International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

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

US Inbound: Obama releases FY 2016 Budget



Jim Fuller

David Forst

The Obama Administration released a series of tax proposals in February 2015 in connection with its Fiscal Year 2016 Budget. There are some differences from previous years' Obama Administration Budgets and some signals as to the extent to which the Administration believes it can press its authority to write regulations absent Congressional action. The Budget essentially repeats last year's proposal that restricts the amount of interest income a US subsidiary of a foreign parent can deduct. Under the proposal a US member's deduction for interest expense generally would be limited if the member has net interest expense for tax purposes and the member's net interest expense for financial reporting purposes (computed on a separate company basis) exceeds the member's proportionate share of the net interest expense reported on the financial reporting group's consolidated financial statements (excess financial statement net interest expense). Also, if a member fails to substantiate the member's proportionate share of the group's net interest expense, or a member so elects, the member's interest expense will be limited to the member's interest income plus 10% of the member's adjusted taxable income.

The fact that this proposal exists at all is evidence that the Obama Administration believes that additional restrictions on interest deductibility (on top of the existing Code sec. 163(j)) must be achieved through Congressional action and cannot be achieved through regulatory action alone. Also in this regard, Notice 2014-52, last year's anti-inversion Notice, did not contain any further restrictions on interest deductibility.

The Budget's proposals enhancing Code sec. 7874, the anti-inversion provision, are also largely the same as last year's, such as reducing the 80% test in § 7874 to a 50% test, and eliminating the 60% test. The new Budget does ameliorate last year's proposal providing that a foreign company acquiring a US company would be treated as US if the expanded affiliated group is primarily managed and controlled in the US and does not conduct substantial business activities in a country in which the foreign acquiring corporation is created or organised. Under the new Budget, this rule would only apply if, immediately before the acquisition, the fair market value of the stock of the domestic entity is greater than the fair market value of the stock of the foreign acquiring corporation. Of course, the Administration, through Notice 2014-52, has already made an impact on inversion transactions by creating new rules under, inter alia, Code secs. 956 and 7701(l). However, a change in the basic mechanics of Code sec. 7874 would need Congressional action. We have discussed the operations of Code sec. 7874 and Notice 2014-52 in previous columns.

The Budget also repeats the Administration's proposal to codify Rev. Rul. 91-32, the revenue ruling that, in contravention of Code sec. 741, would treat a non-US person's sale of a partnership interest as US taxable income to the extent of the partnership's US business assets. The Administration has not taken regulatory action in this area, presumably because Code sec. 741 clearly addresses this issue.

Jim Fuller ( and David Forst (

Fenwick & West

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


more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The General Court reverses its position taken four years ago, while the UN discusses tax policy in New York.
Discussion on amount B under the first part of the OECD's two-pronged approach to international tax reform is far from over, if the latest consultation is anything go by.
Pillar two might be top of mind for many multinational companies, but the huge variations between countries’ readiness means getting ahead of the game now, argues Russell Gammon, chief solutions officer at Tax Systems.
ITR’s latest quarterly PDF is going live today, leading on the looming battle between the UN and the OECD for dominance in global tax policy.
Company tax changes are central to the German government’s plan to revive the economy, but sources say they miss the mark. Ralph Cunningham reports.
The winners of the ITR Americas Tax Awards have been announced for 2023!
There is a ‘huge demand’ for tax services in the Middle East, says new Clyde & Co partner Rachel Fox in an interview with ITR.
The ECB warns the tax could leave banks with weaker capital levels, while the UAE publishes guidance on its new corporate tax regime.
Caroline Setliffe and Ben Shem-Tov of Eversheds Sutherland give an overview of the US transfer pricing penalty regime and UK diverted profits tax considerations for multinational companies.
The result follows what EY said was one of the most successful years in the firm’s history.