Thomson Reuters News & Insight
Featured Content from WESTLAW

Legal

  •  
  •  

IRS REUTERS Kevin Lamarque

Breakingviews: U.S taxman should give credit where credit's due

11/6/2012 COMMENTS (0)

By Reynolds Holding

NEW YORK, Nov 6 (Reuters Breakingviews) - The U.S. taxman should give credit where credit's due. American companies can typically subtract foreign levies from their income tax bill. But a hyper-technical decision by the Internal Revenue Service puts that rule, and investment abroad, at risk. The Supreme Court has a chance to make things right.

The justices will hear a tax dispute between the IRS and U.S. energy company PPL - a rare step for America's top court, which usually steers clear of such battles. PPL is contesting a decision that may cost it about $150 million in tax credits.

The company assumed it could claim a credit for the 1997 windfall assessment it paid on income from a British utility acquired seven years before. The IRS disagreed, claiming the charge wasn't a tax on the utility's income but on its value, which was merely measured by income.

The agency cited the arcane rules about applying foreign tax credits to back up its stance. If the "predominant character" of another nation's levy is an income tax "in the U.S. sense," the credit applies. That allows the IRS a slice of offshore revenue while saving companies from a double hit.

The logic of the agency's argument escaped many experts, including two U.S. courts, which stressed that oddly structured foreign levies are often income taxes in substance. But a federal appeals court backed the IRS last year.

If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the IRS, the potential impact on all American companies operating abroad would be considerable. More than 7,200 U.S.-based firms claimed over $100 trillion of foreign tax credits in 2008, according to the most recently available IRS statistics. Disallowing even a small fraction of that amount would prompt years of litigation.

It would also inject new uncertainty into decisions to invest abroad. If U.S firms had to pay foreign and domestic taxes on the same income, they'd probably do a lot less business in other countries. And those countries would have to choose between encouraging American investment and raising revenue from income earned on their turf. Global economic growth could suffer.

The justices should make the most of this rare opportunity to tackle tax policy and remind federal pencil pushers that form doesn't trump substance.

 

CONTEXT NEWS

- The U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 29 agreed to hear an appeal of an Internal Revenue Service ruling that PPL Corp, a Pennsylvania-based utility and energy holding company, cannot offset its income taxes with an assessment paid to Britain. A victory for the IRS would give it more power to stop American companies from claiming a tax credit for foreign levies that might not technically meet the agency's definition of an income tax but, in substance, are based on a company's income. At stake are potentially trillions of foreign tax credits granted U.S. companies every year.

- PPL is appealing a December 2011 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Philadelphia favoring the IRS. The U.S. Tax Court had ruled for PPL, and another federal appellate court agreed with the company's position in a separate case involving a different firm.

(The author is a Reuters Breakingviews columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.)

Follow us on Twitter @ReutersLegal | Like us on Facebook


Register or log in to comment.

© 2013 Thomson Reuters