Yes, the foreign hybrid rules don’t apply?

Peter Harper: Yeah, the foreign hybrid rules don’t apply. So you’ve got this scenario where if it’s generating US-sourced income, you’ve got this situation where you don’t have the foreign tax, the FITO don’t flow through, right? You get a FITO mismatch, and you’re effectively going to be treated as though you’re paying an unfranked dividend out on an Australian shareholder, which can result in an effective tax rate in the sort of early sixties if you’ve got income that’s being generated in a high tax state of the US.

Heide Robson: So if you have a single member LLC that does have ECI, then the single member is liable to pay tax on this ECI in the US. So in our case, This would be the Australian Propriety Ltd who is paying US tax in the US. But then the LLC is also a tax resident in Australia, so the LLC has taxable income in Australia, and the LLC didn’t pay any tax. Hence, the LLC doesn’t get a FITO, and the Australian entity paid tax. But it wasn’t for tax that actually the Australian Propriety Ltd derived. Hence, the Australian Propriety Ltd doesn’t receive a FITO either. Is that what you’re saying?

Peter Harper: Yeah. And the same, similar thing would happen is you have an Australian company as the owner. I think it’s, it’s even more of a common mismatch if it’s an individual.

Heide Robson: Is it not possible to marry the two? Because I think there was a case in England where a similar problem occurred and the English court decided that it is possible to kind of marry the two, especially since the LLC income will flow into the Australian entity, be it an Australian Propriety Ltd or an English (one).

Peter Harper: Think the – I think about it in the context of Australian Propriety Ltd, it’s less of an issue because you’ve got an Australian company, you’ve already paid tax in the US, so there’s not more tax at the entity level. And then what you would have is you’d have a dividend going from company to company from Australia, which wouldn’t necessarily create an issue under Australian law.

Peter Harper: But there’s an issue if it’s an individual owner; if it’s an individual owner, I don’t think there’s a solution because I think the flow on effect is that you’ve got this situation, because the way that the rules work. And this is often the case that we will see the accounting done for these things where all the profits being pulled out each year, but it’s clear that they’re an Australian resident. So when the profits being pulled out, if it’s an Australian resident company, how is that treated, right? It can only come out in one way and that’s the non-frank dividend.

Heide Robson: If you have this scenario where you have an LLC that is 100% held by an Australian Propriety Ltd and you have ECI and hence you’re paying tax in the US, then you would just have the LLC declare a dividend within the financial year so that the Australian Propriety Ltd has income on which it basically paid tax?

Peter Harper: Correct, yeah.

Heide Robson: But if you have an Australian Propriety Ltd that is holding the LLC, then we also have the issue of branch profit tax, correct?

Peter Harper: Correct.

Heide Robson: But branch profit tax only applies if the LLC has ECI, correct, or FDAP?

Peter Harper: Correct.

Heide Robson: If the income is in this third bucket, it’s neither for FDAP nor ECI. Then we don’t have the issue of branch profit tax, correct?

Peter Harper: Correct.

Heide Robson: And if the individual is holding the LLC, the good point is that we don’t have a branch profit tax. But the bad point is that if the LLC pays tax in the US, then you basically pay tax again. That’s what you’re saying, correct?

Peter Harper: Yeah, what I’m really saying is I don’t see how when you’ve got a single member LLC owned by an Australian resident, I just don’t see how it can not be an Australian resident company. The only way to change that is to appoint an independent director or- sorry, manager in the US and segregate the general nature of those types of entities. Is that that’s just often not the case. They’re kind of managed that way, but it’s a big issue.

Heide Robson: And the treaty doesn’t address this, correct?

Peter Harper: Absolutely not, yeah.

Heide Robson: I had three big learnings in this episode:

Heide Robson: Number one: look at the payback period to determine whether to send debt or capital to your US operations. If the payback period is short, do debt. If it is long, do equity. And also consider the tax leakage the Australian entity might have if you have a company in your structure. The Australian entity pays withholding tax on the interest income from debt funding, and the resulting FITO might get lost, putting strain on the cash flow in Australia.

Heide Robson: Number two: having the borrower cover the withholding tax out of their own pocket doesn’t protect you as the lender from tax leakage, since that additional payment just counts as assessable income anyway, and then creates a circle of reference and hence, it gets very messy. So avoid adding withholding tax on top of interest, and instead, have it deducted from interest. So if you go back to the example we used in the interview, we had interest payments of $500,000, so then have the borrower withhold $50,000, and then transfer $450,000 to you. So don’t do any funny business with your withholding tax, don’t add it to the interest payment, etc. It gets very confusing and you end up with circular references.

Heide Robson: Number three: avoid an individual holding a single-member LLC. If you expect the entity to have ECI in the US and, hence, (have) to pay tax in the US, the single member LLC held by an individual has a FITO mismatch that has a high chance of resulting in double taxation. And the reason is that the single member LLC will be most likely an Australian tax resident, and then you have a mismatch of who has the income and who has paid the tax. If you have a company holding the single member LLC, then the Australian company pays branch profit tax of 5%. But you can avoid a FITO mismatch by declaring a dividend from the LLC to the Australian Propriety Ltd in that year. And that avoids the FITO mismatch because the Australian Propriety Ltd will have dividend income on which it paid US tax. So it gets a FITO. But, of course, you still have a tax leakage nevertheless when you distribute from a company.

Heide Robson: So it all comes down to whether you expect to have ECI in the US. If you expect to have ECI, avoid a single member LLC held by an individual and to avoid tax leakage altogether, avoid a company in your setup.

Heide Robson: In the next episode, Episode 358, let’s go to a mini series I have wanted to do with you for a while, and that is how to set up your overseas team. Over the next two weeks, five listeners will talk about the trials and tribulations they face with different setups overseas. And in the episode thereafter, I will share with you the little I know about how to actually set up your team. Your own team, without a provider in between a provider like tour or similar, but a team that is directly employed by you. So that is the plan for the next three weeks.

Heide Robson: Until then, thank you for listening, and thank you to Class for their support. Bye for now, and see you in next episode.

 

If you liked listening to this series, schedule a consultation with us here at Asena Family Office.

Peter Harper

Peter Harper on Tax Talks: Expansion Into the US (Ep. 356)

Peter Harper‘s second installment on the popular podcast, TaxTalks discusses what you need to know when expanding into the US. The United States can seem like a complicated market for ventures, but with proper planning and high-level strategy, it can be manageable.

Listen to the last episode here and tune in soon for the third and final episode of this series.

Click play below to listen:

Transcript:

Peter Harper: When you work through all this stuff, you realize there’s really a limited number of choices that operators have. When you break down the economic outcomes, there’s really a limited number of options.

Announcer: You’re listening to Australia’s podcast for Accountants: Tax Talks, the podcast to grow your firm.

Heide Robson: Welcome to Episode 356 of Tax Talks. This is Heide Robson, and thank you to Class for sponsoring this episode. When your clients want to expand into the US and ask you how to structure this, what do you tell them? This is the question to Peter Harper of Asena Advisors in New York, California, and Florida. Peter will talk about Australia-US cross-border business structures, and also, briefly, branch profit tax. Before we start, a legal disclaimer.

Peter Harper: So (before) we talk about these complex questions, I want to caution listeners that each case that may come before them will be unique and it is vital that they consult with someone that has US expertise in order to handle delicate matters. These topics are not simplistic and need experience and proficiency to tackle, so please reach out to us to address any issues that your clients may bring up with the diligence they deserve.

Heide Robson: So now to Peter Harper of Asena Advisors. The first question to Peter is what are the most common scenarios among Australian businesses expanding into the US?

Peter Harper: I think there’s really a big transition, and when I’m starting this process and talking to a prospective client about this, I’m asking really what is your objective? Are you an Australian business that’s just using the US for distribution of a particular product? You know, when you think about the Internet age and you think about e-commerce businesses, you can sell stuff anywhere. And really the way I think about it is I say, is the US just another distribution channel for you, or are you building a business that requires a real physical footprint in the US? And if you look across the framework of a lot of different businesses we’ve had advised, they really kind of normally fit into three buckets: 

Peter Harper: One, you’ve got an e-commerce, a typical e-commerce business where it might be headquartered out of Australia, products being made in Asia, and then effectively drop-shipping it into the US. You’ve got a software business where, again, everything’s Australian grown; they’ve got some form of (a) subscription-based platform where US-based customers are just signing up via a website or some derivation of that. And then the third is where you’ve got the type of business that is going to be people-heavy and requires physical boots on the ground to do it. So in the context of the third business where you’re expecting to have physical people on the ground, then it’s going to be the case that, very quickly, you have a US trade or business payment establishment, and to the extent, (while) you’re generating locally sourced income, you’re going to have effectively connected income.

Peter Harper: With respect to the two forms of businesses, there’s flexibility around that. There was a further question that you had asked me around how does this concept of US trade or business versus permanent establishment differentiate? And so for those who aren’t familiar, US trade or business is the US domestic legal concept or threshold that needs to be satisfied. You know, one part that needs to be satisfied (is) to have US-sourced income, the other is effectively connected income, and the treaty language is this concept of permanent establishment. So the US domestic concept is, in my opinion, actually a lower threshold; (it’s) something that’s easier to satisfy than the treaty threshold.

Peter Harper: The US concept of a US trade or business is actually a lower threshold than the treaty threshold. So the treaty threshold is whether you’ve got a permanent establishment and whether you have income under Article Seven that’s business profits connected with a permanent establishment. And given that in the context of the US and Australia, there is a treaty. 

Peter Harper: While it’s relevant, normally you have to have a US trade or business because we do have a treaty. In most cases, we are always going to be focused around, okay, well what is the treaty application to this particular factor? So when I’m thinking through my client’s facts, I’m saying, what is it about your planned expansion plan that’s going to create a permanent establishment?

Heide Robson: So even though the US trade or business threshold is lower, and hence that would be a bad thing because it means you trigger a US TB much easier. Even though it’s a lower threshold, when you have a treaty as Australia does, you actually focus on the PE definition and not on the US TB definition.

Peter Harper: Yeah, because the treaty will override it to the extent that it’s relevant, which in this particular instance it would. So when you actually look at the treaty definition of “permanent establishment”, it’s extremely rigid, right? You got to have a fixed place of work, warehouse… You know, it’s very industrial built for an industrial age. So the question that we’re always asked is if you’re doing an e-commerce business and you drop shipping from some three PL warehouse, it’s not your warehouse, someone else holds your product. That’s not going to create a permanent establishment. So even if you’ve got US-sourced income, if you’re generating effectively in connected income, if you don’t have a permanent establishment under the treaty, you’re not going to have US taxable income.

Heide Robson: So coming back to the three main scenarios you see, which is a product business expanding their distribution into the US, or a software business based in Australia expanding their subscriptions into the US, or third, an Australian business actually building a business in the US for the US footprint. When you look at these three scenarios, the first one we see (is the) e-commerce product business expanding their distribution into the US. I assume the two main options are either to just try it through your Australian entity or to set up an LLC. And then you most likely don’t have ECI in the US and hence that income is not taxable in the US, so you would only tax it in Australia?

Peter Harper: That’s right. It’s great that we’ve spent so much time talking through this notion of the LLC not having a permanent establishment, right, because that is the case. Most of our clients that are looking to make real footprints in the US, or more often than not, will operate and set up their businesses through C corporations, not through LLCs. In the business context, the only times when we see folks actually coordinate and set up in the US will be if they’re running an e-commerce business and they don’t expect they’re going to have a permanent establishment, right, so there’s no nexus to tax income tax. Or if there’s going to be one Australian partner in a US business and one American partner in a US business.

Heide Robson: But if there is no US partner, if it’s entirely from Australia, then the first scenario will most likely run through an LLC, and the second scenario will most likely run through an LLC again. But my question is, is that correct, or is there also an argument to just do those too, just through your Australian entity? When would an Australian entity running either an e-commerce business or a software subscription business, when would they change from just trading through their Australian entity to an LLC?

Peter Harper: Well, with a software business, it’s slightly different in the sense that even though they might have people, you know, engaging through a platform and signing up and paying subscriptions into an Australian entity so you don’t have this US footprint for an Australian entity that’s selling, most of them need to have substantial teams physically present in the US to do various tasks, right? So the one major difference is in software businesses, there’s far more significant segregation of roles. So there might be a US subsidiary that’s established to employ staff that might be doing forward-facing marketing-sales work on behalf of the business. So cost management components, and then all the revenue generation is still happening through the Australian company.

Heide Robson: So the software business might have people on the ground in the US, but they would then run that through a separate C-corp, and then the revenue-generating would still be running through an LLC flowing to Australia.

Peter Harper: Correct. The only real time we see LLCs used in operational businesses is if they’re being utilized by e-commerce businesses that don’t have a physical footprint in the US.

Heide Robson: And why would an e-commerce business, for example, change to an LLC and not just trade from Australia through their Australian entity?

Peter Harper: The core reason’s banking. They’re not going to get banking relationships set up in the US with US institutions. So they can have US-based payment and processing and all that type of stuff can be US-based, and that’s not going to create taxable nexus. But that stuff can be critical to setting up APIs with Shopify and various other payment gateways.

Heide Robson: So for an e-commerce business, the main reason to change to an LLC is usually banking or insurance. 

Peter Harper: Correct.

Heide Robson: And then for (a) software business, the main reason to change to an LLC is probably the same. And then it’s also banking or insurance and/or insurance, and then they might need a C-corp on the side if they also employ staff.

Heide Robson: Quick question (on) branch profit techs: because I was expecting you to say at some stage that branch profit tax is an issue, can you tell me more about branch profit tax? Does it play a big role in your structuring advice?

Peter Harper: Not really. And the reason for that is most businesses of a certain size in Australia are structured through companies, and so branch profits tax applies if you have a foreign corporation that is (the) sole owner of a US LLC because technically that’s a branch for US tax purposes, and it also applies to a US branch of a foreign corporation. And the tax treatment for that scenario, for an Australian company owning a US LLC, when it comes to branch profits tax, it’s identical to the tax outcome of an Australian company owning a US C-corp. And when I say identical, this is what I mean: technically, with branch profits tax, you’ve got this rate of tax that’s an additional 30% above the corporate tax rate. That rate of tax is reduced to 5%.

Peter Harper: And so, just remembering with the branch, what we’re effectively saying (is that) income that’s generated by a foreign corporation in America is flowing out of America theoretically, even if it’s still sitting in a bank account. This is how the tax rules treat it; they treat it like it’s been repatriated to the foreign country. And so you have the US corporate tax rate, then you have another 5% on top of that. If you take a US C corporation that pays a dividend back to an Australian holding company, it’s the same outcome. You have the US corporate tax rate, then you have the dividend withholding tax rate (getting) reduced from 30 down to 5% because you’ve got more than 10% owned by foreign companies.

Heide Robson: If the proprietary limited owns 100% of the C-corp, withholding tax is zero, correct? Because they own more than 80%?

Peter Harper: No, no. That’s only the case with public companies.

Heide Robson: Ah, I see.

Peter Harper: Yeah.

Heide Robson: Okay. So a private company would still have a 5% withholding tax?

Peter Harper: Yeah, correct.

Heide Robson: Okay. And hence, the branch profit tax is also 5%.

Peter Harper: When you think about it in that logical way where we say, okay, the branch profits tax, the objective of the tax policy is to ensure that branch profits are taxed identically to dividends, you go, “Okay. Well, that makes sense.” So then the flow on from that is why would you ever set up an Australian company as the sole owner of a US LLC? Right, because the tax outcome is going to be the same, and what you’re actually doing is you’re now requiring your Australian company to file a US tax return. And, for a whole bunch of different compliance reasons, in my opinion, I think it just doesn’t make any sense.

Peter Harper: So again, what that really results in is, going back to my initial statement of why are you doing this, are you doing this to build cash flow? Are you building this future capital value? When you work through all this stuff, you realize there’s really a limited number of choices that operators have. When you break down the economic outcomes, there’s really a limited number of options.

Heide Robson: So never have an Australian propriety limited holding an LLC alone. If you have a proprietary limited holding an LLC, you need somebody else in there so that it becomes a multi-member LLC, because then the branch profit tax doesn’t apply anymore. Correct?

Peter Harper:  Yep.

Heide Robson: Okay. So the branch profit tax only applies if an Australian propriety limited holds an LLC as a sole member. And it also doesn’t apply if an individual holds an LLC alone, correct? Or does it apply?

Peter Harper: No, it doesn’t apply to an individual holder directly. Yeah.

Heide Robson: For an e-commerce, you most likely do an LLC. For a software business subscription, you most likely do an LLC for banking and insurance purposes. And then for a business with a footprint in the US, (you’re) most likely structured through a C-corp, correct?

Peter Harper: Correct.

Heide Robson: Welcome back. So branch brand tax only applies to non-US corporations, and only if that corporation either operates directly in the US or through a single member LLC. So if an Australian entity is an individual partnership or trust, no branch profit tax. And if the Australian company operates through a multi-member LLC, no branch profit tax either.

Heide Robson: So an Australian company only faces branch profit tax if it either operates directly in the US or through a single member LLC, and, of course, has effectively connected income to a US trade or business. And the point of the branch profits is to mirror the taxation of a foreign head C-corp. When you hold a C-corp in the US, the withholding tax is 30% without a treaty, and the US Australian DTA then reduces the withholding tax to 15%; or, if you hold 10% or more, to 5%. And so exactly the same happens for branch profit tax: the branch profit tax is 30%, but the US Australian DTA then reduces it to 5% because, of course, naturally you hold 100% of a branch, so the lower 5% applies.

Heide Robson: The difference between the two is that the branch profit tax is a lot more complicated to calculate. To calculate, you take the earnings and profits for the year effectively connected to a US trade or business, but then deduct any amounts reinvested into branch assets. So the taxable base for the branch profits increases or decreases by any decrease or increase in the US net equity of the branch.

Heide Robson: So this reminds me a bit of the distributable surplus for divisions of net purposes where you also look at the balance sheet to determine the tax base. And then also, as if this was not already confusing enough, the branch profit tax also applies when the tax deduction claimed for interest by the branch on its US tax return exceeds the amount of interest actually paid during the year. So that can get complicated, and we touch on this in the next episode as well. But before we come to the next episode, let me just quickly play you a clip about what Peter’s firm does, Asena Advisors, and then also the Asena family office.

Peter Harper: Asena Advisors is part of our broader, integrated multifamily office ecosystem called the Asena Family Office. As a whole, we provide a wide range of services from a unique problem-solving perspective. Our companies provide specialist in-house deal support to private clients that are focused on post-transactional liquidity and holistic private wealth solutions that enable them to capture future upside while rebalancing risk for the next generation. We also operate global tax desks in the area of US, Australia, and US India taxation, and these desks serve to provide services that don’t just focus on tax, but on the client as a whole.

Heide Robson: In the next episode, Episode 357, Peter Harper will go through a number of questions with you; notably, whether you should send debt or equity to your new operations in the US. So that is for next week. Until then, thank you for listening, and thank you to Class for their support. Bye for now and see you in the next episode.

 

Before watching the final episode, check out Asena Family Office and see how we can help you expand into the US.

Peter Harper

Single Member LLC Taxes


Quite possibly, the most common business structure is the limited liability company or LLC. Business owners love the flexibility, low cost, and ease of setup an LLC offers. Additionally, with many service providers available to set up an LLC, it is no surprise that many business people consider the first type of business structure is an LLC. And in turn, the most common way of starting an LLC is through sole ownership. In this scenario, we call the structure a single-member LLC (SMLLC).

An LLC is a business structure that exists at the state level. When organizing an LLC with the secretary of state, you do so by registering it in a given state, such as Delaware, California, Wyoming, and so forth. Owners of an LLC are called members, and there is tremendous flexibility in that members may include individuals or even corporations.

What’s The Default Tax Treatment For A Single-Member LLC (SMLLC)?

According to IRS rules, an SMLLC is disregarded for U.S. income tax purposes in terms of the default tax treatment of a limited liability company. 

What does this mean? This means all the income and expenses of the LLC flow through to one’s personal tax return on Schedule C of Form 1040. It also means that no separate federal tax return is needed for the LLC and that the income from the LLC is considered self-employment income, on which the taxpayer will pay federal income and self-employment tax (such as social security and Medicare).

Disregarded Entities and Federal Taxes 

When an entity is disregarded, given that the business income and expenses, and hence, profit, flow through to the individual’s tax return (on Schedule C of Form 1040), the taxpayer is liable for federal income tax on the profits of the entity. However, self-employment tax is also payable on the profits of the business (and reported on Schedule SE of Form 1040). 

Changing Your SMLLC’s Tax Treatment

To change the tax treatment of your LLC, you need to file a Form 8832 to change the default classification of the LLC for tax purposes. This election needs to be made within a year before it becomes effective, or within 75 days after it becomes effective. This means that with a new entity, Form 8832 needs to be filed within 75 days of the start of the entity’s fiscal year. To learn more, visit our blog on Check the Box Elections. There are scenarios, however, where you may be able to make a late election. For guidance on this matter, please get in touch today to discuss your options if you are operating an LLC and wish to change its default classification on a delinquent basis. 

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

You Must Pay Tax On All Profit (Whether You Distribute It Or Not)

It is important to note that even if you do not distribute any of the LLC’s profit, given that the LLC is a pass-through entity, you will need to report and pay taxes on all profits of the LLC. This is the case even if you leave the profits in the bank and do not use the funds for any purpose. 

Paying Business Tax As A Single Member LLC

While operating an SMLLC is simpler than running a large corporation, there are still many obligations to fulfill, particularly as it concerns paying business taxes. Below you will find details on the various business taxes you may have to pay when operating your business in this way.

Filing As A Sole Proprietorship

When you treat an SMLLC in its default manner, as a sole proprietorship, you are liable for tax on the profits generated by the business entity, which, as we discussed, are reported on Schedules C and SE of Form 1040. Additionally, depending on the state the LLC is organized in, you may also have to file a separate form for the LLC (such as Form 568 in California) and pay a franchise tax and/or a minimum LLC tax. Further, you may also have to pay an annual fee to a registered agent for receiving mail or legal documents on your LLC’s behalf. 

Filing As A C Corporation

If you decide to elect for your LLC to be taxed as a C Corporation for tax purposes, you will need to report the income and activities of the LLC on a corporation tax return on Form 1120. The federal tax rate for corporations is currently 21%, and state income tax rates (and required forms) vary. 

Filing As An S Corporation

When filing as an S Corporation, you would need to file a separate tax return for the LLC (Form 1120S), but the profits ultimately flow through to you, the individual (on Schedule E of Form 1040). Therefore, the treatment is similar to that which we discussed in the first scenario above. 

How A Single-Member LLC Is Taxed

As mentioned previously, the default treatment is as a disregarded entity, where all income and expenses (and hence, profit) flow through to the individual’s personal federal tax return. However, if you elected for the LLC to be taxed as a C Corporation, the tax treatment will differ. Further, if you elected for the LLC to be taxed as an S Corporation, then the tax treatment would be as a disregarded entity. 

Employment Tax And Certain Excise Tax Requirements

Just because one’s business is structured as an SMLLC does not mean that that sole proprietor does everything. Indeed, you might be operating a business as a sole proprietorship but also have employees. In this scenario, ensuring that you are complying with your employment tax obligations (such as payroll, making federal and state tax withholding payments, and so forth) for your employees is critical. Additionally, depending on the type of business and industry you are in, your LLC may also have excise tax obligations (business taxes imposed on various goods, services, and activities). If you are unsure whether your small business may have excise or employment tax obligations, please get in touch today to ensure that you are running your business in a manner that complies with employment and excise tax requirements. 

Bookkeeping And Accounting For Single-Member LLCs

It is crucial to get the bookkeeping and accounting correct for your small business from the start. Many people erroneously think that just because an LLC has only one member, they can just get started and then handle the bookkeeping later. Nothing could be further from the truth. We must remember that an SMLLC is a business, just as a partnership is a business, a corporation is a business, and so forth. And therefore, it is crucial to take the finances of the LLC very seriously, just as a large corporation such as Microsoft or Walmart would. 

If you are considering organizing an LLC or have already organized an LLC and need guidance on the bookkeeping or an operating agreement, please get in touch with us today. Indeed, one of the biggest strengths of an LLC is its flexibility, but that also means there are plenty of areas where things can go wrong. You don’t want to be scrambling at the last minute before the tax filing deadline because the bookkeeping has not been done beforehand. 

Non-Tax Purposes

In addition to the tax implications and obligations of running an SMLLC, there are other things to consider too, which may not be directly related to taxes. Below are a few frequently asked questions (and answers) that you may be curious about. 

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

FAQs

Can A Married Couple Be A Single-Member LLC?

Yes, you actually can. If you live in one of nine community property states (Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, or Wisconsin), and you and your spouse jointly own an LLC, then you can elect to treat the entity as an SMLLC. In this scenario, all the income and profits of the LLC flow through to Schedule C of your joint tax return (Form 1040), and there will be no need to file a partnership tax return (Form 1065). 

What Is The Best Way For A Single-Member LLC To File Taxes?

This is a subjective question. As mentioned previously, the default treatment of an SMLLC is that it is a disregarded entity. However, this also leads to a situation in which you are liable for not only federal income tax but also self-employment tax. Thus, you may decide to elect to have the LLC be taxed as a corporation to avoid this situation. However, in this scenario, profits distributed to the LLC owner are taxed, as well as the profits being taxed on a corporate level. Therefore, depending on one’s unique situation, it may or may not be better to go with the default classification of an SMLLC. 

What Can You Write Off On Taxes For Single-Member LLC?

When conducting business as a single-member limited liability company, you may deduct all necessary and allowable business expenses incurred as a result of operating the business. Of course, the exact categories depend on the type of company you are running as well as your operations, but common categories of business expenses include advertising, rent, travel, meals (usually deductible only up to a certain percentage), supplies, repairs, legal fees, insurance, and so forth. Please note that the LLC cannot deduct personal expenses and that doing so may land you in big trouble with the IRS. 

Are LLC Single Taxed?

Yes. Given that the IRS considers SMLLCs as sole proprietorships for tax purposes, the LLC itself does not pay tax. Rather, the profits of the LLC flow to your individual tax return, and you in turn pay tax on the profits of the LLC on your own personal tax return.

Does A Single-Member LLC Need A Separate Bank Account?

Generally speaking, yes, a single member limited liability company would need its own bank account. But why? Because not only does it simplify things from a bookkeeping and accounting perspective to have different accounts for personal and business, but commingling personal and business funds are risky in a legal sense. Mixing personal and business finances may lead to a situation in which if the limited liability company is sued, it may lose its liability protection (a term referred to as “piercing the corporate veil.”).   

 Contact Asena Family Office for a detailed understanding of Single Member LLC Taxes.

Arin Vahanian

Peter Harper

Intentionally Defective Grantor Trust


Deliberate estate planning is a pivotal aspect of the continuous growth of your family office for generations to come. If your existing wealth is not planned out in the most optimal way, your children or any other subsidiaries can face problems. 

One of the vehicles for estate planning is an IDGT, an irrevocable trust that is created by a Grantor during his lifetime. A popular strategy for planning is for the grantor to gift assets to the trust and later sell other assets to the trust. The sale is usually structured to include an initial gift to the trust and if the gift is sufficient to secure a portion of the purchase price (valuation of assets is important), the trust can subsequently purchase the assets from the grantor in exchange for the trust’s promissory note (valuation should be same for assets and promissory note. 

What Is An Intentionally Defective Grantor Trust?

An intentionally defective grantor trust (IDGT) is an irrevocable trust set up by the Grantor, where the trust deed is drafted to trigger grantor trust status intentionally. 

Estate Planning With Intentionally Defective Grantor Trusts

An IDGT is a great estate planning tool because it is owned by the Grantor for federal income tax purposes but treated as separate from the Grantor for purposes of estate and gift tax. This treatment enables the Grantor to pay income taxes on the trust’s income, but the appreciation on the assets in the trust is excluded from the Grantor’s estate and does not form part of their taxable estate. The income tax rate is less than the estate tax rate.

Who Owns Assets In Intentionally Defective Grantor Trust?

Legally it is owned by the trust due to it being an irrevocable trust. For tax purposes, it depends on whether it is for federal income tax or federal gift and estate taxes.

Federal income tax: Due to the trust being created with an intentional mistake to trigger the grantor trust rules, it ensures that the IRS regards you as the owner of the trust’s assets for federal income tax.

Federal gift and estate tax purposes: Due to transferring the assets out of your name and into a trust, the assets are owned by the trust and do not form part of your estate, and they will be regarded as a taxable gift. 

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

Does An Intentionally Defective Grantor Trust Get A Step Up In Basis?

No. The Grantor trust rules, as set out in IRC 671-679, deem the Grantor to own the assets and liable for any federal income tax and transfer; therefore, tax-free. 

What Taxes Relate To An IDGT?

There are various types of taxes to consider for a taxpayer. Most notably: 

  • Gift and Estate Tax
  • Income Taxes, including CGT; 
  • Generation-skipping taxes (GST); and 
  • Transfer tax

Who Pays Income Tax On The Gains Inside Trust?

The Grantor, while alive, pays income tax on the gains. After his demise, the IDGT will bear its own income tax on gains made.

Tax Liabilities

The Grantor is liable for federal income tax on income generated by the trust, including any gains made in his lifetime. If the Grantor gifts the assets to the trust, they will be liable for tax on the gift and are regarded as trust assets subsequent to the gift. 

An IDGT is the preferred estate planning vehicle when generation-skipping transfer tax is a primary goal of the trust. In this case, an asset’s value is set for GSTT purposes as soon as it is sold to the IDGT. Additionally, asset appreciation will not count against the grantor for GSTT purposes if the trust is structured to repay the asset over 10 years.

Reciprocal Trust Doctrine

The reciprocal trust doctrine applies when two trusts are interrelated, “and that the arrangement, to the extent of mutual value, leaves the settlors in approximately the same economic position as they would have been if they had created trusts naming themselves as life beneficiaries“.

For example – 

Spouses set up reciprocal trusts to take advantage of the tax exemption for gifts between spouses. In this case, the husband gives up to $6,030,000 to a trust for the benefit of his wife and issue, and the wife gives up to $6,030,000 to a trust for the benefit of her husband and issue. 

When applying the “reciprocal trust doctrine,” courts often end up uncrossing the trusts. The doctrine states that if a husband creates a trust for his wife, and the wife creates a nearly identical trust for the husband, then the two trusts may be ‘un-crossed’ and treated for tax purposes as if each spouse had made a trust for themselves.

How To Fund An IDGT

There are two methods to fund an IDGT. Either by making a gift or engaging in an installment sale of the trust. 

Selling Assets To An Intentionally Defective Grantor Trust

If you sell assets to an IDGT, this is usually done via an installment sale. In order for a gift to be permanent and count towards a grantor’s lifetime gift exclusion, the trust must be seeded with a gift that is at least 10% of the asset’s value.

The grantor can then sell the assets to the trust and receive an interest-bearing promissory note from the trust in exchange. An IDGT uses the ‘applicable federal rate’ (AFR), a number published monthly by the IRS for purposes of this interest. The interest accrued on this promissory note is not taxable for federal tax purposes due to the fact that you can’t charge yourself an interest rate (i.e. an IDGT being a grantor trust). No tax is due on any gain from the sale by the Grantor to the trust. If the fair market value of the promissory note is equal to the fair market value of assets sold, there will be no gift tax liability except for the 10% initial gift. 

What’s A “Pot Trust”? Can An IDGT Be A Pot Trust?

A pot trust is a trust set up for multiple trust beneficiaries where distributions can be made to any beneficiaries at the trustee’s discretion. And yes, an IDGT can be a Pot Trust. 

Can An IDGT Be A Spendthrift Trust?

Yes. The Grantor may want to build safeguards into the trust to protect their beneficiaries from creditors and to ensure the assets are not misused by beneficiaries due to substance abuse, for example. 

What’s A SLAT? Can An IDGT Be A SLAT?

A Spousal Lifetime Access Trust or ‘SLAT’ is a trust where the Grantor’s spouse and their descendants are permissible beneficiaries of the trust. 

Yes, an IDGT can be a SLAT. 

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

Including A Spouse As An Eligible Beneficiary

The purpose of including the Grantor’s spouse as a beneficiary is that the Grantor can transfer assets to a trust (IDGT) and ensure that the spouse has access to those assets should they need them during their life. This is referred to as a SLAT.

What Makes An IDGT A Dynasty Trust?

An IDGT can be a dynasty trust if it is designed to last for multiple generations without being subject to estate taxes on the death of a beneficiary. 

What Other Considerations Are There?

Using an IDGT should be carefully considered based on your own estate planning needs. This is not a magical estate planning tool that will work or even suit everyone. 

For instance, the IDGT is not even in the tax code, but rather gains its authority through numerous decisions from the tax courts. Every time a trust is challenged in the courts by the IRS, the decision creates new boundaries or allowances for future trusts.

Another issue is when the Grantor dies. In the case of an IDGT, there is no official guidance from the IRS as to how they will treat the trust and its assets. Nearly all tax professionals recognize that upon death, the IDGT loses its grantor status. However, it is not clear when that occurs. The IRS tends to provide guidance on how to proceed after the grantor’s death – which is not conductive to the planning process. This can leave grantors, their beneficiaries, and estate planners without a clear picture of what can be done in the case of a premature death.

Below are some of the factors to consider when looking at the feasibility of an IDGT as part of your estate planning.

Will I Need Access To The Assets I Plan To Put Into The Trust?

No, you don’t need access. However, if you want access to the assets, an IDGT may not be the best tax planning structure for you. 

Do I Expect These Assets To Appreciate Over Time?

The primary purpose of an IDGT is to ‘freeze’ a grantor’s estate. Therefore, it makes sense to transfer appreciating assets to the trust.

How Much Control Do I Wish To Give My Beneficiaries?

The Grantor can retain significant control over the trust property even if it is subsequent to the trust being created. This way, you can manage the power of the beneficiaries. For example, the Grantor can have the right to hire or fire trustees and to make investment decisions. 

Who Will Be My Trustee?

It is crucial to ensure that the trustee or trustees are someone you can trust. Appointing a spouse can have severe tax implications. 

FAQ:

What makes an Intentionally Defective Grantor Trust?

These trusts are referred to as IDGTs because the Grantor intentionally includes in the trust agreement (trust deed) a right or power (such as the Grantor’s ability to switch out and substitute assets for other assets already in the trust) that causes them to be treated as the owner of the trust for federal income tax.

Who pays taxes in an Intentionally Defective Grantor Trust?

An IDGT is considered separate from the Grantor for federal estate and gift tax purposes. However, it is treated as owned by the Grantor for federal income tax purposes. The Grantor has the income tax liability and pays income tax on the trust income, but the appreciation that builds up in the trust’s assets is excluded from the Grantor’s estate.

Does an Intentionally Defective Grantor Trust get a step up in basis?

No, due to exemption of CGT. Due to the grantor trust rules being applicable, the historical base cost will roll over, and the Grantor will still be the deemed owner for federal income tax purposes. Therefore 

Who owns assets in Intentionally Defective Grantor Trust?

Legally the intentionally defective grantor trust owns the assets. However, for tax, ownership is as follows:

Federal income tax: Due to the trust being created with an intentional mistake to trigger the grantor trust rules, it ensures that the IRS regards you as the owner of the trust’s assets for federal income tax.

Federal estate tax purposes: Due to transferring the assets out of your name and into a trust, the assets are owned by the trust and do not form part of your estate. 

Federal Gift tax purposes: If you gift your assets to the trust, you will be subject to tax, which is calculated as the asset’s value on the date of transfer. Similar to estate tax, it is regarded as owned by the trust.

Estate planning is a delicate matter and it is pivotal to have it catered to you. If you have any questions about intentionally defective grantor trusts, please reach out to Asena for more in-depth advice. 

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Peter Harper on Tax Talks: US Public and Private Markets (Ep. 355)

We are proud to present an episode of TaxTalks, the leading podcast for Accountants, featuring the CEO of Asena Family Office – Peter Harper. In this episode, Peter discusses how you structure into US public and private markets depends on whether you invest for cash flow or capital growth.

Tune in these upcoming weeks to listen to the second and third installments of this series on markets, investments, expansions, and taxes.

Transcript:

Peter Harper: The best way when you’re thinking about these rules, whether it’s LLC, these corporate regimes, or limited partnerships, is that they really do provide a lot of flexibility to navigate flows within a structure so that you’re either getting full flow through treatment if you want that, or you’re optimizing the optimal way of applying foreign tax credits against other parts of the holding company structure.

Announcer: You were listening to Australia’s podcast for Accountants Tax Talks, the podcast to grow your firm.

Heide Robson: Welcome to Episode 355 of TaxTalks. This is Heide Robson and thank you to Class for sponsoring this episode. When you invest into public or private markets in the US, so public markets like Nasdaq or the New York Stock Exchange and private markets like venture capital and seed funding and so on. When you do that, how should you structure these investments, trade through an Australian entity or set up a vehicle in the US? This is what Peter Harper of Asena Advisors will discuss with you in this episode. The first question to Peter is what common pain points and questions clients seek his advice on?

Peter Harper: So we talk about these complex questions. I want to caution listeners that each case that may come before them will be unique, and it is vital that they consult with someone that has us expertise in order to handle delicate matters. These topics are not simplistic and need experience and proficiency to tackle, so please reach out to us to address any issues that your clients may bring up with the diligence they deserve.

Peter Harper: It really does kind of two things. You know, a lot of the advice we’re giving is around either US direct investment where it’s folks are either, you know, their share trading or they’re looking at US based private equity or and so it’s structuring into an investment or it’s structuring into some form of operating asset where they’ve got an Australian business, they’re looking to expand into the US, they want to understand how to bolt that together. And a lot of the times there might be one or two founders or executives that are going to move over to the US together with the expansion. So any one of those we could start on any format and kind of lead into that.

Heide Robson: If we now look at Bob is doing significant share trading or share investment in the US. Could you run through how you would structure this in Australia and then also how you would structure this in the US?

Peter Harper: The biggest thing really depends on whether it’s going to be private markets or public markets when it’s public markets trading. So really it’s a matter of someone looking to build out a US-based portfolio and US public companies, it really is just focusing on the atypical structure that you’d be thinking about private investments for in Australia. And the reason for that is, as a general rule, shares as an intangible, they’re only subject to tax in the country in which the owner is a resident. So whether it’s an Australian company or an Australian trust, the tax, whether it was an income tax issue or a capital gains tax issue, depending on the volatility of trading, the only issues you’d be worrying about from a trading perspective would be Australian issues when it comes to withholding tax there are a suite of companies that are, you know, that are dividend paying companies. The yields on dividend-paying stocks in the US versus Australia are very, very different. You know, high-yielding dividend-paying stock in the US might be 2 or 3% which, compare that with Australia, a pretty average return. So it’s far less common in US public markets for people to invest for cash flow, then they’re normally investing for capital growth. So in that scenario, Bob would just be worrying about the returns in Australia.

Heide Robson: So the question of whether the withholding tax is 15% or 5% or 0% usually doesn’t matter so much because the yield is pretty low in the US anyway. Hence Bob would be investing in the US for capital gains and not for cash flow. Hence the withholding tax most likely won’t worry him so much. And the capital gain on these share portfolios since Bob is based in Australia, would be capital gains tax-free in the US. So you would only have to deal with capital gains tax in Australia, correct?

Peter Harper: That’s correct. And so as a result of this, it is rarer for folks to structure into trading operations in the US via US entities, right. If someone was coming from another country where there was some type of civil unrest or concerns about governance or whatever else, then yes, they might like to think that it’s more optimal to structure into a US vehicle for share trading. But in the context of Australia, I think the optimal structure is going to be just trading through either an Australian company or an Australian trust.

Heide Robson: Yes. Or individual?

Peter Harper: Yeah. Individual, yeah.

Heide Robson: You wouldn’t go through a US vehicle because trading from Australia is as good as it gets. When you are trading from Australia through an Australian entity, you have nothing to do with the US tax system apart from the withholding tax on the pretty low yield anyway. Why would you change that by trading through a US vehicle which now puts you into the US tax net?

Peter Harper: Correct. Correct. I think a lot of folks, when they hear about international taxation for the first time and they don’t have a lot of knowledge, their initial reaction is tax havens as a way to somehow get a reduced rate of tax. In my world, where you’re primarily looking at optimization for general business transactions, everyone’s core objective is just ensuring there’s not double tax because it’s far easier to get double taxed on returns than a lot of people would think. So if you can set up a structure like this where Bob can invest in the US market, if that’s really his objective, like he’s not doing this for any tax reason, his sole objective is an investment focused and accessing US public markets and there is absolutely no value in operating through a US vehicle.

Heide Robson: So that’s the public market. And now does the answer change for private markets?

Peter Harper: It changes in the sense that most private market deals are going to be structured through US partnerships. So the US LLC or US LPs, limited partnerships, and there was a very substantial case Grecian Magnesite that was passed down in 2017, I believe.

Heide Robson: Let me quickly tell you a bit more about Grecian Magnesite. So Grecian Magnesite was a Greek corporation and a partner in a US partnership. And then Grecian Magnesite sold its interest in the partnership. And the Tax Court found in 2017 that the profit from that sale was not US-sourced income and hence not subject to US income tax. That was appealed and went to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2019 and the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the tax court’s decision. No tax in the US. Back to Peter.

Peter Harper: Prior to this case. And this was not a widely publicized point of view. And the reason it wasn’t widely publicized, I’ll get to in a moment, but prior to this case, the way the US tax rules worked was if you had an active partnership that was generating active income, that activity was segregated from the activities of the individual. So there wasn’t this notion where, okay, if you have got a partnership that’s generating US sourced income, that that automatically flows through to the underlying partner. Why that’s a substantial issue was you had situations where – and this was massive kind of in the hedge fund world – where people would have these substantial US operating businesses that were generating US sourced income where they could actually trade the interests in these partnerships offshore without US taxation. Right. And so what Grecian did, it came down and confirmed that position. As soon as that happened, the Trump administration changed the law so that any activity of a US based partnership that’s generating US sourced income will actually flow through to the underlying owner. Right.

Peter Harper: So we take this example with Bob. Bob’s investing in US private markets, assuming the US private market, let’s say it’s a real estate deal, so it’s generating US sourced income that is going to create a US tax footprint for him. Right. So it’s still mean that he might structure it into that deal through an Australian trust or an Australian company. But the answer is more complex because you’ve got to flow the – you’re now bringing into the situation a return that is US source subject US tax. We’ve got to ensure that we’re getting access to the foreign tax credits as they’re flowing through to the FITOs, as they’re flowing through to the underlying owner. And so, you know, that kind of makes the structural choices for private deals a little bit different. And so then the other question that this kind of then raises, because this is a very big kind of issue that is highly technical issue, that is very difficult for foreign advisors to get accustomed to. Cause the US notion of their check the box regime is very, very different from anything that exists in Australia. Right. So that fundamentally you’re dealing with this notion that eligible entities can pick their own path is whether they’re taxed, is disregarded entities, partnerships, corporates. But the mysterious thing about a US LLC is that if it doesn’t have a US trade or business, then you can have income generated by it. It’s not subject to US tax, right? So I think the correlation between a US LLC and the notion of what we thought a trust in Australia may have been to a lot of the recent cases that have sort of come down over the last couple of years in Australia dealing with sort of the Australian taxation of foreign sourced income absolutely holds true in the US. LLCs are fully flow through structures and the only way you are going to have income that’s subject to us taxes. If you’ve got a US title business and you’ve got effectively connected income.

Heide Robson: When you spoke about the partnership, if Bob did this investment in a private market and hence did this through a partnership, which entities would be in this partnership?

Peter Harper: The thing with that, when you set up an LLC, it is from a legal fiction and a tax fiction they are different, right? But purely from a tax perspective with an LLC, if you have a single owner of an LLC, it’s classified as a disregarded entity. Right. And I think sometimes I find with Australians that are new to this concept, they kind of just say pass through entity versus corporate. But that’s not true, it’s a disregarded entity. That’s the correct terminology. And really what that means, if you’ve got one owner, it’s taxed as a sole proprietor. If you’ve got more than two owners in an LLC and it’s taxed on a flow-through basis, then it’s going to be taxed as a partnership.

Heide Robson: Good. And so this is what you meant when you spoke about a partnership. Did you mean a multi-member LLC?

Peter Harper: Yeah. So you can either be a multi-member LLC or it can be a limited partnership. What you’ll generally find in the regulated investment world, all of the big funds will be structured through limited partnerships. LLCs are really the domain of private operating businesses or smaller scale investment vehicles.

Heide Robson: Good. And so now when you have either a multi-member LLC or a limited partnership, who are usually the partners to this, I assume are they usually foreign entities?

Peter Harper: It can be anyone. Whenever these structures are set up as an aggregator of investors, you know, they don’t have any nexus to the US tax system. So by virtue of being effectively an in-holding investment vehicle where all they doing are aggregating investments and then investing into some other structure, whether they’ve got a US trade or business will be dependent on the down flow of income. What I mean by that is let’s say Bob is an Australian company and he’s investing in a US LLC or a US LLP that is effectively an aggregation vehicle for investors. That vehicle in and of itself is not necessarily going to be something that’s producing US source income, right? It’ll be wholly dependent on the nature of the investment income that’s generated from the subsequent investment. Right. So if. They then, when invested in some other entity or business that was generating US income, US sourced income that would flow down through the structure and give Bob’s company this obligation to file a tax return in the US because it’s effectively receiving US sourced income.

Heide Robson: You mentioned FITO before and how to make sure that the FITO flows into the hands of the ultimate owners. That is quite difficult. As soon as you have companies in the structure correct to have a FITO flowing all the way through to the ultimate owners, you need trust all the way. Correct.

Peter Harper: Correct. What would generally happen is if you lose the benefit of the FITOs, it’ll get trapped at the company level. So in that example, we just go where we say, okay, we’ve got Bob, we’ve got our company. That’s the Australian owner of that investment. The foreign income tax offsets would be credited inside the company and so then you’re going to have a situation where you’re going to have a franking credit imbalance likely. And so you’ll have whatever your net effective economic outcome is based on tax that’s been paid along the way from a US sourced income down the way. And then you may have a franking credit deficit. So when you’re thinking through the structure or the structural choices, we are very focused on two things. Whether you are structuring for capital growth or whether you are structuring for cash flow, right. And when you’re structuring for cash flow. But in the example that we’re giving, let’s say, you know, you’ve got an Australian-based investor and you’re investing into a US-based private market asset that’s cash flowing, may or may not be producing US-sourced income. You want to assure that you have the most efficient pathway to get that income down to the ultimate owners. And so one other alternative can be to have a situation where you have an Australian trust make a check the box election to be taxed as a US corporation. Right.

Peter Harper: So the way the check the box regulations work is they basically say that to the extent that an entity is relevant to the US tax system and they are eligible – so they’re an eligible entity is classified by the US tax rules – they have the ability to make an election under the US tax rules to be taxed as a corporation or as a disregarded entity or a partnership. And so if an Australian entity is generating US-sourced income, it’s relevant. And Australia is a country that can result in the existence of an eligible entity. So by having an Australian trust make the election, what happens is you’ve got a US corporation for US tax purposes, right, which can be better because it eliminates the compliance obligations on the underlying beneficiaries to file US tax returns. Because if you had a situation where you have a US beneficiary of an Australian trust receiving US sourced income, then the ultimate beneficiary, the ultimate recipient of that income has an obligation to follow US personal tax return, right? Which for a lot of folks is not something that they want to do. So you can file an election, we tax the corporation. And so from a US perspective, you’re paying tax at the corporate tax rate, you’re filing one return from an Australian perspective because this election is irrelevant and you’ve got a flow-through entity that’s a trust. The FITOs that are generated from paying this US taxation can flow through to the underlying beneficiaries.

Heide Robson: This corporate election is that an 8832 election?

Peter Harper: It is. Yep.

Heide Robson: It’s good that you mentioned that. I didn’t realize that foreign entities can make an 8832 election. I thought that was only for US domestic entities, so it’s good to know that it’s possible. So now coming to this scenario, you describe that an Australian trust makes an 8832 election and hence is treated as a US corporation in the US. That means the trust pays US income tax but does that then give rise to franking credits and hence you don’t lose the FITO? Is that what you’re saying?

Peter Harper: No, no. It doesn’t give rise to franking credits. But what it does do, it gives rise to FITOs because from an Australian perspective they just see the fact that there has been tax paid on behalf of the ultimate beneficiaries. Right. And so therefore the foreign income tax offsets. So the biggest issue normally is because the company is paying the tax, but in this instance you’ve got the trust paying the tax.

Heide Robson: And hence it flows through?

Peter Harper: Correct.

Heide Robson: That’s very clever because it’s a trust that is paying the US income tax. It flows through to the beneficiaries and hence the ultimate owners are receiving a FITO.

Peter Harper: Yeah.

Heide Robson: So Bob investing into the public market and then also Bob investing into the private market, assuming the private market is a passive income vehicle. But actually what you said about the private market would also apply to an active business. It’s basically both.

Peter Harper: Yeah. And I think one really critical thing on that is that when I first encountered the check the box regulations, it’s not too dissimilar from Australia where you’ve got trust law and then you have tax law kind of being overlaid where you’ve got these two different concepts, right? So the kind of interesting thing about the check the box regulations, because they were really thought out, is you get this scenario in the foreign world and this is relevant to the controlled foreign corporations regime and whether you’ve got an active business, but you can establish structures whereby you can pick and choose which entity within a corporate tax frame where you want to make an election. And again, I’m jumping over the place a bit, but and this is sort of relevant to going back the other way, but it shows how powerful the regime is. You can have a situation where you could have a foreign holding company in a jurisdiction that might not have a lot of treaties or where you might like it for a bunch of reasons because it’s got a low tax base, but where there’s not a lot of activity, these are really just financial hubs, not operational hubs. And if you check the box over an active foreign subsidiary that’s earning income in a foreign market, that activity flows through to the ultimate holding company, thereby turning the revenue of the holding company into an active business. Right. The best way when you’re thinking about these rules, whether it’s LLCs, corporate regimes, limited partnerships, is that they really do provide a lot of flexibility to navigate flows within a structure so that you’re either getting full flow through treatment if you want that, or you’re optimizing the optimal way of applying foreign tax credits against other parts of the holding company structure.

Heide Robson: Welcome back. I like the idea of having an Australian trust making an 8832 election in the US, which turns the trust into a corporate entity in the US for tax purposes. So making an 8832 election in the US and then FITO for any tax paid in the US flows through to the beneficiaries in Australia without any tax leakage. I hadn’t heard of this before and I think it’s a very elegant solution. Before the interview, I asked Peter how Asena Advisers came about and what they do. Here is Peter’s answer.

Peter Harper: So in 2010, I moved from Australia to the US to set up the office of what is now Asena Family Office. At the time I was working in a business that was more of a traditional accounting business that was structured around tax compliance, accounting, and consulting. Then about eight years ago, I was appointed by a wealthy individual to set up a single-family office, and at the time there was just a whole bunch of things within the existing infrastructure of a traditional firm. It didn’t work. We needed access to multifaceted skills across accounting deals and consulting that wouldn’t have existed in a traditional practice. So we set about either building from scratch or buying interest in firms that could facilitate that. So today we’re a full-stack multifamily office across accounting, tax, estate planning, wealth management, and transactional services – so corporate finance and mergers and acquisitions.

Heide Robson: Welcome back. In the next episode, episode 356 let’s talk with Peter Harper about expanding a business into the US. So today we spoke about passive investments into private and public markets. And next week let’s talk about business expansions into the US. Until then, thank you for listening, and thank you to Class for their support. Bye for now and see you in the next episode.

 

Thinking of taking the first step? Contact Asena Family Office to get started.

Peter Harper

Foreign Personal Holding Company Income

Foreign Personal Holding Company Income

This blog addresses the foreign personal holding company income which is a complex topic for taxpayers that requires a deep background understanding so we will start with some framework regarding CFCs and Subpart F income which is contained in Subchapter N of Title 26 and as promulgated by Treasury Regulations. These are special rules. Please contact us or read other blogs in our Quick Guides series for more in-depth information on each one of these topics.

Corporations are either domestic corporations (i.e. U.S. corporations) or foreign corporations.

What is a Controlled Foreign Corporation (i.e., CFC)?

The purpose of this paragraph is to define CFC. A foreign corporation is a controlled foreign corporation if a United States shareholder (i.e. a U.S. Shareholder) directly, indirectly, or constructively holds more than 50% of the stock in such a corporation. Concerning a corporation in a foreign country, a United States shareholder means a United States person (as defined in section 957(c)) who owns (within the meaning of section 958(a)) or is considered as owning by applying the rules of ownership of section 958(b), 10 percent or more of the total combined voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote of such foreign corporation, or 10 percent or more of the total value of shares of all classes of stock of such foreign corporation. Ownership of a CFC is determined based on direct, indirect, and constructive ownership by United States Shareholders. Section 958 Internal Revenue Code 1986 defines the circumstances when stock owned by persons that are related to United States Shareholders will be relevant to determining whether or not a foreign corporation is a CFC. To learn more about CFCs, visit our blog What is Controlled Foreign Corporation?

A related person is defined in Treasury regulation 1.958-2 Internal Revenue Code. A person is considered a “related person” if – 

(1) They are partners or partnerships described in section 707(b)(1) of the Code; or

(2) They are related within the meaning of sections 267 (b), (c), and (f) of the Code, except that –

(i) “10 percent or more” shall be substituted for “more than 50 percent” each place it appears; and 

(ii) Section 1563 shall apply (for purposes of section 267(d)), without regard to section 1563(b)(2). 

We are the only multi-disciplinary international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S.– Australia taxation.

What is Subpart F Income of a CFC?

The purpose of this paragraph is to define Subpart F Income of a CFC. To combat overseas tax deferral, Congress enacted the Revenue Act of 1962. This enactment added Subpart F to the IRC in order to allow U.S. taxation of specific undistributed amounts earned by the CFC. Before the introduction of Subpart F, if a foreign corporation derived income unrelated to a U.S. trade or business, that corporation could simply retain the profit within the company and not pay any income tax within the U.S.

Subpart F attributes so much of the foreign-sourced gross income in a taxable year of a Controlled Foreign Corporation (also known as a CFC) that is allocable to a U.S. Shareholder that owns stock in such corporation on the last day of the taxable year. As outlined above, a U.S. Shareholder is a United States Person that owns more than 10% of the stock in a foreign corporation. The foreign corporation is the payor.

What is the Foreign Base Company Income of a CFC?

The purpose of this paragraph is to define Foreign Base Company Income of a CFC. Subpart F is separated into several definitions that categorize certain types of transactions. Most foriegn countries that have CFC regimes similarly categorize income. In the U.S., the income of a CFC is broadly divided into two buckets, the first being related party income that relates to services and sales of a corporate group and the second being income that is widely thought of as passive income. The definitions are pretty intertwined and breakdown as follows. 

Foreign Base Company Income Income is defined to include the Foreign Base Company Income of a CFC. The Foreign Base Company Income of a CFC in a taxable year includes Foreign Personal Holding Company Income of a CFC, Foreign Base Company Sales Income of a CFC, and Foreign Base Company Services Income of a CFC.

As outlined above, the Foreign Base Company Sales Income of a CFC correlates to related party sales income where a foreign corporation sells to a related domestic corporation, and the Foreign Base Company Services Income of a CFC is where a foreign corporation provides related party services income to a domestic corporation.

So, What is Foreign Personal Holding Company Income?

The purpose of this paragraph is to define Foreign Personal Holding Company Income of a CFC. It is a portion of gross income that is thought of as passive income. Income derived from dividends, rents, royalties, etc. The list is far longer than that, and you can see what it covers here: dividends, interests, royalties, and rents; certain property transactions; certain commodity transactions; certain foreign currency transactions; interest income; income from notional principal contracts; payments instead of dividends; and personal services contracts.

Is Foreign Personal Holding Company Income Subpart F?

Yes, Foreign Personal Holding Company Income is Subpart Income. It indirectly forms part of that definition as it is included in the description of Foreign Base Company Income of a CFC.

Computation Of Foreign Personal Holding Company Income of a CFC.

The computation of Foreign Personal Holding Company Income includes dividends, royalties, rents; certain property transactions; income equivalent to interest; income from notional principal contracts; payments in place of dividends; and personal services contracts. In general, if the gross income of a CFC is Foreign Personal Holding Company Income and any portion of the income is from more than one category, that income is treated as income from the category with the highest priority. 

The computation of this income can be complex and very specific to a taxpayers’ assets and situations. 

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Dividends, Interest, Rents, Royalties, And Annuities

In a taxable year:

  • Dividends are the dividends derived by the CFC paid from another corporation in the same taxable year. 
  • Interest is interest income derived by the CFC on cash or cash equivalents. 
  • Rents are derived by the CFC on real estate it owns. 
  • Annuities are earnings the CFC derives from fixed income products it holds.

Certain Property Transactions

The purpose of this paragraph is to define certain property transactions of a CFC. Foreign Personal Holding Company Income of a CFC includes Certain Property Transactions, which are the sale of assets that produce income that would otherwise produce foreign personal holding income. This includes:

  1. Property that gives rise to dividends, interest, rents, royalties, or annuities; 
  2. Property that is an interest in a partnership, trust, or REMIC; 
  3. and property that does not give rise to income.

The most basic example of certain property transactions is the sale of real estate, deriving rent, or intellectual property that is paying a royalty. This is a catch-all provision that ensures that regardless of the characteristic of the payment made with respect to this property, it is still subject to Subpart F.

Commodities Transactions

In a taxable year, the Foreign Personal Holding Company Income of a CFC includes gains derived from commodities transactions. Commodities transactions include the sale of any commodity, which would consist of something like coal, and some form of derivative or contract for the sale of commodities.

Foreign Currency Gain or Loss

Foreign Personal Holding Company Income of a CFC in a taxable year includes Foreign Currency Gains Or Losses, the gains or losses realized on a multi-currency transaction. By way of example, if a foreign corporation that was a CFC bought and sold coal in Australian dollars, the Australian dollar appreciated against the U.S. dollar, it would have a foreign currency gain on the sale of the coal to a third party.

Income Equivalent To Interest

The term income equivalent to interest includes income that is derived from- (A) A transaction or series of related transactions in which the payments, net payments, cash flows, or return predominantly reflect the time value of money; (B) Transactions in which the payments (or a predominant portion thereof) are, in substance, for the use or forbearance of money; (C) Notional principal contracts; (D) Factoring; (E) Conversion transactions; (F) The performance of services; (G) The commitment by a lender to provide financing; (H) Transfers of debt securities subject to section 1058; (I) Any guaranteed payments for the use of capital under section 707(c); and (J) Other transactions, as provided by the Commissioner in published guidance.

This is any form of synthetic instrument (like one that would govern factoring) and as outlined above, that generates income equivalent to interest, which is essential since a loan-bearing interest would otherwise be captured under other parts of this section. Without this provision, clever financiers would simply structure around Subpart F.

What Is Excluded From Foreign Personal Holding Company Income?

Certain facets of rents and royalties are excluded from the Foreign Personal Holding Company Income classification:

Excluded Rents:

Rents are considered excluded if they are paid by a related person who is a corporation or delivered to a CFC for the use of property in the country where the CFC is incorporated. This phenomenon is otherwise known as the related entity exception. 

Excluded Royalties:

Royalties are for the use of property in the country where the CFC was incorporated.

Do any Exceptions to Foreign Personal Holding Company Income exist? 

Yes, two notable exceptions are the same country exception and the related party exception. The same country exception provides that sales to property manufactured, grown, or extracted from the country in which the foreign corporation was incorporated is not foreign personal holding company income. This means that if mine coal and generate royalties in Australia the royalties would not be foreign personal holding company income. 

The related party exception is where the payor pays dividends, interest rents, or royalties to a related CFC. This means that if a CFC owns real estate in a country and generates rents from real estate it owns in that country the income is not Foreign Personal Holding Company Income. 

The exceptions to Foreign Personal Holding Company Income focus on the payor of the income rather than the recipient.

Special Rule for Certain Branch Income

954(d)(2) has a special rule for certain branch income to escape a 50% tax on manufacturing and sales income.

 

For any more information on Foreign Personal Holding Company Income or CFCs, contact Asena Advisors.

Peter Harper

Video: US-India Cross Border and Global Taxation Webinar with LCR Capital


We hosted a webinar with LCR Capital Partners on July 14th to discuss cross-border diversification and tax implications for the modern Indian expatriate. 

We discussed:

  • What investors should keep in mind when considering cross-border transactions
  • Tax implications and reporting requirements when investing offshore
  • Exploring options that can optimize tax liability before investing

Continue reading “Video: US-India Cross Border and Global Taxation Webinar with LCR Capital”

Announcement- 07/07/2020


We are pleased to announce the appointment of Peter Nathanial and David Calvert Jones to the Advisory Board of Asena Holdings.

Peter and David will work with the leadership team on strategic direction, governance, and key relationships as Asena looks to grow its exposure to private market investments via its partnership with WoodPoint Capital.

Peter Harper, CEO and Managing Director of Asena Advisors, said, “Our business model is centered around the provision of holistic support for foreign family offices that are investing in the US. You can have the best deal flow in the world but without a strong operational team and appropriate oversight, opportunity is lost in execution.

Peter and David bring many years of institutional and family office governance experience to the team and will support WoodPoint Capital in delivering it’s mandate; investing in essential services and essential infrastructure.”

About Us

10 years ago when we launched what is now Asena, we had a simple goal of providing seamless cross border services to foreign families who were looking to invest in the US and foreign entrepreneurs who were looking to expand into the US.

As our clients faced more challenges and experienced more success we focused on providing more holistic solutions.

These solutions were developed through the acquisition and development of key businesses that advise Australasian (Australia + New Zealand) and South Asian (Indian) family offices on US deals and span tax, accounting, law, and private equity that today includes: Asena Advisors; Polo Tax; MAP International; and WoodPoint Capital.

Bio – Peter Nathanial

Peter provides strategic, governance, risk management and restructuring advice to major financial institutions, central banks, governments and other international organizations from around the world.

Peter is a member of the managing partner for Kilimanjaro Credit Fund as well as a member of its investment committee. He is also a principal of Impala Partners, a boutique advisory firm. Immediately prior to joining Kilimanjaro and Impala, he was Group Chief Risk Officer and a Member of the Executive Committee for The Royal Bank of Scotland Group from January 2007 to December 2009. In this capacity, he oversaw a balance sheet with over $3 trillion globally, and formed RBS’ Global Restructuring Group and its Strategic Assets Unit, with combined assets of over $100 billion. Peter oversaw changes in management, structure, group policies, and risk mitigation activities across the RBS Group.

Prior to joining RBS, Peter spent sixteen years at Citigroup in a variety of senior business roles around the world including in New York, Zurich, London, Moscow and Warsaw. Peter was a Senior Corporate Officer and Head of Global Risk Oversight and Investments with responsibilities for Citigroup’s Asset Management, Insurance, Alternative Investments Businesses, Employee Pension Plans, Country Risk and Citigroup’s proprietary merger and acquisition activities. Earlier in his career at Citigroup, Peter also served in business management roles in Russia and Poland.

Peter is an Adjunct Professor at INSEAD Business School and the director of a certification programme for Boards of Directors in the financial sector. He also leads the Corporate Restructuring Course on the INSEAD MBA Programme in Fontainebleau. Peter is a Fellow of the International Corporate Governance Centre of INSEAD, and an elected Fellow of the Chartered Banker Institute of Scotland.

Peter sits on several for-profit and non-for profit boards around the world and he holds a Bachelor of Arts from Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia.

Bio – David Calvert Jones

David holds various board and advisory positions both in the private and philanthropic sectors in Australia and the United States.

Based in Los Angeles, David owns a number of companies and has a broad range of experience understanding the private capital markets from both the buy and sell side.

He has also completed dozens of venture capital deals in companies throughout Australia, the UK, the USA and is an accomplished athlete in motorsports, golf and mountain biking.

Asena Advisors partners with WoodPoint Capital


Asena Advisors (‘Asena’) has announced that its family office team has issued a new mandate to deliver investment solutions for its private and corporate clients. Asena deliver expert tax and family office consulting services to privately owned businesses and families. The new mandate has been secured by WoodPoint Capital (‘WoodPoint’), a best-in-class provider in the alternative investments arena.

WoodPoint is a specialist alternative investment firm responsible for assets across private equity, real estate, real assets and hedge funds. Founded in 2018, WoodPoint focuses on providing institutional and qualified clients access to global investment opportunities in these asset classes. The firm seeks to realize potential in private markets by financing and developing great companies, sought-after real estate and essential infrastructure.

Asena are a specialized consulting and professional services firm focused on global trade and the intergenerational transfer of familial wealth. When Asena opened its first office in the US a decade ago, it developed a strong reputation for serving the needs of global family offices and foreign-owned businesses.

Alex Thompson, Managing Director for WoodPoint, said, “We are delighted to work with Asena on an investment platform that delivers outcomes for investors, the businesses we invest in, and the communities in which we operate.”

Peter Harper, CEO of Asena, said, “Our partnership with WoodPoint Capital takes us one step closer to supporting a full service family office ecosystem in which we manage (directly or in collaboration with our partners) the private client tax, accounting, legal and private investment needs of our clients. WoodPoint’s focus on investing in the essentials is closely aligned with the needs of our clients and we are looking forward to a long and successful partnership.”

Private markets represent a significant investment opportunity globally. Private equity firms now own stakes in more than 13,000 companies across the globe, up from approximately 2,500 at the turn of the millennium. WoodPoint believes in investing in ‘the essentials’. The company focuses on making long-term investments in private markets in sectors such as housing, healthcare, retirement and food. WoodPoint looks for companies with strong and predictable cash flows, and with sustainable competitive advantage: this improves company survival probability during tough economic times. WoodPoint prioritizes value-based investment decisions. The price paid is the best indicator of long-term return.

U.S Market Entry Event Sydney March 21st

Looking to Expand Your Business into the United States?

Littler, together with Asena Advisors, Polyglot Group and FD Global Connections, will host a market briefing for companies looking to enter the U.S. market. The event will feature a panel of experts and companies that have experienced the pitfalls and successes of expanding into the U.S. and include:

  • Setting up a company
  • Immigration under the Trump Administration and what visa options are available
  • Engaging contractors in new markets
  • Sending employees to a new market and local hires
  • Immigration and tax considerations
  • Obtaining investors
  • Other global issues to consider in U.S. expansion

RSVP:

Please RSVP with event, city and date to Susan Hanks at [email protected]

Speakers:

  • Naomi Seddon, Shareholder
  • Merille Ragas, Counsel
  • Aman Mullee, Senior International Tax Consultant
  • Trena Blair, CEO, FD Global Connections
  • Corinne Bot, CEO of Polyglot Group

The event will be held at

Polyglot Group
25 Burton Street
Glebe NSW 2037

On the 21th March 2019

Program:
6:00 p.m. — 9:00 p.m.

Program is complimentary.

What is a Single Member LLC

What is a Single Member LLC?

A Single-Member Limited Liability Company is a style of entity classification that has one owner (member) who has complete control over the company. Unique to other types, the LLC itself is considered a separate entity, independent of its owner.

How Single Member LLCs Work

The default classification for federal tax purposes is a disregarded entity; thus, tax flows through to the member. This also provides liability protection for the member.

Are Single-Member LLCs similar to Sole Proprietorships?

The taxation is similar; however, the legal natures differ significantly. 

LLC:
    • Personal liability is limited 
    • Needs to be registered in the relevant state
    • Regarded as a legal entity 
Sole Proprietorships:
    • Has full liability 
    • Does not get registered
    • Not regarded as a legal entity

Single Member LLCs vs. Multi-Member LLCs

Ownership
Single-Member LLC Ownership

An SMLLC has one owner (member) who has complete control over the company. The SMLLC is its own legal entity, independent of its owner.

Multi-member LLC Ownership

This LLC has two or more owners (members) that share control of the company. Unless it elects S Corporation tax treatment, there may be an unlimited number of members in a multi-member. The LLC may decide on how (what percentage of) profits and losses will be distributed among its members.

Management

An SMLLC has one member who is also considered the manager. 

However, a Multi-member LLC must decide if they would like the business to be member-managed or manager-managed.

Member-managed LLC

In a member-managed LLC, the members participate in the work of the business. The company requires the majority approval of all of its members when making significant decisions, such as entering into contracts.  

Manager-managed LLC

In a manager-managed LLC, the members agree on a manager, either a particular member or members of the LLC or a third party, to whom they give authority to manage the day-to-day operations and decisions of the business.  

Asena Advisors focuses on strategic advice that sets us apart from most wealth management businesses. We protect wealth.

Personal Asset Protection

Both types of LLCs protect the owners’ personal assets due to their being separate legal structures.   

Owners may, however, be held personally responsible in certain situations. 

Income Tax Treatment
SMLLC Default Tax Treatment

The income tax treatment of an LLC is that the owner reports the business’s profits and losses on Schedule C of Form 1040, and the company does not report or pay taxes independently. The LLC owner also pays self-employment tax using their Social Security number and Medicare) on all taxable income from the business and reports it on their personal tax return. 

Formation

The formations of the types of LLCs are similar:

    • Choose a business name 
    • Apply for an EIN (Employer Identification Number
    • Designate a registered agent
    • File Articles of Organization with the state in terms of the applicable state law
    • Complete the Entity Classification Election Form (IRS Form 8832).
    • Create an LLC operating agreement 
    • Open a business bank account
    • Obtain the necessary business licenses and permits
    • Know and abide by the relevant employment laws
    • Learn the requirements to remain in good standing 

Read our blog – Can you Change a Single Member LLC to a Multi Member LLC? – Asena Advisors for more information

Compliance

A Single-member LLC usually has less-complex requirements to fulfill than a Multi-member one. 

Who Needs a Single Member LLC?

There is no right or wrong answer to this, and it will depend on the specific circumstances of the business and individual. However, a single-member LLC is a prevalent structure for small business owners and entrepreneurs. 

How to Form a Single-Member LLC

  1. Step 1: Name Your LLC
    1. Once you have decided on the specific state where you will form the LLC, you will need to register a unique name and not yet used or registered in that state. 
  2. Step 2: Choose an LLC Registered Agent
    1. It is important to choose a registered agent for your LLC who acts as the representative of the LLC in the state of formation. Some of the responsibilities of the registered agent are to accept legal documents on behalf of your LLC and, if needed (which most LLC owners would rather want to avoid), lawsuits. 
  3. Step 3: File Your LLC’s Articles of Organization
    1. You will need to draft and complete the LLC’s Articles of Incorporation on the secretary of state’s website. 
  4. Step 4: Create an LLC Operating Agreement
    1. It is wise to create an operating agreement for the LLC in order to set out the rules of the business entity whenever it is requested by either a financial institution or a potential buyer. The contract will stipulate how these types of transactions should be dealt with. 
  5. Step 5: Get an EIN
    1. Even if the LLC does not hire employees or start trading immediately, you will need an employer identification number (EIN). The LLC needs to have an EIN because if you apply for finance at a bank, they will need the LLC’s EIN, and it is required to complete your return. Applying for an EIN can be done on the IRS’s website.

How To Pay Yourself As A Single Member LLC

You don’t get paid a salary as the owner of a single-member LLC. Instead, you pay yourself by withdrawing the profits made by the LLC as and when needed. It’s also referred to as an owner’s draw. 

Hiring Employees As A Single Member LLC

First and foremost, a single-member LLC can hire employees. You need to ensure that you adhere to payroll requirements. So make sure you withhold payroll taxes when paying employees and paying it over to the IRS. 

Tips For Setting Up An Single-Member LLC

Make sure you understand your state’s specific requirements to remain compliant. For example, you should understand the state’s renewal filing requirements, annual reports, and filing fees. Some states levy fines if you fail to maintain the LLC’s compliance.  

When A Single Member LLC Might Be Wrong For You

There is no one shoe fits all answer to this question, but we can point out certain factors to consider when making this decision.

  • If you are operating as a sole proprietor without any issues, why burden yourself with additional paperwork and compliance required for an LLC.
  • You can’t afford the ongoing maintenance fees.
  • If there is more than one member, it will then be a multi-member LLC, and depending on the members and business, an alternative structure might be more feasible and advantageous. 

The Pros And Cons Of A Single Member LLC

Pros:
    • Flexibility in terms of how you want the LLC to be taxed
    • Very little paperwork and can form an LLC with one person
    • Flow-through of income taxation simplifies your tax returns. 
    • Liability Protection if the LLC has legal issues. 
Cons:
    • The owner is not allowed to pay themselves wages.
    • Depending on the state, renewal fees could be expensive.
    • Many states levy capital values or franchise tax.
    • Investors are more prone to invest in a corporation which could be an issue if you want to raise capital.

We support family offices with global transactions and advise on US direct investment, mergers & acquisitions.

FAQs

  1. How Much Does It Cost To Form A Single-Member LLC?
    1. It depends on the state where the LLC is formed.
  2. How Are Single-Member LLCs Taxed?
    1. The default classification of a single-member LLC is taxed as a sole proprietorship, and therefore the LLC is treated as a disregarded entity for federal purposes. 
    2. You can also elect to be taxed as either a C corporation or an S corporation. This would require the LLC to complete a separate corporate income tax return. 
  3. Do I Need A Lawyer To Form A Single-Member LLC?
    1. No. This is not a requirement. 
  4. How Are Single-Member LLC Members Paid?
    1. By making withdrawals from the LLC’s profits. This is referred to as an owner’s draw.
  5. Does An SMLLC Need An Operating Agreement?
    1. It is generally not required but highly recommendable. 
  6. Does An SMLLC Need An Employer Identification Number?
    1. Yes
  7. What is the difference between an LLC and a single-member LLC?
    1. There is no difference. An LLC is a type of business structure regarded as a hybrid structure that combines features of both a corporation and a partnership. And a single-member LLC means the LLC has only one member. 
  8. What is the point of a single-member LLC?
    1. Single-member LLCs are considered separate legal entity because of how liabilities are treated and therefore protects the owner’s personal assets from being seized to pay for business debts.
  9. Is it better to be a single-member LLC?
    1. It depends and should be dealt with on a case-to-case basis. It is, however, a standard structure for small startups. Contact an advisor for an in-depth analysis of your case.
  10. What is the difference between a sole proprietor and single-member LLC?
    1. The significant differences are:
      1. Every liability of a sole proprietorship is the responsibility of the owner. On the contrary, this is not the case in a single-member LLC, where the member is shielded from liability.
      2. Raising capital is more difficult for a sole proprietor than for a single-member LLC. 
For more information on Subpart F, please contact one of our specialists at Asena Advisors. We make sure that your specific needs are catered for.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

AAA Immigration and Tax Seminar – NYC


Click here to register

Join presenters from Cammisa Markel and Asena Family Office for an update on key immigration and tax issues including; green cards & permanent residency ­ appropriate pathways for residing permanently in the U.S., recent immigration policy / visa changes in the U.S., how and when someone can become a US citizen, tax residency, superannuation/pensions, employee stock and estate tax.

Presenters

  • Cammisa Markel

    Zjantelle Cammisa Markel, Immigration Attorney & Principal

    Cammisa Markel is a New York based immigration law firm that represents organizations and individuals from all over the world. Principal, Zjantelle Cammisa Markel arrived to the United States from her hometown of Adelaide, South Australia, with the intention of a brief visit. A decade, a husband and four children later, New York has become her home, and enabling other people’s American aspirations to happen is her passion.Professional and friendly, Zjantelle obtains working visas for people at all levels of their career. From corporate executives to scholars. Zjantelle’s career spans Sydney, London, Rome and New York. This international experience gives her a unique understanding of European, Australian and American culture, laws and business practices. Her Australian background and specialization in processing E3 visas makes Zjantelle particularly popular with Australian clientele.

  • Asena Family Office

    Peter Harper, Managing Director US and General Counsel

    Asena Advisors is a leader in US-Australia taxation, U.S.-UK taxation, and US-India taxation. It is highly regarded globally for its specialized tax services and is frequently entrusted with work by governments, major financial institutions, and affluent families worldwide. Peter is the CEO of Asena Advisors, where he specializes in advising foreign family offices and founders. He focuses on US direct investment, cross-border mergers & acquisitions, and the tax impact of international relocation. He is highly regarded for his expertise in optimizing investments in the United States and navigating the complexities of global tax considerations.

The event will be held at

WeWork, Financial District
85 Broad Street, 30th Floor
New York, NY 10004
On the 6th march 2019 from 6:00 – 8:00pm

6:00pm – Registration
6:30pm – Guest Presenters | Followed by Q&A
7:30 – 8:00pm – Reception with complimentary refreshments

Members* $15 | Future Members $35

*To access member pricing, please log into your member account
Want to become a member? Find out more here.

Click here to register

US Market Entry Events – Adelaide March 25th

Looking to Expand Your Business into the United States?

Littler, Asena Advisors, FD Global Connections, Business SA and the government of South Australia will host a market briefing for
companies looking to enter the U.S. market. The event will feature experts to discuss the pitfalls and successes of expanding into the U.S.
and include:

  • Setting up a company
  • Immigration under the Trump Administration and what visa options are available
  • Engaging contractors
  • Local employment issues
  • Obtaining investors
  • Other global issues to consider in U.S. expansion
  • USA Go-To-Market Strategies

Speakers:

  • Naomi Seddon, Shareholder
  • Trena Blair, CEO, FD Global Connection
  • Aman Mullee, Senior Internaonal Tax Consultant

RSVP:

Please RSVP with event, city and date to Susan Hanks at [email protected]

The event will be held at

The Atrium
Business SA
136 Greenhill Road
Unley, SA 5061

On the 25th March 2019 from 5:30pm to 7:30pm

Program is complimentary.

GILTI


The world of U.S. taxation is fraught with rules, Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and Treasury Department regulations, and laws, not to mention potentially massive pitfalls for not complying with your tax liability. This risk is especially the case when it comes to international income tax. Adding to the complexity are acronyms such as CFC, FBAR, FATCA, and, now, the mother of all acronyms, GILTI. But what is GILTI, or global intangible low-taxed income? More importantly, what is the impact of the GILTI rules, does GILTI apply to you, and what are the planning considerations for global individuals and business owners, whether U.S.-based or non-U.S.?

What is Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income (GILTI)?

The Internal Revenue Code (IRC), enforced by the IRS, sets out a complex approach to tax specific income of certain non-U.S. entities owned by U.S. shareholders under the global intangible low-taxed income or GILTI regime. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA) is a tax policy that had few but significant elements to contradict the territorial tax approach, and one of them was promulgated as the GILTI regime. 

Previously excluded under the subpart F regime, certain earnings of controlled foreign corporations (CFC) have become taxable income thanks to the TCJA, and specifically, under the GILTI regime.  

But before we discuss GILTI, we should specify what constitutes subpart F income. Enacted in the year 1962, IRC §952 defines subpart F income in relation to a CFC as the sum of insurance income, foreign base company income, international boycott income, illegal bribes, kickbacks, or other illegal payments made by the CFC, or income derived from certain disfavored countries. It does not include any income effectively connected to a U.S. trade or business. It is important to note that income that is not categorized as foreign base company income and insurance income, if taxable in a foreign jurisdiction at an effective tax rate of more than 90% of the top U.S. corporate tax rate (high-tax exclusion), would be considered income subject to GILTI. Therefore, a CFC’s subpart F income would not include an income effectively taxed at more than 18.9% (i.e., 90% of 21%) in a foreign country. Stated another way, GILTI income is any income that is not considered subpart F income. The impact here is that GILTI often results in double taxation of a CFC’s earnings. Learn more about Subpart F in our blog _____

Structure and Purpose of GILTI

Before the TCJA, U.S. shareholders and owners could defer income tax on the active earnings of foreign entities until those earnings were repatriated to the U.S. in the form of dividends. 

IRC §951A, which contains the GILTI rules, was added to the tax code by the TCJA. One of the features of the TCJA was to provide corporate shareholders a 100% dividends received deduction (DRD) on dividends from foreign corporations. However, to prevent taxpayers from shifting income offshore to low- or no-tax jurisdictions, Congress passed tax reform via the GILTI rules. These require U.S. shareholders of CFCs to include GILTI in gross income each year. 

Specifically, GILTI is a 10.5% percent minimum tax enacted on this income to dissuade U.S. taxpayers from engaging in profit-shifting.

And although the TCJA lowered the top corporate income tax rate in the U.S. to 21% from 35%, many countries still have a corporate tax rate lower than that in the U.S. 

Who Does it Impact?

Do GILTI Rules Apply To Your Organization?

The GILTI rules impact both U.S. individual shareholders and U.S. corporate owners. “In this scenario, a U.S. shareholder is a person who owns directly, indirectly, or constructively 10% or more of the vote or value of a foreign corporation. A U.S. person includes a U.S. citizen or resident, a domestic partnership, a domestic corporation, any estate (that is not foreign), and any trust if a U.S. court has jurisdiction over its administration and one or more U.S. persons have the authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust.” A CFC is any foreign corporation in which U.S. shareholders own more than 50% of the vote or value directly, indirectly, or constructively.

Applicability to U.S. Taxpayers

It is important to note that the GILTI rules do not impact non-U.S. corporate owners and taxpayers. However, constructive rules of ownership may be looked into to determine whether a U.S. subsidiary of a non-U.S. holding company should make an election. It should also be noted that U.S. companies that have no foreign operations are not impacted by these rules. On the other hand, it is safe to say that multinationals generally would be impacted by these rules. Finally, one should avoid being bamboozled by the acronym GILTI, because as we will explain in the next section, it impacts a lot more than just intangible assets or taxable income.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

How the Tax on GILTI Works

While it will be difficult, if not impossible, to demonstrate an entire understanding of GILTI taxation in this limited space, we can share various concepts here to provide an overview. We recommend contacting us for a more specific analysis of your case.

A U.S. shareholder’s GILTI inclusion is the excess of their pro-rata share of net CFC tested income over their net deemed tangible income return (net DTIR). 

But what is tested income? It is the aggregate pro-rata share of income minus the aggregate pro-rata share of loss (but not less than zero). Net DTIR is defined as 10% of the U.S. shareholder’s pro-rata share of aggregate qualified business asset investment (QBAI), less specified interest expense. 

But what is QBAI? It is the CFC’s average quarterly basis in depreciable tangible property used in a trade or business for the production of tested income. Stated another way, GILTI, with respect to any U.S. shareholder, is net CFC tested income less net DTIR.

Does GILTI Really Work as Intended?

For all intents and purposes, GILTI is, in essence, a form of minimum tax on the profits of CFCs. This calculation generally equals the CFC’s total income in excess of its net deemed tangible income return, which equals 10% of the CFC’s investment in depreciable, tangible business assets minus certain interest expenses.

The income tax on GILTI is particularly significant for CFCs whose profits are high with respect to their investment in tangible or fixed assets, such as those providing software and services. Therefore, this presents a potentially significant problem for taxpayers in specific industries, but it is certainly not limited to these taxpayers.  

Further, GILTI is reported on U.S. tax forms such as Form 5471 (and its various schedules), Form 8992, and Form 1040 (for individual taxpayers). Given the complexity of the GILTI inclusion and calculations, not to mention the IRS’ numerous filing requirements, it is highly advisable to enlist the services of a qualified international tax advisor and preparer to ensure that one is appropriately filing the correct forms and in such a way as to minimize income tax and eliminate risk exposure.

What Should Companies Do?

For U.S. corporate owners, a CFC’s earnings excluded under the ‘high-tax exclusion’ election are not treated as ‘previously taxed profits.’ Accordingly, foreign tax credit paid for such prior earnings would not be eligible for adjustment and may not be eligible to claim dividend deduction (unless conditions of IRC §245A are satisfied). The possible tax cost of CFC’s earnings excluded pursuant to the ‘high-tax exclusion’ election should be evaluated against the possible foreign tax credit to decide the situation that is more beneficial to U.S. shareholders.

A corporate U.S. shareholder can claim a 50% deduction of the GILTI and is eligible for 80% of foreign tax credit that was either accrued or paid by a CFC. In comparison, an individual U.S. shareholder is not eligible for it unless they make an election under IRC §962 to be treated as a corporate U.S. shareholder for U.S. federal tax purposes with respect to taxation of a CFC’s earnings.

Opportunities and Risks

For U.S. individual shareholders, the burden of GILTI is more than a corporate U.S. shareholder. To be at par with a corporate shareholder, an individual taxpayer may make an election to be treated as a corporate shareholder. This would allow GILTI deduction and foreign tax credit within permissible limits. Structural reforms in the business concerning individual ownership in the U.S. should be revisited where global owners propose to become U.S. residents. The cost of compliance should be weighed against the election for ‘high-tax exclusion.’ Additionally, the tax consideration at the time of accrued and actual distribution might result in double taxation.

Further, a proposed regulation published in June 2019 was issued covering IRC §§951, 951A, 954, 956, 958, and 1502. The 2020 Regulations have finalized aspects covered under IRC §951A and §954 related to GILTI’ high-tax exclusion’, but other provisions are still pending.  

The 2020 Regulations cover the below items concerning GILTI’ high-tax exclusion’:

  • Conform to implement a unitary approach towards ‘high-tax exclusion’ for subpart F and GILTI: The unitary approach towards ‘high-tax exclusion’ would provide relief to a U.S. shareholder whose CFC’s earnings have already been taxable at an effective tax rate higher than 18.9% and no more part of GILTI inclusion.   
  • Redefine ‘tested unit’: A ‘tested unit’ now includes a CFC, an interest in a pass-through entity held by a CFC (which is not treated as a flow-through entity under a foreign country’s law) certain branches of a CFC.
  • Consolidated group: The manner of computing ‘tested income’ for the consolidated CFC group is consistent with that of a single CFC.
  • Annual election: U.S. shareholders owning more than 50% of the shares (directly or indirectly) may elect for high-tax exclusion annually. They should, however, weigh the cost of compliance as the election continues to apply unless revoked. The election could be made or revoked on an amended federal income return subject to specific requirements.
  • Applicability: The ‘high-tax exclusion’ applies on or after July 23, 2020. But U.S. shareholders may apply for a period after December 31, 2017, to July 22, 2020, under the 2020 Regulations.

GILTI: A Classic Misdirection

While the U.S. Congress no doubt had many goals when it came to passing the TCJA, in particular, to address issues with international profit-shifting and repatriating foreign income, what actually ended up happening is that the tax code became even more complex, rather than simple or streamlined, which was probably not the intended goal of this tax policy. Further, the GILTI rules made the U.S. tax system even more global than before, and as a result, made tax reform more complicated. Therefore, taxpayers must carefully manage their international operations or risk facing the wrath of these new regulations.

Expense Apportionment

GILTI requires taxpayers to potentially apportion interest expenses as well as general and administrative expenses. This allocation of expenses may reduce the GILTI inclusion below the amount of the foreign income on which the CFC paid at least a 13.125% foreign effective tax rate. Due to this, a U.S. shareholder may have foreign taxes that exceed the U.S. tax on GILTI. This foreign tax credit limitation results in excess foreign tax credits. In other words, these would be tax credits that the taxpayer cannot claim to the extent the tax credits exceed the pre-credit U.S. tax on GILTI.

However, the opposite will occur in some cases, and taxpayers will pay additional U.S. tax on their GILTI income because the number of foreign tax credits associated with a GILTI inclusion will not cover the full amount of U.S. tax. One way around this is to treat a portion of the taxpayer’s CFC stock as an exempt asset, which would reduce the expense apportionment to the GILTI inclusion and will help the taxpayer claim foreign tax credits. Most taxpayers will likely pay some U.S. tax on their GILTI inclusions since the foreign tax credit is limited to 80% of the taxes associated with a GILTI inclusion. 

QBAI: The Cliff Effect

As discussed previously, net DTIR is defined as 10% of the U.S. shareholder’s pro-rata share of aggregate qualified business asset investment (QBAI), less specified interest expense. To the extent a U.S. shareholder’s pro-rata share of CFC net tested income exceeds net DTIR, there will be a GILTI inclusion. Stated another way, the U.S. shareholder is allowed a 10% rate of return on assets as exempt income before being subject to GILTI.

It is important to note that CFCs with a tested loss are considered to have zero QBAI. Therefore, taxpayers should be careful of this QBAI cliff, a situation in which it is all-or-nothing.

Calling All Intangibles

While it appears that the U.S. Congress attempted a formulaic approach when writing the GILTI rules, what actually ended up happening was that due to the general nature of the GILTI rules (in that anything not subpart F income is GILTI income), nearly every U.S. multinational would be affected by these rules, even if they do not have any foreign-derived intangible income, thus apparently defeating the purpose of the regulations.  

GILTI: NOL?

A discussion of net operating losses (NOL) should be considered when we discuss GILTI, as this is a common topic when considering business taxes. However, in this scenario, it is not clear whether a tested loss carryover can be used for GILTI purposes. We know that domestic corporations may generally carry over an NOL to subsequent years. Therefore, it is reasonable to extend this treatment to CFCs. However, that does not appear to be the case here, and a U.S. shareholder who has a profit in one year and a loss in the next, would receive no benefit from the loss in the second year and would be subject to GILTI tax in the first tax year. 

Coordinated Global Tax Planning

The taxpayer’s exposure to being treated as a U.S. shareholder in a CFC results in additional U.S. income tax under subpart F and GILTI regimes. A timely discussion with your tax advisor to evaluate the different parameters to determine the global effective tax rate could assist you in deciding the impact and addressing income tax leakages, not to mention ensuring that you are compliant with IRS tax filing requirements and pay the necessary tax liability. Indeed, as more and more taxpayers look to take advantage of technology and mobility to benefit from international arbitrage, it is crucial to consider the impact that GILTI may have on you and your business before embarking on such a move. 

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

A Time for Reexamination

It goes without saying that the GILTI rules introduced many changes in the world of international business. This requires taxpayers, directors, shareholders, and tax advisors to remain vigilant and reexamine their methods when it comes to tax planning and preparation. Further, it is unlikely that the GILTI rules will go away, and therefore, it has become even more important than ever to stay up-to-date with international tax law and regulations, especially in light of the possibility that treasury departments across the world may try to capture any shortfalls with similar tax legislation, under the guise of tax reform. Therefore, given that this sort of tax policy may become increasingly ubiquitous worldwide, multinationals need a good offense and a good defense, and that involves engaging the services of a firm specialized in dealing with guiding clients through the complexity in order to avoid needless tax liability. 

For more information on GILTI, please contact one of our specialists at Asena Advisors. We make sure that your specific needs are catered for.

Arin Vahanian

Janpriya Rooprai

Peter Harper

US Market Entry Events – Sunshine Coast March 26th

Looking to Expand Your Business into the United States?

Littler, together with Trade & Investment Queensland, ASENA Advisors and FD Global Connections, will host a market briefing webinar for companies looking to enter the U.S. market. The event will feature a panel of experts that will cover the pitfalls and successes of expanding into the U.S. and including:

  • Setting up a company
  • Immigration under the Trump Administration and what visa options are available
  • Engaging contractors in new markets
  • Sending employees to a new market and local hires
  • Immigration and tax considerations
  • Obtaining investors
  • Other global issues to consider in U.S. expansion
  • 5 critical areas to prepare your business for market entry

Following the webinar, the team will be on the Sunshine Coast for in-person meetings for any companies that are interested in expanding their business into the US. Spaces are limited. Details on how to reserve your place are below.

Webinar RSVP:

Please RSVP with event city and date to Susan Hanks at [email protected] and a copy of the webinar will be sent to you.

RSVP:

Please RSVP with event, city and date to Susan Hanks [email protected] or 310.772.7211

Speakers:

  • Naomi Seddon, Shareholder
  • Trena Blair, CEO, FD Global Connections
  • Aman Mullee, Senior International Tax Consultant

The event will be held at

Club Kawana
476 Nicklin Way
Wurtulla QLD 4575
On the 26th March 2019 between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m

Program is complimentary.

US-AU DTA: Article 18 – Pensions, Annuities, Alimony and Child Support

Background

The background of this week’s blog is a bit different from the previous ones due to the unique nature of the topic. This week we will be looking at Article 18 of the DTA – Pensions, Annuities, Alimony, and Child Support, which affects a much broader demographic than other articles. The background focuses more on the global economy and financial markets, but there is a reason for this.

Most people start saving for their retirement when they earn their first salary. Contributions are made monthly (either by yourself or on your behalf) towards a Pension Fund (IRA, 401k, super, etc.) and are invested in various classes of assets. We diversify investments to reduce risk and maximize continuous growth, and it gives people a sense of comfort and security to invest in their future via a Pension Fund. 

Asena Advisors is the only multi-disciplinary (Accounting and Legal) international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S. -Australia taxation.

In recent months, the world has contended with the emergence of the Omicron variant, central bank policy tightening, and persistent inflation. And most recently, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has ignited a geopolitical crisis that is shaking global financial markets to their core.

As tensions continue to mount in Eastern Europe, the concern about what is to come has led to some people impulsively cashing out their retirement portfolios or reviewing them. 

I’ve always been a great admirer of Warren Buffet and his quotes on investments. 

So just to lay the foundation for this week’s blog, I thought I would share two relevant quotes about the current economic climate.

“The most important quality for an investor is temperament, not intellect.” 

“Uncertainty actually is the friend of the buyer of long-term values.”

Humans are, by nature, irrational beings and are often tempted to make trades when they think the market is working against them, whereas in contrast, it is the well-tempered investor that learns not to watch the market. This person ultimately ends up reaping the most rewards over the long term. 

Their investment philosophy is that you don’t need to have an extremely high I.Q. to build more wealth, but rather that you should be more disciplined with your reaction toward the market’s irrationality. 

Now to link the background with the rest of the blog to follow, if you are a U.S. resident with an Australian pension or vice versa, prior to considering whether to cash out your pension or not, make sure you take a step back and instead make sure you understand the potential adverse tax implications of having an international pension fund. 

Introduction

The purpose of the Australian treaty is to prevent double taxation and fiscal evasion.

Because the U.S. does not tax contributions or accumulated earnings, and Australia does not tax the distribution of benefits, a U.S. resident could perceivably relocate from the U.S. to Australia and never pay income tax on contributions, accumulated earnings, or the payment of pension benefits that accrued while the employee worked in the U.S. To prevent this issue, the two countries formed a double taxation agreement.

Interpreting Article 18 of The DTA – Pensions, Annuities, Alimony, and Child Support

Article 18 addresses the taxation of cross-border pensions and annuities. Subject to Article 19, pensions and other similar remuneration paid to an individual who is a resident of one Contracting State in connection with past employment shall be taxable only in that State. 

Article 18(4) 

defines the term’ pensions and other similar remuneration, as used in this Article, to mean ‘periodic payments made by reason of retirement or death, in consideration for services rendered, or by way of compensation paid after retirement for injuries received in connection with past employment.’ 

Article 18(5) 

defines the term ‘annuities,’ as used in this Article, to mean ‘stated sums paid periodically at stated times during life, or during a specified or ascertainable number of years, under an obligation to make the payments in return for adequate and full consideration (other than services rendered or to be rendered).’ 

We are the only multi-disciplinary international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S.– Australia taxation.

Article 18 is critical to any U.S. person who is a beneficiary of an Australian Superannuation Fund for the following reasons:

  • The U.S. has taxing authority over vested Australian superannuation benefits pursuant to Article 18 of the DTA; and
  • In the absence of a specific Article dealing with contributions and the annual income derived by pension schemes (as exist in the U.K. treaty), the U.S. retains the right under Article 1 of the DTA to tax contributions and accumulated earnings under its domestic tax laws.

In terms of the IRC, most foreign retirement plans are not considered “qualified plans” under Section 401(a), which means the plans generally do not qualify for tax-deferral treatment. 

For a pension plan to be tax-exempt, the plan must satisfy the requirements contained in § 401 Internal Revenue Code 1986 (IRC). Section 401(a) IRC specifically provides that, for a pension plan to be a “qualified plan” (and therefore exempt from tax under § 501 IRC), it must be organized in the U.S. Accordingly, this means that no Australian superannuation plan (whether retail or self-managed) can be a “qualified plan.” (Read our Whitepaper on Taxation of Foreign Pensions for more details)

There are essentially three phases of U.S. tax treatment that need to be looked at when dealing with the taxation of an Australian superannuation plan. I will provide a brief summary of the three phases for this blog, but please review our Whitepaper for more information.

Phase 1 – Contributions 

Suppose contributions are made to an Australian superannuation fund after an Australian citizen becomes a U.S. person (or a U.S. citizen becomes an Australian resident). In that case, the contributions will be taxable in the U.S. under § 402(b)(1) IRC. 

Phase 2 – Earnings Derived Within A Superannuation Plan After An Australian Citizen Becomes A U.S. Person

Subchapter J contains the general rules concerning estates, trusts, beneficiaries and decedents, specifically the grantor trust rules. While it is critical that an individual assessment of the circumstances of every taxpayer be undertaken, most superannuation plans (or portions thereof) in Australia could be classified as grantor trusts for U.S. tax purposes. 

Phase 3 – Distribution of benefits 

In our opinion, there are two possible ways in which accrued Australian superannuation benefits (contributions and earnings) may be taxed in the U.S.

The first is that Australian superannuation benefits of a U.S. person will be taxable upon such a person attaining 60 years of age (the Australian retirement age). The taxpayer will first be liable for tax in Australia, but receive foreign tax credits in the U.S. (creditable only against U.S. federal income tax) for the Australian tax paid (which will be nil if the account is in the benefits phase). In the event of any shortfall, they will pay further federal, state, and city income tax (where applicable).

The second view (the alternate view) concerns highly compensated employees (HCE) and the application of § 402(b)(4) IRC. If an employee is a highly compensated U.S. person who is also a member of a foreign pension plan (i.e., an Australian superannuation plan), technically, on a literal reading of § 410(b)(3)(C) IRC, there is a high likelihood that the foreign pension plan will fail the minimum coverage tests because contributions made in favor of non-resident aliens with no US-source income are not included for the purposes of determining whether the coverage tests have been satisfied.

Conclusion

Both Australia and the U.S. recognize the need for their citizens to be able to self-fund their retirement and the importance of having a globally mobile workforce. This is evident when looking at the concessional tax treatment for individuals who maximize superannuation and pension contributions, and the current impact government-supported pension plans have on federal and state budgets.

We are the only multi-disciplinary international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S.– Australia taxation.

The inadequacies in the DTA arise because it approaches Australian superannuation and U.S. pensions as though they are only taxed at one point, which is on distribution.

Unfortunately, unless Article 18 is amended, the adverse tax implications of U.S. migration on a taxpayer’s superannuation benefits may become a determining factor in whether an executive migrates between Australia and the U.S.

So, the current global economic turmoil might be the perfect opportunity to focus on reviewing the tax exposure of your pension fund instead of considering cashing it out.

 

Our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisors will be able to assist you with these complex tax rules that could apply to your pension fund. In times of adversity, you need proper guidance to your specific needs, and our Multi-Family Office will help you find opportunities in uncertain times. 

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

US Market Entry Events – Gold Coast March 27th

Looking to Expand Your Business into the United States?

Littler, together Trade & Investment Queensland, Asena Advisors and FD Global Connections, will host a market briefing for companies looking to enter the U.S. market. The event will feature a panel of experts and companies that have experienced the pitfalls and successes of expanding into the U.S. and include:

  • Setting up a company
  • Immigration under the Trump Administration and what visa options are available
  • Engaging contractors in new markets
  • Sending employees to a new market and local hires
  • Immigration and tax considerations
  • Obtaining investors
  • Other global issues to consider in U.S. expansion

RSVP:

Please RSVP with event, city and date to Susan Hanks at [email protected]

Speakers:

  • Naomi Seddon, Shareholder
  • Trena Blair, CEO, FD Global Connections
  • Aman Mullee, Senior International Tax Consultant

The event will be held at

Fishburners, Level 3
155 Queen Street
Brisbane, QLD 4000
On the 27th March 2019 from 5:30pm to 8:30pm

Registration:
5:30 p.m. — 6:00 p.m.

Program:
6:00 p.m. — 8:30 p.m.

Program is complimentary.

5471 Schedule M

What Is Schedule M Form 5471

This schedule is different from many of the Form 5471 Schedules that are required for the different categories of filers or taxpayers. 

This schedule is not an income tax return to report foreign tax, but rather an information return of U.S. persons designed to measure Controlled Foreign Corporation (“CFC”) intercompany payments. This Schedule requires the majority U.S. owner to provide information on transactions between the Controlled Foreign Corporation and its shareholders or other related persons. So this needs to be filed irrespective of income generated that foreign tax was paid on and or tax credit application. 

Who Must Complete Schedule M

Any U.S. citizen, corporation, partnership, trust, or estate who has at least 10% ownership in a foreign corporation, needs to file Form 5471.

Form 5471 and its accompanying schedules must be completed and filed by the following categories of persons or taxpayers:

Category 1 Filer

Officers, directors, or ten percent (or greater) shareholders in a CFC who are US persons. Category 1 includes U.S. shareholders of Section 965 “specified foreign corporation” at any tax year of the foreign corporation, and where that taxpayer-owned that stock on the last day of that year.

A category 1 filer does not need to complete form 5471 M. However they do need to file form 5471 schedule J. 

Category 2 Filer

U.S. persons who are in relation to the foreign corporation a director or officer, where since the last time Form 5471 was filed by a taxpayer, a US shareholder or person has acquired at least 10% or acquired an additional 10% or more in the foreign company.

Category 2 filers do not need to file form 5471 schedule M.

Category 3 Filer

U.S person who 

    • Has acquired a cumulative 10% or greater ownership in the outstanding stock of the foreign corporation;
    • Since the last filing the US person has acquired an additional 10% or more or ownership in such stock;
    • Owns 10% or greater of the value of the outstanding stock of the foreign corporation when it is reorganized, or 
    • Disposes his stock in the foreign corporation to reduce the value of the person’s ownership to less than 10%, or who becomes a U.S. person while owning 10% or more in value of the outstanding stock of the foreign corporation.
Category 4 Filer

Category 4 filers are U.S. persons who had “control” of a foreign corporation for an uninterrupted period of at least 30 days during the foreign corporation’s accounting period. 

Control is defined as more than 50% of voting power or value, with Section 958 of the Internal Revenue Code attribution rules applying. 

The M schedule to 5471 must be completed by Category 4 filers to report the transactions that occurred during the CFC’s accounting period ending with or within the U.S. person’s tax year to the Internal Rev Services.

Category 4 filers also need to complete 5471 schedule J. 

Category 5 Filer

U.S. persons who are 10% or more shareholders in a corporation that was a CFC for an uninterrupted period of 30 days during its annual accounting period and who owned stock in the CFC on the last day of its annual accounting period.

They don’t need to file the M schedule for the current year and therefore form 5471 instructions for the M schedule can be ignored. They do however need to file schedule J of the 5471 and take note of the respective instructions. 

What Category of Filer Must File Attach a Schedule M to their IRS Form 5471

Category 4 filers, as explained above, are the only one out of the 5 categories that need to complete Schedule M.

Transactions of Foreign Corporations

There are various types of different transactions that are included and reportable to the Internal revenue service on this Schedule in the current year. We recommend you refer to the instructions on Form 5471 for further details, especially in respect of a tax credit for purposes of your income tax return. 

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Transactions that Must be Disclosed on Schedule M

This Schedule requires the CFC shareholder or related party to disclose a number of different transactions to the IRS. Anyone completing this Schedule should understand that the IRS will utilize certain information disclosed on this informational return to ensure that the CFC shareholders and related parties report and pay tax on their actual share of income arising from so-called controlled transactions. The IRS, therefore, adopts the regulations under the IRC to adopt an arm’s length standard for evaluating the appropriateness of each transaction under the transfer pricing rules. 

Reporting Transactions on Schedule M

Every U.S. (Category 4 filer) must file this Schedule to report the transactions that occurred during the foreign corporation’s annual accounting period ending with or within the U.S. person’s tax year to the IRS. If a U.S. corporation has stock ownership in a foreign corporation and is a member of a consolidated group, list the common parent as the U.S. person filing this Schedule with the IRS. 

Examples:

  • Distributions by way of Dividends received (exclude hybrid dividends, deemed distributions under subpart F income, and distributions of previously taxed income. 
  • Distributions of Hybrid dividends 
  • Distributions of Dividends paid (exclude hybrid dividends paid)
  • Disposition of its stock in trade
  • Premiums received for insurance or reinsurance

Columns of Schedule M

This Schedule contains six columns.

The preparer of this Schedule should enter the totals in part I for each type of translation listed under column (a) that occurred during the prior year’s annual accounting period being disclosed on the Form 5471 by the CFC and the persons listed in columns (b) through (f). 

All amounts must be stated in U.S. dollars translated from functional currency (functional currency refers to the main currency used by a business or unit of a business) at the average exchange rate for the foreign corporation.
Columns (b) through (f) are broken down as follows:

(b) U.S. person filing this return

If the CFC entered into a transaction or transactions with the U.S. person filing the Form 5471, the transactions must be listed under this column.

(c) Any domestic corporation or partnership controlled by a U.S. person filing this return

If the CFC entered into a transaction or transactions with a domestic corporation or partnership controlled by a U.S. person, the transactions must be listed under this column.

(d) Any other foreign corporation or partnership controlled by a U.S. person filing this return

If the CFC entered into a transaction or transactions with a foreign corporation or partnership controlled by a U.S. person, the transactions must be listed under this column.

(e) A U.S. shareholder with 10% or more of a CFC (other than the U.S. person filing Form 5471)

If the CFC entered into a transaction or transactions with a 10% or more U.S. shareholders of a CFC (domestic corporation for example) with an individual who is a 10% shareholder, but not a U.S. person, the transactions must be reported under this column.

(f) The 10%-or-more U.S. shareholder of any corporation controlled the foreign corporation

If the CFC entered into a transaction or transactions with a 10% or more U.S. shareholder of a CFC, the transactions must be reported under this column.  

Methods for Estimating an Arm’s Length Charge for Transfers of Tangible Property

Comparable Uncontrolled Price Method

The first method is characterized as the “comparable uncontrolled price method,” referred to as the “CUP” method. The basic approach is to examine comparable sales where the parties are unrelated. 

Resale Method

The second is the “resale price method.” In terms of this method, the price for the controlled transaction is equal to the resale price to an uncontrolled buyer less an “appropriate gross profit.” The appropriate gross profit is determined by multiplying the applicable resale price by the “gross profit margin” (expressed as a percentage of total revenue (rev) derived from sales) earned in comparable uncontrolled transactions. 

Cost Plus Method

The third method is the “cost-plus method.” In terms of this method, the transfer price is generally equal to the cost of production plus an amount determined by the application of a “gross profit markup” to that cost.

The Comparable Profits Method

The fourth is the “comparable profits method” (“CPM”). This method determines an arm’s length result based on profit level indicators derived from similarly situated uncontrolled taxpayers. 

Profit Split Method

The fifth is the “profit split method.” This method evaluates whether the allocation of the combined operating profit attributable to a controlled transaction is arm’s length by reference to the relative value of each controlled taxpayer’s contribution to that combined profit.  

The Unspecified Method

The sixth is the “unspecified method,” described in Treasury Regulation Section 1.482-3(e)(1). The method selected is to be applied in accordance with Treasury Regulation Section 1.482-1 and should take into account the general principle that all of the “realistic alternatives” should be considered when valuing these transactions.

Comparable Uncontrolled Transaction Method

The comparable uncontrolled method (“CUT”) is similar to the CUP method used for transfers of tangible property. Therefore, under the CUT method, the arm’s length charge for the transfer of an intangible is the amount charged for comparable intangibles in transactions between uncontrolled parties, adjusted for any material differences that exist between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions. 

Comparable Profits Method

The same comparable profits methods used to determine arm’s length prices for transfers of tangible property can be used to determine arm’s length sales prices or royalty/rent rates for transfers of intangible property. 

Schedule M Reporting Requirements

This schedule requires the Controlled Foreign Corporation shareholder or related party to disclose a number of different transactions to the IRS. 

Additional Schedule M Form 5471 Instructions Tips

  • Every U.S. person described in Category 4 must file Schedule M to report the transactions that occurred during the foreign corporation’s annual accounting period ending with or within the U.S. person’s tax year.
  • If a U.S. corporation that owns stock in a foreign corporation is a member of a consolidated group, list the common parent as the U.S. person filing Schedule M. It is important to note that you translate the amounts from functional currency to U.S. dollars, by using the average exchange rate for the foreign corporation’s tax year. See IRC section 989(b).
  • Report the exchange rate in the entry space provided at the top of Schedule M using the “divide-by convention” specified under Reporting exchange rates on Form 5471, earlier.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Frequently Asked Questions:

  1. What is Schedule M on Form 5471?
    1. Schedule M is designed to measure Controlled Foreign Corporation (“CFC”) intercompany payments. Schedule M requires the majority U.S. owner to provide information on transactions between the Controlled Foreign Corporation and its shareholders or other related persons.
  2. What is reported on Form 5471?
    1. Reporting requirements may be as simple as what percentage of stock the taxpayer owns and company information, to reporting the corporation’s entire income from financial statements and balance sheets and the application of global intangible low-taxed income.
    2. That’s why we recommend speaking to specialists at Asena Advisors to guide you. 
  3. Who must file Schedule Q Form 5471?
    1. Schedule(s) Q (Form 5471) are required to be filed only by Category 4, 5a, and 5b taxpayer filers. Read above for more in-depth information.
  4. What is the purpose of a 5471?
    1. The purpose of it isn’t for a taxpayer to file tax information, but rather so the IRS has a record of which U.S. citizens and residents have ownership in foreign corporations. The IRS wants to prevent people from hiding overseas assets and being aware of who owns what and in which countries helps it do that.
  5. What are some of the Schedules in Form 5471
    1. The Form 5471 schedules have various parts referred and need to ensure you know who needs to fill in part i or part ii for example. The schedules are:
      1. Form 5471 Schedule A – Stock of the Foreign Corporation 
      2. Form 5471 Schedule B – U.S. Shareholders of Foreign Corporations
      3. Form 5471 Schedule C – Income Statement
      4. Form 5471 Schedule E – Income Accrued, War Profits, and Excess Profits Taxes Paid or Accrued
      5. Form 5471 Schedule F – Balance Sheet
      6. Form 5471 Schedule G – Other information
      7. Form 5471 Schedule H – Current earnings and profits
      8. Form 5471 Schedule I – Summary of Shareholder’s Income from
      9. Foreign Corporation
      10. Form 5471 Schedule J – Accumulated earnings and profits of Controlled Foreign Corporations
      11. Form 5471 Schedule M – Transactions between controlled foreign corporation and shareholders or other related persons
      12. Form 5471 Schedule O – Organization or reorganization of a foreign corporation, and acquisitions and dispositions of its stock (Part I to be completed by U.S. officers and directors, Part II to be completed by U.S. shareholders)
      13. Form 5471 Schedule P – Used to report previously tax earnings and profits (PTEP) of the U.S. shareholder of a controlled foreign currency (“CFC”) in the CFC’s functional currency. The term PTEP refers to the earnings and profits (“E&P”) of a foreign corporation. In most cases, special ordering rules under Section 959 of the Internal Rev Code apply in determining how E&P is reported on Schedule P. 
      14. Form 5471 Schedule Q – Used to report a CFC’s income, deductions, taxes, and assets by CFC income groups. A CFC shareholder required to complete Schedule Q will be required to disclose subpart F income in functional currency by each relevant country.
      15. Form 5471 Schedule R – Used to report basic information pertaining to distributions from foreign corporations. According to the instructions for Schedule R, the information reported on the schedule is required by Sections 245A, 959, and 986(c) of the Internal Rev Code.
For more information on 5471 Schedule M, please contact one of our specialists at Asena Advisors. We make sure that your specific needs are catered for.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

US Market Entry Events – Brisbane March 28th

Looking to Expand Your Business into the United States?

Littler, together with Asena Advisors and FD Global Connections, will host a market briefing for companies looking to enter the U.S. market. The event will feature a panel of experts and companies that have experienced the pitfalls and successes of expanding into the U.S. and include:

  • Setting up a company
  • Immigration under the Trump Administration and what visa options are available
  • Engaging contractors in new markets
  • Sending employees to a new market and local hires
  • Immigration and tax considerations
  • Obtaining investors
  • Other global issues to consider in U.S. expansion

RSVP:

Please RSVP with event, city and date to Susan Hanks at [email protected]

Speakers:

  • Naomi Seddon, Shareholder
  • Trena Blair, CEO, FD Global Connections
  • Aman Mullee, Senior International Tax Consultant

The event will be held at

The Gold Coast Innovation Hub Work
and Event Space (The GC Hub)36 Laver Drive
Robina QLD 4226 Australia

On the 28th March 2019 from 5:30pm to 8:30pm

Registration:
5:30 p.m. — 6:00 p.m.

Program:
6:00 p.m. — 8:30 p.m.

Program is complimentary.

US-AU DTA: Article 17 – Entertainers


INTRODUCTION

In this week’s blog we will be discussing Article 17 of the US/Australia DTA which relates to entertainers and how they are taxed from an international perspective. 

In general, Article 17, provides that if a resident of one country derives income in the other country as an entertainer or sports person, some of the income earned may be protected from tax in that other country, but usually not to the same degree as other individuals who are not entertainers or sports person.

What distinguishes entertainers and sportspersons from other individuals who receive income from employment is that by the nature of their work, some entertainers and sportspersons may have the opportunity to earn a large amount of income in a very short period of time.

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 17 OF THE DTA – ENTERTAINERS

Article 17 states that income derived by visiting entertainers and sportspersons from their personal activities as such will be taxed in the country in which the activities are exercised, irrespective of the duration of the visit. 

However, where the gross receipts derived by the entertainer from those activities, including expenses reimbursed to the entertainer or borne on the entertainer’s behalf, do not exceed $10,000 or its equivalent in Australian dollars in the year of income, the income will be subject to tax in accordance with Article 14 or Article 15, which deals with independent or dependent personal services, as the case may be.

It should be noted that income derived by producers, directors, technicians and others who are not artists or athletes is taxable in accordance with Article 14 or 15, accordingly. The commentary to the OECD Model Convention indicates that the word “entertainer” extends to activities which involve a political, social, religious or charitable nature, provided entertainment is present. 

It does however not extend to a visiting conference speaker or to administrative or support staff. The commentary acknowledges that there may be some uncertainty about whether some persons are entertainers or not, in which case it will be necessary to consider the person’s overall activities.

We are the only multi-disciplinary international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S.– Australia taxation.

Article 17(2) is a safeguarding provision to ensure that income in respect of personal activities exercised by an entertainer, whether received by the entertainer or by another person, is taxed in the country in which the entertainer performs. This is irrespective of whether or not that other person has a “permanent establishment” or “fixed base” in that country. 

If it is however established that neither the entertainer nor any person related to him/her participates in any profits of that other person in any manner, the relevant income accruing to that other person shall be taxed in accordance with the provisions of Article 7, 14 or 15, dealing respectively with business profits and income from independent or dependent services, as the case may be.

A legislative instrument has removed the PAYG withholding requirement in relation to entertainers and sportspersons who are US residents when working in Australia. This only applies where the payments relate to entertainment or sports activities carried on in Australia and where the combined payments do not exceed $10,000 or its equivalent in Australian dollars in the year of income.. 

This legislative instrument applies from 3 April 2014 until 1 October 2024.

A US entertainer who fulfils the contractual obligations of a US employer by performing in Australia, for a salary paid by the employer, is considered to derive “income from personal activities”, within Article 17 of the US/Aus DTA. This is irrespective of the fact whether or not the entertainer is at arm’s length from the US employer. Where the entertainer is paid an annual salary, an apportionment will be necessary to determine the amount applicable to the period of time spent in Australia.

Where the contract for the personal services of a US entertainer in Australia is made between a US resident and an Australian resident, and Article 17(2) of the DTA applies, both the US resident and the entertainer may be taxable in Australia. 

The US resident will be liable to tax under Article 17(2) on the taxable income derived by it, and the entertainer may be taxed under Article 17(1) on remuneration derived from the US resident in respect of the personal activities in Australia.

CONCLUSION 

For any person interested in tax planning, Article 17 could be a good motivator to start exercising to ensure this Article applies to you. However, that is easier said than done. 

Our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisors, will be able to assist you with your international tax planning needs to ensure that Article 17 is adhered to by entertainers. Lastly, we will never say no to an autograph.

Our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisors, will be able to assist you with submitting the relevant forms in the US and Australia to get access to these relief measures.  

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 16 – Limitation of Benefits


INTRODUCTION

In this week’s blog we will be discussing the technical Limitation of Benefits (LoB) Article (Article 16) of the US/Australia DTA.

Article 16 states that, in addition to being a resident of the US or Australia, taxpayers need to satisfy the requirements of Article 16 to obtain the benefits of the DTA. 

In particular, the benefits of the DTA are only available if the resident is:

  1. A qualified person (Article 16(2));
  2. Actively engaged in a trade or business (Article 16(3)); or
  3. Entitled to treaty relief because the IRS or ATO makes a determination (Article 16(5)).

The purpose of these restrictions is to prevent residents of third countries from using interposed companies or other entities resident in either Australia or the US to access treaty benefits, also commonly referred to as treaty shopping. 

Treaty shopping is the use by residents of third countries of legal entities established in either the US or Australia with a principal purpose of obtaining the benefits of the US/Australia DTA. 

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 16 OF THE DTA – LIMITATION OF BENEFITS

Article 16(1) stipulates that except as otherwise provided in Article 16 only residents of the US or Australia for the purposes of the DTA that are qualified persons are entitled to the benefits otherwise available under the DTA. 

The benefits otherwise available under the DTA to residents are all limitations on source-based taxation under Article 6 through 15 and Article 17 through 21, the treaty-based relief from double taxation provided by Article 22 (Relief from Double Taxation), and the protection afforded to residents of a Contracting State under Article 23 (Non-discrimination). 

The limitation in Article 16 does however not apply where a person is not required to be a resident in order to enjoy the benefits of the DTA. For example, Article 26 (Diplomatic and Consular Privileges) applies to diplomatic and consular privileges regardless of residence.

Article 16(2) lists the eight categories of resident that will constitute a qualified person for a taxable year and thus will be entitled to all benefits of the DTA provided that they otherwise satisfy the requirements for a particular benefit. It is therefore important to note that the tests must be satisfied for each year that benefits under the DTA are sought.

Article 16(2)(a) – Individuals 

Article 16(2)(a) states that individual residents of a Contracting State will be a qualified person and hence entitled to rely on the DTA. 

However, the definition of US resident in Article 4(1)(b)(ii) excludes citizens who are also a resident of another country with which Australia has a DTA.  In addition, an individual that receives income as a nominee on behalf of a third country resident, may be denied the benefits of the DTA due to the beneficial ownership requirement in Article 10 for example, despite meeting the requirement in Article 16(2)(a).

Article 16(2)(b) – Governmental bodies

Article 16(2)(b) states that the Contracting State, any political subdivision or local authority of the state, or any agency or instrumentality of the state will be a qualified person and hence entitled to rely on the DTA. 

Article 16(2)(c)(i)Publicly traded companies

Article 16(2)(c)(i) states that a resident company will be a qualified person in the following circumstances:

  • Its principal class of shares is listed on a US or Australian stock exchange; and
  • Those shares are regularly traded on one or more recognized stock exchanges.

Article 16(2)(c)(ii) – Subsidiary companies

Article 16(2)(c)(ii) states that a resident company will be a qualified person if:

  • At least 50% of the aggregate vote and value of its shares are owned directly or indirectly by five or fewer companies that are qualified persons due to Article 16(2)(c)(i); and
  • In the case of indirect ownership, each intermediate shareholder is a resident of either the US or Australia.

Article 16(2)(d) – Other listed entities

Article 16(2)(d) states that certain publicly traded entities (other than companies) and entities beneficially owned by certain publicly traded entities or companies may be qualified persons and hence entitled to rely on the DTA. 

Article 16(2)(d)(i) – Publicly traded entities

 Article 16(2)(d)(i) states that a resident entity that is not an individual or a company is a qualified person if:

  • The principal class of units is listed or admitted to dealings on US or Australian stock exchange; and
  • These units are regularly traded on one or more recognized stock exchanges.

Article 16(2)(d)(ii)Other Entities

Article 16(2)(d)(ii) states that a resident entity that is not an individual or a company will be a qualified person if at least 50% of the beneficial interests in the entity are owned directly or indirectly by five or fewer companies that are a qualified person due to Article 16(2)(c)(i) or publicly owned entities that satisfy the requirements of Article 16(2)(d)(i).

Article 16(2)(e)Tax exempt organizations

Article 16(2)(e) states that a resident religious, charitable, educational, scientific or other similar organizations is a qualified person if:

  • It is organized under the laws of the US or Australia; and
  • Was exclusively established and maintained for a religious, charitable, educational, scientific or other similar purpose.

Asena Advisors is the only multi-disciplinary (Accounting and Legal) international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S. -Australia taxation.

Article 16(2)(f) – Pension funds

Article 16(2)(f) states that a pension fund is a qualified person if:

  • It is organized under the laws of either the US or Australia;
  • Established and maintained to provide pensions or similar benefits to employed or self-employed persons pursuant to a plan; and
  • More than 50% of the beneficiaries, members or participants are individuals resident in either the US or Australia.

Article 16(2)(g) – Unlisted entities

Article 16(2)(g) states that a person other than an individual that is a resident of either the US or Australia is a qualified person and hence entitled to rely on the DTA if both an ownership and base erosion test are satisfied. 

However, one or more of the following categories of qualified persons must principally own the unlisted entity directly or indirectly:

  • Individuals who are residents in the US or Australia (Article 16(2)(a));
  • Government bodies of the US or Australia (Article 16(2)(b); and
  • Entities resident in either the US or Australia that satisfy public listing and trading requirements in Article 16(2)(c)(i) and Article 16(2)(d)(i)).

Ownership test — companies

Article 16(2)(g)(i) requires that 50% or more of the aggregate voting power and value of the company must be owned directly or indirectly on at least half the days of the company’s taxable year by certain qualified persons.

Ownership test — trusts/partnerships

Article 16(2)(g)(i) requires that 50% or more of the beneficial interests of entities other than companies must be owned directly or indirectly on at least half the days of the entity’s taxable year by certain qualified persons.

Base erosion test

Article 16(2)(g)(ii) disqualifies a person that satisfies the requirement in Article 16(2)(g)(i) if 50% or more of the unlisted entity’s gross income for the taxable year is paid or accrued (directly or indirectly) to a person or persons who are not residents of either Contracting State in the form of payments deductible for tax purposes in the payer’s state of residence. 

Article 16(2)(h) – Headquarters companies

Article 16(2)(h) states that a resident of the US or Australia that is a recognized headquarters company (RHC) for a multinational corporate group (MCG) is a qualified person and hence entitled to rely on the DTA.

A RHC is a US or Australian resident company where:

  • It has a substantial involvement in the supervision and administration of companies forming the MCG.
  • The MCG being supervised is engaged in an active business in at least five countries and each company generates at least 10% of the gross income of the MCG. 
  • The gross income from any single country where a MCG member carries on business activities must be less than 50% of the gross income of the MCG.
  • No more than 25% of the gross income of the RHC can be derived from the other Contracting State.
  • The supervision and administrative activities for the MCG are carried out by the RHC independently of any other person.
  • Generally applicable taxation rules apply in its country of residence.
  • Income derived in the other Contracting State is attributable to the active business activities carried on by MCG members in that state.

Article 16(2)(h)(i) – Supervision and Administration

Article 16(2)(h)(i) requires that to be a RHC, the company must provide in its state of residence a substantial portion of the overall supervision and administration of the MCG. 

Article 16(2)(h)(ii) – Active business

Article 16(2)(h)(ii) requires that the MCG supervised by the headquarters company must consist of corporations that are residents in, and engaged in active trades or businesses in, at least five countries. In addition the business activities carried on in each of the five countries (or groupings of countries) must generate at least 10% of the gross income of the MCG

Article 16(2)(h)(iii) – Single country income limitation

Article 16(2)(h)(iii) requires that the business activities carried on in any one country other than the headquarters company’s state of residence must generate less than 50% of the gross income of the MCG. If the gross income requirement under this clause is not met for a taxable year, the taxpayer may satisfy this requirement by averaging the ratios for the four years preceding the taxable year.

Article 16(2)(h)(iv) – Gross income limitation

Article 16(2)(h)(iv) requires that no more than 25% of the headquarters company’s gross income may be derived from the other Contracting State. 

Article 16(2)(h)(v) – Independent supervision of MCG

Article 16(2)(h)(v) requires that the headquarters company have and exercise independent discretionary authority to carry out the supervision and administration functions for the MCG. 

Article 16(2)(h)(vi) – Taxation rules

Article 16(2)(h)(vi) requires that the headquarters company be subject to the generally applicable income taxation rules in its country of residence.

Article 16(2)(h)(vii) – Income derived from the other Contracting State

Article 16(2)(h)(vii) requires that the income derived in the other Contracting State be derived in connection with or be incidental to the active business activities referred to in Article 16(2)(h)(ii).

Article 16(3) states that a resident of a Contracting State that is not a qualified person under Article 16(2) is a qualified person for certain items of income that are connected to an active trade or business conducted in the other Contracting State.

In broad terms, the benefits of the DTA will be available if the person resident in the US or Australia:

  • Is engaged in the active conduct of a trade or business in their state of residence;
  • The income derived in the other Contracting State is derived in connection with or incidental to the trade or business conducted in their state of residence; and
  • The trade or business activity in the person’s state of residence is substantial in relation to the activity in the state of source of an item of income.

Article 16(3)(a) firstly requires that a resident of the US or Australia must be engaged in the active conduct of a trade or business in their state of residence. However, a business of making or managing investments for the resident’s own personal account is not regarded as an active trade or business unless these activities are banking, insurance or securities activities carried on by a bank, insurance company or a registered, licensed or authorised securities dealer. 

Secondly, the income derived in the other Contracting State must be derived in connection with or incidental to the trade or business conducted in the state of residence.

Article 16(3)(b) states that where a person or an associate carries on a trade or business in the other Contracting State which gives to an item of income the trade or business carried on in the state of residence must be substantial in relation to the activity in the state of source of the income. 

The substantiality requirement is intended to prevent a narrow case of treaty shopping abuses in which a company attempts to qualify for benefits by engaging in de minimis connected business activities in the treaty country in which it is resident. 

The substantiality requirement only applies to income from related parties. 

Article 16(3)(c) states that where a person is engaged in the active conduct of a trade of business then the following will be deemed to be part of that activity:

  • Partnership activities provided the person is a partner, and
  • Activities of connected persons.

There are three circumstances in which a person will be connected to another person are, firstly, if either person possesses at least 50% of the:

  • Beneficial interest of the other;
  • Aggregate vote and value of a company’s shares; or
  • Beneficial equity interests of the company.

Secondly, if another person possesses directly or indirectly, at least 50% of the:

  • Beneficial interest;
  • Aggregate vote and value of a company’s shares; or
  • Beneficial equity interest in the company in each person.

Thirdly, a person is connected to another person if the relevant facts and circumstances indicate that:

  • One has control of the other; or
  • Both are under the control of the same person or persons.

The above rule is of particular importance to holding companies since they will generally not be able to satisfy Article 16(3)(a) due to the fact that they are managing investments for their own account.

Article 16(4) is an anti-avoidance provision and denies the benefits of the DTA where a company has issued shares that entitle the holders to a portion of the income from the other state that is larger than the portion of such income that holders would otherwise receive.

Article 16(5) states that the competent authorities of the US and Australia can grant the benefits of the DTA to a resident of the relevant Contracting State if they are not a qualified person in accordance with Article 16(2). However, to exercise this discretion the IRS or ATO has to determine that the establishment, acquisition or maintenance of such a person and the conduct of its operations did not have the principal purpose of obtaining the benefits of the DTA.

Article 16(6) defines the term “recognized stock exchange” as:

  1. The NASDAQ System owned by the National Association of Securities Dealers and any stock exchange registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission as a national securities exchange for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
  2. The Australian Stock Exchange and any other Australian stock exchange recognized as such under Australian law, and
  3. Any other stock exchange agreed upon by the competent authorities of the Contracting States.

Article 16(7) lastly states that nothing in Article 16 restricts, in any manner, the ability of the Contracting States to enact and enforce the anti-avoidance provisions in their domestic tax laws.

CONCLUSION 

The Limitation on benefits clause is drafted with the intention of avoiding treaty shopping.

When planning an international structure it is therefore crucial to ensure compliance with Article 16. Failure to plan properly could result in a loss of valuable benefits and can render the structure ineffective. 

To achieve optimal results, immediate business concerns of the client should be carefully balanced with the long-term goals to ensure the establishment of activities in the most favorable environment. 

Our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisors, will be able to assist you with your international tax planning and ensure that Article 16 is adhered to.

Our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisors, will be able to assist you with submitting the relevant forms in the US and Australia to get access to these relief measures.  

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Foreign Base Company Services Income

Introduction

The most common type of Subpart F income is referred to as Foreign Base Company Income. This category includes 4 subcategories in the Internal Revenue Code:

  1. Foreign personal holding company income;
  2. Foreign Base company sales income;
  3. Foreign base company service income;
  4. Foreign base company oil-related income.

When a foreign company (or subsidiaries) has taxpayers who are United States shareholders, it’s a Controlled Foreign Corporation (CFC) for US tax purposes. Even if a CFC is operated abroad, some types of income will be taxed in the US for the United Stated shareholder as earned. The most common category of taxable income in a CFC is Foreign Base Company Income and is includable in the gross income of the shareholder. 

A company (or subsidiaries) with Foreign Base Company Income (or foreign personal holding company income) has United States shareholders if resident taxpayers, green card holders, or citizens of the United States own more than 50% of the company. US persons also include domestic partnerships, domestic corporations, and certain estates and trusts (Internal revenue code § 951).

For purposes of determining who are United States shareholders and CFC status, stock owned directly, indirectly, and constructively is taken into account (purposes of section IRC § 957). These are called the “look through” rules and prevent United States shareholders from avoiding CFC status by giving shares to their families or putting them in offshore structures and trusts.

The purpose of the personal holding company income rules is to prevent US persons from the opportunity of deferral of tax on passive income on portfolio-type investments. Deferral is possible if an active business can defer foreign source income, but an individual can’t typically structure their passive investments offshore and receive the same benefit of passive income.

Under certain circumstances, the classification of income earned by a CFC as FBC services income or Foreign base company sales income may be unclear

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Definition

The purpose of section Subpart F is that income (foreign base company service income) from a foreign country is an item of income defined in the IRC as income derived in connection with the performance of technical, managerial, engineering, architectural, scientific, skilled, industrial, commercial, or like services that are performed for, or on behalf of, a related person, and are performed outside the country under the laws of which the CFC is incorporated in a taxable year.

In terms of this definition, income earned by a CFC in a foreign country in a taxable year will constitute foreign base company services income and be included in gross income only if it satisfies all three of the following tests:

  1. The item of income is derived in connection with the performance by the CFC of certain specified services;
  2. The services are performed by the CFC for, or on behalf of, a related individual or company; and
  3. The services are performed outside of the country in which the CFC is organized

Therefore, if a CFC performs services in a taxable year for a related party through a branch established outside of its country of incorporation, it may incur foreign base company services income for United States Shareholders.

Exception

The IRC provides several exceptions to the general definition of FBC services income Two exceptions are available for services income related to property manufactured, produced, grown, or extracted by the CFC. 

Prior to its repeal, income derived by a CFC that fell within the Foreign base company shipping income category of former §954(f) (2004) was expressly excluded from the definition of FBC services income. In general, however, if the item of income-qualified for an exception to the Foreign base company shipping income, it was still tested to see if it met the definition of FBC services income under §954(e). Despite this general twice-tested rule, if the item of income-qualified for the same-country exception to FBC shipping income, it was entirely excluded from FBCI. 

The purpose of section IRC §954(e)(2) is that the FBC services income rules do not apply to income derived in a taxable year in connection with the performance of services that are directly related to the sale or exchange by the CFC of property the CFC has manufactured, produced, grown, or extracted and which are performed before the time of the sale or exchange, or income derived in connection with the performance of services that are directly related to an offer or effort to sell or exchange such property. 

The 2017 tax act, commonly referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) repealed the Foreign base company oil-related income category of FBCI.

For years beginning before January 1, 2018, the income of a CFC that qualified as Foreign base company oil-related income was expressly excluded from the definition of FBC services income. However, if the item qualified for an exception to the Foreign base company oil-related income category, it would be tested according to §954(e) for possible inclusion as FBC services income. Now, with the Foreign base company oil-related income category repealed, such items of income will be directly tested under §954 for inclusion in another category of FBCI. 

Exceptions are also provided to FBC services income for securities dealers and services income derived in the conduct of an active banking, financing, securities, or gross insurance income in a taxable year. 

Items Included in Foreign Base Company Services Income

The purpose of this paragraph (subchapter) is to stipulate that income earned by a CFC in a taxable year will constitute FBC services income only if it satisfies the following three conjunctive requirements:

  • The income is derived in connection with the performance of certain services by the CFC;
  • The services are performed by the CFC for, or on behalf of, a §954(d)(3) person that is related; and
  • The services are performed outside of the country in which the CFC is organized.

The purpose of this paragraph (subchapter) is to emphasize that this category does not include income from all CFC services, but only that income derived in a taxable year by a CFC from services performed for, or on behalf of, a person that is related (within the meaning of §954(d)(3)) in situations where the CFC’s services are also performed outside of the CFC’s country of organization. Income from services performed anywhere by a CFC for an unrelated individual with no involvement or performed for any person within the CFC’s country of organization, in a taxable year does not constitute FBC services income. Certain services income derived in the active conduct of a banking, financing, securities, or gross insurance income by insurance business in a taxable year is also expressly excluded from this category of FBCI

Services Performed in Foreign Base Company Services Income

The examples contained in the treasury regulations identify the following types of activities as those which may be treated as services for purposes of the FBC services income rules in a taxable year:

  • The installation and/or maintenance of machines; 
  • Equipment warranty and maintenance services; 
  • Contract oil well drilling; 
  • Construction of a dam; and
  • Construction of a superhighway. 

This is usually income earned from the performance of technical, managerial, engineering, architectural, scientific, skilled, industrial, commercial, or other services.

Income earned by a CFC is considered foreign base company service income only if it meets all three of the following criteria:

  1. The income is earned in connection with the performance by the CFC of certain specified services;
  2. The services are performed by the CFC for, or on behalf of, a related person; and
  3. The services are performed outside of the country in which the CFC is incorporated.
  4. This all means that, when a CFC performs services for a related party through a branch established outside of its country of incorporation, it may incur “foreign base company services income” that may be currently included in its US shareholder’s gross income under Section 951.

Services will be considered performed wherever the worker performs their duties. If you’re a consultant flying from country to country performing a technical task, you probably have foreign base company service income.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Special Rules

Guaranty of Performance

This paragraph and subchapter (Subparagraph (1)(ii)) is written to stipulate that it shall not apply for services performed by a CFC pursuant to a contract the performance of which is guaranteed by a related person, if 

    • the related person’s sole obligation with respect to the contract is to guarantee the performance of such services;
    • the CFC is fully obligated to perform the services under the contract, and
    • the related person does not in fact: 
      • pay for the performance of, or perform, any of such services the performance of which is so guaranteed or 
      • pay for the performance of, or perform, any significant services related to such services. 
Application of Substantial Assistance Test

Within this section, the treaty states that the assistance furnished by a related person or persons to the CFC shall include, but shall not be limited to, direction, supervision, services, know-how, financial assistance (other than contributions to capital), and equipment, material, or supplies.

Special Rule Applicable to Distributive Share of Partnership Income

A CFC’s distributive share of partnership’s services income will be deemed to be derived from services performed for or on behalf of a related person, within the meaning of IRC section 954(e)(1)(A), if the partnership is a related person with respect to the cfc, under IRC section 954(d)(3), and, in connection with the services performed by the partnership, the cfc, or a person that is a related person with respect to the cfc, provided assistance that would have constituted substantial assistance contributing to the performance of such services, under paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section, if furnished to the controlled foreign corporation by a related person. 

The Place Where Services Are Performed

The place where services will be considered to have been performed for purposes of paragraph (a)(2) of this section will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. As a general rule, services will be considered performed where the persons performing services for the CFC which derives income in connection with the performance of technical, managerial, architectural, engineering, scientific, skilled, industrial, commercial, or like services are physically located when they perform their duties in the execution of the service activity resulting in such income. 

Items Excluded

Foreign base company services income does not include –

Such income derived in connection with the performance of services by a CFC if:

    • The services directly relate to the sale or exchange of personal property by the cfc,
    • The property sold or exchanged was manufactured, produced, grown, or extracted by such controlled foreign corporation, and
    • The services were performed before the sale or exchange of such property by the controlled foreign corporation;
    • The services, performed in a taxable year, directly relate to an offer or effort to sell or exchange personal property which was, or would have been, manufactured, produced, grown, or extracted by such CFC whether or not a sale or exchange of such property was consummated; or
    • For taxable years beginning after December 31, 1975, foreign base company shipping income

How to Eliminate Subpart F Foreign Base Company Service Income

To avoid Subpart F base company service item of income issues is to ensure that the services are performed where your offshore business is incorporated. The substance is therefore important for IRS purposes. Your main aim should therefore not be based on a low tax rate. 

If your employees are providing a service from India, and the business operates through a Costa Rican corporation, you’re opening yourself up to the item of income being regarded as Subpart F foreign base company service income.

Another way to avoid Subpart F income (item of income services) issues is for the offshore corporation to contract directly with the customer and pay the foreign company directly. This could also help with paying tax at a lower tax rate. 

FAQs

  • What is foreign base company income?
    • Foreign base company income (FBCI) is an item of income and type of subpart F income that U.S. shareholders of a controlled foreign corporation (CFC) must include in their gross income even though the income would not otherwise be currently taxed to the U.S. shareholders.
  • What is a foreign base company?
    • This is a corporation classified by the IRS as a corporation that is not a US tax resident.  
  • What is excluded from foreign personal holding company income?
    • The principal exceptions of foreign personal holding company income   categories item of income include:
      • Dividends, interest, rents, and royalties received from a related person with a connection to the CFC’s country of the organization;
      • Rents and royalties received from unrelated persons in the active conduct of a trade or business;
      • Gains from the sale of property used in an active trade or business and from the sale of inventory;
      • Foreign currency and commodities gains related to a CFC’s business; 
      • Income derived by dealers; 
      • Income from the active conduct of a banking, financing, insurance or securities business; and
      • Dividends, interest, rents, and royalties received or accrued by one CFC from a related CFC to the extent attributable or properly allocable to non-subpart F income of the related CFC.

For more information on Foreign-Based Company Services Income and Foreign Personal Holding Company Income, please contact one of our specialists at Asena Advisors. We make sure that your specific needs are catered for.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Form 8832

What Is Form 8832?

Partnerships and Limited Liability Companies can file this tax form. Businesses like a multi-member llc, file these tax forms if they want to be taxed as different kinds of companies, like a c corporation.

Who Must File Form 8832?

This form is not mandatory and an eligible entity should complete form 8832. It just gives eligible businesses the option to change their entity classification if they want to in a tax year. 

Why Is Form 8832 Important?

Business entities are given a default tax classification and sometimes businesses can reduce their taxes significantly, by changing how the business is taxed.

How Do I Fill Out Form 8832?

The form has two parts: Election Information (Part I) and Late Election Relief (Part II). Part I asks a series of questions pertaining to your tax status election. 

Part II is only for businesses seeking late election relief. 

When to File Form 8832?

The filing date for Form 8832 is within 75 days of the formation of your company. If you miss this timeframe, the IRS allows it to be filed in the first 75 days of each fiscal year.

When Is Form 8832 Due?

Due to Form 8832 not being mandatory, it doesn’t have a deadline per se as most tax returns. It can be filed at any point in the lifetime of an eligible entity. 

Where Should It Be Filed?

Businesses cannot e-File (electronically) Form 8832. 

After completing Form 8832, you need to send it to the appropriate IRS office for review. Where you send the form depends on what state your business is in.

How Long Does It Take To Prepare?

The estimated time of preparation is 17 minutes. 

Penalties for Not Filing Form 8832

It is not necessary to file this form. It is to the advantage of some taxpayers to choose whether their entity is to be taxed like a partnership (multiple owners), as a c corporation or is to be disregarded for tax (single owner entity) and taxed like a proprietorship.

What If You Have Never Filed Form 8832?

If you have never filed form 8832, the Internal Revenue Services will automatically tax you based on your business entity’s default tax classification. 

What to Know If You’re Already in Business

Form 8832 can be filled out at any point during the course of a business’s lifetime.

It is important to know that an entity can only change its status for tax every five years, with a few exceptions.

Entities Eligible to Use Form 8832
  • Domestic Partnership
  • Domestic LLCs
  • Foreign Partnerships
  • Foreign LLCs
  • Foreign corporations in certain jurisdictions
  • US-owned foreign entities (corporations) in certain jurisdictions.

Effects of Election

A business that is currently structured as a partnership and elects to be treated as a corporation; the partnership will be liquidated. All the liabilities and assets of the former partnership will be sold for stock in the new corporation. This stock will then be distributed amongst the former partners.

When changing your corporation to a partnership, the corporation will be dissolved. The assets and liabilities that were once owned by the corporation will be distributed to the shareholders, who will then contribute these items to the new partnership.

A corporation that decides to be treated as a disregarded entity will allocate all of the company’s assets and liabilities to one owner. 

Lastly, when a disregarded entity that is separate from its owner decides to elect corporate tax status, the owner will contribute all obligations and assets to the corporation.

Form 8832 vs. Form 2553

Understanding the difference between Form 8832 and Form 2553 is of the utmost importance if you’re interested in changing your business’s tax status.

Form 8832 allows businesses to request to be taxed as a corporation, partnership, or sole proprietorship when filing the relevant income tax return.

Form 2553 is the form corporations and Limited Liability Companies use to elect S Corp tax status. If you’re filing Form 2553, do not file Form 8832.

Choosing the Right Tax Status for Your LLC

There are advantages and disadvantages to every type of business entity. Each type of entity comes with its own legal and financial implications, as well as its own procedures for setting up. It is recommended to consult with your tax advisor before undergoing any elections.

Electing S Corporation Status with Form 8832

Generally, non-corporation business entities will make use of Form 8832. Even though it is possible to elect S corporation status using Form 8832, traditional corporations prefer to use Form 2553 to elect this status because it is made specifically for this purpose. 

Reasons to Consider Not Using Form 8832

Below are a few businesses that should consider not filing Form 8832 

  • Insurance companies
  • State-chartered banks (if FDIC-insured)
  • A business owned by a state or by a foreign government
  • Tax-exempt organizations
  • Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs)

Reasons to Consider Using Form 8832

Partnerships and Limited Liability Companies for instance may benefit from filing Form 8832. 

Common Mistakes

Some common mistakes are the following:

  • Businesses do not need to file this form if they want to change their classification to an S Corporation and they should instead file Form 2553.
  • When you add more members to your single-member Limited Liability Company the business will be taxed as a partnership unless the business files Form 8832 to change the classification.

Is Form 8832 Complicated?

No! This is not a complicated form. It’s especially made easier with the advice and precision of experts like us.

Asena Advisors is the only multi-disciplinary (Accounting and Legal) international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S. -Australia taxation.

What Information Is Required in Form 8832?

You need the following information to complete it:

  • Business name
  • Business address
  • Business phone number
  • Employer identification number (EIN). Keep in mind that you must have an EIN even a small business (a tax ID for businesses) in order to submit Form 8832.

IRS Form 8832 Instructions: A Step-by-Step Guide

Step 1: Complete Your Basic Business Information

You can find Form 8832 on the IRS website.

This section asks for information regarding your business, including your business name, address, and EIN. 

Step 2: Complete Part 1, Election Information

Part 1 asks a series of questions regarding your tax status election.. Below are some of the questions asked in Part 1:

    • Whether you are filing to change your tax status for the first time or if this is a subsequent change. If this is not your first election, you need to provide relevant information and the timeline of your last election. 
    • Whether your business has more than one owner and depending on which box you check; you will have different tax status options.
    • Select the appropriate box for your business and desired tax status.
    • Select the month, day, and year that you would like your new tax status to take effect. Please note that you are not allowed to provide a date that is more than 75 days prior to the date on which you file.
    • Provide the name and title of someone within your business that the IRS may contact for additional information, as well as their phone number.
Step 3: Complete Part 2, Late Election Relief

Part 2 is only for those who are filing their entity classification election past the deadline. 

To be eligible for the late entity classification election relief, you need to fulfill all of the following requirements:

    • You failed to obtain your requested classification due to not filing Form 8832 on time.
    • You haven’t yet filed your taxes because the deadline hasn’t yet passed, or you’ve filed your taxes on time.
    • You can provide a sufficient reason why you could not file on time.
    • You are still within a window of three years and 75 days from your requested effective date.
Step 4: Mail IRS Form 8832

Mail the fully completed and signed form to the appropriate office. The address where you’ll send your form will depend on where your business is located.

Step 5: Keep an Eye on the Mail

The Internal Revenue Services will either accept or deny your Form 8832 filing request and will notify your business within 60 days of their decision. 

FAQs:

  1. Do I Have To File Form 8832?
    1. No, this is an optional form that is filed if you would like your entity to be taxed differently from its default classification. 
  2. Why Would I File The 8832?
    1. Businesses file this form if they want to be taxed as different kinds of companies, like a corporation.
  3. Which Businesses Can Use Form 8832?
    1. The following are considered eligible businesses for filing Form 8832:
      1. Partnerships
      2. Single and Multi-member LLCs
      3. Certain types of foreign entities (Page 5, Form 8832)
  4. Who Is Not Eligible To File Form 8832?
    1. Sole proprietorships are not eligible to file a Form 8832 election.
    2. If your business is a corporation that wants to be taxed as a Limited Liability Company, don’t file this form. Instead, contact your Secretary of State to find out how to convert your corporation.
    3. Additionally, if your business is an LLC that wants to be taxed as an S Corp, you must use Form 2553 instead of Form 8832.
  5. What Else Should I Know About Form 8832?
    1. You should differentiate between Form 8832 and Form 2553. Both allow certain businesses to request a new tax classification. The biggest difference between the two forms is the type of classification for federal tax purposes you request.
    2. Form 8832 allows businesses to request to be taxed as a corporation, partnership, or sole proprietorship, and Form 2553 is the form corporations and LLCs use to elect S Corp tax status. 
  6. What If I Don’t Have An Employer Identification Number?
    1. If you don’t have an EIN yet, you can easily apply for it for free online.  
  7. Do I Need To Change My Employer Identification Number If I Change My Tax Classification?
    1. No
  8. Who Can Sign My Entity’s Form 8832?
    1. It should be signed by a business owner, manager, or officer of the business. 
  9. Who Can Be An “Authorized Representative” For My Business On Form 8832?
    1. Your tax advisor
  10. Is This The Last Time I Have To Handle Form 8832?
    1. No. You should also attach a copy of the form to your federal income tax return for that year.
  11. How Long Will This Take Me To Fill Out?
    1. The IRS estimates that it takes just 17 minutes to fill out this form.
  12. Can I Use IRS Form 8832 To Elect To Be Taxed As An S-Corporation?
    1. No. You must fill out Form 2553.
  13. Can Partners Within A Corporation Be Taxed Differently Than Other Partners Within The Same Corporation?
    1. No. All partners and members must be taxed consistently – the same as the business.
  14. How Should I Classify My Business?
    1. There are pros and cons to every type of business entity and recommended to consult with your tax advisor before undergoing any elections.
  15. How Do I Know If I Should Change My Current Classification?
    1. Here are a few reasons you might want to change your current classification, including:
    2. If you have a multi-member LLC that was taxed as a partnership but you would now like to be taxed as a C-corporation.
    3. If you have a multi-member LLC that is currently taxed as a C-corporation but you want to go back to default partnership treatment.
    4. When a single-member LLC adds more members, the business will be taxed as a partnership unless the business files Form 8832 to change this classification.
  16. What is the purpose of Form 8832?
    1. Businesses file this form if they want to be taxed as different kinds of companies, like a corporation.
  17. Does a single-member LLC need to file Form 8832?
    1. No
  18. Who must file IRS Form 8832?
    1. It depends since it is not mandatory. It provides eligible entities with the option to change their default classification. 
For more information on Form 8832, please contact one of our specialists at Asena Advisors. We make sure that your specific needs are catered for.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 15 – Dependent Personal Services

INTRODUCTION

In this week’s blog we will be discussing the tax implication of rendering dependent personal services as stipulated in Article 15 of the US/Australia DTA. 

The main purpose of Article 15 is to ensure that income derived by an individual who is a resident of the US or Australia as an employee or director in the other country is taxed appropriately.

In terms of Article 15 the source state will have taxing rights on such income if the individual is present in that state for a certain period of time. 

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 15 OF THE DTA – DEPENDENT PERSONAL SERVICES

Article 15(1) sets out the basis upon which the remuneration derived by employees and directors should be taxed. Pensions, annuities, and remuneration of government employees are covered by Article 18 and 19 of the DTA and therefore not covered in terms of Article 15.

Generally, other salaries, wages, directors’ fees, etc derived by a resident of one country from an employment exercise or services performed as a director of a company in the other country will be taxed in that other country. 

Article 15(2) includes an exemption from tax in the country being visited where the visits are only for a limited period. The conditions for exemption are:

  1. That the visit or visits not exceed, in the aggregate, 183 days in the year of income of the country visited;
  2. That the remuneration is paid by, or on behalf of, an employer or company who is not a resident of the country being visited, and
  3. That the remuneration is not deductible in determining taxable profits of a permanent establishment, fixed base or a trade or business which the employer or company has in the country being visited.

Where these conditions are met, the remuneration derived in the source state will be taxed only in the country of residence.

Article 15(3) stipulates that income derived from employment aboard a ship or aircraft operated in international traffic is to be taxed in the country of residence of the operator. The US Treasury however explained that under US law, the US taxes such income of a non-resident alien only to the extent it is derived from US sources (i.e. in US territorial waters). This paragraph does not confer an exclusive taxing right. 

Article 15(3) does not confer an exclusive taxing right and both countries retain the right to tax their residents and citizens under Art 1(3) of the DTA (Personal scope).

Remuneration derived by US residents from employment in Australia may in terms of Article 15 of the DTA, be taxable in the US rather than Australia if the remuneration is paid in respect of a visit not exceeding 183 days in the year by an employer who is not resident in Australia and has no permanent establishment in Australia.

Asena Advisors is the only multi-disciplinary (Accounting and Legal) international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S. -Australia taxation.

COVID RELIEF

Both the US and Australia implemented certain relief measures for individuals who inadvertently spent more than 183 days in the source due to the Covid pandemic. 

US Covid Relief Measures

Days that you were unable to leave the US either because of a medical condition that arose while were in the US or where you were unable to leave the US due to COVID-19 travel disruptions, you may be eligible to exclude up to 60 consecutive days in the US during a certain period.

Australia Covid Relief Measures

The ATO recognized that the Covid pandemic has created a special set of circumstances that need to be taken into account when evaluating the source of the employment income earned by a foreign resident who usually works overseas but instead performed that same foreign employment in Australia. If the remote working arrangement is short term (3 months or less), the income from that employment will not have an Australian source. However, for working arrangements longer than 3 months, an individual’s personal circumstances need to be examined to ascertain if the employment is connected to Australia. Employment income (ie salary or wages) is likely to be determined as having an Australian source if:

    • The terms and conditions of the employment contract change;
    • The nature of the job changes;
    • Work is performed for an Australian entity affiliated with the overseas employer;
    • The economic impact or result of the work shifts to Australia;
    • The employing entity is in Australia;
    • Work is performed with Australian clients;
    • The performance of the work depends on the individual being physically present in Australia to complete it;
    • Australia becomes the individual’s permanent place of work;
    • The individual’s intention towards Australia changes.

Income earned from paid leave (such as annual or holiday leave) while in Australia temporarily does not need to be declared in Australia. 

CONCLUSION 

Individuals should therefore make sure that they do not unnecessarily file tax returns in the source state if their stay was extended due to Covid related measures.  

Our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisors, will be able to assist you with submitting the relevant forms in the US and Australia to get access to these relief measures.  

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 14 – Independent Personal Services

INTRODUCTION

In this week’s blog we will be discussing the tax implication of rendering Independent Personal Services as stipulated in Article 14 of the US/Australia DTA. Article 14 is luckily far less complex than our previous blogs. 

The main purpose of Article 14 is to ensure that income derived by an individual who is a resident of the US or Australia from the performance of personal services in an independent capacity in the other country is taxed appropriately.

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 14 OF THE DTA – INDEPENDENT PERSONAL SERVICES

In terms of US domestic legislation, income earned by a non-resident individual for personal services rendered in the US which are of an independent nature is taxed at a flat rate of 30%.

Income derived by an individual who is a resident of either the US or Australia for rendering independent personal services in the other country will be taxed in that other country in which the services are performed if:

Article 14(a) – the recipient is present in that country for a period or periods aggregating more than 183 days in the year of income (or taxable year) of the country visited, or

Article 14(b) – that person has a ‘fixed base’ regularly available in that country for the purpose of performing their activities, and the income is attributable to activities exercised from that base.

We are the only multi-disciplinary international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S.– Australia taxation.

Only the country of residence can tax this income if neither of the 2 tests above are met. The US Treasury Department noted that its understanding of the term fixed base is similar to the term permanent establishment.

Independent personal services include all personal services performed by an individual for their own account which includes any services performed as a partner in a partnership. This however does not include services performed as a director of a company which will be covered by Article 15 of the DTA – Dependent personal services.

Lastly, it is important to note that these personal services include all independent activities and are not limited to specific professions. 

CONCLUSION 

The interpretation by courts of Article 14 post COVID will be quite interesting as the way we conduct business has shifted significantly and could perhaps see an amendment to this article in the new future. 

Our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisors, will be able to guide you on how to interpret and apply Article 14 to your specific circumstances.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 13 – Alienation of Property

INTRODUCTION

When it comes to the alienation of property, it is usually standard practice to give the taxing rights to the state which, under the DTA, is entitled to tax both the property and income derived from it. 

Article 13 provides rules for the taxation of certain gains derived by a resident of a Contracting State. In general, the Article makes provision for the following: 

  1. gains from the alienation of real property may be taxed where the real property is located;
  2. gains derived from the alienation of ships or aircraft or related property may be taxed only by the State of which the enterprise is a resident, except to the extent that the enterprise has been allowed depreciation of the property in computing taxable income in the other State; and
  3. gains from the alienation of property referred to in paragraph 4 (c) of Article 12 (Royalties) are taxable under Article 12. 

Gains with respect to any other property are covered by Article 21 (Income Not Expressly Mentioned), which provides that gains effectively connected with a permanent establishment are taxable where the permanent establishment is located, in accordance with Article 7 (Business Profits), and that other gains may be taxed by both the State of source of the gain and the State of residence of the owner. Double taxation is avoided under the provisions of Article 22 (Relief from Double Taxation).

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 13 OF THE DTA – ALIENATION OF PROPERTY 

Article 13(1) states that income or gains derived by a resident of one country from the alienation of real property in the other country may be taxed in that other country.

For example, if a US resident derived income or gains from the disposal of real property located in Australia, that income or gain may be taxed in Australia.

The meaning of the phrase ‘income or gains’ was clarified by the Protocol. Article 2(1)(b) (Taxes Covered) was amended to include a specific reference to Australian capital gains tax to ensure that capital gains are within the scope of the DTA. 

Article 13(2) defines the term ‘real property’.

For purposes of the US, Article 13(2)(a) provides that the term ‘real property situated in the other Contracting State’ includes a ‘United States real property interest and real property referred to in Article 6 which is situated in the United States’. 

Accordingly, the US retains its full taxing rights under its domestic law.

For purposes of Australia Art 13(2)(b) provides that real property includes the following:

  1. real property referred to in Article 6;
  2. shares or comparable interests in a company, the assets of which consist of wholly or principally of real property situated in Australia, and
  3. an interest in a partnership, trust or estate of a deceased individual, the assets of which consist wholly or principally of real property situated in Australia.

Article 6 includes within the definition of real property a leasehold interest in land and rights to exploit or to explore for natural resources.

Shares or comparable interests in a company, the assets of which consist wholly or principally of real property, and an interest in a partnership, trust or deceased estate are also deemed to be real property in terms of Article 13(2)(b)(ii) and 13(2)(b)(iii).

Article 13(3) states that income or gains arising from the alienation of property (other than real property covered by Article 13(1)) forming part of the business assets of a permanent establishment of an enterprise or pertaining to a fixed base used for performing independent personal services may be taxed in that other state. 

This article also applies where the permanent establishment itself (alone or with the whole enterprise) or the fixed base is alienated and corresponds to the rules for the taxation of business profits and income from independent services in Article 7 and Article 14 respectively. 

Asena Advisors is the only multi-disciplinary (Accounting and Legal) international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S. -Australia taxation.

Article 13(4) makes provision for exclusive taxing rights of income and capital gains by the residence country from the alienation of ships, aircraft or containers operated or used in international traffic. It is also important to note, that this applies even if the income is attributable to a permanent establishment maintained by the enterprise in the other Contracting State.

Article 13(5) applies to the taxation of deemed disposals when ceasing your tax residency in a contracting state. This is also referred to as an exit tax. This article states that where an individual, has a deemed disposal event in their residence state due to ceasing residency, they can elect to be treated for the purposes of the taxation laws of the other state as having alienated and re -acquired the property for an amount equal to its fair market value at that time.

This rule has two significant consequences –

  • Firstly, if the individual is subject to tax in the other Contracting State on the gain from the deemed sale of the asset a foreign tax credit for tax on the deemed sale will be available pursuant to Article 22.
  • Secondly, the deemed sale and repurchase will result in the individual resident in the other Contracting State having a “stepped up” cost base equal to the fair market value of the property.

Article 13(6) states that where a resident of one state elects to defer taxation on income or gains relating to property that would otherwise be taxed in that state (upon ceasing to be a resident) only the state where they subsequently become a resident can tax the deferred gain. 

Article 13(7) makes provision for any other capital gains not covered by Article 13. These capital gains are to be taxed in accordance with the domestic laws of each country.

Article 13(8) lastly clarifies the taxation of real property which consists of shares in a company or interests in a partnership, estate or trust as referred to in Article 13(2)(b) is deemed to be situated in Australia.

CONCLUSION 

There have been numerous disputes regarding the application of this Article and reference to case law is extremely important. Especially in relation to limited partnerships and or indirect ownership through a chain of companies of Australian real property.

Make sure you understand how Article 13 can impact your potential liquidity event when planning to dispose of your business.  

We strongly recommend seeking professional advice when it comes to this Article and our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisors, will guide you on how to approach and interpret Article 13. 

We strongly recommend seeking professional advice when it comes to Article 12. As always, our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisors will guide you on how to approach and interpret Article 12. 

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 12 – Royalties

INTRODUCTION

This week we will be taking a closer look at how royalties are dealt with in terms of the US/AUS DTA.  

Royalties earned outside of your resident state are generally taxed by the source state on a withholding basis. Under domestic law, a state can require a person to withhold tax on making a payment to another person. 

Royalties that are effectively connected with a permanent establishment are taxed either in terms of Article 7 which deals with business profits or Article 14 which deals with Independent Personal Services. 

The US/AUS DTA Protocol amended the treatment of royalties to:

  1. reduce the general rate of source country tax on royalties from 10% to 5%;
  2. exclude from the scope of Article12(4) payments for the use of industrial, commercial, or scientific equipment, and
  3. extend the royalties definition to cover additional types of broadcasting media (Article 12(4)(a)(iii)).

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 12 OF THE DTA – ROYALTIES

The purpose of Article 12 is to limit the tax that the source country may impose on royalty payments to beneficial owners in the other country to 5%, however, this limit only applies if the payments are at arm’s length. 

Article 12(1) states that royalties may be taxed in the country of residence of the beneficial owner even though derived from sources in the other Contracting State. This confirms Article 1(3) of the DTA that preserves the right of each country to tax its residents.

Article 12(2) stipulates those royalties may also be taxed by the source country but limits the tax to 5% of the gross amount of the royalties. 

Article 12, however, does not apply to natural resource royalties, which are taxable in the country of source in terms of  Article 6 of the DTA.

Article 12(3) sets out the exclusions and that the reduced withholding tax rate does not apply in the following cases:

    1. the beneficial owner has a permanent establishment in the source country;
    2. or performs personal services in an independent capacity through a fixed base in the source country, and the property giving rise to the royalties is effectively connected with the permanent establishment or fixed base

In that event, the royalties will either be taxed as business profits (Article 7) or income from the performance of independent personal services (Article 14).

Article 12(4) is important as it defines the word royalties for purposes of the treaty. The definition of royalty in Art 12(4) comprises of the following three components:

Component 1 – Intellectual property 

Article 12(4)(a) includes payments or credits of any kind to the extent that they are considered for the use or right to use any:

  (i) copyright, patent, design or model, plan, secret formula or process, trademark or other like property or right

  (ii) motion picture films, or

  (iii) films or audio or videotapes or disks, or any other means of image or sound reproduction or transmission for use in connection with television, radio, or other broadcasting.

Due to the technological advances made since the DTA was signed, the protocol was amended to reflect these advances more accurately. 

For example, due to the Protocol, Article 12(4)(a)(iii) will apply to a payment made by an Australian broadcaster to a US company for the right to transmit a live feed of an entertainment program through satellite or the Internet. 

However, on the other hand, Article 12(4)(a)(iii) will not apply to payments made by a retail customer who has subscribed to a satellite television service provided by a US company.

Asena Advisors is the only multi-disciplinary (Accounting and Legal) international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S. -Australia taxation.

Component 2 – Scientific, technical, industrial, or commercial knowledge or information

Article 12(4)(b)(i) states that royalties include payments or credits for scientific, technical, industrial, or commercial knowledge or information (“know-how”) owned by any person. 

The specific reference to knowledge or information owned is meant to indicate that the term royalties imply a property right as distinguished from personal services.

This is a very important distinction to understand, so let’s use an example – 

An IT specialist who prepares or designs a website for a customer will be considered to perform personal services and the remuneration received will be taxable in terms of either Article 14 (Independent personal services) or Article 15 (Dependent personal services). 

However, should the IT specialist supply a pre-existing design to a customer, this will be considered the furnishing of knowledge (know-how) or information and taxed in terms of Article 12? 

Article 12(4)(b)(ii) provides that consideration for any assistance of an ancillary and subsidiary nature that enables the application or enjoyment of know-how is also a royalty payment. However, if the service is supplied in connection with the sale of property, Article 12 will not apply. 

Article 12(4)(b)(iii) contains a special rule to deal with the situation of a disguised lease of a property right of the type covered Article 12(4)(b). 

Component 3 – Disposition of property that is contingent

Article 12(4)(c) provides that, to the extent that income from the disposition of any property or right described in this paragraph is contingent on the productivity or use or further disposition of such property or right, it is a royalty.

Article 12(5) applies where there is a special relationship between the payer of the royalties and the person beneficially entitled to the royalties or between both of them and some other person. 

Where this requirement is satisfied, the 5% limitation will only apply to the extent that the royalties do not exceed the amount that might be expected to be agreed upon by independent persons acting at arm’s length. The excess amount will therefore be taxable according to the law of each contracting state but subject to any other provisions of the DTA. 

The term special relationship is significantly wider than the term associated enterprise contained in Article 9 and should be read in conjunction with Article 12(5). 

Article 12(6) lastly provides special source rules for royalties. In general, a royalty is considered to have its source in a country if paid by the Government, or a resident of that country, or by a company that under domestic law is a resident of that country. 

The US Treasury Department explained that a royalty paid by a dual resident company may be eligible for the reduced rate provided in Article 12(2), although a royalty beneficially owned by such a company is not.

CONCLUSION 

It is important to take note that a mere accounting entry may be sufficient to attract royalty withholding tax as the definition refers to payments or credits.

To determine whether a payment is a royalty subject to Article 12 or a payment for services within the scope of Article 7, will depend on the purpose of the payment and circumstances of the arrangement been the parties. 

The interpretation of Article 12 is going to take center stage in the near future. Due to the pandemic, numerous people across the world started new business ventures based on models that enable them to generate global income while rendering services remotely. The DTA and Protocol were drafted long before anyone knew the pandemic so neither the US nor Australia took this into consideration when the DTA bilateral instrument was agreed upon. 

Make sure you understand how Article 12 can impact your new start-up, as you do not want to have non-compliance issues, penalties, or additional tax just due to not understanding Article 12. 

We strongly recommend seeking professional advice when it comes to Article 12. As always, our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisors will guide you on how to approach and interpret Article 12. 

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 11 – Interest

INTRODUCTION

This week we will be taking a closer look at how interest is dealt with in terms of the US/AUS DTA.

Interest earned outside of your resident state is generally taxed by the source state on a withholding basis. Under domestic law a state can require a person to withhold tax on making a payment to another person.

An overly simplified example of how Article 11 (Interest) applies in practice is if a US tax resident earns interest income from Australia. The US has the right to tax the interest earned from sources in Australia. This right is however not exclusive. If Australia also wants to also tax the interest income, it is limited to the amount of tax it can levy in terms of Article 11.

Article 11 of the DTA (Interest) has a dual purpose:

– Firstly, to limit the tax imposed by the source state where the interest arises; and

– Secondly prevents the treaty benefits available where there is an excessive payment of interest arising from a “special relationship”.

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 11 OF THE DTA – INTEREST

Article 11 generally limits the withholding tax that the source country may impose on interest payments to beneficial owners in the other country to 10%.

Article 11(1) states that interest from sources in one of the contracting states to which a resident of the other is beneficially entitled may be taxed in that other country. Hence there is no exclusive right.

A person will be beneficially entitled to interest for purposes of Article 11 if they are the beneficial owner of the interest.

Article 11(2) provides that the source state (country where the interest arises) may also tax the interest that the resident of the other state is beneficially entitled subject to a maximum rate of 10%.

Currently the US has a non-treaty interest withholding tax rate of 30% and Australia has a general interest withholding tax rate of 10%.

Article 11(3) however provides an exemption for interest paid to government bodies and financial institutions subject to the restrictions in Article 11(4).

Article 11(3)(a) states that interest derived by a Contracting State or a political or administrative subdivision or a local authority of the Contracting State is only subject to tax in the State of residence. This exemption extends to interest received by any other body exercising governmental functions.

Article 11(3)(b) states further that interest derived by financial institutions that are unrelated to and dealing wholly independently of the payer are only taxed in the State of residence.

An example of the type of financial institutions that will qualify for the exemption in Art 11(3)(b) are investment banks, brokers, and commercial finance companies

A financial institution will be “unrelated and dealing wholly independently” of the payer of the interest if the financial institution and payer are not treated as Associated Enterprises as stipulated in Article 9.

Article 11(4) operates as a restrictive provision on the exemption provided in Article 11(3).

Article 11(4)(a) stipulates that the exemption in Article 11(3)(b) will not apply, and the interest derived will be taxed at 10% of the gross amount if it arises from back-to-back loans or an arrangement that is economically equivalent.

Article 11(4)(b) preserves the application of the domestic tax law of each State regarding anti-avoidance provisions. Nothing in Article 11 limits the ability of the US to enforce existing anti-avoidance provisions.

Similarly, Australia reserves the right to apply its general anti-avoidance rules where there is a conflict with the provisions of a tax treaty and Article 11(4)(b) extends this power to any anti-avoidance rule.

Article 11(4)(b) further does not limit the ability of Australia or the US to adopt new anti-avoidance provisions.

Article 11(5) defines “interest” to mean interest from:

(a) government securities, bonds, debentures, and any form of indebtedness, and

(b) income subject to the same taxation treatment as income from money lent according to the law of the Contracting State in which the income arises.

However, income dealt with in Article 10 (Dividends) and penalty charges for late payment are not treated as interest.

The exclusion of income dealt with by the Dividends Article, clarifies that Article 10 takes precedence over Article 11 in cases where both Articles can apply.

We are the only multi-disciplinary international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S.– Australia taxation.

Article 11(6) simply states that tax is not payable under Article 11 where the interest income of the person beneficially entitled to it is subject to tax under Article 7 (Business Profits) or Article 14 (Independent Personal Services).

Article 11(7) defines the source of interest, which is a necessary pre-requisite for the Contracting State withholding tax under Article 11(2).

Generally, interest is deemed to arise and hence has its source in the Contracting State where the payer is a resident.

Unfortunately, it is not always that simple or straightforward. For example, if a person paying the interest has a permanent establishment in connection with which the interest is attributable, the interest is deemed to arise in that Contracting State if borne by that permanent establishment. This is irrespective of the fact whether or not the payer of the interest is a resident of one of the contracting states.

Article 11(8) states that, in cases involving special relationships between persons, Article 11 applies only to that portion of the total interest payments between those persons that would have been made absent such special relationships. Any excess amount of interest paid remains taxable according to the laws of the US and Australia, respectively, with due regard to the other provisions of the Convention.

Article 11(9) contains two anti-abuse exceptions to the treatment of interest in paragraphs (1), (2), (3) and (4)

Article 11(9)(a) states that interest paid by a resident of one of the Contracting States to a resident of the other Contracting State that is determined by reference to the profits of the issuer, or an associated enterprise may be taxed at a rate not exceeding 15%.

Article 11(9)(b) states that interest paid on ownership interests in securitization entities may be taxed in accordance with the domestic law, but only to the extent that the interest paid exceeds the normal rate of return on publicly traded debt instruments with a similar risk profile.

This article is specifically included to preserve the US taxation of real estate mortgage investment conduits (REMICs). A REMIC is a US entity that holds a fixed pool of real estate loans and issues debt securities with serial maturities and differing rates of return backed by those loans.

The purpose of Article 11(9)(b) is to permit the US to charge purchasers of REIMIC investments the domestic US tax on residual interests in REMICs.

Article 11(10) is only regarded to be relevant to US withholding tax. It states that where interest incurred by a company resident in one of the Contracting States is deductible in connection with a permanent establishment (Article 5), due to Article 6 (Real property) or Article 13 (Alienation of property) in the other Contracting State and that interest exceeds the interest actually paid, the amount of the excess interest deducted will be deemed to be interest arising in that other Contracting State to which a resident of the first-mentioned Contracting State is beneficially entitled.

Example:

An Australian company carries on business in the US via a permanent establishment (Branch). For US purposes this relates to branch profit tax. The branch incurs interest that is deductible in determining its US profits. However, the interest incurred by the branch is more than the amount of interest actually paid by the branch. Article 11(10) gives the US the right to tax the amount of interest not paid.

CONCLUSION

We would recommend seeking professional advice when it comes to Article 11. As always, our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisors, will guide you on how to approach and interpret Article 11.

Our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisors, advise numerous clients and corporations on their international structuring and how to make sure it is done in the most tax effective way. 

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 10 – Dividends

INTRODUCTION

For purposes of this week’s blog, it will be beneficial just to recap on the purpose of a DTA. The major purpose of DTA is to mitigate international double taxation through tax reduction or exemptions on certain types of income derived by residents of one treaty country from sources within the other treaty country. Due to the fact that DTAs often modify US and foreign tax consequences substantially, the relevant DTA must be considered in order to fully analyze the income tax consequences of any outbound or inbound transaction.

Article 10 of the US/Australia DTA is a great example of this. 

This week we will be looking at the tax implications of declaring a dividend in the context of Article 10 of the US/Australia DTA.

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 10 OF THE DTA – DIVIDENDS

Dividends are distributions made by a company of something of value to a shareholder. Both the US and Australia levy withholding tax when a dividend is paid to a foreign shareholder. 

Under US domestic tax law, a foreign person is generally subject to 30% US tax on the gross amount of certain US-source income. All persons (‘withholding agents’) making US-source fixed, determinable, annual, or periodical (FDAP) payments to foreign persons generally must report and withhold 30% of the gross US-source FDAP payments, such as dividends.

Under Australian domestic tax law, dividends paid to an Australian non-resident recipient is subject to a flat withholding tax to the extent they are unfranked and are otherwise not assessed in Australia.

Article 10 however limits the tax that the source country may impose on these dividends payable to beneficial owners’ resident in the other country.

Article 10(1) preserves the right of a shareholder’s country of residence to tax dividends arising in the other country by permitting Australia or the US to tax its residents on dividends paid to them by a company that is resident in the other Contracting State.

Article 10(2) allows the Contacting State of the company to tax dividends to which a resident of the other Contracting State is entitled subject to the limitations in Article 10(2) and 10(3). 

Important to note is that Article 10(2) also requires that if either the US or Australia significantly modifies their laws regarding taxation of corporations or dividends they must consult with each other to determine any appropriate amendment to Article 10(2).

Article 10(2)(a) stipulates that where the shareholder who is beneficially entitled to the dividend is a company resident in the other Contracting State and directly owns shares representing at least 10% of the voting power of the company paying the dividend then the withholding tax rate is limited to 5% of the gross dividend.

The term ‘beneficially entitled’ is not defined in the DTA and therefore the domestic law of the country imposing the tax should be considered. 

The term ‘voting power‘ is also not defined but must be determined to ascertain if the 10% shareholding test is satisfied. 

The US Department of Treasury’s technical explanation of the Protocol that replaced Art 10 of the Convention states the following:

“Shares are considered to be voting shares if they provide the power to elect, appoint or replace any person vested with the powers ordinarily exercised by the board of directors of a US corporation.”

In Australia voting power is considered to refer to the voting power on all types of shares and not only in relation to the power to replace members of the board of directors. 

In determining the voting power for the purposes of Article 10(2) only shares that are held ‘directly’ by the beneficial shareholder can be taken into account. 

Accordingly, indirect interests are not to be taken into account. However, the US Department of Treasury’s technical explanation of the Protocol when discussing Article 10(2) states the following:

“Companies holding shares through fiscally transparent entities such as partnerships are considered for purposes of this paragraph to hold their proportionate interest in the shares held by the intermediate entity. As a result, companies holding shares through such entities may be able to claim the benefits of sub-paragraph (a) under certain circumstances. The lower rate of withholding tax applies when the company’s proportionate share of the shares held by the intermediate entity meets the 10 percent threshold. Whether this ownership threshold is satisfied may be difficult to determine and often will require an analysis of the partnership or trust agreement.”

The voting power test in Article 10 is therefore likely to be applied differently in the US and Australia unless the reference to “beneficially entitled” is interpreted to override the requirement that the payee company holds the shares “directly”.

Article 10(2)(b) limits the withholding tax rate on dividends derived by a resident from shares held in a company resident in the other Contracting State to 15%. Accordingly, this rate will apply to individuals, trusts, partnerships and companies that cannot rely on Article 10(2)(a) or the exemption in Art 10(3) discussed below.

Article 10(3) is quite often misinterpreted. This Article stipulates that a shareholder company resident in the US or Australia is exempt from withholding tax on dividends if it owns 80% or more or the voting power of the company paying the dividends for a 12-month period ending on the date the dividend is declared. However, the exemption is subject to the shareholder company being:

  (a) a qualified person as defined in Article 16(2)(c), or

  (b) entitled to benefits under the Limitation of Benefits Article.

In contrast to Article 10(2), voting power for the purposes of Article 10(3) is limited to shares that are held “directly” by the beneficial shareholder and therefore excludes indirect ownership through corporate chains. 

Asena Advisors is the only multi-disciplinary (Accounting and Legal) international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S. -Australia taxation.

The shareholder company will be a “qualified person” if:

1. its principal class of shares is listed on a recognized stock exchange and is regularly traded on one or more stock exchanges. A recognized stock exchange is a recognized stock exchange under Australian or US law and any stock exchange agreed by the ATO and IRS as explained in Article 16(6), or

2. at least 50% of the vote and value of the shares in the shareholder company must be owned directly or indirectly by five or fewer companies that are listed on a recognized stock exchange as defined in Article 16(6). Importantly in addition, where the shares in the shareholder company are held indirectly, each intermediate owner must be a resident of either Australia or the US.

Where a shareholder company is not a qualified person the exemption from withholding tax may still be available provided that the ATO or IRS makes a determination under Article 16(5). 

Article 10(4) provides that dividends paid by a Regulated Investment Company (RIC) or Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) are not eligible for the 5% maximum rate of withholding tax in Art 10(2)(a) or the exemption from withholding tax in Art 10(3). Accordingly, the 15% withholding rate will generally apply to these entities.

Article 10(5) excludes from the general source country withholding tax limitations under Art 10(2), (3) and (4) dividends paid with respect to holdings that form part of the business property of a permanent establishment as defined in Article 5 or fixed base situated in the source country. 

Article 10(6) defines “dividends” to mean income from shares and amounts subject to the same taxation treatment as income from shares under the laws of the country where the company making the distribution is a resident.

In Australia the rules for defining what constitutes equity in a company and what constitutes debt are set out in ITAA97 Div 974 of the ITAA 1997 that apply from 1 July 2001. 

In the case of the US, the term dividends include amounts treated as a dividend under US law upon the sale or redemption of shares or upon a transfer of shares in a reorganisation. Further, a distribution from a US publicly traded partnership, which is taxed as a corporation under US law, is a dividend for purposes of Article 10. However, a distribution by a US LLC is not a dividend for purposes of Article 10 if it is not taxable as a corporation under US law.

Article 10(7) states that where a company which is resident for example in the US and derives profits or income from Australia, Australia is not permitted to tax dividends paid by the company unless either:

1. the person beneficially entitled to the dividends is a resident in Australia; or

2. the shares in respect of which the dividends are paid is effectively connected with a permanent establishment in Australia.

Therefore, Article 10(7) overrides section 44(1)(b) of the ITAA 1936 which permits Australia to tax dividends paid to non-residents to the extent of profits derived from sources within Australia. 

Similarly, it overrides the ability of the US to impose taxes under Code s 871 and Code s 882(a) on dividends paid by foreign corporations that have a US source under Code s 861(a)(2)(B).

Article 10(7) also provides that the Contracting States cannot impose tax on a company’s undistributed profits even if the dividends are wholly or partly paid out of profits in the relevant Contracting State unless Article 10(8) applies.

However, Article 10(7) does not restrict a State’s right to tax its resident shareholders on undistributed earnings of a corporation resident in the other State. The authority of the US to impose the foreign personal holding company tax, the taxes on subpart F income and on an increase in earnings invested in US property, and the tax on income of a passive foreign investment company that is a qualified electing fund is in no way restricted by this provision.

Article 10(8) permits Australia and the US to impose a branch profits tax on a company that is a resident in the other State. This tax is in addition to other taxes permitted by the Convention.

Currently, Australia does not impose a branch profits tax. However, if Australia were to impose such a tax, the base of such a tax would be limited to an amount analogous to the US dividend equivalent amount.

Article 10(9) lastly provides that the branch profits tax permitted by Article 10(8) shall not be imposed at a rate of withholding tax exceeding the maximum direct investment dividend rate of withholding tax of 5% in Article 10(2)(a).

CONCLUSION 

As you can see, Article 10 of the DTA is comprehensive and one should be cautious when applying it to a specific situation. 

Our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisors, advise numerous clients and corporations on their international structuring and how to make sure it is done in the most tax effective way. 

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 9 – Associate Enterprises

BACKGROUND

This week, we will have a closer look at Article 9 of the US/AUS DTA. Article 9 of the DTA incorporates into the treaty the US and Australian arm’s-length principles reflected in the transfer pricing provisions of the Internal Revenue Code Section 482 and in Australia the transfer pricing provisions in ITAA 1997 Division 815.

An arm’s-length transaction is a transaction between independent parties. For the purposes of this blog, a simple example will help in understanding the basic concept of what an arm’s-length transaction is and when transfer pricing provisions will apply to a specific transaction. 

Example: USCO A and B are both US companies and co-shareholders of AusCo, a company in Australia. The directors of both USCO A and B are John and Jane who are married.  Further, each owns 50% of the stock in AusCo. USCO A is considering selling its 50% stake in AusCo and determined that the market related value of the 50% stake is $10m. However, after further consideration and the adverse tax implications on disposal, John and Jane decided that USCO A should rather sell its 50% stake to USCO B. John and Jane decided that it will sell the 50% stake for $100, to avoid the tax implications and streamline their current structure. 

IMPLICATIONS

If USCO A sold the 50% stake for $10million to USCO B it would have been sold at arm’s-length as this is the market related price. 

USCO A however sold it to USCO B for $100. They would not have sold the same stake to an independent party for $100. Hence the transaction is not at arm’s length and a transfer pricing adjustment needs to be made.  

INTRODUCTION

Article 9 provides that when enterprises which are related engaged in a transaction and the enterprises engage in a transaction on terms that are not arm’s length, the Contracting States may make appropriate adjustments to the taxable income and tax liability of such related enterprises to reflect what the income and tax of these enterprises with respect to the transaction would have been had there been an arm’s-length relationship between them. 

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 9 OF THE DTA – ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISES 

Article 9 provides that, where related persons engage in transactions which are not at arm’s length, the Contracting States may make appropriate adjustments to their taxable income and tax liability.

It should be noted that it is generally accepted that Article 9 is intended to be permissive. It allows contracting states to apply the transfer pricing rules that form part of their tax legislation. It is generally considered that; Article 9 does not create a stand-alone right for countries to make transfer pricing adjustments that go beyond what is authorized by their own domestic rules. This is mainly because the basic purpose of a DTA is to relieve double taxation and it would go way beyond this purpose if a DTA imposed harsher tax treatment on a particular transaction between country A and country B than would have applied if the same transaction had taken place between country A and another country,

Article 9(1) sets out the general rule for this Article and when it will be applicable. Where an enterprise of one Contracting State (US) and an enterprise of the other Contracting State (Australia) are related through management, control, or capital and their commercial or financial relations differ from those which would prevail between independent enterprises, the profits of the enterprises may be adjusted to reflect the profits which would have accrued if the two enterprises had been independent. 

Where a reallocation of profits is affected under this paragraph, in such a manner that the profits of an enterprise of one country are adjusted upwards, a form of double taxation would arise if the profits so reallocated continued to be subject to tax in the hands of an associated enterprise in the other country.

We are the only multi-disciplinary international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S.– Australia taxation.
 

Article 9(2) states that where one of the Contracting States has increased the profits of an enterprise of that State to reflect the amount that would have accrued to the enterprise had it been independent of an enterprise in the other Contracting State, the second State shall make an appropriate adjustment, decreasing the amount of tax which it has imposed on those profits. 

In determining such adjustments, due regard is to be had to the other provisions of the DTA and the competent authorities of the two States (IRS and ATO) shall consult each other if necessary, in implementing this provision.

Article 9(3) states that each Contracting State may apply its internal law in determining liability for its tax. For example, although Articles 9(1) and 2 refer to allocations of profits and taxes, it is understood that such terms also include the components of the tax base and of the tax liability, such as income, deductions, credits, and allowances. 

The US will apply its rules and procedures under section 482 of the IRC and Australia on the other hand will apply the transfer pricing provisions in ITAA 1997 Division 815.  It is important that such determinations must be consistent in each case with the principles of arm’s length transactions.

CONCLUSION 

This Article is a great example of how the domestic transfer pricing provisions of the US and Australia are applied on international transactions. 

At Asena Advisors, we have years of experience in dealing with transfer pricing issues and how to ensure that both domestic transfer pricing provisions and the DTA’s transfer pricing provisions are applied correctly.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 8 – Shipping and Air Transport

INTRODUCTION

This week, we will be discussing an Article in the US/AUS DTA which is generally not as relevant to individuals as other Articles in the DTA, but still important to understand. Especially regarding the interrelationship with other Articles in the DTA and how one article can override another in the DTA. 

Article 8 of the DTA governs the taxation of profits of an enterprise of a contracting state from the operation of ships or aircraft in ‘international traffic’, meaning any transport by a ship or aircraft, except when such transport is solely between places in a contracting state. In simple terms, this article does not apply to an enterprise who solely renders services within the US or Australia and provides primary taxing rights to the Country of Residence. 

In this week’s blog we will therefore have a look at Article 8 of the US/AUS DTA and how it interplays with Article 7 of the DTA. 

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 8 OF THE DTA – SHIPPING AND AIR TRANSPORT 

In our previous blog – Article 7- Business Profits , we explained that where profits include items of income dealt with separately in other articles of the DTA, then the provisions of those Articles shall not be affected by the provisions of Article 7. 

Article 8 is such an article, as it deals with profits of an enterprise from the operation of ships or aircraft in international traffic. If Article 8 applies to the profits of an enterprise, it will therefore override the provisions of Article 7.

Article 8(1) stipulates that the profits derived by a resident of one of the Contracting States from the operation in international traffic of ships or aircraft are taxable only in that Contracting State. In addition, this treatment extends to certain items of rental income that are closely related to the operation of ships and aircraft in international traffic.

Article 1(3)(d) of the DTA defines international traffic as any transport by a ship or aircraft, except where such transport is solely between places within a Contacting State.  

In particular, the following is subject to the above treatment:

– Profits from the rental of ships or aircraft on a full time basis (for example with crewmembers) operated in international traffic if the resident either operates ships or aircraft in international traffic or regularly leases ships or aircraft on a full basis. Such income is exempt from tax in the other Contracting State.

– Profits from the lease of ships or aircraft on a bare boat basis (meaning without crewmembers) when the income is ‘merely incidental’ to the operation of ships or aircraft in international traffic by the lessor.

Whether profits from the lease of ships or aircraft on a bare boat basis are merely incidental to operation in international traffic, the operative effect of this phrase is to restrict the application of Article 8 to those bareboat leases where:

– The primary activity of the lessor is the operation of ships or aircraft in international traffic, and

– The lessor’s bareboat leasing activity only makes a minor contribution to, and is so closely related to, this primary activity that it does not amount to a separate business or source of income for the lessor.

We are the only multi-disciplinary international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S.– Australia taxation.

Article 8(2) stipulates that profits of an enterprise of a Contracting State from the use, maintenance or rental of containers (including equipment for their transport) that are used for the transport of goods in international traffic are exempt from tax in the other Contracting State. This applies regardless of whether the recipient of the income is engaged in the operation of ships or aircraft in international traffic. 

Article 8(3) stipulates that Article 8(1) and 8(2) apply to profits derived though participation in a pool service or other profit sharing arrangement entered into by carriers in shipping and air transport in the interest of international cooperation. As an example, airlines from the US and Australia may agree to share profits relating to the transport of passengers between the two countries. They each will fly the same number of flights per week and share the revenues from that route equally, regardless of the number of passengers that each airline transports. Article 8(3) further makes it clear that all of the income arising from the pool service or other profit sharing arrangement and not just the income derived directly by that carrier is taxable in the Contracting State of residence.

Article 8(4) states that the carriage of passengers, livestock, mail, merchandise or goods taken on board in a Contracting State for discharge in that State is not from an operation in international traffic of ships or aircraft and may therefore be taxed in that State (source state). This relates to profits from the transport of goods or passengers picked up and discharged within the same Contracting State and therefore does not fall within the definition of international traffic and may be taxed by that State at source. However, for the Contracting State to impose such tax at source it is considered that the requirements of Article 7 would need to be satisfied.

This can be simplified with the following two examples:

Example 1 – Company A, a US shipping company contracts to carry goods from Australia to a city in the US. Part of the contract includes the transport of the goods by road from its point of origin in Australia to another point in Australia.  The income earned by the US shipping company from the overland leg of the journey would still be taxable only in the US. 

Example 2 – Company B is a US airline company which carries passengers from New York to Hobart, with an intervening stop in Perth. The Perth to Hobart leg of the trip would be treated as international transport of passengers with respect to those passengers and would still only be taxable in the US.

INTERRELATIONSHIP WITH ARTICLE 7 (BUSINESS PROFITS)

Profits from the lease of ships or aircraft that are not covered by the Shipping and Air Transport Article will fall within the scope of Article 7. 

Examples of profits that would fall within Article 7 include the following:

– Full basis leases of ships or aircraft that are not operated in international traffic by the lessee or where the lessor only operates ships or aircraft between places in the source country and does not regularly lease ships or aircraft on a full-time basis; and 

– Bare boat leases not incidental to the lessor’s international transport operations.

More importantly the source country’s taxation is only permitted under the Business Profits Article to the extent the profits are effectively connected with a permanent establishment in that country.

CONCLUSION 

This is a great example of how a specific article in the DTA can override the provisions of Article 7.

At Asena Advisors, our team of International Tax specialists, are able to assist you with applying this article correctly and establishing whether the profits are taxable in terms of Article 7 or Article 8 of the DTA. 

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 7 – Business Profits

INTRODUCTION

Covid has changed the way business is done globally. Two of the most common changes are 

– Remote working (Employee sitting in Australia could be working for an employer in the US); and

– The increase in e-commerce businesses and being able to grow and expand these businesses globally without actually leaving the house. 

That being said, have you ever as an employer considered what the potential tax implications could be for the company by having employees working remotely?  

And does your e-commerce business create a permanent establishment in another country perhaps? 

Make sure you have taken proper steps to mitigate any unnecessary tax implications due to the ‘new norm’.

Article 7 is one of the more complex and technical articles in the DTA as it has various components to consider. However, I will try and provide a brief summary of its interpretation.

The first overriding principle of double taxation treaties is that a company resident in one country will not be taxed on its business income in the other State unless it carries on that business in the other country through a Permanent Establishment (PE) situated in that country.

The second principle is that the taxation right of the State where the PE is situated does not extend to income that is not attributable to the PE. The interpretation of these principles has differed from country to country. Some countries have pursued a principle of general force of attraction, which means that all income such as other business profits, dividends, interest and royalties arising from sources in their territory was fully taxable in that country if the beneficiary had a PE there, even though such income was clearly not attributable to that PE. 

In this week’s blog we will have a look at Article 7 of the US/AUS DTA and highlight some key aspects. 

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 7 OF THE DTA – BUSINESS PROFITS

Article 7 sets out the limits of the source state’s taxing rights in relation to business profits. If an enterprise resident in a contracting state has a Permanent Establishment (PE) in the other state through which it carries on business it can be taxable in that other state, as well as the state of residence. The tax is limited in the source state to no more than the profits attributable to the PE. 

Article 7(1) states the basic principle which is that the profits of an Australian enterprise may be taxed in the US only if it carries on business in the US through a permanent establishment and vice versa. In the case of an Australian enterprise, the US can only tax the profits of the enterprise to the extent that they are attributable to the permanent establishment.

It should be noted that dual-resident corporations are excluded from the term “enterprise of one of the Contracting States” by reason of the definition of an Australian or a US corporation contained in Article 3(1)(g) and the definition of residence contained in Article 4.  Such dual-resident corporations are treated as a resident of neither country for convention purposes, and therefor denied the benefit of this article and other provisions in the convention. 

The phrase ‘business profits of an enterprise’ is critical to the operation of Article 7.

The term ‘profits’ is not defined in the agreement and the question arises as to whether it includes profits which are ordinarily regarded as capital in nature or which are not derived from the carrying on of a business.

Article 3(2) of the DTA provides that, unless the context otherwise requires, a reference to profits of a business is a reference to the taxable income of the business. As capital gains are included in taxable income, the section arguably supports the view that Article 7 applies to capital gains. 

The 2006 U.S. Model Treaty Technical Explanation attempts to define business profits more generally in Article 7(1), providing that business profits are ‘income derived from any trade or business’.

Asena Advisors is the only multi-disciplinary (Accounting and Legal) international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S. -Australia taxation.

Article 7(2), which is subject to Article 7(3), provides that the profits to be attributed to a permanent establishment are those, which it might be expected to make if it were an independent enterprise engaged in similar activities under similar conditions. The profits must reflect arm’s length prices. For example, the profits of a branch must be calculated as if it were a separate entity distinct from its head office and on the basis that the branch was dealing wholly independently with its head office.

The practical application of Article 7(2) is not as straightforward as it seems. Quite often, a functional analysis needs to be done to ensure that arm’s length principles are applied properly. This includes the proper characterization of the transaction and the commercial risks undertaken by the enterprise.

Article 7(3) states that expenses that are reasonably connected with the profits of the permanent establishment and would have been deductible if the permanent establishment were an independent entity are deductible. Further, these expenses are deductible whether incurred in the Contracting State in which the permanent establishment is situated or elsewhere including executive and general administrative expenses.

Article 7(4) states that no profits are to be attributed to a permanent establishment by reason of mere purchase by that permanent establishment of goods or merchandise for that enterprise. 

Article 7(5) states that unless there is a good and sufficient reason to the contrary, the same method of determining the business profits attributable to a permanent establishment shall be used each year.

Article 7(6) states that where business profits include items of income dealt with in other articles of the Convention the provisions of those other articles override the provisions of this Article. 

Categories of income not specifically included in the definition of business profits are subject to the “overlap” rule of Article 7(6), which provides that a treaty article that governs a specific category of income (for example, the article pertaining to interest or dividends) takes precedence over the business profits article. If the item of income is attributable to a permanent establishment, it may ultimately be taxed under the business profits article anyway, because many of the treaty articles addressing specific categories of income (such as dividends and interest) provide that if the income is attributable to a permanent establishment, it is subject to taxation under the business profits article. 

Article 7(7) allows the ATO and IRS to apply any of its domestic laws to determine a person’s tax liability where the information required to make an appropriate attribution of profits to a permanent establishment is inadequate. 

Article 7(8) provides that nothing in Article 7 prevents each country from applying its domestic law to tax insurance business income provided that such law remains the same (or is modified in only minor respects) since the date the Convention was signed. or will tax the net income of a US trade or business. 

Article 7(9) applies where a fiscally transparent entity, such as a trust, has a permanent establishment in a Contracting State and a resident of the other Contracting State is beneficially entitled to a share of the business profits (beneficial owner).

Where the above requirement is satisfied then the beneficial owner is treated as carrying on a business through the permanent establishment in the Contracting State and therefore its share of the business profits of the fiscally transparent entity are taxable due to Article 7(1). 

For example, if a trust with a US beneficiary carries on a business in Australia through its trustee, and that trustee’s actions rise to the level of a permanent establishment then the US beneficiary will be treated as having a permanent establishment in Australia. This has the consequence that the profits of the trust attributable to the US beneficiary will be treated as business profits subject to Australian tax.

Article 7(9) was introduced at the request of Australia because the trustees of a trust, as the legal owner of the trust property, might be regarded as the only person having a permanent establishment.

CONCLUSION 

This article is probably one of the more difficult articles to comprehend in the DTA. For purposes of this blog, it’s important to know that a source country can’t attribute any business profits in terms of Article 7 if there is no permanent establishment in that source country. 

Our diverse team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisors, will be able to assist you with applying this article correctly and how to accurately attribute profits to a permanent establishment. 

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Owning Private Aviation with Shelley Svoren


One of the first episodes in the Wealth Management Series talked about how you could begin your journey of investing in private aviation. Today, we continue that topic with special guest Shelley Svoren who talks to our host, Peter Harper, about how you can go about owning, sustaining, and maintaining your aircraft.

Check out the podcast and transcript below to hear the continuation of Episode 2. Tune in to our podcast every other week to learn more about the many ways you can manage your wealth wisely.

To listen to the podcast, click play below or go to https://asenaadvisors.podbean.com/

Transcript TL;DR

Peter Harper: Hello and welcome to the Three Pillars podcast. I’m Peter Harper, the managing director and CEO of Asena Advisors. For those of you who are not familiar with the business, we’re a multifamily office advising foreign family offices and private clients on US direct investments and mergers and acquisitions. In this episode of the Wealth Management series, we’ll be discussing private aviation with Shelley Svoren. Shelley, once again, it’s fantastic to have you here with us.

Shelley Svoren: Well, thank you so much, Peter, for having me on your podcast and welcoming me into your community. As you mentioned, my name is Shelley Svoren. I’m the CEO and founder of Infinite Branches, which is a consulting company focused on meeting the financial needs of businesses working with in business aviation and those who use business aviation. And I like to think of business aviation as an investment in one’s brand that facilitates efficiency, as well as safety to meet my client’s unique needs. Over the course of my near 30 year career, I served in financial management capacities in banking and regulatory organizations, as well as technology in multinational consumer brands. Among the many things I’ve done throughout my career, I’ve partnered with multiple stakeholders to manage sales activity and minimize expenses. I’ve developed and managed detailed and multinational budgets. I’ve structured complex credit facilities, provided customized analyses that identified new niche market opportunities and whether divestitures should commence, and developed and managed client referral and financing relationships. And in addition to aviation, I’m experienced with the complexity of owning and perfecting an interest in and monetizing maritime art and winery and vineyard assets. In my spare time, I serve on the board of the International Aviation Women’s Association as the network’s vice president of leader development and I support the activities of our scholarship, mentorship, internship and leadership development committees where we are working to develop the skills and the opportunities for women in aviation globally. And I also serve on the National Business Aviation Association’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Working Group. Thank you again for this opportunity.

Peter Harper: So, Shelley, last time we had Lisa Senters on our podcast when we were talking about private aviation and we discussed markets generally, basics of buying So what I’d like to do is as far as is starting, this discussion with a general. overview of how the process of buying, applying and dealing with people who’re trying to understand this process, how that actually works, and someone who’s thinking about it for the first time, what are the initial steps they should be taking?

Shelley Svoren: Peter, you’ve asked an amazing question, and it’s one of the many things that I am doing at Infinite Branches. I’m taking my last 14 years of my career where I worked for a bank that focused on meeting the aviation financing needs of our high net worth clients to another level. Buying an aircraft can sometimes be a daunting task. There are so many different facets of it, and what you really want to do is find someone that can build your team to help you find the right aircraft, which Lisa does extraordinarily well, but also someone who provides you the thoughtful tax advice and ensures that whatever tax advice you’re given meshes with the requirements of the Federal Aviation Authority. Sometimes they’re not intuitive, and you want to make sure you lay the foundation appropriately and how you structure your aircraft ownership. Typically, it’s done through a limited liability corporation, but that may not be what you need or your clients need. And then, of course, it’s finding the right legal adviser who knows the ins and out to meet your ultimate goal of owning and operating the aircraft. And two other participants, one is an aircraft management company. People often ask me, why do I need an aircraft management company? And I want to say economies of scale. If you find the right aircraft management company, they will not only help you find, hire and keep your pilots well trained, they can find your director of maintenance to make sure your aircraft is well-maintained and can help manage your flight needs. And if you so choose – charter your aircraft when it’s not in use and do so in compliance with all of the Federal Aviation Authority’s legal requirements that involve chartering an aircraft.

Shelley Svoren: And last but not least, I go back to what I did for the past 14 years, which is if you so choose to finance your aircraft, you find the right lender that works for you and elevates your aircraft ownership by providing you with the right structure and who can work with your team that you’ve created to structure a financing facility that meets your needs, not just initially. But Peter, I can imagine that a lot of your clients and listeners were like the ones who I worked with in the past: they’re creative, entrepreneurial individuals. And sometimes it’s hard to predict what their cash flow will be like in the future. And so finding a lender that can work with your clients needs not just today, but think about how you should work with them in the future. It’s incredibly important, and sometimes in the excitement it’s not something that people generally think about. So what I’m doing today, I’m working with a couple of high net worth individuals to build their deal teams, and so we bring in people who can fulfill all of those roles. And we work together seamlessly and we build off of each other’s strengths to make sure our client is happy, not just today, but five years down the road when they’re contemplating, do we want to buy another aircraft do we continue to maintain a happy, path with the mission that we have today and the asset that we own?

Peter Harper:  Shelley, the music to my ears that I’m hearing you talk about, you’re actually bringing a math based approach to assessing the acquisition of a plane, right? So a lot of times people are coming at this process with the heart. And I know that one of the biggest areas of regret for folks can be particularly when they’ve had a singular liquidity event that may not be repeated is how quickly they’ve turned a lot of money into not a lot of money through sort of poor investment decisions around assets such as planes. I mean, there was a lot of great stuff there that you were talking about, you know, the right people, the need for commercial attorneys to negotiate the deals, tax attorneys to ensure the financing piece is tax efficient, and then a team to kind of manage the asset so that as it depreciates over time and things wear out, which like any depreciating asset they do, that you’ve got a team that’s looking after the asset to make sure that if you need to sell it, it’s still retaining their value. What is the approach that you take when people are trying to analyze that and compare it with, you know, because with the advent of Jet Cards and all these other sort of different options that are out there to make them truly understand the economic decision that they’re making.

Shelley Svoren: Well, I always like to take a step back and realize that every situation is unique. And so I use my superpower, which is my curiosity, to have a conversation with my clients and ask them. This is fantastic that you want to fly private. But what is causing this decision that you’re making and how do you expect to use the aircraft and who will be using it along with you? And that starts to open up the discussion about the type of aircraft that they need versus what they want, because sometimes Peter as you know, wants and needs can be two vastly different things. And so at that point, we start digging a little bit further to investigate what makes sense for them. And as you pointed out, sometimes you’ll have a singular liquidity event and it may not be repeated. So how do you conserve that capital if you want to actually purchase an aircraft? And you can use tax depreciation for this particular purchase? There’s a lot of ins and outs of it. And this is why I guide people to work with an aviation tax advisor who works with your general tax advisor to gain the ins and outs of what it is that makes the most sense for you.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Shelley Svoren: I had a client recently, a former client now, whose tax advisor had said, well, they needed to put the aircraft into an income producing status, and the principal knew enough about the tax implications of doing so and the logistical issues that might provide a hindrance or a hurdle for them with the FAA. And he said, this is not what we want to do. So that shows that I’ve tried to bring my clients up and not just let it be a black box for them to say that I am the one who knows everything or that the tax advisor knows everything. My goal always is to give everyone a little bit of ownership in the decision that’s made, so they feel confident with the decision that they make today and be comfortable as well coming back to me 12 months, 18, 24 months from now to say, I’m not sure if this makes sense. And so it’s the ability to be confident and comfortable asking questions and having the conversation that I like to empower my clients with at every step of the way.

Peter Harper: Yeah, that’s a great. I think a lot of times where the difference between a good adviser and a poor adviser across any specialty is your ability to take complex data sets and frame it in a way where they can understand. I mean, generally, people that are in this level – that have got this level of wealth – are intuitively intelligent and have the ability to understand and assess this type of information quickly provided it’s framed in the right way, and I think a couple of things that you’re touching on there is that I’m sure from a regulatory standpoint in a risk mitigation perspective, I mean, when you go in and say, Hey, listen, I’m going to buy a plane and all of a sudden you’re in the business of chartering planes the risk associated with that would be biblical proportions, right? The level of risk that goes up when all of a sudden someone could crash a plane, right? So how does that impact your insurance? All these different things that kind of come out of that? But it comes back to how we conduct ourselves on any, any different investment or expenditure item in our clients to think about. We model out the data sets as far as what are the options? And then we work with the appropriate people to figure out solutions. So it’s, you know, it’s great to see that we’re aligned on that. So probably the one area that I think also is probably overlooked is is maintenance. Can you talk us a bit about maintenance, how important it is to the overall management of a plane? You mentioned as part of the team that you need to bring together to look after and work out what you want to buy You mentioned that maintenance folks were very important part of that team. How important are they and what sort of role do they play in locating a plane and the ongoing management of a plane?

Shelley Svoren: Well, I know that you’ve probably heard this before, but it’s always worth restating: aviation is deeply embedded in a culture of safety. And it’s not just the pilots that takes safety as their number one priority, it’s also their partners who are maintaining the aircraft. So many of the components of the aircraft have set maintenance schedules that are mandated by the original equipment manufacturers, and in some cases, if those maintenance milestones are not being met, the aircraft can’t fly. Literally, it cannot fly. It can be grounded for that particular work. So it’s always important to find someone who is qualified to touch your aircraft, to maintain it properly, and if you are working with an aircraft management company, what you will find is the moment that you engage them to be a part of your aircraft acquisition team, they will go out and they will conduct their own assessment. They will determine, particularly if it’s a used aircraft, what the maintenance schedule should be. And they will help you develop a budget related to the cost associated with the ongoing maintenance and milestones that are that are associated to keep the aircraft flying. What you’ll see too in particular with an engine manufacturers they offer maintenance contracts and many times this makes absolute perfect sense. What these are, really, they’re almost like savings accounts, Peter, to where you put money into these accounts based upon the hour of usage each month, and they save up for certain milestone events so that you’ve essentially repaid for them. But at the same time, to the benefit of that versus saving for yourself are efficiencies that the manufacturers provide to you for ensuring that you are involved in these maintenance programs. So I hope that gives a little bit of insight to your community without going too far into the weeds. But let me put it this way: Maintenance it is not something to take lightly, and it is really important that you partner up front and on an ongoing basis with someone who can ensure the safety of your aircraft and its operations.

Peter Harper: Oh, Shelley, that’s great, I want to again, thank you for coming in today. You know, the biggest things for me that I’ve taken away from this is that for anyone that’s assessing whether or not to buy a plane and going through that process, and they want to understand the cost benefits of doing that, Shelley and her wizard team of folks will come in, analyze the data, give you the tools you need to do that, and help you make the right choice as far as buying. That is not as straightforward as buying the shiniest, pretty thing, which I don’t mind people buying expensive stuff, but the biggest thing I always try to ensure with my clients as they understand the cost of doing that so that’s huge. And building a team, I mean, I think like on anything when a lot of my clients, if they’re going off and they’re going investing in a deal or doing something in business that they’ve done forever, they would always coordinate a team of experts to help them go off and achieve whatever they’ve got to do. This is no different. And I think you know, it’s often the case that people can can approach things like this where they’ve used to having a team around them like, I don’t need a team, I just need one person to know, like, you need a team of experts because this can be a complex deal. So again, thank you for for all of your guidance and help today. If anyone that’s listening today would like to get in contact with Shelley, her details are up on our website. Www.asenaadvisors.com And you can feel free to reach out to Shelley and her team directly, and I’m sure they’ll take good care of you. So, Shelley, thanks again for joining us.

Shelley Svoren: Peter, it’s been my pleasure and thank you to you and your team and your community for having me here today. I really appreciate this opportunity.

To contact Shelley Svoren, email  [email protected] or contact Asena for more information.

Peter Harper

Investing in Rare Diamonds with Anna Cisecki

Diamonds are a beautiful part of anyone’s investment portfolio. They come in all shapes and sizes, but not all jewels are valued the same way and some are significantly better for investing than others. In this episode of the Wealth Management Podcast, Peter Harper and Accredited Diamond Expert Anna Cisecki discuss investing in rare diamonds and what it takes to buy, maintain, and sell pink diamonds.
Check out the podcast and transcript below to learn more about how you can invest in rare diamonds. Tune in to our podcast every other week to learn more about the many ways you can manage your wealth wisely.

To listen to the podcast, click the play button below or visit https://asenaadvisors.podbean.com/

Transcript TL;DR

Peter Harper: Hello and welcome to the Three Pillars podcast. I’m Peter Harper, the managing director and CEO of Asena Advisors. If you’re not familiar with the business, we’re a multifamily office advising foreign family offices and private clients on US direct investments in mergers and acquisitions. In this episode of the Wealth Management series, we’ll be discussing investing in diamonds with Anna Cisecki. Anna, it’s great to have you here with us.

Anna Cisecki: Hi, Peter, thank you so much for having me. As you have said, my name is Anna Cisecki and I am the executive director of Australian Diamond Portfolio. We are a specialist diamond brokerage based in Sydney, Australia, and we work with investors to buy and sell rare physical colored diamonds. We started the company about eight years ago now, mainly with the mission to really make rare colored diamonds accessible to all investors. Firstly, by providing education and transparent market information and really to empower investors to better understand diamonds as a hard asset class and then also by structuring an end to end solution that makes it easy to buy, store and eventually resell them.

Peter Harper: That is awesome. And so Anna this is this was a topic when I was getting ready in preparing for this session, I was really excited. I mean, as an Australian, I think Australia is known for having these quite rare, colored diamonds that can have stratospheric prices. The marketplace for those type of stones versus traditional diamonds, how are they differentiated? And then how should someone who’s looking at alternative asset class like rare stones start that process and educate themselves and think about investments generally?

Anna Cisecki: Yeah. Well, with the start of that question in terms of looking at your traditional white diamonds and your colored diamonds, they’re they’re actually two completely different markets. Perhaps we should talk about first what actually constitutes a good investment in this space? Or What actually is an investment diamond when we talk about it. Again, because it is actually quite a broad market. Just like when you’re looking to buy shares or buy a property, there are myriad of options. And contrary to popular belief, no matter how hard the industry tries to convince you that all diamonds are rare, this is really not the case. For example, if you were to go to buy a traditional white diamond, even a very big and flawless one, the reality is that if you try to go and resell that diamond a few years later, you’ll be lucky to get back half of your money. To be considered for investment, you must really be looking at a diamond that that does in fact have intrinsic rarity. Traditionally there are three main color categories of diamonds that are looked at for investment that meet this rarity criteria and those are pink diamonds, yellow diamonds and blue diamonds. Now, while diamonds come in all colors of the rainbow, the ones that really weren’t enough trade to have an investment market will fall into this pink, yellow or blue category.

Anna Cisecki: You can get color diamonds that that could be considered more rare, for example, like pure orange or pure purple. But they’re really not enough of them out there to have a really robust secondary trading market. And of course, when investing in any asset class, you always need to consider your exit strategy as well. In terms of considering the pink yellows and blues for investment, I’ll talk a little about all three of these, but by far the best investment opportunity in the market now lays in blazing pink diamonds for a number of reasons. Firstly, they have a very unique supply profile in the sense that they are a finite resource. Most people aren’t aware that almost 95 percent of all the world’s pink diamonds come from one single source, which I’m sure you’re aware of is the Argyle Diamond Mine in WA, which is owned by Rio Tinto, and this mine actually ceased production in November of last year. Every mine has what’s called it’s mine life after which it’s no longer economically viable, and Argyle started production in the early 80s and has now simply reached the end of its mine life and the point of exhausted supply.

Anna Cisecki: So by the end of this year, when the last of the Polish pink diamonds from Argyle are released, there will be no more new Argyle pink diamonds coming onto the market, which makes the implications for and the opportunity now for investment quite quite unprecedented. Argyle was at one point the fourth largest producer of diamonds in the world. However, the vast majority of those rocks were industrial gems used for things like cutting tools and laser machines. Only five percent of Argyle production is what’s considered gem quality ore or good enough to use in jewelry. And of that, five percent, only one in 10000 is pink. So, hopefully that gives you a better idea of the type of rarity we’re talking about. When you walk down the street, you’ll see 10 jewelry shops, and all of them will have hundreds of white diamonds in their windows. But you would really have to go to a specialist place to be able to have a look at a pink diamond.

Peter Harper:  I know with diamonds, you have clarity -you have all these different ways that you rate the normal white diamonds, the guys that are selling them tell you that they’re, you know, they’re superior. Is it the same with pink diamonds or are you focusing on the same things Is it just the fact that it’s a pink diamond mean that it’s a good thing?

Anna Cisecki: No, no, no. Absolutely not. Just like not all properties are a good investment. Not all pink diamonds are a good investment. With whites, you’re looking at what you call the four Cs, your carat weight, which is the size of the diamond. Your clarity, which is the presence or absence of inclusions or imperfections within the stone. You’re looking at the absence of colors, so you actually want it to be as clear as possible from that perspective. And then the quality of the cut, how the diamond is proportioned. You look at those same things in a pink, but with a very different weighting given to them. With the pinks, 90 percent of the value is in what we would call the quality of color. So the brighter, the more vibrant, the richer the pink, the more valuable the stone will be. You want to make sure that you’re looking for stones that are really very bright and beautiful. Even as a layperson, looking at – looking at a pink diamond that might be, very brownish and dull and unattractive or looking at a vivid, vibrant stone that has almost a fuchsia tone to it, you’ll always go for the one that’s most attractive.

Peter Harper:  How does that then equate to value. I mean, in the current market, what is a half carat pink diamond that’s got, got good medium color grade. What type of value would have diamond like that trade for?

Anna Cisecki: Well, it’s interesting, in terms of a half carat diamond – in a white diamond that wouldn’t be considered a very large size, but in a pink that’s actually huge. Less than 0.6 percent of pink diamonds are over half a carat.

Peter Harper: So what is the average size of a pink diamond?

Anna Cisecki:  90 percent of them are below 0.2 of a carat. So it’s, you know, only 10 percent of them are over 0.2. So you’re actually talking about very, very small stones. But it’s the rarity of color, really, that’s the key to it. So in terms of asking about the price of a pink diamond, if it was a very, very light pink color, it could be as little as, in half a carat, it could be as little as $100000, but it could very well go up into the the million dollars plus. If it’s a very, very vibrant pink or a red.

Peter Harper:  I’ve got to think with what you’re saying about the Argyle diamond mine. How are you seeing that impacting prices today, or is it not, but you think there is a major opportunity to buy and hold now given the the reduction in supply?

Anna Cisecki: Yeah, absolutely. Well, on the back of the Argyle story, we’ve seen incredible sustained price growth in pinks over the past 10 to 20 years. All categories of investment picks have appreciated it on average 10 to 15 percent in terms of annualized returns and some of the top categories of pinks have done even better. Up to 25 to 30 percent per year, like we’ve seen over this past year since Argyle closed.

Peter Harper: That’s phenomenal. I mean, I think if anyone was looking at those type of annualized returns in their share portfolio, they’d be punching the Moon. So I mean, how do you then, Anna, take this – from what I understand there is a huge amount of those diamonds that exist in the market, it’s just that they control supply and demand You know, De Beers still control, you know, huge quantity of the world’s white diamonds. How do you take this and construct a portfolio or assess how people should be deploying capital into diamonds as an investment?

Anna Cisecki: And, well, it’s interesting that you mention you mentioned De Beers, they actually did have a monopoly over the diamond industry up until about the 90s and absolutely with the control of supply, they were able to very much, control pricing. Rio Tinto that owns Argyle actually was quite instrumental in in changing that dynamic, so De Beers still controls a very large, large proportion of the industry. But it’s a minority now. You have several other mining companies that are in this space.  And it really is now much more subject to the traditional forces of supply and demand. And that’s why we’ve seen, for example, over the past year with the COVID pandemic and lockdowns, demand for your traditional diamonds has decreased significantly with the extended global lockdowns, reduced spending ability.

Peter Harper:  In turn, you’re seeing price adjustments, right? You’re saying, due to COVID, less people looking for diamonds. You’re in your track pants, and so people are less worried about…

Anna Cisecki:  Hard to find someone to propose to from your living room couch.

Peter Harper:  Then is it a buyer’s market for all types of diamonds or if people are collectors of rare stones, then they’re collectors of rare stones. Are they less concerned about putting it in / setting it into some piece of jewelry than say someone who’s traditionally, buying white diamonds?

Anna Cisecki: I mean, with the with the investment stones, while you are able to wear them, the reality is most investors are putting them in a safety deposit box. The pinks, unlike the the whites, they’ve shown excellent stability and consistency of performance, including since the start of COVID, and there’s a few reasons why they’ve done so well. Firstly, the pink diamonds and colored diamonds in general really are not influenced by the speculative moods of equity markets that create major short term fluctuations like what we’re seeing with the white diamonds. There’s no options. There’s no futures. There’s no short selling. It’s not a highly leveraged market. And the absence of these factors, which can lead to significant levels of added volatility in financial markets, helps protect investors from those kind of market risks. And we’ve actually seen a bit of this in the past as well when the GFC hit. When financial markets are doing well, we typically see investment, pink diamond prices grow nice and steady. And in times of economic slowdown or recession, unlike with other asset classes, we don’t see prices fall. If you look at the performance of of pinks and blues over the period of the worst of the GFC back in 2008 and 2009, prices remain steady back then.

Peter Harper:  You actually view them as an alternative asset that you think performs stable in a market downturn?

Anna Cisecki: Absolutely. One of the main reasons that our clients look at pink diamonds are to diversify their portfolio and insulate themselves from the risks in an economy.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Peter Harper:  When you’re thinking about portfolio construction and I understand, okay people are buying these, they’re investment grade stones, putting in a safety deposit box. What’s the sort of minimum that someone wanted to get into rare stones and invest with you, what would be the minimum you would say that you should be thinking about investing to start?

Anna Cisecki:  In order to get a diamond of sufficient rarity and beauty. You’d be looking at starting at about twenty thousand dollars, so that would be considered an entry level. Pink diamonds are actually quite quite accessible and you don’t need to be a millionaire to to get into the market.

Anna Cisecki: It’s always going to be a trade off between color and size. If you’re looking at something with a stronger, more vibrant color for a particular budget, you’ll be looking at a smaller size than a stone that would be a lighter, more kind of a baby pink look. For $20000 you are looking at something that’s a nice what we call fancy pink; the best size really to start with from investment would be around 0.15 of the carat. You can also look at stones that are smaller, but the demand in the market is really for stones above above 0.15 carat.

Peter Harper:  I imagine, given the rarity of pink diamonds that that the demand would obviously be higher than the available stock in the market. How hard is it for someone who doesn’t have someone like yourself to connect with to even find the pink diamond to purchase?

Anna Cisecki:  Well, they’re certainly not abundant on the market. You can, with a quick Google, I’m sure, find a number of pink diamond sellers from which you could purchase a pink diamond, but it’s really important to do your homework and work with people that you trust.

Peter Harper:  This would be my big concern: it’d be one thing to find someone, but then to have someone to actually assess a stone from an investment grade purpose, very different to having someone who says, “Okay, I’ve got a pink diamond. It’s very pretty and you can put in a bit of jewelry.” I mean, how do you find that? You know that in the marketplace, there is a major difference between, from a professionalism standpoint, people’s representations about value. I know this from my own experience when I went and I was looking for a new ring for my wife and only a number of years ago I went through this process and it scares the absolute bejesus out of me because I’m sitting there and thinking, this guy is absolutely going to take me for a ride, right? I think it’s a stressful experience. What is something that someone can look for that’s coming to this for the first time? What should they be focusing on?

Anna Cisecki:  You want to work with a company that has that has a history specifically within this space and that can make the actual process easy for you from the beginning to end. And that’s really what Australian diamond portfolio was about when we first launched it. Besides the actual education at the start of the process, the way we work with our clients is that they’ll give us a budget and we will then recommend the best stone that we can find on the market at that particular time for them and present it to them in a full formal proposal, explaining not only the details of the stone, but also what the historical performance of that stone has been and what we expect that stone to do in the future. As I said, even a layperson, when they’re looking at a diamond can appreciate the various features of it that you’re pointing out and then verify that independently themselves by looking at other options that may be available to them as well.

Anna Cisecki: Once the stone is acquired, you want to make sure that you’re actually acquiring the physical diamond that you’re not buying into a potential hypothetical pool of diamonds somewhere. That is one of the things that certainly needs to be looked at. Then ideally, you’re working with somebody that will also help you store, insure, and most importantly, resell the diamond for you at the end, because that’s something that most companies will not do. We’ll be happy to sell you a diamond, but not resell it for you down the road. So that exit strategy is something that’s very, very important to to consider.

Peter Harper: That’s my biggest takeaway from today. As I’m hearing you, well a couple of major takeaways. I was not aware about, you know, Argyle diamond mine sort of running out of supply. As someone who is focused on investments, they’re going to understand how that would have an impact on prices. And then I think the other thing is having a clear pathway or framework with a dealer to be able to buy in and out positions makes complete sense, right? If you don’t have a counterparty on the other side of the trade, you’re never going to have liquidity in the asset. Well, two things before we finished up you chat to investment folks and wealth management people, they’re obsessed with inflation. Has there been an increase of interest in pink diamond as a hard asset, as a way of hedging against inflation?

Anna Cisecki:  Absolutely. Because they are so truly limited supply. They absolutely have inflation protection qualities. And that’s one of the reasons why the increasing demand for them has pushed prices up so much over the last 15 to 20 years.

Peter Harper: And that’s awesome. Then, Anna, what is the coolest and most expensive diamond that you’ve ever had the ability to wear, see or trade?

Anna Cisecki: The coolest diamond it was this absolutely incredible red diamond. Red diamonds are the absolute pinnacle of the pink diamond family, and red is the most rare color of diamonds in the world. I had the opportunity to hold this incredible pure what you call Pigeon’s Blood Red Stone. It was worth $4 million, and I have to tell you it was. It was absolutely sensational. That was certainly the highlight of the stones that I’ve seen. Even as someone that looks at diamonds on a daily basis, you can always appreciate when you see something that’s that’s truly one of a kind, so rare.

Peter Harper: That’s awesome. I always love hearing nice stories. When you meet someone who’s an absolute expert and specialist in something, it makes me happy when I get to see them smile and talk about things that are cool in their line of work. So, Anna, this has been extremely informative. I’ve enjoyed the discussion very, very much. Any of the listeners, if you are interested to learn more about the diamond trading or investing in rare diamonds, if you head to our website, Asena Advisors.com, there’ll be further information on how you can contact Anna and the Australian Diamond Portfolio Group team in order to get in-depth advice about rare and precious diamonds. So, Anna, thank you very much for joining once again.

Anna Cisecki: Thank you very much, Peter. It’s lovely speaking with you.

To contact Anna Cisecki, email Australian Diamond Portfolio at [email protected] or contact Asena for more information.

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 6 – Income from Real Property

INTRODUCTION

Almost everyone dreams of one day owning their own holiday home, which they can use switch off and relax. For those dreamers with aspirations, it usually materializes through hard work and dedication. 

In practice, we often have client who are US residents with real properties situated in Australia or Australian residents with real properties situated in the US. The purpose of investing in foreign real property will not always be the same. 

However, in terms of Article 6 of the US/Australia DTA (Income from Real Property) the tax treatment will be the same. Article 6 is in reality a sourcing provision, which means that the country where the real property is situated, will have the primary taxing rights. This aligns with both Australia and US domestic law, where income from real property is treated as being sourced where the real property is located. 

In this week’s blog we will be looking at the tax implications in the context of Article 6 of the US/Australia DTA when earning income from real property situated in the other jurisdiction. 

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 6 OF THE DTA – INCOME FROM REAL PROPERTY

Article 6 of the DTA states the following: 

Income from Real Property 

(1) Income from real property may be taxed by the Contracting State in which such real property is situated.

(2) For the purposes of this Convention:

 (i) a leasehold interest in land, whether or not improved, shall be regarded as real property situated where the land to which the interest relates is situated; and 

(ii) rights to exploit or to explore for natural resources shall be regarded as real property situated where the natural resources are situated or sought.

The US and Australia taxes their residents on a worldwide basis and hence the reason why Article 6 is heavily relied upon by US and Australian residents with foreign rental properties. 

In the context of Article 6, it is important to understand what constitutes real property, also referred to as immovable property, in other treaties. 

The definition of real property is determined under the law of the country in which the property in question is located. Regardless of source country law, however, the concept of real property includes the following elements:  

  1. Property accessory to real property (immovable property);
  2. Livestock and equipment used in agriculture and forestry;
  3. Rights to which the provisions of general law respecting landed property apply;
  4. Usufruct of real property (immovable property); and
  5. Rights to variable or fixed payments as consideration for the working of, or the right to work, mineral deposits, sources, and other natural resources.

Ships and aircraft, however, are not regarded as real property (immovable property). 

When relying on a specific provision in a DTA to determine the allocation of the taxing rights between the two countries, one of the most important distinctions to understand is the following – 

  1. ‘income that may be taxed by a contracting state’ and;
  2. ‘income shall only be taxable by a contracting state’.

We are the only multi-disciplinary international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S.– Australia taxation.

Article 6(1) uses the wording may be taxed and therefore does not confer an exclusive right of taxation on the State where the property is located. It simply provides that the situs State (the country where the property is situated) has the primary right to tax such income, regardless of whether the income is derived through a permanent establishment in that State or not. The country where the income producing real property is situated, is obliged to allow a resident of the other country to elect to compute that income on a net basis as if the income were business profits attributable to a permanent establishment in the source country. This is permitted in terms of IRC §871(d) and §882(d) as well in the absence of any treaty provision. 

Article 6(2) incorporates the rule that a leasehold interest in land and rights to exploit or explore for natural resources constitute real property situated where the land or resources, respectively, are situated. Except for those cases, the definition of real property is governed by the internal law of the country where the property is situated.

CONCLUSION 

Even though Article 6 is quite straight forward, there are various other domestic nuances to take into account when calculating your foreign rental income for either US or Australian tax purposes.  

Our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisors, will be able to assist you with applying Article 6 correctly and how to implement same in your US or Australian tax returns.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Investing in Italian Real Estate with Monia di Guilmi

Italy is a phenomenal country and in this week’s episode of the Wealth Management Series, our host Peter Harper and special guest Monia Di Guilmi discuss investing and owning real estate in Italy.
Tune in to our podcast every other week to learn more about the many ways you can manage your wealth sensibly.
To listen to the podcast, click the play button below or visit https://asenaadvisors.podbean.com/

Transcript – TL;DR

Peter Harper:  Hello, and welcome to the Three Pillars podcast. I’m Peter Harper, the managing director and CEO of Asena Advisors, If you’re not familiar with the business, we’re multifamily office advising foreign family offices and private clients on US direct investment in mergers and acquisitions. In this episode of the Wealth Management series, we’ll be discussing investing in Italian real estate with our special guest, Monir Di Guilmi. Monia, it’s great to have you here with us today. It’d be great if you could introduce yourself and tell our listeners a bit about yourself and your business.

Monia Di Guilmi:  Hello to everyone. My name is Monia Di Guilmi. I am Italian and I have been working as an international real estate agent for the past 10 years. I found that Abruzzo Property nine years ago, in 2012, and since then we have been working with foreign clients from all over the world, the mainly from the US to buy properties in Italy, especially in the central regions of Abruzzo and Molise. They are on the west coast of Italy In the past few years, the international press and also many TVs like the BBC or CNN, have been broadcasting and talking about Abruzzo region. Abruzzo is considered the new Tuscany of Italy. And we have been helping clients to purchase their properties in this part of Italy.

Peter Harper: It’s fantastic. A lot of our listeners are interested in learning about is just generally information.  For those folks out there that have been to Italy a number of times, maybe on vacation, and they’ve fallen in love with the region and they think they might like to buy real estate there. What is the sort of general process that you know, as they’re kind of starting to try and educate themselves on different regions and what markets make sense for a lifestyle and maybe for investment? How do you generally start that process with your clients?

Monia Di Guilmi: Ok. Well, generally the first thing to do is starting to look online and find the properties. Obviously, if the client has no idea at all of where to buy in Italy, because Italy, it’s a big country. Well, they can start looking at the map and decide if they prefer to buy in the north of Italy or in this center or in the south. The south and the north are two completely different parts of Italy. I would say the climate is different and the prices of houses is different and the center is in between. So it’s really a compromise. It’s also very easy to travel to the north to the south from the center of Italy. So when the clients started to go online and find suitable properties, what is possible to do is to start to contact real estate agents. It’s important to find an English speaking agent because obviously, unless the buyer doesn’t speak Italian, it would be harder to communicate. And it’s also important to find a trustworthy agent. And then the negotiation will start. So through your agent, you can start a negotiation on the price of the house you have selected. Usually here in Italy, the prices of houses are negotiable, so it’s possible to try to place an offer and see how far it can get. And then the process is, to buy a house, is usually three or four months.

Monia Di Guilmi: And when your offer has been accepted, then we start to work on what is called the preliminary contract. The preliminary contract is a pre agreement where the buyer and the sellers states all the terms and conditions of the sale or purchase for the buyer. It’s very important to know that the preliminary agreement is a binding document – is a binding contract. The buyer is required to pay a deposit that is usually 10 percent of the price of the property, and if it pulls out, you will lose its deposit. So it’s very important to understand this point. In case the sellers pulls out, he has to pay double the deposit Many clients we deal with felt a little bit uncomfortable to send a deposit, but this is how it works in Italy. And the preliminary contract it’s an official document because it’s registered at the tax agency. Your broker for you, or yourself if you are physically in Italy, you can register this contract. And so it’s something official.

Monia Di Guilmi: After usually two or three or four months, in some cases from the signing of the preliminary contract, it’s possible to complete the purchase in front of a notary. Here in Italy, to buy a house, you have to sign in front of a notary. You don’t need a lawyer. Like in the US, or in the UK, but you will need a notary. A notary in Italy is a public officer, so you work for the government. But in the cases of property transactions, he works for the buyer; the buyer pays the notary. The notary has a university degree in law and then a further specialization in purchase matters. It’s important, if you don’t speak Italian, that you find an English speaking notary to address the question in English. Your broker should be able to provide the details of some English speaking notary. It’s also important that you find an English speaking notary because at the end, when you will have to transfer the money for your house, you will send the money to the escrow account of the notary. if you decide that you don’t want to transfer the money to the escrow account or the notary, you can come to Italy, open a bank account, transfer your money from your US account your to your Italian bank account, and then you can issue bank cheques for the sellers.

Peter Harper:  This is super helpful. So just to recap, you’re saying that the really the only role of attorneys or advocates in this process is really the notary section, right? So when someone gets set up, they’re working with you, they’ve found a property, they’re negotiating and they’re signing off on this preliminary contract that’s binding, do they involve attorneys at that legal representative entity at that stage? Normally, when they’re going to the final stage that they’re dealing with attorneys, what’s the general practice?

Monia Di Guilmi: It generally is only at the end, because the preliminary agreement is written by the realtor, so it’s written by the broker and also the broker at this stage of the signing of the preliminary contract will send to the notary all the documents related to the house so that the notary can start all the legal checks and also will provide an estimate to the buyer and estimate related to the taxation he has to pay for the purchase and also the legal fees. So before committing with the signing of the preliminary contract, the buyer already has a complete knowledge of all the costs involved in the purchase.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Peter Harper: Okay, as a buyer, you’re paying some notary fee. What percentage of the transaction do you have to pay in taxes?

Monia Di Guilmi: It’s not a percentage of the price of the property, but it’s a percentage of the assessed value of the property. It’s might seem difficult, but it is not because every house and even every plot of land in Italy has an assessed value, a value that the government has given to that property in order to calculate taxation. This is for obvious reason because a property can be sold or purchased at any price and the government doesn’t charge the taxation according to the price you pay, but in accordance to the assessed value. So, for example, you can buy a house that is on the market for $200,000 and you can place an offer and buy it for $150,000. The government will still charge the taxation according to the assessed value, not to the price you pay. So in Italy, if you buy as a main residency, so the house where you will spend 185 days a year, you will pay the two percent. And I think it’s also important to know that regarding taxation in Italy, if you buy us a main residency, you don’t have any annual property tax because the government in Italy does not tax your main house. Everyone needs a house to live. So your main house is not taxed by the government.

Monia Di Guilmi: On the other hand, if you buy a holiday home or a house as an investment, the government will charge a property tax that is called the IMU. I M U, and this tax is usually approximately 600 US dollars a year. But it will obviously change according to the value of the house, the size of the house and the location. So usually it’s around 600 dollars, but it can be a little bit more or slightly less, according to the house. And always also regarding taxation it’s important to to know that here in Italy, if you buy a house and you sell it after five years from the purchase, you are not charged any capital gains tax. So this is a great advantage if you decided to buy a property that is low cost. So a property that maybe needs some restyling or some cosmetic works, and then you do the work. You enjoy the house for five years or even longer. You can even rent it. And after five years, if you resell the property at a higher price, you will not be charged any capital gains tax.

Peter Harper:  is that is that regardless of whether you’re a resident of Italy or not. So the folks that are, say, buying a house in Italy is a second home or third home.

Monia Di Guilmi: Yes, is regardless. Everyone, even if it’s a holiday home or a house for investment, will not be charged any capital gains tax.

Peter Harper: So that’s that’s great incentive. I think what I’m hearing is a lot of the things that you’re putting out there that you’re talking about is actually very similar to the to the US. So for the most part in most, states within the US, they’re their broker representative. I mean, some people will still have an attorney involved there’s no legal requirement to do that. And then you have this idea of the escrow agent that has some similarities to to what you have as far as the notary, albeit that you generally find the escrow agents in the US are far larger. And even when you when you talk about transactional tax, a lot of it’s a regional thing. But there are a lot of counties around the US that will charge a percentage of the assessed value as far as the transactional tax, as well as your property tax. So then I think there is a lot of similarities. We’ve spoken to some other folks on this show about France, and it seems as though France has a lot more other differences maybe their challenges might represent challenges for Americans. Monia in your experience, then given that that it’s not necessarily normal for buyers to have an attorney representing them, just how important is the role of the broker in the transaction, right? I imagine it is. It’s it’s a very critical relationship because if you don’t have that person who understands the nuances of the region as well as things for foreign buyers, that’s when you can maybe end up making major mistakes. I’d be interested to hear your view on that.

Monia Di Guilmi:  Yes, obviously, it’s very important that the buyer is able to find a broker that is trustworthy and speak English. Here in Italy. there is a big difference in comparison with the United States the broker represents the buyer, but also represents the seller. So the broker will have a portfolio of properties and the he will represent both the seller and the buyer for the matter that the broker has to have all the documents related to a house, a house that is selling. I know that in the United States it works differently. So the buyer contact the broker and the broker can contact many other brokers to propose properties. Here in Italy, this is possible, but usually the broker will propose the houses of its own portfolio, and it’s also possible to collaborate with other brokers but is not so usual. And how to find a broker that you trust if you are abroad, if you cannot travel to Italy, or if you rely just on the internet, I think that now it’s possible to to find a broker checking the reviews. There are pages like Google Business or Trustpilot or even Facebook, where it’s possible to read the reviews of the company. And I also advise the buyers to try to contact some of the person who have left the reviews because sometimes a review can be fake. So it’s good to start a communication with someone who has already bought a house from the same broker.

Monia Di Guilmi:  And then obviously start to make phone calls. And sometimes also the feeling is important. If you have a good feeling towards that broker, maybe you are already in a good in a good position. And we had, in the past couple of years, we had the many clients from US that bought remotely. So they just had the video tour on WhatsApp – so a video call. And they bought their houses without coming to see the houses just through a video call. This might sound a bit crazy or a bit uncommon, but they did. And because we had the travel restrictions, they even bought through the power of attorney. So they gave me power of attorney to purchase a property that they saw just on a video call. And this summer, U.S. clients started to travel again to Italy, and they saw their houses and they were all happy. So I think, yes, it’s important to find the broker that you really trust when you are buying abroad.

Peter Harper: And Monia, just to close, I think it’d be great just to hear your predictions for the market. I mean, is it a hot market at the moment for Italian real estate? Prices going up? What regions do you see that are where people are excited about them the most? What’s your prediction and what do you think? Where do you think prices and the market generally is going to go over the next 12 months?

Monia Di Guilmi: Well, I think the recent big difference amongst regions. Prices have dropped approximately 8% in the last couple of years, so now we hope that prices will start to increase a little bit and the economy started to be better in summer 2021. So probably prices will start to increase a little bit. So the difference was that while the price of the houses started to drop, the prices of houses for rent for tourist renters – so in the tourist location, close to the beach, close to the mountains, summer houses or winter houses – those prices have a rise of 30%, probably because during COVID we couldn’t travel abroad or many Europeans couldn’t travel in places like Mexico or Thailand, and they came to Italy. So now I think buy a house that you can rent to tourists is a good opportunity because it’s a good moment to to buy because prices are still low and rentals have increased a lot. And regarding the area, I would say it’s very important to understand the purpose of the purchase. So if it’s to retire, so obviously it would be better to buy in a small town or not in a big metropolitan city. And if it’s a house to rent for holidays or an investment it’s nice to find the summer location that it’s known but not too expensive. Like, for example, Tuscany, everyone knows Tuscany. But the prices are so high even now, even with COVID that maybe it’s better to find a region that is not so famous and can provide better opportunities. I would say, like Abruzzo also, because it’s considered the new tourist destination. The prices of properties close to the beach tend to be high in comparison with prices of houses a little bit more inland – let’s say, 30/35 minutes drive from the beach. And where to buy is always a matter of also budget. And if the client has a unlimited budget, you can buy obviously everywhere if the budget is limited. It’s obviously good to find the some buyer’s market.

Peter Harper:  Brilliant. Well, Monica, thank you very much for taking the time to join us today and give us insight into Italian real estate. for any of our listeners, if you wish to learn more about Italian real estate or wealth management in general. Visit our website Asena Advisors.com. That is asenaadvisors.com  And thanks again and for those hunting for Italian real estate. Happy hunting.

Monia Di Guilmi: Thank you, and thank you for the podcast.

To contact Monia Di Guilmi, email her at [email protected] or contact Asena for more information.

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 5 – Permanent Establishment

GENERAL BACKGROUND

In the unprecedented COVID-19 environment the temporary displacement of employees has given rise to many concerns from employers that it may unintentionally be creating ‘permanent establishment’ issues for them in foreign jurisdictions. This is especially relevant where employees are working through the pandemic in a different country to where they ordinarily work.

Due to COVID-19, it is common for employees of US employers to be temporarily working in Australia when they would ordinarily work in the US and vice versa. 

Tax authorities around the world are also targeting in particular ‘artificial PE avoidance’ by multinationals on foreign-sourced income.

This blog will highlight some of the key permanent establishment issues facing US and Australian taxpayers with an emphasis on Article 5 of the US/Australia DTA. 

INTRODUCTION

The fundamental rationale behind the PE concept is to allow, within certain limits, the taxation of non-resident enterprises in respect of their activities in the source jurisdiction.

Understanding the rules relating to permanent establishments (PEs) has two steps to it. 

  1. The first step is to understand when a PE exists, and 
  2. The second step is to look at how profits are attributed to that PE.

Broadly speaking, an overseas resident has a substantive presence in a state if he meets the

threshold of having a PE. At the same time, if that person is carrying on business through the PE then tax may be due in the state in which the PE is established as well as in the state of residence.

Therefore, on its own, without a business activity through it, a PE may not of itself

give rise to a tax liability.

In its simplest form a PE exists where a company is resident in one country (referred to as the head office) but also has a business conducted from a fixed base in another country (the branch). The income attributable to the other fixed base usually attracts a tax liability in the second country. 

In its more complex form of deemed PE, it is a tax “fiction” enabling tax authorities to impose corporate taxes on the deemed branch. A third type of PE is again a tax “fiction” where there is a deemed branch providing services.

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 5 OF THE DTA – PERMANENT ESTABLISHMENT

Under the US/Australia PE provision, the business profits of a resident of one treaty country are exempt from taxation by the other treaty country unless those profits are attributable to a permanent establishment located within the host country.

Article 7 of the US/Aus DTA (which will be discussed in detail in the following weeks) states that profits are taxable only in the Contracting State where the enterprise is situated “unless the enterprise carries on business in the other Contracting State through a permanent establishment situated therein,” in which case the other Contracting State may tax the business profits “but only so much of them as [are] attributable to the permanent establishment.” 

TYPES OF PERMANENT ESTABLISHMENTS

There are a few common types of permanent establishment to be aware of based on traditional approaches, although these are being modified as more business is conducted virtually over digital mediums.

Fixed Place of Business Permanent Establishment

The historical and easiest test of ‘permanent establishment’ is having a fixed place of business and can include:

    • A branch
    • An office
    • A factory
    • A workshop
    • A mine, or gas/oil well
Sales Agents

Employees that work as sales agents and have the authority to conclude contracts in the name of an enterprise may also be sufficient to create PE.  The determining requirement is that the authority must be exercised habitually, rather than once or twice.  Also, the majority of the negotiation, drafting and signing of contracts must have occurred in the host country.

Service Permanent Establishment

The areas of service PE are expanding in scope and can include situations such as providing technical or managerial services in the country.  

PRACTICAL EXAMPLES OF PERMANENT ESTABLISHMENT

Building and Construction Projects

Since building and construction projects are not “permanent” for the company, the test for PE becomes more time-based.  The time period applicable to the US/Aus DTA is a site which exists for at least 9 months may trigger PE.

Services and Consulting Projects

The analysis for services PE will revolve around the non-physical elements of permanent establishment, since there may be no office or branch in the country.

TYPES OF AGENCY PERMANENT ESTABLISHMENT

If a company uses sales agents inside a country, this type of activity may trigger permanent establishment if the agents are concluding contracts on behalf of the company.  This qualifies for the ‘revenue creation’ element of PE, and those contracts would be subject to corporate tax if the activity is habitual and ongoing.

Digital Sales and e-Commerce

An emerging area of PE is that of revenue created through the digital economy. This is extremely prevalent, especially with online platforms being used to sell goods or services worldwide. 

WHAT IS THE TAX RISK RELATED TO CREATING A PE?

When embarking on global expansion, one of the core considerations is corporate taxation on foreign sourced revenue.  While a company will typically be taxed on profits in its home country, there may be additional taxes owed in other countries of business activity.  This could affect the net profitability of entering a new country and should be part of an overall planning analysis.

Asena Advisors is the only multi-disciplinary (Accounting and Legal) international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S. -Australia taxation.

HOW WILL A PE BE TAXED?

If sufficient presence is created in a foreign country, but a multinational, this could make it liable for local corporate taxes or value-added tax (VAT).  This law basically reflects the rights of countries to tax businesses that are generating revenue through local operations, even if they maintain their principal headquarters in the home country.

The reason this becomes important for planning purposes is that a company could be subject to ‘double taxation’ on profits, since the home country could tax those amounts as well.  

The IRS will impose corporate tax on foreign companies that meet the PE criteria.  To avoid any penalties or back payments, a company should file IRS Form 8833 as a proactive claim on any treaty benefits with the US.

CONCLUSION 

To assist in managing PE issues from a US and Australian income tax perspective, taxpayers should ensure they action the following:

  • Carefully monitor and keep track of the geographical working location of employees during the COVID-19 pandemic;
  • Understand what constitutes a PE and a deemed PE;
  • Seek tax advice if due to COVID-19 you have employees temporarily exercising their employment in another country;
  • Seek tax advice if your business tax model has changed due to COVID-19 and could potentially place you at risk of creating a PE; and
  • monitor and carefully consider official guidance in respect of “permanent establishment” issues (ie. from the ATO, IRS, OECD and other relevant foreign authorities);

The global pandemic has changed the way businesses conduct business. It has also created opportunities for new businesses to conduct business exclusively on online platforms, without physically being present in the country the services are provided or goods are sold. 

Our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisor, have an in-depth knowledge of how to interpret international tax treaties and how to ensure you mitigate any potential PE risks associated with your business. 

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Rare Book Collecting with Pom Harrington

In the third episode of the Wealth Management Podcast, our host Peter Harper and collector Pom Harrington discuss the wonderful world of rare book collecting.
Learn more about how you can invest in the books you love. Tune in to our podcast every other week to learn more about the many ways you can manage your wealth sensibly.
To listen to the podcast, click the play button below or visit https://asenaadvisors.podbean.com/

Transcript TL;DR

Peter Harper: Hello and welcome to Three Pillars podcast. I’m Peter Harper, the managing director and CEO of Asena Advisors. If you’re not familiar with the business we’re a multifamily office advising foreign family offices and private clients on US direct investment and mergers and acquisitions. In this episode of the Wealth Management series, we’ll be discussing investing in collectible rare books with Pom Harrington. Pom, thanks a lot for taking the time out of your schedule to meet with us today.

Pom Harrington: Hello, Peter, and thank you. My name is Pom Harrington and I’m the owner of Peter Harrington rare books. We focus on rare book collecting. It was founded by my father and our business is one of the largest rare book dealerships in the world. And we’re featured this year in the Sunday Times, BDO Profit Track 100 as one of Britain’s biggest, fastest growing private companies with profits the last three years. I’m also the president of the Antiquarian Booksellers’ Association, which is the senior trade body for rare book dealers in the U.K. and also happens to be the chairman of Firsts, which is London’s rare book for events and it’s the key annual book fair in the U.K. I personally love to collect books and I find it fun and it’s personal and it happens to be my hobby.

Peter Harper: Well, that’s fantastic. I mean, if you’re lucky enough to do what you do for a living and it’s a hobby, that’s always fantastic. Well, Pom, as I said before, thanks very much for making the time. For our listeners, I think it’d be great to sort of kick off with this a general overview of sort of “Buying 101”, if they’re thinking about getting into collecting rare books, where’s the best place to start? How they should be thinking about it? Is it like other investments or is it more like a collectible focus and maybe some market trends and what you’re seeing in the market at the moment?

Pom Harrington: Ok, well, quite a few questions there, but I think right back at the beginning, when we meet prospective new collectors of books, I think where people start is they buy or pursue books that have influenced their lives. So it might be reading Winnie the Pooh by A.A. Milne as a child, or Lord of the Rings as a teenager, or you studied Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations at university.

Pom Harrington: What they then want to do is: how did this book appear when it first came out? And really the point of book collecting is to acquire the book in the condition it was born in. So in the case of Adam Smith, you put it in an 18th century binding. And if it’s Lord of the Rings, you want them fine in the original dust jackets. So that’s what we aspire to. You want the first printing. Sometimes you aim for autographs, which then add another component to it. So that’s what people start.

Pom Harrington: The next thing is you buy the best you can afford. There’ll be huge sliding price scales for first editions. And for example, with Lord of the Rings as an example, it was issued in dust jackets. A first edition set in the trilogy without dust jackets can cost you 2, 3, 4, 5 thousand dollars, but a fine set will be 50 thousand dollars. So there’s a big wide spectrum there, what you can spend. But basically you buy the best you can afford because when it comes to selling and if it had problems when you bought it, it’s still going to have problems when you sell it and it’ll be harder to sell. So quality really comes through.

Peter Harper: I think the big take away for me was really focusing on first editions. You might like a book and you might be interested in it, but is it even worth acquiring something if it’s not a first edition?

Pom Harrington: We always aim for first printing, and that is, again, the primary goal, the price, if it’s not a first printing, falls off a cliff. I mean, the common one is, of course, at the moment as Harry Potter. This is the great big rising star of collectible in the last decade or so. And a true first of the first Harry Potter book will now set you back a 100 thousand dollars or possibly more. The second printing, 2 or 3 thousand dollars. And the difference is literally a month, they look exactly the same apart from one little digit on the back of the title page to tell you that it’s the first printing. So, again, I mean when we look at books and when you’re spending a lot of money in books, it’s an investment of your money. And when we look at books in terms of what can happen in value, we can’t say what’s going to happen in the future, but we look at the track history of what happens with books in the past. And if you look at certain books like Harry Potter or maybe a bit more conventional, Charles Darwin, Origin of Species, the beautiful copies that 25 years ago, you could buy an Origin of Species first edition for, say, 30, thousand dollars. These days, it’s going to cost you 300 to 400 thousand dollars. If you bought a second printing 30 years ago, you probably bought it at 15 hundred bucks, now it’s going to be 6,7 thousand bucks. You know, it’s just dragging behind. The truly great stuff seems to just keep getting greater. And just remember, when you find something that’s truly amazing, if you think it’s amazing when you come to sell it, it’s much more likely someone else will think it’s amazing too.

Peter Harper: That’s a really important point. And Pom when we were catching up previously, one thing that was really interesting to me was you were talking about trends and things that come in and out of fashion. So thinking about someone with your type of experience, certain books you can spot and would say, I imagine these might be a trend of the time, whereas other books have got, you know, maybe the prices aren’t jackknifing up, but they’re just slowly increasing over time. Can you talk a bit about the importance…?

Pom Harrington: I mentioned Origin of Species, I think that’s a good example of where natural science and science in general is just being more and more in fashion. A bit from technology stock and the money coming into there, but also natural sciences, environmentalism, climate change, and now, of course, we have the pandemic. And so the interest in natural science is huge. That influences what we want to collect. In the 1930s, they were quite obsessed with John Galsworthy and John Galsworthy was quite expensive in the 1930s. No one cares about John Galsworthy these days. David Roberts is a good example of fashion, David Roberts was the English artist and traveler that went to the Middle East and importantly, was the first Westerner really allowed into the mosques and the holy sites in the Middle East to actually paint and draw them. He came back in 19th century Britain and he did the most amazing book, came out in six volumes, all these amazing illustrations and drawings of inside the mosques and the pyramids, et cetera. This book has been hugely popular, in particular the latter half of the 20th century where tourists for the first time are now going into Egypt, seeing these pyramids, going into Petra, going to the Holy Land, and they come back from this great holidays and then go, “oh, my God, there’s a book from the 19th century” and they’ll buy it. And this book, therefore, has gotten more and more collectible, more valuable.

Pom Harrington: The problem is now, for the last 20 years, no one’s really been going because of political problems. No one’s really traveling to Egypt anymore, not for the tourism. And for that reason, the book has not really changed in value in 20 years. And this is what I mean by, you know, this is fashion So the question, if you’re wanting to sort of buy something that might appreciate, your best pitch would be: what’s going to be popular in 20, 30 years time.

Peter Harper: Sure.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Pom Harrington: What is perhaps underrated now that you think will be important in 20, 30 years time?

Pom Harrington: Jane Austen! Jane Austen was collected within a decade or two of her time. First editions, were important in libraries right back in the 19th century and a first edition of Pride and Prejudice is still probably one of the most desired and sought after first editions that you could find. And the price has continued, has gone up and up. And actually, particularly in the last two or three years, it’s probably doubled. I mean, it’s extraordinary. Three years ago I was selling copies for 40 to 50 thousand pounds. Those same books are now selling for 80 thousand pounds.

Peter Harper: And when they do a reboot of the movie and this new generation that are..

Pom Harrington: No question, they influence it. And actually the best example of that is James Bond. Every time a James Bond movie comes out, a new batch of collectors for James Bond novels. Ian Fleming, there were 14 novels you can collect. They were published in 1953 – 1966. He did one per year. And actually, it’s a great series for beginners to learn the rules of rare book collecting because the rules of rarity: there’s only four thousand copies of Casino Royale, the first book, with the dust jacket it’s worth 30, 40, 50 thousand dollars. Without the jacket, it’s worth 3 or 4 thousand dollars. But you can learn those rules. The next book that came out had twice the print run, so you can probably half the price and again, condition comes into it. So you know they’re are great ways of learning how the collecting works.

Peter Harper: And one thing that I’m sure is important is, you know, an authentication process. And I imagine there is some degree of fraud in the business. It seems to be everywhere when you’ve got people willing to pay a lot of money for our limited things. How do people think about authenticating a product and accredited sellers and and the risk of getting something that may not be what they think it is.

Pom Harrington: That the good news for rare books is, for the most part, that they’re actually very few forgeries. I mean, deliberate forgery is actually very hard to do. With autographs, that’s quite a different matter, and I’ll come to that in a second. The best advice I can give anybody, use an accredited dealer. As it happens, I’m president of the Antiquarian Booksellers’ Association in the U.K., there is the equivalent in America Antiquarian Booksellers’ Association of America is 450 members and actually we’re united by a global body called ILAB, the International League of Antiquarian Booksellers. Anybody part of that group have been voted in by their peers and they’re bound by regulations, morals and ethics of our trade. And that means everything is guaranteed as original and everybody has to have at least five years experience of trading in the book trade, et cetera. So buying from accredited dealers is quite important. I think if you buy on the Internet blindly – there is pop-up dealers and eBay or other ways of buying online, you do probably take a little bit more of a risk. Whereas you can take some comfort from buying from accredited dealer.

Pom Harrington: Autographs, is definitely more difficult. It’s a different matter, but I think just buying from an accredited dealer.

Peter Harper: And how do you go about verifying? You think about an old book where it’s signed, what’s the process like for verifying an older signature? Is it simply trying to find another example of the signature somewhere in the public?

Pom Harrington: In our case, I mean, we’ve been dealing 50 years or so and we’ve had a database for the last 20 years and we photographed everything that we’ve had in the last 10 years. So we actually have our own wonderful database of reference. And it’s funny, you know, I could look at Roald Dahl (because that’s what I collected) and I look at my screen and I can flick my records. I could have two hundred records of Roald Dahl autographs and believe me, the wrong one suddenly pops up, it jumps out. There’s a consistency of an autograph and it’s like a fingerprint. And, you know, when you understand the author and their autograph, then when it’s not them, it really does jump out.

Pom Harrington: We like to see actually fully inscribed. And that also is helpful and you tend to get that with maybe 19th century authors where they write to whoever with kind regards from the author and you get basically more writing to judge with. I mean, my favorite one is Charles Dickens. I mean, he had a wonderful flourish, and it’s a quite complicated flourish and therefore forgers don’t really try. It’s such an easy one to pick out. So experience is the main way. And actually, once you learn a little bit, you can self-govern yourself. I mean, some of it’s pretty straightforward. I mean, J.K. Rowling at the moment is the biggest problem in the marketplace. And so I’d say of all the ones that right now, beware of that one.

Peter Harper: Ok, that’s really good advice. And then: final question, what is your favorite book that you’ve ever come across and dealt with? And what’s the most valuable book that you’ve ever dealt with?

Pom Harrington: I think my favorite book – and I mentioned Charles Dickens – I actually first read about this book existing, just doing some research for something else. And I thought it was amazing: it was Charles Dickens Tales of Two Cities, but a presentation copy to George Eliot with admiration from the author, Charles Dickens. I just thought, my God, that’s an amazing book to have those two authors connected. And then, you know, some years later, it must be about 6 or 7 years ago, it was actually offered to me and I bought it and then, said how much. And I thought it was amazing. I actually took it home – I kept it for about 18 months. And then when we did an anniversary catalogue for Peter Harrington (we had a catalogue 100) and I actually put it in that catalog. We sold it immediately. But that’s probably my favorite ones. That’s such a big title from one author to another. That was pretty amazing. It was like 275 thousand pounds in the end. I pretty much have to have it back to that now.

Pom Harrington: And most valuable: we have done various things. Probably the most expensive thing we’ve handled was actually like a 13th century Islamic manuscript of Encyclopedia that was translated and was used as a reference for the first English to Arabic dictionary. And we had the actual manuscript of the dictionary to get with it.

Peter Harper: Oh, wow.

Pom Harrington: And we actually bought a for a client at auction it was like a million pounds at the time. Well, we have handled things pretty more valuable, but most things don’t go much over that it, would be pretty unusual. World record, however, is we once had a set of books from George Washington’s Library, which was signed by George Washington about the history American Revolution, a can’t disclose exactly what it was, but millions. And that’s probably the most valuable thing we’ve had.

Peter Harper: Fantastic. Well, thank you very much for your time, this has been very informative and excited to get started collecting

Pom Harrington: Great. Thank you.

Peter Harper: Thanks, Pom. Bye bye.

To contact Pom Harrington, check out www.peterharrington.co.uk or contact Asena for more information.

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 4 – Residence

GENERAL BACKGROUND

In this week’s blog, we will be discussing Article 4 of the DTA (Residence), with a specific focus on its applicability to individuals.

A person’s residence for treaty purposes is a key consideration when applying the DTA. Not only because this allows a person to claim certain treaty benefits, but also because the treaty will allocate taxing rights to the state of residence or the state of source. It is therefore vital to know where a person is resident for such purposes. 

INTRODUCTION

Article 4 contains ‘residency tie-breakers’ to determine residence for both individuals and companies.

When the domestic law of the US and Australia result in claimed residency by both countries, the taxpayer must apply the treaty’s residency tie-breaker provisions. The reason it is important is because residency determines the taxation of many important types of income, such as dividends, interest, royalties, capital gain, pension distributions, retirement pay, annuities, and alimony.

It should be noted that these tiebreakers, for companies and individuals, apply for the purposes of the treaty and so determine a sole state as the place of residence for treaty purposes only. A person does not cease to be resident of either state for domestic law purposes unless the domestic law specifically states this

For instance, in South Africa, the definition of ‘resident’ in Article 1 of the Income Tax Act No. 58 of 1962 includes a provision whereby the definition of ‘residence’ contained in any DTA between South Africa and another country overrides the domestic definition of a resident. So, this is an example whereby a person will cease its residency should they be regarded as an exclusive resident of another contracting states. Herewith an extract of the provision – 

‘But does not include any person who is deemed to be exclusively a resident of another country for purposes of the application of any agreement entered into between the governments of the Republic and that other country for the avoidance of double taxation.’

This however does not apply to Article 4 of the DTA between the US and Australia. One should therefore be careful when applying Article 4 and what limitations apply to the specific DTA’s definition of residence. 

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 4 OF THE DTA – RESIDENCE

The country of residence generally gets the most exclusive taxing rights. When an individual is determined to be a tax resident under the domestic law of two countries that have an income tax treaty with one another, there are a set of factors that ‘break the tie’. When interpreting the specific terms as set out below, one should look at the domestic interpretation of the US/Australia respectively and at the OECD commentary on Article 4 of the Model Tax Convention.

The country of residency for purposes of the DTA is determined by applying the following tie-breaker clauses in the US-Australia DTA.

Tie-breaker 1: 

Permanent home – first, the country in which the individual maintains a permanent home. If the individual has a permanent home in only one of the Contracting States, the individual will be treated as a resident of that State for treaty purposes.

The IRS states that a permanent home is one that is retained for permanent and continuous use and is not a place retained for a short duration. An individual has a permanent home in the US if he or she purchased a home in the United States, intended to reside in that home for an indefinite time, and did reside in that home. Individuals may also have a permanent home where:

    1. a room/apartment is continuously available to them, 
    2. their personal property (e.g., automobiles, personal belongings) is stored at a dwelling, and 
    3. they conduct business (e.g., maintaining an office, registering a telephone), including using such addresses for insurance and a driver’s license.

The OECD describes a permanent home to be a home that the:

‘Individual has arranged to have the dwelling available to him at all times continuously and not occasionally’. 

We are the only multi-disciplinary international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S.– Australia taxation.

Tie-breaker 2: 

Habitual abodesecond, if the individual’s permanent home cannot be determined, then the state in which he has a habitual abode

The IRS states the following in this regard:

“An individual’s habitual abode is located in the Contracting State in which the individual has a greater presence during a calendar year. Although the length of time is not specified, the comparison must cover sufficient length of time and take into account the intervals at which the stays take place for it to be possible to determine where residence is habitual. For example, an individual who is present in the United States more frequently and at longer intervals than in the other Contracting State during a calendar year likely has a habitual abode in the United States. Determine whether the individual has a habitual abode in the United States by calculating how much time the individual spent in in the United States in a tax year…” 

The OECD explains that a habitual abode refers to the frequency, duration and regularity of stays that are part of the settled routine of an individual’s life and is therefore more than transient. 

There is no specific commentary on the Australian interpretation of the words habitual abode in the context of the Treaty, only the words habitual place of abode in the context of the statutory definition of resident in section 6 ITAA 1936. However, the Courts consider the Commentary on the OECD Model Tax Convention as authoritative guidance on the interpretation of Tax Treaties.  

Tie-breaker 3: 

Closer connectionsthird, if the individual has a habitual abode in both countries or in neither, then the country in which the individual has closer economic or personal relations, with regard being given to the country of citizenship. 

The IRS considers the following factors in this regard:

Personal relations:

    1. Family location – Includes parents and siblings, and where the individual spent his or her childhood. 
    2. Recent relocation – Whether the family moved from their permanent home to join the individual, or the individual relocated to a second state (for example, as a result of marriage). 

Community relations

Determine where the individual has his or her:

    1. health insurance, 
    2. medical and dental professionals, 
    3. driver’s license/motor vehicle registration, 
    4. health club membership, 
    5. political and cultural activities, and 
    6. ownership of bank accounts. 

Economic relations: 

Determine where the individual:

    1. keeps his or her investments or conducts business, 
    2. incorporated his or her business, and retains professional advisors (e.g., attorneys, agents, and The center of vital interests can shift, when an individual retains ties in one State but establishes ties in a second State, and all surrounding facts and circumstances must be considered in determining the individual’s center of vital interests. For example, the IRS states that evidence that an individual has executed contracts relating to his or her business in the second State may indicate that the center of vital interests is in the second State. 

CONCLUSION

It is of utmost importance to ensure that you understand how to apply the tie-breaker provisions set out in Article 4(2) of the US/Australia DTA. Secondly, it is important to note that by being regarded as a resident in terms of the DTA, does not automatically cease your tax residency. Especially if you are a US citizen living in Australia. It should only be applied for purposes of the treaty and allocating the taxing rights accordingly. 

Our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisor, have an in-depth knowledge of how to interpret international tax treaties and how to correctly apply the tie-breaker provisions.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Investing in Private Aviation with Lisa Senters

In the second episode of the Wealth Management series, Peter Harper interviews Lisa Senters on Private Aviation and how you can go about investing in aircrafts in today’s economy.

Tune in to our podcast every other week to learn more about the many ways you can manage your wealth sensibly.

To listen to the podcast, click the play button below or visit https://asenaadvisors.podbean.com/

Transcript TL;DR

Peter Harper: Hello and welcome to the Three Pillars podcast. I’m Peter Harper, the managing director and CEO of Asena Advisors. To those of you who are not familiar with the business, we’re a multifamily office advising foreign family offices and private clients on US direct investments and mergers and acquisitions. In this episode of the wealth management series, we’ll be discussing investing in private aviation with Lisa Senters. Lisa, it’s great to have you with us. Thanks for joining.

Lisa Senters: Peter, thank you so much for having me. I really appreciate the opportunity to help you out with this podcast. And it is an exciting topic, so I’m excited to talk to you about it. My name, as you said, is Lisa Senters, and I’m the CEO of a company called Jet Senters Aviation. I am a private aviation expert and I have more than twenty five years experience in the aviation industry. I began my career in this industry over two decades ago when I started a charter brokerage firm out of New York City. After a few years of doing that, I was recruited to NetJets and I became a salesperson for Marquis Jet and NetJets. I was there for over a decade as a senior vice president reporting to Warren Buffett, so that was a super thrilling, exciting part of my career as well. I became really well known throughout the industry during that time as a global specialist and now I’m running my own company. We help people buy, sell, manage, and charter aircraft. So thank you again for having me.

Peter Harper:  What I’d like to go through today is you cover off on industry updates, to give them a sense of what’s going on in the marketplace, and also for those who’ve gone through a process – maybe they’ve had a liquidity event – looking at private aviation for the first time, whether that’s buying their own plane, a part of a plane/a fraction of a plane, or they’re looking at some other form of jet card and understanding what that sort of means. Firstly, if we can touch on the past, what the industry looked like pre-Covid and what it looks like today.

Lisa Senters: Sure. It’s very interesting what’s happened in our industry over the past two years. Prior to COVID, at the beginning of aviation, obviously, you could purchase a plane, then you could charter your plane. A man named Richard Santulli came along and invented what we now know is NetJets. So you could buy a plane, get together with a couple of buddies, fraction it out: that became the fractional. Spun off of that, with the jet card, where you could buy twenty-five hours on the jet of your choice and/or you could still do fractional. So there was a lot of different things that you could do back then, in the industry. Obviously, NetJets being the nine hundred pound gorilla, there was a lot of flexibility. Prices were a lot lower than they are today, actually, and there was a lot more inventory, so if you went to go purchase a plane, I would say at that time it was a buyer’s market. There was a lot of inventory out to purchase and to pick from. There was a lot of activity, but the planes weren’t quite as old as they have now become mature. So, you know, in the past, it was just what it is. It’s very different than what it is today.

Peter Harper:  That was great. I mean, there’s a couple of things there that kind of stand out to me is that I think a lot of industries at the moment are have supply chain constraints. And so I imagine it’s no different for aviation – there was probably abundance of product in the marketplace, and then companies probably reduced construction. But as far as new planes coming to market, maybe people held on to ones that were going to sell. And then there’s also the issue of – OK – people that aren’t performing, aren’t hitting the mark that they wanted to get Due to COVID, very few people are traveling. That being said, I’m sure you experience this as well, in the high-net-worth/ultra affluent space, if anyone was traveling – that was part of a community that was still hopping on a plane and getting somewhere, if they could, other than home, what does that mean today for pricing? Imagine there’s increases in pricing both in the new and used market, what does that look like as far as optionality for people?

Lisa Senters: Well, Peter, it’s very interesting to talk about what has happened in my industry post COVID and to go back to the beginning of COVID, the perfect storm that was set up to give us the market that we have today. So that perfect storm that was set up when COVID hit was the tax break that the previous administration had for people that bought planes. The interest rates were at an all time low. Optics on flying private changed – there was no longer any private flight shaming because of COVID people didn’t want to risk their lives. It became a necessity so that all of a sudden anybody that could fly privately was flying privately. So the market could actually expanded twenty five percent with first time flyers. And in a recent survey they said that ninety six percent of those people are going to continue to fly private once COVID restrictions are over. It’s such a great way to fly, so it’s very difficult to go from having your own plane to sitting in a middle seat with someone coughing on you. Right. So COVID really changed that dynamic. And because of that, similar to what’s happened in the housing market, everybody that could buy a plane went out and did buy a plane. So now we’re at an all time low of inventory. In fact, in the used inventory market, Amstat just published a statistic of five point four percent used aircrafts are available for purchase. That’s lower than any time in history.

Lisa Senters: So what does that mean? That means that there are very few newer aircraft available to buy. So, if you if you go out to buy an aircraft, you have to be ready to act. Cash is king, you can’t vacillate and you have to put your best foot forward. So pricing is inflated and it is now a seller’s market Some planes are going before they’re even listed, so everybody wants to purchase a plane. It’s astounding in our market how quickly this has sort of expanded to the state that we’re in now, which is an all time low.

Peter Harper: And fascinating, I imagine that’s flowed on to. If someone wanted a new plane, what’s the type of lead time today between going and flying plane, ordering and even expecting to receive one?

Lisa Senters: You know, that depends with each different manufacturer. However, I spoke to one of the best Gulfstream salespeople yesterday, and he said that people that he had been talking to that would never consider buying a new plane are now buying a new plane because there’s no used planes available. So they’re ponying up and putting out the money for a new plane. It’s really fascinating You know, I’d like to mention also if you’re going to buy a plane now, people similar to houses are saying, I won’t even do the inspection. They’re that desperate to get a plane and we highly recommend that they do not do that because they could end up obviously with a lemon. But it’s so competitive now that people are actually doing that.

Peter Harper: Yeah, that’s that’s crazy. For the reasons you’ve kind of outlined, I mean, I think you’re right. I think that one point that was really interesting to me, which I saw, was that element of, as you said, what you call private shaming. I’ve never heard it put like that. But I think that’s a real thing. And it kind of evaporated. Right? It’s like if you can afford to do it. And pricing, compared to what it maybe it was historically, there’s ways to get into and utilize private planes, even if you’re not owning it – on a charter basis, it maybe wasn’t available historically. You also touched on a point that probably a lot of people weren’t aware of, you mentioned that there was a tax break put in place by the previous administration that was removed. Do you mind explaining how that has impacted things? Was it a depreciation issue?

Lisa Senters: Well, there is a lot of different tax laws that are advantageous for people that are buying the planes. But there’s a couple of different things that happened last year under the previous administration. They did away with the seven point five percent federal excise tax that’s on every charter, every flight. If you’re taking many flights over the course of the year and you’re paying seven point five percent on top of it… So that went away for all of last year. But that’s back now, though. So the seven point five percent is back. Obviously people get the accelerated depreciation still, but part of the perfect storm is no one knows when that will go away because that’s going over everyone’s head, that that will go away. We don’t know if it will go away or not, but the fear of that going away created again, the perfect storm last December I mean, my friends and the lawyers that do this had more transactions than in their entire career and they’ve ever seen in a quarter.

Peter Harper: Right. That’s fascinating. You touched on a bit of the history of of buying planes, charter, you know, the JetCard, NetJets – for those that are new to this and they’re going to be there for the first time, can you run through 1: the value of and importance of a broker? And  how you work as far as considering what is the appropriate fit for someone, whether it is buy a plane, fractional ownership, or working with some third party supplier or charter operator.

Lisa Senters: Sure. So there are many different ways to fly private. One of them is simply charter and on demand charter. So what that looks like is obviously, if somebody wants to take a trip from New York to California, they just call a company like JetSenters Aviation and the broker goes to work for them and negotiates the best rate on their behalf. Obviously weighs in on safety, you want to use Argus, IS-BAO, or Wyvern. So you want to pick a good person that knows the top level safety. So that’s one thing you can do. You can charter.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Lisa Senters: The next level up is you can buy a card that acts as a debit card. So you pre-purchase twenty five hours on the card of your choice. Which means, for instance, NetJets has a fleet of maybe 13 different planes. You pick the plane that you want and you stick to that and you buy the twenty five hours on that. It’s a pr- purchase card, so it acts as an ATM debit card. I will say that NetJets has such high demand now that if you buy a new card with NetJets, a new system they just put into place is there are forty five days out of the year that are peak period days that you may not use your new card. So you’ve now purchased hundreds of thousands of dollars for twenty five hours card. You will not be going to Aspen for Christmas. You will not be taking off for Easter, Thanksgiving, New Year’s Eve. Nothing. Fourty five days you can’t use your new card. That’s how busy they are. So that’s a very telling sign as far as the industry goes.

Lisa Senters: But hence why we get to now people are saying, you know what, I’ve never flown private before. It was the largest number of never flying private before people that jumped in and say, I’m going to buy a plane. So people that had never even chartered, I had one personally here in Atlanta, Georgia, that bought a Challenger 605, which is a very large plane “I’ve never chartered before. I had a liquidity event. I have a grandson that’s being born. It’s COVID. Let’s roll. Get me a plane.” So nine million dollar assets, first time out of the gate. Never even did a charter. So people are doing that.

Lisa Senters: That’s obviously another thing that you can do and you can also, which is really important and a big deal, I think is you can purchase a plane and put it into a managed fleet which Jet Edge International just came out with a new way of doing that. What they do is they have something called the Jet Edge Advant-edge and you can buy a plane, put it into their fleet, be guaranteed that type of plane or better and offset your cost. So a lot of people are jumping on to that bandwagon. And it makes a lot of sense, [Peter Harper: Sure] especially for a guy that doesn’t care if he has to fly on his plane or not. And then they still have the asset, they still get the depreciation and they can still turn around and sell it. So it’s a whole aircraft situation, not a fractional program. And it’s brilliant, actually. I think KKR just gave them one hundred and fifty million about two weeks ago to go after that market.

Peter Harper: It makes a lot of sense.

Lisa Senters: History is changing and evolving for sure.

Peter Harper: Yeah, I mean, it’s fascinating that you mentioned that sort of it – and this based on my experience in discussions we’ve had before, I think where it would be sensible for someone to engage you when they haven’t been through this process before. I mean, as you said, there are various options. They come with benefits and they’re both positives and negatives associated with it, depending on how you’re approaching it and understanding those I think is is really key. If it’s not about money, right, and if for some people it’s just a factor of saying, “hey, listen, this is something I want to do and I’ve got the means to do it.” I mean, maybe that’s a different way of looking at it. But what would be your recommendation if someone’s going through this, again, be the first time and you want them to understand that optionality, what’s the sort of process that you take them through? And how do you kind of approach that may be different from how other people work?

Lisa Senters: Well, I think that’s a great question. First of all, I think it’s imperative to pick somebody that is a trusted adviser. So somebody that’s been in the industry for decades. And I think having the relationships in this industry is super important. So, as I mentioned, I got my pedigree at NetJets and a lot of my colleagues from NetJets are still in the industry. Obviously, that’s a nine hundred pound gorilla and we had a great product there and it’s still a great company. So it’s imperative that you pick somebody that you trust. I would say that’s number one. And I’m very proud to say I have decades long relationship with most of my customers too. It’s a referral only business, so I would be very wary of when something looks too good to be true; some people do great advertising or marketing, but it’s all about the relationship. There are bad brokers, unfortunately, out there. You don’t want to skip the steps. You don’t want to say, “I’m so desperate for a plane, I’ll take it without the inspection.” There will be another plane just like there will be another house. When you’re going house hunting and you fall in love, best not to get emotionally attached to it. That’s harder to do, but that’s another reason why it’s imperative to have a broker to keep people off the rails and from overpaying or just making it very bad error.

Lisa Senters: My process for walking people through would be to find out what they’re trying to do. Are they trying to get accelerated depreciation? Do they want to offset their books? Do they need another asset? Or do they simply want to fly private without a commitment? Do they want to prepay or are they the kind of person that wants to be involved in the decision and make it as they go? As I mentioned about the card, you do prepay for the plane of your type. So just for instance, one qualifying question would be if somebody is flying to Aspen twice a year, but all of their other flights are up and down the East Coast from Atlanta to Maine, those are two totally different planes that you need. So if you pre-purchased the card, you’re going to be charged what’s called a privilege charge to use a different type of plane. So all the marketing and advertising says “You can use any plane that we have.” You have to be very careful because, yes, you can, but you’re going to pay double or triple sometimes the price.

Peter Harper: That’s been my experience If you are trying to live in an existence where you need flexibility of any plane, it can become prohibitively expensive when you, compared with “Hey let’s not commit to a card, let’s just charter.” Or another type of option. And I mean, it seems to me that it’s logical, like with any sort of depreciating asset (boats, whatever else) you can get out there and pay as you go on and understand what it feels like to charter what planes you like, what you don’t like. But I imagine, Lisa, these days, you can pretty much charter any type of plane that exists in the world with some limitations is that fair sort of…

Lisa Senters:  A very fair statement? Yes. And sometimes I counsel people because I am a trusted advisor for all of my clients. And I’m very proud of the relationship and the expertise that I have. So sometimes I will counsel somebody to buy a card, but also charter so we can weigh if it’s a one way round trip, same day. OK, that’s going to be a much less expensive charter flight than using your card, because, again, most card programs advertise wheels up, wheels down pricing. All that means is there baking in the round trip. If a card program is about twenty thousand on a heavy jet JSA can get you that same heavy jet for less than half of that. But again, it depends on what the mission is, so if they’re going one way to some esoteric location in the middle of the Midwest, it’s half of one dozen, whether they charter or they take a card.

Peter Harper: Sure, I think that’s really, really good advice. I mean, the one thing I’d hope that listeners get out of this is that that it’s a big industry. It’s grown up a lot. There’s a lot of optionality about it. Getting it wrong can be very expensive. And it’s not just a matter of money/money out the door as far as acquisition costs, it’s ongoing costs. Trying to do this without a broker and without a broker who has deep connections would seem to be a pretty, pretty crazy thing to do. Lisa, thank you very much for joining. It’s been super informative, particularly the updates about the currency, the market. And and thanks for joining us.

Lisa Senters: Yeah. Thank you so much for having me, Peter. Any time.

To contact Lisa Senters, email her at [email protected] or contact Asena for more information.

Peter Harper

Investing in French Real Estate with Delphine Belin


In our first episode of the 3 Pillars Podcast: Wealth Management Series, special guest Delphine Belin and host Peter Harper discuss investing and owning real estate in France.

To listen to the podcast, click the play button below or visit https://asenaadvisors.podbean.com/

Transcript TL;DR

Peter Harper: Hello and welcome to the Three Pillars podcast. I’m Peter Harper, the managing director and CEO of Asena Advisers. If you’re not familiar with the business, we’re multifamily office advising foreign family offices and private clients on US direct investment and mergers and acquisitions.

In this episode of the Wealth Management series, we’ll be discussing investing in French real estate with our special guest, Delphine Belin. Delphine, it’s great to have you here with us today.

Delphine Belin: Hello, thank you Peter for having me. And as mentioned, my name is Delphine Beien and I’m a French native, with dual US French citizenship. So I have a master’s degree in international law from the University of Burgundy in France. And I also have 30 years of experience managing real estate in France and advising US citizens on fiscal, administrative and estate planning matters.

Peter Harper: Fantastic, why don’t we kick off? I mean, France is probably my favorite country in the world.

Delphine Belin: Great.

Peter Harper: And I love French wine, French food, all things France. So I was very excited to be talking about this topic. I think a great place to start, is that for any American, when they’re going on that adventure, falling in love with a country, trying to understand general market differences, legal differences can kind of feel overwhelming. Maybe we can start off with some general buying information investment 101 when you’re thinking about investing and buying real estate in France.

Delphine Belin: Sure. I will talk first about something pretty obvious. But when a property is located in France, French law applies regardless of the nationality of the owner. And that is true for all transactions or procedures and fiscal matters. So that’s the first thing that people should know. And then I would like to mention a person that every buyer will have to interact with when buying a property in France. And that person is the French notaire. So it’s not like the American notary and there is no equivalent person in the US. The notaire is a hybrid, high trained lawyer in private civil law who is appointed as a public official and whose duty is to the state. So it’s a mix of private and public and they have a monopoly on property conveyance matters and it covers all related transactions, succession estate planning, donation, etc.. So that’s a big difference between US and France. And last, I want to say that unlike in America, there is no transparency and centralized information on real estates. It’s quite difficult to compare sales – there is no multiple listing services like we have here, and when a French seller is ready to list his property, it will put it in a different agency and sometimes there is different prices for the same property. So it’s a few pointers that, you know, it’s a different country; different rules

Peter Harper:  That’s super fascinating Delphine So a notaire is public and private. Do you have an advocate in addition to the notaire? If I’m an American and I’m saying, OK, I’ll make the decision, I love France, I’m about to go and explore, who are the people that I need to kind of engage with at the start to start that process?

Delphine Belin: So it’s a very good question Peter. So since French law is going to be applicable, it’s crucial for an American citizen to be informed and to consult with a professional, even if they speak French. The cell contract should be reviewed by a specialist who can alert the buyer of any red flags and misinformation. The notaire is a mandatory process, so the selection of an attorney is very important. And I will recommend American investor to choose one that speaks English and has an international law background. It’s not super easy to find, but know that you’re notaire doesn’t have to be local. Even if you want to invest in the French Rivera, your notaire can be based in Paris, for instance. And also the buyer and the seller don’t have to have the same notaire, they can have their own at no extra fees.

Peter Harper: Ok, great, and you had mentioned that there is no sort of central location As far as, you know, in America there is a handful of websites like Zillow and various other things, and then the big agency sites where people kind of use that as a short list before they even engage with a buyer’s agent As far as trying to first find someone, it sounds like then the relationships, the individual relationships with whoever the person is that’s going to help you locate the property is even of higher importance than it would be in America. Because how do you even find the right deals or good opportunities?

Delphine Belin: Yes, well, I think that once, you know, an investor has made his homework and narrowed down the region that they want to invest in, then there are some renowned real state agencies that will help you. In the meantime, you know, it’s hard for Americans to travel right now. Internet is your best friend still. And even if there is not a full transparency, it gives you a good idea of the market. But yes,  once we can travel again, exploring the region in person and meet with a good real estate agency would be my advice.

Peter Harper: Fantastic. I’m a tax attorney by background, and we are kind of always focused on the numbers. One thing that always is interesting to me when I’m looking at global markets and foreign markets is holding costs and sort of understanding what the carrying costs of an asset in various markets are like. When someone’s looking at buying in various locations, what type of indirect taxes or costs should they be sort of having in their mind, and what does that kind of look like as a percentage of the sort of capital invested in your experience?

Delphine Belin: So another very good question. So you can add, around eight percent of the purchase price. when you buy your property for the notaire fees so that’s something to keep in mind.

Peter Harper: Yup

Delphine Belin: And then beside the usual property tax, there is an annual tax that comes with ownership in certain situation and it’s called Impôt sur la Fortune Immobilière (IFI). And that could be considered as a French wealth tax on real estates. It only concerns property situated on the French soil and whose value exceeds 1.3 Million Euros.

Delphine Belin: So I want to reassure potential buyers because as unpopular as the tax appears, its impact is not as widespread or substantial as one could imagine. In 2019, it only concerned one hundred and forty thousand owners, and they pay an average of fifteen thousand Euros per household. And as another practical example, on the property that is worth two million, the wealth tax will be around 7,000 Euros.

Peter Harper: That’s great. It’s interesting to get that statistic because, you know, property taxes vary from place to place across the US, but in most markets that are the more sort of affluent markets, that’s actually not prohibitive when you compare that to what I think Americans would be used to paying as far as property tax.

Delphine Belin: I agree. It’s just that the French have a bad reputation with taxes. And when you hear wealth tax

Peter Harper: I agree. I mean, listen to those stories myself. I think one of the things that always fascinates me is – I love the romantic notion of renovating a chateau or villa or some form property in the French countryside, but I think the sort of notion, the sense of “how affordable are they? and what are these ongoing costs with that?”. I mean, one other thing that I think that would be interesting to understand is that given the history of France, how – in the age of some of these properties, assuming that they’re looking to buy something that’s older – how challenging is it to remodel or renovate a property that someone might be buying as a foreigner? And how would someone even sort of go about thinking about that if they’re looking at places to buy?

Delphine Belin: So it is not a problem usually. And a lot of my clients that make big renovations in a chateau or property usually have a sort of an agent right there in France that can help with translation and of the architectural plans, etc. Because English,  it’s spoken in Paris and cities, but countryside, you might be out of luck. So there is some English person, an American person, that you can find locally that will help you with the work, make sure that they do what you want. But then it’s not very difficult, and we have very good builders in France.

Peter Harper: Yep, fantastic. And so Delphine, on the back of all this, I think what I’m hearing is that the opportunity to buy real estate in and renovate real estate to a high quality, given the generally high level of the builders or artisans that are used to dealing with quality, all the product is at a different level and is not something that you should be nervous about. It’s about having the right connections.

Delphine Belin: Exactly

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Peter Harper: Of the back of that, what are you seeing in the markets? I mean, I think in America, when the pandemic kind of hit, everyone started having thoughts back to prior to the financial crisis and was saying, OK, we’re going to have major upheaval in real estate markets. But quite the opposite of that happened and things are kind of taking off. What are you seeing within the market as a whole when it comes to French real estate? And I’d be interested to know which regions within France you think are the most interesting at the moment.

Delphine Belin: Ok, well, you know, definitively the pandemic happened, but there is some sort of optimistic economic markers despite the pandemic. The French GDP is expecting to go back to its pre covid level at the beginning of 2022. It’s good news. And France seems to be to have been less impacted by the global crisis because its GDP, is less based on exportation. So that’s a good point. Infection rates are low as well as interest rate on French mortgage. The housing prices have been going up since 2016 and they’re expected to continue that rise. Unfortunately, with the pandemic and the border closures, the foreign investment in real estate have been at their lowest level in 10 years. But again, the return on foreign investors is expected. They usually represent between 10 and 20 percent of the buyers. And with the return of the housing market in Paris, is predicted to increase significantly in 2022. And also, I think it’s very true in France that we can observe a shift from urban life to rural life. A lot of people with remote working, have invested in houses. Instead of living in a small apartment in Paris or in the big cities, they have purchased houses in the countryside or in a small town, and they have a garden. And that’s a big tendency in France. And that also explains why in 2020, the Parisian market dropped by 18 percent in terms of the number of transactions.

Peter Harper: And that’s fascinating, I mean, I think that sort of trend if you compared that with New York City, probably that has been a similar trend line as well. We’ve seen similar things happen. And then in the US, in certain markets, Palm Beach, where I’m based, is seeing an astronomic rises; as far as volume of sales was up 300 percent in the last 12 months because of, you know, huge migration numbers from northeastern states, people looking for similar things. Delphine, find in light of that, looking forward to the balance of this year and next year, what markets do you like and why?

Delphine Belin: So Paris is always a very sure value. The distinction between Paris and the rest of France is that your investment is going to cost you twice as much with an average of 1,100 euros per square foot. But the Parisian real estate market is very good for resale and capital gain, with an increased value of 29 percent over the past 10 years. So Paris is always a sure deal and foreign investors are coming back and apparently, they want to invest in France. Just know that the return on rental investment property is lower in Paris than in the rest of France and is because there is a higher purchase price and higher property tax. But outside of Paris, there is a ranking of the 10 best places to invest, the ranking is based on capital gain, potential of employment, demographic perspective, economic development, proximity to Paris – there is a very well-developed train system in Paris with fast train and all the towns I’m going to mention are within two hours of Paris. There are usually university towns and touristic towns. That’s the common denominator of all those cities. And I’m going to tell them where they are. In number one, we have Rennes. Then there is Nantes, Strasbourg, Anger, Toulouse, Bordeaux, Lyon, Clermont-Ferrand, Tour, Lille, so all those cities have great potential for investors and it’s half the price of Paris.

Delphine Belin: So we talk about Paris, we talk about towns outside of Paris, and I want to mention also the countryside you mentioned earlier, you know, buying your chateau in the countryside, etc. Tt is true, and there are, a lot of chateaus in France. I mean, a lot. It’s not uncommon also to find a very reasonable price, old stone house with character and charm. And depending on the condition, you know, for 1,000 square feet property that will cost between 50,000 and 100,000 euros. So it’s very reasonable. What I say is not true for a certain region in France, the Luberon, Provence, Côte d’Azur – the houses are much more expensive than in the rest of France, but also there is a higher return on investment, whether it’s rental or resale.

Delphine Belin: And I also want to make a distinction between the new construction and older houses. The older houses tend to keep their value over time with the slow growth, unless there is a big remodel. And then there is the new construction and their value usually increases the first 10 to 15 years, then plateau and then start to decrease. And the reason why is it’s always possible to build new houses. But there is a limited inventory of older houses and they’re very old and there is very high demand right now. People are not afraid to remodel anymore. With the pandemic, home improvement has been a big deal.

Peter Harper: That’s fantastic and super helpful. Listen, I think we’ve covered a lot of ground. The key takeaways for me is that there is a lot of opportunity to find good buying opportunities in France, whether you’re looking for something in a big city like Paris or in regions that are close to Paris and that don’t be afraid of remodeling, because if you find the right deal, then over time you might find there’s more value in that. Delphine, this has been super insightful. We’ll have Delphine’s information available so if anyone wants to learn more about buying in France, or wants to start their journey, please reach out to us via our website, asenaadvisors.com, and we’ll make sure that you get connected with Delphine so you can get more in-depth advice and learn what to do. Thanks very much again for joining us.

Delphine Belin: Thank you Peter for having me.

To contact Delphine Belin, email her at [email protected] or contact Asena for more information.

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 3 – General Definitions

GENERAL BACKGROUND

Last week we discussed the taxes covered by the DTA as set out in Article 2In this week’s blog, we will be discussing Article 3 of the DTA – General Definitions; it is important to understand the application of the defined terms in the DTA and its interpretation by either US or Australian courts. I am not going to explain every definition set out in Article 3, but rather focus on certain specific terms and their interpretation.

INTRODUCTION

Article 3 provides general definitions and rules of interpretation applicable throughout the DTA. Certain other terms are defined in other articles of the DTA. For example, the term “resident” is defined in Article 4 (Residence), the term “permanent establishment” is defined in Article 5 (Permanent Establishment), and the term “royalties” is defined in Article 12 (Royalties).

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 3 OF THE DTA – GENERAL DEFINITIONS

Article 3 of the DTA can be broken down into two parts. Paragraph 1 defines some principal terms used throughout the DTA and Paragraph 2 makes provision for terms not defined in the DTA and how they should be interpreted.

Paragraph 1

The definitions of the terms person, “company”, “enterprise of a Contracting State”, and “international traffic” are similar to the definitions in the U.S. Model. The “competent authority” for the United States is the Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate and for Australia the Commissioner of Taxation or his authorized representative. The terms “United States” and “Australia” are defined to include the continental shelf areas of the two countries for exploration and exploitation of their natural resources. Definitions are provided for the terms “Contracting State,” “State,” “United States tax,” ”Australian tax,” and “resident of one of the Contracting States.”

The definitions of a United States corporation and an Australian corporation in terms of the DTA are of importance. The DTA specifically excludes from these definitions, corporations under the laws of the Contracting States are residents of both States. A corporation created and organized under the laws of a state of the United States is considered by the United States to be a United States corporation; but such a corporation could also be considered by Australia to be an Australian corporation if it is managed and controlled in Australia or if it does business there and its voting power is controlled by Australian resident shareholders. If such a situation does arise, the dual resident corporation is not considered a resident of either country for purposes of the Treaty and is therefore not entitled to benefits granted by either State under the Treaty to residents of the other State.

We are the only multi-disciplinary international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S.– Australia taxation.

Paragraph 2

Paragraph 2 provides that terms not defined in the Convention shall have the meaning which they have under the laws of the Contracting State concerning the taxes to which the Convention applies unless the context of the Convention requires a different interpretation.

Under the terms of Article 24 (Mutual Agreement Procedure), the competent authorities may agree on a common definition of an otherwise undefined term. The term “context” includes the purpose and background of the provision in which the term appears. An agreement by the competent authorities for the meaning of a term used in the Convention would supersede conflicting meanings in the domestic laws of the Contracting States. Difficulties arise when international rules of interpretation are applied to a DTA which may differ from a state’s domestic fiscal interpretation. Such a conflict might arise because on an international level the courts would look to the Vienna Convention (for example, the interpretation of matters such as non-defined terms in Article 3(2), multi-lingual versions of the treaty, aids to interpretation such as external materials, etc.), which would then need to be compared with the domestic approach to statutory fiscal interpretation. The domestic approach may differ, for example, the domestic law may require a more literal approach; the natural vs the specific meaning of words in the statute, the use of the OECD commentary; the application of Article 3(2) of the treaty for non-defined terms (and possible conflict between the contracting states as to such definitions); domestic case law precedent etc.

A further issue that should be highlighted is the timing of the enactment of a treaty and the subsequent domestic law of a contracting state which may be applicable under Article 3(2).

The question is whether the “static approach” or the “ambulatory approach” to interpretation should be taken. The static approach means the term has the meaning given under domestic law at the time the treaty was entered into – which may be different from the meaning at the time the term is being applied (due to changes in domestic law, for example). The ambulatory approach means the term has the meaning which it has under the contracting state’s domestic law as that is amended from time to time. So the interpretation of the term can be at a later date from the entering into of the treaty.

These two approaches may give rise to the conflict concerning undefined terms within a treaty, however, it should be noted that the ambulatory approach is generally seen as the more common method of interpretation of undefined terms. (This approach was used in the US case of Kappus v Commissioner, 337 F. 3d 1053 (DC Cir. 2003)). In addition, the OECD commentary itself supports the ambulatory approach to interpretation.

CONCLUSION

Due to the different approaches taken to the rules of interpretation for treaties or conventions and the approaches applied to the interpretation of domestic fiscal legislation, Article 3 (2) could be seen as leading to an apparent dichotomy.

It is therefore recommended to make sure that your international structure does not fall within terms not defined in the DTA as this could lead to an expensive exercise to resolve.

Our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisor has an in-depth knowledge of how to interpret international tax treaties and ensure that your international structure is not open to ambiguity.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 2 – Taxes Covered

GENERAL BACKGROUND

Last week we discussed the scope and limitations of the DTA as set out in Article 1.

In this week’s blog, we will be discussing Article 2 of the DTA – Taxes Covered.

This DTA is for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion concerning taxes on income.

It, therefore, does not include taxes that fall outside the scope of Article 2. For examples Gift and Estate, Taxes are covered in the Gift Tax and Estate Tax Treaty respectively.

INTRODUCTION

Article 2 is intended to make the terminology and nomenclature relating to the taxes covered by the DTA more acceptable and precise, to ensure identification of the US and Australian taxes are covered by this convention. Further to widen as much as possible the field of application of the DTA by including as far as possible and in harmony with the domestic laws of the US and Australia imposed and to avoid the necessity of concluding a new DTA whenever the domestic laws of either the US or Australia are modified.

Shaun the only point I would add is that to the extent that a DTA is silent then that item is taxed under domestic law.  DTAs are not all-encompassing in that regard.  Otherwise, it is good.

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 2 OF THE DTA – TAXES COVERED

Article 2 of the DTA states the following –

(1) The existing taxes to which this Convention shall apply are:

(a) in the United States: the Federal income taxes imposed by the Internal Revenue Code; and

(b) in Australia:

(i) the Australian income tax, including a tax on capital gains; and

(ii) the resource rent tax in respect of offshore projects relating to exploration for or exploitation of petroleum resources, imposed under the federal law of Australia.”.

(2) This Convention shall also apply to any identical or substantially similar taxes which are imposed by either Contracting State after the date of signature of this Convention in addition to, or in place of, the existing taxes. At the end of each calendar year, the competent authority of each Contracting State shall notify the competent authority of the other Contracting State of any substantial changes which have been made during that year in the laws of his State relating to the taxes to which this Convention applies or in the official interpretation of those laws or of this Convention.

We are the only multi-disciplinary international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S.– Australia taxation.

Paragraph 1

US Taxes Covered

Sub-paragraph (1)(a) of Article 2 provide that all U.S. income taxes are covered taxes for purposes of the Convention. Thus, the accumulated earnings tax and the personal holding company tax are also covered taxes because they are income taxes, and they are not otherwise excluded from coverage. Under the Code, these taxes will not apply to most foreign corporations because of either a statutory exclusion or the corporation’s failure to meet a statutory requirement.

The DTA excludes social security taxes and excise taxes, such as those imposed on private foundations and foreign insurers, from the taxes covered by the Convention.

Australian Taxes Covered –

Sub-paragraph (1)(b) of Article 2 provides that the covered taxes are the Australian income tax, including a tax on capital gains, and the resource rent tax in respect of offshore projects relating to exploration for or exploitation of petroleum resources (“RRT”), imposed under the federal law of Australia.

The specific reference to the Australian capital gains tax makes it clear that U.S. taxpayers receive a foreign tax credit for Australian capital gains taxes paid.

Concerning the RRT being covered Australian taxes mean that the provisions of the DTA, including Article 5 (Permanent Establishment), Article 7 (Business Profits), and Article 27 (Miscellaneous), generally will apply to the RRT.

However, the effect of the Protocol’s modification to Article 22 (Relief from Double Taxation) is that even though the RRT is a covered tax, the United States is not required by the Convention to grant a U.S. foreign tax credit for RRT paid to Australia. Whether the RRT is creditable therefore is determined under U.S. domestic law.

Paragraph 2

Under paragraph 2, the DTA will apply to any taxes that are identical, or substantially similar, to those enumerated in paragraph 1, and which are imposed in addition to, or place of, the existing taxes after the date of signature of the Convention. The paragraph also provides that the competent authorities agree to notify each other at the end of each calendar year of substantial changes in their income tax laws or the official interpretation of those laws or the Convention.

CONCLUSION

Ensure that you understand the taxes that are covered by this DTA. First and foremost, you need to identify the type of income generated before relying on the DTA.

It is important to note, that to the extent that a DTA is silent on a specific type of tax, that item is taxed under domestic law.  DTAs are not all-encompassing in that regard. 

The DTA only applies to US Federal Income Taxes, which implies that it does not extend to State taxes. You will therefore not be able to claim treaty relief for state taxes paid in the US.

Furthermore, Estate and Gift Taxes are covered in separate treaties and do not fall within the ambit of this DTA.

It will be interesting to see how the US and Australia interpret the taxation of Cryptocurrencies in terms of the DTA. Even though there is sufficient coverage currently we might see some amendments soon.

Our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisor has an in-depth knowledge of how to interpret international tax treaties and how to ascertain their applicability to your specific circumstances.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

US-AU DTA: Article 1 – Personal Scope

GENERAL BACKGROUND

In this series, we will be discussing the Convention Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Australia for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and Fiscal Evasion concerning Taxes on Income 1982 and the 2001 protocol (DTA). 

These series aim to make sure the reader has a comprehensive understanding of the DTA and how to interpret and apply it correctly. 

The only way to get a comprehensive understanding of the DTA is to make sure you understand every article on its own. 

If the reader is anything like my wife, you will probably question the above statement and see it as a way of me dragging it out. Especially considering that the DTA only consists of 29 Articles in a 27-page document. How complicated can it be?

Well just to give you some perspective, the US bases all its DTAs on the US Model Tax Treaty. This model is used as a foundation and guideline on how to draft specific DTAs with various countries. The US Model Tax Treaty also has a Technical Explanation to understand how to interpret and apply a DTA. The technical explanation is 92 pages long. 

Most countries in the world (excluding the US) follow the Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) Model Tax Convention which consists of 32 Articles. The commentary on the OECD’s Model Tax Convention is 658 pages. 

I would therefore recommend not taking international tax advice from my wife or any advisor who summarizes the DTA in one or two pages. It’s not that simple. 

In this week’s blog, we will discuss Article 1 of the DTA – Personal Scope

INTRODUCTION

The main reason why countries across the world implement DTAs is to avoid the imposition of comparable taxes in two or more countries on the same taxpayer in respect of the same subject matter and for identical periods. The harmful effects of double taxation on the exchange of goods and services and movements of capital, technology, and persons are so well known that it is scarcely necessary to stress the importance of removing the obstacles that double taxation presents to the development of economic relations between countries.

DTAs, therefore, help to clarify, standardize, and confirm the fiscal situation of taxpayers who are engaged in commercial, industrial, financial, or any other activities in other countries through the application by all countries of common solutions to identical cases of double taxation. 

The US and Australia tax their residents on a worldwide basis and non-residents on a source basis. So, these tax systems will seek to levy taxation where there is a source of income in a state/country (state is the term used for the country, either the US or Australia) and/or a person who is a resident in a country. Both source and residence are referred to as ‘connecting factors’ in the world of public international tax. This is where the DTA comes into play, to ascertain whether the US or Australia has taxing rights on a specific type of income.

INTERPRETING ARTICLE 1 OF THE DTA – PERSONAL SCOPE

Article 1 of the DTA states the following – 

Except as otherwise provided in this Convention, this Convention shall apply to persons who are residents of one or both of the Contracting States.

This Convention shall not restrict in any manner any exclusion, exemption, deduction, rebate, credit, or other allowance accorded from time to time: 

by the laws of either Contracting State; or 

by any other agreement between the Contracting States.

Notwithstanding any provision of this Convention, except paragraph (4) of this Article, a Contracting State may tax its residents (as determined under Article 4 (Residence)) and individuals electing under its domestic law to be taxed as residents of that state, and because of citizenship may tax its citizens, as if this Convention had not entered into force. For this purpose, the term “citizen” shall, for United States source income according to United States law relating to United States tax, include a former citizen or long-term resident whose loss of such status had as one of its principal purposes the avoidance of tax, but only for a period of 10 years following such loss.

The provisions of paragraph (3) shall not affect

the benefits conferred by a Contracting State under paragraph (2) of Article 9 (Associated Enterprises), paragraph (2) or (6) of Article 18 (Pensions, Annuities, Alimony and Child Support), Article 22 (Relief from Double Taxation), 23 (Non-Discrimination), 24 (Mutual Agreement Procedure) or paragraph (1) of Article 27 (Miscellaneous); or 

the benefits conferred by a Contracting State under Article 19 (Governmental Remuneration), 20 (Students) or 26 (Diplomatic and Consular Privileges) upon individuals who are neither citizens of, nor have immigrant status in, that State (in the case of benefits conferred by the United States), or who are not ordinarily resident in that State (in the case of benefits conferred by Australia).

Paragraph 1

This paragraph sets out the scope of DTA’s application. It applies to residents of the US and/or Australia. However, the scope is extended in certain articles of the DTA and can also apply to residents of third countries, for example, Article 10 (Dividends), Article 11 (Interest), and Article 25 (Exchange of Information). A resident is defined in Article 4 of the DTA. 

Paragraph 2

This paragraph goes on further to state that the DTA may not increase tax above the liability that would result under either the US or Australian domestic legislation or any other agreement between the US and Australia. It also provides taxpayers with the option to rather apply domestic law instead of the DTA, if the domestic law provides the more favorable treatment. A taxpayer, however, may not make inconsistent choices between the rules of the Internal Revenue Code and the DTA rules.

Asena Advisors is the only multi-disciplinary (Accounting and Legal) international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S. -Australia taxation.

Paragraph 3

This paragraph is probably one of the most important provisions of the DTA as it lays the foundation of taxing rights for the rest of the DTA. It provides the US with broader powers than what is usually provided to other countries in DTAs. This is due to the US being one of the only countries in the world (the other country is Eritrea) to continue to tax individuals who are US citizens on a worldwide basis irrespective of where they live in the world. 

It contains a ‘saving clause’ which stipulates that the US and Australia reserve the right to tax its residents as if the DTA had not come into effect.  The US and Australia also reserve the right to tax their citizens, individuals electing under their respective domestic laws to be taxed as residents, and in the case of the US, former citizens whose loss of citizenship had as one of its main purposes the avoidance of tax. This reservation was extended in the 2001 protocol to include not only former citizens but also former long-term residents of the US. This was to ensure that the DTA is consistent with US law, more specifically Section 877 of the Internal Revenue Code. 

Section 877(c) provides certain exceptions to these presumptions of tax avoidance. The US defines ‘long-term resident’ as an individual (other than a US citizen) who is a lawful permanent resident of the United States in at least 8 of the prior 15 taxable years. An individual is not treated as a lawful permanent resident for any taxable year if such individual is treated as a resident of a foreign country under the provisions of a tax treaty between the United States and the foreign country and the individual does not waive the benefits of such treaty applicable to residents of the foreign country.

The major thing to note here is that even though the right to tax its citizens is reserved for Australia as well, Australia does not tax individuals based on citizenship. Whereas in the case of the US, individuals are taxed based on citizenship. 

Paragraph 4

This paragraph sets out the limitations of the saving clause and where other provisions of the DTA will override the savings clause. The saving clause does not override the benefits provided under paragraph 2 of Article 9 (Associated Enterprises), relating to correlative adjustments of tax liability, or the benefits of paragraphs 2 or 6 of Article 18 (Pensions, Annuities, Alimony and Child Support), relating to social security payments, alimony and child support. 

Social security payments and similar public pensions paid by Australia and alimony, child support, and similar maintenance payments arising in Australia are taxable only by Australia even though the recipient may be a resident of the US. Similarly, social security payments by Australia to a citizen of the US, wherever resident, are taxable only in Australia. 

The benefits provided in Articles 22 (Relief from Double Taxation), 23 (non-Discrimination), and 24 (Mutual Agreement Procedure), and the source rules of paragraph 1 of Article 27 (Miscellaneous) are also available to residents and citizens of the Contracting States, notwithstanding the saving clause.

THE IMPORTANCE OF READING COMPREHENSION 

Although most people can read, the act of reading and the act of comprehending what you read are two very different things.

Reading comprehension is the ability to process text, understand its meaning, and integrate with what the reader already knows. 

Lawyers generally know the importance of reading comprehension. At law school, students are taught how to interpret legislation. So, this is not a gift or talent, lawyers are born with, but rather a skill set you can develop that will be extremely beneficial when looking at the DTA. 

The reason why it is extremely important to understand the DTA and more specifically Article 1 of the DTA, is so that you understand if the DTA even applies to you. We’ve assisted numerous clients who either misinterpreted the application of the DTA or whose advisor misinterpreted the application. 

The key questions you should consider to ensure the correct application of the DTA is – 

  1. What is the scope of the DTA and do I fall within that scope to use the DTA?
  2. Am I a resident of Australia or the US for purposes of the DTA?
  3. What are the benefits available to me in the DTA?
  4. What is the limitation of benefits in the DTA?
  5. What is the interplay between US/Australia domestic legislation and the DTA?
Our team of International Tax specialists at Asena Advisor has an in-depth knowledge of how to interpret international tax treaties and how to ascertain their applicability to your specific circumstances. 

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Remediation for Cryptocurrency

GENERAL BACKGROUND

As briefly mentioned in our blog last week, the Green Book offers new details on the various proposals included in the President’s Made in America tax plan.

In this week’s blog, we will focus on the proposed changes relating to the reporting requirements for cryptocurrencies and what options you have to remediate any historical disclosure issues regarding cryptocurrencies held.

INTRODUCTION

Cryptocurrency is probably the most talked-about topic by tax authorities across the world due to the rapidly growing problem of evading tax with cryptocurrencies.

Since the industry is entirely digital, taxpayers can transact with offshore crypto exchanges and wallet providers without leaving the US. The global nature of the crypto market offers opportunities for US taxpayers to conceal assets and taxable income by using offshore crypto exchanges and wallet providers. US taxpayers also attempt to avoid US tax reporting by creating entities through which they can act. To combat the potential for crypto assets to be used for tax evasion, third-party information reporting is critical to help identify taxpayers and bolster voluntary tax compliance.

This blog is not intended for people who are willfully using cryptocurrencies to avoid paying taxes to the IRS.

This blog is intended to give guidance to people who have had dealings with cryptocurrencies in the past and neglected to disclose such dealings in their tax returns and how they should approach this going forward.  

DO I NEED TO REPORT CRYPTOCURRENCIES ON MY TAXES?

The answer is yes, you do need to report crypto on your taxes if it resulted in a taxable event.

For the first time ever, the IRS has placed a question at the top of the 2020 Form 1040 that asks:

at any time during 2020, did you receive, sell, send, exchange, or otherwise acquire any financial interest in any virtual currency?”

Essentially, by adding this question front and center on Form 1040, the IRS is indicating that you can no longer claim you simply did not know you were supposed to report it.

By checking yes to the question above, the IRS will look to see if you also filed a Form 8949, the same form used when reporting gains and losses on stocks or equities. And if you fail to file this form, you can almost certainly expect to be audited.

But, as mentioned above, not all cryptocurrency activity is taxable. For purposes of this blog, we will not be discussing in detail what does and does not constitute a taxable event.

The only important thing to remember is that it is possible to report cryptocurrencies as both property and income depending on how you used it. For example, if you were paid in cryptocurrency for a service rendered and use that cryptocurrency to buy a sandwich at a participating merchant, you would be required to report your cryptocurrency income on Form 1040 in addition to filing form IRS 8949 for your capital gain or loss when disposing of the crypto to buy the sandwich.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

PROPOSED REPORTING REQUIREMENT CONCERNING CRYPTOCURRENCIES

It is proposed that a comprehensive financial account reporting regime is introduced to improve tax compliance. Financial institutions would report data on financial accounts in an information return. The proposal specifically refers to crypto asset reporting, and states the following –

‘Separately, reporting requirements would apply in cases in which taxpayers buy crypto asset from one broker and then transfer the crypto assets to another broker, and businesses that receive crypto assets in transactions with a fair market value of more than $10,000 would have to report such transactions.’

The proposal would be effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2022.

In addition, it is proposed to expand broker information reporting with respect to crypto assets.

The proposal is to expand the scope of information reporting by brokers who report on crypto assets to also include reporting on certain beneficial owners of entities holding accounts with the broker.

Brokers, including entities such as US crypto asset exchanges and hosted wallet providers, would be required to report information relating to certain passive entities and their substantial foreign owners when reporting with respect to crypto assets held by those entities in an account with the broker. Should the proposal be adopted, which seems highly likely, a broker would be required to report gross proceeds and such other information as the Secretary may require with respect to sales of crypto assets with respect to customers, and in the case of certain passive entities, their substantial foreign owners.

The proposal would be effective for returns required to be filed after December 31, 2022.

WHAT ARE MY OPTIONS FOR NON-COMPLIANCE?

First and foremost, the non-compliant taxpayer must fully analyze all of his civil and criminal risks due to not reporting cryptocurrencies. It recommended to not attempt this alone and make sure you seek professional help in relation to this.

If there is no criminal exposure, the taxpayer could consider filing a qualified amended return (QAR). The added benefit of filing a QAR, is that it assists taxpayers to avoid accuracy related penalties.

If a taxpayer is disqualified from filing a QAR, he or she should consider the remediation options made available by the IRS.

The remediation options include the following programs with the IRS –

streamlined procedures – including the streamlined domestic offshore procedures (SDOP) and streamlined foreign offshore procedures (SFOP); and
the Updated Voluntary Disclosure Program (UVDP).

You will be ineligible for any of the remediation programs if:

You are already under examination or investigation by the IRS or a law enforcement agency; or
You have been notified by the IRS of its intent to examine or investigate.

It is extremely important to note that the success of remediation will depend on whether the noncompliance was willful or non-willful.

THE OSTRICH EFFECT  

In behavioral economics, the Ostrich Effect refers to the tendency to avoid negative financial information.

The ostrich’s method for solving financial problems is to ignore them for as long as possible, and then to respond in utter panic and agonizing stress when they are finally forced to act. Not only does avoiding uncomfortable truth keep them from solving those problems: It compounds them.

Noncompliant taxpayers, have options available to remediate their historical noncompliance and we recommend utilizing these options rather sooner than later.

Our trusted advisors at Asena, have successfully advised and assisted numerous noncompliant taxpayers by remediating their cryptocurrency non-compliance.

So don’t stick your head in the sand with the hope that your problems will disappear. The reporting requirements are here to stay and will continue to be enforced for as long as cryptocurrencies are around.

At Asena Advisors we make sure that your specific needs are catered for and ensure that you make informed decisions based on the proposed tax changes, instead of decisions based on an article written regarding the changes.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

President Biden’s Green Book: Deductions for On & Offshoring Corporations

Sub Part F of the Green Book Budget

GENERAL BACKGROUND

Given the global pandemic and the economic stress experienced by governments due to the pandemic, I don’t think it came as a surprise when President Biden’s administration released their $ 6-trillion budget proposal (budget) for the fiscal year, including $ 3.6 trillion of tax increases over 10 years. 

The Treasury Department explains the tax-related aspects of the Budget in its accompanying ‘Green Book.’ 

In the background of many of the proposed international tax changes, the administration has indicated to the OECD negotiators its support of a worldwide minimum tax rate of 15%. The Budget includes a host of provisions affecting international structures that are intended to discourage moving U.S. jobs, intellectual property, and economic activity offshore, while narrowing tax deferral and increasing taxes on both offshore and onshore operations. Incentives to bring operations onshore and disincentives to move operations offshore would be expanded. Taxes would be increased across a broad array of economic activity, and incentives for investment in clean (renewable) energy would be expanded. 

For purposes of this article, we will discuss the proposed changes regarding allowable deductions with onshoring and offshoring corporations.

INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS THE GREEN BOOK?

The Green Book, offers new details on the various proposals included in the President’s ‘Made in America’ tax plan.

The significant international tax proposals include:

  • Increased tax rates and other changes to the regime for global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI);
  • Country-by-country limitations on foreign tax credits;
  • Repeal of the deduction for foreign-derived intangible income (FDII);
  • Replacement of the base erosion and anti-abuse tax (BEAT) with a newly proposed “SHIELD” (Stopping Harmful Inversions and Ending Low-tax Developments);
  • Expanded rules targeting inversions;
  • A new minimum tax on book income;
  • Limits on interest deductions for disproportionate borrowing in the US; and
  • Treatment of dispositions of ‘specified hybrid entities’ as stock sales for certain purposes.

Most of the proposals would be effective for tax years beginning after 31 December 2021, though several are proposed to be effective for transactions completed after the date of enactment. The proposal to repeal BEAT and introduce SHIELD would be effective for tax years beginning after 31 December 2022.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

PROPOSED CHANGES TO ONSHORING AND OFFSHORING CORPORATIONS

The Green Book isn’t all doom and gloom, and the Biden administration has provided certain tax incentives to try and stimulate the economy post the pandemic. Most notably is the incentive proposed for onshoring corporations which leads to job creation in the US.  

Currently, there are limited tax incentives for US employers to bring offshore jobs and investments into the US. In addition to this, the costs incurred by employers to offshore US jobs are generally deductible for US income tax purposes. 

The administration has therefore proposed a new general business credit equal to 10 percent of the eligible expenses paid or incurred in connection with onshoring a US trade or business. For purposes of this incentive, onshoring a US trade or business means reducing or eliminating a trade or business (or line of business) currently conducted outside the US and starting up, expanding, or otherwise moving the same trade or business to a location within the US, to the extent that this action results in an increase in US jobs. 

In addition, and contrary to the above incentive, it is proposed to reduce the tax benefits associated with US companies moving jobs outside of the US. It is proposed that expenses paid or incurred in connection with offshoring a US trade or business are disallowed as a deduction for federal income tax.  For this purpose, offshoring a US trade or business means reducing or eliminating a trade or business or line of business currently conducted inside the US and starting up, expanding, or otherwise moving the same trade or business to a location outside the US, to the extent that this action results in a loss of US. jobs. 

In determining the income of a US shareholder of a controlled foreign corporation (CFC) on its global minimum tax inclusion or Subpart F income, no deduction would be allowed in determining such amounts for any expenses paid or incurred in connection with moving a US trade or business outside the United States.

For purposes of the proposal, expenses paid or incurred in connection with onshoring or offshoring a US trade or business are limited solely to expenses associated with the relocation of the trade or business and do not include capital expenditures or costs for severance pay and other assistance to displaced workers. 

THERE ARE ALWAYS TWO SIDES TO EVERY STORY

Majority of the times, articles or opinion pieces only focusses on one side of the story. For instance, the new tax incentive for onshoring corporations. However, it’s always best to delve a bit deeper to see what the downside is. In this instance, it’s the disallowance of deductions for offshoring corporations. There are always two sides to every story.

It is best to have a three-prong approach when interpreting proposed tax changes and understanding is a three-edged sword. Your side, their side, and the truth in the middle. Get all the facts before you jump to conclusions with your international structure. 

At Asena Advisors we make sure that your specific needs are catered for and ensure that you make informed decisions based on the proposed tax changes, instead of decisions based on an article written regarding the changes. 

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Form 5472

What Is IRS Form 5472 Used For?

Historically, non-US parties have resisted making their records available to the IRS for tax purposes or have not maintained records sufficient to determine arm’s length transfer prices, due to no obligation for such a requirement in the internal revenue code. In response to this, Congress enacted the reporting requirements in its tax laws declaring that, each year, certain reporting corporations (the filer) must file IRS Form 5472, the Information Return of a 25% Foreign-Owned U.S. Corporation or a Foreign Corporation Engaged in a U.S. Trade or Business, and maintain certain records.

The purpose of IRS Form 5472 is therefore to prevent base erosion and non-US parties from evading US taxes. The IRS wants to monitor US businesses that have foreign ownership or foreign businesses that do significant business within the US, and this form is one method of enforcing the tax laws and preventing base erosion. The form is used to disclose information about certain reportable transactions that occur with a foreign or domestic related party (part iii).

How To File Form 5472?

Form 5472 instructions are quite complex and difficult to understand.

This is especially true for a foreign shareholder of a US Corporation/Disregarded Entity.

Being a foreign entity doing business in the US can result in overwhelming tax filing requirements. For instance, a foreign-owned LLC needs to get an Employer Identification Number (EIN) and in order to file Form 5472 and Form 1120, your LLC is required to have an Employer Identification Number.

If you have an ITIN (Individual Taxpayer Identification Number) you can get an Employer Identification Number for your LLC online.

Failure to comply with the filing requirements can result in severe penalties. We recommend not to try and complete this form alone as the realm of international taxation is extremely complex, rather make contact with one of our international tax specialists to guide you on the US tax side. As we have all heard on tv before – “Please don’t try this at home folks”

Who Files Form 5472?

To fully understand who needs to file IRS Form 5472, we first need to define certain terms. In summary, only reporting corporations need to file IRS Form 5472.

Reporting Corporation – A 25% foreign-owned U.S. corporation (including a foreign-owned U.S. disregarded entity (part v) (Foreign-Owned U.S DE)), or

A foreign corporation engaged in a trade or business within the United States.

Foreign-owned U.S. corporation – A corporation is 25% foreign-owned if it has at least one direct or indirect 25% foreign shareholder at any time during the US tax year.

Foreign Shareholder – A foreign person is a 25% foreign shareholder if that foreign person owns, directly or indirectly, at least 25% of either the total voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote, or the total value of all classes of stock of the corporation.

Foreign Person – Only foreign persons who meet the definition of the term “foreign person” are required to file the Form. The Internal Revenue Services stipulates that a foreign person includes:

    1. Individuals who are not U.S. citizens or residents of the United States;
    2. Individuals who are U.S. citizens or residents of a U.S. possession who is not otherwise a citizen or resident of the United States;
    3. Any partnership, association, company, or corporation that is not created or organized in the United States
    4. Any foreign estate or foreign trust described in section 7701(a)(31) of the internal revenue code; or
    5. Any foreign government (or agency or instrumentality thereof) to the extent that the foreign government is engaged in the conduct of a commercial activity as defined in section 892 of the internal revenue code.

The term “foreign person” does however not include any foreign person who consents to the filing of a joint income tax return.

A US corporation with 25% or more foreign ownership, or foreign corporations that do business or trade in the US are required to file the Form. All the related parties need to be reported in the form (part iii) and complete a separate form for each foreign owner. Additionally, if you are filing on behalf of a foreign-owned US company, you may also have to file Form 1120.

What Information Is Required?

Form 5472 should be used to provide information required under sections 6038A and 6038C when reportable transactions occur during the tax year of a reporting corporation with a foreign or domestic related party.

The reference to IRC 6038A is a specific section involving foreign ownership of certain U.S. and related business ownership. IRC 6038A stipulates the following:

“If, at any time during a taxable year, a corporation (hereinafter in this section referred to as the “reporting corporation”)—

(1) is a domestic corporation, and

(2) is 25-percent foreign-owned, such corporation shall furnish, at such time and in such manner as the Secretary shall by regulations prescribe, the information described in subsection

(b) and such corporation shall maintain (in the location, in the manner, and to the extent prescribed in regulations) such records as may be appropriate to determine the correct treatment of transactions with related parties as the Secretary shall by regulations prescribe (or shall cause another person to so maintain such records).”

IRC 6038C on the other hand refers specifically to foreign corporations engaged in US transactions.

“If a foreign corporation (hereinafter in this section referred to as the “reporting corporation”) is engaged in a trade or business within the United States at any time during a taxable year—

(1)such corporation shall furnish (at such time and in such manner as the Secretary shall by regulations prescribe) the information described in subsection (b), and

(2) such corporation shall maintain (at the location, in the manner, and to the extent prescribed in regulations) such records as may be appropriate to determine the liability of such corporation for tax under this title as the Secretary shall by regulations prescribe (or shall cause another person to so maintain such records).”

The form required the disclosure of the foreign shareholders’ name, address, country of citizenship, organization/incorporation, and the nature & amount of the reportable transaction with each foreign shareholder. An important note is that this form is not required where various foreign persons own 25% or more of the US company in aggregate, but rather where any one foreign person owns 25% or more of the US corporation.

How Long Does It Take To Prepare?

If you attempt to prepare this on your own, it could take hours or days and you run the risk of filling it in incorrectly.

Our trusted international tax advisors at Asena will be able to prepare this for you in a timely manner and without hassle, irrespective of the location of the foreign person/corporation or foreign trust.

Planning And Documentation

The rules in determining if you have a foreign related party are complex and you should carefully review your structure to ascertain your filing requirements for Form 5472.

With any complex international tax disclosure or filing requirements with the Internal Revenue Services, the best time to address the issues are at the time the transaction is being entered into and the tax compliance component should be part of the overall planning process.

Some examples of reportable transactions are:

  1. The exchange of money or property, including payments, rental income, sales transactions, remuneration, commission payments, capital contributions and capital reductions
  2. The use of US company property, such as real estate, by a foreign owner or related party; and
  3. Loans and/or interest payments between the corporation and a foreign owner

Before the transaction is entered into, the transfer pricing rationale and relationship between the parties should be well documented. Subsequent to the completion of the transaction, the terms of the related party transaction should be closely monitored, and you should ensure that proper records and documentation is maintained. Prevention is better than cure and ensuring that all your records are up to date and maintained will minimize the risk of an audit from the Internal Revenue Services or penalties.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Exceptions From Filing Form 5472

The IRS states that a reporting corporation is not required to file the Form if any of the following apply:

  1. The reporting corporation had no reportable transactions of the types listed in Parts IV and VI of the form.
  2. A U.S. person that controls the foreign related corporation files Form 5471 for the tax year to report information under section 6038. To qualify for this exception, the U.S. person must complete Schedule M of Form 5471showing all reportable transactions between the reporting corporation and the related party for the tax year. It’s further important to note that this reporting requirements exception does not apply to foreign-owned U.S. DE (disregarded entities).
  3. The related corporation qualifies as a foreign sales corporation for the tax year and files Form 1120-FSC. This exception also does not apply to foreign-owned U.S. disregarded entities.
  4. It is a foreign corporation that does not have a permanent establishment in the United States under an applicable income tax treaty and timely files Form 8833.
  5. It is a foreign corporation whose gross income is exempt from taxation under section 883 and it timely and fully complies with the reporting requirements of sections 883 and 887.
  6. Both the reporting corporation and the related party are not U.S. persons as defined in section 7701(a)(30) and the transactions will not generate in any tax year:
    1. Gross income from sources within the United States or income effectively connected, or treated as effectively connected, with the conduct of a trade or business within the United States; or
    2. Any expense, loss, or other deduction that is allocable or apportionable to such income.”

Penalties For Not Filing Form 5472

If you fail to file the Form when due and, in the manner, prescribed, a penalty of $ 25 000 will be assessed on any reporting corporation. This penalty also applies for the failure to maintain records as required by CFR § 1.6038A-3.

Each member of a group of corporations filing a consolidated information return is a separate reporting corporation subject to a separate $25,000 penalty and each member is jointly and severally liable. If the failure continues for more than 90 days after notification by the IRS, an additional penalty of $25,000 will apply. Hence why it’s advisable to make use of professionals to assist you.

This penalty applies with respect to each related party for which a failure occurs for each 30-day period (or part of a 30-day period) during which the failure continues after the 90-day period ends.”

Reasonable Cause For 5472 Penalty Abatement

If a person has reasonable cause for the late, incomplete or failure to file the Form, they may be able to avoid the fines and penalties associated with it. So, if you are late and need to file the Form, you could get your penalties abated (reduced) if there is ‘reasonable cause’. If your non U.S. LLC makes $ 20 million or less and has a limited presence in the US, the IRS is usually more flexible.

When Is It Due And Where Should It Be Filed?

Due to Form 5472 being sent to the IRS as a separate form with Form 1120, the Form 1120 due dates apply to both separate forms/tax forms. For LLCs that operate on the calendar year, Form 5472 and Form 1120 are due by the 15th of April each year. However, if the non U.S. LLC operates on a different fiscal year, please refer to Form 1120 instructions and refer to the “When to File” section.

A foreign-owned US Disregarded Entity is required to file a pro forma Form 1120 with Form 5472 attached by the due date, even though it has no income tax return requirement as a result of the final regulations under section 6038A. The only information required to be completed on Form 1120 is the name and address of the foreign-owned U.S. DE and items B and E on the first page. The foreign-owned U.S. DE has the same tax year used by its owner for U.S. tax filing requirements or, if none, the calendar year should be used. Foreign-owned U.S. DEs are required to use the special mailing address and should not use the mailing addresses provided in the instructions for Form 1120. These mailing addresses are –

Fax (300 DPI or higher) to 855-887-7737, or

Mail to:

Internal Revenue Service
1973 Rulon White Blvd
M/S 6112 Attn: PIN Unit
Ogden, Utah 84201

If you file your income tax return electronically, see the instructions for your income tax return for general information about electronic filing.

Extension Of 5472 Due Date

If you require more time to file Form 5472, you can request an extension by filing Form 7004 and this will extend the due date to file for 6 months. So until the 15th of October. This is however not an extension to pay any taxes owed. It is only an extension to file the paperwork. If your due date is the 15th of April, then Form 7004 must also be postmarked 15th of April.

 

Related Party Rules Under Form 5472

Reportable transactions only happen between related parties and, hence, where base erosion is prevalent. The related party rules are complex and generally means that certain persons (individuals or entities) may be attributed ownership (attribution) of a company that they do not directly own. Another term used for this is ‘constructive ownership’.

The IRS defines a related as:

“A related party is:

– Any direct or indirect 25% foreign shareholder of the reporting corporation

– Any person who is related (within the meaning of section 267(b) or 707(b)(1)) to the reporting corporation

– Any person who is related (within the meaning of section 267(b) or 707(b)(1)) to a 25% foreign shareholder of the reporting corporation, or

– Any other person who is related to the reporting corporation within the meaning of section 482 and the related regulations. “Related party” does not include any corporation filing a consolidated federal income tax return with the reporting corporation.”

Multiple Forms 5472 For Multiple Related Parties

If your LLC has reportable transactions with more than one related party (domestic related party or foreign related party), you will need to file a Form 5472 for each related party.

Direct And Indirect Ownership

Determining direct, indirect, and constructive ownership can be quite tricky.

A foreign person is a direct 25% foreign shareholder if it owns directly at least 25% of the stock of the reporting corporation by vote or value.

An ultimate indirect 25% foreign shareholder is a 25% foreign shareholder whose ownership of stock of the reporting corporation is not attributed (under the principles of sections 958(a)(1) and (2)) to any other 25% foreign shareholder.

An example of how indirect ownership could apply – non-US individual (A) owns 10% of US Corporation (B), however another US business (C) that A is related to own 15% of B, then A might be considered the owner of those 15% shares, which will in turn cause B to be 25% foreign-owned.

Reportable Transactions For Form 5472

The IRS specifies which specific transactions are reportable:

“A reportable transaction is:

– Any type of transaction listed in Part IV (for example, sales, rents, etc.) for which monetary consideration (including U.S. and foreign currency) was the sole consideration paid or received during the reporting corporation’s tax year; or

– Any transaction or group of transactions listed in Part IV, if:

– Any part of the consideration paid or received was non-monetary consideration, or

– Less than full consideration was paid or received. Transactions with a U.S. related party, however, are not required to be specifically identified in Part IV and VI.”

The IRS has tax treaties with over 60 countries. This means the governments of those countries agree to share information about their tax citizens in order to better collect tax revenue.

The requirement to file Form 5472 should not be taken lightly. The United States Treasury Department spends billions of dollars enforcing its laws on those that have filing requirements in the U.S.

What is the difference between Form 5471 and 5472?

The main difference is that Form 5471 is filed by a U.S. taxpayer, while Form 5472 is filed by any foreign company/non-US entity engaged in a U.S. trade or business activity or a U.S. company that is 25% foreign-owned.

For more information on Form 5472, please contact one of our specialists at Asena Advisors. We make sure that your specific needs are catered for.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Grantor Trust

What Is A Grantor Trust?

According to the IRS, a grantor trust is one in which the grantor, i.e. the settlor establishing the trust, retains control over trust’s income and assets. It’s usually used by families for estate planning purposes. 

What Is A Grantor?

Identifying The Grantor

The grantor of a trust is the person (settlor) who provides property or other funds to the trust that forms part of the trust corpus (assets).

Multiple Grantors

A trust can have more than one grantor. For instance, if more than one person funded the trust, they will each be treated as grantor in proportion to the value of the cash or property that they transferred to the trust. 

Foreign Grantors

If a foreign person is treated as the owner of the trust under the grantor trust rules, and the trust has a U.S. person as a beneficiary, the beneficiary will be treated as the grantor of the trust to the extent that the beneficiary made gifts (directly or indirectly) to the foreign person irrespective of gift tax applying. 

Powers Held By Grantor’s Spouse

In terms of the grantor rules, the grantor of a trust is treated as owning any powers or interests held by their spouse.

Who Is The Grantor Of A Trust?

The trust grantor will usually be regarded by the IRS as the person who funds the trust.

Grantor Vs Grantee

A grantor differs from a grantee. While the grantor is the person who owns the trust and transfers assets to the trust, the grantee is the person who receives the assets. 

Grantor Vs Trustee

Trustees are individuals or companies that hold and manage the assets for the benefit of a trust and its beneficiaries (while a grantor is the owner).

Examples Of A Grantor Trust

A common example is a revocable living trust

Who Needs A Grantor Trust?

There is no one-shoe-fits-all answer to who needs a grantor trust. It will depend on your financial situation and estate planning needs, as they are generally used for asset protection purposes. It is best to talk with the trusted advisors at Asena to guide you on your specific needs and how the IRS reporting requirements work. 

How A Grantor Trust Works

For federal income tax purposes, a grantor trust is considered a disregarded entity by the IRS. Any taxable income or deduction earned by the trust, will be included in the grantor’s income tax return. The IRS allows a grantor trust to use the grantor’s Social Security Number (SSN) instead of having a separate Tax Income Number (TIN).

Pros And Cons Of Grantor Trusts

The primary advantage for estate planning is the potential to preserve wealth and minimize taxes for your heirs.

One of the major concerns however is that the assumption is you have the financial resources to pay income tax obligations on trust assets during your lifetime.

Types Of Grantor Trusts

Revocable Living Trust

In a revocable living trust you name yourself or someone else as trustee. You then transfer the assets to the trustee’s ownership to manage. Due to the trust being a revocable living trust, you can change the terms at any time or terminate the trust altogether. 

Retained Interest Trusts

This is a trust where a grantor makes an irrevocable transfer of assets but reserves the right to receive income or enjoyment of those assets for a period of time. When the trust then subsequently terminates, the assets are passed on to others. 

Grantor Retained Annuity Trust (GRAT)

This is a type of irrevocable trust that allows you to draw income from the assets you transferred to the trust. You will receive annuity payments from the trust for a set number of years. Once the annuitization period ends, any remaining assets in the trust would be passed on to the beneficiaries. 

Qualified Personal Residence Trust (QPRT)

This trust allows you to transfer ownership of your primary home or secondary home to it and exclude that value from your taxable income.

Intentionally Defective Grantor Trust (IDGT)

Intentionally defective grantor trusts (IDGT) are another type of irrevocable trust. It treats you as the owner of the assets transferred to the trust for income tax purposes, but not for estate tax purposes. Intentionally defective grantor trusts (IDGT) are useful in helping to reduce your estate and gift tax liabilities. 

What Are Grantor Trust Rules?

These rules are guidelines in the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), which outlines certain tax implications of a grantor trust. In terms of these rules, the individual who creates a trust that is a grantor is regarded as the owner of the assets transferred to the trust for income and estate tax purposes. 

With this type of structure, the income from the trust is taxed to the grantor, not the trust itself. The IRS grantor trust rules stipulate that all revocable trusts are grantor trusts

Benefits Of Grantor Trust Rules

Trust Income

The income generated by the trust is included in the grantor’s income tax return rather than to the trust. This provides individuals with a certain degree of tax protection as individual tax rates are generally more favorable than trust tax rates. 

Beneficiaries

Grantors have the discretion to change the beneficiaries of the trust.

Revocable

As long as a grantor is deemed mentally competent, they can change or terminate the trust if needed. 

Changing The Trust

The grantor is also free to relinquish control of the trust and make it an irrevocable trust.

Asena Advisors is the only multi-disciplinary (Accounting and Legal) international CPA firm in the United States that specializes in U.S. -Australia taxation.

How Grantor Trust Rules Apply To Different Trusts?

The rules outline certain conditions when an irrevocable trust can receive some of the same treatment as a revocable trust for federal income tax purposes. These situations sometimes lead to the creation of IDGTs (intentionally defective grantor trusts) as discussed earlier and the income generated by the trust assets is taxable to the grantor but excluded from the grantor’s estate. 

Examples Of Grantor Trust Rules

Two examples of where grantor status can be triggered, include, where:

  1. the grantor (or the grantor’s spouse) has the power to vest the title to the trust assets in the grantor, including, any power ‘to revoke, to terminate, to alter or amend, or to appoint’; or
  2. the grantor has the power to control trust distributions by paying principal to the grantor instead of to the beneficiaries.

Powers That Make A Trust A Grantor Trust

The power to:

  1. add or change the beneficiary of a trust;
  2. borrow from the trust without adequate security;
  3. use the income from the trust to pay life insurance premiums
  4. make changes to the trust’s composition by substituting assets of equal value

Grantor Trusts Vs. Other Irrevocable Trusts

Grantor Trusts

Irrevocable Trusts

Grantor can reclaim assets from the trust Grantor gives up assets i.e. separation of ownership
Grantor manages trust assets or dictates trustee how to manage assets A 3rd party must act as a trustee
Income is taxed on the grantor’s personal return Trust files its own return and pays taxes. 
Trust assets are included for estate tax purposes.  Trust assets are not subject to estate tax

When An Irrevocable Trust Can Be A Grantor Trust

The Grantor Maintains A Reversionary Interest

If the grantor as stipulated in IRC § 673(a) holds a ‘reversionary interest’ in a trust which is greater than 5% of the trust principal or income. 

The Grantor Has The Power To Control Beneficial Enjoyment

If the grantor in terms of IRC § 674 can control the ‘beneficial enjoyment’ of trust income or assets.

The Grantor Maintains Administrative Control

In terms of IRC § 675, if the grantor maintains administrative control over the trust that can be exercised for his own benefit.

The Grantor Maintains Revocation Powers

In terms of IRC § 676, the trust allows the grantor to revoke any part of the trust and then reclaim or take back the trust’s assets. 

The Trust Distributes Income To The Grantor

If the trust distributes income to the grantor, the trust may in terms of IRC § 677(a) be regarded as a grantor trust.

What’s The Difference Between A Grantor And Non-Grantor Trust?

Grantor Trust – As discussed above, this is any trust in which the grantor is treated as owner of any portion of the trust. This is determined by a list of powers. A grantor only needs one of these powers for the trust to be regarded as a grantor trust. 

Non-Grantor Trust – A non-grantor trust is any trust that is not a grantor trust and is required to have its own TIN due to it being a separate tax entity. 

Non-grantor trusts pay taxes on income received, which is typically higher than individual rates.

What Happens To A Grantor Trust When The Grantor Dies?

The grantor status of the trust terminates with the death of the grantor. The trust deed must be reviewed to determine what happens to the trust property after the death of the grantor. 

Provisions Triggering Grantor Trust Status

Grantor Trust Powers Generally (IRC §671)

671 lays out the basic foundation on which the more specific grantor rules are premised. IRC §671 sets forth the general principle that if the grantor (or another person) is treated as the owner of any part of a trust, then the grantor (or such other person) must include the trust’s income, deductions and credits in calculating is or her own personal taxable income.

Definitions And Rules (IRC §672)

To understand how the rules are applied, it is necessary to understand the meaning of certain terms and rules that are defined in IRC §672. Such as – “Adverse Party.”, “Non-adverse Party.”, and “Related or Subordinate Party.” 

Reversionary Interests (IRC §673)

Under IRC §673(a), a grantor is treated as the owner of trust assets if:

  1. The grantor (or the grantor’s spouse) retains a reversionary interest in those assets; and if
  2. The value of the reversionary interest exceeds five percent (5%) of the value of those assets over which the reversionary interest is held.

Power To Control Beneficial Enjoyment (IRC §674)

IRC §674(a) sets forth the general rule that a grantor is treated as the owner of a trust and taxed on its income if the grantor or a non-adverse party (or both) have the power to affect the beneficial enjoyment of the trust corpus or income without the approval or consent of an adverse party.

Administrative Powers (IRC §675)

The grantor is treated as the owner of a trust if he possesses certain administrative powers which are exercisable for his benefit rather than the beneficiaries

Power To Revoke (IRC §676)

The grantor will be treated as the owner of any part of a trust in which the grantor (or a non-adverse) party has the power to revest title to trust assets in the grantor. 

Income For The Benefit Of The Grantor (IRC §677)

The grantor will be treated as the owner of any portion of a trust if the income from the trust is or may, in the discretion of the grantor (or a non-adverse party) be:

  1. Distributed to the grantor or the grantor’s spouse;
  2. Accumulated for future distribution to the grantor or the grantor’s spouse; or
  3. Applied to the payment of insurance policies on the life of the grantor or the grantor’s spouse.

Persons Other Than The Grantor Treated As Owner (IRC §678)

Under IRC §678, a person other than the grantor of a trust (such as, for example, a trust beneficiary) will be treated as owning the trust assets if that person holds one or more of the following powers:

The right to unilaterally withdraw the trust corpus or income;

Retention of a grantor trust-type power (under IRC §§673-677) over trust assets after having released a power to withdraw trust corpus or income; or

The actual use of trust income to discharge the holder’s legal support obligation.

Drafting Tips

Obtaining Stepped-Up Tax Basis

If a grantor wants their estate planning to have a trust asset’s tax basis ‘stepped-up’ at their death, it will be necessary to trigger grantor status in a way that causes the asset to be treated as part of the grantor’s estate. This will ensure that the asset’s tax basis will be stepped up at the grantor’s death. A way to achieve this is for the grantor to retain a power of revocation over the trust assets or retain an ongoing right to trust income. 

Preserving The Home Sale Exemption 

If a trust is created for the purpose of protecting the grantor’s home from long-term care creditors, it will be advantageous to structure the trust as a grantor trust in order to preserve the grantor’s exemption from a gain on the sale of a personal residence. Any grantor trust power should suffice when including this into your estate planning. 

Avoiding Estate Tax Inclusion

In order to avoid estate tax inclusion, grantors will most likely want to utilize grantor trust powers that causes the trust to be disregarded for income tax purposes, but will also not cause the assets to be included in the grantor’s gross estates for federal tax purposes. 

So, for example, the grantor might be inclined to incorporate into the trust deed, a power on the part of a non-adverse party (other than the grantor) to borrow against corpus or income without adequate interest or without adequate security.

Avoiding Realty Transfer Tax

An issue that will frequently arise when real estate is used to fund a trust is the issue of realty transfer tax. It makes sense to authorize the trustee to distribute the trust assets to persons other than the grantor and those persons are persons who could be counted to provide for the grantor’s needs if required. However, the drafting of such a trust deed necessitates a working knowledge of the applicable Realty Transfer Tax laws applicable to different states. 

Tax Reporting

Income Tax Reporting Methods

There are basically three reporting methods available: 

Traditional Reporting Method

Alternate Reporting Method #1

Alternate Reporting Method #2

Filing Deadline (Under The Traditional Method)

The fiduciary tax return for the trust (under the traditional reporting method) is due by the 15th of April following the end of the trust’s tax year.

Tax Reporting In Year Of Grantor’s Death

The trust continues to report in the same manner as before the grantor died. Under the traditional method of tax reporting, the trustee is required to file a fiduciary tax return for the trust tax year that ends with the decedent’s date of death. The filing deadline for the fiduciary return would be the fifteenth day of the fourth month that began with the first day of the decedent’s taxable year.

Tax Years After The Year Of Grantor’s Death

For tax years beginning after the year of the grantor’s death, the trust is no longer a grantor trust. The trust must therefore obtain an entirely new Employment Identification Number (EIN). The trustee must report the trust’s income, deduction and credits on a fiduciary return under the rules normally applicable to a trust under Subchapter J of the Internal Revenue Code, 

Quick Q & A:

What is the purpose of a grantor trust?

The are various reason for setting up a grantor trust, but the following reasons are common: 

Asset protection and wealth preservation;

Credit protection;

Avoiding probate;

Reduce or eliminate estate taxes; and 

To gain some tax benefits or tax deferral benefits.

Who pays tax on grantor trust?

If a trust is a grantor trust, then the grantor is treated as the owner of the assets, the trust is disregarded as a separate tax entity, and all income is taxed to the grantor

Is a family trust a grantor trust?

Not automatically. Only if it falls within the grantor trust rules. 

What makes an irrevocable trust a grantor trust?

An irrevocable trust can become a grantor trust if the trust meets any one of the requirements as set out in IRC § 673-679. 

For more information on Grantor Trusts, please contact one of our specialists at Asena Advisors. We make sure that your specific needs are catered for.
Check out our vlog series on Grantor Trusts on our YouTube Page.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Form 5471

WHAT IS FORM 5471?

IRS Form 5471 is an information return (as opposed to a tax return) for certain U.S. taxpayers with an interest in certain foreign companies or corporations. Form 5471 is officially called the Information Return of U.S. Persons with Respect to Certain Foreign Corporations

WHAT IS A CONTROLLED FOREIGN CORPORATION (CFC)?

Where U.S. shareholders hold more than 50% stock ownership in a foreign entity, that foreign entity will be regarded as a controlled foreign corporation (CFC) for U.S. Federal Income Tax purposes. The income of a CFC is referred to as subpart F income and subpart F income is dealt with separately by the IRS in terms of taxation. 

The IRS defines a foreign corporation as being U.S. controlled if:

“more than 50% of the total combined voting power of all classes of stock of such corporation entitled to vote, or more than 50% of the value of all its outstanding stock, is owned (directly, indirectly, or constructively) by U.S. shareholders on any day during the foreign corporation’s tax year.”

If the above definition applies to you, you might also be liable for the Global Intangible Low-taxed Income (GILTI). 

HOW DO I DETERMINE MY COMPANY STRUCTURE?

If you followed our series on Entity Classifications, this should be quite easy for you. However, those who have not had a chance to look at it might find it a bit more complex. The most important thing to remember is that the classification or foreign tax implications of your entity in the foreign country will not automatically be the same classification for U.S. Federal Income Tax purposes. Should your entity not be classified as a corporation in the foreign country, it might still be classified as a corporation for U.S. Federal Income Tax purposes.

For purposes of Form 5471, the IRS classifies international business companies and foreign liability companies (LLCs) as corporations. 

In terms of the Check the Box (CTB) regulations, certain foreign companies, however, have the ability to elect its status as a “disregarded entity” by filing Form 8832 within 75 days of the company’s creation to avoid the Form 5471 reporting requirements. 

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FORM 5471 AND FORM 5472?

The main difference is that Form 5471 is filed by a U.S. taxpayer, while Form 5472 is filed by any foreign company engaged in a U.S. trade or business or a U.S. corporation that is 25% foreign owned. 

FORM 5471 FILING

WHO FILES FORM 5471?

U.S. citizens, corporations, partnership, trusts, or estates who have at least 10% ownership in a foreign company should file form 5471. Generally, all U.S. persons or U.S. taxpayers described on pages 3-5 on the instructions for Form 5471 must complete the schedules, statements, and/or other information requested in the Form. 

There are five (5) different categories, and some categories can be further broken down into subcategories. I have summarized the categories below and recommend that you should still refer to the instructions for Form 5471 for the detailed instructions. 

CATEGORY 1 (U.S. SHAREHOLDERS)

This is usually regarded as the most common category. It primarily relates to shareholders of foreign corporations who meet the 10% threshold requirement, however, also extends to other specific situations. 

CATEGORY 2 (OFFICER OR DIRECTOR WITH AN INVESTOR WHO IS A U.S. PERSON)

Also, relatively common, and primarily relates to shareholders of foreign corporations who are directors or officers and in which a U.S. person has an interest or stake in. 

CATEGORY 3 (ACQUISITION OF ADDITIONAL STOCK)

This category includes:

    1. A U.S. person who acquires stock in a foreign corporation and when added together with other stock meets the 10% threshold, or without regard to acquisition of additional stock already owns 10%. 
    2. A person treated as a U.S. shareholder in terms of section 953(c). 
    3. A person who becomes a U.S. person while meeting the 10% threshold. Or
    4. A U.S. person who disposes of stock in the foreign corporation to reduce the threshold to below 10%. 
CATEGORY 4 (CONTROL TEST)

This includes a U.S. person who had control of a foreign corporation during the annual accounting period of the foreign corporation. 

A U.S. person has control if at any time during the tax year, it owns stock that is – 

    1. More than 50% of the total combined voting power of all classes of stock of the foreign company entitled to vote, or
    2. More than 50% of the total value of shares of all classes of stock of the foreign company.
CATEGORY 5 – (CFC)

This includes a U.S. shareholder who owns stock in a foreign company that is a CFC at any time during any tax year of the foreign company and who owned that stock on the last day in that year on which it was a CFC. 

FORM 5471 FILING REQUIREMENTS

As we briefly outlined above, there are five major categories of U.S. persons that are required to file Form 5471. The Form has multiple schedules or parts; which of those the filers must complete depends on which category is applicable. If the filers are in more than one category, they must complete each schedule or part for the categories. 

At page 5 of the instructions to form 5471 is a table with a summary of the reporting requirements depending on which category filer you are. 

FORM 5471 FILING INSTRUCTIONS

The IRS has made the filing instructions for Form 5471 unnecessarily complex, especially in trying to determine the different categories of filers and who needs to file what schedules. The filing instructions for Form 5471 can therefore be quite intimidating for a taxpayer. It is recommended to have a tax professional with experience in Form 5471 assist you with this and your tax return. 

WHERE SHOULD IT BE FILED?

Form 5471 should be filed as an attachment to the taxpayer’s federal income tax return, partnership or exempt organization return, and filed by the due date (including extensions) for that return.

WHAT INFORMATION IS REQUIRED?

You should supply the IRS with the corporation’s income statement, balance sheet, and data on its loans, operations and other shareholders. 

The form also requires information on dividends and managerial payments made to shareholders, officers and directors. The financial information must be presented using U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP) which generally differ from those used to produce foreign financial statements. Hence why it is recommended to have a tax professional assist you with the process to ensure that the income statement, balance sheet etc. is processed in the required manner. 

HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO PREPARE?

The IRS estimate of the average time to prepare this form is about 38 hours, exclusive of record keeping time and the time required to learn about the relevant law and the instructions. The learning time could be much longer for someone who is not familiar with the pertinent sections of the tax law. However, for an operating business with extensive transactions, it could take much longer and for a CFC that is owned by one person and used as an investment entity, it could take as few as five hours by someone familiar with the form. It might only take an hour or two to prepare the form for a dormant foreign corporation.

FORM 5471 SCHEDULES TO KNOW

Within Form 5471 there are various schedules you may or may not need to fill out. They are:

  1. Form 5471 Schedule A – Stock of the Foreign Corporation
  2. Form 5471 Schedule B – U.S. Shareholders of Foreign Corporations (for example are they U.S. citizens etc.)
  3. Form 5471 Schedule C – Income Statement
  4. Form 5471 Schedule E – Income, War Profits, and Excess Profits Taxes Paid or Accrued
  5. Form 5471 Schedule F – Balance Sheet
  6. Form 5471 Schedule G – Other information
  7. Form 5471 Schedule H – Current earnings and profits
  8. Form 5471 Schedule I – Summary of Shareholder’s Income from Foreign Corporation
  9. Form 5471 Schedule J – Accumulated earnings and profits of Controlled Foreign Corporations
  10. Form 5471 Schedule M – Transactions between controlled foreign corporation and shareholders or other related persons
  11. Form 5471 Schedule O – Organization or reorganization of foreign corporation, and acquisitions and dispositions of its stock (Part I to be completed by U.S. officers and directors, Part II to be completed by U.S. shareholders)

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

WHEN IS IT DUE?

Form 5471 is due with the income tax return of the affected shareholder for the current year. For most corporations, that would be March 15th or the extended due date for the current year. For most individuals, that would be April 15th or the extended due date for the current year.

WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU DON’T FILE FORM 5471 OR FILE IT LATE?

The penalties for failing to file this form with your income tax return are severe, even though no tax may be due. There is a penalty of $10,000 for each year for failing to file the form as an attachment to your income tax return. The penalties may be waived by the IRS on a showing of reasonable cause for failing to file the form. If the taxpayer is notified by the IRS of a duty to file, the penalty is $10,000 per month up to a maximum of $50,000. There are additional penalties that are described in the instructions to the form.

HOW TO GET COMPLIANT?

Depending on the circumstances, your best options are either the Traditional IRS Voluntary Disclosure Program, or one of the Streamlined Offshore Disclosure Programs. For taxpayers who are looking to get compliant, please contact Asena Advisors to discuss the remediation options available to you.

SHOULD A U.S. CORPORATION WITH NET OPERATING LOSSES STILL BE CONCERNED?

Many U.S. companies have accumulated significant Net Operating Losses (NOLs) due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Companies need to be aware that significant NOLs will not protect them from potential problems with the IRS. This is mainly due to Form 5471 being an information return and not a tax return. The failure to file Form 5471 results in a penalty and not a tax. 

WILL FORM 5471 IMPACT MY U.S. TAX LIABILITY?

Form 5471 could potentially impact your U.S. tax liability. The most common situation is U.S. shareholders of foreign corporations being taxed on their dividends in the year of receipt and deferring any unpaid earnings and profits until they are distributed or until the company is liquidated. 

As we know, the IRS has many complex tax laws in place to prevent taxpayers from setting up an offshore company simply to avoid U.S. tax. It is therefore extremely important to consider the type of income that the foreign company receives as well as its source. Several types of income are labelled by the IRS as subpart F income. Subpart F income will likely end up as taxable income to the U.S. owners, irrespective of whether it was distributed as dividend or not. 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON FORM 5471:

What is Form 5471 used for?

Form 5471 is used by certain U.S. persons who are officers, directors, or shareholders in certain foreign corporations. The form and schedules are used to satisfy the filing requirements of sections 6038 and 6046, and the related regulations, as well as to report amounts related to section 965.

Do I need to file 5471 every year?

The Category of Filer(s) will determine the Form 5471 filing requirements’ frequency and timing. For example, a Category 5 Filer must file IRS Form 5471 every year.

Does TurboTax have Form 5471?

No. Most tax programs do not include IRS Form 5471. This is mainly due to the limited applicability of the IRS Form 5471 Information Return of U.S. Persons to taxpayers. 

When did Form 5471 start?

Many of the changes related to international reporting, as well as an increase in the IRS’s ability to obtain information relating to foreign activities, stem from the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA) and the Tax Haven Report of 1982. 

The IRS implemented the recommendations of the Tax Haven Report of 1982 with the introduction of the 5471 FormInformation Return With Respect to a Foreign Corporation, in March of 1983 (the title of the form was changed to Information Return of U.S. Persons With Respect to Certain Foreign Corporation in 2018). 

 

For more information on Form 5471, please contact one of our specialists at Asena Advisors. We make sure that your specific needs are catered for.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Net Investment Income Tax (NIIT)

GENERAL BACKGROUND

Last week, we wrapped up our series on Entity Classification. If you have not read it yet, or would like to know more, feel free to go to our website. 

This week, we will focus on an overlooked (and when not overlooked, misunderstood) part of US Federal Income Tax namely, the Net Investment Income Tax (NIIT) and how the IRS could apply it to you. Other common terms used for this federal tax which might be more familiar to you are: NIIT Tax or Investment Income Tax. 

The purpose of this article is to explain in a simplified manner the complex topic of Net Investment Income Tax to the reader. 

WHAT IS NET INVESTMENT INCOME (NII)?

In summary, NII is income derived from investment assets (before any applicable taxes are applied) such as bonds, stocks, mutual funds, annuities, loans, and other investments (less properly allocable expenses). 

WHAT IS THE NET INVESTMENT INCOME TAX (NIIT)?

NIIT is a surtax imposed on certain unearned income. The tax equals 3.8% of the lesser of the taxpayer’s NIIT, or the excess of the taxpayer’s modified gross income (MAGI) over a threshold. 

It applies to estates, trusts, families and individuals, however certain income thresholds need to be met before the tax takes effect. 

HOW THE NET INVESTMENT INCOME TAX DEVELOPED

The main purpose for including NIIT as part of that legislation was to raise revenue. The official name of the NIIT is actually “Unearned Income Medicare Contribution Tax” which logically would imply that it is used to fund Medicare which is not the case.  

HOW NET INVESTMENT INCOME TAX WORKS

In the case of an individual, section 1411(a)(1) imposes a tax (in addition to any other tax imposed by subtitle A) for each taxable year equal to a tax rate of 3.8% of the lesser of the individual’s NII for that tax year, or the excess (if any) of the individual’s MAGI for that tax year, over the threshold amount. 

Section 1411(b) provides that the threshold amounts for individuals’ filing status are as follows – 

– in the case of an individual making a joint return or a surviving spouse $250,000 (married filing); 

– in the case of a married taxpayer filing a separate return (not married filing), $125,000; and 

– in the case of any other individual, $200,000 including head of household. (In order to qualify as a head of household certain criteria needs to be met by the taxpayer).

In the case of a trust or an estate, section 1411(a)(2) imposes a tax (in addition to any other tax imposed by subtitle A) for each taxable year equal a tax rate of 3.8% of the lesser of the trust’s or estate’s undistributed net investment income, or the excess (if any) of the trust’s or estate’s adjusted gross income (AGI) for such taxable year, over the dollar amount at which the highest tax bracket in section 1(e) begins for such taxable year. 

WHEN DID THE NET INVESTMENT INCOME TAX TAKE EFFECT?

In the 2012 tax year, Congress passed a Medicare surtax on investment income at a tax rate of 3.8% as part of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 to help pay for the Affordable Care Act. This surtax was effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2012.

WHAT COUNTS AS NET INVESTMENT INCOME?

It is important to understand what types of investment income is included in NII and what type of investment income is excluded.  

Net Investment Income Includes:  It Doesn’t Include:
Short and long-term Capital gains. 

Taxable interest.

Rental and royalty income.

Qualified and nonqualified dividends.

Passive income from investments which are not actively participated in. 

Business income from trading financial instruments or commodities.

Taxable portion of nonqualified annuity payments.  (for example Roth IRAs)

Wages.

Veterans’ or Social Security benefits.

Qualified retirement plan withdrawals.

Unemployment payments.

Pay-outs from a deferred compensation plan from a state, local government or tax-exempt organization. 

Pay-outs from a traditional defined benefit pension plan or retirement annuity.

Proceeds from life insurance

Income from a business which is actively participated in.

Tax-exempt interest from municipal bonds or funds.

Tax-exempt income/capital gains from the sale of your primary residence. 

HOW TO PAY THE NET INVESTMENT INCOME TAX

If you are subject to NIIT, you will need to file IRS Form 8960 with your tax return. The form has detailed instructions to assist you with determining your NIIT liability and will depend on your filing status. (i.e., head of household, married filing etc.). The form is used for individuals, trusts and estates when submitting tax returns. 

WHERE DOES THE TAX REVENUE GO?

The amounts collected under the NIIT are not designated for the Medicare Trust Fund. The revenues raised by this tax goes into the nation’s general fund.

WHAT INDIVIDUALS ARE SUBJECT TO THE NET INVESTMENT INCOME TAX?

All individuals who file tax returns, except Non-resident Aliens (NRAs), are subject to NIIT if they have NII and MAGI over the above-mentioned taxable income thresholds. 

WHAT ESTATES AND TRUSTS ARE SUBJECT TO THE NET INVESTMENT INCOME TAX?

Trusts and Estates that have Undistributed Net Investment Income and an AGI more than the highest tax bracket applicable will be subject to the NIIT. 

Special computational rules apply for certain unique types of trusts set up for a small business, such as an electing small business trust (ESBT) which can be found in the final regulations

HOW TO CALCULATE THE NIIT?

Earlier we stated that the NIIT liability is based on the lesser of your NII or the amount by which your MAGI surpass the filing status-based thresholds imposed by the IRS. 

Calculating MAGI: For purposes of NII, MAGI is a household’s AGI, with certain deductions and tax-exempt interest payments such as contributions from individual retirement accounts (IRAs) included again. The relevant deductions for purposes of adjusted gross income are listed on Schedules 1, 2, and 3 to Form 1040. If your MAGI is higher than the thresholds for your filing status, you will need to pay NIIT. 

Calculating Net Investment Income: The next step is to calculate your NII based on the included income stated above. Before you can calculate your NII, you first need to ascertain what your gross investment income is. This is the amount prior to considering any eligible deductions. 

Once you arrive at the gross investment income, it will be reduced by deductions allowed against the income tax which are properly allocable to those items of gross income or net gain to arrive at the NII. 

Calculating Net Investment Income Tax: 

The amount that will be subject to NIIT at a rate of 3.8% will therefore vary as follows – 

If your NII is higher than the amount by which MAGI surpasses the threshold, the tax applies to your MAGI.

If your NII is lower than the amount by which MAGI surpasses the threshold, the tax applies to your NII.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

STRATEGIES TO AVOID OR REDUCE THE NET INVESTMENT INCOME TAX

There are various strategies and planning opportunities to either reduce your NII or reduce your MAGI which will result in reduced taxable income. No blanket strategy or planning tool exists and due to the complex nature of the NIIT, it is advisable to consult professionals such as your tax advisor or CPA on possible mitigation. The IRS will not be lenient if these regulations are willfully avoided, hence why it is important to get advice from a CPA or relevant professional.  

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON THE NIIT

1. What Is Modified Adjusted Gross Income For Purposes Of The Net Investment Income Tax?

Answer: In simple terms, MAGI = Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) + certain adjusted foreign earned income exclusions. 

2. What Is Included In Net Investment Income?

Answer: In general, investment income includes, but is not limited to: 

– interest, 

– dividends, 

– capital gains, 

– rental and royalty income, 

– non-qualified annuities, 

– income from businesses involved in trading of financial instruments or commodities and businesses that are passive activities.

To calculate your NII, your investment income is reduced by certain expenses properly allocable to the income. 

3. What Are Some Common Types Of Income That Are Not Net Investment Income?

Answer: In general, NII does not include the following: 

– wages, 

– unemployment compensation; 

– operating business income from a non-passive activity, 

– Social Security Benefits,

– alimony, 

– tax-exempt interest, 

– self-employment income, 

– Alaska Permanent Fund Dividends and 

– distributions from certain Qualified Plans (those described in sections 401(a), 403(a), 403(b), 408, 408A or 457(b)) such as qualified annuities.

4. What Kinds Of Gains Are Included In Net Investment Income?

Answer: In general, the following capital gains are common examples of items taken into account in computing NII.

– gains from the sale of stocks, bonds, and mutual funds.

– capital gains distributions from mutual funds.

– gain from the sale of investment real estate (including gain from the sale of a second home that is not a primary residence).

– gains from the sale of interests in partnerships and S corporations (to the extent the partner or shareholder was a passive owner). 

5. Does This Tax Apply To Gain On The Sale Of A Personal Residence?

Answer: Section 121 exempts the first $250,000 ($500,000 in the case of a married couple) of gain recognized on the sale of a principal residence from gross income for regular income tax purposes and, thus, from the NIIT.

6. Does Net Investment Income Include Interest, Dividends And Capital Gains Of My Children That I Report On My Form 1040 Using Form 8814?

Answer: Yes. The calculation, however, does exclude certain amounts.  

7. What Investment Expenses Are Deductible In Computing NII?

Answer: Some examples of deductions which may be properly allocable to gross investment income include the following – 

– brokerage fees;

– investment advisory fees;

– tax preparation fees;

– fiduciary expenses which will only apply to estates and trusts; 

– interest expenses;

– investment advisory fees;

– expenses incurred in relation to royalty and rental income; and

– state and local income taxes. 

If the deductions aren’t properly allocable to gross investment income, it will not be allowed as a deduction. For instance, brokerage fees that are not properly allocable will not be allowed as a deduction. The instructions to Form 8960 provides examples of deductions that are not deductible for NII purposes. For example, deductions for contributions to IRAs or other qualified plans. 

Special rules apply for traders in financial instruments and commodities regarding the deduction of expenses in relation to self-employment income. 

8. Will I Have To Pay Both The 3.8% Net Investment Income Tax And The Additional .9% Medicare Tax?

Answer: You may be subject to both taxes, but not on the same type of income. These two taxes apply to different types of income. 

9. If I Am Subject To The Net Investment Income Tax, How Will I Report And Pay The Tax?

Answer: For individual taxpayers, the NIIT will be reported on and paid with Form 1040  and for estate and trust taxpayers with Form 1041  All taxpayers will however use Form 8960 to compute their NIIT.

10. Is The Net Investment Income Tax Subject To The Estimated Tax Provisions?

Answer: Yes. It is also subject to estimated tax provisions. Taxpayers that expect to be subject to NIIT should ensure that their income tax withholding or estimated payments are adjusted to account for this tax.

11. Can Tax Credits Reduce My NIIT Liability?

Answer: Yes. Any tax credit that is allowed to offset a tax liability imposed by subtitle A of the Code may be used to offset the NII. If the tax credit is only allowed to be offset against tax imposed by Chapter 1 of the Code, such as regular income tax, that credit may not reduce the NIIT.

12. Does The Tax Have To Be Withheld From Wages?

Answer: There is no obligation that the tax should be withheld for wages, however you may request that additional income tax be withheld from your wages for this purpose

 

Feel free to contact one of our specialists should you have any concerns or queries relating to the NIIT regulations as we have extensive experience when dealing with these matters.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Entity Classification Series: What Is A Change In Classification?

GENERAL BACKGROUND

Last week we discussed what exactly an initial election is under the Check the Box regulations. We barely touched on what constitutes a change in classification under the CTB regulations. However, on face value alone it did not look as if it seemed simpler than an initial election, right? 

Well, if you read this article, it might just be. 

While typing the above sentence I was trying my best not too sound like the narrator of your favorite reality television show, where the only part you want to see or in this instance read, is left until the very last scene or paragraph. 

Luckily for the reader, this blog is not funded by commercials. I have no need to drag it out to the very last sentence so that all the companies who paid the network for airing their commercials are televised. 

So, let us discuss a bit more in detail what is a change in classification election for US Federal tax purposes and why it is important for any business owner to understand this type of change. 

INTRODUCTION

As the CTB regulations rightly stipulates, elective classification changes are transactions without actual form. In layman’s terms, an elective classification change is possible without changing the legal form of the business entity itself.

In terms of the regulations, an elective change is treated as triggering one or more deemed transactions, which differ depending upon the reclassification that takes place. The tax implications and treatment of an elective change is determined under all relevant provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. This includes the step-transaction doctrine. The step-transaction doctrine ensures that the tax consequences of an elective change will be “identical” to the tax consequences if a taxpayer had actually taken the steps described in the regulations. 

THE IMPLICATION OF AN ELECTIVE CHANGE DEPENDS ON YOUR BUSINESS ENTITY

It is important to keep in mind that there is no “one shoe fits all” rule when it comes to changing the classification of your business entity. The implications, or should I rather say “deemed” implications, differ depending on what the initial entity was classified as and what it will be changed to. 

Elective change of a Partnership to an Association – 

When an eligible entity which is initially elected to be classified as a partnership elects to change its classification to an association, it will be deemed that the partnership contributes all of its assets and liabilities to the association in exchange for stock. Immediately afterwards, the partnership liquidates by distributing the association’s stock to the partners.

Elective change of an Association to a Partnership – 

Similar as above, but from an association to a partnership will deem the association to distribute all of its assets and liabilities to its shareholders in liquidation of the association, and immediately thereafter, the shareholders will contribute all of the distributed assets and liabilities to a newly formed partnership.

Elective change of an Association to a Disregarded Entity – 

If an association elects to be disregarded as an entity separate from its owner, the association will be deemed to have distributed all of its assets and liabilities to the single owner in liquidation of the association.

Elective change of a Disregarded Entity to an Association — 

If a disregarded entity separate from its owner elects to be classified as an association the owner of the entity will be deemed to contribute all of the assets and liabilities of the entity to the association in exchange for the stock.  under paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section to be classified as an association, the following is deemed to occur: The owner of the eligible entity contributes all of the assets and liabilities of the entity to the association in exchange for stock of the association.

At this stage of the blog, the emphasis for the reader should be on the word “deemed”. The election change of an entity might be a proactive step taken by the owner, but it automatically deems certain tax implications to occur. Further, once an elective change has been made in terms of the CTB regulations, there is a waiting period of 5 years, before you can make another elective change.  

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

THE DUCK TEST

Those of you who are not familiar with the Duck Test, this is a basic concept stipulating that if it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck it probably is a duck. 

The CTB regulations do a great job in phrasing certain options available to a taxpayer so that it seems harmless. By way of example – “Change of entity classification”. 

I don’t know about you, but I’m really struggling to see the word tax in that phrase. 

Remember, if it acts like a tax authority, drafts regulations like a tax authority, collects tax like a tax authority, and enforces tax legislation like a tax authority: it probably is a tax authority. 

The CTB regulations are enforced by the IRS, so there will always be tax consequences somewhere in the fine print.

Luckily for the reader, at Asena Advisors we love reading the fine print and we know how to prevent any deemed tax consequence from transpiring due to your election change. 
We make sure that your specific needs are catered for and that our recommendations on entity classification changes are client specific and never generic.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Entity Classification Series: What Is An Initial Classification Election?

GENERAL BACKGROUND

As you have probably realized in this Entity Classification series, any question put to the reader in the weekly blog does not have a straightforward answer. It is also not meant to be construed as condescending to the reader. It is all about applying metacognition to any “straightforward”  question relating to entity classification for US Federal Tax Purposes. 

I have found often that clients will never be as passionate or interested in all the intricate tax issues and complexities as I am. I am reminded about this by my wife every day. 

So as with any complex tax issue, it is always best to make a comparison with everyday occurrences that the client can relate to. So, if I can use an example of a “straightforward” question that most adults have faced at least once from their life partner – “How does this look on me?” 

First thought is hesitation, right? 

Exactly. Apply that instinct of metacognition to a “straightforward” question relating to the entity classification rules under US Federal Tax as well. 

So, let us discuss a bit more in detail what is an initial classification election for US Federal tax purposes and why it is important for any business owner to understand this type of election.  

INTRODUCTION

Entity classification regulations for US federal tax purposes can be found under the Internal Revenue Code 7701 and are also known as Check-the-Box or CTB regulations. These regulations are applicable to all domestic and foreign eligible entities. The regulations allow an eligible (i.e., not automatically classified as a corporation) entity to elect to be classified as a corporate (association) or a flow-through (partnership or an entity disregarded from its owner (DRE)) for U.S. income tax purposes.

In terms of the CTB regulations, it is of utmost importance to understand the process of classification election of your entity. 

So contrary to an affirmative act suggested by the term “check-the-box,” the default rules of the entity classification regulations are actually designed to minimize the need to make classification elections. Hence it makes provision for not only explicit election, but implicit as well. 

There are only two circumstances, when an eligible entity needs to file a classification election – 

  •  it desires initially to be classified differently than it would be classified under the default rules, or
  •  it desires to change its classification.

WHEN WILL THE ELECTION BE REGARDED AS AN INITIAL ELECTION? 

When dealing with the CTB regulations, it is of utmost importance to understand the difference between an election that produces an initial classification and an election that produces a change in classification. 

A change in classification, basically means that an entity is electing to change the way it was previously classified under the entity classification rules. Most importantly, an election to change an entity’s classification will deem certain transactions to occur for US Federal Tax Purposes.  It should also be noted that once an entity changes its classification for U.S. federal tax purposes, it cannot change its classification again for 60 months.  

On the other hand, a check-the-box election that produces an initial classification does not carry with it any of the deemed transactions that attach to a change in classification, and the entity is free to change its classification at any time thereafter, subject to the above limitation on changes in classification after the first change in classification occurs. 

“An election made on Form 8832 can specify an effective date not more than 75 days prior to the date of the filing of the form and not more than 12 months subsequent; if no effective date is specified, the election is effective as of the date the form is filed. The election is also effective on the date the election is filed if the entity is not eligible to make the election on the date specified on the Form 8832. Note that if there is any period between which the entity is in existence and the effective date of the form, the election will cause a change of tax status if the default rule for the entity is other than the elected classification.”

Foreign entities, however, has an additional hurdle known as “relevance” that needs to be considered when looking at a CTB election. In short, a foreign eligible entity’s classification is “relevant” when that classification affects the liability of any person for U.S. federal tax or information purposes. 

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

The IRS recently issued general legal guidance illustrating the application of the often-misunderstood relevance rules for foreign entities in various settings.

The recent IRS guidance answers the question favorably for taxpayers, clarifying that an election by an entity whose classification was previously never relevant nevertheless results in a change in the entity’s classification. In the scenarios provided in the guidance, the IRS confirms that the foreign entity’s check-the-box election will be treated as a change in classification, carrying with it the deemed tax consequences that attach to changes in classification. The IRS further clarified that notwithstanding the foregoing change in classification, solely for purposes of applying the 60 month rule, the entity’s check-the-box election would be treated as though it produced an initial classification and, therefore, the entity is not precluding by the 60 month rule from changing its classification.

The key takeaway from the IRS guidance is that it would appear only a single election is required to produce a change in classification for a foreign entity whose classification has never been relevant. However a cautionary approach is required whenever basing decisions on IRS guidance. 

CONFIRMATION BIAS RESULTS IN FLAWED DECISIONS.

Confirmation Bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one’s prior beliefs or values. 

Due to the worldwide lockdown, we have become even more dependent on social media feeds for news and information. We unfortunately live in a world craving instant gratification when it comes to news and information.

This leads to a complete imbalance between quantity and quality of information we have access to.  Most of us therefore, whether it is on LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook or Instagram basically just read headlines and form our own confirmation bias based on the headlines. Marketing agencies have been exceptionally good in exploiting the confirmation bias of the public with carefully worded headlines.   

We will unfortunately never go back to a world where quality of information outweighs quantity. 

I would therefore like to urge the reader to always make sure he/she understands the entity classification rules in terms of the CTB regulations. Confirmation Bias will result in flawed decisions pertaining to your entity. 

At Asena Advisors, our weekly blogs are a perfect example of how we render services. Providing clients with top quality information and top-quality services to match the information.  
We make sure that your specific needs are catered for and that our recommendations on entity classification elections are client specific and never generic.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Entity Classification Series: Converting a Corporation to a Partnership

GENERAL BACKGROUND

Following on from last week’s blog regarding the “Conversion of a Multi Member LLC to a Corporation”, it is probably an opportune time to move away from LLC conversion and look at a different type of entity conversion. In the culinary field some people might refer to it as a “deconstructive conversion”. 

In layman’s terms, let’s assume you already have a Corporation, but would now like to convert it into a Partnership. What would the US Federal Income Tax Implications of such a conversion entail?

This conversion should be carefully examined by business owners, both in terms of the change in legal form and in tax status. 

In this week’s blog, we will focus mainly on the US Federal Income Tax implications of converting a Corporation to a Partnership and identify the potential pitfalls that local and global tax advisors should be cognizant of when a client wants to convert their Corporation to a Partnership. 

Does the above “warning” seem repetitive and starting to work on your nerves due to it being mentioned in every week’s blog?  

Good! That is the intention. It is not purely added in as part of a “cut and paste” exercise, but rather to continue emphasizing the importance of entity conversions. 

INTRODUCTION 

For purposes of this blog, it is important to briefly recap on how a Partnership and a Corporation will be taxed by the IRS. 

Partnership – While a partnership is treated as an entity separate from its owners for some tax purposes, it is not treated as a separate tax-paying entity. The partnership’s items of income, gain, loss, deduction, and credit are passed through to its owners and included on their income tax returns for the year that includes or ends with the end of the partnership’s taxable year. 

CorporationEntities classified as corporations that do not elect to be taxed as “S corporations” are considered “C corporations.” The term “C corporation” refers to Subchapter C of the Internal Revenue Code, which governs the taxation of a C corporation. Under Subchapter C of the Code, a corporation is treated as a separate taxable entity and the income generated by the corporate business is taxed twice. 

It is clear from the above, that the main difference here is that flow through applies to partnerships and not corporations. For a quick recap on this, please refer to our previous blog – Entity Classification Series: Corporate Taxation vs Passthrough – What is the Difference?

FEDERAL INCOME TAX TREATMENT OF CLASSIFICATION CHANGES

The check-the-box regulations permit entities to elect to change their U.S. tax classification. However, a change in tax classification, no matter how achieved, has tax consequences. This is applicable to U.S and International business owners.

Essentially there are three ways to accomplish a classification change. 

    1. An elective classification change by filing IRS Form 8832
    2. An automatic classification change, wherein an entity’s default classification changes as a result of a change in the number of owners; and
    3. An actual conversion, wherein an entity merges into, or liquidates and forms, an entity that has the desired classification.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

If a corporation elects to be classified as a partnership, the corporation will be deemed to have distributed all its assets and liabilities to its shareholders in liquidation, and the shareholders are deemed to contribute all the distributed assets and liabilities immediately thereafter to a newly formed partnership. The entity will therefore be deemed to have liquidated under either §331 or §332 and the deemed liquidation is treated for tax purposes as if it were an actual liquidation.  

An entity that is not regarded as an eligible entity, will first need to convert into an eligible entity before making the check-the-box election. 

Lastly an actual conversion can be implemented.

If a corporation merges into a partnership, the IRS will alter the transaction as a transfer of assets by the corporation to the partnership in exchange for partnership interests. This will then be followed by the distribution of the partnership interests by the corporation to its shareholders in complete liquidation. The transfer of assets to the partnership will generally be tax-free under §721 and the liquidation is tax-free under §332 if it meets the requirements of that section; otherwise, it is taxable under §331. 

THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT 

During the 139th meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Edward Lorenz posed a question: “Does the flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas?” 

This question ultimately led to what we now refer to as the “Butterfly Effect”

In simple terms, the “Butterfly Effect” is a situation in which an action or change that does not seem important has a very large effect, especially in other places. 

Let’s give it a shot and apply this theory to the blog. 

Let’s assume your current situation necessitates you to change your entity from a Corporation to a Partnership.  You action this without considering all the potential tax implications, what do you think the effect would be? 

At Asena Advisors we make sure that your specific needs are catered for and that our recommendations on the conversion of your structure is family/business specific.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Entity Classification Series: Converting Multi Member LLC to Corporation

GENERAL BACKGROUND

Last week we discussed the conversion of a Single Member LLC to a Corporation. In this week’s blog we will discuss the conversion of a Multi Member Limited Liability Company (LLC) to a corporation in legal form and the US Federal Income Tax Implications of such a conversion. 

This conversion should be carefully examined by business owners, both in terms of the change in legal form and in tax status. For purposes of this article, we will focus mainly on the US Federal Income Tax implications of such a conversion and broadly examine the pitfalls that local and global tax advisors should be cognizant of when a client wants to convert their business to a corporation. 

INTRODUCTION 

The default rule pertaining to any LLC that has more than one owner is that it is taxed as a partnership. An LLC classified as a partnership is therefore subject to the same filing and reporting requirements as a partnership.

It is important for the reader to distinguish between the following conversions –  

  1. Conversion of a Multi Member LLC to a Corporation in legal form which will automatically trigger potential Federal Income Tax Implications; and
  2. Solely changing the tax status of the Multi Member LLC in terms of the Check the Box regulations, which means that you retain the LLC as an entity but elect to be taxed as a corporation for Federal Income Tax Purposes. 

The general methods available to convert your LLC to a Corporation will be either by way of a Statutory Conversion, Statutory Merger or Non-Statutory Conversion.

CHANGE IN TAX STATUS (“CHECK-THE-BOX”)

By default, the IRS taxes a multi-member LLC as a partnership and there is no separate IRS tax category for LLCs.

If you’re seeking to convert your LLC’s tax status from a partnership to a corporation without changing the LLC’s legal form, you only need to file IRS Form 8832 (to be taxed as a C corporation) or IRS Form 2553 (to be taxed as an S corporation). 

It’s important to note that, generally once an LLC has elected to change its classification, it cannot elect again to change its classification during the 60 months after the effective date of the election. 

An election to change the classification from a partnership to a corporation will be treated as if the partnership contributed all of its assets and liabilities to the corporation in exchange for stock and the partnership then immediately liquidated by distributing the stock to it partners.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

THE APPROACH OF THE IRS WHEN CONVERTING AN LLC TO A CORPORATION

In Revenue Ruling 84-111, the IRS described three specific methods of converting an LLC to a corporation when using non-statutory conversion. 

  1. “Assets-over” Conversion:

    the LLC transferred all its assets and liabilities to a newly formed corporation and in exchange received all outstanding stock of the corporation. Subsequently, the LLC terminated by distributing all the newly formed corporation’s stock to the LLC members.

  2. “Assets-up” Conversion:

    Firstly, the LLC distributed all its assets and liabilities to its members to enable the LLC to terminate.  Secondly the members transferred all the assets received from the LLC to the corporation in exchange for all outstanding stock of the corporation plus the corporation’s assumption of all of those LLC liabilities. 

  3. “Interests-over” Conversion:

    the LLC members transferred their LLC interests to a newly formed corporation and in exchange received all the outstanding stock of the corporation. The LLC terminated, with all the LLC assets and liabilities becoming assets and liabilities of the corporation. 

This ruling however did not address how the IRS interprets Statutory Conversions or Statutory Mergers.2004 IRS bulletin provided some clarity and stipulated that the IRS will treat these types of conversions as essentially equivalent to “asset-over” conversions. 

The bulletin further stated that the IRS will assume that the LLC members contribute “all LLC assets and liabilities to the corporation in exchange for stock in such corporation, and immediately thereafter, the LLC liquidates distributing the stock of the corporation to its members.”

The conversion of a multi member LLC to a Corporation will therefore also be able to qualify as a tax-free contribution in terms of IRC §351 if it complies with all the requirements. 

TAX IS INEVITABLE, SUFFERING IS OPTIONAL

No one person is the same and the same applies to your Multi Member LLC. Irrespective of the reason behind the conversion, i.e., legal form or check the box change, you should always make sure you consult tax professionals on what the tax implications of your conversion could entail. 

Remember that as death, tax is inevitable but if proper planning is done, you do not need to suffer.

As always, Asena Advisors can advise on any kind of LLC to Corporation conversion and assist you accordingly.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Entity Classification Series: Converting a Single Member LLC to a Corporation

GENERAL BACKGROUND

In this week’s blog we will look at the US Federal Tax Implications of converting a Single Member Limited Liability Corporation (LLC) to a Corporation or Multi Member LLC.

In many situations where the owner of a new company does not have the resources to create a corporation, he or she may opt for an LLC instead. This could also be the best course initially due to the separation of company and personal assets and the usual option for less taxation to company revenue. However, remember that hindsight is 20/20 and at some point, it may be more beneficial to convert the business from an LLC to a Corporation.

This conversion should be carefully examined by business owners, both in terms of the change in legal form and in tax status. For purposes of this article, we will focus on the US Federal Tax implications of such a conversion.

We will broadly examine the pitfalls that local and global tax advisors should be cognizant of when a client wants to convert their business to a corporation.

INTRODUCTION

When an LLC is first formed, the owner or partners elects a taxation status for the LLC. This election affects how the LLC will be taxed for US Federal Tax Purposes.

For Federal Tax Purposes, an LLC can be treated as either a corporation, partnership, or as a disregarded entity. The LLC business owner uses Form 8832 – “Entity Classification Election” to elect how they would prefer their business to be taxed.

There are separate tax scenarios your LLC could fall under, but we will focus on a single member LLC in this article. To read more about LLCs, click this link to go to our series.

A single-member LLC that does not file Form 8832, will file its taxes like a sole proprietorship which is the default tax status of single member LLCs. This means that, even though it is legally a separate entity from your person, you and your small business are one and the same for US Federal Tax Purposes.

It can also opt to file for C corporation tax status by submitting Form 8832.

Usually if clients want the liability protection of an LLC, but with the simple tax filing of a sole proprietorship, they will choose a single member LLC as the structure for their business.

CONVERTING YOUR SINGLE MEMBER LLC TO A CORPORATION

To change the status of a single member LLC to a corporation may be achieved by several methods as set out below:

  1. By filing a Form 8832, Entity Classification Election, for a disregarded entity to be treated as an association taxable as a corporation.
  2. By filing a Form 2553, Election by a Small Business Corporation, which is treated as a deemed election for a single-member LLC to be taxed as an S corporation association.
  3. The conversion of a single-member LLC treated as a disregarded entity into a corporation under the applicable state law formless conversion statute.
  4. The merger of a single-member LLC treated as a disregarded entity into a corporation under the applicable state law cross-entity merger statute.

FEDERAL TAX IMPLICATIONS OF CONVERSION

When converting your LLC to a corporation it is of upmost importance to understand what type of tax status already exists in the LLC. As determined above, a single member LLC that did not elect to be treated as a corporation will be a disregarded entity and taxed as a sole proprietorship. The tax status of the LLC will determine how the company is converted.

A conversion of a single member LLC to a corporation can have significant tax consequences based on the transactions that are deemed to occur as a result of the conversion.

If an election is made in terms of Form 8832 to change classification from a disregarded entity to a corporation, it will be treated as if the owner of the disregarded entity contributed all of the assets and liabilities to the corporation in exchange for stock.

When a business entity undergoes a change in elective classification status from a disregarded entity to a corporation, the change should be treated as the transfer of all the assets and liabilities held by the owner of a former disregarded entity to a newly formed corporation, with the owner of the disregarded entity treated as the transferor.

This could lead to quite unforeseen tax implications.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Should the tax consequences of a classification change be undesirable, the entity can change its classification through a structural modification rather than by means of an election.

The owner of the disregarded entity can transfer ownership of the disregarded entity to a new or existing corporation.

Equivalently, the change from a disregarded entity to a corporation could mitigate US Federal Tax implications by forming a new corporation and the disregarded entity could transfer all of its assets to the new corporation in a transaction described in IRC §351.

Under IRC §351, this is considered a tax-free contribution and you could avoid any gains or losses.

However, there are certain anti-avoidance measures in place to ensure that people do not abuse this provision. Specially under IRC §357(c), if the liabilities deemed assumed by the entity exceed the owner’s basis in those assets, then the transferor must recognize a gain equal to the excess of the liabilities over the transferor’s basis. Further, if the transfer of liabilities had a purpose to avoid federal income taxes or if the arrangement was not made for a bona fide business purpose, all of the transferred liabilities will be treated as boot received on a §351 exchange.

TREAD CAREFULLY

When converting a single member LLC to a corporation you should be cognizant of the conversion of the legal form as well as the conversion of the tax status. It’s not a straightforward process and one should always tread carefully when considering such a conversion and how to approach it.

As always, Asena Advisors can advise on any kind of LLC to Corporation conversion and assist you accordingly.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Entity Classification Series: What Is An Ordinary Trust And Is Your Entity One?

GENERAL BACKGROUND

We discussed in our previous blog what constitutes a “business trust” for Federal Tax Purposes. 

In this week’s blog we will look a bit more in depth at what constitutes an “ordinary trust” for US Federal Tax Purposes and if your entity is one. 

Trusts are used all over the world and are generally regarded as extremely beneficial vehicles to hold assets and investments. 

However, make sure that you understand how the IRS will classify your trust and what the implications of that will be for the trust and its beneficiaries. 

This article will broadly examine the issues local and global tax advisors must address when a client uses a trust structure for US expansion and how it will be classified for federal tax purposes. 

INTRODUCTION

While many believe that classifying a “trust” is a matter of local law, the determination of trust status for U.S. tax purposes must be made in accordance with the U.S. tax rules. Such determination is not always a simple matter.

A trust is a separate legal entity or arrangement typically used for family and estate planning purposes. Trusts allow assets to be held by an entity, other than a natural person. Accordingly, trusts are often used to hold property and facilitate a transfer of such property to beneficiaries without the need for probate proceedings.

Classifying a trust for US Federal Tax purposes is of critical importance. This is applicable to domestic and foreign trusts and would politely ask the reader to leave any ignorance regarding the classification of their trust right about here before continuing with this blog. The reason for such a request is codified below – 

Reg. Section 301.7701-1(a)(1) provides that:

whether an organization is an entity separate from its owners for federal tax purposes is a matter of federal tax law and does not depend on whether the organization is recognized as an entity under local law. 

DEFINING A “TRUST” FOR US FEDERAL TAX PURPOSES

The entity classification rules use the term “ordinary” trust to distinguish such an entity from a “business” trust.  

For an arrangement to be considered a trust for US Federal Tax Purposes, the entity needs to be an “entity separate from its owner” that is treated as an “ordinary trust” (in contrast to a “business trust” as discussed in our previous blog).

In terms of the Internal Revenue Code, an arrangement will be treated as an “ordinary trust” if it can be shown that the purpose of the arrangement is to vest in trustees, responsibility for the protection and conservation of property for the beneficiaries who cannot share in the discharge of this responsibility and therefore are not associates in a joint enterprise for the conduct of business for a profit. The beneficiaries of such a trust usually do no more than accept the benefits thereof and are not voluntary planners or creators of the trust arrangement. 

However, when it comes to the protection of a family’s wealth more so than not, the beneficiaries and the people who created the trust are one in the same.  Such an arrangement will still be recognized as a trust for US Federal Tax Purposes if it were created for the purposes of protecting or conserving the trust property for the beneficiaries who stand in the same relation to the trust as they would have been if the trust had been created by someone other than them. 

Once it has been established that the entity will be classified as a trust for US Federal Tax Purposes it should be determined whether the trust is a domestic or foreign trust. 

DOMESTIC OR FOREIGN TRUST

This classification is extremely important as it impacts how the trust activities should be reported and taxed in the US. 

A trust will be considered to be a foreign trust unless it meets the following two tests: – 

The Court Test

A trust will meet the court test if a court within the United States is able to exercise primary supervision over the administration of the trust.

The Control Test –  

A trust will meet the control test if one or more United States persons have the authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust with no other person having the power to veto any of the substantial decisions.

If the trust meets both the Control test and the Court test, the trust is treated as a domestic trust and if the trust fails either the Control Test or the Court Test, the trust is treated as a foreign trust.

So, you would think that classifying the entity as a trust and determining if its domestic or foreign is sufficient to understand the tax implications in the US right?

Try and recall the previous blog when it was recommended to utilize metacognition when classifying entities for US tax purposes. Well the same applies here. 

Once it has been established if the trust is a domestic or foreign trust, the next step is to determine if the trust will be regarded as a grantor or non grantor trust. 

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

IS YOUR TRUST A GRANTOR OR NON GRANTOR TRUST?

Determining whether a trust is a grantor or non grantor trust is of upmost importance as it affects who is taxed on the trust income and when they are taxed. If a foreign trust is characterized as a grantor trust under IRC §§ 671–679, the grantor or another person is treated as the owner of the trust. If a U.S. person is treated as the owner of a trust for U.S. Federal Tax Purposes under the grantor trust rules, then the U.S. person must report its share of trust income, deductions and credits on its income tax return as if those items were directly received by or paid to that U.S. person. 

Right about now, you might be asking yourself what exactly is a grantor? Now to explain this in one blog is impossible, so I have tried and given a simplified summary of it below. 

Although the term “grantor” is generally used to refer to anyone who places property in trust, the term “grantor trust” has a specific technical meaning. 

Internal Revenue Code (IRC) §§ 671-679 are commonly referred to as the “Grantor Trust Rules.” IRC §§ 671-678 apply to both domestic and foreign trusts. IRC § 679 applies only to foreign trusts and takes precedence over the rules found in IRC §§ 673-678 with respect to a foreign trust.

Please view our Grantor Trust video series for more information.

For purposes of the grantor trust rules, the grantor is generally identified as the individual or corporations who both creates and funds the trust. Situations occur in which the grantor is an entity other than the trust’s creator, however, and it may be necessary to “peel off a façade to get at the truth.

Reg. §1.671-2(e) defines who is the grantor of a trust for purposes of the grantor trust rules. The regulations state that, for purposes of the grantor trust rules, the “grantor” of a trust includes:

any person to the extent such person either creates a trust, or directly or indirectly makes a gratuitous transfer of property to a trust.

Any foreign trust not determined to be a grantor trust will be treated as a foreign non-grantor trust for U.S. tax purposes.

THE SEMMELWIES REFLEX – MENTAL MYOPIA

The Semmelweis Reflex is a metaphor for the rejection of new knowledge because it contradicts existing norms, beliefs, or paradigms. It is a form of mental myopia that can spell doom, even for the most successful organization or person.

If the content of this blog is regarded as new knowledge for the reader, please be cognizant of mental myopia and its potential impact on your Trust. 

To summarize the above, ask yourself the following questions – 

  1. Is the entity classified as a Trust for Federal Tax Purposes?
  2. Is the Trust classified as a Domestic or Foreign Trust for Federal Tax Purposes? 
  3. Is the Trust classified as a Grantor or Non Grantor Trust for Federal Tax purposes?
The classification of your trust as domestic, foreign, grantor or non grantor for US Federal Tax Purposes has a direct impact on the tax treatment and disclosure obligations in the US. Make sure you consult tax experts who can assist you with this. At Asena we can assist with mitigating risk on your existing trust or advise on how to utilize a trust for future structuring in the US.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Entity Classification Series: What is a Business Trust and Is Your Entity One?

GENERAL BACKGROUND

Trusts are one the most popular investment and business vehicles used worldwide. It provides various benefits and planning opportunities for families and businesses. 

However, the reader should be aware that the legal definition of a trust is not necessarily the same as that of the IRS for federal income tax purposes. 

This article will broadly examine the issues local and global tax advisors must address when a client uses a trust structure for US expansion and how it could be classified for federal income tax purposes with specific emphasis on when it constitutes a “business trust”. 

INTRODUCTION

Classifying a trust for US Federal Income Tax purposes is of critical importance. An entity which is not classified as an “ordinary” trust for US tax purposes is treated as either a corporation or a partnership. (Reg. Section 301.7701-2(a)). 

Reg. Section 301.7701-1(a)(1) provides that:

whether an organization is an entity separate from its owners for federal tax purposes is a matter of federal tax law and does not depend on whether the organization is recognized as an entity under local law

If the participants of a trust carry on trade, business, financial operations or ventures and divide the profits from that trade, it could create a separate entity for federal tax purposes. 

THE CLASSIFICATION OF A TRUST FOR FEDERAL INCOME TAX PURPOSES

The entity classification rules use the term “ordinary” trust to distinguish such an entity from a “business” trust which would be classified as either a corporation or a partnership. 

The Internal Revenue Code does not define a trust, however the regulations contain sections that define trusts and differentiate them form taxable entities such as corporations or partnerships.  

Section 301.7701-4(a) of the Regulations provide that in general, the term “trust” refers to –

“an arrangement created either by a will or by an inter vivos declaration whereby trustees take title to property for the purposes of protecting or conserving it for the beneficiaries.”

The regulations also distinguish a trust from a taxable association. 

An arrangement will be treated as a trust under the Internal Revenue Code if it can be shown that the purpose of the arrangement is to vest in trustees the responsibility for the protection and conservation of property for beneficiaries who cannot share in the discharge of this responsibility and, therefore, are not associates in a joint enterprise for the conduct of business for profit. 

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

WHAT IS CLASSIFIED AS A BUSINESS TRUST FOR FEDERAL TAX PURPOSES

Section 301.7701-4(b) addresses “business trusts” and state that they are Trusts that generally are created by beneficiaries simply as a device to carry on a profit-making business which normally would have been carried on through business organizations that are classified as corporations or partnerships. 

The main reason why business trusts are not regarded as trusts for federal tax purposes is because it’s not used to protect or conserve the property for the beneficiaries but rather to carry on a profit-making business. 

A business trust with more than one beneficiary may be taxable as a partnership and a business trust that is a domestic eligible entity, with a single owner is disregarded as an entity separate from its owner. 

It’s however important to note that if the corpus of the trust is not supplied by the beneficiaries is not sufficient reason in itself for classifying the arrangement as an ordinary trust rather than as an association or partnership. 

The fact that any organization is technically cast in the trust form, by conveying title to property to trustees for the benefit of persons designated as beneficiaries, will not change the real character of the organization if the organization is more properly classified as a business entity under §  301.7701-2.

A business entity is any entity recognized for federal tax purposes (including an entity with a single owner that may be disregarded as an entity separate from its owner) that is not properly classified as a trust under Section 301.7701-4 or otherwise subject to special treatment under the Internal Revenue Code.

 A business entity with two or more members is classified for federal tax purposes as either a corporation or a partnership. A business entity with only one owner is classified as a corporation or is disregarded; if the entity is disregarded, its activities are treated in the same manner as a sole proprietorship, branch, or division of the owner. 

METACOGNITION – “GAIN ABILITY TO THINK ABOUT THE WAY YOU THINK”

When it comes to the US and classification of entities for Federal Tax Purposes, you should utilize metacognition. In simple terms, do not just assume your trust, either US or foreign is a trust for US Federal Tax Purposes. 

An entity that purports to be a trust, but that conducts an active trade or business will be reclassified as a business trust in the US and this could have severe tax implications. 

Make sure you consult tax experts who knows how entity classification rules work and how and when your “trust” is at risk of reclassification. At Asena, we can assist with this either proactively or retroactively. So it’s not too late to rectify or regularize same today, however tomorrow might be too late.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Entity Classification Series: Pick Your Own Path – Are You Eligible?

GENERAL BACKGROUND

As discussed in our previous blog – “Entity Classification Series: Corporate Taxation vs Passthrough – What is the Difference?”  The United States (US) taxes business entities based on how they are classified. 

This article will provide a brief overview of how to determine if your entity is an eligible entity in terms of the CTB regulations.

INTRODUCTION

Entity classification regulations for US federal tax purposes can found under the Internal Revenue Code 7701 and is also known as Check-the-Box or CTB regulations. These regulations are applicable to all domestic and foreign eligible entities. The regulations allow an eligible (i.e., not automatically classified as a corporation) entity to elect to be classified as a corporate (association) or a flow-through (partnership or an entity disregarded from its owner (DRE)) for U.S. income tax purposes.

In terms of the CTB regulations, it is of upmost importance to ascertain if your entity is eligible for election as this will determine if it will be taxed as a flow through entity or corporation.  The choice is not always up to you. Further if no election is made, the default rules will apply. 

WHEN IS YOUR ENTITY NOT ELIGIBLE FOR ELECTION? 

An entity will not be eligible for election if it is deemed to be a corporation. 

An entity is a deemed corporation if it is formed under federal or state corporate statutes or is a type of foreign entity as listed in Treasury Regulations 301.7701-2(b)(8) also known as per se foreign corporations. These entities are automatically classified as corporations and are not eligible to elect their classification. 

However, as an exception to the rule the following types of corporations are treated as eligible entities -: 

  1. An eligible entity that previously elected to be an association taxable as a corporation by filing Form 8832
  2. An entity that elects to be classified as a corporation by filing Form 8832 can make another election to change its classification subject to the 60-month limitation rule. 
  3. A foreign eligible entity that became an association taxable as a corporation under the foreign default rule described below.

WHEN IS YOUR ENTITY ELIGIBLE FOR ELECTION?

To be classified as an Eligible Entity for US Federal Tax Purposes the following requirements must be met:

  1. The entity cannot be an individual.
  2. The entity should not be automatically classified as a corporation And
  3. The entity must be a business entity. 

Eligible entities include limited liability companies (LLCs) and partnerships. Generally, corporations are not eligible entities as explained above. 

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

DEFAULT CLASSIFICATION RULES 

If no election is made by the business entity in terms of the CTB regulations, the default classification rules as set out in Treasury Regulations 301.7701-3 will apply and classification is determined as follows – 

The following Domestic entities will be classified as eligible under the default rules – 

  1. a partnership if it has two or more members/owners [i.e., owners],
  2. or a DRE if it has a single owner.

The following Foreign entities will be classified as eligible under the default rules – 

  1. a partnership that has two or more members and at least one of the members do not have limited liability.
  2. a corporation if all the members have limited liability, or 
  3. a DRE if it has a single owner without limited liability. 

WHICH CAME FIRST: THE CHICKEN OR THE EGG?

When it comes to structuring our financial affairs, it is human nature to always look at the most tax efficient way of how this can be done and exclude anything else. This is mainly because we want to save as much money as possible, but also that we like to push the limits in terms of what is legally possible. Everyone enjoys challenging revenue authorities.

So when someone is looking at the feasibility of investing in the US, the google searches will always contain a combination of the following words – “tax efficient structure”, “pass through or corporate tax” , “how to save the most tax” etc.

When it comes to entity classification in the US and CTB regulations the IRS will not entertain your argument of which came first: the chicken or the egg. You won’t win an argument with them about how your business should be taxed if you don’t understand your eligibility.

In short – Eligibility comes before taxation.   

Unlike the age old debate about which came first: the chicken or the egg, the CTB regulations are very clear. 

When considering what US business entity is best for a given circumstance, the two most common entities that impact Australian businesses and Australian families investing in the US are C corporations and LLCs.

The choice of entity should always be driven by the commercial objectives of a client. The commercial objectives are therefore looked at first and this could be then structured in the most tax efficient manner. Which could be either by using a flow through entity or corporation. 

At Asena Advisors we make sure that your specific needs are catered for and that our recommendations on choosing a structure is family/business specific. Choosing between a flow through or corporations will therefore depend on the client’s needs and optimising long term growth for the client. 

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

Entity Classification Series: Corporate Taxation vs Passthrough – What is the Difference?

GENERAL BACKGROUND

The United States (US) taxes business entities based on how they are classified for income tax purposes. There are distinct differences in the tax treatment of flow through entities compared to corporations.

This article will provide a brief overview of the different US tax implications applicable to flow through entities and to corporations. This is especially important for International businesses who are expanding or looking to expand to the US.

The recent “Made In America Tax Plan” of the Biden Administration is another important factor to consider and how this proposed tax reform could affect your current or future US structure. This tax plan proposes corporate reforms to stimulate economic growth in the US post-COVID and one of the key provisions of the plan applicable to this article includes raising the U.S. corporate rate to 28% from 21% and imposing minimum taxes on both foreign incomes as well as the domestic earnings that corporations report to shareholders, all of which are expected to hike corporate America’s tax bill.

INTRODUCTION

Businesses in the US can choose from five basic legal structures of which a quick summary is provided below:

  1. Sole proprietorship
  2. Partnership
  3. S Corporation
  4. C Corporation
  5. Limited Liability Company (LLC)

The above list can then be further categorized as follows – 

  1. Pass-Through Entities:
    1. Sole proprietorship
    2. Partnership
    3. S Corporation
  2. C Corporation
  3. LLC, which is a legal entity only, and is taxed as one of the four options above

Businesses in the US are either taxed as pass-through (or flow-through) entities or as corporations. Unlike C-Corporations, flow through entities are not subject to the corporate income tax or any other entity-level tax. Instead, their owners or members include their allocated shares of profits in taxable income under the individual income tax. 

From a federal tax standpoint, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) treats an LLC as an eligible entity under the “check-the-box” rules, and therefore, the LLC has the flexibility to be classified as either a partnership, an association taxable as a corporation, or a disregarded entity. 

FEDERAL TAXATION OF FLOW THROUGH ENTITIES

  1. Sole Proprietorship
    A sole proprietorship is not treated as an entity separate from its owner for federal income tax purposes and the income earned by the sole proprietorship is simply included on its owner’s individual income tax return along with his or her other items of income and deduction. The income of a sole proprietorship is therefore taxed at its owner’s individual marginal income tax rates.
  2. Partnership
    While a partnership is treated as an entity separate from its owners for some tax purposes, it is not treated as a separate tax-paying entity. The partnership’s items of income, gain, loss, deduction, and credit are passed through to its owners and included on their income tax returns for the year that includes or ends with the end of the partnership’s taxable year.
  3. S Corporation —
    A S corporation is generally not subject to any corporate-level taxes. Its income, gain, loss, deduction, and credit pass through to its shareholders and are reported by them on their individual income tax returns.  An S corporation may, however, be subject to corporate-level taxes if it was originally formed as a C corporation and converted to S status after its initial taxable year. It’s also important to note that S Corporations aren’t allowed to have non-US citizen shareholders.

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

FEDERAL TAXATION OF CORPORATIONS

Entities classified as corporations that do not elect to be taxed as “S corporations” are considered “C corporations.” The term “C corporation” refers to Subchapter C of the Internal Revenue Code, which governs the taxation of a C corporation. 

Under Subchapter C of the Code, a corporation is treated as a separate taxable entity. Thus, income generated by the corporate business is taxed twice. The income is taxed once earned by the corporation and again when distributed to the shareholders. C corporations are therefore taxed quite differently than a pass-through entity

STATE TAXATION 

The state income tax consequences of the selection of an entity must also be considered. As a general rule, sole proprietorships and partnerships are exempt from state-level income taxes just as they are from federal income taxes. Some states, however, impose entity-level taxes on sole proprietorships and partnerships. Similarly, some states impose a separate, entity-level tax on LLCs.

C corporations are generally subject to a separate entity-level state income tax. The treatment of S corporations varies greatly from state to state. Some states follow the federal tax treatment of S corporations, while others tax S corporations as regular corporations. Moreover, some states that recognize the federal S election may still impose a corporate-level tax (if, for example, the corporation has non-resident shareholders).

POSSIBLE TAX REFORM SHIFTING MINDSETS (ONCE AGAIN)

The proposed reforms of President Biden regarding the increase of the corporation tax rate could once again reshape the way businesses and individuals analyse entity choices in the US and abroad. It’s however advisable to not jump to any conclusions as of yet and avoid the looking for advice from the tax specialist called Google. This could lead to premature decision made on your US structure that could have negative tax implications in the long run. 

Irrespective of the possible increase in corporate tax rates, there is always opportunity for tax planning, and one should be cognizant of this when looking at a structure. There’s no one shoe that fits all answers. 

CONSIDERATION OF WHICH US BUSINESS ENTITY TO ESTABLISH

When considering what US business entity is best for a given circumstance, the two most common entities that impact Australian businesses and Australian families investing in the US are C corporations and LLCs.

The choice of entity should always be driven by the commercial objectives of a client. The commercial objectives are therefore looked at first and this could be then structured in the most tax efficient manner. Which could be either by using a flow through entity or corporation. 

At Asena Advisors we make sure that your specific needs are catered for and that our recommendations on choosing a structure is family/business specific. Choosing between a flow through or corporations will therefore depend on the client’s needs and optimizing long term growth for the client.

Shaun Eastman

Peter Harper

IRC Section 679 – When is a Trust a Foreign Grantor Trust?

In our last installment of the Grantor Trust Series, Peter Harper, Asena’s managing director and CEO, explains IRC Section 679, addressing foreign trusts, and the stipulations of having a foreign trust in the US.

This vlog is for anyone that owns assets in a foreign trust and is moving to the US.

To watch the full video, click play below:

Check out our new blog for a quick guide to everything Grantor Trusts: https://asenaadvisors.com/blog/grantor-trust/

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

IRC Section 678 – Someone Other Than the Grantor is the Owner of Trust


In our 8th installment of the grantor trust series, Peter Harper, our managing director and CEO, explains IRC Section 678 and the circumstances in which someone other than the grantor can be the owner of the trust.

This vlog is for anyone that owns assets in a foreign trust who has a US beneficiary.

To watch the full video, click play below:

Check out our new blog for a quick guide to everything Grantor Trusts: https://asenaadvisors.com/blog/grantor-trust/

IRC Section 678 – Quick Guide Blog

What is IRC Section 678?

Section 678 was added to the grantor trust provisions by the IRS as a result of the decision in Mallinckrodt v. Commissioner by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. In that case, the grantor created a trust for the benefit of a beneficiary and the beneficiary’s family. The trust instrument provided that the trustees were to distribute trust income generated from the trust assets to the beneficiary upon his request. The Eighth Circuit held that, because the beneficiary could essentially direct the timing and amount of distribution of income from the trust, the beneficiary had the equivalent of ownership of the trust income for income tax purposes and the taxpayer should include these distributions including capital gains in his taxable income as it does not constitute a non-grantor trust. 

The most common form of a Mallinckrodt power is a general power of appointment over the trust income or corpus that enables the holder to appoint it to himself or herself during the holder’s lifetime. (See also PLR 8545076 ; PLR 9220012)

Mallinckrodt power also exists if a beneficiary has a demand or Crummey (See, e.g., PLR 201039010) power as to a limited portion of the additions to the trust

Mallinckrodt power renders a third person taxable under §678(a) only if the power is exercisable by the third person alone. If the exercise of the power requires the consent of any other person, whether or not adverse, §678(a) does not apply.

Example: Beneficiary B is one of three trustees who must act by majority vote to make distributions to the beneficiaries. Absent an actual distribution, B is not taxed on the trust income. Section 678(a) does not apply. (See PLR 8213140. See also PLR 201718012, PLR 201718010–PLR 201718003 (trust beneficiaries serving as distribution committee members not trust owners because none has power exercisable alone to vest trust income or corpus to himself), PLR 201436008–PLR 201436032 (trust beneficiaries serving on distribution committee not treated as owners of trust where no single member can direct distributions of trust income and all distributions require consent of majority of committee members), PLR 201426014 (same; revoked on other grounds by PLR 201642019 (trust is grantor trust to settlor under §673 because corpus reverts to settlor if both his children cease to serve on distribution committee or committee has less than two members)), PLR 201410001–PLR 201410010 (same).)

General Rule

What makes a Section 678 trust stand out from the other grantor trust provisions is that under this tax law provision a person or taxpayer other than the grantor/decedent or a transferor to the trust could be the deemed owner of all or a portion of the trust assets for income tax purposes by the IRS and any distributions – interest, capital gain etc will be taxable income. 

The general rule of a Section 678 trust is that a person or taxpayer other than the grantor shall be treated as the owner of any portion of a grantor trust’s assets with respect to which:

  1. such person or taxpayer has a power exercisable solely by himself (power of appointment) to vest the trust corpus/trust assets or the income therefrom in himself, or
  2. such person or taxpayer has previously partially released or otherwise modified such a power of appointment and after the release or modification retains such control as would, within the principles of sections 671 to 677, inclusive, subject a grantor of a trust to treatment as the owner of the trust assets.

Any trust regarded as a grantor trust in terms of Section 678 is also sometimes referred to as a “beneficiary‐deemed owner trusts” (“BDOTs”). The beneficiary is regarded as the grantor of the trust. 

There are certain tax benefits when a beneficiary is regarded as the grantor of the trust. One of these income tax benefits relates to life insurance rules. 

A beneficiary can sell a life insurance policy insuring themselves to a BDOT without triggering the transfer for value rule. 

An Exception to IRC Section 678 Grantor trust

Exception Where Grantor is Taxable

There is however an exception in tax law to the grantor trust provision which stipulates that if the grantor/decedent or transferor (which IRC 679 applies to – foreign grantor trusts) are treated as the owner of trust income, the grantor trust rules of IRC §§ 674 through 677 trump application of IRC § 678(a) to the third party taxpayer. 

A plain reading of subsection (b) implies that, if a third person holds a withdrawal power over the trust principal (power of appointment), Section 678(b) would not apply, and therefore the person with the withdrawal power would be taxed as owner of the trust and the trust assets. The key reconciling this seeming inconsistency between Section 678(b) treatment of a withdrawal power over income and a power over principal seems to be in the definition of the word “income” 

Obligations of Support

Section 678(c) provides another exception in relation to grantor trust status, where a third person, in his or her capacity as trustee or co-trustee, will not be treated as the owner of the trust assets if he or she has the power merely to apply the income of the trust, including capital gains to the support or maintenance of a person whom such third person is obligated to support or maintain, except to the extent that such income is so applied. Therefore there is no withdrawal power to vest in himself and no taxable income due to Grantor trust status not being applicable. The support obligation is in terms of asset protection for the beneficiaries. 

In cases where the amounts so applied or distributed are paid out of trust corpus or out of other than income of the taxable year, such amounts shall be considered to be an amount paid or credited within the meaning of paragraph (2) of section 661(a) and shall be taxed to the holder of the power under section 662.

This grantor trust status exception, however, does not apply if the third person holding the withdrawal power can exercise the power by himself or herself in any capacity other than that of a trustee or co-trustee.

Effect of Renunciation or Disclaimer

Subsection (a) grantor trust status shall not apply with respect to a grantor trust power which has been renounced or disclaimed within a reasonable time after the holder of the power first became aware of its existence.

It is important to understand what constitutes a “reasonable time” and how the IRS will interpret the same to determine grantor trust status. 

A valid disclaimer is a matter for determination by state law, since neither Code Section 678 nor the regulations provide any guidelines as to what will constitute a valid disclaimer for these purposes while Sections 2518(a) and 2046 provide substantial guidance with respect to what constitutes “qualified disclaimer” for federal gift tax and estate tax purposes. The IRS has been quite vague on this regarding to it’s application for income tax purposes. 

It is realistic to believe that if one meets the §2518(a) statutory standard and disclaims the trust assets within nine months of the date of its transfer or, if the third person is a minor, within nine months of attaining age 21, the disclaimer will be timely for income tax purposes. 

Generally the estate and gift tax effect of general powers of appointment (and lapses) are unaffected by a powerholder’s incapacity. IRC §678(a) is similar – see Rev. Rul. 81-6, holding that a minor beneficiary with a withdrawal right (Crummey power) is deemed the substantial owner for §678 purposes even if local law requires a court appointed guardian and none has ever been appointed.

The IRS has taken the position that a trust beneficiary who disclaims the trust income remains taxable on the trust income (capital gain, interest, etc.) realized prior to the disclaimer. 

The disclaimer of a Code Section 678 power did not allow the disclaimant to avoid income taxation on the income earned by the trust on the trust assets prior to the disclaimer for income tax purposes. 

Cross Reference

Section 678(e) of the Code refers to section 1361(d) as the provision under which a beneficiary of a trust is treated as the owner of the portion of the trust assets which consists of stock in an electing small business corporation.

Section 1.671-4(b) of the Income Tax Regulations provides that in the case of a trust, when the same individual is both grantor and trustee, and that individual is treated as owner for the taxable year of all of the assets of the trust by the application of section 676, a Form 1041 should not be filed with the IRS for tax return purposes. Instead, all items of income, deduction, and credit from the trust should be reported on the individual’s Form 1040 in accordance with its instructions provided by the IRS for taxable income on his tax return. 

Section 1361(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code provides that the term “S corporation” means, with respect to any taxable year, a small business corporation for which an election under section 1362(a) is in effect.

Deciphering the Term ‘Income’ Under Internal Revenue Code Section 678

In the context of the Internal Revenue Code section 678, “income” likely refers to “taxable income” such as capital gains disclosed in your tax return, as opposed to “trust accounting income’ for grantor trust purposes. 

Treas. Reg. section 1.671-2(b) specifies that for purposes of the grantor trust rules the term “income” refers to income for income tax purposes and not trust accounting purposes and that if trust accounting income is being referenced the term “ordinary income” would be used. IRC section 678(b) uses the unmodified term “income” which refers to taxable income pursuant to the regulation.  Accordingly, in terms of the grantor trust rules, if a grantor and a third person are both deemed the owner of income allocable to either trust corpus or accounting income, then under IRC § 678(b) the grantor would be treated as the owner (i.e., IRC sections 674 through 677 trump IRC section 678(a)).

IRC section 643(b) (which does not apply to grantor trusts) specifies that the term “income” refers to “income of the estate or trust for the taxable year determined under the terms of the governing instrument and applicable local law” (i.e., trust accounting income under a state’s principal and income act) for the purposes of Subparts B, C, and D of Part I of Subchapter J (Irrevocable trust).  The grantor trust rules are in Subpart E, clearly omitted from the IRC section 643(b) reference. 

Ducking the IRC Section 678 Bullet

Designing a trust to derive tax benefits and to avoid application of the grantor trust rules to the grantor may be a sound strategy if a goal is to avoid trust tax attributes appearing on the grantor’s tax return. In connection with that strategy many may want to provide access to trust assets by allowing the trustee or some other person with withdrawal power to make distributions to one or more individuals or a class of individuals, while still providing asset protection. 

Please be careful when trying to argue exemption from the grantor trust rules for such trusts. Avoiding grantor trust rules should be dealt with the same as that sticker on a box of breakables being transported. Handle with care! The IRS will not be lenient when you try to argue non-grantor trust classification and could trigger some unforeseen gift or estate tax implications for such trusts. 

By way of an example, a trust granting a trustee withdrawal power to make distributions to descendants of the grantor “within the sole discretion of the trustee” will trigger application of the grantor trust rules to the trustee if the trustee is a descendant of the grantor/descendant.

There are however ways to address this grantor trust provisions. The easiest exemption method is to add an additional restriction on the trustee’s withdrawal power (fiduciary power) to make a decision by requiring approval from another person. This could then be regarded as a non-grantor trust and still provide asset protection. 

Two Common Planning Scenarios Could Land You in a Malpractice Trap if You Don’t Know This Rule

Trap 1:  Fourie Du Preez is retired and for estate planning purposes wants to protect some real property and other income generating assets for future use. A non-grantor trust could be a solution to estate planning to ensure estate inclusion to obtain a stepped-up basis on trust property.  The trustee in their fiduciary capacity will be given discretionary authority to make distributions of income and principal among Fourie Du Preez’s descendants, and appoints his son, Arno as sole trustee of the non-grantor trust.

Trap 2:  Fourie Du Preez’s last will and testament leaves most of his assets to a testamentary trust and the trust property is for the benefit of his descendants. The trustee, his son Arno has discretion to distribute income of the trust and trust property among his descendants until the youngest living at the decedent’s death has attained age 21.

Issue : In both scenarios the sole trustee is one of the children of the settlor/testator/decedent. Further, the trustee’s discretion is unlimited. Both trusts will therefore be treated as owned by the trustee for income tax purposes and not classified as a non-grantor trust, which makes the estate planning irrelevant. 

Shaun Eastman

IRC Section 677 – When A Right to Income Makes a Trust a Grantor Trust


In this week’s vlog, the managing director and CEO of Asena Advisors, Peter Harper examines Section 677 of the Internal Revenue Code: the Grantor Trust Rules and the ability for a grantor to still receive the income from a trust.

This vlog is for anyone that owns assets in foreign trusts and is moving to the US or facing a liquidity event.

To watch the 7th installment of our series, click play below:

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

Check out our new blog for a quick guide to everything Grantor Trusts:
https://asenaadvisors.com/blog/grantor-trust/

IRC Section 676 – How a Power of Revocation Makes a Trust a Grantor Trust


​​In the 6th installment of our Grantor Trust Series, Peter Harper, managing director and CEO of Asena Advisors, discusses Section 676 of the Internal Revenue Code and the power of revocation with a grantor or someone who is not adverse to the grantor.

This vlog is for anyone that owns assets in foreign trusts and is moving to the US or facing a liquidity event.

To watch the full video, click play below:

Check out our new blog for a quick guide to everything Grantor Trusts: https://asenaadvisors.com/blog/grantor-trust/

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

IRC Section 675 – Do Your Trust Powers Make a Foreign Trust a Grantor Trust?


​​In this week’s vlog, the managing director and CEO of Asena Advisors, Peter Harper, discusses Section 675 of the Internal Revenue Code and the non-market value consideration provisions within the specific trusts powers of a deed.

This vlog is for anyone that owns assets in foreign trusts and is moving to the US or facing a liquidity event.

To watch the full video, click play below:

Check out our new blog for a quick guide to everything Grantor Trust: https://asenaadvisors.com/blog/grantor-trust/

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

IRC Section 674 – Does Your Trustee Make Your Trust a Grantor Trust?


​​In this week’s vlog, Peter Harper – the managing director and CEO of Asena Advisors – discusses Section 674 of the Internal Revenue Code and how the allocated power of the trustee impacts a grantor classification.

This vlog is for anyone that owns assets in foreign trusts and is moving to the US or facing a liquidity event.

To watch the full video, click play below:

Check out our new blog for a quick guide to everything Grantor Trust: https://asenaadvisors.com/blog/grantor-trust/

Asena advisors. We protect Wealth.

1 2 3