A Cliff Effect: the New Landscape for Taxable Asset Transactions
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A cliff effect: The new landscape for taxable asset transactions New tax act shifts economics of certain transaction structures The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the Act)1 signed into law last Taxable sale of stock vs. taxable sale of assets December immediately ushered in a wave of unknowns. It’s In general, an acquisition of a trade or business can take only clear, however, that there is a new landscape for negotiating two possible forms, a purchase of equity or a purchase of and structuring taxable acquisitions. Most significantly, the assets. Although certain provisions in the tax law provide for Act reduced the corporate tax rate to 21% for taxable years gain deferral either in whole or in part, a basic tenet of U.S. beginning after Dec. 31, 2017, down from the highest pre-Act federal income tax law provides that gain or loss is recognized rate of 35%. when property is exchanged in a transaction. In such instances, buyers and sellers engaged in taxable transactions face the Although the Act is arguably a boon to corporations overall, fundamental decision of whether to structure the transaction it presents new, nuanced issues when structuring taxable as the sale of equity or the sale of assets. This age-old tension asset acquisitions. Other modifications to the code,2 when between buyers and sellers is an important negotiating point in coupled with the rate changes, may cause ripple effects that many transactions. Sellers are primarily concerned with reducing fundamentally shift the economics of certain transaction their taxes upon sale, while buyers seek higher deductible, structures. One such modification — and a central topic of depreciable and/or amortizable tax basis to shield the future discussion in this article — is the expanded definition of what is taxable income (referred to herein as the tax shield) of the excluded from capital asset treatment under Section 1221(a)(3) acquired business.3 of the code. This expanded language increases the likelihood As mentioned, the seller’s predominant concern is to pay the that intellectual property held by a business will be taxed at least amount of tax possible upon the sale of the business. If the higher ordinary rates upon a sale or exchange. buyer proposes a taxable asset sale, and that structure results in a greater tax liability to the sellers (which is often the case), The changes imposed by the Act create an environment in which the sellers will demand that the buyer make them whole for buyers and sellers now face a slim margin for error, as their that additional tax liability in the form of additional purchase competing interests are now likely to diverge even further than consideration (referred to herein as the gross-up payment). was previously the case. For buyers, there are new opportunities to enhance economic returns; for sellers, there are heightened risks. This article explores how tax and valuation advice from professionals is essential when navigating this new terrain. 1. P.L. 115-97. 2. All references to the “code” or a “section” are references to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and a section thereof, respectively. 3. This decision can have far-reaching implications to the buyer for years to come because, under Section 1012, the buyer should obtain a cost basis in the assets acquired in the transaction, generally equal to the respective asset’s fair market value. If the buyer acquires the stock of the corporation, the buyer generally will not be able to recover this basis until and unless that stock is disposed of in the future by the buyer (because stock is neither a depreciable nor an amortizable asset). On the other hand, if a buyer acquires the business assets held by the target corporation, and those assets are either depreciable or amortizable under tax law, the basis (to the extent gain has been recognized) may provide incremental depreciation or amortization deductions to the buyer, reducing the buyer’s taxable income in post-close periods. If the target business is held by a C corporation, an asset sale is The value creation and value erosion of a taxable often not desirable due to the inherent double taxation imposed asset sale under the tax regime of Subchapter C. Various provisions of In general, a taxable purchase of business assets will produce Subchapter C ensure that tax is levied first at the C corporation some amount of a tax shield that may be used to offset the future level upon the sale of the business assets, and a second layer taxable income of the buyer. To induce the seller to structure the of tax is levied on the shareholders upon the distribution of the transaction as a taxable asset sale, sometimes the buyer must proceeds (through corporate liquidation or otherwise). However, make the seller whole for the incremental tax liability that the an asset sale may be feasible if the target C corporation has seller incurs. In effect, the buyer (through its gross-up payment) sufficient tax attributes (e.g., net operating losses) to offset the is paying an incremental tax today to receive an incremental effects of double taxation. benefit in future periods. Any astute financier might immediately question this seemingly counterintuitive strategy; however, value A scenario perhaps more common than the taxable sale of can indeed be created, a “win-win” situation, by entering into assets by a C corporation occurs when the target is an S a taxable asset sale, provided there is substantial forethought corporation and the acquisition is a “qualified” stock purchase given to the purchase price allocations. under Section 338(d)(3). In this scenario, the buyer and seller can make a joint election under Section 338(h)(10) to treat the A key factor to the value creation lies in the arbitrage between taxable purchase of the stock as a deemed taxable purchase the buyer and seller rates. This is no more apparent than when of the assets for federal income tax purposes.4 Due to the flow- dealing with an individual seller and a C corporation buyer. The through nature of the S corporation, and by operation of certain individual capital gains rate is the rate at which the seller (an rules that adjust the basis of the shareholder’s stock, the general individual) will pay tax upon the sale of his capital assets, and effect is that the gain is taxed only once (rather than twice, as the corporate rate is the rate at which the tax shield will offset under Subchapter C).5 the future taxable income of the buyer (a C corporation). Prior to the Act, the highest individual capital gains rate and the When a taxable transaction is structured as either the actual highest corporate rate were 20% and 35%, respectively. The sale of assets or the deemed sale of assets, the magnitude highest individual ordinary rate — generally, the rate at which of the requisite gross-up payment — which can result from the individual seller would pay tax on the sale of his ordinary tax character differences (ordinary versus capital) — could assets — was 39.6%. completely negate the benefit of the tax shield. This article discusses some new (and some old) tax considerations a buyer should take into account when purchasing assets, along with the allocations of value assigned to the various asset classes. The Act generally impacts the allocation between capital and ordinary income due to changes to the definition of what is not a capital asset under Section 1221. Finally, this article addresses certain valuation concepts and subjective valuation methodologies that are used to allocate the purchase price to the various asset classes when a transaction is structured as the taxable sale and purchase of a business’s assets. 4. Treas. Reg. § 1.338(h)(10)-1(d)(5)(i). 5. In general, the gain upon sale of the target S corporation’s assets will be recognized by the target S corporation’s shareholders (i.e., it will flow through to the shareholders) under section 1366, and their bases in the stock of the S corporation will increase under section 1367 by a commensurate amount of the gain recognized. However, under section 1374, property that was transferred from a C corporation to the S corporation, and the S corporation’s basis in the asset is determined (in whole or in part) by reference to the basis in the hands of the C corporation, will be taxed at the corporate level if gain is recognized on the sale or exchange of the property within the recognition period (currently 5 years from the time of the S corporation election). 2 A cliff effect: The new landscape for taxable asset transactions By comparing these three rates, it’s readily apparent that the often annual, income production that results from the sale of value creation of a taxable asset sale with a gross-up payment assets in the ordinary course of a person’s trade or business. can quickly dissipate as more of the gain upon sale of the The one-time, sporadic income from the sale of a capital asset corporation’s assets is taxed at the higher, individual ordinary is typically the result of years of accumulated appreciation in rate. To illustrate, consider a basic example in which the pre- the asset’s value. Prior to 1921, the recognition of this lump sum Act tax rates are applied to an individual seller that is selling a windfall in a single year could have unduly subjected a person cash-free, debt-free business worth $100; the seller’s basis in his to a higher rate bracket, resulting in an increased tax liability, S corporation stock is zero, and all the assets inside the business had the appreciated value been recognized as income over are ordinary in character and have been fully depreciated the capital asset’s holding period.