Search the Archives           Subscribe           About this News Service           Reader Comments


Archived updates for Wednesday, August 31, 2005

U.S. Proposes New Tax Regulations for Valuation of Intangibles

On August 24, 2005, the U.S. Treasury Department and Internal revenue Service announced proposed regulations regarding methods to determine taxable income in connection with "cost sharing arrangements" between controlled taxpayers. "The regulations take aim at how related companies value so-called 'intangibles,' such as research and development, patents and other inputs," writes Edward Alden in The Financial Times
on August 25, 2005
.The proposals would limit cost-sharing arrangements that allow companies to undervalue patents, licenses, trademarks and other intellectual property rights that are transferred to a subsidiary company. According to WebCPA, "The changes could mean a big difference to the bottom lines of companies whose main asset is their intellectual property."

Under such cost sharing arrangements, related parties will agree to share the costs and risks of intangible development in proportion to their reasonable expectations of benefit from the separate exploitation of the developed intangibles. The second sentence of 26 U.S.C. Section 482 enunciates a "commensurate with income" standard for transfer or licensing of the developed intangible property and requires that the income from the agreement be commensurate with the income attributable to the intangible. The proposed regulations are intended to provide further guidance under the "arms-length standard" in 26 CFR §1.482-1(b)(1) regarding “the results that would have been realized if uncontrolled taxpayers had engaged in the same transaction under the same circumstances.”

U.S. tax authorities have now proposed an "investor model" in which each controlled participant may be viewed as making an aggregate investment, attributable to both cost contributions
(ongoing share of intangible development costs) and external contributions (the preexisting advantages which the parties bring into the arrangement), in order to achieve an anticipated return appropriate to the risks of the arrangement. Valuations are not appropriate if an investor would not undertake to invest in the arrangement because its total anticipated return is less than the total anticipated return that could have been achieved through an alternative investment. The appropriate “price” of undertaking a risky investment is typically determined
at the time the investment is undertaken, based on the ex ante expectations of the investors. According to the proposal:

Given the uncertainty about whether and to what extent intangibles will be successfully developed under a cost sharing arrangement, ex post interpretations of ex ante expectations are inherently unreliable and susceptible to abuse. Accordingly, an important implication of determining the arm’s length result under the investor model, reflected in the methods, is that compensation for external contributions is analyzed and valued ex ante. The ex ante perspective is fundamental to achieving arm’s length results.

Under-priced transfer agreements for intangible assets such as intellectual property have long been a target of tax collectors for allowing companies to stash income in overseas tax havens while still providing their U.S. parent companies with deductions for research and development expenses. For example, Ireland has a corporate tax rate of 12.5 percent, while the U.S. has a 35 percent federal rate plus additional amounts charged by states. According to the American Shareholders Association, this year's one-time discount for such tax liabilities under the Invest
in USA Act has repatriated about $200 billion from multinational corprations at an effective
U.S. tax rate of about 5.25 percent.

"This Treasury development makes it even more clear that patent holders must have a strategy for managing their intellectual property that includes a mechanism for measuring value, says Bill Black, a CPA and valuation consultant in Atlanta. "Like FAS 141/142, which required IP valuation in acquisitions, this means that you need to be able to segregate the prospective cash flows from the various components of your intangible assets, and be
prepared to defend the methodology you use to measure that which cannot be seen, touched, or
tasted."

Written or electronic comments must be received on or before November 28, 2005. Requests to speak and outlines of topics to be discussed at the public hearing scheduled for November 16, 2005, at 10:00 a.m. must be received by October 26, 2005.

Click here for more informationon "Technology Pricing Through Risk Allocation."

    (5)comment(s)     translate     More Updates     Send    

5 Comments:

Anonymous Bill Black said...

Bill:

This Treasury development makes it even more clear that patent holders must have a strategy for managing their intellectual property that includes a mechanism for measuring value. Like FAS 141/142, which required IP valuation in acquisitions, this means that you need to be able to segregate the prospective cash flows from the various components of your intangible assets, and be prepared to defend the methodology you use to measure that which cannot be seen, touched, or tasted. There are good measurement methods available, and I know you will encourage your clients to choose a strategy now in order to control their own destinies. They can then show that the valuation methods they use have been in place as part of the normal course of business, and that they have generated reasonable results over a period of time. Otherwise, they may have to select from a limited array of methods prescribed by regulatory agencies who may not have the best interests of your clients firmly in the forefront of their minds.

There is no doubt the transition period will have some interesting developments.

August 27, 2005 10:06 AM  
Blogger Bill Heinze said...

For example, see "TGIF for Technology Pricing Through Risk Allocation" at http://ip-updates.blogspot.com/2005/08/tgif-for-technology-pricing-through.html or

contact Bill Black, CPA at billblack@mindspring.com,
(770)698-8020,
7040 Hunters Knoll NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30328

August 27, 2005 3:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What is this forum about is it like http://aboutip.info ? about Internet protocol

August 29, 2005 12:06 PM  
Blogger hjkl said...

You said you will love me wow gold the whole life, but WoW Gold you marry her. You said you will wow power leveling,come to marry me, but this will not be carried out forever.WoW Gold I am trying my best to forget you and do not love you anymore. wow leveling But I failed and I still love you. Maybe wow leveling she needs you more compared wow leveling with me. So I tell you that world of warcraft power leveling you should love world of warcraft power leveling her and take good world of warcraft leveling care of her. You said I was so kind.world of warcraft leveling Yes, because I love you,world of warcraft leveling I hope you will be power leveling happy forever.

February 05, 2009 11:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

^^Thanks!!

婚前徵信婚姻感情大陸抓姦外遇抓姦法律諮詢家暴婚前徵信尋人感情挽回大陸抓姦離婚工商徵信婚前徵信外遇抓姦感情挽回尋人大陸抓姦離婚家暴工商徵信法律諮詢跟蹤工商徵信婚前徵信感情挽回外遇抓姦法律諮詢家暴尋人大陸抓姦離婚大陸抓姦外遇尋人家暴工商徵信法律諮詢家暴感情挽回大陸抓姦外遇婚前徵信離婚尋人工商徵信外遇抓姦法律諮詢家暴婚前徵信大陸抓姦尋人感情挽回外遇抓姦婚前徵信感情挽回尋人大陸抓姦工商徵信法律諮詢離婚家暴工商徵信外遇抓姦法律諮詢家暴婚前徵信尋人感情挽回大陸抓姦離婚婚前徵信工商徵信外遇抓姦尋人離婚家暴大陸抓姦感情挽回法律諮詢離婚感情挽回婚前徵信外遇抓姦家暴尋人工商徵信外遇抓姦法律諮詢家暴婚前徵信尋人感情挽回">徵大陸抓姦離婚婚前徵信工商徵信外遇抓姦尋人離婚家暴大陸抓姦感情挽回法律諮詢

April 07, 2009 4:29 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home