Liquidating vs nonliquidating distributions

Conversely, the stockholders record a loss (also, almost always a capital loss), if the net distribution is less than their adjusted basis in the stock surrendered in the transaction. Indeed, in that situation, the tax consequences spelled out in ( Section 331(a) and Section 336(a) will not be visited on the shareholders and the corporation, respectively.** Federal Law Governs The ruling concludes that the “core test of corporate existence,” for purposes of federal income taxation, is always, a matter of federal law.The transaction is treated somewhat differently if a shareholder owns more than one block of stock, and receives a series of distributions in complete liquidation. To be sure, since the state law in the IRS example brought about an automatic transfer (to its shareholders) of a dissolved corporation’s assets, it followed that the company’s dissolution did not give rise to a complete liquidation.In the ruling, a corporate taxpayer had been incorporated in a state on a particular date, let’s say January 19, 2007.The company was “administratively dissolved” some time after, for example, effective January 25, 2008, due to its failure to timely pay state franchise taxes.

If it is considered terminated, the company would have been viewed as having completely liquidated, and both it and its shareholders would have experienced the tax consequences attendant to the situation. In other words, in most cases, the liquidation of a corporation commonly engenders two levels of taxation: tax will be imposed at both the corporate and distributee shareholder levels.* The De Facto Company Closure A complete liquidation is not always accompanied by a formal or legal company shutdown. Thus, unless dissolution brings about an automatic transfer of the corporation’s assets to its shareholders, the corporation, even though dissolved, continues its existence.

Despite the tax advantages, investors who receive liquidation dividends often find that they do not cover their initial investment.

When a company has more liabilities than assets, equity is negative and no liquidating distribution is made at all.

Further, shareholders are permitted to recover their entire basis in a block before reporting gain. More to the point, notwithstanding the dissolution and reincorporation, no new corporation is deemed to come into existence so the corporate taxpayer is not required to apply for a new Employer Identification Number.

A loss from the liquidation, garners different treatment. For that reason, it is well-settled that a liquidation can occur without a formal or legal dissolution and, now, thanks to LTR 200806006, we also know that a dissolution—which does not give rise to an automatic transfer of the dissolved corporation’s assets to its shareholders—also does not give rise to, in and of itself, a complete liquidation.

Search for liquidating vs nonliquidating distributions:

liquidating vs nonliquidating distributions-21liquidating vs nonliquidating distributions-70liquidating vs nonliquidating distributions-14liquidating vs nonliquidating distributions-23

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

One thought on “liquidating vs nonliquidating distributions”