Copying and distributing are prohibited without permission of the publisher

Debate still continues on US carried interest

28 December 2010

Richard Zarin and William Zimmerman of Morgan Lewis & Bockius investigate why the US Congress is having such difficulty passing carried interest legislation.

Since 2007 the US Congress has considered legislation numerous times that would subject investment fund managers to increased US federal income taxes on the share of investment partnership profits they are allocated in return for investment advisory services provided to such partnerships (carried interest). Why hasn't some form of carried interest legislation been passed to date? We believe the answer to this question is quite simple: The line drawing necessary to differentiate (and impose additional tax on) income attributable to investment management services provided by partners to US partnerships, without changing the favoured tax treatment of true equity investments in such partnerships, is just too difficult in light of the flexibility provided in US partnership tax rules, and in the current US political environment.

While there are a number of competing policy factors at play, we believe that two of such factors are the most significant.

The most compelling argument...



This article is locked content, available to current subscribers or trialists.

  • Current subscribers or trialists - Please log in to view this article in full.
  • New users - Please take a free 7 day trial.
  • Expired subscribers or trialists - Please subscribe to gain immediate full access.

If you think you've received this message in error, please contact your account manager, Nick Burroughs:
Email: nburroughs@euromoneyplc.com, Tel: +44 (0)207 779 8379

Subscribe now

Subscribe today to gain full access to International Tax Review.

Subscribe

Free trial

Take a free trial now and gain 7 days of full access to International Tax Review.

Free trial





International Tax Review Profile

RT @austaxprof: "9 global drug companies booked $8 billion in Aus revenue last year but paid just $85 million #tax" @FinancialReview #senate

Jul 3 2015 08:34 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
International Tax Review Profile

RT @JolyonMaugham: @IntlTaxReview I believe the noun is "tweep"

Jul 2 2015 01:42 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
International Tax Review Profile

Must agree on that one. Perhaps a tax tweeter (twitterer?) of the year? https://t.co/02ZUaIlbZe

Jul 2 2015 01:41 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
International Tax Review Profile

RT @friedmanllp: #BEPS relies on buy in from jurisdictions like the US. @IntlTaxReview shares why the hard yards may still lie ahead: http:…

Jul 2 2015 01:32 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
International Tax Review Profile

You may be on to something with that award! We'll give it some thought. https://t.co/ayN5x6I4vb

Jul 2 2015 01:32 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
International Correspondents

After the Irish budget, what would make you more likely to put more substance into Ireland?