Articles by Alvin Brown Tax Preparation Offer In Compromise State Offers in Compromise Levy IRS Tax Liens IRS Tax Liens - continued IRS Tax Liens - continued 2 Levy - continued Audit Techniques Guide Congressional Contacts Criminal Investigation D.O.J Criminal Tax Manual Tax Litigation Penalty Installment Agreements Statute of Limitations Frivolous Tax Argument Interest Abatement IRS Misconduct IRS Abuses Tax Fraud Fraud Statutes Bankruptcy Tax Reform Legislation Tax Shelters Tax Court Trust Fund Penalty Legislation Innocent Spouse Relief Important Links
Tax
Shelters
Additional
Information:
IRS Notice 2001-16 FS 2005-11 IRS Notice 2003-47 IRS Notice 2000-61 IRS Notice 2002-21 IRS Notice 2001-45 IRS Notice 2001-51 Announcement 2002-2 IRS Notice 98-5 IRS Notice 99-59 IRS Notice 95-34 IRS Notice 2000-60 Revenue Ruling 99-14 Revenue Ruling 2000-12 Revenue Ruling 2004-12 IRS Notice 95-53 IRS Notice 2002-35 IRS Notice 2003-24 IRS Notice 2003-55 IRS Notice 2003-81 IRS Notice 2003-77 IRS Notice 2004-7 IRS Notice 2004-8 IRS Notice 2004-41 Revenue Ruling 2004-4 Revenue Ruling 2004-20 Announcement 2005-80 Revenue Ruling 2002-3 Revenue Ruling 2002-80 Reg 1.643(a)-8 IRS Settlement Proposal
|
IRS Notice
2003-81

Notice
2003-81 , I.R.B. 2003-51, December 4, 2003.
The Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury
Department are aware of a type of transaction,
described below, in which a taxpayer claims a loss
upon the assignment of a section
1256 contract to a charity but fails to
report the recognition of gain when the taxpayer's
obligation under an offsetting non- section
1256 contract terminates. This notice
alerts taxpayers and their representatives that
these transactions are tax avoidance transactions
and identifies these transactions, and those that
are substantially similar to these transactions, as
listed transactions for purposes of §1.6011-4(b)(2)
of the Income Tax Regulations and §§301.6111-2(b)(2)
and 301.6112-1(b)(2) of the Procedure and
Administration Regulations. This notice also alerts
parties involved with these transactions of certain
responsibilities that may arise from their
involvement with these transactions.
FACTS
A taxpayer pays premiums to purchase a call option
and a put option (the purchased options) on a
foreign currency. The currency is one in which
positions are traded through regulated futures
contracts, and the purchased options, therefore, are
foreign currency contracts within the meaning of section
1256(g)(2)(A) of the Internal Revenue
Code and section
1256 contracts within the meaning of section
1256(b). The purchased options are
reasonably expected to move inversely in value to
one another over a relevant range, thus ensuring
that, as the value of the underlying foreign
currency changes, the taxpayer will hold a loss
position in one of the two section
1256 contracts. The taxpayer also
receives premiums for writing a call option and a
put option (the written options) on a different
foreign currency in which positions are not traded
through regulated futures contracts. Thus, the
written options are not foreign currency contracts
within the meaning of section
1256(g)(2)(A), nor are they section
1256 contracts within the meaning of section
1256(b). The written options are
reasonably expected to move inversely in value to
one another over a relevant range, thus ensuring
that, as the value of the underlying foreign
currency changes, the taxpayer will hold a gain
position in one of the two non- section
1256 contracts.
The values of the two currencies underlying the
purchased and written options (i) historically have
demonstrated a very high positive correlation with
one another, or (ii) officially have been linked to
one another, such as through the European Exchange
Rate Mechanism (ERM II). Thus, as the currencies
change in value, the taxpayer reasonably expects to
have the following potential gains and losses in
substantially offsetting positions: (1) a loss in a
purchased option and a gain in a written option; and
(2) a gain in a purchased option and a loss in a
written option. At any time, the taxpayer's loss in
the purchased option position that has declined in
value may be more or less than the taxpayer's gain
in the offsetting written option position that has
appreciated in value. Similarly, the taxpayer's gain
in the remaining purchased option position may be
more or less than the taxpayer's loss in the
remaining written option position. A material
pre-tax profit or rate of return, or both, on the
transaction is possible but unlikely.
The taxpayer assigns to a charity the purchased
option that has a loss. The charity also assumes the
taxpayer's obligation under the offsetting written
option that has a gain. As with all written options,
the amount of gain on the option is limited to the
premium received for the option. In the same tax
year, the taxpayer may dispose of the remaining
purchased option and offsetting written option.
Because the purchased option assigned to the charity
is a section
1256 contract, the taxpayer relies on section
1256(c) and Greene v. United States,
79 F.3d 1348 (2d Cir. 1996), to mark to market the
purchased option when the option is assigned to the
charity and to recognize a loss at that time. In
contrast, because the assumed written option is not
a section
1256 contract, the taxpayer claims not to
recognize gain attributable to the option premium.
Specifically, the taxpayer claims that the charity's
assumption of the option obligation does not cause
the taxpayer to recognize gain and that the taxpayer
also does not recognize gain either at the time the
option expires or terminates or at any other time.
ANALYSIS
Rev.
Rul. 58-234, 1958-1 C.B. 279, clarified
by Rev.
Rul. 68-151, 1968-1 C.B. 363, holds that
an option writer does not recognize income or gain
with respect to a premium received for writing an
option until the option is terminated, without
exercise, or otherwise. Accord Rev.
Rul. 78-182, 1978-1 C.B. 265; Koch v.
Commissioner, 67 T.C. 71 (1976), acq.
1980-2 C.B. 1. Rev.
Rul. 58-234 explains that this is the
treatment for the option writer because the option
writer assumes a burdensome and continuing
obligation, and the transaction therefore stays open
without any ascertainable income or gain until the
writer's obligation is finally terminated. When the
option writer's obligation terminates, the
transaction closes, and the option writer must
recognize any income or gain attributable to the
prior receipt of the option premium.
In some cases, the option writer's obligation under
the option contract may terminate on the charity's
assumption of the written option obligation. In
other cases, the writer will have a continuing
obligation because the writer may be called upon to
perform if the charity fails to perform or to
reimburse the charity for any losses or expenses it
may incur if called upon to perform. If an
assumption terminates the option writer's obligation
under the option contract, the option writer must
recognize gain when the option obligation is
assumed. If the assumption does not terminate the
option writer's obligation under the option
contract, the option writer must recognize the
premium when the option writer's obligation under
the option contract terminates (other than through
an exercise of the option against, and performance
by, the option writer).
These general principles remain applicable even if
the assumption of the option writer's obligation is
part of what the taxpayer claims is a donative
transaction. Cf. Diedrich v. Commissioner,
457 U.S. 191 (1982) (noting that if a donee pays a
gift tax obligation arising from a donative
transfer, the donative nature of the transaction
does not preclude income recognition by the donor on
the obligation assumed). Here, the taxpayer has made
a transfer to the charity of the purchased option,
and the charity has assumed the burden of the
written option. No aspect of the taxpayer's transfer
or the charity's assumption (or their combination)
relieves the taxpayer from its duty under the Code
to account for the gain attributable to the premium
originally received by the taxpayer for assuming the
burden of writing the option. See Lucas v.
Earl, 281 U.S. 111 (1930) (holding that a
taxpayer may not avoid inclusion of future earned
income by making a gratuitous transfer of the right
to receive the income).
Finally, if the taxpayer has any unrecognized gain
on the written option at the end of the year in
which the assumption occurs (e.g., the assumption
did not terminate the option writer's obligation
under the option contract), the mark-to-market loss
on the offsetting contributed section
1256 contract will be deferred under section
1092.
Transactions that are the same as, or substantially
similar to, the transactions described in this
notice are identified as "listed
transactions" for purposes of §§1.6011-4(b)(2),
301.6111-2(b)(2)
and 301.6112-1(b)(2)
effective December 4, 2003, the date this notice was
released to the public. Variations on these
transactions may include positions in other section
1256 and non- section
1256 contracts. Independent of their
classification as "listed transactions"
for purposes of §§1.6011-4(b)(2),
301.6111-2(b)(2),
and 301.6112-1(b)(2),
transactions that are the same as, or substantially
similar to, the transaction described in this notice
may already be subject to the disclosure
requirements of section
6011 ( §1.6011-4),
the tax shelter registration requirements of section
6111 ( §§301.6111-1T, 301.6111-2), or
the list maintenance requirements of section
6112 ( §301.6112-1). Persons who are
required to register these tax shelters under section
6111 but have failed to do so may be
subject to the penalty under section
6707(a). Persons who are required to
maintain lists of investors under section
6112 but have failed to do so (or who
fail to provide those lists when requested by the
Service) may be subject to the penalty under section
6708(a). In addition, the Service may
impose penalties on parties involved in these
transactions or substantially similar transactions,
including the accuracy-related penalty under §6662.
The Service and the Treasury recognize that some
taxpayers may have filed tax returns taking the
position that they were entitled to the purported
tax benefits of the type of transaction described in
this notice. These taxpayers should consult with a
tax advisor to ensure that their transactions are
disclosed properly and to take appropriate
corrective action.
The principal author of this notice is Clay
Littlefield of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel
(Financial Institutions and Products). For further
information regarding this notice, contact Mr.
Littlefield at (202) 622-3920 (not a toll-free
call).
|