US Inbound: Tax Cuts and Jobs Act

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

US Inbound: Tax Cuts and Jobs Act

intl-updates-small.jpg

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act proposes the most significant changes in US tax law in more than three decades.

The 'Act' at this point is only two bills: the House bill was approved by the House and the Senate bill was approved by the Senate. A conference committee will need to reconcile them.

While the language and provisions of the final bill are not certain at this time, we thought it would be helpful to discuss some of the financing provisions that can affect inbound planning.

Interest deductions of a US corporation would generally be limited to 30% of the taxpayer's adjusted taxable income plus any business interest income under amended § 163(j) rules. The 30% interest deduction cap applies to all interest deductions, not just related-party interest.

Under new § 163(n) in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, a US corporation's interest deduction relative to the worldwide group's interest deduction could be no greater than 110% of the US corporation's earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortisation (EBITDA) relative to the worldwide group's EBITDA. In other words, a US corporation's interest deductions would generally be restricted if it were more highly leveraged relative to the rest of the worldwide group. The EBITDA of US corporations includes the EBITDA of any disregarded entities, but generally does not include any distributions received from foreign subsidiaries.

The Senate proposal reduces interest deduction to the product of the net interest expense multiplied by the debt-to-equity differential percentage of the worldwide affiliated group. The asset amounts taken into account in the equity calculation are based on the assets' adjusted bases.

Section 163(n) would apply to corporations that file consolidated financial statements that include at least one US corporation, one foreign corporation, and report annual gross receipts in excess of $100 million.

When both the new § 163(j) and the new § 163(n) interest limitations apply, the one that results in the greater disallowance would take precedence.

The Senate proposal also would require "applicable taxpayers" to pay a minimum tax of 10% of "modified taxable income", i.e. taxable income computed without deducting "base erosion payments" or the "base erosion percentage" of net operating loss carryovers. An applicable taxpayer would mean a taxpayer with at least $500 million of annual average gross receipts and a base erosion percentage of at least 4%.

A base erosion payment would mean any amount that is paid or accrued to a related foreign person (with "relatedness" broadly defined) and for which a deduction is allowable (interest, royalties, services, etc.), including any amount paid or accrued in connection with depreciable or amortisable property.

The House bill's version of this provision is an excise tax on such payments, which seems less likely to be enacted.

The new § 267A provides that no deduction is allowed for amounts paid or accrued to a related party in hybrid transactions or with hybrid entities.

In another change, Grecian Magnesite Mining v. Commissioner, 149 T.C. No. 3 (2017), would be overturned prospectively by a statutory change. It dealt with a foreign partner's sale of its partnership interest in a partnership that is engaged in a US business. It would be enforced by subjecting the buyer to a withholding tax.

Fuller-James
Forst-David

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 case to determine whether the tariff regime is constitutional will eventually find its way to the US Supreme Court, ITR has also heard
In other news, the Council of the EU pledged support to a CBAM simplification and exemption initiative, and Portugal issued new VAT filing guidance
While Brazil’s sweeping tax updates are a triumph for modernisation, Giuliano Gioia of Sovos warns that MNEs with a Brazilian footprint should be prepared for a short and sharp adjustment
Matthew Sharp, leader of London’s newest tax disputes team, shares the trials and tribulations of starting from scratch
Brazil appears to be adopting protocols to align national taxation with international standards, but recent changes are not immune from criticism, experts tell ITR
The US president did not have the authority to impose the tariffs, a court ruled; in other news, Fried Frank and Crowe Ireland made key tax hires
Pillar two considerations have become a fact of life for taxpayers everywhere, not least in Switzerland, where companies nonetheless continue to be active with investment
The Dutch TP software company’s co-founder tells ITR about speeding up documentation processes, following in Steve Jobs’s footsteps, and what makes tax cool
The ruling underscores the need for companies to provide robust and defensible valuations of intangible assets, one partner tells ITR
Pillar two is certain to be a game-changer for tax advisers and their clients. Russell Gammon of Tax Systems outlines 10 reasons why
Gift this article