I. Introduction
On September 12, 2012, the Internal Revenue Service (the "IRS")
issued Final Treasury Regulations (the "Final Regulations") that
clarify the circumstances that cause property to be treated as
"traded on an established market" for purposes of determining the
issue price of a debt instrument that is issued for property. The
Final Regulations broadly define the term "traded on an established
market." These new rules could create adverse U.S. federal income
tax issues for borrowers and certain lenders in connection with
certain restructurings, recapitalizations, debt-for-debt exchanges
and amendments or modifications to credit agreements and other debt
instruments. In particular, these new rules could create adverse
results in the case of distressed borrowers. If a debt instrument is
traded on an established market, the fair market value of such debt
instrument (rather than its stated redemption price at maturity),
generally must be used to determine whether cancellation of
indebtedness income ("COD income") of the borrower, or any "original
issue discount" ("OID") with respect to the debt instrument, results
from a significant modification of the debt instrument for U.S.
federal income tax purposes. While the preamble to these new rules
indicates that "potential distortions created by distressed debt
obligations are the subject of a separate guidance project," no
additional guidance has been issued yet to address these
distortions. The Final Regulations also amend the current
regulations addressing potentially abusive situations and reopenings
of debt instruments. Other than with respect to reopenings, the
Final Regulations do not change the rules that are applicable for
determining the issue price of debt instruments that are issued for
cash.
II. Definition of Traded on an Established Market
A. Background
In general, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the issue
price of a debt instrument that is issued for property is its fair
market value if the debt instrument is (i) traded on an
established market or (ii) issued for property that is traded on
an established market. The issue price of any other debt
instrument that is issued for property generally is its stated
redemption price at maturity (i.e., very generally, its principal
amount) if the debt instrument provides for adequate stated
interest. Under the Treasury Regulations that will be replaced by
the Final Regulations (the "Prior Regulations"), property is
treated as traded on an established market if the property:
- is listed on a specified exchange or quotation system;
- is of a kind that is traded on a board of trade designated
as a contract market by the Commodities Futures Trading
Commission or on an interbank market;
- appears on a system of general circulation that disseminates
recent price quotations or actual prices of recent sales
transactions ("a quotation medium"), or
- is a debt instrument for which price quotations are readily
available from dealers, brokers or traders, subject to certain
safe harbors ("readily quotable debt instruments").
On January 7, 2011, the IRS issued Proposed Treasury
Regulations (the "Proposed Regulations") amending the foregoing
rules. The most significant change in the Proposed Regulations
(and by far the most controversial) is a provision that treats
debt as traded on an established market if an "indicative quote"
is available. The Final Regulations substantially follow the
framework established in the Proposed Regulations, but in response
to comments, include several changes.
B. The Final Regulations
Under the Final Regulations, property is treated as traded on
an established market if, at any time during the 31 day period
ending 15 days after the issue date of the debt instrument:
- there is a sales price for the property;
- there are one or more firm quotes for the property; or
- there are one or more indicative quotes for the property.
If any of the foregoing criteria is met, the fair market value
of the property is presumed to be the sales price or quoted price
that is available. For purposes of the foregoing:
- A sales price exists for property if the price for an
executed purchase or sale of the property is reasonably
available within a reasonable period of time after the sale. For
this purpose, the price of a debt instrument is considered
reasonably available if the sales price (or information
sufficient to calculate the sales price) appears in a medium
that is made available to issuers of debt instruments, persons
that regularly purchase or sell debt instruments (including a
price provided only to certain customers or to subscribers), or
persons that broker purchases or sales of debt instruments.
- A firm quote is considered to exist when a price quote is
available from at least one broker, dealer, or pricing service
(including a price provided only to certain customers or to
subscribers) for property and the quoted price is substantially
the same as the price for which the person receiving the quoted
price could purchase or sell the property. A price quote is
considered to be available whether the quote is initiated by the
person providing the quote or provided at the request of the
person receiving the quote. The identity of the person providing
the quote must be reasonably ascertainable. A quote will be
considered a firm quote if the quote is designated as a firm
quote by the person providing the quote or if market
participants typically purchase or sell, as the case may be, at
the quoted price, even if the party providing the quote is not
legally obligated to purchase or sell at that price.
- An indicative quote is considered to exist when a price
quote is available from at least one broker, dealer, or pricing
service (including a price provided only to certain customers or
to subscribers).
- Taxpayers are permitted to use any reasonable method,
consistently applied to the same or substantially similar facts,
to determine fair market value when there is more than one sales
price or price quote. The Final Regulations provide a
nonexclusive list of factors a taxpayer may consider to
establish fair market value, including: (a) the timing of each
relevant sale or quote in relation to the issue date; (b)
whether the price is derived from a sale, a firm quote, or an
indicative quote; (c) the size of each relevant sale or quote;
or (d) whether the sales price or quote corresponds to pricing
information provided by an independent bond or loan pricing
service. In response to comments, the Final Regulations add an
anti-abuse rule that disregards any sales or price quote that
has a principal purpose of (i) causing the property to be traded
on an established market or (ii) materially misrepresenting the
value of property for income tax purposes.
The Final Regulations provide an exception to the foregoing
rules for small debt issues (the "Small Issue Exception"). For
this purpose, a debt instrument will not be treated as traded on
an established market if the outstanding stated principal amount
of the issue that includes the debt instrument does not exceed
$100 million at the time the determination is made. The Final
Regulations expand this exception to $100 million from the $50
million exception provided in Proposed Regulations. In this
regard, the Prior Regulations include a limited exception to the
definition of "readily quotable debt instruments" for debt issues
with original stated principal amounts of $25 million or less.
The Final Regulations require that the issue price of a debt
instrument be reported consistently by issuers and holders. For
this purpose, an issuer’s determination of whether property is
traded on an established market and, if it is, the property’s fair
market value generally is binding on the holders of the debt
instrument. If the issuer determines that property is traded on an
established market, the Final Regulations require the issuer of a
debt instrument to make that determination and the fair market
value of the property available to holders in a commercially
reasonable fashion, including by electronic publication within 90
days of the date that the debt instrument is issued. The
determination by the issuer is binding on a holder of the debt
instrument unless the holder explicitly discloses that its
determination is different from the issuer’s determination. A
holder must describe in the disclosure the reasons for its
different determination and, if applicable, how the holder
determined fair market value. A holder’s disclosure must be filed
on a timely filed U.S. federal income tax return. The requirement
that issuers provide information to holders regarding their
determinations of whether debt instruments are traded on an
established market and the fair market value of property does not
exclude foreign issuers of debt instruments. However, the Final
Regulations do not provide for a penalty if the issuer of a debt
instrument fails to provide the required information to
holders.
The rules described in this section apply to debt instruments
issued on or after November 13, 2012.
C. Analysis
As noted above, the Final Regulations expand the conditions
under which a debt instrument will be considered to be traded on
an established market. For example, the Final Regulations treat a
debt instrument as traded on an established securities market if a
single indicative price quote is available for the debt instrument
or related property. Therefore, the issue price of a debt
instrument that is issued for property is more likely to be its
fair market value. This change will be particularly relevant in
the case of debt-for-debt exchanges and restructurings of existing
debt instruments that give rise to deemed reissuances for U.S.
federal income tax purposes. In the case of a debt-for-debt
exchange or a transaction that gives rise to a deemed reissuance
of a debt instrument, if neither the original/unmodified debt
instrument nor the new/modified debt instrument is traded on an
established market, the issue price of the new/modified debt
instrument generally will be its stated redemption price at
maturity. Accordingly, such a debt-for-debt exchange/deemed
reissuance often will not result in the (i) recognition of COD
income by the issuer of the debt instrument, (ii) recognition of
gain or loss by the holder of the debt instrument, or (iii) the
new/modified debt instrument being treated as issued with OID.
However, if the original/unmodified debt instrument or the
new/modified debt instrument is traded on an established market,
the issue price of the new/modified debt instrument generally will
be the fair market value of the original/unmodified debt
instrument or the new/modified debt instrument, as the case may
be. This treatment can result in the (i) recognition of COD income
by the issuer of the debt instrument, (ii) recognition of gain or
loss by the holder of the debt instrument, and (iii) the
new/modified debt instrument being treated as issued with OID. The
following example illustrates these consequences.
Example
Pursuant to a credit agreement dated January 1, 2011, Bank C
loans $200 million to Corporation A. The credit agreement provides
for a fixed rate of interest of 5%. The $200 million principal
amount of the loan is payable on January 1, 2015. On January 30,
2011, Corporation B, an insurance company that invests in
commercial loans for its own account, purchases the loan from Bank
C for $200 million. On October 1, 2012, Corporation A informs
Corporation B that it does not expect to be able to repay the
principal amount of the loan on the scheduled maturity date.
Corporation B tentatively agrees to certain modifications to the
credit agreement in order to enable Corporation A to repay the
loan. The modifications include an extension of the maturity date
of the loan until January 1, 2018. In connection with the
amendment of the credit agreement, on December 30, 2012,
Corporation B requests a nonbinding quote of the value of the loan
from Bank C. The quote provided by Bank C values the loan at $150
million. Neither causing the loan to be traded on an established
market, nor materially misrepresenting the value of the loan, is a
principal purpose for the existence of the quote provided by Bank
C. On January 1, 2013, the credit agreement is amended to reflect
these modifications. Corporation B does not mark the loan to
market for U.S. federal income tax purposes and at the time of the
modification, its U.S. federal income tax basis in the loan is
$200 million. All interest on the loan is qualified stated
interest for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Corporation A is
neither in bankruptcy nor insolvent for U.S. federal income tax
purposes at the time of the modification. Corporation B holds the
loan as a capital asset. The extension of the maturity date of the
loan does not constitute a tax-free recapitalization under Section
368 (a)(1)(E) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended (the "Code").
For U.S. federal income tax purposes, as a result of the
modifications agreed to on January 1, 2013, Corporation A
generally will be treated as having issued a new modified loan in
satisfaction of its obligations under the original loan. Under the
rules described above, for U.S. federal income tax purposes:
- the original loan is treated as property that is traded on
an established market;
- the fair market value of the original loan is $150 million
(i.e., the value quoted by Bank C on December 30, 2012);
- the issue price of the new modified loan is $150 million;
- the new modified loan is issued with $50 million of OID
(i.e., the difference between its $150 million issue price and
its $200 million stated redemption price at maturity) which
generally will be taken into account by Corporation A (as
interest deductions) and Corporation B (as interest income) over
the term of the new modified loan under the U.S. federal income
tax rules applicable to OID;
- Corporation A recognizes COD income of $50 million (i.e.,
the difference between the $200 million owed on the original
loan and the $150 million fair market value of the new modified
loan issued in satisfaction of the original loan); and
- Corporation B recognizes a $50 million capital loss on the
deemed exchange of the original loan for the new modified loan.
III. Rules Regarding Potentially Abusive Situations Modified to
Exclude Debt-for-Debt Exchanges
Section 1274 of the Code addresses the treatment of debt
instruments issued in exchange for property. It contains an
anti-abuse rule that prevents the issue price of a debt instrument
from being overstated. Under this rule, in certain potentially
abusive situations, the issue price of a debt instrument issued in
exchange for property is the fair market value of such property,
rather than the debt instrument’s stated principal amount or imputed
principal amount (as determined under Section 1274(b) of the Code).
One such potentially abusive situation is where there has been a
recent sale of property (a "recent sales transaction"). Under the
Final Regulations, a debt instrument issued in a debt-for-debt
exchange, including a deemed exchange, is not treated as the subject
of a recent sales transaction for purposes of Section
1274(b)(3)(B)(ii)(I) of the Code, even if the debt instrument
exchanged for the new/modified debt instrument has been recently
acquired before the exchange. Accordingly, the issue price of the
new/modified debt instrument will not be equal to the fair market
value of the original debt instrument under this rule. However,
unless the Small Issue Exception applies, if the new/modified debt
instrument or the original debt instrument is traded on an
established market, the issue price of the new/modified debt
instrument generally will be the fair market value of such debt
instrument or the original debt instrument, as the case may be. The
foregoing rules apply to debt instruments issued on or after
November 13, 2012.
IV. Reopenings of Debt Instruments
Debt instruments that are issued as part of a "qualified
reopening" generally are treated as part of the same issue as an
original issue of debt instruments for U.S. federal income tax
purposes. Prior to the issuance of the Final Regulations, qualified
reopenings were limited to reopenings where the original debt
instruments were traded on an established market. Therefore, unlike
in the case of a debt-for-debt exchange of distressed debt where the
treatment of debt as traded on an established market may be
unfavorable to a borrower since a depressed fair market value may
result in COD income, generally, it was more favorable under the
prior qualified reopening rules for original debt instruments to be
traded on an established market.
The Final Regulations expand the definition of qualified
reopening. Under the Final Regulations, a debt instrument may be
issued as part of a qualified reopening even if the original debt
instrument is not traded on an established market, if the new debt
instrument is issued within six months of the issue date of the
original debt instruments for cash to persons unrelated to the
issuer for an arm’s length price and rules similar to the rules that
apply to debt instruments that are traded on an established market
are met. Additionally, under the Final Regulations, debt instruments
may be issued in a qualified reopening more than six months after
the issue date of the original debt instruments if (x) either the
original debt instruments are traded on an established market or the
original debt instruments are non-publicly traded and are issued for
cash to unrelated persons for an arm’s length price and (y), on the
date on which the price of the additional debt instruments is
established (or, if earlier, the announcement date), the yield of
the additional debt instruments is not more than 100% of the yield
of the original debt instruments on their issue date. Thus, under
the Final Regulations, the treatment of an original debt instrument
as traded on an established market is less important. Unlike the
other sections of the Final Regulations that are described in this
alert, the foregoing rules generally apply to debt instruments that
are part of a reopening if the reopening date is on or after
September 13, 2012. Thus, the Final Regulations will apply to
reopenings even where the original debt instrument was issued prior
to September 13, 2012.
V. Summary
The Final Regulations will impact taxpayers differently,
depending on whether they are issuers or borrowers.
- Definition of Traded on an Established Market – In general,
under the Final Regulations property is more likely to be treated
as traded on an established market. This change will be
particularly relevant in the case of debt-for-debt exchanges and
restructurings of existing debt instruments, potentially causing
adverse results for distressed borrowers and certain lenders.
- Exclusion of Debt-for-Debt Exchanges from the Rules Applicable
to Potentially Abusive Situations – Under the Final Regulations
debt instruments issued in debt-for-debt exchanges (including
deemed exchanges) are not subject to the rules applicable to
recent sales transactions that require the use of fair market
value for purposes of determining issue price. However, this
exemption may have limited applicability where the Small Issue
Exception does not apply, since it is more likely that debt
instruments will be treated as traded on established markets under
the Final Regulations (i.e., it is likely that the issue price of
debt instruments issued for property will be determined by
reference to fair market value). Thus, the impact of this
provision may be limited.
- Reopenings of Debt Instruments – The Final Regulations
liberalize the rules applicable to reopenings of debt instruments.
Under the Final Regulations, (i) debt instruments may be issued in
a qualified reopening more than six months after the issue date of
the original debt instruments, and (ii) qualified reopenings of
debt instruments that are not traded on an established market are
permitted, in each case, if certain conditions are met.
Circular 230 Disclaimer: To ensure compliance with
requirements imposed by the IRS, please note that any tax advice
contained herein was not intended or written to be used, and cannot
be used, for the purpose of avoiding tax-related penalties that may
be imposed on the taxpayer. |