On January 17, 2025, multiple news outlets and other sources reported the existence of a memorandum circulated by the U.S. House of Representatives Budget Committee to the House Republican Caucus (the “Memorandum”) containing an extensive list of budget proposals that may be considered in connection with the new Congress’s widely expected budget reconciliation legislation. The Memorandum, which is publicly available via link from a number of news outlets,[1] contains approximately fifty pages of proposals covering a wide range of policy areas and enumerating scores of potential specific legislative proposals (along with estimated budget effects in most cases), some of which are seemingly mutually exclusive. Included in the memo are a number of tax-related proposals, including tariff proposals, which are briefly set forth below.
Trump Administration Disavows the OECD Global Tax Deal
On January 20, 2025, the White House issued a memorandum (the “Memorandum”)[1], announcing that the “Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Global Tax Deal” (the “Global Tax Deal”) has “no force or effect in the United States” and disavowing “any commitments” previously made by the United States
Supreme Court Rules on Moore v. U.S. – Upholds Mandatory Repatriation Tax
On June 20, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that the so called mandatory repatriation tax under Internal Revenue Code Section 965 (“MRT”) is constitutional.
Justice Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion. Justice Thomas (joined by Justice Gorsuch) dissented. Justice Barrett (joined by Justice Alito) and Justice Jackson delivered separate
Proposed Regulations Issued on the Excise Tax on Repurchases of Corporate Stock
Introduction
On April 9, 2024, the Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) and the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) issued two sets of proposed Treasury Regulations related to section 4501, REG-115710-22, which provides guidance on the application of section 4501, and REG-118499-23 (together with REG-115710-22, the
Final Regulations on Domestically Controlled REITs
- Introduction
On April 24, 2024, the U.S. Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) and the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) issued final regulations[1] on the definition of “domestically controlled” real estate investment trusts (“REITs”) (the “Final Regulations”). The Final Regulations retain
Tax Relief for American Families and Workers Act of 2024
On January 17, 2024, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-Mo.) released a bill, the “Tax Relief for American Families and Workers Act of 2024” (“TRAFA” or the “bill”). All of the provisions in the bill are taxpayer favorable, except
Senate Finance Committee Requests Public Comments on Digital Asset Taxation
On July 11, 2023, the Senate Finance Committee released an open letter to the Digital Asset Community asking a variety of questions in connection with possible future legislation. Public comments must be emailed to the Senate Finance Committee staff at responses@finance.senate.gov by September 8, 2023. The questions are related to the following nine general areas.
- Marking-to-market for traders and dealers;
- Trading safe harbor;
- Treatment of loans of digital assets;
- Wash sales;
- Constructive sales;
- Timing and source of income earned from staking and mining;
- Nonfunctional currency;
- FATCA and FBAR reporting; and
- Valuation and substantiation.
The balance of this blog describes each area, lists each question, and discusses certain of them.
New Bill Would Deny Section 892 Benefits To Certain Sovereign Wealth Funds
On July 26, 2023, Senate Finance Chairman Ron Wyden (D-OR) introduced the Ending Tax Breaks for Massive Sovereign Wealth Funds Act (the “bill”), which would deny the benefits of section 892 of the Internal Revenue Code[1] to sovereign wealth funds whose foreign government holds more than $100 billion of investable assets,[2] and either (i) is not a party to a free trade agreement or income tax treaty in effect with the United States or (ii) is North Korea, China, Russia, or Iran.[3] If the bill is passed, it would deny the benefits of section 892 to several of the largest sovereign wealth funds by assets.
Section 892 generally exempts foreign governments (including “integral parts”[4] of foreign governments and foreign governments’ sovereign wealth funds and other “controlled entities”[5]) from U.S. federal income tax on income received from investments in U.S. stocks, bonds, and other securities, financial instruments held in the execution of governmental financial or monetary policy, and interest on deposits in banks in the United States. However, section 892 does not exempt from U.S. federal income tax any income that is derived from the conduct of a “commercial activity”,[6] income received by a “controlled commercial entity” or received (directly or indirectly) from a “controlled commercial entity”,[7] and income derived from the disposition of any interest in a controlled commercial entity.
The bill would generally apply to income received after December 31, 2023. However, the bill contains three grandfather provisions that would apply until 2026.
First, any investment made before the enactment of the bill would be grandfathered until 2026.
Recent Legislative Proposals and IRS Guidance on the Taxation of Digital Assets
This blog post summarizes recent federal bills that have been introduced (but not yet passed), proposals by the Biden Administration, and guidance issued by the Internal Revenue Service with respect to the taxation of digital assets.
Summary of the Guidance:
The Responsible Financial Innovation Act (the “RFIA”) introduced
New Proposed Regulations Would Impact the Determination of Domestically Controlled REIT and Structures for Sovereign Wealth Funds’ US Real Estate Investments
On December 28, 2022, the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) and the Treasury Department released proposed regulations (the “Proposed Regulations”) under sections 892 and 897 of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”).[1] If finalized as proposed, the Proposed Regulations would prevent a non-U.S. person from investing through a wholly-owned U.S. corporation in order to cause a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) to be “domestically controlled”. The ability of a non-U.S. person to invest through a U.S. corporation to cause a REIT to be domestically controlled had been approved in a private letter ruling, and is a structure that is widely used. The Proposed Regulations would also apply to existing REITs that rely on a non-U.S. owned U.S. corporation for their domestically-controlled status, and suggest that the IRS could attack such a structure under current law (i.e., even if the Proposed Regulations are not finalized).
The Proposed Regulations also clarify that in determining a REIT’s domestically controlled status, a foreign partnership would be looked through and “qualified foreign pension funds” (“QFPFs”) and entities that are wholly owned by one or more QFPFs (“QCEs”) would be treated as foreign persons. Lastly, the Proposed Regulations also provide a helpful set of rules for sovereign wealth fund investors that indirectly invest in U.S. real estate.