US Inbound: Inbound convertible debt

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

US Inbound: Inbound convertible debt

fuller.jpg

forst.jpg

Jim Fuller


David Forst

Private letter ruling 201517003 describes a Country X parent company (Parent) that owns US Sub, which, in turn, owns US Sub-2. US Sub intends to borrow from Parent the X Country currency equivalent of a certain dollar amount. US Sub will issue to Parent a convertible debt instrument denominated in the X currency with a stated principal amount equal to the amount advanced by Parent. US Sub and US Sub-2 will use the borrowed funds to repay their previously outstanding dollar debt owing to Parent.

The stated interest rate will be set at a market rate on the issue date and will exceed the applicable federal rate in effect on that date. Stated interest will accrue monthly but will not be paid until maturity. On the repayment date, US Sub must pay the Parent the stated principal amount plus all accrued interest. US Sub will make this payment in cash unless the convertible note is converted into shares of US Sub stock.

The maximum number of shares subject to conversion will be determined on the issue date using the following formula:

formula.jpg

The number that US Sub proposes to use for Factor is greater than 1.0. The number of shares that Parent is eligible to receive will be adjusted if certain organisational changes occur that would, without adjustment, dilute or concentrate Parent's potential ownership interest.

US Sub represented that under the X tax laws, the portion of the redemption amount that exceeds the principal (that is, the accrued but unpaid stated interest) will be treated as capital gain regardless of whether US Sub delivers cash or shares. Parent and its subsidiaries in X now have a capital loss carryforward that will offset the capital gain on the convertible note.

US Sub also represented that Parent will exercise the conversion feature only if the value of the stock to be received exceeds the redemption amount.

Because the interest will not be paid currently in cash, the stated interest on the convertible note is original issue discount (OID). The OID will not be deductible as interest until US Sub delivers either cash or shares to repay the redemption amount.

Under § 163(l) no deduction is allowable for any interest paid or accrued on a disqualified debt instrument. A disqualified debt instrument means an indebtedness of a corporation that is payable in equity of the issuer or a related party or equity held by the issuer (or any related party) in any other person.

Section 163(l)(3)(A) states that indebtedness will be treated as payable in equity of the issuer or any other person if "a substantial amount of the principal or interest is required to be paid or converted, or at the option of the issuer or a related party is payable in, or convertible into, such equity…"

The flush language at the end of § 163(l)(3) also states "For purposes of this paragraph, principal or interest shall be treated as required to be so paid, converted, or determined if it may be required at the option of the holder or a related party and there is a substantial certainty the option will be exercised."

The issue the ruling addressed was whether the governing provision was § 163(l)(3)(A), which would deny a deduction for the interest expense, or § 163(l)(3)'s flush language which would deny a deduction based only on certain facts (a substantial certainty of exercise).

The Service concluded that it is appropriate in this case to read the language of § 163(l)(3)(A) as informed by the flush language at the end of § 163(l)(3). Thus, on the facts presented, the note will be a disqualified debt instrument under § 163(l) only if there is a substantial certainty the option will be exercised.

The Service stated that it expressed no opinion whether the facts provided by US Sub indicate that there is substantial certainty that Parent will exercise its conversion rights.

This ruling clearly will have significance, and be helpful, any time a foreign parent company makes a loan to its US subsidiary in exchange for the subsidiary's issuance of a convertible note.

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

Fenwick & West

Tel: +1 650 335 7205; +1 650 335 7274

Website: www.fenwick.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

In looking at the impact of taxation, money won't always be all there is to it
Australia’s Tax Practitioners Board is set to kick off 2026 with a new secretary to head the administrative side of its regulatory activities.
Ireland’s Department of Finance reported increased income tax, VAT and corporation tax receipts from 2024; in other news, it’s understood that HSBC has agreed to pay the French treasury to settle a tax investigation
The Australian Taxation Office believes the Swedish furniture company has used TP to evade paying tax it owes
Supermarket chain Morrisons is facing a £17 million ($23 million) tax bill; in other news, Donald Trump has cut proposed tariffs
The controversial deal will allow US-parented groups to be carved out from key aspects of pillar two
Awards
ITR invites tax firms, in-house teams, and tax professionals to make submissions for the 2027 World Tax rankings and the 2026 ITR Tax Awards globally
Pillar two was ‘weakened’ when it altered from a multinational convention agreement to simply national domestic law, Federico Bertocchi also argued
Imposing the tax on virtual assets is a measure that appears to have no legal, economic or statistical basis, one expert told ITR
The EU has seemingly capitulated to the US’s ‘side-by-side’ demands. This may be a win for the US, but the uncertainty has only just begun for pillar two
Gift this article