92-044

Response December 18, 1992

 

 

December 18, 1992

 

XXXXX,

 

Dear XXXXX:

 

Your request for an advisory opinion regarding whether Utah will follow the federal provisions of IRC 332 relating to the tax-free liquidation of two wholly owned subsidiaries was referred to the Tax Commission's Auditing Division for their analysis and recommendation. You indicated that you are representing XXXXX which is considering the merger of two of its subsidiaries, XXXXX and XXXXX into XXXXX under IRC 332.

 

The division staff recommendation is as follows:

 

Utah has not adopted IRC 332 and the Utah statute is silent as to Utah's treatment of this type of corporate liquidation. Therefore, U.C.A. 59-7-117(2) is the controlling statute relating to this matter. It states:

 

"Amounts distributed in complete liquidation of a corporation shall be treated as in full payment in exchange for the stock, ...The gain or loss to the distributee resulting from such exchange shall be determined under Section 59-7-114 but shall be recognized only to the extent provided in Section 59-7-115..."

 

U.C.A. 59-7-114(1) states that "... the gain from the sale or other disposition of property shall be the excess of the amount realized therefrom over the basis provided in Section 59-7-116, and the loss shall be the excess of such basis over the amount realized." U.C.A. 59-7-114(3) defines "amount realized" as "...the sum of any money received plus the fair market value of the property (other than money) received."

 

Therefore, U.C.A. 59-7-117(2) standing alone, provides that a gain or loss would be recognizable in a corporate liquidation (unless expressly not recognizable under U.C.A. 59-7-115) for the difference between the basis of the assets and their fair market value. Since, there is no provision in U.C.A. 59-7-115 which would exclude a complete liquidation from the provisions of 59-7-114, 59-7-117(2) standing alone, would create a taxable event in a complete liquidation of a subsidiary into its parent.

 

However, U.C.A. 59-7-108(9) provides that amounts claimed as depreciation, cost recovery, etc. are the same as used in determining tax liabilities under the IRC. This section clearly indicates that the legislative intent was to keep the Utah basis of assets the same as it is for federal purposes.

 

U.C.A. 59-7-117(2) and 59-7-108(9) potentially create conflicting provisions in the case of an IRC 332 liquidation. Since, the recognition of gain or loss under U.C.A. 59-7-117(2) would create a different basis of assets for Utah purposes than the basis would be under federal law, which is contrary to the provisions of U.C.A. 59-7-108(9), Utah will follow the tax-free provisions of IRC 332.

 

Based upon the facts presented in your letter, we are in agreement with the Auditing Division's recommendations. Obviously, if there are deviations from these facts, this opinion may be negated.

 

If you do not agree with this determination, you may appeal to the Tax Commission for a formal hearing. The results of that hearing would constitute a declaratory judgement and be appealable to the Utah State Supreme Court.

 

A Notice of Appeal Rights and a copy of the Utah Taxpayer Bill of Rights are attached. In contacting the Tax Commission, if special accommodations are needed in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, please call (801) 530-6290, (801) 530-6077 or TDD (801) 530-6269 allowing three working days notice.

 

For the Commission

 

Joe B. Pacheco


December 3, 1992

 

Mr. H. R. Hansen, Chairman

Utah State Tax Commission

Heber M. Wells Building

160 East Third South

Salt Lake City, Utah 84134-0300

 

Dear Chairman Hansen:

 

We are writing on behalf of our client, XXXXX (XXXXX), to request an advisory opinion regarding the proposed liquidation of two wholly-owned subsidiaries into their parent company. This matter has been discussed with XXXXX in advance of our submitting this request. We have included below a discussion of the background of the entities involved and a complete description of the proposed transaction. The company wishes to finalize this transaction before the close of the current calendar year and we therefore respectfully request a response to our inquiry by December 20, 1992, if possible.

 

BACKGROUND

 

XXXXX, a California corporation domiciled in California, is the parent of a group of subsidiaries doing business in a number of states and foreign countries. XXXXX and its subsidiaries design, manufacture, and market various electronic components. The company is privately held and headquartered in XXXXX, California.

 

XXXXX (XXXXX), a California corporation domiciled in Utah, is a wholly-owned XXXXX subsidiary which designs and manufactures electronic sensing and control devices. The company occupies a manufacturing facility in XXXXX, Utah.

 

XXXXX(XXXXX), a California corporation domiciled in Utah, is a wholly-owned XXXXX subsidiary which designs and manufactures resistive networks. The company occupies a manufacturing facility in XXXXX, Utah.

 

Prior to 1989, both XXXXX and XXXXX were operated in Utah for a number of years as divisions of XXXXX. Due to unfavorable business and economic conditions, these operations were spun-off as wholly-owned subsidiaries in December 1988. Recently, substantially improved business and economic conditions both internally and externally have made the merger of these two subsidiaries back into the parent a favorable option. XXXXX has determined that numerous financial and operating efficiencies could be achieved by once again operating XXXXX and XXXXX as divisions of XXXXX. It is anticipated that manufacturing operations in these two divisions would continue in Utah for the foreseeable future.

 

PROPOSED TRANSACTION

 

XXXXX is considering a complete liquidation of two wholly-owned subsidiaries, XXXXX and XXXXX, into XXXXX. It has been determined that this transaction will qualify for nontaxable treatment for federal income tax purposes under Internal Revenue Code Section (IRC §) 332. Utah law appears to follow the federal provisions for tax-free reorganizations, however, the Utah statutes are silent as to whether or not Utah will follow the federal provisions under IRC §332. Therefore, we are requesting an advisory opinion on the State of Utah's position with regard to tax-free liquidations of wholly-owned subsidiaries which qualify under IRC §332.

 

If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this proposed transaction please do not hesitate to contact me directly. Again, due to the timing of this liquidation, we would like to thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter.

 

Very truly yours,

 

XXXXX

 

XXXXX, Partner

 

The Utah State Tax Commission will allow this tax-free liquidation as provided under IRC §332 for the indicated subsidiaries.

 

UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION