US Inbound: Sale of partnership interest

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

US Inbound: Sale of partnership interest

Sponsored by

fenwick.jpg
The IRS lost in court but the result the IRS wanted is now codified

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (2017 Act) overturned Grecian Magnesite v Commissioner, which held that the sale by a foreign person of its interest in a partnership engaged in a US trade or business was not subject to US tax.

The 2017 Act adds new Code Sec 864(c)(8), providing that if a non-resident alien individual or foreign corporation owns, directly or indirectly, an interest in a partnership that is engaged in any trade or business within the US, gain or loss on the sale or exchange of all (or any portion of) such interest will be treated as income that is effectively connected with the conduct of a US trade or business (ECI). This is the end result that the IRS advocated in Rev Rul 91-32. The IRS lost in court, but the result the IRS wanted is now codified.

The amount of gain or loss that is ECI is: (i) The portion of the partner's distributive share of the amount of gain or loss that would have been ECI, if the partnership had sold all of its assets at their fair market value as of the date of the sale or exchange of such interest; or (ii) Zero, if no gain or loss on such deemed sale would have been ECI. The status of the partnership as US or foreign does not matter; the relevant point is whether the partnership is engaged in a US trade or business. A partner's distributive share of gain or loss on the deemed sale is determined in the same manner as such partner's distributive share of the non-separately stated taxable income or loss of such partnership.

New section 1446(f)(1) provides that if any portion of the gain on any disposition of an interest in a partnership would be treated under new Sec 864(c)(8) as effectively connected with the conduct of a trade or business within the US (effectively connected gain), then the transferee must withhold a tax equal to 10% of the amount realised on the disposition. Future guidance will be issued on how to withhold, deposit, and report the tax withheld.

Presumably these new withholding rules will use the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act (FIRPTA) rules as a precedent, in which the purchaser of a US real property interest from a non-resident seller must withhold 10% of the purchase price. The FIRPTA rules contain an exemption to the extent the seller can demonstrate that the withholding of 10% of the purchase price would exceed the seller's tax on the disposition. Absent rules under section 1446, as a matter of prudence presumably buyers will withhold whenever there is a foreign seller of a partnership interest. Further, the partnership will need to exercise caution that it is not treated as a 'backup' withholding agent.

While a seller can provide a 'non-foreign affidavit' to certify that they are not a foreign person (and thus avoid withholding), the statute does not provide for a certification that the partnership does not have a US trade or business. Hopefully, regulations will authorise such an exception from withholding.

In addition, commentators expressed concern that in the case of a disposition of a publicly traded partnership interest, applying new section 1446(f) presents substantial practical problems. In response, the Treasury and the IRS determined that withholding under section 1446(f) is not required for any disposition of an interest in a publicly traded partnership until regulations or other guidance has been issued. The temporary suspension is limited to dispositions of interest that are publicly traded and does not extend to non publicly traded interests.

Fuller-James

Forst

Jim

Fuller

David

Forst

Jim Fuller (jpfuller@fenwick.com) and David Forst (dforst@fenwick.com)

Fenwick & West

Website: www.fenwick.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The threat of 50% tariffs on Brazilian goods coincides with new Brazilian legal powers to adopt retaliatory economic measures, local experts tell ITR
The country’s chancellor appears to have backtracked from previous pillar two scepticism; in other news, Donald Trump threatened Russia with 100% tariffs
In its latest G20 update, the OECD also revealed tense discussions with the US where the ‘significant threat’ of Section 899 was highlighted
The tax agency has increased compliance yield from wealthy individuals but cannot identify how much tax is paid by UK billionaires, the committee also claimed
Saffery cautioned that documentation requirements in new government proposals must be limited if medium-sized companies are not exempted from TP
The global minimum tax deal is not viable without US participation, Friedrich Merz has argued
Section 899 of the ‘one big beautiful’ bill would have spelled disaster for many international investors into the US, but following its shelving, attention turns to the fate of the OECD’s pillars
DLA Piper’s co-head of tax for the US and Latin America tells ITR about her fervent belief in equal access to the law, loving yoga, and paternal inspirations
Tax expert Craig Hillier agrees with the comparison of pillar two to using a sledgehammer to crack a nut
The amount is reported to be up 57% from the £5.6bn that the UK tax agency believes was underpaid in the previous year
Gift this article