[JPRT 105-23-97]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




                        [JOINT COMMITTEE PRINT]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
         GENERAL EXPLANATION OF TAX LEGISLATION ENACTED IN 1997         

                               __________

                         Prepared by the Staff

                                 of the

                      JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION







                           DECEMBER 17, 1997




                                 ------


                      U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE                   

45-107                       WASHINGTON : 1997                 JCS-23-97


            For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office             
 Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328
                           ISBN 0-16-055897-2                           





                      JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION

                      105th Congress, 1st Session
                                 ------                                
               HOUSE                               SENATE

BILL ARCHER, Texas,                  WILLIAM V. ROTH, Jr., Delaware,
  Chairman                             Vice Chairman
PHILIP M. CRANE, Illinois            JOHN H. CHAFEE, Rhode Island
WILLIAM M. THOMAS, California        CHARLES GRASSLEY, Iowa
CHARLES B. RANGEL, New York          DANIEL PATRICK MOYNIHAN, New York
FORTNEY PETE STARK, California       MAX BAUCUS, Montana

                    Kenneth J. Kies, Chief of Staff
              Mary M. Schmitt, Deputy Chief of Staff (Law)
      Bernard A. Schmitt, Deputy Chief of Staff (Revenue Analysis)

                                  (II)




                            SUMMARY CONTENTS

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Introduction.....................................................     1

Part One: GAirport and Airway Trust Fund Extension Act of 1997 
  (H.R. 668).....................................................     2

Part Two: GTaxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (H.R. 2014)...............     6

Part Three: GRevenue Provisions of the Balanced Budget Act of 
  1997 (H.R. 2015)...............................................   493

Part Four: GTaxpayer Browsing Protection Act (H.R. 1226).........   506

Part Five: GHighway Trust Fund Extension (sec. 9 of S. 1519).....   508

Appendix: GEstimated Budget Effects of Tax Legislation Enacted in 
  1997...........................................................   511

                                 (III)


                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Introduction.....................................................     1

Part One: GAirport and Airway Trust Fund Extension Act of 1997 
  (H.R. 668).....................................................     2

Part Two: Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (H.R. 2014)................     6

    Title I. Child Tax Credit....................................     6

        A. Child Tax Credit for Children Under Age 17 (sec. 
            101(a), (c), and (d))................................     6

        B. Expand Definition of High-Risk Individuals With 
            Respect to Tax-Exempt State-Sponsored Organizations 
            Providing Health Coverage (sec. 101(c))..............    10

    Title II. Education Tax Incentives...........................    11

        A. Tax Benefits Relating to Education Expenses...........    11

            1. HOPE tax credit and Lifetime Learning tax credit 
                for higher education tuition expenses (sec. 201).    11
            2. Deduction for student loan interest (sec. 202)....    20
            3. Penalty-free withdrawals from IRAs for higher 
                education expenses (sec. 203)....................    23
            4. Tax treatment of qualified State tuition programs 
                and education IRAs; exclusion for certain 
                distributions from education IRAs used to pay 
                qualified higher education expenses (secs. 211 
                and 213).........................................    24

        B. Other Education-Related Tax Provisions................    33

            1. Extension of exclusion for employer-provided 
                educational assistance (sec. 221)................    33
            2. Modification of $150 million limit on qualified 
                501(c)(3) bonds other than hospital bonds (sec. 
                222).............................................    34
            3. Expansion of arbitrage rebate exception for 
                certain bonds (sec. 223).........................    35
            4. Enhanced deduction for corporate contributions of 
                computer technology and equipment (sec. 224).....    36



            5. Treatment of cancellation of certain student loans 
                (sec. 225).......................................    39
            6. Tax credit for holders of qualified zone academy 
                bonds (sec. 226).................................    40

    Title III. Savings and Investment Tax Incentives.............    42

        A. Individual Retirement Arrangements (secs. 301-304)....    42

        B. Capital Gains Provisions..............................    48

            1. Maximum rate of tax on net capital gains of 
                individuals (sec. 311)...........................    48
            2. Exclusion of gain on sale of principal residence 
                (sec. 312).......................................    54
            3. Exception from real estate reporting requirements 
                for certain sales of principal residences (secs. 
                312(c) and 701)..................................    57
            4. Rollover of gain from sale of certain small 
                business stock (sec. 313)........................    58
            5. Computation of alternative capital gains tax for 
                corporations (sec. 314)..........................    59

    Title IV. Alternative Minimum Tax Provisions.................    60

            A. Repeal Alternative Minimum Tax for Small 
                Businesses and Modify the Depreciation Adjustment 
                (secs. 401-402)..................................    60

            B. Repeal AMT Installment Method Adjustment for 
                Farmers (sec. 403)...............................    61

    Title V. Estate, Gift, and Generation-Skipping Tax 
      Provisions.................................................    63

        A. Estate and Gift Tax Provisions........................    63

            1. Increase in estate and gift tax unified credit 
                indexing of certain other estate and gift tax 
                provisions (sec. 501)............................    63
            2. Estate tax exclusion for qualified family-owned 
                businesses (sec. 502)............................    65
            3. Installment payments of estate tax attributable to 
                closely held businesses (sec. 503)...............    71
            4. Estate tax recapture from cash leases of 
                specially-valued property (sec. 504).............    72
            5. Clarify eligibility for extension of time for 
                payment of estate tax (sec. 505).................    73
            6. Gifts may not be revalued for estate tax purposes 
                after expiration of statute of limitations (sec. 
                506).............................................    74
            7. Repeal of throwback rules applicable to domestic 
                trusts (sec. 507)................................    76



            8. Reduction in estate tax for certain land subject 
                to permanent conservation easement (sec. 508)....    78

        B. Generation-Skipping Tax Provision.....................    81

            1. Modification of generation-skipping transfer tax 
                for transfer to individuals with deceased parents 
                (sec. 511).......................................    81

    Title VI. GExtension of Certain Expiring Tax Provisions......    83

        A Research Tax Credit (sec. 601).........................    83

        B. Contributions of Stock to Private Foundations (sec. 
            602).................................................    86

        C. Work Opportunity Tax Credit (sec. 603)................    88

        D. Orphan Drug Tax Credit (sec. 604).....................    91


    Title VII. GDistrict of Columbia Tax Incentives (sec. 701)...    93

    Title VIII. GWelfare-to-Work Tax Credit (sec. 801)...........   107

    Title IX. Miscellaneous Provisions...........................   109

        A. Excise Tax Provisions.................................   109

            1. Transfer of General Fund highway fuels tax 
                revenues to the Highway Trust Fund (sec. 901)....   109
            2. Repeal excise tax on diesel fuel used in 
                recreational motorboats (sec. 902)...............   110
            3. Continued application of tax on imported recycled 
                Halon-1211 (sec. 903)............................   111
            4. Uniform rate of excise tax on vaccines (sec. 904).   112
            5. Treat certain gasoline ``chain retailers'' as 
                wholesale distributors under the gasoline excise 
                tax refund rules (sec. 905)......................   113
            6. Exemption of electric and other clean-fuel motor 
                vehicles from luxury automobile classification 
                (sec. 906).......................................   114
            7. Tax certain alternative fuels based on energy 
                equivalency to gasoline (sec. 907)...............   116
            8. Reduce rate of alcohol excise tax on certain hard 
                ciders (sec. 908)................................   117
            9. Study feasibility of moving collection point for 
                distilled spirits excise tax (sec. 909)..........   118
            10. Codify Treasury Department regulations regulating 
                wine labels (sec. 910)...........................   119

        B. Disaster Relief Provisions............................   120



            1. Authority to postpone certain tax-related 
                deadlines by reason of Presidentially declared 
                disaster (sec. 911)..............................   120
            2. Use of certain appraisals to establish amount of 
                disaster loss (sec. 912).........................   121
            3. Treatment of livestock sold on account of weather-
                related conditions (sec. 913)....................   121
            4. Mortgage bond financing for residence located in 
                Presidentially declared disaster areas (sec. 914)   122
            5. Requirement to abate interest by reason of 
                Presidentially declared disaster (sec. 915)......   123

        C. Provisions Relating to Employment Taxes...............   124

            1. Clarification of standard to be used in 
                determining tax status of retail securities 
                brokers (sec. 921)...............................   124
            2. Clarification of exemption from self-employment 
                tax for certain termination payments received by 
                former insurance salesman (sec. 922).............   125

        D. Provisions Relating to Small Businesses...............   126

            1. Delay imposition of penalties for failure to make 
                payments electronically through EFTPS (sec. 931).   126
            2. Home office deduction: clarification of definition 
                of principal place of business (sec. 932)........   128
            3. Income averaging for farmers (sec. 933)...........   130
            4. Increase deduction for health insurance costs of 
                self-employed individuals (sec. 934).............   132
            5. Moratorium on regulations regarding employment 
                taxes of limited partners (sec. 935).............   132

        E. Expensing of Environmental Remediation Costs 
            (``Brownfields'') (sec. 941).........................   133

        F. Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities (secs. 
            951-956).............................................   136

        G. Other Provisions......................................   143

            1. Shrinkage estimates for inventory accounting (sec. 
                961).............................................   143
            2. Treatment of workmen's compensation liability 
                under rules for certain personal injury liability 
                assignments (sec. 962)...........................   146
            3. Tax-exempt status for certain State workmen's 
                compensation act companies (sec. 963)............   148
            4. Election for 1987 partnership to continue 
                exception from treatment of publicly traded 
                partnerships as corporations (sec. 964)..........   149



            5. Exclusion from UBIT for certain corporate 
                sponsorship payments (sec. 965)..................   152
            6. Timeshare associations (sec. 966).................   155
            7. Modification of advance refunding rules for 
                certain tax-exempt bonds issued by the Virgin 
                Islands (sec. 967)...............................   157
            8. Deferral of gain on certain sales of farm product 
                refiners and processors (sec. 968)...............   158
            9. Increased deduction for business meals while 
                operating under Department of Transportation 
                hours of service limitations (sec. 969)..........   160
            10. Deductibility of meals provided for the 
                convenience of the employer (sec. 970)...........   161
            11. Modify limits on depreciation of luxury 
                automobiles for certain clean-burning fuel and 
                electric vehicles (sec. 971).....................   162
            12. Temporary suspension of income limitations on 
                percentage depletion for production from marginal 
                wells (sec. 972).................................   163
            13. Increase in standard mileage rate for purposes of 
                computing charitable deduction (sec. 973)........   164
            14. Purchasing of receivables by tax-exempt hospital 
                cooperative service orgainzations (sec. 974).....   165
            15. Provide above-the-line-deduction for certain 
                business expenses in connection with service 
                performed by certain officials (sec. 975)........   166
            16. Combined employment tax reporting demonstration 
                project (sec. 976)...............................   167
            17. Elective carryback of existing net operating 
                losses of the National Railroad Passenger 
                Corporation (Amtrak) (sec. 977)..................   168

        H. Extension of Duty-Free Treatment Under the Generalized 
            System of Preferences (sec. 981).....................   170

    Title X. Revenue-Increase Provisions.........................   172

        A. Financial Products....................................   172

            1. Require recognition of gain on certain appreciated 
                financial positions in personal property (sec. 
                1001(a)).........................................   172
            2. Election of mark-to-market for securities traders 
                and for traders and dealers in commodities (sec. 
                1001(b)).........................................   180
            3. Limitation on exception for investment companies 
                under section 351 (sec. 1002)....................   182
            4. Gains and losses from certain terminations with 
                respect to property (sec. 1003)..................   185



            5. Determination of original issue discount where 
                pooled debt obligations subject to acceleration 
                (sec. 1004)......................................   190
            6. Deny interest deduction on certain debt 
                instruments (sec. 1005)..........................   192

        B. Corporate Organizations and Reorganizations...........   194

            1. Require gain recognition for certain extraordinary 
                dividends (sec. 1011)............................   194
            2. Require gain recognition on certain distributions 
                of controlled corporation stock (sec. 1012)......   197
            3. Reform tax treatment of certain corporate stock 
                transfers (sec. 1013)............................   206
            4. Treat certain preferred stock as ``boot'' (sec. 
                1014)............................................   209
            5. Modify holding period for dividends-received 
                deduction (sec. 1015)............................   213

        C. Administrative Provisions.............................   214

            1. Reporting of certain payments made to attorneys 
                (sec. 1021)......................................   214
            2. Information reporting on persons receiving 
                contract payments from certain Federal agencies 
                (sec. 1022)......................................   216
            3. Disclosure of tax return information for 
                administration of certain veterans programs (sec. 
                1023)............................................   217
            4. Establish IRS continuous levy and improve debt 
                collection (secs. 1024-1026).....................   218
            5. Consistency rule for beneficiaries of trusts and 
                estates (sec. 1027)..............................   220
            6. Registration of confidential corporate tax 
                shelters and substantial understatement penalty 
                (sec. 1028)......................................   221

        D. Excise and Employment Tax Provisions..................   225

            1. Extension and modification of Airport and Airway 
                Trust Fund excise taxes (sec. 1031)..............   225
            2. Extend diesel fuel excise tax rules to kerosene 
                (sec. 1032)......................................   233
            3. Reinstate Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust 
                Fund excise tax (sec. 1033)......................   235
            4. Application of communications excise tax to 
                prepaid telephone cards (sec. 1034)..............   235
            5. Extension of temporary Federal unemployment surtax 
                (sec. 1035)......................................   238

        E. Provisions Relating to Tax-Exempt Organizations.......   239

            1. Extend UBIT rules to second-tier subsidiaries and 
                amend control test (sec. 1041)...................   239



            2. Repeal grandfather rule with respect to pension 
                business of certain insurers (sec. 1042).........   240

        F. Foreign Provisions....................................   242

            1. Inclusion of income from notional principal 
                contracts and stock lending transactions under 
                Subpart F (sec. 1051)............................   242
            2. Restrict like-kind exchange rules for certain 
                personal property (sec. 1052)....................   244
            3. Impose holding period requirement for claiming 
                foreign tax credits with respect to dividends 
                (sec. 1053)......................................   246
            4. Limitation on treaty benefits for payments to 
                hybrid entities (sec. 1054)......................   249
            5. Interest on underpayments that are reduced by 
                foreign tax credit carrybacks (sec. 1055)........   251
            6. Determination of period of limitations relating to 
                foreign tax credits (sec. 1056)..................   253
            7. Repeal special exception to foreign tax credit 
                limitation for alternative minimum tax purposes 
                (sec. 1057)......................................   254

        G. Partnership Provisions................................   255

            1. Allocation of basis of properties distributed to a 
                partner by a partnership (sec. 1061).............   255
            2. Treatment of inventory items of a partnership 
                (sec. 1062)......................................   258
            3. Treatment of appreciated property contributed to a 
                partnership (sec. 1063)..........................   259

        H. Pension and Employee Benefit Provisions...............   260

            1. Cashout of certain accrued benefits (sec. 1071)...   260
            2. Election to receive taxable cash compensation in 
                lieu of nontaxable parking benefits (sec. 1072)..   261
            3. Repeal of excess distribution and excess 
                retirement accumulation taxes (sec. 1073)........   262
            4. Tax on prohibited transactions (sec. 1074)........   263
            5. Basis recovery rules (sec. 1075)..................   264

        I. Other Revenue-Increase Provisions.....................   265

            1. Phase out suspense accounts for certain large farm 
                corporations (sec. 1081).........................   265
            2. Modify net operating loss carryback and 
                carryforward rules (sec. 1082)...................   267
            3. Modify general business credit carryback and 
                carryforward rules (sec. 1083)...................   269
            4. Expand the limitations on deductibility of 
                interest and premiums with respect to life 
                insurance, endowment, and annuity contracts (sec. 
                1084)............................................   269



            5. Earned income credit compliance provisions (secs. 
                1085(a), (b) and (d))............................   276
              a. Deny EIC eligibility for prior acts of 
                  recklessness or fraud (sec. 1085(a)(1))........   278
              b. Recertification required when taxpayer found to 
                  be ineligible for EIC in past (sec. 1085(a)(1))   279
              c. Due diligence requirements for paid preparers 
                  (sec. 1085(a)(2))..............................   280
              d. Modify the definition of AGI used to phase out 
                  the EIC (secs. 1085(b) and (d))................   281
            6. Treatment of amounts received under the work 
                requirements of the Personal Responsibility and 
                Work Opportunity Act of 1996 (sec. 1085(c))......   282
            7. Eligibility for income forecast method (sec. 1086)   283
            8. Modify the exception to the related-party rule of 
                section 1033 for individuals to only provide an 
                exception for de minimis amounts (sec. 1087).....   286
            9. Repeal of exception for certain sales by 
                manufacturers to dealers (sec. 1088).............   287
            10. Treatment of charitable remainder trusts (sec. 
                1089)............................................   288
            11. Expanded SSA records for tax enforcement (secs. 
                1090(a)(1) and 1090(b))..........................   292
            12. Using Federal case registry of child support 
                orders for tax enforcement purposes (secs. 
                1090(a)(2) and 1090(a)(3)).......................   292
            13. Modification of estimated tax safe harbors (sec. 
                1091)............................................   293

    Title XI. Foreign Tax Provisions.............................   295

        A.  General Provisions...................................   295

            1. Simplify foreign tax credit limitation for 
                individuals (sec. 1101)..........................   295
            2. Simplify translation of foreign taxes (sec. 1102).   296
            3. Election to use simplified foreign tax credit 
                limitation for alternative minimum tax purposes 
                (sec. 1103)......................................   299
            4. Simplify treatment of personal transactions in 
                foreign currency (sec. 1104).....................   300
            5. Simplify foreign tax credit limitation for 
                dividends from 10/50 companies (sec. 1105).......   301

        B. General Provisions Affecting Treatment of Controlled 
            Foreign Corporations (secs. 1111-1113)...............   303



        C. Modification of Passive Foreign Investment Company 
            Provisions to Eliminate Overlap With Subpart F, to 
            allow Mark-to-Market Election, and to Require 
            Measurement Based on Value for PFIC Asset Test (secs. 
            1121-1124)...........................................   308

        D. Simplfy Formation and Operation of International Joint 
            Ventures (secs. 1131, 1141-1145, and 1151)...........   314

        E. Modification of Reporting Threshold for Stock 
            Ownership of a Foreign Corporation (sec. 1146).......   318

        F. Other Foreign Simplification Provisions...............   319

            1. Transition rules for certain trusts (sec. 1161)...   319
            2. Simplify stock and securities trading safe harbor 
                (sec. 1162)......................................   320
            3. Clarification of determination of foreign taxes 
                deemed paid (sec. 1163(a)).......................   321
            4. Clarification of foreign tax credit limitation for 
                financial services income (sec. 1163(b)).........   322

        G. Other Foreign Provisions..............................   322

            1. Eligibility of licenses of computer software for 
                foreign sales corporation benefits (sec. 1171)...   322
            2. Increase dollar limitation on section 911 
                exclusion (sec. 1172)............................   324
            3. Treatment of certain securities positions under 
                the subpart F investment in U.S. property rules 
                (sec. 1173)......................................   325
            4. Treat service income of nonresident alien 
                individuals earned on foreign ships as foreign 
                source income and disregard the U.S. presence of 
                such individuals (sec. 1174).....................   327
            5. Exceptions under subpart F for active financing 
                income (sec. 1175)...............................   329

    Title XII. GSimplification Provisions Relating to Individuals 
      and Businesses.............................................   335

        A. Provisions Relating to Individuals....................   335

            1. Modifications to standard deduction of dependents, 
                AMT treatment of certain minor children (sec. 
                1201)............................................   335
            2. Increase de minimis threshold for estimated tax to 
                $1,000 for individuals (sec. 1202)...............   336
            3. Treatment of certain reimbursed expenses of rural 
                letter carrier's vehicles (sec. 1203)............   337
            4. Travel expenses of Federal employees participating 
                in a Federal criminal investigation (sec. 1204)..   338



            5. Payment of taxes by commercially acceptable means 
                (sec. 1205)......................................   339

        B. Provisions Relating to Businesses Generally...........   343

            1. Modifications to look-back method for long-term 
                contracts (sec. 1211)............................   343
            2. Minimum tax treatment of certain property and 
                casualty insurance companies (sec. 1212).........   346
            3. Treatment of construction allowances provided to 
                lessees (sec. 1213)..............................   347

        C. Partnership Simplification Provisions.................   349

            1. General provisions................................   349
              a. Simplified flow-through for electing large 
                  partnerships (sec. 1221).......................   349
              b. Simplified audit procedures for electing large 
                  partnerships (sec. 1222).......................   361
              c. Due date for furnishing information to partners 
                  of electing large partnerships (sec. 1223).....   366
              d. Partnership returns required on magnetic media 
                  (sec. 1224)....................................   367
              e. Treatment of partnership items of individual 
                  retirement arrangements (sec. 1225)............   367
            2. Other partnership audit rules.....................   369
              a. Treatment of partnership items in deficiency 
                  proceedings (sec. 1231)........................   369
              b. Partnership return to be determinative of audit 
                  procedures to be followed (sec. 1232)..........   371
              c. Provisions relating to statute of limitations 
                  (sec. 1233)....................................   371
              d. Expansion of small partnership exception (sec. 
                  1234)..........................................   374
              e. Exclusion of partial settlements from 1-year 
                  limitation on assessment (sec. 1235)...........   375
              f. Extension of time for filing a request for 
                  administrative adjustment (sec. 1236)..........   376
              g. Availability of innocent spouse relief in 
                  context of partnership proceedings (sec. 1237).   376
              h. Determination of penalties at partnership level 
                  (sec. 1238)....................................   377
              i. Provisions relating to Tax Court jurisdiction 
                  (sec. 1239)....................................   378
              j. Treatment of premature petitions filed by notice 
                  partners or 5-percent groups (sec. 1240).......   378
              k. Bonds in case of appeals from certain 
                  proceedings (sec. 1241)........................   379



              l. Suspension of interest where delay in 
                  computational adjustment resulting from certain 
                  settlements (sec. 1242)........................   380
              m. Special rules for administrative adjustment 
                  requests with respect to bad debts or worthless 
                  securities (sec. 1243).........................   380
            3. Closing of partnership taxable year with respect 
                to deceased partner (sec. 1246)..................   381

        D. Modifications of Rules for Real Estate Investment 
            Trusts (secs. 1251-1263).............................   382

        E. Repeal the ``Short-Short'' Test for Regulated 
            Investment Companies (sec. 1271).....................   392

        F. Taxpayer Protections..................................   393

            1. Provide reasonable cause exception for additional 
                penalties (sec. 1281)............................   393
            2. Clarification of period for filing claims for 
                refunds (sec. 1282)..............................   394
            3. Repeal of authority to disclose whether a 
                prospective juror has been audited (sec. 1283)...   395
            4. Clarify statute of limitations for items from 
                pass-through entities (sec. 1284)................   396
            5. Awarding of administrative costs and attorneys 
                fees (sec. 1285).................................   396

    Title XIII. GEstate, Gift, and Trust Simplification 
      Provisions.................................................   398

        1. Eliminate gift tax filing requirements for gifts to 
            charities (sec. 1301)................................   398
        2. Clarification of waiver of certain rights of recovery 
            (sec. 1302)..........................................   399
        3. Transitional rule under section 2056A (sec. 1303).....   400
        4. Treatment for estate tax purposes of short-term 
            obligations held by nonresident aliens (sec. 1304)...   400
        5. Certain revocable trusts as part of estate (sec. 1305)   402
        6. Distributions during first 65 days of taxable year of 
            estate (sec. 1306)...................................   403
        7. Separate share rules available to estate (sec. 1307)..   404
        8. Executor of estate and beneficiaries treated as 
            related persons for disallowance of losses (sec. 
            1308)................................................   405
        9. Simplified taxation of earnings of pre-need funeral 
            trusts (sec. 1309)...................................   406
        10. Adjustments for gifts within 3 years of decent's 
            death (sec. 1310)....................................   407
        11. Clarify relationship between community property 
            rights and retirement benefits (sec. 1311)...........   408



        12. Treatment under qualified domestic trust rules of 
            forms of ownership which are not trusts (sec. 1312)..   410
        13. Opportunity to correct certain failures under section 
            2032A (sec. 1313)....................................   411
        14. Authority to waive requirement of U.S. trustee for 
            qualified domestic trusts (sec. 1314)................   412

    Title XIV. GExcise Tax and Other Simplification Provisions...   413

        A. Excise Tax Simplification Provisions..................   413

            1. Increase de minimis limit for after-market 
                alternations subject to heavy truck and luxury 
                automobile excise taxes (sec. 1401)..............   413
            2. Modify treatment of tires under the heavy highway 
                vehicle retail excise tax (sec. 1402)............   414
            3. Simplification of excise taxes on distilled 
                spirits, wines, and beer (sec. 1411-1422)........   414
            4. Authority for Internal Revenue Service to grant 
                exemptions from excise tax registration 
                requirements (sec. 1431).........................   417
            5. Repeal of expired excise tax provisions (sec. 
                1432)............................................   418
            6. Modifications to the excise tax on certain arrows 
                (sec. 1433)......................................   418
            7. Modifications to heavy highway vehicle retail 
                excise tax (sec. 1434)...........................   419
            8. Treatment of skydiving flights as noncommercial 
                aviation (sec. 1435).............................   420
            9. Eliminate double taxation of certain aviation 
                fuels sold to producers by ``fixed base 
                operators'' (sec. 1436)..........................   421

        B. Tax-Exempt Bond Provisions............................   421

            1. Repeal of $100,000 limitation on unspent proceeds 
                under 1-year exception from rebate (sec. 1441)...   422
            2. Exception from rebate for earnings on bona fide 
                debt service fund under construction bond rules 
                (sec. 1442)......................................   423
            3. Repeal of debt service-based limitation on 
                investment in certain nonpurpose investments 
                (sec. 1443)......................................   424
            4. Repeal of expired provisions relating to student 
                loan bonds (sec. 1444)...........................   425

        C. Tax Court Procedures..................................   425

            1. Overpayment determinations of Tax Court (sec. 
                1451)............................................   425
            2. Redetermination of interest pursuant to motion 
                (sec. 1452)......................................   426



            3. Application of net worth requirement for awards of 
                litigation costs (sec. 1453).....................   426
            4. Tax Court jurisdiction for determination of 
                employment status (sec. 1454)....................   427

        D. Other Provisions......................................   428

            1. Due date for first quarter estimated tax payments 
                by private foundations (sec. 1461)...............   428
            2. Witholding of Commonwealth income taxes from wages 
                of Federal employees (sec. 1462).................   429
            3. Certain notices disregarded under provision 
                increasing interest rate on large corporate 
                underpayments (sec. 1463)........................   430

    Title XV. Pension and Employee Benefit Provisions............   432

        A. Pension Simplification Provisions.....................   432

            1. Matching contributions of self-employed 
                individuals not treated as elective deferrals 
                (sec. 1501)......................................   432
            2. Modifications of prohibition on assignment or 
                alienation (sec. 1502)...........................   433
            3. Elimination of paperwork burdens on plans (sec. 
                1503)............................................   434
            4. Modification of section 403(b) exclusion allowance 
                to conform to section 415 modifications (sec. 
                1504)............................................   435
            5. Permanent moratorium on application of 
                nondiscrimination rules to State and local 
                governmental plans (sec. 1505)...................   436
            6. Clarification of certain rules relating to ESOPs 
                of S corporations (sec. 1506)....................   437
            7. Modification of 10-percent tax on nondeductible 
                contributions (sec. 1507)........................   438
            8. Modify funding requirements for certain plans 
                (sec. 1508)......................................   439
            9. Plans not disqualified merely by accepting 
                rollover contributions (sec. 1509)...............   440
            10. New technologies in retirement plans (sec. 1510).   441

        B. Miscellaneous Provisions Relating to Pensions and 
            Other Benefits.......................................   442

            1. Increase in full funding limit (sec. 1521)........   442
            2. Contributions on behalf of a minister to a church 
                plan (sec. 1522 (a)(2))..........................   443
            3. Exclusion of ministers from discrimination testing 
                of certain non-church retirement plans (sec. 
                1522(a)(1))......................................   444
            4. Repeal application of UBIT to ESOPs of S 
                corporations (sec. 1523).........................   444



            5. Diversification in section 401(i) plan investments 
                (sec. 1524)......................................   445
            6. Cash or deferred arrangements for irrigation and 
                drainage entities (sec. 1525)....................   447
            7. Portability of permissive service credit under 
                governmental pension plans (sec. 1526)...........   448
            8. Removal of dollar limitation on benefits payments 
                from a defined benefit plan for police and fire 
                employees (sec. 1527)............................   450
            9. Survivor benefits of public safety officers killed 
                in the line of duty (sec. 1528)..................   451
            10. Treatment of certain disability payments to 
                public safety employees (sec. 1529)..............   452
            11. Gratuitous transfers for the benefits of 
                employees (sec. 1530)............................   453

        C. Certain Health Act Provisions.........................   455

            1. Newborns' and mothers' health protection; mental 
                health parity (sec. 1531)........................   455
            2. Church plan exception to prohibition on 
                discrimination against individuals based on 
                health status (sec. 1532)........................   456

        D. Date for Adoption of Plan Amendments (sec. 1541)......   457

    Title XVI. Technical Corrections Provisions..................   458

        Technical Corrections to the Small Business Job 
          Protection Act of 1996.................................   458

        A. Small Business-Related Provisions.....................   458

            1. Returns relating to purchases of fish (sec. 
                1601(a)(1))......................................   458
            2. Charitable remainder trusts not eligible to be 
                electing small business trusts (sec. 1601(c)(1)).   458
            3. Clarify the effective date for post-termination 
                transition period provision (sec. 1601(c)(2))....   458
            4. Treatment of qualified subchapter S subsidiaries 
                (sec. 1601(c)(3))................................   459

        B. Pension Provisions....................................   460

            1. Salary reduction simplified employee pensions 
                (``SARSEPS'') (sec. 1601(d)(1)(B))...............   460
            2. SIMPLE retirement plans (secs. 1601(d)(1)(A) and 
                (d)(1)(C)-(F))...................................   460
              a. Reporting requirements for SIMPLE IRAs 
                  (1601(d)(1)(A))................................   460
              b. Notification requirement for SIMPLE IRAs (sec. 
                  1601(d)(1)(C)).................................   461
              c. Maximum dollar limitation for SIMPLE IRAs (sec. 
                  1601(d)(1)(D)).................................   461



              d. Application of exclusive plan requirement for 
                  SIMPLE IRAs to noncollectively bargained 
                  employees (sec. 1601(d)(1)(E)).................   462
              e. Application of exclusive plan requirement for 
                  SIMPLE IRAs in the case of mergers and 
                  acquisitions (sec. 1601(d)(1)(F))..............   462
              f. Top-heavy exemption for SIMPLE 401(k) 
                  arrangements (sec. 1601(d)(2)(A))..............   463
              g. Cost of living adjustments for SIMPLE 401(k) 
                  arrangements (sec. 1601(d)(2)(B))..............   463
              h. Employer deduction for SIMPLE 401(k) 
                  arrangements (sec. 1601(d)(2)(C))..............   463
              i. Notification and election periods for SIMPLE 
                  401(k) arrangements (sec. 1601(d)(2)(D)).......   464
              j. Treatment of Indian tribal governments under 
                  section 403(b) (sec. 1601(d)(4))...............   464
              k. Special rules for chaplains and self-employed 
                  ministers (sec. 1601(d)(6))....................   465

        C. Foreign Provisions....................................   465

            1. Measurement of earnings of controlled foreign 
                corporations (sec. 1601(e))......................   465
            2. Transfers to foreign trusts at fair market value 
                (sec. 1601(i)(2))................................   465
            3. Treatment of trust as U.S. person (sec. 
                1601(i)(3))......................................   466

        D. Other Provisions......................................   467

            1. Phaseout and expiration of excise tax on luxury 
                automobiles (sec. 1601(f)(3))....................   467
            2. Treatment of certain reserves of thrift 
                institutions (sec. 1601(f)(5))...................   467
            3. ``FASIT'' technical corrections (sec. 1601(f)(6)).   468
            4. Qualified State tuition programs (sec. 1601(h)(1))   469
            5. Adoption credit (sec. 1601(h)(2)).................   470
            6. Phaseout of adoption assistance exclusion (sec. 
                1601(h)(2))......................................   471

        Technical Corrections to the Health Insurance Portability 
          and Accountability Act of 1996.........................   472

        A. Medical Savings Accounts (sec. 1602(a))...............   472

            1. Additional tax on distributions not used for 
                medical programs.................................   472
            2. Definition of permitted coverage..................   472
            3. Taxation of distributions.........................   472
            4. Penalty for failure to provide required reports...   473



        B. Definition of Chronically Ill Individual Under a 
            Qualified Long-Term Care Insurance Contract (sec. 
            1602(b)).............................................   473

        C. Deduction for Long-Term Care Insurance of Self-
            Employed Individuals (sec. 1602(c))..................   474

        D. Applicability of Reporting Requirements of Long-Term 
            Care Contracts and Accelerated Death Benefits (sec. 
            1602(d)).............................................   474

        E. Consumer Protection Provisions for Long-Term Care 
            Insurance Contracts (sec. 1602(e))...................   475

        F. Insurable Interests Under the COLI Provision (sec. 
            1602(f)(1))..........................................   476

        G. Applicable Period For Purposes of Applying the 
            Interest Rate For a Variable Rate Contract Under the 
            COLI Rules (sec. 1602(f)(2)).........................   476

        H. Definition of 20-Percent Owner for Purposes of Key 
            Persons Exception Under COLI Rules (sec. 1602(f)(3)).   477

        I. Effective Date of Interest Rate Cap on Key Persons and 
            Pre-1986 Contracts Under the COLI Rule (sec. 
            1602(f)(4))..........................................   477

        J. Clarification of Contract Lapses Under Effective Date 
            Provisions of the COLI Rule (sec. 1602(f)(5))........   478

        K. Requirement of Gain Recognition on Certain Exchanges 
            (sec. 1602(g)(1))....................................   479

        L. Suspension of 10-year Period in Case of Substantial 
            Diminution of Risk of Loss (sec. 1602(g)(3)).........   480

        M. Treatment of Property Contributed to Certain Foreign 
            Corporations (sec. 1602(g)(4)).......................   480

        N. Credit For Foreign Estate Tax (sec. 1602(g)(6)).......   480

        Technical Corrections to the Taxpayer Bill of Rights 2...   482

        A. Reasonable Cause Abatement for First-Tier Intermediate 
            Sanctions Excise Tax (sec. 1603(a))..................   482

        B. Reporting by Public Charities With Respect to 
            Intermediate Sanctions and Certain Other Excise Tax 
            Penalties (sec. 1603(b)).............................   483

        Technical Corrections to Other Acts......................   485

        A. Correction of GATT Interest and Mortality Rate 
            Provisions in the Retirement Protection Act (sec. 
            1604(b)(3))..........................................   485



        B. Clarify Definition of Indian Reservation Under Section 
            168(j)(6) (sec. 1604(c)).............................   486

        C. Treatment of ``Cost-Plus'' Contracts Under Section 833 
            (sec. 1604(d)).......................................   486

        D. Related Parties Determined By Reference to Section 267 
            (sec. 1604(d)).......................................   487

    Title XVII. GLimited Tax Benefits Subject to the Line Item 
      Veto Act (sec. 1701).......................................   488

Part Three: GRevenue Provisions of the Balanced Budget Act of 
  1997 (H.R. 2015)...............................................   493

        A. Taxation of Medicare + Choice Medical Savings Accounts 
            (sec. 4006)..........................................   493

        B. Tax Treatment of Hospitals which Participate in 
            Provider-Sponsored Organizations (sec. 4041).........   496

        C. Provision of Employer Identification Numbers by 
            Medicare Providers (sec. 4313).......................   498

        D. Disclosure of Tax Return Information for Verification 
            of Employment Status of Medicare Beneficiaries and 
            the Spouse of a Medicare Beneficiary (sec. 4631(c))..   498

        E. Unemployment Tax Provisions...........................   499

            1. Exemption from service performed by election 
                workers from the Federal unemployment tax (sec. 
                5405)............................................   499
            2. Treatment of certain services performed by inmates 
                (sec. 5406)......................................   500
            3. Exemption of service performed for an elementary 
                or secondary school operated primarily for 
                religious purposes from the Federal unemployment 
                tax (sec. 5407)..................................   500

        F. Earned Income Credit Provision........................   501

            1. Authorization of appropriations for enforcement 
                initiatives related to the earned income credit 
                (sec. 5702)......................................   501

        G. Increase in Excise Tax on Tobacco Products (sec. 9302)   502

        H. Identification of Limited Tax Benefits Subject to Line 
            Item Veto (sec. 9304)................................   504



Part Four: GTaxpayer Browsing Protection Act (H.R. 1226).........   506

Part Five: GExtension of Highway Trust Fund (Sec. 9 of S. 1519)..   508

Appendix: GEstimated Budget Effects of Tax Legislation Enacted in 
  1997...........................................................   511



                              INTRODUCTION

    This pamphlet,\1\ prepared by the staff of the Joint 
Committee on Taxation in consultation with the staffs of the 
House Committee on Ways and Means and Senate Committee on 
Finance, provides an explanation of tax legislation enacted in 
1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ This pamphlet may be cited as follows: Joint Committee on 
Taxation, General Explanation of Tax Legislation Enacted in 1997 (JCS-
23-97), December 17, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A committee report on legislation issued by a Congressional 
committee sets forth the committee's explanation of the bill as 
it was reported by that committee. In some instances, a 
committee report does not serve as an explanation of the final 
provisions of the legislation as enacted. This is because the 
version of the bill enacted after action by the conference 
committee may differ significantly from the versions of the 
bill reported by the House and Senate. The material contained 
in this pamphlet is prepared so that Members of Congress, tax 
practitioners, and other interested parties can have an 
explanation of the final tax legislation enacted in 1997 in one 
publication.
    Part One of the pamphlet is an explanation of the 
provisions of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund Reinstatement 
Act of 1997 (H.R. 668, P.L. 105-2) relating to the temporary 
extension (through September 30, 1997) of Airport and Airway 
Trust Fund excise taxes.\2\ Part Two is an explanation of the 
Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (H.R. 2014, P.L. 105-34). Part 
Three is an explanation of the revenue provisions of the 
Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (H.R. 2015, P.L. 105-33). Part Four 
is an explanation of the Taxpayer Browsing Protection Act (H.R. 
1226, P.L. 105-35) relating to prohibitions on tax return/tax 
information browsing. Part Five is an explanation of section 9 
of S. 1519 (P.L. 105-130). The Appendix provides estimates of 
the effects of tax legislation enacted in 1997 on Federal 
fiscal year receipts for 1997-2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ See also section 1031 of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (H.R. 
2014, P.L. 105-34) in Part Two of this pamphlet for subsequent 
extension and modifications to the Airport and Airway Trust fund excise 
taxes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The first footnote in each part of the pamphlet gives the 
legislative history of each of the 1997 Acts.
    Further, footnote references are included with respect to 
related provisions in the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997 
(Title VI of H.R. 2676 as passed by the House on November 5, 
1997). The Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997 was reported 
by the House Committee on Ways and Means in H.R. 2645 on 
October 29, 1997 (H. Rept. 105-356), and was added as an 
amendment to H.R. 2676. (Titles I-V of H.R. 2676, the Internal 
Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1997, was 
reported by the House Committee on Ways and Means on October 
31, 1997; H. Rept. 105-364, Part I.)



 PART ONE: AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND EXTENSION ACT OF 1997 (H.R. 
                                668) \3\

                               Prior Law

Tax rates
    Excise taxes are imposed on commercial air passenger and 
freight transportation and on fuels used in general aviation 
(i.e., transportation on noncommercial aircraft which is not 
for hire) to fund the Airport and Airway Trust Fund (``Airport 
Trust Fund''). These taxes generally had expired after December 
31, 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ P.L. 105-2; February 28, 1997. H.R. 668 was reported by the 
House Committee on Ways and Means on February 13, 1997 (H. Rept. 105-
5). The bill was passed by the House on February 26, 1997, and by the 
Senate on February 27, 1997. H.R. 668 was signed by the President on 
February 28, 1997.
    See also Part Two for a description of the subsequent 10-year 
extension and modification of the Airport Trust Fund excise taxes in 
the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (sec. 1031 of H.R. 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Airport Trust Fund excise taxes which had expired 
included three taxes on commercial air transportation:
          (1) A 10-percent excise tax on domestic air passenger 
        transportation;
          (2) A $6 per person international air passenger 
        departure tax; and
          (3) A 6.25-percent domestic air freight excise tax.
    Noncommercial aviation (e.g., corporate aircraft) was 
subject to Airport Trust Fund excise taxes on the fuels it used 
rather than the commercial aviation passenger ticket and 
freight excise taxes. The Airport Trust Fund rates for these 
excise taxes were 17.5 cents per gallon for jet fuel and 15 
cents per gallon for aviation gasoline.
Collection and deposit of tax
    The air passenger ticket and freight excise taxes are 
collected from passengers and freight shippers by the 
commercial air carriers. The air carriers then remit the funds 
to the Treasury Department; however, the air carriers are not 
required to remit monies immediately. Excise tax returns are 
filed quarterly (similar to annual income tax returns) with 
taxes being deposited on a semi-monthly basis (similar to 
estimated income taxes). For air transportation sold during a 
semi-monthly period, air carriers may elect to treat the taxes 
as collected on the last day of the first week of the second 
following semi-monthly period.\4\ Under these ``deemed 
collected'' rules, for example, the taxes on air transportation 
sold between October 1 and October 15, are treated as collected 
by the air carriers on or before November 7. These amounts 
generally must be deposited with the Treasury by November 10. 
Thus, on average, revenues from commercial air passenger 
transportation generally are not received by the Federal 
Government until approximately one month after the air carrier 
actually sells the transportation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ Air carriers generally make this election because it allows 
them to delay remitting tax beyond the date when remittance otherwise 
would be required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Like income tax withholding and estimated tax payments, the 
excise taxes contain payment safe harbors for avoiding 
underpayment penalties. In general, Treasury Department 
regulations provide that commercial air carriers are not 
subject to underpayment penalties if their semi-monthly 
deposits of passenger ticket and freight waybill taxes for a 
quarter equal to least the amount of taxes they were required 
to remit during the second preceding calendar quarter (the 
``look back'' rules). For example, air carriers generally would 
not be subject to underpayment penalties if their semi-monthly 
deposits for the fourth quarter (October 1 through December 31) 
equaled at least the amount they were required to remit during 
the second quarter (April 1 through June 30) of the same year.
    In a general information letter to the Air Transport 
Association of America, dated August 30, 1996, the Internal 
Revenue Service advised the air carriers that, notwithstanding 
that no excise taxes were required to be remitted during a 
look-back quarter, applicable Treasury Department regulations 
in 1997 permitted the air carriers to continue to avail 
themselves of the safe harbor and avoid remitting taxes 
collected from consumers during September, October, and 
November of 1996 until the air carriers filed their quarterly 
excise tax returns for that period on February 28, 1997. 
(Similarly, the air carriers were expected to retain most taxes 
collected from consumers during December 1996 until their 
excise tax returns for the first quarter of 1997 were due on 
May 31, 1997.)
Trust fund deposits
    The Airport Trust Fund received gross receipts attributable 
to the excise taxes described above. The Code provided that 
taxes received by the Treasury Department through the end of 
the period when the taxes were last imposed (i.e., through 
December 31, 1996 at the time of the legislation) were 
deposited in the Airport Trust Fund. Thus, under prior law, 
taxes received after December 31, 1996, were not transferred to 
the Airport Trust Fund.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Treasury Department credited the Airport Trust Fund 
with approximately $1.2 billion based on incorrect estimates of 
excise tax deposits. Subsequently, the Treasury learned that 
air carriers would not remit taxes attributable to the fourth 
quarter of 1996 to the Treasury until February 28, 1997. The 
Treasury Department planned to reverse this error. As a result, 
the combination of the remaining uncommitted balance in the 
Airport Trust Fund and General Fund appropriations available to 
the FAA were believed to be sufficient only to support the 
FAA's operational expenses through the fiscal year 1997, and to 
allow new capital commitments (assuming previously anticipated 
commitment levels) to be made through March 1997. However, 
because best available estimates of the effect of this error on 
the FAA budget did not include any estimates of the costs of 
terminating certain multiple phase contracts, the FAA projected 
that it would have to stop making new commitments and begin 
notifying contractors of its intent to terminate multiple phase 
contracts on March 1, 1997, or earlier, absent legislative 
action.
    The Congress determined that a short-term extension of the 
Airport Trust Fund excise taxes was needed in order to fund the 
FAA budget commitments through the fiscal year ending September 
30, 1997, and to give Congress time for review of proposals 
related to a longer-term extension of the aviation taxes.

                        Explanation of Provision

Reinstate air transportation excise taxes
    The Act reinstated the air transportation excise taxes that 
expired after December 31, 1996, during the period beginning 
seven days after the date of enactment and ending after 
September 30, 1997.
Transfer revenues to the Airport Trust Fund
    The Act authorized the Treasury Department to transfer to 
the Airport Trust Fund receipts attributable to excise taxes 
described above that were imposed on commercial and general 
aviation. This permitted transfer of receipts attributable to 
taxes imposed both during the period August 27, 1996, through 
December 31, 1996, and during the period beginning seven days 
after the date of enactment.
Modify Treasury Department excise tax deposit regulations
    To prevent a delay in depositing tax similar to that which 
occurred with respect to the fourth quarter of 1996, the 
provisions of Treasury Department regulations providing an 
exception to penalties for underpayment of estimated excise 
taxes based on a look-back period were made inapplicable when 
tax was not imposed throughout the look-back period. In such a 
case, taxpayers could continue to use an alternative safe 
harbor that provides that no underpayment penalty is imposed as 
long as the taxpayer has paid at least 95 percent of the 
current quarter's liability.

                             Effective Date

    The provisions reinstating the commercial air 
transportation excise taxes were effective for (1) 
transportation beginning during the period beginning seven days 
after the date of enactment (March 7, 1997) and ending after 
September 30, 1997, and (2) amounts paid during such period for 
transportation occurring after September 30, 1997. Refunds 
would have been provided for any taxes paid on air passenger 
and air freight transportation purchased before October 1, 
1997, for transportation that occurs at a time when the taxes 
are not in effect. (This refund provision was rendered moot by 
provisions of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (see sec. 1031) 
that extended the Airport Trust Fund excise taxes, as modified 
in that Act, for 10 years, through September 30, 2007.)
    The provisions reinstating the general aviation gasoline 
excise tax were effective for gasoline removed during the 
period beginning seven days after the date of enactment (March 
7, 1997) and ending after September 30, 1997. The provision 
reinstating the general aviation jet fuel excise tax was 
effective for fuels sold by producers during the same period. 
Floor stocks taxes were imposed on these fuels held beyond the 
removal or producer level on the date which is seven days after 
the date of enactment (March 7, 1997).
    The provisions relating to transfer of receipts to the 
Airport Trust Fund and the modification of the Treasury 
Department's excise tax deposit regulations were effective on 
the date of enactment (February 28, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provisions are estimated to increase Federal fiscal 
year budget receipts by $2,730 million in 1997, and to reduce 
fiscal year budget receipts by $54 million in 1998.

         PART TWO: TAXPAYER RELIEF ACT OF 1997 (H.R. 2014) \5\

                       TITLE I. CHILD TAX CREDIT

A. Child Tax Credit For Children Under Age 17 (sec. 101(a), (b) and (d) 
                of the Act and new sec. 24 of the Code)

                               Prior Law

In general
    Prior law did not provide tax credits based solely on the 
taxpayer's number of dependent children. Taxpayers with 
dependent children, however, generally are able to claim a 
personal exemption for each of these dependents. The total 
amount of personal exemptions is subtracted (along with certain 
other items) from adjusted gross income (``AGI'') in arriving 
at taxable income. The amount of each personal exemption is 
$2,650 for 1997, and is adjusted annually for inflation. In 
1997, the amount of the personal exemption is phased out for 
taxpayers with AGI in excess of $121,200 for single taxpayers, 
$151,500 for heads of household, and $181,800 for married 
couples filing joint returns. These phaseout thresholds are 
adjusted annually for inflation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ P.L. 105-34; August 5, 1997. H.R. 2014 was reported by the 
House Committee on the Budget on June 24, 1997 (H. Rept. 105-148), 
after the revenue reconciliation provisions were approved by the House 
Committee on Ways and Means on June 13, 1997. The bill, as amended, was 
passed by the House on June 26, 1997.
    S. 949 was reported by the Senate Committee on Finance on June 20, 
1997 (S. Rept. 105-33). The bill was considered by the Senate on June 
25-27, 1997, and the provisions of the bill as amended, were 
incorporated in the Senate-passed version of H.R. 2014 on June 27, 
1997. A conference report on H.R. 2014 was filed in the House on July 
30, 1997 (H. Rept. 105-220); the House agreed to the conference report 
on July 31, 1997; and the Senate also agreed to the conference report 
on July 31, 1997. H.R. 2014 was signed by the President on August 5, 
1997.
    Two provisions in the conference agreement on H.R. 2014 as passed 
by the House and the Senate were canceled by the President under the 
Line Item Veto Act: (1) temporary exceptions under subpart F for 
certain active financing income; and (2) nonrecognition of gain on the 
sale of stock in agricultural processors facilities to certain farmer's 
cooperatives. Modified versions of these two canceled provisions were 
passed by the House in H.R. 2513, as amended, on November 8, 1997. (See 
report of the Committee on Ways and Means on H.R. 2513; H. Rept. 105-
318, Part I, October 9, 1997. H.R. 2513 was referred to the House 
Committee on the Budget, and the bill was discharged from the Committee 
on the Budget on October 22, 1997.)
    Further, section 977 of H.R. 2014 (relating to carryback of 
existing net operating losses of the National Railroad Passenger 
Corporation (Amtrak)) was contingent on the enactment of Amtrak reform 
legislation. S. 738 (``Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act of 1997'') 
was reported by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation on May 14, 1997 (S. Rept. 105-85), and was passed by the 
Senate, as amended, on November 7, 1997. S. 738 was passed by the 
House, with amendment, on November 13, 1997, and the Senate agreed to 
the House amendment on November 13, 1997. S. 738 was signed by the 
President on December 2, 1997 (P.L. 105-134).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the individual income tax 
structure does not reduce tax liability by enough to reflect a 
family's reduced ability to pay taxes as family size increases. 
In part, this is because over the last 50 years the value of 
the dependent personal exemption has declined in real terms by 
over one-third. The Congress believed that a tax credit for 
families with dependent children will reduce the individual 
income tax burden of those families, will better recognize the 
financial responsibilities of raising dependent children, and 
will promote family values.

                        Explanation of Provision

In general
    Present law provides a $500 ($400 for taxable year 1998) 
tax credit for each qualifying child under the age of 17. A 
qualifying child is defined as an individual for whom the 
taxpayer can claim a dependency exemption and who is a son or 
daughter of the taxpayer (or a descendent of either), a stepson 
or stepdaughter of the taxpayer or an eligible foster child of 
the taxpayer.
Phase-out range
    For taxpayers with AGI in excess of certain thresholds, the 
otherwise allowable child credit is phased out. Specifically, 
the otherwise allowable child credit is reduced by $50 for each 
$1,000 of modified AGI (or fraction thereof) in excess of the 
threshold (``the modified AGI phase-out''). For these purposes 
modified AGI is computed by increasing the taxpayer's AGI by 
the amount otherwise excluded from gross income under Code 
sections 911, 931, or 933 (relating to the exclusion of income 
of U.S. citizens or residents living abroad; residents of Guam, 
American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands; and residents 
of Puerto Rico, respectively). For married taxpayers filing 
joint returns, the threshold is $110,000. For taxpayers filing 
single or head of household returns, the threshold is $75,000. 
For married taxpayers filing separate returns, the threshold is 
$55,000. These thresholds are not indexed for inflation. The 
length of the phase-out range is affected by the number of the 
taxpayer's qualifying children. For example, in 1999, the 
phase-out range for a single person with one qualifying child 
will be between $75,000 and $85,000 of modified AGI. The phase-
out range for a single person with two qualifying children will 
be between $75,000 and $95,000 of modified AGI in 1999.
Tax liability limitation; refundable credits
    In general, the amount of the child credit, together with 
the other nonrefundable personal credits, is limited to the 
excess of the taxpayer's regular tax over the taxpayer's 
tentative minimum tax (determined without regard to the 
alternative tax minimum foreign tax credit) (sec. 26(a)).
    In the case of an individual with three or more qualifying 
children, the taxpayer also may be allowed a refundable child 
credit (sec. 24(d)).\6\ The amount of the refundable child 
credit is the amount that the nonrefundable personal credits 
would increase if the tax liability limitation of section 26(a) 
were increased by the excess of the taxpayer's social security 
taxes over the taxpayer's earned income credit (if any).\7\ The 
amount of the refundable child credit is limited to the amount 
of the child credit allowable under section 24, determined 
without regard to section 26(a). The social security taxes 
means the individual's share of FICA taxes and one-half of the 
SECA tax liability. The amount of the refundable child credit 
is reduced by the amount of the alternative minimum tax imposed 
by section 55 that did not result in a reduction of the earned 
income credit under section 32(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ The provision is described as set forth in Title VI (sec. 
603(a)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as 
passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
    \7\ For this purpose, the earned income credit is determined 
without regard to the supplemental earned income credit discussed 
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The amount of the refundable child credit under section 
24(d) will reduce the amount of the nonrefundable child credit 
(determined without regard to section 26). This will result in 
the proper calculation of personal credit carryovers.
    The following examples illustrate the operation of credit 
for a taxpayer with three or more qualifying children:
    Example 1.--Assume that in 1999, A, an unmarried individual 
with three qualifying children and an adjusted gross income 
below $75,000, incurs a regular tax liability in excess of the 
tentative minimum tax in the amount of $1,000. Assume also that 
A's employee share of FICA taxes is $3,000. Also assume that A 
is not entitled to any other credits. A is allowed a $1,000 
nonrefundable credit, as limited by section 26(a). A is also 
allowed a refundable credit of $500 by reason of section 24(d). 
The amount of this credit is the lesser of (1) $1,500 (the 
credit that would be allowed under section 24(a) without regard 
to the tax limitation of section 26) or (2) $500 (the excess of 
$1,500 (the amount of subpart A credits which would be allowed 
if A's $3,000 social security taxes were added to the $1,000 
section 26(a) limit) over $1,000 (the subpart A credits 
otherwise allowed)).
    Example 2.--Assume the same facts as in example 1, except 
that A is also allowed a $960 dependent care credit (without 
regard to section 26). A is allowed $1,000 of nonrefundable 
credits. A is also allowed a refundable credit of $1,460 by 
reason of section 24(d). The amount of this credit is the 
lesser of (1) $1,500 (as in example 1) or (2) $1,460 (the 
excess of $2,460 (the amount of subpart A credits which would 
be allowed if A's $3,000 social security taxes were added to 
the $1,000 section 26(a) limit) over $1,000 (the subpart A 
credits otherwise allowed)).
    Example 3.--Assume the same facts as in example 2, except 
that A is also allowed a $5,000 adoption credit (without regard 
to section 26). A is allowed $1,000 of nonrefundable credits. A 
is also allowed a refundable credit of $1,500. The amount of 
this credit is the lesser of (1) $1,500 (as in example 2) or 
(2) $3,000 (the excess of $4,000 (the amount of the subpart A 
credits which would be allowed if A's $3,000 social security 
taxes were added to the $1,000 section 26(a) limit) over $1,000 
(the subpart A credits otherwise allowed)).
    $4,960 of the adoption credit may be carried forward under 
section 23(c) ($5,000 credit under section 23(a) in excess of 
$40 (the excess of the $1,000 credit limitation under section 
26(a) over the $960 of credits allowed by subpart A other than 
section 23)). For purposes of computing the credits allowed by 
subpart A, the $1,500 child credit is not taken into account 
because it is allowed under subpart C.
            Supplemental child credit
    Part or all of the child credit may be treated as a 
supplemental child credit under the earned income credit (sec. 
32(n)).\8\ The amount treated as a supplemental child credit 
under section 32(n) reduces the amount of the child credit 
under section 24, but does not change the total amount of child 
credits allowed and has no effect on determining the amount of 
any other credit for any taxable year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ The provision is described as set forth in Title VI (sec. 
603(b)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as 
passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The amount of the supplemental child credit is the amount 
by which the personal credits would be reduced if the section 
26(a) tax liability limitation were reduced by an amount equal 
to the excess of the taxpayer's earned income credit (without 
regard to the supplemental child credit) over the taxpayer's 
social security taxes (as defined above). The amount of the 
supplemental child credit cannot exceed the amount of the 
nonrefundable child credit under section 24, determined without 
regard to the tax liability limitation of section 26. The 
eligibility provisions of section 32 are disregarded in 
determining the amount of supplemental child credit which is 
allowed to the taxpayer.
    For example, assume an individual with two qualifying 
children is allowed an earned income credit of $1,300 under 
section 32(a), has a $500 regular tax liability, no other 
personal credits, and pays social security taxes of $1,000. 
Without regard to section 32(n), the individual would be 
allowed a child credit of $500 under section 24(a), as limited 
by section 26(a). However, section 32(n) provides that $300 of 
the child credit will be allowed as supplemental child credit 
under section 32 rather than as a child credit under section 
24. $300 is the amount that the nonrefundable child credit 
would have been reduced if the section 26(a) limitation had 
been reduced by the excess of the $1,300 regular earned income 
credit over the $1,000 social security taxes. Thus, the 
individual will be allowed a supplemental child credit under 
section 32(n) of $300 and a child credit under section 24 of 
$200. This provision will not change the total amount of 
credits allowed to the taxpayer.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $2,710 million in 1998, $18,119 million in 
1999, $21,549 million in 2000, $21,401 million in 2001, $21,258 
million in 2002, $20,901 million in 2003, $20,430 million in 
2004, $19,702 million in 2005, $18,997 million in 2006, and 
$18,317 million in 2007.

   B. Expand Definition of High-Risk Individuals with Respect to Tax-
 Exempt State-Sponsored Organizations Providing Health Coverage (sec. 
           101(c) of the Act and sec. 501(c)(26) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Present and prior law provide tax-exempt status to any 
membership organization that is established by a State 
exclusively to provide coverage for medical care on a nonprofit 
basis to certain high-risk individuals, provided certain 
criteria are satisfied.\9\ The organization may provide 
coverage for medical care either by issuing insurance itself or 
by entering into an arrangement with a health maintenance 
organization (``HMO'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ No inference is intended as to the tax treatment of other types 
of State-sponsored organizations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    High-risk individuals eligible to receive medical care 
coverage from the organization must be residents of the State 
who, due to a pre-existing medical condition, are unable to 
obtain health coverage for such condition through insurance or 
an HMO, or are able to acquire such coverage only at a rate 
that is substantially higher than the rate charged for such 
coverage by the organization. The State must determine the 
composition of membership in the organization. For example, a 
State could mandate that all organizations that are subject to 
insurance regulation by the State must be members of the 
organization.
    The State or members of the organization are required to 
fund the liabilities of the organization to the extent that 
premiums charged to eligible individuals are insufficient to 
cover such liabilities. Finally, no part of the net earnings of 
the organization can inure to the benefit of any private 
shareholder or individual.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that including the spouse and certain 
children of high-risk individuals in the group of individuals 
to whom such an organization may provide medical care coverage 
will assist States in providing medical care coverage for 
uninsured children.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The provision expands the definition of high-risk 
individuals to include a child of an individual who meets the 
present-law definition of a high-risk individual, subject to 
certain requirements. The requirements are: (1) the taxpayer is 
allowed a deduction for a personal exemption for the child for 
the taxable year; (2) the child has not attained the age of 17 
as of the close of the calendar year in which the taxable year 
of the taxpayer begins; and (3) the child is a son or daughter 
of the taxpayer (or a descendant of either), a stepson or 
stepdaughter of the taxpayer, or an eligible foster child of 
the taxpayer. The definition of high-risk individuals is also 
expanded to include the spouse of an individual who meets the 
prior-law definition of a high-risk individual.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million in 1998 and by $2 million per 
year in each of 1999 through 2007.

                   TITLE II. EDUCATION TAX INCENTIVES

             A. Tax Benefits Relating to Education Expenses

1. HOPE tax credit and Lifetime Learning tax credit for higher 
        education tuition expenses (sec. 201 of the Act and new secs. 
        25A and 6050S of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

Deductibility of education expenses

    Taxpayers generally may not deduct education and training 
expenses. However, a deduction for education expenses generally 
is allowed under section 162 if the education or training (1) 
maintains or improves a skill required in a trade or business 
currently engaged in by the taxpayer, or (2) meets the express 
requirements of the taxpayer's employer, or requirements of 
applicable law or regulations, imposed as a condition of 
continued employment (Treas. Reg. sec. 1.162-5). However, 
education expenses are not deductible if they relate to certain 
minimum educational requirements or to education or training 
that enables a taxpayer to begin working in a new trade or 
business. In the case of an employee, education expenses (if 
not reimbursed by the employer) may be claimed as an itemized 
deduction only if such expenses meet the above-described 
criteria for deductibility under section 162 and only to the 
extent that the expenses, along with other miscellaneous 
deductions, exceed 2 percent of the taxpayer's adjusted gross 
income (AGI).

Exclusion for employer-provided educational assistance

    A special rule allows an employee to exclude from gross 
income for income tax purposes and from wages for employment 
tax purposes up to $5,250 annually paid by his or her employer 
for educational assistance (sec. 127). In order for the 
exclusion to apply, certain requirements must be satisfied, 
including a requirement that not more than 5 percent of the 
amounts paid or incurred by the employer during the year for 
educational assistance under a qualified educational assistance 
program can be provided for the class of individuals consisting 
of more than 5-percent owners of the employer and the spouses 
or dependents of such more than 5-percent owners. This special 
rule for employer-provided educational assistance expires with 
respect to courses beginning after May 31, 2000, and does not 
apply to graduate-level courses.
    For purposes of the special exclusion, educational 
assistance means the payment by an employer of expenses 
incurred by or on behalf of the employee for education of the 
employee including, but not limited to, tuition, fees, and 
similar payments, books, supplies, and equipment. Educational 
assistance also includes the provision by the employer of 
courses of instruction for the employee (including books, 
supplies, and equipment). Educational assistance does not 
include tools or supplies which may be retained by the employee 
after completion of a course or meals, lodging, or 
transportation. The exclusion does not apply to any education 
involving sports, games, or hobbies.
    In the absence of the special exclusion, employer-provided 
educational assistance is excludable from gross income and 
wages as a working condition fringe benefit (sec. 132(d)) only 
to the extent the education expenses would be deductible under 
section 162.

Exclusion for interest earned on savings bonds

    Another special rule (sec. 135) provides that interest 
earned on a qualified U.S. Series EE savings bond issued after 
1989 is excludable from gross income if the proceeds of the 
bond upon redemption do not exceed qualified higher education 
expenses paid by the taxpayer during the taxable year.\10\ 
``Qualified higher education expenses'' include tuition and 
fees (but not room and board expenses) required for the 
enrollment or attendance of the taxpayer, the taxpayer's 
spouse, or a dependent of the taxpayer at certain colleges, 
universities, or vocational schools.\11\ The exclusion provided 
by section 135 is phased out for certain higher-income 
taxpayers, determined by the taxpayer's modified AGI during the 
year the bond is redeemed. For 1997, the exclusion is phased 
out for taxpayers with modified AGI between $50,850 and $65,850 
($76,250 and $106,250 for joint returns). To prevent taxpayers 
from effectively avoiding the income phaseout limitation 
through issuance of bonds directly in the child's name, section 
135(c)(1)(B) provides that the interest exclusion is available 
only with respect to U.S. Series EE savings bonds issued to 
taxpayers who are at least 24 years old.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ If the aggregate redemption amount (i.e., principal plus 
interest) of all Series EE bonds redeemed by the taxpayer during the 
taxable year exceeds the qualified education expenses incurred, then 
the excludable portion of interest income is based on the ratio that 
the education expenses bear to the aggregate redemption amount (sec. 
135(b)).
    \11\ The Act amended section 135 to allow taxpayers to redeem U.S. 
Savings Bonds and be eligible for the exclusion under that section (as 
if the proceeds were used to pay qualified higher education expenses) 
provided that the proceeds from the redemption are contributed to a 
qualified State tuition program defined under section 529, or to an 
education IRA defined under section 530, on behalf of the taxpayer, the 
taxpayer's spouse, or a dependent. Title VI of H.R. 2676, the Tax 
Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 
5, 1997, includes a technical correction provision that conforms the 
definition of ``eligible educational institution'' under section 135 to 
the broader definition of that term under sections 529 and 530. The 
result of this technical correction would be that, for purposes of 
section 135, as under sections 529 and 530, the term ``eligible 
educational institution'' would be defined as an institution which is 
(1) described in section 481 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
U.S.C. 1088) and (2) eligible to participate in Department of Education 
student aid programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Qualified scholarships

    Section 117 excludes from gross income amounts received as 
a qualified scholarship by an individual who is a candidate for 
a degree and used for tuition and fees required for the 
enrollment or attendance (or for fees, books, supplies, and 
equipment required for courses of instruction) at a primary, 
secondary, or post-secondary educational institution. The tax-
free treatment provided by section 117 does not extend to 
scholarship amounts covering regular living expenses, such as 
room and board. There is, however, no dollar limitation for the 
section 117 exclusion, provided that the scholarship funds are 
used to pay for tuition and required fees. In addition to the 
exclusion for qualified scholarships, section 117 provides an 
exclusion from gross income for qualified tuition reductions 
for education below the graduate level provided to employees 
(and their spouses and dependents) of certain educational 
organizations.\12\ Section 117(c) specifically provides that 
the exclusion for qualified scholarships and qualified tuition 
reductions does not apply to any amount received by a student 
that represents payment for teaching, research, or other 
services by the student required as a condition for receiving 
the scholarship or tuition reduction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\ A special rule provides that qualified tuition reductions 
under section 117(d) may be provided for graduate-level courses in 
cases of graduate students who are engaged in teaching or research 
activities for the educational organization (sec. 117(d)(5)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Student loan forgiveness

    In the case of an individual, section 108(f) provides that 
gross income subject to Federal income tax does not include any 
amount from the forgiveness (in whole or in part) of certain 
student loans, provided that the forgiveness is contingent on 
the student's working for a certain period of time in certain 
professions for any of a broad class of employers (e.g., 
providing health care services to a nonprofit organization). 
Student loans eligible for this special rule must be made to an 
individual to assist the individual in attending an education 
institution that normally maintains a regular faculty and 
curriculum and normally has a regularly enrolled body of 
students in attendance at the place where its education 
activities are regularly carried on. Loan proceeds may be used 
not only for tuition and required fees, but also to cover room 
and board expenses (in contrast to tax-free scholarships under 
section 117, which are limited to tuition and required fees). 
In addition, the loan must be made by (1) the United States (or 
an instrumentality or agency thereof), (2) a State (or any 
political subdivision thereof), (3) certain tax-exempt public 
benefit corporations that control a State, county, or municipal 
hospital and whose employees have been deemed to be public 
employees under State law, or (4) an educational organization 
that originally received the funds from which the loan was made 
from the United States, a State, or a tax-exempt public benefit 
corporation. Thus, loans made with private, nongovernmental 
funds are not qualifying student loans for purposes of the 
section 108(f) exclusion. As with section 117, there is no 
dollar limitation for the section 108(f) exclusion.
    The Act expanded section 108(f) to apply to cancellations 
of student loans made by an educational organization with its 
own funds, provided that the cancellation is contingent on the 
student working for a certain period of time in certain 
professions for any of a broad class of employers and provided 
that the student's work satisfies a public service requirement.

Qualified State tuition programs

    Section 529 provides tax-exempt status to ``qualified State 
tuition programs,'' meaning certain programs established and 
maintained by a State (or agency or instrumentality thereof) 
under which persons may (1) purchase tuition credits or 
certificates on behalf of a designated beneficiary that entitle 
the beneficiary to a waiver or payment of qualified higher 
education expenses of the beneficiary, or (2) make 
contributions to an account that is established for the purpose 
of meeting qualified higher education expenses of the 
designated beneficiary of the account. ``Qualified higher 
education expenses'' are defined as tuition, fees, books, 
supplies, and equipment required for the enrollment or 
attendance at a college or university (or certain vocational 
schools). Under the Act, qualified higher education expenses 
also include certain room and board expenses, provided that the 
student is enrolled at an eligible educational institution on 
at least a half-time basis. Section 529 also provides that no 
amount shall be included in the gross income of a contributor 
to, or beneficiary of, a qualified State tuition program with 
respect to any distribution from, or earnings under, such 
program, except that (1) amounts distributed or educational 
benefits provided to a beneficiary (e.g., when the beneficiary 
attends college) will be included in the beneficiary's gross 
income (unless excludable under another Code section) to the 
extent such amounts or the value of the educational benefits 
exceed contributions made on behalf of the beneficiary, and (2) 
amounts distributed to a contributor (e.g., when a parent 
receives a refund) will be included in the contributor's gross 
income to the extent such amounts exceed contributions made by 
that person. Section 529(c)(3)(C) allows tax-free rollovers of 
credits or account balances in qualified State tuition programs 
(and redesignations of named beneficiaries) between certain 
relatives.

                           Reasons for Change

    To assist low- and middle-income families and students in 
paying for the costs of post-secondary education, the Congress 
believed that taxpayers should be allowed to claim a credit 
against Federal income taxes for certain tuition and related 
expenses incurred when a student attends a college or 
university (or certain vocational schools).

                       Explanation of Provisions

HOPE credit

     Allowance of credit.--Individual taxpayers are allowed to 
claim a non-refundable HOPE credit against Federal income taxes 
up to $1,500 per student per year for qualified tuition and 
related expenses paid for the first two years of the student's 
post-secondary education in a degree or certificate program. 
The HOPE credit rate is 100 percent on the first $1,000 of 
qualified tuition and related expenses, and 50 percent on the 
next $1,000 of qualified tuition and related expenses.\13\ The 
maximum HOPE credit amount will be indexed for inflation 
occurring after the year 2000.\14\ The qualified tuition and 
related expenses must be incurred on behalf of the taxpayer, 
the taxpayer's spouse, or a dependent. The HOPE credit is 
available with respect to an individual student for two taxable 
years, provided that the student has not completed the first 
two years of post-secondary education before the beginning of 
the second taxable year.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ Thus, an eligible student who incurs $1,000 of qualified 
tuition and related expenses is eligible (subject to the AGI phaseout) 
for a $1,000 HOPE credit; and if such a student incurs $2,000 of 
qualified tuition and related expenses, then he or she is eligible for 
a $1,500 HOPE credit.
    \14\ The maximum HOPE credit amount will be indexed for inflation 
occurring after the year 2000, by increasing the cap on qualified 
tuition and related expenses subject to the 100-percent credit rate and 
the cap on such tuition and related expenses subject to the 50-percent 
credit rate, both caps rounded down to the closest multiple of $100. 
(Some printed versions of the Act incorrectly indicated that the caps 
would be rounded down to the closest multiple of $1,000.) The first 
taxable year for which the inflation adjustment could be made to 
increase the caps on qualified tuition and related expenses will be 
2002.
    \15\ The HOPE credit may not be claimed against a taxpayer's 
alternative minimum tax (AMT) liability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The HOPE credit amount that a taxpayer may otherwise claim 
is phased out ratably for taxpayers with modified AGI between 
$40,000 and $50,000 ($80,000 and $100,000 for joint returns). 
Modified AGI includes amounts otherwise excluded with respect 
to income earned abroad (or income from Puerto Rico or U.S. 
possessions). The income phase-out ranges will be indexed for 
inflation occurring after the year 2000, rounded down to the 
closest multiple of $1,000. The first taxable year for which 
the inflation adjustment could be made to increase the income 
phase-out ranges will be 2002.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\ If a taxpayer is married (within the meaning of section 7703), 
the HOPE credit may be available only if the taxpayer and his or her 
spouse file a joint return for the taxable year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The HOPE credit is available in the taxable year the 
expenses are paid, subject to the requirement that the 
education commence or continue during that year or during the 
first three months of the next year. Qualified tuition and 
related expenses paid with the proceeds of a loan generally are 
eligible for the HOPE credit (rather than repayment of the loan 
itself).
    Dependent students.--A taxpayer may claim the HOPE credit 
with respect to an eligible student who is not the taxpayer or 
the taxpayer's spouse (e.g., in cases where the student is the 
taxpayer's child) only if the taxpayer claims the student as a 
dependent for the taxable year for which the credit is claimed. 
If a student is claimed as a dependent by the parent or other 
taxpayer, the eligible student him- or herself is not entitled 
to claim a HOPE credit for that taxable year on the student's 
own tax return. If a parent (or other taxpayer) claims a 
student as a dependent, any qualified tuition and related 
expenses paid by the student are treated as paid by the parent 
(or other taxpayer) for purposes of the provision.
    Election of HOPE credit, Lifetime Learning credit, or 
exclusion from gross income for certain distributions from 
education IRAs.--For each taxable year, a taxpayer may elect 
with respect to an eligible student the HOPE credit or the 
``Lifetime Learning'' credit (described below), or an exclusion 
from gross income under section 530 for certain distributions 
from an education IRA (described at A.4, below). Thus, for 
example, if a parent claims a child as a dependent for a 
taxable year, then all qualified tuition and related expenses 
paid by both the parent and child are deemed paid by the 
parent, and the parent may claim the HOPE credit (assuming that 
the AGI phaseout does not apply) on the parent's return. As an 
alternative, the parent may elect for that taxable year the 
Lifetime Learning credit for qualified tuition and related 
expenses (or an exclusion from gross income for certain 
distributions from an education IRA) with respect to the 
dependent child (as described below).\17\ On the other hand, if 
a child is not claimed as a dependent by the parent (or by any 
other taxpayer) for the taxable year, then the child him- or 
herself has the option of electing either the HOPE credit, or 
the Lifetime Learning credit, or the section-530 exclusion for 
certain distributions from an education IRA for the taxable 
year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\ For any taxable year, a taxpayer may claim the HOPE credit for 
qualified tuition and related expenses paid with respect to one student 
and also claim the Lifetime Learning credit or the section-530 
exclusion with respect to one or more other students. If the HOPE 
credit is claimed with respect to one student for one or two taxable 
years, then the Lifetime Learning credit or the section-530 exclusion 
may be available with respect to that same student for subsequent 
taxable years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Qualified tuition and related expenses.--The HOPE credit is 
available for ``qualified tuition and related expenses,'' 
meaning tuition and fees required for the enrollment or 
attendance of an eligible student at an eligible educational 
institution. Charges and fees associated with meals, lodging, 
student activities, athletics, insurance, transportation, and 
similar personal, living or family expenses are not included. 
The HOPE credit is not available for expenses incurred to 
purchase books. The expenses of education involving sports, 
games, or hobbies are not qualified tuition and related 
expenses unless this education is part of the student's degree 
program.
    Qualified tuition and related expenses generally include 
only out-of-pocket expenses. Qualified tuition and related 
expenses do not include expenses covered by educational 
assistance that is not required to be included in the gross 
income of either the student or the taxpayer claiming the 
credit. Thus, total qualified tuition and related expenses are 
reduced by any scholarship or fellowship grants excludable from 
gross income under present-law section 117 and any other tax-
free educational benefits received by the student during the 
taxable year. No reduction of qualified tuition and related 
expenses is required for a gift, bequest, devise, or 
inheritance within the meaning of section 102(a). Under the 
provision, a HOPE credit is not allowed with respect to any 
education expense for which a deduction is claimed under 
section 162 or any other section of the Code.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\ In addition, the Act amends section 135 to provide that the 
amount of qualified higher education expenses taken into account for 
purposes of that section is reduced by the amount of such expenses 
taken into account in determining the HOPE credit claimed by any 
taxpayer with respect to the student for the taxable year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Eligible students.--An eligible student for purposes of the 
HOPE credit is an individual who is enrolled in a degree, 
certificate, or other program (including a program of study 
abroad approved for credit by the institution at which such 
student is enrolled) leading to a recognized educational 
credential at an eligible educational institution. The student 
must pursue a course of study on at least a half-time basis. 
(In other words, for at least one academic period which begins 
during the taxable year, the student must carry at least one-
half the normal full-time work load for the course of study the 
student is pursuing.) To be eligible for the HOPE credit, a 
student must not have been convicted of a Federal or State 
felony consisting of the possession or distribution of a 
controlled substance.
    Eligible educational institutions.--Eligible educational 
institutions are defined by reference to section 481 of the 
Higher Education Act of 1965. Such institutions generally are 
accredited post-secondary educational institutions offering 
credit toward a bachelor's degree, an associate's degree, or 
another recognized post-secondary credential. Certain 
proprietary institutions and post-secondary vocational 
institutions also are eligible educational institutions. The 
institution must be eligible to participate in Department of 
Education student aid programs.
    Regulations.--The Secretary of the Treasury is granted 
authority to issue regulations to implement the provision, 
including regulations providing for a recapture of the HOPE 
credit where there is a refund of tuition and related expenses 
with respect to which a credit was claimed in a prior year 
(sec. 25A(i)). In addition, new Code section 6050S provides 
that eligible educational institutions which receive payments 
for qualified tuition and related expenses, and certain other 
persons who make reimbursements or refunds of qualified tuition 
and related expenses,\19\ are required to furnish information 
returns to the IRS and students (and individuals claiming the 
student as a dependent) as prescribed by Treasury Department 
regulations, in order to assist students, their parents, and 
the IRS in calculating the amount of the HOPE credit 
potentially available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \19\ Title VI of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 
1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997, includes a provision 
that clarifies that, under section 6050S, information returns 
containing information with respect to qualified tuition and related 
expenses must be filed by a person that is not an eligible educational 
institution only if such person is engaged in a trade or business of 
making payments to any individual under an insurance arrangement as 
reimbursements or refunds (or similar payments) of qualified tuition 
and related expenses. Section 6050S will continue to require the filing 
of information returns by persons engaged in a trade or business if, in 
the course of such trade or business, the person receives from any 
individual interest aggregating $600 or more for any calendar year on 
one or more qualified education loans within the meaning of section 
221(e)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lifetime Learning credit for qualified tuition and related expenses

    Allowance of credit.--The Act provides that individual 
taxpayers are allowed to claim a nonrefundable ``Lifetime 
Learning'' credit against Federal income taxes equal to 20 
percent of qualified tuition and related expenses incurred 
during the taxable year on behalf of the taxpayer, the 
taxpayer's spouse, or any dependents. For expenses paid after 
June 30, 1998, and prior to January 1, 2003, up to $5,000 of 
qualified tuition and related expenses per taxpayer return will 
be eligible for the 20-percent Lifetime Learning credit (i.e., 
the maximum credit per taxpayer return will be $1,000). For 
expenses paid after December 31, 2002, up to $10,000 of 
qualified tuition and related expenses per taxpayer return will 
be eligible for the 20-percent Lifetime Learning credit (i.e., 
the maximum credit per taxpayer return will be $2,000).
    In contrast to the HOPE credit, a taxpayer may claim the 
Lifetime Learning credit for an unlimited number of taxable 
years. Also in contrast to the HOPE credit, the maximum amount 
of the Lifetime Learning credit that may be claimed on a 
taxpayer's return will not vary based on the number of students 
in the taxpayer's family--that is, the HOPE credit is computed 
on a per-student basis, while the Lifetime Learning credit is 
computed on a family-wide basis.
    The Lifetime Learning credit is phased out ratably over the 
same phase-out range that applies for purposes of the HOPE 
credit--i.e., taxpayers with modified AGI between $40,000 and 
$50,000 ($80,000 and $100,000 for joint returns). The income 
phase-out ranges will be indexed for inflation occurring after 
the year 2000, rounded down to the closest multiple of $1,000. 
The first taxable year for which the inflation adjustment could 
be made to increase the income phase-out ranges will be 
2002.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\ If a taxpayer is married (within the meaning of section 7703), 
the Lifetime Learning credit may be available only if the taxpayer and 
his or her spouse file a joint return for the taxable year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Lifetime Learning credit is available in the taxable 
year the expenses are paid, subject to the requirement that the 
education commence or continue during that year or during the 
first three months of the next year. Qualified tuition and 
related expenses paid with the proceeds of a loan generally are 
eligible for the Lifetime Learning credit (rather than 
repayment of the loan itself).
    Dependent students.--As with the HOPE credit, a taxpayer 
may claim the Lifetime Learning credit with respect to a 
student who is not the taxpayer or the taxpayer's spouse (e.g., 
in cases where the student is the taxpayer's child) only if the 
taxpayer claims the student as a dependent for the taxable year 
for which the credit is claimed. If a student is claimed as a 
dependent by the parent or other taxpayer, the student him- or 
herself is not entitled to claim the Lifetime Learning credit 
for that taxable year on the student's own tax return. If a 
parent (or other taxpayer) claims a student as a dependent, any 
qualified tuition and related expenses paid by the student are 
treated as paid by the parent (or other taxpayer) for purposes 
of the provision.
    Election of Lifetime Learning credit, HOPE credit, or 
exclusion from gross income for certain distributions from 
education IRAs.--A taxpayer may claim the Lifetime Learning 
credit for a taxable year with respect to one or more students, 
even though the taxpayer also claims a HOPE credit (or claims 
the section-530 exclusion for distributions from an education 
IRA) for that same taxable year with respect to other students. 
If, for a taxable year, a taxpayer claims a HOPE credit with 
respect to a student (or claims an exclusion for certain 
distributions from an education IRA with respect to a student), 
then the Lifetime Learning credit will not be available with 
respect to that same student for that year (although the 
Lifetime Learning credit may be available with respect to that 
same student for other taxable years).
    Qualified tuition and related expenses.--The Lifetime 
Learning credit is available for ``qualified tuition and 
related expenses,'' meaning tuition and fees required for the 
enrollment or attendance of the eligible student at an eligible 
institution. Charges and fees associated with meals, lodging, 
student activities, athletics, insurance, transportation, and 
similar personal, living or family expenses are not included. 
The Lifetime Learning credit is not available for expenses 
incurred to purchase books. The expenses of education involving 
sports, games, or hobbies are not qualified tuition expenses 
unless this education is part of the student's degree program.
    In contrast to the HOPE credit, qualified tuition and 
related expenses for purposes of the Lifetime Learning credit 
include tuition and fees incurred with respect to undergraduate 
or graduate-level (and professional degree) courses.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\ The HOPE credit is available only with respect to the first 
two years of a student's undergraduate education.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As with the HOPE credit, qualified tuition and fees 
generally include only out-of-pocket expenses. Qualified 
tuition and fees do not include expenses covered by educational 
assistance that is not required to be included in the gross 
income of either the student or the taxpayer claiming the 
credit. Thus, total qualified tuition and fees are reduced by 
any scholarship or fellowship grants excludable from gross 
income under present-law section 117 and any other tax-free 
educational benefits received by the student during the taxable 
year (such as employer-provided educational assistance 
excludable under section 127). No reduction of qualified 
tuition and fees is required for a gift, bequest, devise, or 
inheritance within the meaning of section 102(a). Under the 
provision, a Lifetime Learning credit is not allowed with 
respect to any education expense for which a deduction is 
claimed under section 162 or any other section of the Code.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \22\ In addition, the Act amends present-law section 135 to provide 
that the amount of qualified higher education expenses taken into 
account for purposes of that section is reduced by the amount of such 
expenses taken into account in determining the Lifetime Learning credit 
claimed by any taxpayer with respect to the student for the taxable 
year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Eligible students.--In addition to allowing a credit for 
the tuition and related expenses of a student who attends 
classes on at least a half-time basis as part of a degree or 
certificate program, the Lifetime Learning credit also is 
available with respect to any course of instruction at an 
eligible educational institution (whether enrolled in by the 
student on a full-time, half-time, or less than half-time 
basis) to acquire or improve job skills of the student. 
Undergraduate and graduate students are eligible for the 
Lifetime Learning credit. Moreover, in contrast to the HOPE 
credit, the eligibility of a student for the Lifetime Learning 
credit does not depend on whether or not the student has been 
convicted of a Federal or State felony consisting of the 
possession or distribution of a controlled substance.
    Eligible educational institutions.--Eligible educational 
institutions are (as with the HOPE credit) defined by reference 
to section 481 of the Higher Education Act of 1965. Such 
institutions generally are accredited post-secondary 
educational institutions offering credit toward a bachelor's 
degree, an associate's degree, graduate-level or professional 
degree, or another recognized post-secondary credential. 
Certain proprietary institutions and post-secondary vocational 
institutions also are eligible educational institutions. The 
institution must be eligible to participate in Department of 
Education student aid programs.
    Regulations.--As with the HOPE credit, the Secretary of the 
Treasury is granted authority to issue regulations to implement 
the provision, including regulations providing for a recapture 
of the Lifetime Learning credit where there is a refund of 
tuition and related expenses with respect to which a credit was 
claimed in a prior year (sec. 25A(i)). In addition, the new 
Code section 6050S requires information reporting (as 
prescribed by Treasury Department regulations) by eligible 
educational institutions which receive payments for qualified 
tuition and related expenses, and certain other persons who 
make reimbursements or refunds of qualified tuition and related 
expenses, in order to assist students, their parents, and the 
IRS in calculating the amount of the Lifetime Learning credit 
potentially available.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \23\ Title VI of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 
1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997, includes a provision 
that clarifies that, under section 6050S, information returns 
containing information with respect to qualified tuition and related 
expenses must be filed by a person that is not an eligible educational 
institution only if such person is engaged in a trade or business of 
making payments to any individual under an insurance arrangement as 
reimbursements or refunds (or similar payments) of qualified tuition 
and related expenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The HOPE credit is available for expenses paid after 
December 31, 1997, for education furnished in academic periods 
beginning after such date. The Lifetime Learning credit is 
available for expenses paid after June 30, 1998, for education 
furnished in academic periods beginning after such date.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provisions are estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $2,083 million in 1998, $6,469 million in 
1999, $7,393 million in 2000, $7,907 million in 2001, $7,707 
million in 2002, $8,620 million in 2003, $8,754 million in 
2004, $8,893 million in 2005, $9,035 million in 2006, and 
$9,180 million in 2007.

2. Deduction for student loan interest (sec. 202 of the Act and new 
        sec. 221 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Tax Reform Act of 1986 repealed the deduction for 
personal interest. Student loan interest generally is treated 
as personal interest and thus is not allowable as an itemized 
deduction from income.
    Taxpayers generally may not deduct education and training 
expenses. However, a deduction for education expenses generally 
is allowed under section 162 if the education or training (1) 
maintains or improves a skill required in a trade or business 
currently engaged in by the taxpayer, or (2) meets the express 
requirements of the taxpayer's employer, or requirements of 
applicable law or regulations, imposed as a condition of 
continued employment (Treas. Reg. sec. 1.162-5). Education 
expenses are not deductible if they relate to certain minimum 
educational requirements or to education or training that 
enables a taxpayer to begin working in a new trade or business. 
In the case of an employee, education expenses (if not 
reimbursed by the employer) may be claimed as an itemized 
deduction only if such expenses relate to the employee's 
current job and only to the extent that the expenses, along 
with other miscellaneous deductions, exceed 2 percent of the 
taxpayer's adjusted gross income (AGI).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress understood that many students incur 
considerable debt in the course of obtaining undergraduate and 
graduate education. The Congress believed that permitting a 
deduction for interest on certain student loans will help to 
ease the financial burden that such obligations represent.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, certain individuals who have paid interest 
on qualified education loans may claim an above-the-line 
deduction for such interest expenses, up to a maximum deduction 
of $2,500 per year. The deduction is allowed only with respect 
to interest paid on a qualified education loan during the first 
60 months in which interest payments are required. Months 
during which the qualified education loan is in deferral or 
forbearance do not count against the 60-month period. No 
deduction is allowed to an individual if that individual is 
claimed as a dependent on another taxpayer's return for the 
taxable year.
    A qualified education loan generally is defined as any 
indebtedness incurred to pay for the qualified higher education 
expenses of the taxpayer, the taxpayer's spouse, or any 
dependent of the taxpayer as of the time the indebtedness was 
incurred in attending (1) post-secondary educational 
institutions and certain vocational schools defined by 
reference to section 481 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, 
or (2) institutions conducting internship or residency programs 
leading to a degree or certificate from an institution of 
higher education, a hospital, or a health care facility 
conducting postgraduate training. Qualified education loans do 
not include indebtedness owed to persons related (within the 
meaning of sections 267(b) or 707(b)(1)) to the taxpayer.
    Qualified higher education expenses are defined as the 
student's cost of attendance as defined in section 472 of the 
Higher Education Act of 1965 (generally, tuition, fees, room 
and board, and related expenses), reduced by (1) any amount 
excluded from gross income under section 135, (2) any amount 
distributed from an education IRA and excluded from gross 
income, and (3) the amount of any scholarship or fellowship 
grants excludable from gross income under present-law section 
117, as well as any other tax-free educational benefits, such 
as employer-provided educational assistance that are excludable 
from the employee's gross income under section 127. Such 
expenses must be paid or incurred within a reasonable period 
before or after the indebtedness is incurred, and must be 
attributable to a period when the student is at least a half-
time student.
    The maximum deduction is phased in over 4 years, with a 
$1,000 maximum deduction in 1998, $1,500 in 1999, $2,000 in 
2000, and $2,500 in 2001. The maximum deduction amount is not 
indexed for inflation. In addition, the deduction is phased out 
ratably for individual taxpayers with modified AGI of $40,000-
$55,000 ($60,000-$75,000 for joint returns); such income ranges 
will be indexed for inflation occurring after the year 2002, 
rounded down to the closest multiple of $5,000. Thus, the first 
taxable year for which the inflation adjustment could be made 
will be 2003. Modified AGI includes amounts otherwise excluded 
with respect to income earned abroad (or income from Puerto 
Rico or U.S. possessions) as well as amounts excludable from 
gross income under section 137 (qualified adoption expenses) 
\24\, and is calculated after application of section 86 (income 
inclusion of certain Social Security benefits), section 219 
(deductible IRA contributions), and section 469 (limitation on 
passive activity losses and credits).\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \24\ For purposes of section 137, adjusted gross income is 
determined without regard to the deduction for student loan interest.
    \25\ For purposes of sections 86, 135, 219, and 469, adjusted gross 
income is determined without regard to the deduction for student loan 
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    No deduction is allowed for any amount for which a 
deduction is otherwise allowable under chapter 1 of the Code. 
In addition, no deduction is allowed for any amount that is 
disallowed as a deduction under section 261. For example, no 
deduction would be allowed as interest on a qualified education 
loan for any amount that is disallowed under section 264 
(relating to certain amounts paid in connection with insurance 
contracts).
    Any person in a trade or business or any governmental 
agency that receives $600 or more in qualified education loan 
interest from an individual during a calendar year must provide 
an information report on such interest to the IRS and to the 
payor.
    The Congress expressed its expectation that the Secretary 
of Treasury will issue regulations setting forth reporting 
procedures that will facilitate the administration of this 
provision. Specifically, such regulations should require 
lenders separately to report to borrowers the amount of 
interest that constitutes deductible student loan interest 
(i.e., interest on a qualified education loan during the first 
60 months in which interest payments are required). In this 
regard, the regulations should include a method for borrower 
certification to a lender that the loan proceeds are being used 
to pay for qualified higher education expenses. The regulations 
also should provide guidance as to how a lender can fulfill its 
reporting obligations (both to borrowers and to the IRS) with 
respect to interest that constitutes deductible student loan 
interest in the case of a revolving line of credit.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \26\ Such guidance could provide, for example, that interest on 
loans (or other lines of credit) the proceeds of which are used in part 
to pay qualified higher education expenses and in part to pay other 
expenses cannot be reported as qualified education loan interest under 
this provision unless the portion of the loan or line of credit that is 
attributable to the qualified higher education expenses is separately 
stated and accounted for. Under such an approach, interest on a 
revolving line of credit that is used in part to pay qualified higher 
education expenses and in part to pay other, nonqualifying expenses 
generally could not be reported as qualified education loan interest. 
However, if the amount of the line of credit or loan that is 
attributable to the higher education expenses is identified at the time 
the loan is made or the account is established, and such amount is 
separately accounted for such that the applicable 60-month period and 
other requirements of the provision, including the lender reporting 
requirements, can be satisfied, then the interest could be reported as 
qualified education loan interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for interest payments due and 
paid after December 31, 1997, on any qualified education loan. 
Thus, in the case of already existing qualified education 
loans, interest payments qualify for the deduction to the 
extent that the 60-month period has not expired. For purposes 
of counting the 60 months, any qualified education loan and all 
refinancing (that is treated as a qualified education loan) of 
such loan are treated as a single loan.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $18 million in 1998, $69 million in 1999, 
$122 million in 2000, $204 million in 2001, $277 million in 
2002, $308 million in 2003, $326 million in 2004, $346 million 
in 2005, $368 million in 2006, and $391 million in 2007.

3. Penalty-free withdrawals from IRAs for higher education expenses 
        (sec. 203 of the Act and sec. 72(t) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, amounts held in an individual 
retirement arrangement (``IRA'') generally are includible in 
income when withdrawn (except to the extent the withdrawal is a 
return of nondeductible contributions). Amounts withdrawn prior 
to attainment of age 59\1/2\ are subject to an additional 10-
percent early withdrawal tax, unless the withdrawal is due to 
death or disability, is made in the form of certain periodic 
payments, is used to pay medical expenses in excess of 7.5 
percent of AGI, or is used to purchase health insurance of an 
unemployed individual.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that it is both appropriate and 
important to allow individuals to withdraw amounts from their 
IRAs for purposes of paying higher education expenses without 
incurring an additional 10-percent early withdrawal tax.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that the 10-percent early withdrawal tax 
does not apply to distributions from IRAs (including new Roth 
IRAs created by the Act) if the taxpayer uses the amounts to 
pay qualified higher education expenses (including those 
related to graduate-level courses) of the taxpayer, the 
taxpayer's spouse, or any child, or grandchild of the taxpayer 
or the taxpayer's spouse.
    The penalty-free withdrawal is available for ``qualified 
higher education expenses,'' meaning tuition, fees, books, 
supplies, and equipment required for enrollment or attendance, 
at an eligible educational institution (defined by reference to 
sec 481 of the Higher Education Act of 1965). Certain room and 
board expenses also are qualified higher education expenses, 
provided that the student is enrolled at an eligible 
educational institution at least on a half-time basis. 
Qualified higher education expenses are reduced by any amount 
excludable from gross income under section 135 relating to the 
redemption of a qualified U.S. savings bond and certain 
scholarships and veterans benefits.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for distributions after December 
31, 1997, with respect to expenses paid after such date for 
education furnished in academic periods beginning after such 
date.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $78 million in 1998, $201 million in 1999, 
$181 million in 2000, $175 million in 2001, $177 million in 
2002, $179 million in 2003, $182 million in 2004, $184 million 
in 2005, $186 million in 2006, and $189 million in 2007.

4. Tax treatment of qualified State tuition programs and education 
        IRAs; exclusion for certain distributions from education IRAs 
        used to pay qualified higher education expenses (secs. 211 and 
        213 of the Act and sec. 529 and new sec. 530 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

Exclusion for interest earned on savings bonds

    Section 135 provides that interest earned on a qualified 
U.S. Series EE savings bond issued after 1989 is excludable 
from gross income if the proceeds of the bond upon redemption 
do not exceed qualified higher education expenses paid by the 
taxpayer during the taxable year.\27\ ``Qualified higher 
education expenses'' include tuition and fees (but not room and 
board expenses) required for the enrollment or attendance of 
the taxpayer, the taxpayer's spouse, or a dependent of the 
taxpayer at certain colleges, universities, or vocational 
schools.\28\ The exclusion provided by section 135 is phased 
out for certain higher-income taxpayers, determined by the 
taxpayer's modified AGI during the year the bond is redeemed. 
For 1997, the exclusion is phased out for taxpayers with 
modified AGI between $50,850 and $65,850 ($76,250 and $106,250 
for joint returns). To prevent taxpayers from effectively 
avoiding the income phaseout limitation through issuance of 
bonds directly in the child's name, section 135(c)(1)(B) 
provides that the interest exclusion is available only with 
respect to U.S. Series EE savings bonds issued to taxpayers who 
are at least 24 years old.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\ If the aggregate redemption amount (i.e., principal plus 
interest) of all Series EE bonds redeemed by the taxpayer during the 
taxable year exceeds the qualified expenses incurred, then the 
excludable portion of interest income is based on the ratio that the 
education expenses bears to the aggregate redemption amount (sec. 
135(b)).
    \28\ The Act amended section 135 to allow taxpayers to redeem U.S. 
Savings Bonds and be eligible for the exclusion under that section (as 
if the proceeds were used to pay qualified higher education expenses) 
provided that the proceeds from the redemption are contributed to a 
qualified State tuition program defined under section 529, or to an 
education IRA defined under section 530, on behalf of the taxpayer, the 
taxpayer's spouse, or a dependent. Title VI of H.R. 2676, the Tax 
Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 
5, 1997, includes a technical correction provision that conforms the 
definition of ``eligible educational institution'' under section 135 to 
the broader definition of that term under sections 529 and 530. The 
result of this technical correction would be that, for purposes of 
section 135, as under sections 529 and 530, the term ``eligible 
educational institution'' would be defined as an institution which is 
(1) described in section 481 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
U.S.C. 1088) and (2) eligible to participate in Department of Education 
student aid programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Qualified State tuition programs

    Section 529 (enacted as part of the Small Business Job 
Protection Act of 1996) provides tax-exempt status to 
``qualified State tuition programs,'' meaning certain programs 
established and maintained by a State (or agency or 
instrumentality thereof) under which persons may (1) purchase 
tuition credits or certificates on behalf of a designated 
beneficiary that entitle the beneficiary to a waiver or payment 
of qualified higher education expenses of the beneficiary, or 
(2) make contributions to an account that is established for 
the purpose of meeting qualified higher education expenses of 
the designated beneficiary of the account. ``Qualified higher 
education expenses'' are defined as tuition, fees, books, 
supplies, and equipment required for the enrollment or 
attendance at a college or university (or certain vocational 
schools). Under prior law, qualified higher education expenses 
did not include any room and board expenses. Section 529 also 
provides that no amount shall be included in the gross income 
of a contributor to, or beneficiary of, a qualified State 
tuition program with respect to any distribution from, or 
earnings under, such program, except that (1) amounts 
distributed or educational benefits provided to a beneficiary 
(e.g., when the beneficiary attends college) will be included 
in the beneficiary's gross income (unless excludable under 
another Code section) to the extent such amounts or the value 
of the educational benefits exceed contributions made on behalf 
of the beneficiary, and (2) amounts distributed to a 
contributor (e.g., when a parent receives a refund) will be 
included in the contributor's gross income to the extent such 
amounts exceed contributions made by that person.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \29\ Specifically, section 529(c)(3)(A) provides that any 
distribution under a qualified State tuition program shall be 
includible in the gross income of the distributee in the same manner as 
provided under present-law section 72 to the extent not excluded from 
gross income under any other provision of the Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A qualified State tuition program is required to provide 
that purchases or contributions only be made in cash. 
Contributors and beneficiaries are not allowed to direct any 
investments made on their behalf by the program. The program is 
required to maintain a separate accounting for each designated 
beneficiary. A specified individual must be designated as the 
beneficiary at the commencement of participation in a qualified 
State tuition program (i.e., when contributions are first made 
to purchase an interest in such a program), unless interests in 
such a program are purchased by a State or local government or 
a tax-exempt charity described in section 501(c)(3) as part of 
a scholarship program operated by such government or charity 
under which beneficiaries to be named in the future will 
receive such interests as scholarships. A transfer of credits 
(or other amounts) from one account benefiting one designated 
beneficiary to another account benefiting a different 
beneficiary will be considered a distribution (as will a change 
in the designated beneficiary of an interest in a qualified 
State tuition program) unless the beneficiaries are members of 
the same family.\30\ Earnings on an account may be refunded to 
a contributor or beneficiary, but the State or instrumentality 
must impose a more than de minimis monetary penalty unless the 
refund is (1) used for qualified higher education expenses of 
the beneficiary, (2) made on account of the death or disability 
of the beneficiary, or (3) made on account of a scholarship 
received by the designated beneficiary to the extent the amount 
refunded does not exceed the amount of the scholarship used for 
higher education expenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \30\ For this purpose, the term ``member of the family'' was 
defined under prior law by reference to section 2032A(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Estate and gift tax rules

    In general, a taxpayer may exclude $10,000 of gifts made by 
an individual ($20,000 in the case of a married couple that 
elects to split their gifts) to any one donee during a calendar 
year (sec. 2503(b)).\31\ This annual exclusion does not apply 
to gifts of future interests, and thus may not be applicable to 
contributions made to a State tuition program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \31\ The Act provides that, after 1998, the annual gift-tax 
exclusion of $10,000 in the case of an individual, or $20,000 in the 
case of a married couple that splits their gifts, will be indexed for 
inflation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under prior law, contributions made to a qualified State 
tuition program were treated as incomplete gifts for Federal 
gift tax purposes. Thus, any Federal gift tax consequences were 
determined at the time that a distribution was made from an 
account under the program. The waiver (or payment) of qualified 
higher education expenses of a designated beneficiary by (or 
to) an educational institution under a qualified State tuition 
program was treated as a qualified transfer for purposes of 
present-law section 2503(e). Amounts contributed to a qualified 
State tuition program (and earnings thereon) were includible in 
the contributor's estate for Federal estate tax purposes in the 
event that the contributor died before such amounts were 
distributed under the program.

Individual retirement arrangements (``IRAs'')

    An individual may make deductible contributions to an 
individual retirement arrangement (``IRA'') for each taxable 
year up to the lesser of $2,000 or the amount of the 
individual's compensation for the year if the individual is not 
an active participant in an employer-sponsored qualified 
retirement plan (and, if married, the individual's spouse also 
is not an active participant). Contributions may be made to an 
IRA for a taxable year up to April 15th of the following year. 
An individual who makes excess contributions to an IRA, i.e., 
contributions in excess of $2,000, is subject to an excise tax 
on such excess contributions unless they are distributed from 
the IRA before the due date for filing the individual's tax 
return for the year (including extensions). Under prior law, if 
the individual (or his or her spouse, if married) is an active 
participant, the $2,000 limit was phased out between $40,000 
and $50,000 of adjusted gross income (``AGI'') for married 
couples and between $25,000 and $35,000 of AGI for single 
individuals.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \32\ The Act increases the income phase-out limits for active 
participants in employer-sponsored retirement plans and modifies the 
limit for an individual who is not an active participant but whose 
spouse is. The Act also creates a new nondeductible IRA called a ``Roth 
IRA.'' If certain conditions are satisfied, distributions from a Roth 
IRA are not includible in income. (See Title III.A., below.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Prior law permitted individuals to make nondeductible 
contributions (up to $2,000 per year) to an IRA to the extent 
an individual is not permitted to (or does not) make deductible 
contributions.\33\ Earnings on such contributions are 
includible in gross income when withdrawn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \33\ Under the Act, nondeductible contributions are permitted to 
the extent the individual can not or does not make deductible 
contributions or contributions to a Roth IRA. (See Title III., A, 
below.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    An individual generally is not subject to income tax on 
amounts held in an IRA, including earnings on contributions, 
until the amounts are withdrawn from the IRA. Amounts withdrawn 
from an IRA are includible in gross income (except to the 
extent of nondeductible contributions). In addition, a 10-
percent additional tax generally applies to distributions from 
IRAs made before age 59-\1/2\, unless the distribution is made 
(1) on account of death or disability, (2) in the form of 
annuity payments, (3) for medical expenses of the individual 
and his or her spouse and dependents that exceed 7.5 percent of 
AGI, or (4) for medical insurance of the individual and his or 
her spouse and dependents (without regard to the 7.5 percent of 
AGI floor) if the individual has received unemployment 
compensation for at least 12 weeks, and the withdrawal is made 
in the year such unemployment compensation is received or the 
following year.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \34\ The Act provides an exception from the early withdrawal tax 
for withdrawals for qualified higher education expenses (see 3., above) 
and for withdrawals for first-time home purchase (up to $10,000). (See 
Title III. A., below.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    To encourage families and students to save for future 
education expenses, the Congress believed that tax-exempt 
status should be granted to certain education investment 
accounts (referred to as ``education IRAs'' \35\) established 
by taxpayers on behalf of future students. The Congress further 
believed that modifications should be made to the rules 
governing qualified State tuition programs, in order to allow 
greater flexibility in the use of such programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \35\ ``Education IRAs''--although they are referred to as ``IRAs'' 
and are subject to some of the same rules as individual retirement 
arrangements--are not, in fact, individual retirement arrangements 
within the meaning of the Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       Explanation of Provisions

Qualified State tuition programs

    The Act makes the following modifications to present-law 
section 529, which governs the tax treatment of qualified State 
tuition programs.
    Room and board expenses.--The Act expands the definition of 
``qualified higher education expenses'' under section 529(e)(3) 
to include room and board expenses (meaning the minimum room 
and board allowance applicable to the student as determined by 
the institution in calculating costs of attendance for Federal 
financial aid programs under sec. 472 of the Higher Education 
Act of 1965) for any period during which the student is at 
least a half-time student. In addition to such room and board 
expenses, ``qualified higher education expenses'' include (as 
under prior law) tuition, fees, books, supplies, and equipment 
required for the enrollment or attendance of a designated 
beneficiary at an eligible educational institution.
    Eligible educational institution.--The Act expands the 
definition of ``eligible educational institution'' for purposes 
of section 529 by defining such term by reference to section 
481 of the Higher Education Act of 1965. Such institutions 
generally are accredited post-secondary educational 
institutions offering credit toward a bachelor's degree, an 
associate's degree, a graduate-level or professional degree, or 
another recognized post-secondary credential. Certain 
proprietary institutions and post-secondary vocational 
institutions also are eligible institutions. The institution 
must be eligible to participate in Department of Education 
student aid programs.
    Definition of ``member of family''.--The Act expands the 
definition of the term ``member of the family'' for purposes of 
allowing tax-free transfers or rollovers of credits or account 
balances in qualified State tuition programs (and 
redesignations of named beneficiaries), so that the term means 
persons described in paragraphs (1) through (8) of section 
152(a)--e.g., sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, nephews and 
nieces, certain in-laws, etc.--and any spouse of such 
persons.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \36\ The Act also provides a special rule that, in the case of any 
contract issued prior to August 20, 1996 (i.e., the date of enactment 
of section 529), section 529(c)(3)(C) will be applied without regard to 
the requirement that a distribution be transferred to a member of the 
family (or the requirement that a change in beneficiaries may be made 
only to a member of the family) in order for such distribution or 
change in beneficiaries to be tax free.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Prohibition against investment direction.--The Act 
clarifies the prior-law rule contained in section 529(b)(5) 
that qualified State tuition programs may not allow 
contributors or designated beneficiaries to direct the 
investment of contributions to the program (or earnings 
thereon) by specifically providing that contributors and 
beneficiaries may not ``directly or indirectly'' direct the 
investment of contributions to the program (or earnings 
thereon).
    Interaction with HOPE credit and Lifetime Learning 
credit.--Under the Act (as under prior law), no amount will be 
includible in the gross income of a contributor to, or 
beneficiary of, a qualified State tuition program with respect 
to any contribution to or earnings on such a program until a 
distribution is made from the program, at which time the 
earnings portion of the distribution (whether made in cash or 
in-kind) will be includible in the gross income of the 
distributee.\37\ However, to the extent that a distribution 
from a qualified State tuition program is used to pay for 
qualified tuition and fees, the distributee (or another 
taxpayer claiming the distributee as a dependent) will be able 
to claim the HOPE credit or Lifetime Learning credit provided 
for by the Act with respect to such tuition and fees (assuming 
that the other requirements for claiming the HOPE credit or 
Lifetime Learning credit are satisfied and the modified AGI 
phaseout for those credits does not apply).\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \37\ Title VI of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 
1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997, clarifies that, under 
rules contained in present-law section 72, distributions from qualified 
State tuition programs are treated as representing a pro-rata share of 
the principal (i.e., contributions) and accumulated earnings in the 
account, and also makes certain conforming changes to section 72. In 
particular, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997 provides that, 
under section 72(e)(8)(B), the determination of the ratio that the 
aggregate amount of contributions to a qualified State tuition program 
on behalf of a beneficiary bears to the total balance (or value) of the 
account for the beneficiary is to be made at the time of the 
distribution or at such other time as the Secretary of the Treasury may 
prescribe.
    \38\ In cases where in-kind benefits are provided to a beneficiary 
under a qualified State tuition program, section 529(c)(3)(B) provides 
that the provision of such benefits is treated as a distribution to the 
beneficiary. Thus, to the extent such in-kind benefits, if paid for by 
the beneficiary, would constitute payment of qualified tuition and fees 
for purposes of the HOPE credit or Lifetime Learning credit, the 
beneficiary (or another taxpayer claiming the beneficiary as a 
dependent) may be able to claim the HOPE credit or Lifetime Learning 
credit with respect to payments that are deemed to be made by the 
beneficiary with respect to the in-kind benefit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Education IRAs

    In general.--The Act provides tax-exempt status to 
``education IRAs,'' meaning certain trusts (or custodial 
accounts) which are created or organized in the United States 
exclusively for the purpose of paying the qualified higher 
education expenses of a named beneficiary.\39\ Contributions to 
education IRAs may be made only in cash.\40\ Annual 
contributions to education IRAs may not exceed $500 per 
designated beneficiary (except in cases involving certain tax-
free rollovers, as described below), and may not be made after 
the designated beneficiary reaches age 18.\41\ Moreover, the 
Act imposes a penalty excise tax under section 4973 if a 
contribution is made by any person to an education IRA 
established on behalf of a beneficiary during any taxable year 
in which any contributions are made by anyone to a qualified 
State tuition program (defined under sec. 529) on behalf of the 
same beneficiary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \39\ Education IRAs generally are not subject to Federal income 
tax, but are subject to the unrelated business income tax (``UBIT'') 
imposed by section 511.
    \40\ The Act allows taxpayers to redeem U.S. Savings Bonds and be 
eligible for the exclusion under section 135 (as if the proceeds were 
used to pay qualified higher education expenses) if the proceeds from 
the redemption are contributed to an education IRA (or qualified State 
tuition program) on behalf of the taxpayer, the taxpayer's spouse, or a 
dependent. In such a case, the beneficiary's basis in the bond proceeds 
contributed on his or her behalf to the education IRA or qualified 
tuition program will be the contributor's basis in the bonds (i.e., the 
original purchase price paid by the contributor for such bonds).
    \41\ An excise tax penalty may be imposed under present-law section 
4973 to the extent that excess contributions above the $500 annual 
limit are made to an education IRA. However, Title VI of H.R. 2676, the 
Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on 
November 5, 1997, clarifies that neither the excise tax penalty under 
section 4973 nor the additional 10-percent tax under section 530(d)(4) 
(described infra) may be imposed in cases where contributions (and any 
earnings thereon) are distributed from the education IRA before the 
date that a return is required to be filed (including extensions of 
time) by the beneficiary for the year in which the contribution was 
made (or, if the beneficiary is not required to file such a return, 
April 15th of the year following the taxable year during which the 
contribution was made).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Phase-out of contribution limit.--The $500 annual 
contribution limit for education IRAs is phased out ratably for 
contributors with modified AGI between $95,000 and $110,000 
($150,000 and $160,000 for joint returns). Individuals with 
modified AGI above the phase-out range are not allowed to make 
contributions to an education IRA established on behalf of any 
other individual.
    Treatment of distributions.--Amounts distributed from 
education IRAs are excludable from gross income to the extent 
that the amounts distributed do not exceed qualified higher 
education expenses of an eligible student incurred during the 
year the distribution is made (provided that a HOPE credit or 
Lifetime Learning credit is not claimed with respect to the 
beneficiary for the same taxable year).\42\ If a HOPE credit or 
Lifetime Learning credit is claimed with respect to a student 
for a taxable year, then a distribution from an education IRA 
may (at the option of the taxpayer) be made on behalf of that 
student during that taxable year, but an exclusion is not 
available under the Act for the earnings portion of such 
distribution.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \42\ The exclusion will not be a preference item for alternative 
minimum tax (AMT) purposes.
    \43\ If a HOPE credit or Lifetime Learning credit was claimed with 
respect to a student for an earlier taxable year, the exclusion 
provided for by the Act may be claimed with respect to the same student 
for a subsequent taxable year with respect to a distribution from an 
education IRA made in that subsequent taxable in order to cover 
qualified higher education expenses incurred during that year. 
Conversely, if an exclusion is claimed for a distribution from an 
education IRA with respect to a particular student, then a HOPE credit 
or Lifetime Learning credit will be available in a subsequent taxable 
year with respect to that same student (provided that no exclusion is 
claimed in such other taxable years for distributions from an education 
IRA on behalf of that student and provided that the requirements of the 
HOPE credit or Lifetime Learning credit are satisfied in the subsequent 
taxable year).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Distributions from an education IRA generally will be 
deemed to consist of distributions of principal (which, under 
all circumstances, are excludable from gross income) and 
earnings (which may be excludable from gross income under the 
Act) by applying the ratio that the aggregate amount of 
contributions to the account for the beneficiary bears to the 
total balance of the account.\44\ If the qualified higher 
education expenses of the student for the year are at least 
equal to the total amount of the distribution (i.e., principal 
and earnings combined) from an education IRA, then the earnings 
in their entirety will be excludable from gross income. If, on 
the other hand, the qualified higher education expenses of the 
student for the year are less than the total amount of the 
distribution (i.e., principal and earnings combined) from an 
education IRA, then the qualified higher education expenses 
will be deemed to be paid from a pro-rata share of both the 
principal and earnings components of the distribution. Thus, in 
such a case, only a portion of the earnings will be excludable 
under the Act (i.e., a portion of the earnings based on the 
ratio that the qualified higher education expenses bear to the 
total amount of the distribution) and the remaining portion of 
the earnings will be includible in the distributee's gross 
income.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \44\ Title VI of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 
1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997, clarifies that, under 
rules contained in present-law section 72, distributions from education 
IRAs are treated as representing a pro-rata share of the principal 
(i.e., contributions) and accumulated earnings in the account, and also 
makes certain conforming changes to section 72. In particular, the Tax 
Technical Corrections Act of 1997 provides that, under section 
72(e)(8)(B), the determination of the ratio that the aggregate amount 
of contributions to an education IRA bears to the account balance is to 
be made at the time of the distribution or at such other time as the 
Secretary of the Treasury may prescribe.
    \45\ For example, if an education IRA has a total balance of 
$10,000, of which $4,000 represents principal (i.e., contributions) and 
$6,000 represents earnings, and if a distribution of $2,000 is made 
from such an account, then $800 of that distribution will be treated as 
a return of principal (which under no event is includible in the gross 
income of the distributee) and $1,200 of the distribution will be 
treated as accumulated earnings. In such a case, if qualified higher 
education expenses of the beneficiary during the year of the 
distribution are at least equal to the $2,000 total amount of the 
distribution (i.e., principal plus earnings), then the entire earnings 
portion of the distribution will be excludible under new Code section 
530, provided that a HOPE credit or Lifetime Learning credit is not 
claimed for that same taxable year on behalf of the beneficiary. If, 
however, the qualified higher education expenses of the beneficiary for 
the taxable year are less than the total amount of the distribution, 
then only a portion of the earnings will be excludable from gross 
income under section 530. Thus, in the example discussed above, if the 
beneficiary incurs only $1,500 of qualified higher education expenses 
in the year that a $2,000 distribution is made, then only $900 of the 
earnings will be excludable from gross income under section 530 (i.e., 
an exclusion will be provided for the pro-rata portion of the earnings, 
based on the ratio that the $1,500 of qualified higher education 
expenses bears to the $2,000 distribution) and the remaining $300 of 
the earnings portion of the distribution will be includible in the 
distributee's gross income.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Distributions from an education IRA that exceed qualified 
higher education expenses of the designated beneficiary during 
the year of the distribution are includible in the 
distributee's gross income. Moreover, an additional 10-percent 
tax is imposed on any distribution from an education IRA to the 
extent that the distribution exceeds qualified higher education 
expenses of the designated beneficiary (unless the distribution 
is made on account of the death or disability of, or 
scholarship received by, the designated beneficiary).\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \46\ A technical correction is needed to section 530(d)(4) to 
clarify that the 10-percent additional tax should not be imposed in 
cases where a distribution (although used to pay for qualified higher 
education expenses) is includible in gross income because the taxpayer 
elects the HOPE or Lifetime Learning credit on behalf of the student 
for the same taxable year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Act allows tax-free (and penalty-free) transfers or 
rollovers of account balances from one education IRA benefiting 
one beneficiary to another education IRA benefiting another 
beneficiary (as well as redesignations of the named 
beneficiary), provided that the new beneficiary is a member of 
the family of the old beneficiary.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \47\ For this purpose, a ``member of the family'' means persons 
described in paragraphs (1) through (8) of section 152(a)--e.g., sons, 
daughters, brothers, sisters, nephews and nieces, certain in-laws, 
etc.--and any spouse of such persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The legislative history to the Act provides that any 
balance remaining in an education IRA will be deemed to be 
distributed within 30 days after the date that the named 
beneficiary reaches age 30 (or, if earlier, within 30 days of 
the date that the beneficiary dies).\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \48\ A technical correction providing that any balance remaining in 
an education IRA will be deemed distributed within 30 days after the 
date that the designated beneficiary reaches age 30 is included in 
Title VI of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as 
passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Qualified higher education expenses.--The term ``qualified 
higher education expenses'' includes tuition, fees, books, 
supplies, and equipment required for the enrollment or 
attendance of a student at an eligible education institution, 
regardless of whether the beneficiary is enrolled at an 
eligible educational institution on a full-time, half-time, or 
less than half-time basis. Moreover, the term ``qualified 
higher education expenses include room and board expenses 
(meaning the minimum room and board allowance applicable to the 
student as determined by the institution in calculating costs 
of attendance for Federal financial aid programs under sec. 472 
of the Higher Education Act of 1965) for any period during 
which the student is at least a half-time student. Qualified 
higher education expenses include expenses with respect to 
undergraduate or graduate-level courses. In addition, the Act 
specifically provides that qualified higher education expenses 
include amounts paid or incurred to purchase tuition credits 
(or to make contributions to an account) under a qualified 
State tuition program for the benefit of the beneficiary of the 
education IRA.
    Qualified higher education expenses generally include only 
out-of-pocket expenses. Such qualified higher education 
expenses do not include expenses covered by educational 
assistance that is not required to be included in the gross 
income of either the student or the taxpayer claiming the 
credit. Thus, total qualified higher education expenses are 
reduced by scholarship or fellowship grants excludable from 
gross income under present-law section 117, as well as any 
other tax-free educational benefits, such as employer-provided 
educational assistance that is excludable from the employee's 
gross income under section 127. In addition, qualified higher 
education expenses do not include expenses paid with amounts 
that are excludible under section 135. No reduction of 
qualified higher education expenses is required for a gift, 
bequest, devise, or inheritance within the meaning of section 
102(a). Qualified higher education expenses do not include any 
education expense for which a deduction is claimed under 
section 162 or any other section of the Code.
    Eligible educational institution.--Eligible educational 
institutions are defined by reference to section 481 of the 
Higher Education Act of 1965. Such institutions generally are 
accredited post-secondary educational institutions offering 
credit toward a bachelor's degree, an associate's degree, a 
graduate-level or professional degree, or another recognized 
post-secondary credential. Certain proprietary institutions and 
post-secondary vocational institutions also are eligible 
institutions. The institution must be eligible to participate 
in Department of Education student aid programs.

Estate and gift tax treatment

    For Federal estate and gift tax purposes, any contribution 
to a qualified State tuition program or education IRA will be 
treated as a completed gift of a present interest from the 
contributor to the beneficiary at the time of the contribution. 
Annual contributions are eligible for the present-law gift tax 
exclusion provided by Code section 2503(b) and also are 
excludable for purposes of the generation-skipping transfer tax 
(provided that the contribution, when combined with any other 
contributions made by the donor to that same beneficiary, does 
not exceed the annual gift-tax exclusion limit of $10,000, or 
$20,000 in the case of a married couple).\49\ Contributions to 
a qualified State tuition program or to an education IRA will 
not, however, be eligible for the educational expense exclusion 
provided by Code section 2503(e). In no event will a 
distribution from a qualified State tuition program or 
education IRA be treated as a taxable gift.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \49\ The Act provides that, after 1998, the annual gift-tax 
exclusion of $10,000 in the case of an individual, or $20,000 in the 
case of a married couple that splits their gifts, will be indexed for 
inflation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    If a contribution in excess of $10,000 ($20,000 in the case 
of a married couple) is made in one year--which, under the Act, 
can occur only in the case of a qualified State tuition program 
and not an education IRA (which cannot receive contributions in 
excess of $500 per year)--the contributor may elect to have the 
contribution treated as if made ratably over five years 
beginning in the year the contribution is made. For example, a 
$30,000 contribution to a qualified State tuition program could 
be treated as five annual contributions of $6,000, and the 
donor could therefore make up to $4,000 in other transfers to 
the beneficiary each year without payment of gift tax. Under 
this rule, a donor may contribute up to $50,000 every five 
years ($100,000 in the case of a married couple) with no gift 
tax consequences, assuming no other gifts are made by the donor 
to the beneficiary in the five-year period. A gift tax return 
must be filed with respect to any contribution in excess of the 
annual gift-tax exclusion limit, and the election for five-year 
averaging must be made on the contributor's gift tax return.
    If a donor making an over-$10,000 contribution to a 
qualified State tuition program dies during the five-year 
averaging period, the portion of the contribution that has not 
been allocated to the years prior to death is includible in the 
donor's estate. For example, if a donor makes a $40,000 
contribution, elects to treat the transfer as being made over a 
five-year period, and dies the following year, $8,000 would be 
allocated to the year of contribution, another $8,000 would be 
allocated to the year of death, and the remaining $24,000 would 
be includible in the donor's estate.
    If a beneficiary's interest in a qualified State tuition 
program or education IRA is rolled over to another beneficiary, 
there are no transfer tax consequences if the two beneficiaries 
are in the same generation. If a beneficiary's interest is 
rolled over to a beneficiary in a lower generation (e.g., 
parent to child or uncle to niece), the five-year averaging 
rule described above may be applied to exempt up to $50,000 of 
the transfer from gift tax.
    For Federal estate tax purposes, the value of any interest 
in a qualified State tuition program or education IRA will be 
includible in the estate of the designated beneficiary. Such 
interests will not be includible in the estate of the 
contributor.
    The Federal estate and gift tax treatment of qualified 
State tuition programs and education IRAs has no effect on the 
actual rights and obligations of the parties pursuant to the 
terms of the contracts under State law.

                             Effective Date

    The modifications to section 529 generally are effective 
after December 31, 1997. The expansion of the term ``qualified 
higher education expenses'' to cover certain room and board 
expenses is effective as if included in the Small Business Job 
Protection Act of 1996 (enacted on August 20, 1996). The 
provisions governing education IRAs apply to taxable years 
beginning after December 31, 1997. The gift tax provisions are 
effective for contributions (or transfers) made after August 5, 
1997, and the estate tax provisions are effective for decedents 
dying after June 8, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provisions are estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $192 million in 1998, $751 million in 1999, 
$1,030 million in 2000, $1,190 million in 2001, $1,269 million 
in 2002, $1,605 million in 2003, $1,925 million in 2004, $2,244 
million in 2005, $2,569 million in 2006, and $2,910 million in 
2007.

               B. Other Education-Related Tax Provisions

1. Extension of exclusion for employer-provided educational assistance 
        (sec. 221 of the Act and sec. 127 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, an employee's gross income and 
wages do not include amounts paid or incurred by the employer 
for educational assistance provided to the employee if such 
amounts are paid or incurred pursuant to an educational 
assistance program that meets certain requirements. This 
exclusion is limited to $5,250 of educational assistance with 
respect to an individual during a calendar year. Under prior 
law, the exclusion did not apply to graduate level courses 
beginning after June 30, 1996. Under prior law, the exclusion 
expired with respect to courses beginning after June 30, 
1997.\50\ In the absence of the exclusion, educational 
assistance is excludable from income only if it is related to 
the employee's current job.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \50\ The legislative history reflects congressional intent that the 
provision expire with respect to courses beginning after May 31, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the exclusion for employer-
provided education assistance has enabled millions of workers 
to advance their education and improve their job skills without 
incurring additional taxes and a reduction in take-home pay. In 
addition, the exclusion lessens the complexity of the tax laws. 
Without the special exclusion, a worker receiving educational 
assistance from his or her employer is subject to tax on the 
assistance, unless the education is related to the worker's 
current job. Because the determination of whether particular 
educational assistance is job-related is based on the facts and 
circumstances, it may be difficult to determine with certainty 
whether the educational assistance is excludable from income. 
This uncertainty may lead to disputes between taxpayers and the 
Internal Revenue Service.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act extends the exclusion for employer-provided 
educational assistance for undergraduate education with respect 
to courses beginning before June 1, 2000. The exclusion does 
not apply with respect to graduate level courses.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1996.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $534 million in 1998, $369 million in 1999, 
and $250 million in 2000.

2. Modification of $150 million limit on qualified 501(c)(3) bonds 
        other than hospital bonds (sec. 222 of the Act and sec. 150 of 
        the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Interest on State and local government bonds generally is 
excluded from income if the bonds are issued to finance 
activities carried out and paid for with revenues of these 
governments. Interest on bonds issued by these governments to 
finance activities of other persons, e.g., private activity 
bonds, is taxable unless a specific exception is included in 
the Code. One such exception is for private activity bonds 
issued to finance activities of private, charitable 
organizations described in Code section 501(c)(3) (``section 
501(c)(3) organizations'') when the activities do not 
constitute an unrelated trade or business.
    Present and prior law treats section 501(c)(3) 
organizations as private persons; thus, bonds for their use may 
only be issued as private activity ``qualified 501(1)(3) 
bonds,'' subject to the restrictions of Code section 145. Under 
prior law, the most significant of these restrictions limited 
the amount of outstanding bonds from which a section 501(c)(3) 
organization could benefit to $150 million. In applying this 
``$150 million limit,'' all section 501(c)(3) organizations 
under common management or control were treated as a single 
organization. The limit did not apply to bonds for hospital 
facilities, defined to include only acute care, primarily 
inpatient, organizations.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed a distinguishing feature of American 
society is the singular degree to which the United States 
maintains a private, non-profit sector of higher education and 
other charitable institutions in the public service. The 
Congress found inappropriate the restrictions of prior law 
which placed these section 501(c)(3) organizations at a 
financial disadvantage relative to substantially identical 
governmental institutions. For example, a public university 
generally had unlimited access to tax-exempt bond financing, 
while a private, non-profit university was subject to a $150 
million limitation on outstanding bonds.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act repeals the $150 million limit for bonds issued 
after the date of enactment to finance capital expenditures 
incurred after the date of enactment. Because this provision of 
the Act applies only to bonds issued with respect to capital 
expenditures incurred after the date of enactment, the $150 
million limit will continue to govern issuance of other non-
hospital qualified 501(c)(3) bonds (e.g., refunding bonds with 
respect to capital expenditures incurred before the date of 
enactment or new-money bonds for capital expenditures incurred 
before that date).\51\ Thus, the Congress understood that bond 
issuers will continue to need Treasury Department guidance on 
the application of this limit in the future, and expects that 
the Treasury will continue to provide interpretative rules on 
this limit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \51\ See colloquy between Senators Moynihan and Roth, Cong. Record, 
July 31, 1997, S8466-67, clarifying that bonds to which the $150 
million limit does not apply under the Act are not taken into account 
in applying the $150 million limit to other bonds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for bonds issued after the date 
of enactment (August 5, 1997) to finance capital expenditures 
incurred after such date.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $6 million in 1998, $45 million in 1999, $75 
million in 2000, $89 million in 2001, $99 million in 2002, $106 
million in 2003, $115 million in 2004, $125 million in 2005, 
$138 million in 2006, and $162 million in 2007.

3. Expansion of arbitrage rebate exception for certain bonds (sec. 223 
        of the Act and sec. 148 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Interest on State and local government bonds generally is 
excluded from income if the bonds are issued to finance 
activities carried out and paid for with revenues of these 
governments. Interest on bonds issued by these governments to 
finance activities of other persons, e.g., private activity 
bonds, is taxable unless a specific exception is included in 
the Code. In the case of bonds the interest on which is 
excluded from income, generally, all arbitrage profits earned 
on investments unrelated to the purpose of the borrowing 
(``nonpurpose investments'') when such earnings are permitted 
must be rebated to the Federal Government.
    An exception is provided for bonds issued by governmental 
units having general taxing powers if the governmental unit 
(and all subordinate units) issues $5 million or less of 
governmental bonds during the calendar year (``the small-issuer 
exception''). This exception does not apply to private activity 
bonds.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress recognized the need for additional monies to 
address public school infrastructure needs. It believed that 
this provision will reduce the compliance costs of issuers of 
tax-exempt debt issued for public school construction.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that up to $5 million dollars of bonds 
used to finance public school capital expenditures incurred 
after December 31, 1997, is excluded from application of the 
present-law $5 million limit. Thus, otherwise qualified issuers 
will continue to benefit from the small issue exception from 
arbitrage rebate if they issue no more than $10 million in 
governmental bonds per calendar year and no more than $5 
million of the bonds is used to finance expenditures other than 
public school capital expenditures.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for bonds issued after December 
31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million in 1998, $4 million in 1999, $7 
million in 2000, $11 million in 2001, $14 million in 2002, $27 
million in 2003, $30 million in 2004, $33 million in 2005, $36 
million in 2006, and $38 million in 2007.

4. Enhanced deduction for corporate contributions of computer 
        technology and equipment (sec. 224 of the Act and new sec. 
        170(e)(6) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In computing taxable income, a taxpayer who itemizes 
deductions generally is allowed to deduct the fair market value 
of property contributed to a charitable organization.\52\ 
However, in the case of a charitable contribution of inventory 
or other ordinary-income property, short-term capital gain 
property, or certain gifts to private foundations, the amount 
of the deduction is limited to the taxpayer's basis in the 
property. In the case of a charitable contribution of tangible 
personal property, a taxpayer's deduction is limited to the 
adjusted basis in such property if the use by the recipient 
charitable organization is unrelated to the organization's tax-
exempt purpose (sec. 170(e)(1)(B)(i)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \52\ The amount of the deduction allowable for a taxable year with 
respect to a charitable contribution may be reduced depending on the 
type of property contributed, the type of charitable organization to 
which the property is contributed, and the income of the taxpayer 
(secs. 170(b) and 170(e)). Corporations are entitled to claim a 
deduction for charitable contributions, generally limited to 10 percent 
of their taxable income (computed without regard to the contributions) 
for the taxable year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Special rules in the Code provide augmented deductions for 
certain corporate \53\ contributions of inventory property for 
the care of the ill, the needy, or infants \54\ (sec. 
170(e)(3)), and certain corporate contributions of scientific 
equipment constructed by the taxpayer, provided the original 
use of such donated equipment is by the donee for research or 
research training in the United States in physical or 
biological sciences (sec. 170(e)(4)).\55\ Under these special 
rules, the amount of the augmented deduction available to a 
corporation making a qualified contribution is equal to its 
basis in the donated property plus one-half of the amount of 
ordinary income that would have been realized if the property 
had been sold.\56\ However, the augmented deduction cannot 
exceed twice the basis of the donated property.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \53\ S corporations are not eligible donors for purposes of section 
170(e)(3) or section 170(e)(4).
    \54\ Treas. Reg. sec. 1.170A-4(b)(2)(ii)(F) defines an ``infant'' 
as a minor child (as determined under the laws of the jurisdiction in 
which the child resides). Treas. Reg. sec. 1.170A-4(b)(2)(ii)(G) 
provides that the ``care of an infant'' means performance of parental 
functions and provision for the physical, mental, and emotional needs 
of the infant.
    \55\ Eligible donees under section 170(e)(3) are public charities 
(but not governmental units) and private operating foundations. 
Eligible donees under section 170(e)(4) are limited to post-secondary 
educational institutions, scientific research organizations, and 
certain other organizations that support scientific research.
    \56\ For purposes of section 170(e)(3), however, no deduction is 
allowed for any portion of gain that would have been recognized as 
ordinary income (had the property been sold) because of the application 
of the recapture provisions in sections 617, 1245, 1250, or 1252. No 
such limitation applies under section 170(e)(4) because qualified 
contributions for purposes of section 170(e)(4) are limited to 
nondepreciable inventory property.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that providing an incentive for 
businesses to invest their computer equipment and software for 
the benefit of primary and secondary school students will help 
to provide America's schools with the technological resources 
necessary to prepare both teachers and students for a 
technologically advanced present and future.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act specifically provides that certain contributions of 
computer and other equipment to eligible donees to be used for 
the benefit of elementary and secondary school children qualify 
for an augmented deduction similar to the deduction currently 
available under Code section 170(e)(3). Under the Act, 
qualified contributions mean gifts of computer technology and 
equipment (i.e., computer software, computer or peripheral 
equipment, and fiber optic cable related to computer use) to 
eligible donees to be used within the United States for 
educational purposes in any of grades K-12.
    Eligible donees are (1) any educational organization that 
normally maintains a regular faculty and curriculum and has a 
regularly enrolled body of pupils in attendance at the place 
where its educational activities are regularly carried on, and 
(2) Code section 501(c)(3) entities that are organized 
primarily for purposes of supporting elementary and secondary 
education. A private foundation also is an eligible donee, 
provided that, within 30 days after receipt of the 
contribution, the private foundation contributes the property 
to an eligible donee described above.
    Qualified contributions are limited to gifts made no later 
than two years after the date the taxpayer acquired or 
substantially completed the construction of the donated 
property. In addition, the original use of the donated property 
must commence with the donor or the donee. Accordingly, 
qualified contributions generally are limited to property that 
is no more than two years old. Such donated property could be 
computer technology or equipment that is inventory or 
depreciable trade or business property in the hands of the 
donor.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \57\ In the case of depreciable trade or business property, the 
limitation of section 170(e)(3)(C) does not apply for purposes of 
determining the amount of the deduction under the provision. Thus, a 
deduction is allowed under the provision for a portion of the gain that 
would have been recognized as ordinary income (had the property been 
sold) because of the application of the recapture provisions relating 
to depreciation, certain mining and exploration expenditures, certain 
soil and water conservation expenditures, and certain land-clearing 
expenditures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Act generally provides that the donee organizations 
cannot transfer the donated property for money or services 
(e.g., a donee organization cannot sell the computers). 
However, a donee organization may transfer the donated property 
in furtherance of its exempt purposes and be reimbursed for 
shipping, installation, and transfer costs. For example, if a 
corporation contributes computers to a charity that 
subsequently distributes the computers to several elementary 
schools in a given area, the charity could be reimbursed by the 
elementary schools for shipping, transfer, and installation 
costs.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \58\ In the case of contributions made through private foundations, 
the Act permits the payment by the ultimate recipient to the private 
foundation of shipping, transfer, and installation costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The special treatment applies only to donations made by C 
corporations; as under present law section 170(e)(4), S 
corporations, personal holding companies, and service 
organizations are not eligible donors.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for contributions made in 
taxable years beginning after December 31, 1997, and before 
January 1, 2001.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \59\ A technical correction is necessary to provide that the 
provision is effective for contributions made during a three-year 
period ending December 31, 2000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $46 million in 1998, $48 million in 1999, 
$77 million in 2000, $49 million in 2001, $5 million in 2002, 
and $1 million in 2003.

5. Treatment of cancellation of certain student loans (sec. 225 of the 
        Act and sec. 108(f) (of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In the case of an individual, gross income subject to 
Federal income tax does not include any amount from the 
forgiveness (in whole or in part) of certain student loans, 
provided that the forgiveness is contingent on the student's 
working for a certain period of time in certain professions for 
any of a broad class of employers (sec. 108(f)).
    Student loans eligible for this special rule must be made 
to an individual to assist the individual in attending an 
educational institution that normally maintains a regular 
faculty and curriculum and normally has a regularly enrolled 
body of students in attendance at the place where its education 
activities are regularly carried on. Loan proceeds may be used 
not only for tuition and required fees, but also to cover room 
and board expenses (in contrast to tax free scholarships under 
section 117, which are limited to tuition and required fees). 
In addition, the loan must be made by (1) the United States (or 
an instrumentality or agency thereof), (2) a State (or any 
political subdivision thereof), (3) certain tax-exempt public 
benefit corporations that control a State, county, or municipal 
hospital and whose employees have been deemed to be public 
employees under State law, or (4) an educational organization 
that originally received the funds from which the loan was made 
from the United States, a State, or a tax-exempt public benefit 
corporation. Thus, loans made with private, nongovernmental 
funds are not qualifying student loans for purposes of the 
section 108(f) exclusion.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that it is appropriate to expand 
present-law section 108(f), so that certain loan cancellation 
programs of educational organizations receive Federal income 
tax treatment comparable to that provided for similar 
government-sponsored programs. This provision promotes the 
establishment of programs that encourage students to use their 
education and training in valuable community service.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act expands section 108(f) so that an individual's 
gross income does not include amounts from the forgiveness of 
loans made by educational organizations (and certain tax-exempt 
organizations in the case of refinancing loans) if the proceeds 
of such loans are used to pay costs of attendance at an 
educational institution or to refinance outstanding student 
loans \60\ and the student is not employed by the lender 
organization. As under present law, the section 108(f) 
exclusion applies only if the forgiveness is contingent on the 
student's working for a certain period of time in certain 
professions for any of a broad class of employers. In addition, 
in the case of loans made or refinanced by educational 
organizations (as well as refinancing loans made by certain 
tax-exempt organizations), the student's work must fulfill a 
public service requirement.\61\ The student must work in an 
occupation or area with unmet needs and such work must be 
performed for or under the direction of a tax-exempt charitable 
organization or a governmental entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \60\ A technical correction is required to clarify that gross 
income does not include amounts from the forgiveness of loans made by 
educational organizations and certain tax-exempt organizations to 
refinance any existing student loan (and not just loans made by 
educational organizations). A provision to this effect is included in 
Title VI (sec. 604(e)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act 
of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
    \61\ A technical correction is required to clarify that refinancing 
loans made by educational organizations and certain tax-exempt 
organizations must be made pursuant to a program of the refinancing 
organization (e.g., school or private foundation) that requires the 
student to fulfill a public service work requirement. A provision to 
this effect is included in Title VI (sec. 604(e)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax 
Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 
5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to discharges of indebtedness after 
August 5, 1997, the date of enactment.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible revenue 
effect on Federal fiscal year budget receipts in each of 1998 
through 2007.

6. Tax credit for holders of qualified zone academy bonds (sec. 226 of 
        the Act and new sec. 1397E of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Interest on State and local governmental bonds generally is 
excluded from gross income for Federal income tax purposes if 
the proceeds of the bonds are used to finance direct activities 
of these governmental units, including the financing of public 
schools (Code sec. 103).
    Pursuant to the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 
(OBRA 1993), the Secretaries of the Department of Housing and 
Urban Development (HUD) and the Department of Agriculture 
designated a total of nine empowerment zones and 95 enterprise 
communities on December 21, 1994 (sec. 1391). Designated 
empowerment zones and enterprise communities were required to 
satisfy certain eligibility criteria, including specified 
poverty rates and population and geographic size limitations 
(sec. 1392). The Code provides special tax incentives for 
certain business activities conducted in empowerment zones and 
enterprise communities (secs. 1394, 1396, and 1397A). In 
addition, the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 provides for the 
designation of 22 additional empowerment zones (secs. 
1391(b)(2) and 1391(g)).

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the provision, certain financial institutions (i.e., 
banks, insurance companies, and corporations actively engaged 
in the business of lending money) that hold ``qualified zone 
academy bonds'' are entitled to a nonrefundable tax credit in 
an amount equal to a credit rate (set by the Treasury 
Department) multiplied by the face amount of the bond. The 
credit rate applies to all such bonds issued in each month. A 
taxpayer holding a qualified zone academy bond on the credit 
allowance date (i.e., each one-year anniversary of the issuance 
of the bond) is entitled to a credit. The credit is includible 
in gross income (as if it were an interest payment on the 
bond). The credit may be claimed against regular income tax and 
AMT liability.\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \62\ A technical correction may be necessary to clarify that the 
credit also may be claimed against estimated tax liability on the 
credit allowance date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Treasury Department will set the credit rate each month 
at a rate estimated to allow issuance of qualified zone academy 
bonds without discount and without interest cost to the issuer. 
The maximum term of the bond issued in a given month also is 
determined by the Treasury Department so that the present value 
of the obligation to repay the bond is 50 percent of the face 
value of the bond. Such present value will be determined using 
as a discount rate the average annual interest rate of tax-
exempt obligations with a term of 10 years or more issued 
during the month.
    ``Qualified zone academy bonds'' are defined as any bond 
issued by a State or local government, provided that (1) 95 
percent of the proceeds are used for the purpose of renovating, 
providing equipment to, developing course materials for use at, 
or training teachers and other school personnel in a 
``qualified zone academy'' and (2) private entities have 
promised to contribute to the qualified zone academy certain 
equipment, technical assistance or training, employee services, 
or other property or services with a value equal to at least 10 
percent of the bond proceeds.
    A school is a ``qualified zone academy'' if (1) the school 
is a public school that provides education and training below 
the college level, (2) the school operates a special academic 
program in cooperation with businesses to enhance the academic 
curriculum and increase graduation and employment rates, and 
(3) either (a) the school is located in an empowerment zone or 
enterprise community (including empowerment zones designated or 
authorized to be designated under the Act), or (b) it is 
reasonably expected that at least 35 percent of the students at 
the school will be eligible for free or reduced-cost lunches 
under the school lunch program established under the National 
School Lunch Act.
    A total of $400 million of ``qualified zone academy bonds'' 
may be issued in each of 1998 and 1999. The $800 million 
aggregate bond cap will be allocated to the States according to 
their respective populations of individuals below the poverty 
line. A State may carry over any unused allocation into 
subsequent years. Each State, in turn, will allocate the credit 
to qualified zone academies within such State.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for qualified zone academy bonds 
issued after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $8 million in 1998, $27 million in 1999, $43 
million in 2000, and $47 million in each of years 2001 through 
2007.

            TITLE III. SAVINGS AND INVESTMENT TAX INCENTIVES

        A. Individual Retirement Arrangements (secs. 301-304 of

         the Act and secs. 72, 219, and 408 of the Code and new

                         sec. 408A of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, an individual may make 
deductible contributions to an individual retirement 
arrangement (``IRA'') up to the lesser of $2,000 or the 
individual's compensation if the individual is not an active 
participant in an employer-sponsored retirement plan. Under 
present and prior law, in the case of a married couple, 
deductible IRA contributions of up to $2,000 can be made for 
each spouse (including, for example, a home maker who does not 
work outside the home) if the combined compensation of both 
spouses is at least equal to the contributed amount.
    Under present and prior law, if the individual (or the 
individual's spouse) is an active participant in an employer-
sponsored retirement plan, the $2,000 deduction limit is phased 
out over certain adjusted gross income (``AGI'') levels. Under 
prior law, the limit was phased out between $40,000 and $50,000 
of AGI for married taxpayers filing joint returns, and between 
$25,000 and $35,000 of AGI for single taxpayers. Under present 
and prior law, contributions cannot be made to a deductible IRA 
after age 70\1/2\. Under prior law, an individual could make 
contributions to a nondeductible IRA to the extent the 
individual could not (or did not) make contributions to a 
deductible IRA.
    Under present and prior law, amounts held in a deductible 
or nondeductible IRA are includible in income when withdrawn 
(except to the extent the withdrawal is a return of 
nondeductible contributions). Includible amounts withdrawn 
prior to attainment of age 59\1/2\ are subject to an additional 
10-percent early withdrawal tax, unless the withdrawal is due 
to death or disability, is made in the form of certain periodic 
payments, is used to pay medical expenses in excess of 7.5 
percent of AGI, or is used to purchase health insurance of an 
unemployed individual.
    Under present and prior law, distributions from a 
deductible or nondeductible IRA are required to begin at age 
70\1/2\. An excise tax is imposed if the minimum required 
distributions are not made. Distributions to the beneficiary of 
an IRA are generally required to begin within 5 years of the 
death of the IRA owner, unless the beneficiary is the surviving 
spouse.
    Under present and prior law, IRAs generally may not be 
invested in collectibles. Under prior law, coins were 
considered collectibles, other than coins issued by a State and 
certain gold and silver coins issued by the U.S. Mint.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress was concerned about the national savings rate, 
and believed that individuals should be encouraged to save. The 
Congress believed that the ability to make deductible 
contributions to an IRA was a significant savings incentive. 
However, this incentive was not available to all taxpayers 
under prior law. Further, the prior-law income thresholds for 
IRA deductions were not indexed for inflation so that fewer 
Americans will be eligible to make a deductible IRA 
contribution each year. The Congress believed it was 
appropriate to encourage individual saving and that deductible 
IRAs should be available to more individuals.
    In addition, the Congress believed that some individuals 
would be more likely to save if funds set aside in a tax-
favored account could be withdrawn without tax after a 
reasonable holding period for retirement or certain special 
purposes. Some taxpayers might find such a vehicle more 
suitable for their savings needs.
    The Congress believed that providing an incentive to save 
for certain special purposes was appropriate. The Congress 
believed that many Americans may have difficulty saving enough 
to ensure that they will be able to purchase a home. Home 
ownership is a fundamental part of the American dream.
    The Congress believed that the prior-law rules relating to 
deductible IRAs penalize American homemakers. The Congress 
believed that an individual should not be precluded from making 
a deductible IRA contribution merely because his or her spouse 
participates in an employer-sponsored retirement plan.
    Finally, the Congress believed that IRAs should not be 
precluded from investing in bullion.

                        Explanation of Provision

In general

    The Act (1) increases the AGI phase-out limits for 
deductible IRAs, (2) modifies the AGI phase-out limits for an 
individual who is not an active participant in an employer-
sponsored retirement plan but whose spouse is, (3) provides an 
exception from the early withdrawal tax for withdrawals for 
first-time home purchase (up to $10,000),\63\ and (4) creates a 
new nondeductible IRA called the Roth IRA. Individuals with AGI 
below certain levels may make nondeductible contributions of up 
to $2,000 annually to a Roth IRA. In addition, the $2,000 
maximum contribution limit is reduced to the extent an 
individual makes contributions to any other IRA in the same 
taxable year. A Roth IRA is an IRA which is designated at the 
time of establishment as a Roth IRA in the manner prescribed by 
the Secretary. Qualified distributions from a Roth IRA are not 
includible in income.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \63\ The Act also provides for penalty-free withdrawals from IRAs 
for education expenses. (See Title II.A.3., above.) The penalty-free 
withdrawal exceptions for first-time homebuyer and education expenses 
do not apply to distributions from employer-sponsored retirement plans. 
A technical correction may be necessary to prevent the avoidance of the 
early withdrawal tax by participants in employer-sponsored retirement 
plans who roll over hardship distributions into an IRA and withdraw the 
funds from the IRA. A technical correction to that effect is included 
in Title VI (sec. 605) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act 
of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997. The technical 
correction would provide that hardship distributions cannot be rolled 
over into an IRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Act modifies the prior-law rules relating to 
nondeductible IRAs. Thus, an individual may make nondeductible 
contributions to an IRA to the extent they cannot or do not 
make deductible contributions and contributions to a Roth IRA.

Modification to active participant rule and increase income phase-out 
        ranges for deductible IRAs

    Under the Act, the maximum deductible IRA contribution for 
an individual who is not an active participant in an employer-
sponsored retirement plan, but whose spouse is, is phased out 
for taxpayers with AGI between $150,000 and $160,000.
    Under the Act, the deductible IRA income phase-out limits 
are increased as follows:

                              Joint Returns                             
                                                                        
             Taxable years beginning in:                Phase-out range 
                                                                        
1998.................................................    $50,000--60,000
1999.................................................     51,000--61,000
2000.................................................     52,000--62,000
2001.................................................     53,000--63,000
2002.................................................     54,000--64,000
2003.................................................     60,000--70,000
2004.................................................     65,000--75,000
2005.................................................     70,000--80,000
2006.................................................     75,000--85,000
2007 and thereafter..................................    80,000--100,000
                                                                        


                            Single Taxpayers                            
                                                                        
             Taxable years beginning in:                Phase-out range 
                                                                        
1998.................................................    $30,000--40,000
1999.................................................     31,000--41,000
2000.................................................     32,000--42,000
2001.................................................     33,000--43,000
2002.................................................     34,000--44,000
2003.................................................     40,000--50,000
2004.................................................     45,000--55,000
2005 and thereafter..................................     50,000--60,000
                                                                        

    The following examples illustrate the income phase-out 
rules.
    Example 1.--W is an active participant in an employer-
sponsored retirement plan, and W's husband, H, is not. Further 
assume that the combined AGI of H and W for the year is 
$200,000. Neither W nor H is entitled to make deductible 
contributions to an IRA for the year.
    Example 2.--Same as example 1, except that the combined AGI 
of W and H is $125,000. H can make deductible contributions to 
an IRA. However, a deductible contribution could not be made 
for W.

Modifications to early withdrawal tax

    The Act provides that the 10-percent early withdrawal tax 
does not apply to withdrawals from an IRA (including a Roth 
IRA) for up to $10,000 of first-time homebuyer expenses.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \64\ The Act also provides for penalty-free withdrawals from IRAs 
for education expenses. (See Title II.A.3., above.) The penalty-free 
withdrawal exceptions for first-time homebuyer and education expenses 
do not apply to distributions from employer-sponsored retirement plans. 
A technical correction may be necessary to prevent the avoidance of the 
early withdrawal tax by participants in employer-sponsored retirement 
plans who roll over hardship distributions into an IRA and withdraw the 
funds from the IRA. A technical correction to that effect is included 
in Title VI (sec. 605) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act 
of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997. The technical 
correction would provide that hardship distributions cannot be rolled 
over into an IRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under the Act, qualified first-time homebuyer distributions 
are withdrawals of up to $10,000 during the individual's 
lifetime that are used within 120 days to pay costs (including 
reasonable settlement, financing, or other closing costs) of 
acquiring, constructing, or reconstructing the principal 
residence of a first-time homebuyer who is the individual, the 
individual's spouse, or a child, grandchild, or ancestor of the 
individual or individual's spouse. A first-time homebuyer is an 
individual who has not had an ownership interest in a principal 
residence during the 2-year period ending on the date of 
acquisition of the principal residence to which the withdrawal 
relates. The Act requires that the spouse of the individual 
also meet this requirement as of the date the contract is 
entered into or construction commences. The date of acquisition 
is the date the individual enters into a binding contract to 
purchase a principal residence or begins construction or 
reconstruction of such a residence. Principal residence is 
defined as under the provisions relating to the rollover of 
gain on the sale of a principal residence.
    Under the Act, any amount withdrawn for the purchase of a 
principal residence is required to be used within 120 days of 
the date of withdrawal. The 10-percent additional tax on early 
withdrawals is imposed with respect to any amount not so used. 
If the 120-day rule cannot be satisfied due to a delay in the 
acquisition of the residence, the taxpayer may recontribute all 
or part of the amount withdrawn to a Roth IRA prior to the end 
of the 120-day period without adverse tax consequences.

IRA investments in coins and bullion

    Under the Act, IRA assets may be invested in certain 
bullion. The Act applies to any gold, silver, platinum or 
palladium bullion of a fineness equal to or exceeding the 
minimum fineness required for metals which may be delivered in 
satisfaction of a regulated futures contract subject to 
regulation by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The 
provision does not apply unless the bullion is in the physical 
possession of an IRA trustee. The Act also provides that IRA 
assets may be invested in certain platinum coins issued by the 
U.S. mint.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \65\ The Act does not modify the prior-law rule permitting IRAs to 
be invested in State coins and certain coins issued by the U.S. Mint.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Roth IRAs

            Contributions to Roth IRAs
    The maximum annual contribution that may be made to a Roth 
IRA is the lesser of $2,000 or the individual's compensation 
for the year. As under the rules relating to IRAs generally, a 
contribution of up to $2,000 for each spouse may be made to a 
Roth IRA provided the combined compensation of the spouses is 
at least equal to the contributed amount. The maximum annual 
contribution that can be made to a Roth IRA is phased out for 
single individuals with AGI between $95,000 and $110,000 and 
for joint filers with AGI between $150,000 and $160,000.\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \66\ For this purpose, AGI does not include amounts includible in 
income as a result of a conversion of an IRA into a Roth IRA. It was 
intended that the phase-out range for married taxpayers filing 
separately be $0 to $10,000. A technical correction is necessary so 
that the statute reflects this intent. See Title VI (sec. 605) of H.R. 
2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House 
on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Contributions to a Roth IRA may be made even after the 
individual for whom the account is maintained has attained age 
70\1/2\.
            Taxation of distributions
    Qualified distributions from a Roth IRA are not includible 
in gross income, nor subject to the additional 10-percent tax 
on early withdrawals. A qualified distribution is a 
distribution that (1) is made after the 5-taxable year period 
beginning with the first taxable year in which the individual 
made a contribution to a Roth IRA,\67\ and (2) which is (a) 
made on or after the date on which the individual attains age 
59\1/2\, (b) made to a beneficiary (or to the individual's 
estate) on or after the death of the individual, (c) 
attributable to the individual's being disabled, or (d) a 
qualified special purpose distribution. A qualified special 
purpose distribution is a distribution that is exempt from the 
10-percent early withdrawal tax because it is for first-time 
homebuyer expenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \67\ As is the case with IRAs generally, contributions to a Roth 
IRA may be made for a year by the due date for the individual's tax 
return for the year (determined without regard to extensions). In the 
case of a contribution to a Roth IRA made after the end of the taxable 
year, the 5-year holding period begins with the taxable year to which 
the contribution relates, rather than the year in which the 
contribution is actually made.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Distributions from a Roth IRA that are not qualified 
distributions are includible in income to the extent 
attributable to earnings, and subject to the 10-percent early 
withdrawal tax (unless an exception applies). The same 
exceptions to the early withdrawal tax that apply to IRAs apply 
to Roth IRAs.
    An ordering rule applies for purposes of determining what 
portion of a distribution that is not a qualified distribution 
is includible in income. Under the ordering rule, distributions 
from a Roth IRA are treated as made from contributions first, 
and all of an individual's Roth IRAs are treated as a single 
Roth IRA. Thus, no portion of a distribution from a Roth IRA is 
treated as attributable to earnings (and therefore includible 
in gross income) until the total of all distributions from all 
the individual's Roth IRAs exceeds the amount of contributions.
    The pre-death minimum distribution rules that apply to IRAs 
generally do not apply to Roth IRAs.
    Distributions from a Roth IRA may be rolled over tax free 
to another Roth IRA.
            Conversions of an IRA to a Roth IRA
    All or any part of amounts in a present-law deductible or 
nondeductible IRA may be converted into a Roth IRA. If the 
conversion is made before January 1, 1999,\68\ the amount that 
would have been includible in gross income if the individual 
had withdrawn the converted amounts is included in gross income 
ratably over the 4-taxable year period beginning with the 
taxable year in which the conversion is made. The early 
withdrawal tax does not apply to such conversions.\69\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \68\ If the conversion is made by means of an actual withdrawal 
followed by a rollover contribution to a Roth IRA, the withdrawal must 
occur in 1998 for the 4-year income inclusion rule to apply. In such a 
case, the 4-year income inclusion begins with the year in which the 
withdrawal was made, even if the rollover to the Roth IRA does not 
occur until 1999. As is the case with rollovers generally, a rollover 
to a Roth IRA must be made within 60 days of the withdrawal from the 
IRA.
    \69\ In the case of conversions from an IRA to a Roth IRA, the 5-
taxable year holding period begins with the taxable year in which the 
conversion was made.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under the Act, only taxpayers with AGI of $100,000 \70\ or 
less are eligible to convert an IRA into a Roth IRA. In the 
case of a married taxpayer, AGI is the combined AGI of the 
couple. Married taxpayers filing a separate return are not 
eligible to make a conversion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \70\ For this purpose, AGI is determined before any amount 
includible in income as a result of the conversion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A conversion of an IRA into a Roth IRA can be made in a 
variety of different ways and without taking a withdrawal. For 
example, an individual may make a conversion simply by 
notifying the IRA trustee. Or, an individual may make the 
conversion in connection with a change in IRA trustees through 
a rollover or a trustee-to-trustee transfer. If a part of an 
IRA balance is converted into a Roth IRA, the Roth IRA amounts 
may have to be held separately.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \71\ The rules relating to conversions of IRAs into Roth IRAs were 
not intended to allow individuals receiving premature distributions 
from a Roth conversion IRA while retaining the benefits of 4-year 
income averaging and the nonpayment of the early withdrawal tax. A 
technical correction may be necessary so that the statute reflects this 
intent. See Title VI (sec. 605) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical 
Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997. In 
general, the proposed technical correction would provide that, if 
converted amounts are withdrawn within the 5-year period beginning with 
the year of conversion, then amounts withdrawn which were includible in 
income due to the conversion would be subject to the 10-percent early 
withdrawal tax and, if the 4-year income inclusion rule applied to the 
conversion, an additional 10-percent tax. If the 4-year income 
inclusion rule applied to the conversion, the converted amounts would 
still be includible in income under such rule, that is, there would be 
no acceleration of the income inclusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provisions are effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provisions are estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
receipts by $367 million in 1998, $345 million in 1999, $346 
million in 2001, $860 million in 2002, $1,830 million in 2003, 
$3,292 million in 2004, $3,842 million in 2005, $4,424 million 
in 2006, and $5004 million in 2007. The provisions are 
estimated to increase Federal fiscal year receipts by $86 
million in 2000.

                      B. Capital Gains Provisions

1. Maximum rate of tax on net capital gain of individuals (sec. 311 of 
        the Act and sec. 1(h) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    In general, gain or loss reflected in the value of an asset 
is not recognized for income tax purposes until a taxpayer 
disposes of the asset. On the sale or exchange of capital 
assets, the net capital gain was taxed at the same rate as 
ordinary income, except that individuals were subject to a 
maximum marginal rate of 28 percent of the net capital gain. 
Net capital gain is the excess of the net long-term capital 
gain for the taxable year over the net short-term capital loss 
for the year. Gain or loss is treated as long-term if the asset 
is held for more than one year.
    A capital asset generally means any property except (1) 
inventory, stock in trade, or property held primarily for sale 
to customers in the ordinary course of the taxpayer's trade or 
business, (2) depreciable or real property used in the 
taxpayer's trade or business, (3) specified literary or 
artistic property, (4) business accounts or notes receivable, 
or (5) certain U.S. publications. In addition, the net gain 
from the disposition of certain property used in the taxpayer's 
trade or business is treated as long-term capital gain. Gain 
from the disposition of depreciable personal property is not 
treated as capital gain to the extent of all previous 
depreciation allowances. Gain from the disposition of 
depreciable real property is generally not treated as capital 
gain to the extent of the depreciation allowances in excess of 
the allowances that would have been available under the 
straight-line method of depreciation.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed it is important that tax policy be 
conducive to economic growth. Economic growth cannot occur 
without saving, investment, and the willingness of individuals 
to take risks. The greater the pool of savings, the greater the 
monies available for business investment. It is through such 
investment that the United States' economy can increase output 
and productivity. It is through increases in productivity that 
workers earn higher real wages. Hence, greater saving is 
necessary for all Americans to benefit through a higher 
standard of living.
    The Congress believed that, by reducing the effective tax 
rates on capital gains, American households will respond by 
increasing saving. The Congress believed it is important to 
encourage risk taking and believed a reduction in the taxation 
of capital gains will have that effect. The Congress also 
believed that a reduction in the taxation of capital gains will 
improve the efficiency of the capital markets, because the 
taxation of capital gains upon realization encourages investors 
who have accrued past gains to keep their monies ``locked in'' 
to such investment even when better investment opportunities 
present themselves. A reduction in the taxation of capital 
gains should reduce this ``lock in'' effect.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act,\72\ the maximum rate of tax on the adjusted 
net capital gain of an individual is reduced from 28 percent to 
20 percent. In addition, any adjusted net capital gain which 
otherwise would be taxed at a 15 percent rate is taxed at a 10 
percent rate. These rates apply for purposes of both the 
regular tax and the alternative minimum tax.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \72\ The Act is described as it would be modified by the technical 
corrections set forth in a letter dated September 29, 1997, to Donald 
Lubick, Acting Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy, from Chairman 
Archer, Chairman Roth, Congressman Rangel, and Senator Moynihan. These 
changes are included in Title VI (sec. 605(d)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax 
Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 
5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The ``adjusted net capital gain'' of an individual is the 
net capital gain reduced (but not below zero) by the sum of the 
28-percent rate gain and the unrecaptured section 1250 gain. As 
under prior law, the net capital gain is reduced by the amount 
of gain which the individual treats as investment income for 
purposes of determining the investment interest limitation 
under section 163(d). The Act does not change the definitions 
in section 1222 relating to capital gains and losses, but 
rather taxes portions of the net capital gain at different tax 
rates.\73\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \73\ Gain from the sale of a capital asset held more than one year 
remains ``long-term capital gain'' for purposes of the Code. Thus, for 
example, the deduction for charitable contributions of appreciated 
property (under sec. 170(e)) is not changed by this provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The term ``28-percent rate gain'' means the amount of net 
gain attributable to long-term capital gains and losses from 
property held more than one year but not more than 18 months, 
long-term capital gains and losses from the sale or exchange of 
collectibles (as defined in section 408(m) without regard to 
paragraph (3) thereof) held more than 18 months (``collectibles 
gain and loss''),\74\ an amount of gain equal to the amount of 
gain excluded from gross income under section 1202 relating to 
certain small business stock (``section 1202 gain''),\75\ the 
net short-term capital loss for the taxable year, and any long-
term capital loss carryover to the taxable year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \74\ Only gains taken into account in computing gross income, and 
only losses taken into account in computing taxable income are included 
in collectibles gains and losses. See section 1222(l)-(4) for a similar 
rule in defining various categories of capital gain. A look-through 
rule is provided in the case of the sale of a partnership interest.
    \75\ For example, assume an individual has $300,000 gain from the 
sale of qualified stock in a small business corporation and $120,000 of 
the gain (50 percent of $240,000) is excluded from gross income under 
section 1202, as limited by section 1202(b). The entire $180,000 of 
gain included in gross income is included in the computation of net 
capital gain and $120,000 of that gain will be taken into account in 
computing 28-percent rate gain. The combination of the 50-percent 
exclusion and the 28-percent maximum rate will result in a maximum 
effective regular tax rate of 14 percent on the $240,000 gain from the 
sale of the small business stock to which the 50-percent section 1202 
exclusion applies, and the maximum rate on the remaining $60,000 of 
gain is 20 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ``Unrecaptured section 1250 gain'' means the amount of 
long-term capital gain (not otherwise treated as ordinary 
income) which would be treated as ordinary income if section 
1250 recapture applied to all depreciation (rather than only to 
depreciation in excess of straight-line depreciation) from the 
sale or exchange of property held more than 18 months,\76\ 
reduced by the net loss (if any) attributable to the items 
taken into account in computing 28-percent rate gain. The 
amount of unrecaptured section 1250 gain (before the reduction 
for the net loss) attributable to the disposition of property 
to which section 1231 applies shall not exceed the net section 
1231 gain for the year. Thus, if a taxpayer sells a building 
used in a trade or business held more than 18 months for a gain 
of $20,000 attributable entirely to depreciation adjustments 
not otherwise recaptured as ordinary income, and sells land 
used in a trade or business held for more than one year for a 
loss of $5,000, the net section 1231 gain is $15,000 and 
$15,000 (rather than $20,000) will be taken into account in 
computing the unrecaptured section 1250 gain for the year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \76\ Section 1250 will continue to treat gain attributable to 
certain depreciation (generally the amount of depreciation in excess of 
the amount allowable under the straight-line method) as ordinary 
income. Thus, for example, assume a taxpayer sold a building for $1 
million, which originally cost $500,000, and the taxpayer was allowed 
$400,000 depreciation of which $100,000 is additional depreciation (as 
defined in section 1250(b)). As under prior law, $100,000 is treated as 
ordinary income under section 1250, and $800,000 is treated as long-
term capital gain (assuming that section 1231(a)(2) does not apply). 
Under the Act, $300,000 will be taken into account in computing 
unrecaptured section 1250 gain since, if section 1250 had applied to 
all depreciation (rather than only additional depreciation), $300,000 
of the $800,000 long-term capital gain would have been treated as 
ordinary income, and only $500,000 would have been treated as long-term 
capital gain.
    In the case of a disposition of a partnership interest held more 
than 18 months, the amount of long-term capital gain (not otherwise 
treated as ordinary income) which would be treated as ordinary income 
under section 751(a) if section 1250 applied to all depreciation, will 
be taken into account in computing unrecaptured section 1250 gain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The unrecaptured section 1250 gain is taxed at a maximum 
rate of 25 percent, and the 28-percent rate gain is taxed at a 
maximum rate of 28 percent. (secs. 1(h)(1) and 55(b)(3)). Any 
amount of unrecaptured section 1250 gain or 28-percent rate 
gain otherwise taxed at a 15-percent rate will continue to be 
taxed at the 15-percent rate.\77\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \77\ In order to arrive at this result, section 1(h)(1) provides 
that the amount taxed at a 25-percent rate is limited to the net 
capital gain and is further adjusted to take into account amounts 
otherwise taxed at the 15-percent rate (or not taxed at all by reason 
of a taxpayer's ordinary loss), and that the amount taxed at a 28-
percent rate is the amount of taxable income reduced by the sum of the 
amounts taxed at the regular section 1 rates and the 10-, 20-, and 25-
percent capital gains rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The following examples illustrate the application of these 
rules. (For purposes of the examples, assume the maximum amount 
of taxable income in the rate schedule applicable to the 
individual taxed at the 15-percent rate is $40,000 and the 
maximum amount of taxable income taxed at a rate below 31 
percent is $80,000.)
    Example 1.--Assume an individual has taxable income of 
$100,000, with an adjusted net capital gain of $50,000. $50,000 
will be taxed at regular tax rates (i.e., $40,000 at 15 percent 
and $10,000 at 28 percent), and the $50,000 adjusted net 
capital gain will be taxed at 20 percent.
    Example 2.--Assume an individual has taxable income of 
$100,000 with an adjusted net capital gain of $70,000. $30,000 
will be taxed at regular tax rates (i.e., 15 percent), and 
$10,000 of the adjusted net capital gain will be taxed at 10 
percent and the remaining $60,000 of the adjusted net capital 
gain will be taxed at 20 percent.
    Example 3.--Assume an individual has taxable income of 
$100,000, with a net capital gain of $50,000, and a 28-percent 
rate gain of $20,000, resulting in an adjusted net capital gain 
of $30,000. $50,000 will be taxed at the regular tax rates 
(i.e., $40,000 at 15 percent and $10,000 at 28 percent), the 
$30,000 of adjusted net capital gain will be taxed at 20 
percent, and the remaining $20,000 will be taxed at 28 percent.
    Example 4.--Assume an individual has taxable income of 
$150,000, with a net capital gain of $50,000, and a 28-percent 
rate gain of $20,000, resulting in an adjusted net capital gain 
of $30,000. $100,000 will be taxed at regular tax rates (i.e., 
$40,000 at 15 percent, $40,000 at 28 percent, and $20,000 at 31 
percent), the $30,000 of adjusted net capital gain will be 
taxed at 20 percent, and the remaining $20,000 will be taxed at 
28 percent.
    Example 5.--Assume an individual has taxable income of 
$80,000, with a net capital gain of $50,000, and a 28-percent 
rate gain of $20,000, resulting in an adjusted net capital gain 
of $30,000. $40,000 will be taxed at the regular tax rates 
(i.e., 15 percent); the $30,000 adjusted net capital gain will 
be taxed at 20 percent; and the remaining $10,000 will be taxed 
at 28 percent.
    Example 6.--Assume an individual has taxable income of 
$60,000, with a net capital gain of $50,000, and a 28-percent 
gain of $20,000, resulting in an adjusted net capital gain of 
$30,000. $30,000 will be taxed at the regular tax rates (i.e., 
15 percent); $10,000 of the adjusted net capital gain will be 
taxed at 10 percent; and $20,000 of the adjusted net capital 
gain will be taxed at 20 percent.
    Example 7.--Assume an individual has taxable income of 
$40,000, with a net capital gain of $50,000, and a 28-percent 
rate gain of $20,000, resulting in an adjusted net capital gain 
of $30,000. $10,000 will be taxed at the regular tax rates 
(i.e., 15 percent); and the $30,000 adjusted net capital gain 
will be taxed at 10 percent.
    Example 8.--Assume an individual has taxable income of 
$150,000, with a net capital gain of $50,000, an unrecaptured 
section 1250 gain of $10,000 and a 28-percent rate gain of 
$10,000, resulting in an adjusted net capital gain of $30,000. 
$100,000 will be taxed at regular tax rates (i.e., $40,000 at 
15 percent, $40,000 at 28 percent, and $20,000 at 31 percent); 
the unrecaptured section 1250 gain of $10,000 will be taxed at 
25 percent; the $30,000 adjusted net capital gain will be taxed 
at 20 percent; and the remaining gain of $10,000 will be taxed 
at 28 percent.
    Example 9.--Assume an individual has taxable income of 
$80,000, with a net capital gain of $50,000, an unrecaptured 
section 1250 gain of $10,000 and a 28-percent rate gain of 
$10,000, resulting in an adjusted net capital gain of $30,000. 
$40,000 will be taxed at the regular tax rates (i.e., 15 
percent); the $30,000 adjusted net capital gain will be taxed 
at 20 percent; and the remaining $10,000 will be taxed at 28 
percent. No amount will be taxed at 25 percent.\78\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \78\ The amount taxed at 25 percent is determined by starting with 
the $10,000 unrecaptured section 1250 gain and subtracting $10,000, 
which is the excess of $90,000 (i.e., the sum of the amount taxed at 
the regular rates ($40,000) plus the net capital gain ($50,000)) over 
$80,000 (i.e., the taxable income). This results in no amount taxed at 
25 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Example 10.--Assume an individual has taxable income of 
$60,000, with a net capital gain of $50,000, an unrecaptured 
section 1250 gain of $10,000, and a 28-percent rate gain of 
$10,000, resulting in an adjusted net capital gain of $30,000. 
$30,000 will be taxed at the regular tax rates (i.e., 15 
percent); $10,000 of the adjusted net capital gain will be 
taxed at 10 percent; and $20,000 of the adjusted net capital 
gain will be taxed at 20 percent.
    Example 11.--Assume an individual has taxable income of 
$40,000, with a net capital gain of $50,000, an unrecaptured 
section 1250 gain of $10,000, and a 28-percent rate gain of 
$10,000, resulting in an adjusted net capital gain of $30,000. 
$10,000 will be taxed at the regular tax rates (i.e., 15 
percent) and the $30,000 adjusted net capital gain will be 
taxed at 10 percent.
    Example 12.--Assume an individual has taxable income of 
$150,000, with an unrecaptured section 1250 gain of $120,000, 
and a loss of $20,000 from the sale of a capital asset held 
more than 18 months, resulting in a net capital gain of 
$100,000 and no adjusted net capital gain. $50,000 will be 
taxed at the regular tax rates (i.e., $40,000 at 15 percent and 
$10,000 at 28 percent); and $100,000 will be taxed at 25 
percent.
    Example 13.--Assume an individual has taxable income of 
$150,000, with an unrecaptured section 1250 gain of $90,000, a 
28-percent rate gain of $30,000, and a loss of $20,000 from the 
sale of a capital asset held more than 18 months, resulting in 
a net capital gain of $100,000 and no adjusted net capital 
gain. $50,000 will be taxed at the regular tax rates (i.e., 
$40,000 at 15 percent and $10,000 at 28 percent); the $90,000 
unrecaptured section 1250 gain will be taxed at 25 percent and 
the remaining gain of $10,000 will be taxed at 28 percent.
    Example 14.--Assume an individual has taxable income of 
$150,000, with an unrecaptured section 1250 gain of $110,000, a 
28-percent rate gain of $10,000, and a loss of $20,000 from the 
sale of a capital asset held more than 18 months, resulting in 
a net capital gain of $100,000 and no adjusted net capital 
gain. $50,000 will be taxed at the regular tax rates (i.e., 
$40,000 at 15 percent and $10,000 at 28 percent); and $100,000 
(the lesser of unrecaptured section 1250 gain or net capital 
gain) will be taxed at 25 percent.
    For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2000, any 
gain from the sale or exchange of property held more than 5 
years which would otherwise be taxed at the 10-percent rate 
instead will be taxed at an 8-percent rate.
    Any gain from the sale or exchange of property held more 
than 5 years and the holding period for which begins after 
December 31, 2000, which would otherwise be taxed at a 20-
percent rate will be taxed at an 18-percent rate. For purposes 
of determining whether the holding period begins after December 
31, 2000, the holding period of any property acquired pursuant 
to the exercise of an option (or other right or obligation) 
shall include the period such option (or other right or 
obligation) was held. Thus, the sale or exchange of property 
acquired after December 31, 2000, pursuant to the exercise of 
an option acquired before January 1, 2001, will not qualify for 
the 18-percent rate.\79\ In addition, a taxpayer holding a 
capital asset or property used in the trade or business on 
January 1, 2001, may elect to treat the asset as having been 
sold on such date for an amount equal to its fair market value, 
and having been reacquired for an amount equal to such value. 
If the election is made, the asset will be eligible for the 18-
percent rate if sold after being held for more than 5 years 
after December 31, 2000. Any gain resulting from the election 
will be treated as received on the date of the deemed sale. Any 
loss will not be allowed (and the disallowed loss will not be 
added to the basis of the asset). A taxpayer may make the 
election with respect to some assets and not with respect to 
others.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \79\ The option rule applies solely for purposes of determining 
whether the property meets the requirement that the holding period 
began on or after January 1, 2001, in order to determine whether the 
gain qualifies for the 18-percent maximum rate. It does not apply for 
determining the holding period for any other purpose of the Code, 
including whether the 5-year holding period is met.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Act \80\ contains several conforming amendments to 
coordinate the multiple holding periods with other provisions 
of the Code. Inherited property (section 1223(11) and (12)) and 
certain patents (section 1235) will be deemed to have a holding 
period of more than 18 months, allowing the lower 10- and 20-
percent rates to apply. The Act treats the long-term capital 
gain or loss on a section 1256 contract as attributable to 
property held more than 18 months. Rules similar to the short 
sale holding period rules of section 1233(b) and (d) and the 
holding period rules of section 1092(f) will apply where the 
applicable property is held more than one year but not more 
than 18 months. Amounts treated as ordinary income by reason of 
section 1231(c) will be allocated among categories of net 
section 1231 gain in accordance with IRS forms or 
regulations.\81\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \80\ These provisions were not contained in the 1997 Act itself but 
are contained the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, Title VI of 
H.R. 2676 as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
    \81\ See IRS Notice 97-59 (Oct. 27, 1997) for rules relating to 
recharacterizing section 1231 gains under section 1231(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Act allows the Treasury Department to prescribe 
regulations applying these capital gains rates to pass-through 
entities, i.e., regulated investment companies, real estate 
investment trusts, S corporations, partnerships, estates, 
trusts, common trust funds, foreign investment companies to 
which section 1247 applies, and qualified electing funds (as 
defined in section 1295).
    The Act also gives the Treasury Department regulatory 
authority to modify the application of section 904(b)(2) and 
(3) to the extent necessary to properly reflect capital gain 
rate differentials and the computation of net capital gain. 
These regulations may take into account that the net capital 
gain includes gains and losses in different categories of 
income under section 904(d).
    These maximum capital gain rates also apply for purposes of 
computing the alternative minimum tax.\82\ In addition, the 
minimum tax preference (under section 57(a)(7)) for the 
excluded portion of the gain from certain small business stock 
is reduced to 42 percent, resulting in an inclusion for minimum 
tax purposes of 71 percent (50 percent under the regular tax 
plus an additional 21 percent) of the gain from the sale of 
small business stock. Thus, the maximum rate of tax on this 
gain under the minimum tax will be 19.88 percent (.71 of 28 
percent). For gains which, but for section 1202, would be taxed 
at an 18-percent rate beginning in 2006, the minimum tax 
preference will be 28 percent, resulting in a minimum tax rate 
of 17.92 percent.\83\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \82\ The amount of net capital gain, adjusted net capital gain, 
unrecaptured section 1250 gain and 28-percent rate gain will be 
computed with any adjustments (such as differences in adjusted bases) 
used in computing alternative minimum taxable income.
    \83\ See Title VI (sec. 605(d)(3)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical 
Corrections Act of 1997 as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to taxable years ending after May 6, 
1997.
    Long-term capital gains and losses properly taken into 
account before May 7, 1997, are taken into account in computing 
28-percent rate gain for the taxable year. This generally has 
the effect of applying the lower rates to capital assets sold 
or exchanged (or installment payments received) on or after May 
7, 1997, and subjecting the earlier portion of the capital gain 
to the prior-law maximum rate of 28 percent. In the case of 
gain taken into account by a pass-through entity, the date 
taken into account by the entity is the appropriate date for 
applying this rule.
    The 18-month holding period is effective for amounts 
properly taken into account after July 28, 1997. Thus, amounts 
properly taken into account after May 6, 1997, and before July 
29, 1997, with respect to property (other than collectibles) 
held more than 1 year but not more than 18 months will be 
eligible for the 10- and 20-percent rates (as well as the 25-
percent rate in the case of the disposition of section 1250 
property).

                             Revenue Effect

    The revenue effect of this provision is included in item 5, 
below.

2. Exclusion of gain on sale of principal residence (sec. 312 of the 
        Act and secs. 121 and 1034 of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Under prior law, no gain was recognized on the sale of a 
principal residence if a new residence at least equal in cost 
to the sales price of the old residence was purchased and used 
by the taxpayer as his or her principal residence within a 
specified period of time (sec. 1034). This replacement period 
generally began two years before and ended two years after the 
date of sale of the old residence. The basis of the replacement 
residence was reduced by the amount of any gain not recognized 
on the sale of the old residence by reason of this gain 
rollover rule.
    Also, under prior law, in general, an individual, on a one-
time basis, could exclude from gross income up to $125,000 of 
gain from the sale or exchange of a principal residence if the 
taxpayer (1) had attained age 55 before the sale, and (2) had 
owned the property and used it as a principal residence for 
three or more of the five years preceding the sale (old sec. 
121).

                           Reasons for Change

    Calculating capital gain from the sale of a principal 
residence was among the most complex tasks faced by a typical 
taxpayer. Many taxpayers buy and sell a number of homes over 
the course of a lifetime, and are generally not certain of how 
much housing appreciation they can expect. Thus, even though 
most homeowners never paid any income tax on the capital gain 
on their principal residences, as a result of the rollover 
provisions and the $125,000 one-time exclusion under prior law, 
detailed records of transactions and expenditures on home 
improvements had to be kept, in most cases, for many decades. 
To claim the exclusion, many taxpayers had to determine the 
basis of each home they owned, and appropriately adjust the 
basis of their current home to reflect any untaxed gains from 
previous housing transactions. This determination could involve 
augmenting the original cost basis of each home by expenditures 
on improvements. In addition to the record-keeping burden this 
created, taxpayers faced the difficult task of drawing a 
distinction between improvements that add to basis, and repairs 
that do not. The failure to account accurately for all 
improvements could lead to errors in the calculation of capital 
gains, and hence to an under- or over-payment of the capital 
gains on principal residences. By excluding from taxation 
capital gains on principal residences below a relatively high 
threshold, few taxpayers will have to refer to records in 
determining income tax consequences of transactions related to 
their house.
    To have postponed the entire capital gain from the sale of 
a principal residence under prior law, the purchase price of a 
new home must have been greater than the sales price of the old 
home. This provision of prior law encouraged some taxpayers to 
purchase larger and more expensive houses than they otherwise 
would in order to avoid a tax liability, particularly those who 
move from areas where housing costs are high to lower-cost 
areas. This promoted an inefficient use of taxpayer's financial 
resources.
    Prior law also may have discouraged some older taxpayers 
from selling their homes. Taxpayers who would have realized a 
capital gain in excess of $125,000 if they sold their home and 
taxpayers who had already used the exclusion may have chosen to 
stay in their homes even though the home no longer suited their 
needs. By raising the $125,000 limit and by allowing multiple 
exclusions, this constraint to the mobility of the elderly was 
removed.
    While most homeowners do not pay capital gains tax when 
selling their homes, prior law created certain tax traps for 
the unwary that resulted in significant capital gains taxes or 
loss of the benefits of the prior-law exclusion. For example, 
an individual was not eligible for the one-time capital gains 
exclusion if the exclusion was previously utilized by the 
individual's spouse. This restriction had the unintended effect 
of penalizing individuals who married someone who had already 
taken the exclusion. Households that moved from a high housing-
cost area to a low housing-cost area may have incurred an 
unexpected capital gains tax liability. Divorcing couples may 
have incurred substantial capital gains taxes if they did not 
carefully plan their house ownership and sale decisions.

                        Explanation of Provision

     Under the Act, a taxpayer generally is able to exclude up 
to $250,000 ($500,000 if married filing a joint return) of gain 
realized on the sale or exchange of a principal residence. The 
exclusion is allowed each time a taxpayer selling or exchanging 
a principal residence meets the eligibility requirements, but 
generally no more frequently than once every two years. The Act 
provides that gain would be recognized to the extent of any 
depreciation allowable with respect to the rental or business 
use of such principal residence for periods after May 6, 1997.
     To be eligible for the exclusion, a taxpayer must have 
owned the residence and occupied it as a principal residence 
for at least two of the five years prior to the sale or 
exchange. A taxpayer who fails to meet these requirements by 
reason of a change of place of employment, health, or other 
unforseen circumstances is able to exclude the fraction of the 
$250,000 ($500,000 if married filing a joint return) equal to 
the fraction of two years that these requirements are met.\84\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \84\ The partial exclusion is a fraction of the maximum exclusion 
(i.e., $250,000 or $500,000 if married filing a joint return), not the 
realized gain on the sale or exchange. A technical correction may be 
needed so that the statute reflects this intent. See Title IV (sec. 
605(e)) of H.R. 2676, The Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as 
passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     In the case of joint filers not sharing a principal 
residence, an exclusion of $250,000 is available on a 
qualifying sale or exchange of the principal residence of one 
of the spouses. Similarly, if a single taxpayer who is 
otherwise eligible for an exclusion marries someone who has 
used the exclusion within the two years prior to the marriage, 
the Act would allow the newly married taxpayer a maximum 
exclusion of $250,000. Once both spouses satisfy the 
eligibility rules and two years have passed since the last 
exclusion was allowed to either of them, the taxpayers may 
exclude up to $500,000 of gain on their joint return.
     Under the Act, the gain from the sale or exchange of the 
remainder interest in the taxpayer's principal residence may 
qualify for the otherwise allowable exclusion.
     The provision limiting the exclusion to only one sale 
every two years by the taxpayer does not prevent a husband and 
wife filing a joint return from each excluding up to $250,000 
of gain from the sale or exchange of each spouse's principal 
residence provided that each spouse would be permitted to 
exclude up to $250,000 of gain if they filed separate returns.

                             Effective Date

     The provision is available for all sales or exchanges of a 
principal residence occurring after May 6, 1997, and replaces 
the present-law rollover and one-time exclusion provisions 
applicable to principal residences.
     A taxpayer may elect to apply present law (rather than the 
new exclusion) to a sale or exchange (1) made on or before the 
date of enactment of the Act,\85\ (2) made after the date of 
enactment pursuant to a binding contract in effect on such date 
or (3) where the replacement residence was acquired on or 
before the date of enactment (or pursuant to a binding contract 
in effect of the date of enactment) and the rollover provision 
would apply. If a taxpayer acquired his or her current 
residence in a rollover transaction, periods of ownership and 
use of the prior residence would be taken into account in 
determining ownership and use of the current residence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \85\ A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects Congressional intent that the prior-law election be available 
to sales or exchanges on the date of enactment. See Title VI (sec. 
605(e)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as 
passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Revenue Effect

     The revenue effect of this provision is included in item 
5, below.

3. Exception from real estate reporting requirements for certain sales 
        of principal residences (secs. 312(c) and 701 of the Act and 
        secs. 6045 and 1400C(f) of the Code)

                          Present and Prior Law

    Persons who close real estate transactions are required to 
file information returns with the IRS. These returns, filed on 
Form 1099S, are required to show the name and address of the 
seller of the real estate, details with regard to the gross 
proceeds of the sale, and the portion of any real property tax 
which is treated as a tax imposed on the purchaser. Code 
section 6045(e) also provides for reporting where any financing 
of the seller was federally-subsidized indebtedness, but 
Treasury regulations do not currently require the reporting of 
this information.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that information returns should not 
generally be required on sales of personal residences where 
there is no possibility of the gain being taxable and 
information regarding the transaction is not otherwise required 
to be reported.

                        Explanation of Provision

     The Act excludes most sales of personal residences with a 
gross sales price of $500,000 or less ($250,000 or less in the 
case of a seller who is not married) from the real estate 
transaction reporting requirement. The Secretary of the 
Treasury has the discretion to increase these dollar thresholds 
if the Secretary determines that such an increase will not 
materially reduce revenues to the Treasury. In order to be 
eligible for this exclusion, the person who would otherwise be 
required to file the information return must obtain written 
assurances from the seller of the real estate, in a form 
acceptable to the Secretary of the Treasury, that any gain will 
be exempt from Federal income tax under section 121(a).
     The Secretary of the Treasury is authorized under present 
and prior law to require information as to whether there is 
federally subsidized mortgage financing assistance with respect 
to mortgages on residences. However, the Secretary does not at 
this time require such information to be provided in connection 
with the reporting of real estate transactions under section 
6045(e). Should the Secretary require such reporting in the 
future, the exception to the real estate transaction reporting 
requirement created by this provision will not apply unless the 
person otherwise required to file the information return also 
obtains assurances that there is no such assistance with 
respect to the mortgage on the residence.
     The Act separately establishes a credit of $5,000 for 
first-time home buyers in the District of Columbia. The 
Congress anticipates that the Secretary of the Treasury will 
require such information as is necessary to verify eligibility 
for the D.C. first-time home buyer credit. In order to allow 
such information to be collected in an efficient manner, the 
exclusion from the real estate transaction reporting 
requirement does not apply to sales of homes that are eligible 
for this credit, if the Secretary requires such information 
reporting.

                             Effective Date

     The provision was effective with regard to sales or 
exchanges occurring after the date of enactment (August 5, 
1997).

                             Revenue Effect

     The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by a negligible amount.

4. Rollover of gain from sale of certain small business stock (sec. 313 
        of the Act and sec. 1045 of the Code)

                          Present and Prior Law

     The Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1993 provided 
individuals a 50-percent exclusion for the sale of certain 
small business stock acquired at original issue and held for at 
least five years. In order to qualify as a small business, when 
the stock is issued, the gross assets of the corporation may 
not exceed $50 million. The corporation also must meet an 
active trade or business requirement.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress hoped that by providing deferral of gain 
recognition for funds reinvested in qualifying small businesses 
that investors will make more capital available to the new, 
small businesses that are important to the long term growth of 
the economy.

                        Explanation of Provision

     The Act allows an individual \86\ to roll over gain from 
the sale or exchange of small business stock held more than six 
months where the taxpayer uses the proceeds to purchase other 
qualifying small business stock within 60 days of the sale of 
the original stock. For purposes of this provision, the 
replacement stock must meet the active business requirement of 
section 1202 for the six-month period following the purchase. 
The holding period of the replacement stock generally will 
include the holding period of the stock sold, except that the 
replacement stock itself must be held for more than six months 
to do another tax-free rollover.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \86\ Title VI (sec. 605(f)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical 
Corrections Act of 1997, as passed the House on November 5, 1997, 
provides that a partnership or S corporation can roll over gain from 
small business stock held more than six months if (and only if) all the 
interests in the partnership or S corporation are held by individuals 
or estates at all times during the taxable year. The term ``estate'' is 
intended to include both the estate of a decedent and the estate of an 
individual in bankruptcy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

     The provision applies to stock sold after August 5, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

     The revenue effect of this provision is included in item 
5, below.

5. Computation of alternative capital gains tax for corporations (sec. 
        314 of the Act and sec. 1201 of the Code)

                                Prior Law

     Under prior law, the Code provided that if the regular 
corporate tax rate exceeded 35 percent, the corporate tax could 
not exceed a tax computed at the regular tax rates on the 
taxable income reduced by the net capital gain plus a tax of 35 
percent of the net capital gain. Because the regular corporate 
tax rates do not exceed 35 percent, this provision has no 
effect under the present and prior law rate structure.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress wished to provide a more appropriate formula 
for taxing the net capital gain of a corporation with an 
ordinary loss, in the event that the alternative corporate 
capital gain rate becomes effective at some future time.

                        Explanation of Provision

     The Act provides that the amount taxed at the maximum 
corporate capital gain rate (under section 1201(a)(2)) may not 
exceed the amount of a corporation's taxable income. Because 
the section 1201 alternative rate does not apply under the 
current rate structure, this change will have no effect without 
further amendment to the Code.

                             Effective Date

     The provision is effective for taxable years ending after 
December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

     The capital gains provisions for items 1, 2, 4 and 5, 
above, are estimated to increase Federal fiscal year budget 
receipts in 1997 by $1,254 million, in 1998 by $6,371 million, 
and in 1999 by $171 million and to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts in 2000 by $2,954 million, in 2001 by $2,934 
million, in 2002 by $1,785 million, in 2003 by $3,742 million, 
in 2004 by $3,981 million, in 2005 by $4,179 million, in 2006 
by $4,424 million, and in 2007 by $4,958 million.
              TITLE IV. ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX PROVISIONS

 A. Repeal Alternative Minimum Tax for Small Businesses and Modify the 
Depreciation Adjustment (secs. 401 and 402 of the Act and secs. 55 and 
                            56 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

In general

     Present law imposes a minimum tax on an individual or a 
corporation to the extent the taxpayer's minimum tax liability 
exceeds its regular tax liability. The individual minimum tax 
is imposed at rates of 26 and 28 percent on alternative minimum 
taxable income in excess of a phased-out exemption amount; the 
corporate minimum tax is imposed at a rate of 20 percent on 
alternative minimum taxable income in excess of a phased-out 
$40,000 exemption amount. Alternative minimum taxable income 
(``AMTI'') is the taxpayer's taxable income increased by 
certain preference items and adjusted by determining the tax 
treatment of certain items in a manner that negates the 
deferral of income resulting from the regular tax treatment of 
those items. In the case of a corporation, in addition to the 
regular set of adjustments and preferences, there is a second 
set of adjustments known as the ``adjusted current earnings'' 
adjustment.
     The most significant alternative minimum tax adjustment of 
businesses relates to depreciation. Under prior law, in 
computing AMTI, depreciation on property placed in service 
after 1986 was computed by using the class lives prescribed by 
the alternative depreciation system of section 168(g) and 
either (1) the straight-line method in the case of property 
subject to the straight-line method under the regular tax or 
(2) the 150-percent declining balance method in the case of 
other property. For regular tax purposes, depreciation on 
tangible personal property generally is computed using shorter 
recovery periods and more accelerated methods than are allowed 
for alternative minimum tax purposes.

                           Reasons for Change

     The Congress believed that the alternative minimum tax 
inhibits capital formation and business enterprise. Therefore, 
the Act modified the depreciation adjustment of the alternative 
minimum tax (the most significant business-related adjustment 
of the alternative minimum tax) with respect to new 
investments. In addition, the Congress believed that the 
alternative minimum tax is administratively complex. Therefore, 
the Act repealed the alternative minimum tax for small 
corporations.

                        Explanation of Provision

Repeal of the alternative minimum tax for small corporations

    The alternative minimum tax is repealed for small 
corporations for taxable years beginning after December 31, 
1997. A corporation that had average gross receipts of less 
than $5 million for the three-year period beginning after 
December 31, 1993,\87\ is a small corporation for its first 
taxable year beginning after December 31, 1997. A corporation 
that meets the $5 million gross receipts test will continue to 
be treated as a small corporation exempt from the alternative 
minimum tax so long as its average gross receipts do not exceed 
$7.5 million. If a corporation no longer qualifies as a small 
corporation, it will become subject to the corporate 
alternative minimum tax only with respect to adjustments and 
preferences relating to investments made, and transactions 
entered into, in taxable years beginning with the first taxable 
year the corporation does not so qualify.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \87\ Legislative history erroneously refers to the three-year 
period beginning after December 31, 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition, the alternative minimum tax credit allowable 
to a small corporation is limited to the amount by which the 
corporation's regular tax liability (reduced by other credits) 
exceeds 25 percent of the excess (if any) of the corporation's 
regular tax (reduced by other credits) over $25,000.

Modification to the depreciation adjustment

    For property (including pollution control facilities) 
placed in service after December 31, 1998, the Act conforms the 
recovery periods (but not the methods) used for purposes of the 
alternative minimum tax depreciation adjustment to the recovery 
periods used for purposes of the regular tax under present law.

                             Effective Date

    Except as provided above, the provision is effective for 
taxable years beginning after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision that exempts small corporations from the 
alternative minimum tax is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal 
year budget receipts by $97 million in 1998, $171 million in 
1999, $131 million in 2000, $100 million in 2001, $77 million 
in 2002, $59 million in 2003, $45 million in 2004, $34 million 
in 2005, $26 million in 2006, and $20 million in 2007. The 
provision that modifies the depreciation adjustment is 
estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year budget receipts $580 
million in 1999, $1,653 million in 2000, $2,230 million in 
2001, $2,358 million in 2002, $2,561 million in 2003, $2,622 
million in 2004, $2,350 million in 2005, $2,044 million in 
2006, and $1,920 million in 2007.

 B. Repeal AMT Installment Method Adjustment for Farmers (sec. 403 of 
                    the Act and sec. 56 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The installment method allows gain on the sale of property 
to be recognized as payments are received. Under the regular 
tax, dealers in personal property are not allowed to defer the 
recognition of income by use of the installment method on the 
installment sale of such property. For this purpose, dealer 
dispositions do not include sales of any property used or 
produced in the trade or business of farming. For alternative 
minimum tax purposes, the installment method is not available 
with respect to the disposition of any property that is the 
stock in trade of the taxpayer or any other property of a kind 
which would be properly included in the inventory of the 
taxpayer if held at year end, or property held by the taxpayer 
primarily for sale to customers. No explicit exception is 
provided for installment sales of farm property under the 
alternative minimum tax.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress understood that the Internal Revenue Service 
(``IRS'') took the position that the installment method may not 
be used for sales of property produced on a farm for 
alternative minimum tax purposes. The Congress further 
understood that the IRS had announced that it generally will 
not enforce this position for taxable years beginning before 
January 1, 1997, so long as the farmer changes its method of 
accounting for installment sales for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1996.\88\ The Congress believed that this 
issue should be clarified in favor of the farmer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \88\ Notice 97-13, January 28, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act repeals the minimum tax adjustment relating to the 
installment method of accounting. Thus, sales reported under 
the installment method for regular tax purposes may be reported 
under such method for alternative minimum tax purposes as well.

                             Effective Date

    The provision generally is effective for dispositions in 
taxable years beginning after December 31, 1987.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $8 million in 1997, $157 million in 1998, 
$158 million in 1999, $167 million in 2000, $164 million in 
2001, $157 million in 2002, and $148 million in 2003; and to 
increase Federal fiscal year budget receipts by $22 million in 
2004, $22 million in 2005, $21 million in 2006, and $21 million 
in 2007.
     TITLE V. ESTATE, GIFT, AND GENERATION-SKIPPING TAX PROVISIONS

                   A. Estate and Gift Tax Provisions

1. Increase in estate and gift tax unified credit; indexing of certain 
        other provisions (sec. 501 of the Act and secs. 2010, 2032A, 
        2503, 2631, and 6601(j) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

In general

    A gift tax is imposed on lifetime transfers by gift and an 
estate tax is imposed on transfers at death. Since 1976, the 
gift tax and the estate tax have been unified so that a single 
graduated rate schedule applies to cumulative taxable transfers 
made by a taxpayer during his or her lifetime and at death.\89\ 
Under prior law, a unified credit of $192,800 was provided 
against the estate and gift tax, which effectively exempted the 
first $600,000 in cumulative taxable transfers from tax (sec. 
2010). For transfers in excess of $600,000, estate and gift tax 
rates began at 37 percent and reached 55 percent on cumulative 
taxable transfers over $3 million (sec. 2001(c)). In addition, 
a 5-percent surtax was imposed upon cumulative taxable 
transfers between $10 million and $21,040,000, to phase out the 
benefits of the graduated rates and the unified credit (sec. 
2001(c)(2)).\90\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \89\ Prior to 1977, separate tax rate schedules applied to the gift 
tax and the estate tax.
    \90\ Thus, if a taxpayer made cumulative taxable transfers equaling 
$21,040,000 or more, his or her average transfer tax rate was 55 
percent. The phaseout has the effect of creating a 60-percent marginal 
transfer tax rate on transfers in the phaseout range.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Annual exclusion for gifts

    A taxpayer could exclude $10,000 of gifts of present 
interests in property made by an individual ($20,000 per 
married couple) to each donee during a calendar year (sec. 
2503).

Special use valuation

    An executor may elect for estate tax purposes to value 
certain qualified real property used in farming or a closely-
held trade or business at its current use value, rather than 
its ``highest and best use'' value (sec. 2032A). The maximum 
reduction in value under such an election was $750,000.

Generation-skipping transfer (``GST'') tax

    An individual was allowed an exemption from the GST tax of 
up to $1,000,000 for generation-skipping transfers made during 
life or at death (sec. 2631).

Installment payment of estate tax

    An executor may elect to pay the Federal estate tax 
attributable to an interest in a closely held business in 
installments over, at most, a 14-year period (sec. 6166). The 
tax on the first $1,000,000 in value of a closely-held business 
was eligible for a special 4-percent interest rate (sec. 
6601(j)).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that increasing the amount of the 
estate and gift tax unified credit would encourage saving, 
promote capital formation and entrepreneurial activity, and 
help to preserve existing family-owned farms and businesses. 
The Congress further believed that increasing the unified 
credit exemption equivalent amount over time, and annually 
indexing for inflation the annual exclusion for gifts, the 
ceiling on special use valuation, the generation-skipping 
transfer tax exemption, and the ceiling on the value of a 
closely-held business eligible for the special low interest 
rate, was appropriate to reduce the transfer tax consequences 
that result from increases in asset value attributable solely 
to inflation.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act increases the present-law unified credit beginning 
in 1998, from an effective exemption of $600,000 to an 
effective exemption of $1,000,000 in 2006. The increase in the 
effective exemption is phased in according to the following 
schedule: the effective exemption is $625,000 for decedents 
dying and gifts made in 1998; $650,000 in 1999; $675,000 in 
2000 and 2001; $700,000 in 2002 and 2003; $850,000 in 2004; 
$950,000 in 2005; and $1 million in 2006 and thereafter. The 
effective exemption amount is not indexed for inflation.
    The Act also provides that, after 1998, the $10,000 annual 
exclusion for gifts, the $750,000 ceiling on special use 
valuation, the $1,000,000 generation-skipping transfer tax 
exemption,\91\ and the $1,000,000 ceiling on the value of a 
closely-held business eligible for the special low interest 
rate (as modified below), are indexed annually for inflation 
occurring after 1997. Indexing of the annual exclusion is 
rounded to the next lowest multiple of $1,000 and indexing of 
the other amounts is rounded to the next lowest multiple of 
$10,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \91\ A technical correction may be necessary to clarify that 
indexing of the $1,000,000 generation-skipping transfer tax exemption 
is effective with respect to all generation-skipping transfers (i.e., 
direct skips, taxable terminations, and taxable distributions) made 
after 1998. See Title VI (sec. 606(a)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical 
Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Conforming amendments to reflect the increased unified 
credit are made (1) to the 5-percent surtax to conform the 
phase out of the increased unified credit and graduated 
rates,\92\ (2) to the general filing requirements for an estate 
tax return under section 6018(a), and (3) to the amount of the 
unified credit allowed under section 2102(c)(3) with respect to 
nonresident aliens with U.S. situs property who are residents 
of certain treaty countries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \92\ A technical correction may be necessary to properly phase out 
the benefits of the unified credit and the graduated rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The increases in the unified credit are effective for 
decedents dying, and gifts made, after December 31, 1997. 
Indexing of the annual exclusion for gifts, the ceiling on 
special use valuation, the generation-skipping transfer tax 
exemption, and the ceiling on the value of a closely-held 
business eligible for the special low interest rate is 
effective for decedents dying, and gifts made, after December 
31, 1998.

                             Revenue Effect

    This provision, in combination with the provision described 
in item 2., below, is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $843 million in 1999, $1,259 million in 
2000, $1,816 million in 2001, $2,013 million in 2002, $2,596 
million in 2003, $2,997 million in 2004, $5,656 million in 
2005, $7,279 million in 2006, and $8,638 million in 2007.

2. Estate tax exclusion for qualified family-owned businesses (sec. 502 
        of the Act and new sec. 2033A of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under prior law, there were no special estate tax rules for 
qualified family-owned businesses. All taxpayers were allowed a 
unified credit in computing the taxpayer's estate and gift tax, 
which effectively exempted a total of $600,000 in cumulative 
taxable transfers from the estate and gift tax (sec. 2010). An 
executor also could elect, under section 2032A, to value 
certain qualified real property used in farming or another 
qualifying closely-held trade or business at its current use 
value, rather than its highest and best use value (up to a 
maximum reduction of $750,000). In addition, an executor may 
elect to pay the Federal estate tax attributable to a qualified 
closely-held business in installments over, at most, a 14-year 
period (sec. 6166). The tax attributable to the first 
$1,000,000 in value of a closely-held business was eligible for 
a special 4-percent interest rate (sec. 6601(j)).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that a reduction in estate taxes for 
qualified family-owned businesses would protect and preserve 
family farms and other family-owned enterprises, and prevent 
the liquidation of such enterprises in order to pay estate 
taxes. The Congress further believed that the protection of 
family enterprises would preserve jobs and strengthen the 
communities in which such enterprises are located.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act allows an executor to elect special estate tax 
treatment for qualified ``family-owned business interests'' if 
such interests comprise more than 50 percent of a decedent's 
estate and certain other requirements are met. The exclusion 
for family-owned business interests may be taken only to the 
extent that the exclusion for family-owned business interests, 
plus the amount effectively exempted by the unified credit, 
does not exceed $1.3 million.\93\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \93\ A technical correction may be necessary to revise the rules 
correlating the increase in the unified credit with a decrease in the 
family-owned business exclusion to ensure that there is neither an 
increase nor a decrease in the total estate tax on estates holding 
family-owned businesses as increases in the unified credit are phased 
in. See Title VI (sec. 606(b)(1)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical 
Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997. A 
further modification may be necessary to reflect Congressional intent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This new exclusion for qualified family-owned business 
interests is provided in addition to the unified credit (which 
currently effectively exempts $600,000 of taxable transfers 
from the estate and gift tax, and will be increased to an 
effective exemption of $1,000,000 of taxable transfers under 
other provisions of the Act), the special-use provisions of 
section 2032A (which permit a qualifying farm or other closely-
held business in a decedent's estate to be valued at the value 
in its current use), and the provisions of section 6166 (which 
provide for the installment payment of estate taxes 
attributable to closely held businesses).

Qualified family-owned business interests

    For purposes of the provision, a qualified family-owned 
business interest is defined as any interest in a trade or 
business (regardless of the form in which it is held) with a 
principal place of business in the United States if ownership 
of the trade or business is held at least 50 percent by one 
family, 70 percent by two families, or 90 percent by three 
families, as long as the decedent's family owns at least 30 
percent of the trade or business. Under the provision, members 
of an individual's family are defined using the same definition 
as is used for the special-use valuation rules of section 
2032A, and thus include (1) the individual's spouse, (2) the 
individual's ancestors, (3) lineal descendants of the 
individual, of the individual's spouse, or of the individual's 
parents, and (4) the spouses of any such lineal descendants. 
For purposes of applying the ownership tests in the case of a 
corporation, the decedent and members of the decedent's family 
are required to own the requisite percentage of the total 
combined voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote 
and the requisite percentage of the total value of all shares 
of all classes of stock of the corporation. In the case of a 
partnership, the decedent and members of the decedent's family 
are required to own the requisite percentage of the capital 
interest, and the requisite percentage of the profits interest, 
in the partnership.
    In the case of a trade or business that owns an interest in 
another trade or business (i.e., ``tiered entities''), special 
look-through rules apply. Each trade or business owned 
(directly or indirectly) by the decedent and members of the 
decedent's family is separately tested to determine whether 
that trade or business meets the requirements of a qualified 
family-owned business interest. In applying these tests, any 
interest that a trade or business owns in another trade or 
business is disregarded in determining whether the first trade 
or business is a qualified family-owned business interest. The 
value of any qualified family-owned business interest held by 
an entity is treated as being proportionately owned by or for 
the entity's partners, shareholders, or beneficiaries. In the 
case of a multi-tiered entity, such rules are sequentially 
applied to look through each separate tier of the entity.
    For example, if a holding company owns interests in two 
other companies, each of the three entities will be separately 
tested under the qualified family-owned business interest 
rules. In determining whether the holding company is a 
qualified family-owned business interest, its ownership 
interest in the other two companies is disregarded. Even if the 
holding company itself does not qualify as a family-owned 
business interest, the other two companies still may qualify if 
the direct and indirect interests held by the decedent and his 
or her family members satisfy the requisite ownership 
percentages and other requirements of a qualified family-owned 
business interest. If either (or both) of the lower-tier 
entities qualify, the value of the qualified family-owned 
business interests owned by the holding company are treated as 
proportionately owned by the holding company's shareholders.
    An interest in a trade or business does not qualify if the 
business's (or a related entity's) stock or securities were 
publicly-traded at any time within three years of the 
decedent's death. An interest in a trade or business also does 
not qualify if more than 35 percent of the adjusted ordinary 
gross income of the business for the year of the decedent's 
death was personal holding company income (as defined in 
section 543). This personal holding company restriction does 
not apply to banks or domestic building and loan associations.
    The value of a trade or business qualifying as a family-
owned business interest is reduced to the extent the business 
holds passive assets or excess cash or marketable securities. 
Under the provision, the value of qualified family-owned 
business interests does not include any cash or marketable 
securities in excess of the reasonably expected day-to-day 
working capital needs of the trade or business. For this 
purpose, it is intended that day-to-day working capital needs 
be determined based on a historical average of the business's 
working capital needs in the past, using an analysis similar to 
that set forth in Bardahl Mfg. Corp., 24 T.C.M. 1030 (1965). It 
is further intended that accumulations for capital acquisitions 
not be considered ``working capital'' for this purpose. The 
value of the qualified family-owned business interests also 
does not include certain other passive assets. For this 
purpose, passive assets include any assets that: (1) produce 
dividends, interest, rents, royalties, annuities and certain 
other types of passive income (as described in sec. 543(a)); 
(2) are an interest in a trust, partnership or REMIC (as 
described in sec. 954(c)(1)(B)(ii)); (3) produce no income (as 
described in sec. 954(c)(1)(B)(iii)); (4) give rise to income 
from commodities transactions or foreign currency gains (as 
described in sec. 954(c)(1)(C) and (D)); (5) produce income 
equivalent to interest (as described in sec. 954(c)(1)(E)); or 
(6) produce income from notional principal contracts or 
payments in lieu of dividends (as described in new secs. 
954(c)(1)(F) and (G), added elsewhere in the Act). In the case 
of a regular dealer in property, such property is not 
considered to produce passive income under these rules, and 
thus, is not considered to be a passive asset.

Qualifying estates

    A decedent's estate qualifies for the special treatment 
only if the decedent was a U.S. citizen or resident at the time 
of death, and the aggregate value of the decedent's qualified 
family-owned business interests that are passed to qualified 
heirs exceeds 50 percent of the decedent's adjusted gross 
estate (the ``50-percent liquidity test''). For this purpose, 
qualified heirs include any individual who has been actively 
employed by the trade or business for at least 10 years prior 
to the date of the decedent's death, and members of the 
decedent's family. If a qualified heir is not a citizen of the 
United States, any qualified family-owned business interest 
acquired by that heir must be held in a trust meeting 
requirements similar to those imposed on qualified domestic 
trusts (under present-law sec. 2056A(a)), or through certain 
other security arrangements that meet the satisfaction of the 
Treasury Secretary. The 50-percent liquidity test generally is 
applied by adding all transfers of qualified family-owned 
business interests made by the decedent to qualified heirs at 
the time of the decedent's death, plus certain lifetime gifts 
of qualified family-owned business interests made to members of 
the decedent's family,\94\ and comparing this total to the 
decedent's adjusted gross estate. To the extent that a decedent 
held qualified family-owned business interests in more than one 
trade or business, all such interests are aggregated for 
purposes of applying the 50-percent liquidity test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \94\ A technical correction may be necessary to clarify the formula 
for determining the amount of gifts of family-owned business interests 
made to members of the decedent's family that are not otherwise 
includible in the decedent's gross estate. See Title VI (sec. 
606(b)(2)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as 
passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The 50-percent liquidity test is calculated using a ratio, 
the numerator and denominator of which are described below.
    The numerator is determined by aggregating the value of all 
qualified family-owned business interests that are includible 
in the decedent's gross estate and are passed from the decedent 
to a qualified heir, plus any lifetime transfers of qualified 
business interests that are made by the decedent to members of 
the decedent's family (other than the decedent's spouse), 
provided such interests have been continuously held by members 
of the decedent's family and were not otherwise includible in 
the decedent's gross estate. For this purpose, qualified 
businessinterests transferred to members of the decedent's 
family during the decedent's lifetime are valued as of the date of such 
transfer. This amount then is reduced by all indebtedness of the 
estate, except for the following: (1) indebtedness on a qualified 
residence of the decedent (determined in accordance with the 
requirements for deductibility of mortgage interest set forth in 
section 163(h)(3)); (2) indebtedness incurred to pay the educational or 
medical expenses of the decedent, the decedent's spouse or the 
decedent's dependents; and (3) other indebtedness of up to $10,000.
    The denominator is equal to the decedent's gross estate, 
reduced by any indebtedness of the estate, and increased by the 
amount of the following transfers, to the extent not already 
included in the decedent's gross estate: (1) any lifetime 
transfers of qualified business interests that were made by the 
decedent to members of the decedent's family (other than the 
decedent's spouse), provided such interests have been 
continuously held by members of the decedent's family, plus (2) 
any transfers of assets other than qualified family-owned 
business interests from the decedent to the decedent's spouse 
that were made within 10 years of the date of the decedent's 
death, plus (3) any other transfers made by the decedent within 
three years of the decedent's death, except non-taxable 
transfers made to members of the decedent's family. The 
Secretary of the Treasury is granted authority to disregard de 
minimis gifts. In determining the amount of gifts made by the 
decedent, any gift that the donor and the donor's spouse 
elected to have treated as a split gift (pursuant to sec. 2513) 
is treated as made one-half by each spouse for purposes of this 
provision.

Participation requirements

    To qualify for the beneficial treatment provided under the 
Act, the decedent (or a member of the decedent's family) must 
have owned and materially participated in the trade or business 
for at least five of the eight years preceding the decedent's 
date of death. In addition, each qualified heir (or a member of 
the qualified heir's family) is required to materially 
participate in the trade or business for at least five years of 
any eight-year period within 10 years following the decedent's 
death. For this purpose, ``material participation'' is defined 
as under present-law section 2032A (special use valuation) and 
the regulations promulgated thereunder. See, e.g., Treas. Reg. 
sec. 20.2032A-3. Under such regulations, no one factor is 
determinative of the presence of material participation and the 
uniqueness of the particular industry (e.g., timber, farming, 
manufacturing, etc.) must be considered. Physical work and 
participation in management decisions are the principal factors 
to be considered. For example, an individual generally is 
considered to be materially participating in the business if he 
or she personally manages the business fully, regardless of the 
number of hours worked, as long as any necessary functions are 
performed.
    If a qualified heir rents qualifying property to a member 
of the qualified heir's family on a net cash basis, and that 
family member materially participates in the business, the 
material participation requirement will be considered to have 
been met with respect to the qualified heir for purposes of 
this provision. For example, if the qualified heir rents his 
property to his sister on a net cash basis, and his sister 
materially participates in the business, his sister's 
participation is sufficient to satisfy the requirement that the 
qualified heir or a member of his family materially 
participates in the business.

Recapture provisions

    The benefit of the exclusions for qualified family-owned 
business interests are subject to recapture if, within 10 years 
of the decedent's death and before the qualified heir's death, 
one of the following ``recapture events'' occurs: (1) the 
qualified heir ceases to meet the material participation 
requirements (i.e., if neither the qualified heir nor any 
member of his or her family has materially participated in the 
trade or business for at least five years of any eight-year 
period); (2) the qualified heir disposes of any portion of his 
or her interest in the family-owned business, other than by a 
disposition to a member of the qualified heir's family or 
through a conservation contribution under section 170(h); (3) 
the principal place of business of the trade or business ceases 
to be located in the United States; or (4) the qualified heir 
loses U.S. citizenship. A qualified heir who loses U.S. 
citizenship may avoid such recapture by placing the qualified 
family-owned business assets into a trust meeting requirements 
similar to a qualified domestic trust (as described in present 
law sec. 2056A(a)), or through certain other security 
arrangements. For this purpose, a sale or disposition, in the 
ordinary course of business, of assets such as inventory or a 
piece of equipment used in the business (e.g., the sale of 
crops or a tractor) does not constitute a disposition of ``a 
portion of a family-owned business interest'' that would result 
in recapture of the benefits of the qualified family-owned 
business exclusion.
    If one of the above recapture events occurs, an additional 
tax is imposed on the date of such event. As under section 
2032A, each qualified heir is personally liable for the portion 
of the recapture tax that is imposed with respect to his or her 
interest in the qualified family-owned business. Thus, for 
example, if a brother and sister inherit a qualified family-
owned business from their father, and only the sister 
materially participates in the business, her participation will 
cause both her and her brother to meet the material 
participation test. If she ceases to materially participate in 
the business within 10 years after her father's death (and the 
brother still does not materially participate), the sister and 
brother would both be liable for the recapture tax; that is, 
each would be liable for the recapture tax attributable to his 
or her interest.
    The portion of the reduction in estate taxes that is 
recaptured would be dependent upon the number of years that the 
qualified heir (or members of the qualified heir's family) 
materially participated in the trade or business after the 
decedent's death. If the qualified heir (or his or her family 
members) materially participated in the trade or business after 
the decedent's death for less than six years, 100 percent of 
the reduction in estate taxes attributable to that heir's 
interest is recaptured; if the participation was for at least 
six years but less than seven years, 80 percent of the 
reduction in estate taxes is recaptured; if the participation 
was for at least seven years but less than eight years, 60 
percent is recaptured; if the participation was for at least 
eight years but less than nine years, 40 percent is recaptured; 
and if the participation was for at least nine years but less 
than 10 years, 20 percent of the reduction in estates taxes is 
recaptured. In general, there is no requirement that the 
qualified heir (or members of his or her family) continue to 
hold or participate in the trade or business more than 10 years 
after the decedent's death. As under present-law section 2032A, 
however, the 10-year recapture period may be extended for a 
period of up to two years if the qualified heir does not begin 
to use the property for a period of up to two years after the 
decedent's death.
    If a recapture event occurs with respect to any qualified 
family-owned business interest (or portion thereof), the amount 
of reduction in estate taxes attributable to that interest is 
determined on a proportionate basis. For example, if the 
decedent's estate included $2 million in qualified family-owned 
business interests and $1 million of such interests received 
beneficial treatment under this proposal, one-half of the value 
of the interest disposed of is deemed to have received the 
benefits provided under this proposal.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to the estates of 
decedents dying after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    This provision, in combination with the provision described 
in item 1., above, is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $843 million in 1999, $1,259 million in 
2000, $1,816 million in 2001, $2,013 million in 2002, $2,596 
million in 2003, $2,997 million in 2004, $5,656 million in 
2005, $7,279 million in 2006, and $8,638 million in 2007.

3. Installment payments of estate tax attributable to closely held 
        businesses (secs. 503 of the Act and secs. 6601(j) and 6166 of 
        the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In general, the Federal estate tax is due within nine 
months of a decedent's death. Under Code section 6166, an 
executor generally may elect to pay the estate tax attributable 
to an interest in a closely held business in installments over, 
at most, a 14-year period. If the election is made, the estate 
may pay only interest for the first four years, followed by up 
to 10 annual installments of principal and interest. Interest 
generally is imposed at the rate applicable to underpayments of 
tax under section 6621 (i.e., the Federal short-term rate plus 
3 percentage points). Under prior law, a special 4-percent 
interest rate was applied to the amount of deferred estate tax 
attributable to the first $1,000,000 in value of the closely-
held business. Interests in holding companies and non-readily-
tradable business interests were not eligible for the reduced 
interest rate under prior or present law.
    To qualify for the installment payment election, the 
business must be an active trade or business and the value of 
the decedent's interest in the closely held business must 
exceed 35 percent of the decedent's adjusted gross estate. An 
interest in a closely held business includes: (1) any interest 
as a proprietor in a business carried on as a proprietorship; 
(2) any interest in a partnership carrying on a trade or 
business if the partnership has 15 or fewer partners, or if at 
least 20 percent of the partnership's assets are included in 
determining the decedent's gross estate; or (3) stock in a 
corporation if the corporation has 15 or fewer shareholders, or 
if at least 20 percent of the value of the voting stock is 
included in determining the decedent's gross estate.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the provision, by eliminating 
the deductibility of interest paid on estate taxes deferred 
under section 6166 (and reducing the interest rate 
accordingly), would eliminate the need to file annual 
supplemental estate tax returns and make complex iterative 
computations to claim an estate tax deduction for interest 
paid.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act reduces the 4-percent interest rate to 2 percent, 
and makes the interest paid on estate taxes deferred under 
section 6166 non-deductible for estate or income tax purposes. 
The 2-percent interest rate is imposed on the amount of 
deferred estate tax attributable to the first $1,000,000 in 
taxable value of the closely held business (i.e., the first 
$1,000,000 in value in excess of the effective exemption 
provided by the unified credit and any other exclusions).\95\ 
The interest rate imposed on the amount of deferred estate tax 
attributable to the taxable value of the closely held business 
in excess of $1,000,000 is reduced to an amount equal to 45 
percent of the rate applicable to underpayments of tax.\96\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \95\ The $1,000,000 threshold is indexed under other provisions of 
the Act.
    \96\ A technical correction may be necessary to clarify that 
deferred payments of estate tax on holding companies and non-readily 
tradable business interests do not qualify for the 2-percent interest 
rate, but instead are subject to a non-deductible interest rate of 45 
percent of the regular deficiency rate. See Title VI (sec. 606(c)) of 
H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the 
House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for decedents dying after 
December 31, 1997. Estates deferring estate tax under current 
law may make a one-time election to use the lower interest 
rates and forego the interest deduction for installments due 
after the date of the election (but such estates do not receive 
the benefit of the increase in the amount eligible for the 
6601(j) interest rate--i.e., only the amount that was 
previously eligible for the 4-percent rate would be eligible 
for the 2-percent rate).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $9 million in 1999, $17 million in 2000, $25 
million in 2001, $33 million in 2002, $41 million in 2003, $47 
million in 2004, $53 million in 2005, $58 million in 2006, and 
$65 million in 2007.

4. Estate tax recapture from cash leases of specially-valued property 
        (sec. 504 of the Act and sec. 2032A of the Code)

                          Present and Prior Law

    A Federal estate tax is imposed on the value of property 
passing at death. Generally, such property is included in the 
decedent's estate at its fair market value. Under section 
2032A, the executor may elect to value certain ``qualified real 
property'' used in farming or other qualifying trade or 
business at its current use value rather than its highest and 
best use. If, after the special-use valuation election is made, 
the heir who acquired the real property ceases to use it in its 
qualified use within 10 years (15 years for individuals dying 
before 1982) of the decedent's death, an additional estate tax 
is imposed in order to ``recapture'' the benefit of the 
special-use valuation (sec. 2032A(c)).
    Under prior law, some courts had held that cash rental of 
specially-valued property after the death of the decedent was 
not a qualified use under section 2032A because the heirs no 
longer bear the financial risk of working the property and, 
therefore, resulted in the imposition of the additional estate 
tax under section 2032A(c). See Martin v. Commissioner, 783 
F.2d 81 (7th Cir. 1986) (cash lease to unrelated party not 
qualified use); Williamson v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 242 (1989), 
aff'd, 974 F.2d 1525 (9th Cir. 1992) (cash lease to family 
member not a qualified use); Fisher v. Commissioner, 65 T.C.M. 
2284 (1993) (cash lease to family member not a qualified use); 
cf. Minter v. U.S., 19 F.3d 426 (8th Cir. 1994) (cash lease to 
family's farming corporation is qualified use); Estate of Gavin 
v. U.S., 1997 U.S. App. Lexis 10383 (8th Cir. 1997) (heir's 
option to pay cash rent or 50 percent crop share is qualified 
use).
    With respect to a decedent's surviving spouse, a special 
rule provides that the surviving spouse will not be treated as 
failing to use the property in a qualified use solely because 
the spouse rents the property to a member of the spouse's 
family on a net cash basis. (Sec. 2032A(b)(5)). Under section 
2032A, members of an individual's family include (1) the 
individual's spouse, (2) the individual's ancestors, (3) lineal 
descendants of the individual, of the individual's spouse, or 
of the individual's parents, and (4) the spouses of any such 
lineal descendants.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that cash leasing of farmland among 
family members was consistent with the purposes of the special-
use valuation rules, which are intended to prevent family farms 
(and other qualifying businesses) from being liquidated to pay 
estate taxes in cases where members of the decedent's family 
continue to participate in the business.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that the cash lease of specially-valued 
real property by a lineal descendant of the decedent to a 
member of the lineal descendant's family, who continues to 
operate the farm or closely held business, does not cause the 
qualified use of such property to cease for purposes of 
imposing the additional estate tax under section 2032A(c).

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for cash rentals occurring after 
December 31, 1976.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $25 million in 1998, and $2 million per year 
thereafter.

5. Clarify eligibility for extension of time for payment of estate tax 
        (sec. 505 of the Act and new sec. 7479 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In general, the Federal estate tax is due within nine 
months of a decedent's death. Under Code section 6166, an 
executor generally may elect to pay the estate tax attributable 
to an interest in a closely held business in installments over, 
at most, a 14-year period. If the election is made, the estate 
may pay only interest for the first four years, followed by up 
to 10 annual installments of principal and interest. To qualify 
for the installment payment election, the business must meet 
certain requirements. If certain events occur during the 
repayment period (e.g., the closely held business is sold), 
full payment of all deferred estate taxes is required at that 
time.
    Under prior law, there was limited access to judicial 
review of disputes regarding initial or continuing eligibility 
for the deferral and installment election under section 6166. 
If the Commissioner determined that an estate was not initially 
eligible for deferral under section 6166, or had lost its 
eligibility for such deferral, the estate was required to pay 
the full amount of estate taxes asserted by the Commissioner as 
being owed in order to obtain judicial review of the 
Commissioner's determination.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that taxpayers should have access to 
the courts to resolve disputes over an estate's eligibility for 
the section 6166 election, without requiring potential 
liquidation of the assets that the installment provisions of 
section 6166 are designed to protect.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act authorizes the U.S. Tax Court to provide 
declaratory judgments regarding initial or continuing 
eligibility for deferral under section 6166.\97\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \97\ A technical correction may be necessary to clarify that the 
jurisdiction of the U.S. Tax Court to determine whether an estate 
qualifies for installment payment of estate tax on closely-held 
businesses extends to determining which businesses in an estate are 
eligible for the deferral. See Title VI (sec. 606(d)) of H.R. 2676, the 
Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on 
November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to decedents dying after date of 
enactment.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $15 million in each of fiscal years 1999-
2004, $14 million in 2005, $12 million in 2006, and $11 million 
in 2007.

6. Gifts may not be revalued for estate tax purposes after expiration 
        of statute of limitations (sec. 506 of the Act and secs. 2001, 
        6501(c)(9) and 7477 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Federal estate and gift taxes are unified so that a 
single progressive rate schedule is applied to an individual's 
cumulative gifts and bequests. The tax on gifts made in a 
particular year is computed by determining the tax on the sum 
of the taxable gifts made that year and all prior years and 
then subtracting the tax on the prior years taxable gifts and 
the unified credit. Similarly, the estate tax is computed by 
determining the tax on the sum of the taxable estate and prior 
taxable gifts and then subtracting the tax on taxable gifts and 
the unified credit. Under a special rule applicable to the 
computation of the gift tax (sec. 2504(c)), the value of gifts 
made in prior years is the value that was used to determine the 
prior year's gift tax. There is no comparable rule in the case 
of the computation of the estate tax.
    Generally, any estate or gift tax must be assessed within 
three years after the filing of the return. No proceeding in a 
court for the collection of an estate or gift tax can be begun 
without an assessment within the three-year period. If no 
return is filed, the tax may be assessed, or a suit commenced 
to collect the tax without assessment, at any time. If an 
estate or gift tax return is filed, and the amount of 
unreported items exceeds 25 percent of the amount of the 
reported items, the tax may be assessed or a suit commenced to 
collect the tax without assessment, within six years after the 
return was filed (sec. 6501).
    Commencement of the statute of limitations generally does 
not require that a particular gift be disclosed. A special 
rule, however, applies to certain gifts that are valued under 
the special valuation rules of Chapter 14. The gift tax statute 
of limitations runs for such a gift only if it is disclosed on 
a gift tax return in a manner adequate to apprise the Secretary 
of the Treasury of the nature of the item.
    Under prior law, most courts had permitted the Commissioner 
to redetermine the value of a gift for which the statute of 
limitations period for the gift tax has expired in order to 
determine the appropriate tax rate bracket and unified credit 
for the estate tax. See, e.g., Evanson v. United States, 30 
F.3d 960 (9th Cir. 1994); Stalcup v. United States, 946 F. 2d 
1125 (5th Cir. 1991); Estate of Levin, 1991 T.C. Memo 1991-208, 
aff'd 986 F. 2d 91 (4th Cir. 1993); Estate of Smith v. 
Commissioner, 94 T.C. 872 (1990). But see Boatman's First 
National Bank v. United States, 705 F. Supp. 1407 (W.D. Mo. 
1988) (Commissioner not permitted to revalue gifts).

                           Reasons for Change

    Revaluation of lifetime gifts at the time of death requires 
the taxpayer to retain records for a potentially lengthy 
period. Rules that encourage a determination within the gift 
tax statute of limitations ease transfer tax administration by 
eliminating reliance on stale evidence and reducing the period 
for which retention of records is required.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that a gift for which the limitations 
period has passed cannot be revalued for purposes of 
determining the applicable estate tax bracket and available 
unified credit. For gifts made in calendar years ending after 
the date of enactment, the Act also extends the special rule 
governing gifts valued under Chapter 14 to all gifts. Thus, the 
statute of limitations will not run on an inadequately 
disclosed transfer in calendar years ending after the date of 
enactment, regardless of whether a gift tax return was filed 
for other transfers in that same year.
    It is intended that, in order to revalue a gift that has 
been adequately disclosed on a gift tax return, the IRS must 
issue a final notice of redetermination of value (a ``final 
notice'') within the statute of limitations applicable to the 
gift for gift tax purposes (generally, three years). This rule 
is applicable even where the value of the gift as shown on the 
return does not result in any gift tax being owed (e.g., 
through use of the unified credit or the annual exclusion). It 
also is anticipated that the IRS will develop an administrative 
appeals process whereby a taxpayer can challenge a 
redetermination of value by the IRS prior to issuance of a 
final notice.\98\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \98\ A technical correction to this provision may be necessary. See 
Title VI (sec. 606(e)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act 
of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997. The technical 
correction would clarify that in determining the amount of taxable 
gifts made in preceding calendar periods, the value of prior gifts is 
the value of such gifts as finally determined, even if no gift tax was 
assessed or paid on that gift. For this purpose, final determinations 
would include, e.g., the value reported on the gift tax return (if not 
challenged by the IRS prior to the expiration of the statute of 
limitations), the value determined by the IRS (if not challenged 
through the declaratory judgment procedure by the taxpayer), the value 
determined by the courts, or the value agreed to by the IRS and the 
taxpayer in a settlement agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A taxpayer who is mailed a final notice may challenge the 
redetermined value of the gift (as contained in the final 
notice) by filing a motion for a declaratory judgment with the 
Tax Court. The motion must be filed on or before 90 days from 
the date that the final notice was mailed. The statute of 
limitations is tolled during the pendency of the Tax Court 
proceeding.

                             Effective Date

    The provision generally applies to gifts made after the 
date of enactment (August 5, 1997). The extension of the 
special rule under chapter 14 to all gifts applies to gifts 
made in calendar years ending after the date of enactment.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $16 million in 1999, $18 million in 2000, 
$21 million in 2001, $26 million in 2002, $32 million in 2003, 
$38 million in 2004, $45 million in 2005, $53 million in 2006, 
and $61 million in 2007.

7. Repeal of throwback rules applicable to domestic trusts (sec. 507 of 
        the Act and secs. 644(e) and 665 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A nongrantor trust is treated as a separate taxpayer for 
Federal income tax purposes. Such a trust generally is treated 
as a conduit with respect to amounts distributed currently \99\ 
and taxed with respect to any income which is accumulated in 
the trust rather than distributed. A separate graduated tax 
rate structure applies to trusts which historically has 
permitted accumulated trust income to be taxed at lower rates 
than the rates applicable to trust beneficiaries. This benefit 
often was compounded through the creation of multiple trusts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \99\ The conduit treatment is achieved by allowing the trust a 
deduction for amounts distributed to beneficiaries during the taxable 
year to the extent of distributable net income and by including such 
distributions in the beneficiaries' income.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Internal Revenue Code has several rules intended to 
limit the benefit that would otherwise occur from using the 
lower rates applicable to one or more trusts. Under the so-
called ``throwback'' rules, the distribution of previously 
accumulated trust income to a beneficiary will be subject to 
tax (in addition to any tax paid by the trust on that income) 
where the beneficiary's average top marginal rate in the 
previous five years is higher than those of the trust.
    Under section 643(f), two or more trusts are treated as one 
trust if (1) the trusts have substantially the same grantor or 
grantors and substantially the same primary beneficiary or 
beneficiaries, and (2) a principal purpose for the existence of 
the trusts is to avoid Federal income tax. For trusts that were 
irrevocable as of March 1, 1984, section 643(f) applies only to 
contributions to corpus after that date.
    Under prior law, section 644 provided that if property was 
sold within two years of its contribution to a trust, the gain 
that would have been recognized had the contributor sold the 
property would be taxed at the contributor's marginal tax 
rates. In effect, section 644 treated such gains as if the 
contributor had realized the gain and then transferred the net 
after-tax proceeds from the sale to the trust as corpus.
    Sections 665 through 668 apply different rules to 
distributions of previously accumulated trust income from a 
foreign trust than to distributions of such income from 
domestic trusts. If a foreign trust accumulates income, changes 
its situs so as to become a domestic trust, and then makes a 
distribution that is deemed to have been made in a year in 
which the trust was a foreign trust, the distribution is 
treated as a distribution from a foreign trust for purposes of 
the accumulation distribution rules. Rev. Rul. 91-6, 1991-1 
C.B. 89.

                           Reasons for Change

    The throwback rules and section 644 were intended to 
eliminate the potential tax reduction arising from taxation at 
the trust level, rather than the beneficiary or contributor 
level. When those provisions were enacted, a taxpayer could 
reduce his or her overall tax liability substantially by 
transferring property to one or more trusts, so that any income 
from the property would be taxed at lower income tax rates. In 
the Tax Reform Act of 1984, Congress curtailed the tax 
avoidance use of multiple trusts. Moreover, in the Tax Reform 
Act of 1986, Congress provided a new rate schedule for estates 
and trusts under which the maximum tax benefit of the graduated 
rate structure applicable to estates or trusts was reduced 
substantially to slightly more than $600 per year for a trust 
or estate. (Because of indexing of the rate brackets, that 
benefit has increased to $845 per year per trust or estate.) 
The Congress determined that the insignificant potential tax 
reduction available through the transfer of property to trusts 
no longer warranted the complexity of the throwback rules and 
section 644.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act generally exempts from the throwback rules amounts 
distributed by a domestic trust after the date of enactment. 
The throwback rules continue to apply with respect to (1) 
foreign trusts, (2) domestic trusts that were once treated as 
foreign trusts (except as provided in Treasury regulations), 
and (3) domestic trusts created before March 1, 1984, that 
would be treated as multiple trusts under sec. 643(f) of the 
Code.
    The Act also provides that precontribution gain on property 
sold by a domestic trust no longer is subject to section 644 
(i.e., taxed at the contributor's marginal tax rates).

                             Effective Date

    The provision with respect to the throwback rules is 
effective for distributions made in taxable years beginning 
after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997). The modification 
to section 644 applies to sales or exchanges after the date of 
enactment.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $11 million per year in fiscal years 1999 
through 2007.

8. Reduction in estate tax for certain land subject to permanent 
        conservation easement (sec. 508 of the Act and sec. 2031 of the 
        Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A deduction is allowed for estate and gift tax purposes for 
a contribution of a qualified real property interest to a 
charity (or other qualified organization) exclusively for 
conservation purposes (secs. 2055(f), 2522(d)). For this 
purpose, a qualified real property interest means the entire 
interest of the transferor in real property (other than certain 
mineral interests), a remainder interest in real property, or a 
perpetual restriction on the use of real property (sec. 
170(h)). A ``conservation purpose'' is (1) preservation of land 
for outdoor recreation by, or the education of, the general 
public, (2) preservation of natural habitat, (3) preservation 
of open space for scenic enjoyment of the general public or 
pursuant to a governmental conservation policy, and (4) 
preservation of historically important land or certified 
historic structures. Also, a contribution will be treated as 
``exclusively for conservation purposes'' only if the 
conservation purpose is protected in perpetuity.
    The same definition of qualified conservation contributions 
also applies for purposes of determining whether such 
contributions qualify as charitable deductions for income tax 
purposes.
    A donor making a qualified conservation contribution 
generally was not allowed to retain an interest in minerals 
which could be extracted or removed by any surface mining 
method. However, deductions for contributions of conservation 
interests satisfying all of the above requirements were 
permitted if two conditions were satisfied. First, the surface 
and mineral estates in the property with respect to which the 
contribution is made must have been separated before June 13, 
1976 (and remain so separated) and, second, the probability of 
surface mining on the property with respect to which a 
contribution is made must have been so remote as to be 
negligible (sec. 170(h)(5)(B)).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that a reduction in estate taxes for 
land subject to a qualified conservation easement would ease 
existing pressures to develop or sell off open spaces in order 
to raise funds to pay estate taxes, and would thereby help to 
preserve environmentally significant land.

                        Explanation of Provision

Reduction in estate taxes for certain land subject to permanent 
        conservation easement

    The Act allows an executor to elect to exclude from the 
taxable estate 40 percent of the value of any land subject to a 
qualified conservation easement that meets the following 
requirements: (1) the land is located within 25 miles of a 
metropolitan area (as defined by the Office of Management and 
Budget) or a national park or wilderness area, or within 10 
miles of an Urban National Forest (as designated by the Forest 
Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture); (2) the land 
has been owned by the decedent or a member of the decedent's 
family at all times during the three-year period ending on the 
date of the decedent's death; and (3) a qualified conservation 
contribution (within the meaning of sec. 170(h)) of a qualified 
real property interest (as generally defined in sec. 
170(h)(2)(C)) was granted by the decedent or a member of his or 
her family. For purposes of the provision, preservation of a 
historically important land area or a certified historic 
structure does not qualify as a conservation purpose.
    In order to qualify for the exclusion, a qualifying 
easement must have been granted by the decedent, a member of 
the decedent's family, the executor of the decedent's estate, 
or the trustee of a trust holding the land, no later than the 
date of the election. To the extent that the value of such land 
is excluded from the taxable estate, the basis of such land 
acquired at death is a carryover basis (i.e., the basis is not 
stepped-up to its fair market value at death). Property 
financed with acquisition indebtedness is eligible for this 
provision only to the extent of the net equity in the property. 
For example, if a $1 million property is subject to an 
outstanding acquisition indebtedness balance of $100,000, it is 
treated in the same manner as a $900,000 property that is not 
debt-financed.
    The exclusion amount is calculated based on the value of 
the property includible in the gross estate, reduced by the 
amount of any deduction taken under section 2055(f) with 
respect to such land. In general, this value will be equal to 
the value of the property after the conservation easement has 
been placed on the property. The exclusion from estate taxes 
does not extend to the value of any development rights retained 
by the decedent or donor, although payment for estate taxes on 
retained development rights may be deferred for up to two 
years, or until the disposition of the property, whichever is 
earlier. For this purpose, retained development rights are any 
rights retained to use the land for any commercial purpose 
which is not subordinate to and directly supportive of farming 
purposes, as defined in section 2032A(e)(5) (e.g., tree 
farming, ranching, viticulture, and the raising of other 
agricultural or horticultural commodities). De minimis 
commercial recreational activity that is consistent with the 
conservation purpose, such as the granting of hunting and 
fishing licenses, will not cause the property to fail to 
qualify for the exclusion. It is anticipated that the Secretary 
of the Treasury will provide guidance as to the definition of 
``de minimis'' activities.
    With respect to land held by a partnership, corporation, or 
trust, a look-through rule applies to the extent that the 
decedent owns (directly or indirectly) at least 30 percent of 
the entity involved.

Maximum benefit allowed

    The 40-percent estate tax exclusion for land subject to a 
qualified conservation easement is limited to a maximum 
exclusion of $100,000 in 1998, $200,000 in 1999, $300,000 in 
2000, $400,000 in 2001, and $500,000 in 2002 and thereafter.
    If the value of the conservation easement is less than 30 
percent of (1) the value of the land without the easement, 
reduced by (2) the value of any retained development rights, 
then the exclusion percentage is reduced. The reduction in the 
exclusion percentage is equal to two percentage points for each 
point that the above ratio falls below 30 percent. Thus, for 
example, if the value of the easement is 25 percent of the 
value of the land before the easement less the value of the 
retained development rights, the exclusion percentage is 30 
percent (i.e., the 40 percent amount is reduced by twice the 
difference between 30 percent and 25 percent). Under this 
calculation, if the value of the easement is 10 percent or less 
of the value of the land before the easement less the value of 
the retained development rights, the exclusion percentage is 
equal to zero.

Treatment of land subject to a conservation easement for purposes of 
        special-use valuation

    The granting of a qualified conservation easement (as 
defined above) is not treated as a disposition triggering the 
recapture provisions of section 2032A. In addition, the 
existence of a qualified conservation easement does not prevent 
such property from subsequently qualifying for special-use 
valuation treatment under section 2032A.

Retained mineral interests

    The Act also allows a charitable deduction (for income tax 
purposes or estate tax purposes) to taxpayers making a 
contribution of a permanent conservation easement on property 
where a mineral interest has been retained and surface mining 
is possible, but its probability is ``so remote as to be 
negligible.'' Prior law provided for a charitable deduction in 
such a case if the mineral interests were separated from the 
land prior to June 13, 1976. The provision allows such a 
charitable deduction to be taken regardless of when the mineral 
interests were separated.

                             Effective Date

    The estate tax exclusion applies to decedents dying after 
December 31, 1997. The rules with respect to the treatment of 
conservation easements under section 2032A and with respect to 
retained mineral interests are effective for easements granted 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $7 million in 1999, $15 million in 2000, $25 
million in 2001, $35 million in 2002, $48 million in 2003, $51 
million in 2004, $56 million in 2005, $60 million in 2006, and 
$64 million in 2007.

                  B. Generation-Skipping Tax Provision

1. Modification of generation-skipping transfer tax for transfers to 
        individuals with deceased parents (sec. 511 of the Act and sec. 
        2651 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under the ``predeceased parent exception,'' a direct skip 
transfer to a transferor's grandchild is not subject to the 
generation-skipping transfer (``GST'') tax if the child of the 
transferor who was the grandchild's parent is deceased at the 
time of the transfer (sec. 2612(c)(2)). Under prior law, this 
``predeceased parent exception'' to the GST tax was not 
applicable to (1) transfers to collateral heirs, e.g., 
grandnieces or grandnephews, or (2) taxable terminations or 
taxable distributions.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that a transfer to a collateral 
relative whose parent is dead should qualify for the 
predeceased parent exception in situations where the transferor 
decedent has no lineal heirs, because no motive or opportunity 
to avoid transfer tax exists. For similar reasons, the Congress 
believed that transfers to trusts should be permitted to 
qualify for the predeceased parent exclusion where the parent 
of the beneficiary is dead at the time that the transfer is 
first subject to estate or gift tax. The Congress also 
understood that this treatment would remove a present law 
impediment to the establishment of charitable lead trusts.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act extends the predeceased parent exception to 
transfers to collateral heirs, provided that the decedent has 
no living lineal descendants at the time of the transfer. For 
example, the exception applies to a transfer made by an 
individual (with no living lineal heirs) to a grandniece where 
the transferor's nephew or niece who is the parent of the 
grandniece is deceased at the time of the transfer.
    In addition, the Act extends the predeceased parent 
exception (as modified by the change in the preceding 
paragraph) to taxable terminations and taxable distributions, 
provided that the parent of the relevant beneficiary was dead 
at the earliest time that the transfer (from which the 
beneficiary's interest in the property was established) was 
subject to estate or gift tax. For example, where a trust was 
established to pay an annuity to a charity for a term for years 
with a remainder interest granted to a grandson, the 
termination of the term for years would not be a taxable 
termination subject to the GST tax if the grandson's parent 
(who is the son or daughter of the transferor) is deceased at 
the time the trust was created and the transfer creating the 
trust was subject to estate or gift tax.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for generation skipping 
transfers occurring after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $4 million per year in 1999-2003, $5 million 
per year in 2004-2006, and $6 million in 2007.
         TITLE VI. EXTENSION OF CERTAIN EXPIRING TAX PROVISIONS

  A. Research Tax Credit (sec. 601 of the Act and sec. 41 of the Code)

                               Prior Law

General rule

    Prior to May 31, 1997, section 41 provided for a research 
tax credit equal to 20 percent of the amount by which a 
taxpayer's qualified research expenditures for a taxable year 
exceeded its base amount for that year. The research tax credit 
expired and generally did not apply to amounts paid or incurred 
after May 31, 1997.\100\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \100\ When originally enacted, the research tax credit applied to 
qualified expenses incurred after June 30, 1981. The credit was 
modified several times and was extended through June 30, 1995. The 
credit later was extended for the period July 1, 1996, through May 31, 
1997 (with a special 11-month extension for taxpayers that elect to be 
subject to the alternative incremental research credit regime).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A 20-percent research tax credit also applied to the excess 
of (1) 100 percent of corporate cash expenditures (including 
grants or contributions) paid for basic research conducted by 
universities (and certain nonprofit scientific research 
organizations) over (2) the sum of (a) the greater of two 
minimum basic research floors plus (b) an amount reflecting any 
decrease in nonresearch giving to universities by the 
corporation as compared to such giving during a fixed-base 
period, as adjusted for inflation. This separate credit 
computation is commonly referred to as the ``university basic 
research credit'' (see sec. 41(e)).

Computation of allowable credit

    Except for certain university basic research payments made 
by corporations, the research tax credit applies only to the 
extent that the taxpayer's qualified research expenditures for 
the current taxable year exceed its base amount. The base 
amount for the current year generally is computed by 
multiplying the taxpayer's ``fixed-base percentage'' by the 
average amount of the taxpayer's gross receipts for the four 
preceding years. If a taxpayer both incurred qualified research 
expenditures and had gross receipts during each of at least 
three years from 1984 through 1988, then its ``fixed-base 
percentage'' is the ratio that its total qualified research 
expenditures for the 1984-1988 period bears to its total gross 
receipts for that period (subject to a maximum ratio of .16). 
All other taxpayers (so-called ``start-up firms'') are assigned 
a fixed-base percentage of 3 percent.\101\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \101\ The Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 expanded the 
definition of ``start-up firms'' under section 41(c)(3)(B)(i) to 
include any firm if the first taxable year in which such firm had both 
gross receipts and qualified research expenses began after 1983.
    A special rule (enacted in 1993) is designed to gradually recompute 
a start-up firm's fixed-base percentage based on its actual research 
experience. Under this special rule, a start-up firm will be assigned a 
fixed-base percentage of 3 percent for each of its first five taxable 
years after 1993 in which it incurs qualified research expenditures. In 
the event that the research credit is extended beyond the scheduled 
expiration date, a start-up firm's fixed-based percentage for its sixth 
through tenth taxable years after 1993 in which it incurs qualified 
research expenditures will be a phased-in ratio based on its actual 
research experience. For all subsequent taxable years, the taxpayer's 
fixed-based percentage will be its actual ratio of qualified research 
expenditures to gross receipts for any five years selected by the 
taxpayer from its fifth through tenth taxable years after 1993 (sec. 
41(c)(3)(B)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In computing the credit, a taxpayer's base amount may not 
be less than 50 percent of its current-year qualified research 
expenditures.
    To prevent artificial increases in research expenditures by 
shifting expenditures among commonly controlled or otherwise 
related entities, a special aggregation rule provides that all 
members of the same controlled group of corporations are 
treated as a single taxpayer (sec. 41(f)(1)). Special rules 
apply for computing the credit when a major portion of a 
business changes hands, under which qualified research 
expenditures and gross receipts for periods prior to the change 
of ownership of a trade or business are treated as transferred 
with the trade or business that gave rise to those expenditures 
and receipts for purposes of recomputing a taxpayer's fixed-
base percentage (sec. 41(f)(3)).

Alternative incremental research credit regime

    As part of the Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996, 
taxpayers are allowed to elect an alternative incremental 
research credit regime. If a taxpayer elects to be subject to 
this alternative regime, the taxpayer is assigned a three-
tiered fixed-base percentage (that is lower than the fixed-base 
percentage otherwise applicable under present law) and the 
credit rate likewise is reduced. Under the alternative credit 
regime, a credit rate of 1.65 percent applies to the extent 
that a taxpayer's current-year research expenses exceed a base 
amount computed by using a fixed-base percentage of 1 percent 
(i.e., the base amount equals 1 percent of the taxpayer's 
average gross receipts for the four preceding years) but do not 
exceed a base amount computed by using a fixed-base percentage 
of 1.5 percent. A credit rate of 2.2 percent applies to the 
extent that a taxpayer's current-year research expenses exceed 
a base amount computed by using a fixed-base percentage of 1.5 
percent but do not exceed a base amount computed by using a 
fixed-base percentage of 2 percent. A credit rate of 2.75 
percent applies to the extent that a taxpayer's current-year 
research expenses exceed a base amount computed by using a 
fixed-base percentage of 2 percent. An election to be subject 
to this alternative incremental credit regime may be made only 
for a taxpayer's first taxable year beginning after June 30, 
1996, and before July 1, 1997, and such an election applies to 
that taxable year and all subsequent years (in the event that 
the credit subsequently is extended by Congress) unless revoked 
with the consent of the Secretary of the Treasury. If a 
taxpayer elects the alternative incremental research credit 
regime for its first taxable year beginning after June 30, 
1996, and before July 1, 1997, then all qualified research 
expenses paid or incurred during the first 11 months of such 
taxable year are treated as qualified research expenses for 
purposes of computing the taxpayer's credit.

Eligible expenditures

    Qualified research expenditures eligible for the research 
tax credit consist of: (1) ``in-house'' expenses of the 
taxpayer for wages and supplies attributable to qualified 
research; (2) certain time-sharing costs for computer use in 
qualified research; and (3) 65 percent of amounts paid by the 
taxpayer for qualified research conducted on the taxpayer's 
behalf (so-called ``contract research expenses''). \102\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \102\ Under a special rule enacted as part of the Small Business 
Job Protection Act of 1996, 75 percent of amounts paid to a research 
consortium for qualified research is treated as qualified research 
expenses eligible for the research credit (rather than 65 percent under 
the general rule under section 41(b)(3) governing contract research 
expenses) if (1) such research consortium is a tax-exempt organization 
that is described in section 501(c)(3) (other than a private 
foundation) or section 501(c)(6) and is organized and operated 
primarily to conduct scientific research, and (2) such qualified 
research is conducted by the consortium on behalf of the taxpayer and 
one or more persons not related to the taxpayer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To be eligible for the credit, the research must not only 
satisfy the requirements of present-law section 174 (described 
below) but must be undertaken for the purpose of discovering 
information that is technological in nature, the application of 
which is intended to be useful in the development of a new or 
improved business component of the taxpayer, and must pertain 
to functional aspects, performance, reliability, or quality of 
a business component. Research does not qualify for the credit 
if substantially all of the activities relate to style, taste, 
cosmetic, or seasonal design factors (sec. 41(d)(3)). In 
addition, research does not qualify for the credit if conducted 
after the beginning of commercial production of the business 
component, if related to the adaptation of an existing business 
component to a particular customer's requirements, if related 
to the duplication of an existing business component from a 
physical examination of the component itself or certain other 
information, or if related to certain efficiency surveys, 
market research or development, or routine quality control 
(sec. 41(d)(4)).
    Expenditures attributable to research that is conducted 
outside the United States do not enter into the credit 
computation. In addition, the credit is not available for 
research in the social sciences, arts, or humanities, nor is it 
available for research to the extent funded by any grant, 
contract, or otherwise by another person (or governmental 
entity).

Relation to deduction

    Under section 174, taxpayers may elect to deduct currently 
the amount of certain research or experimental expenditures 
incurred in connection with a trade or business, 
notwithstanding the general rule that business expenses to 
develop or create an asset that has a useful life extending 
beyond the current year must be capitalized. However, 
deductions allowed to a taxpayer under section 174 (or any 
other section) are reduced by an amount equal to 100 percent of 
the taxpayer's research tax credit determined for the taxable 
year. Taxpayers may alternatively elect to claim a reduced 
research tax credit amount under section 41 in lieu of reducing 
deductions otherwise allowed (sec. 280C(c)(3)).

                           Reasons for Change

    Businesses may not find it profitable to invest in some 
research activities because of the difficulty in capturing the 
full benefits from the research. Costly technological advances 
made by one firm are often cheaply copied by its competitors. A 
research tax credit can help promote investment in research, so 
that research activities undertaken approach the optimal level 
for the overall economy. Therefore, the Congress believed that, 
in order to encourage research activities, it is appropriate to 
reinstate the research tax credit.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The research tax credit is extended for 13 months--i.e., 
generally for the period June 1, 1997, through June 30, 1998.
    Under the provision, taxpayers are permitted to elect the 
alternative incremental research credit regime under section 
41(c)(4) for any taxable year beginning after June 30, 1996, 
and such election will apply to that taxable year and all 
subsequent taxable years unless revoked with the consent of the 
Secretary of the Treasury.

                             Effective Date

    Extension of the research credit is effective for qualified 
research expenditures paid or incurred during the period June 
1, 1997, through June 30, 1998. A special rule provides that, 
notwithstanding the general termination date for the research 
credit of June 30, 1998, if a taxpayer elects to be subject to 
the alternative incremental research credit regime for its 
first taxable year beginning after June 30, 1996, and before 
July 1, 1997, the alternative incremental research credit will 
be available during the entire 24-month period beginning with 
the first month of such taxable year--i.e., the equivalent of 
the 11-month extension provided for by the Small Business Job 
Protection Act of 1996 plus an additional 13-month extension 
provided for by the conference agreement. However, to prevent 
taxpayers from effectively obtaining more than 24-months of 
research credits from the Small Business Job Protection Act of 
1996 and this bill, the 24-month period for taxpayers electing 
the alternative incremental research credit regime is reduced 
by the number of months (if any) after June 1996 with respect 
to which the taxpayer claimed research credit amounts under the 
regular, 20-percent research credit rules.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $161 million in 1997, $820 million in 1998, 
$639 million in 1999, $294 million in 2000, $204 million in 
2001, $123 million in 2002, and $33 million in 2003.

 B. Contributions of Stock to Private Foundations (sec. 602 of the Act 
                    and sec. 170(e)(5) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In computing taxable income, a taxpayer who itemizes 
deductions generally is allowed to deduct the fair market value 
of property contributed to a charitable organization.\103\ 
However, in the case of a charitable contribution of short-term 
gain, inventory, or other ordinary income property, the amount 
of the deduction generally is limited to the taxpayer's basis 
in the property. In the case of a charitable contribution of 
tangible personal property, the deduction is limited to the 
taxpayer's basis in such property if the use by the recipient 
charitable organization is unrelated to the organization's tax-
exempt purpose.\104\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \103\ The amount of the deduction allowable for a taxable year with 
respect to a charitable contribution may be reduced depending on the 
type of property contributed, the type of charitable organization to 
which the property is contributed, and the income of the taxpayer 
(secs. 170(b) and 170(e)).
    \104\ As part of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, 
Congress eliminated the treatment of contributions of appreciated 
property (real, personal, and intangible) as a tax preference for 
alternative minimum tax (AMT) purposes. Thus, if a taxpayer makes a 
gift to charity of property (other than short-term gain, inventory, or 
other ordinary income property, or gifts to private foundations) that 
is real property, intangible property, or tangible personal property 
the use of which is related to the donee's tax-exempt purpose, the 
taxpayer is allowed to claim the same fair-market-value deduction for 
both regular tax and AMT purposes (subject to present-law percentage 
limitations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In cases involving contributions to a private foundation 
(other than certain private operating foundations), the amount 
of the deduction is limited to the taxpayer's basis in the 
property. However, under a special rule contained in section 
170(e)(5), taxpayers are allowed a deduction equal to the fair 
market value of ``qualified appreciated stock'' contributed to 
a private foundation prior to May 31, 1997.\105\ Qualified 
appreciated stock is defined as publicly traded stock which is 
capital gain property. The fair-market-value deduction for 
qualified appreciated stock donations applies only to the 
extent that total donations made by the donor to private 
foundations of stock in a particular corporation do not exceed 
10 percent in value of the outstanding stock of that 
corporation. For this purpose, an individual is treated as 
making all contributions that are made by any member of the 
individual's family.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \105\ The special rule contained in section 170(e)(5), which was 
originally enacted in 1984, expired January 1, 1995. The Small Business 
Job Protection Act of 1996 reinstated the rule for 11 months--for 
contributions of qualified appreciated stock made to private 
foundations during the period July 1, 1996, through May 31, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that, to encourage donations to 
charitable private foundations, it is appropriate to extend the 
rule that allows a fair market value deduction for certain 
gifts of appreciated stock to private foundations.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that the special rule contained in section 
170(e)(5) is extended for the period June 1, 1997, through June 
30, 1998.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for contributions of qualified 
appreciated stock to private foundations made during the period 
June 1, 1997, through June 30, 1998.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $99 million in 1998, $9 million in 1999, and 
$4 million in 2000.

C. Work Opportunity Tax Credit (sec. 603 of the Act and sec. 51 of the 
                                 Code)

                              Present Law

In general

    The work opportunity tax credit is available on an elective 
basis for employers hiring individuals from one or more of 
seven targeted groups. The credit generally is equal to 35 
percent of qualified wages. Generally, qualified wages consist 
of wages attributable to service rendered by a member of a 
targeted group during the one-year period beginning with the 
day the individual begins work for the employer.
    Generally, no more than $6,000 of wages during the first 
year of employment is permitted to be taken into account with 
respect to any individual. Thus, the maximum credit per 
individual is $2,100. With respect to qualified summer youth 
employees, the maximum credit is 35 percent of up to $3,000 of 
qualified first-year wages, for a maximum credit of $1,050.
    The deduction for wages is reduced by the amount of the 
credit.

Targeted groups eligible for the credit

            (1) Families receiving AFDC
    An eligible recipient is an individual certified by the 
designated local employment agency as being a member of a 
family eligible to receive benefits under AFDC or its successor 
program for a period of at least nine months part of which is 
during the 9-month period ending on the hiring date. For these 
purposes, members of the family are defined to include only 
those individuals taken into account for purposes of 
determining eligibility for the AFDC or its successor program.
            (2) Qualified ex-felon
    A qualified ex-felon is an individual certified as: (1) 
having been convicted of a felony under any State or Federal 
law, (2) being a member of a family that had an income during 
the six months before the earlier of the date of determination 
or the hiring date which on an annual basis is 70 percent or 
less of the Bureau of Labor Statistics lower living standard, 
and (3) having a hiring date within one year of release from 
prison or date of conviction.
            (3) High-risk youth
    A high-risk youth is an individual certified as being at 
least 18 but not yet 25 on the hiring date and as having a 
principal place of abode within an empowerment zone or 
enterprise community (as defined under Subchapter U of the 
Internal Revenue Code). Qualified wages willnot include wages 
paid or incurred for services performed after the individual moves 
outside an empowerment zone or enterprise community.
            (4) Vocational rehabilitation referral
    Vocational rehabilitation referrals are those individuals 
who have a physical or mental disability that constitutes a 
substantial handicap to employment and who have been referred 
to the employer while receiving, or after completing, 
vocational rehabilitation services under an individualized, 
written rehabilitation plan under a State plan approved under 
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or under a rehabilitation plan 
for veterans carried out under Chapter 31 of Title 38, U.S. 
Code. Certification will be provided by the designated local 
employment agency upon assurances from the vocational 
rehabilitation agency that the employee has met the above 
conditions.
            (5) Qualified summer youth employee
    Qualified summer youth employees are individuals: (1) who 
perform services during any 90-day period between May 1 and 
September 15, (2) who are certified by the designated local 
agency as being 16 or 17 years of age on the hiring date, (3) 
who have not been an employee of that employer before, and (4) 
who are certified by the designated local agency as having a 
principal place of abode within an empowerment zone or 
enterprise community (as defined under Subchapter U of the 
Internal Revenue Code). As with high-risk youths, no credit is 
available on wages paid or incurred for service performed after 
the qualified summer youth moves outside of an empowerment zone 
or enterprise community. If, after the end of the 90-day 
period, the employer continues to employ a youth who was 
certified during the 90-day period as a member of another 
targeted group, the limit on qualified first-year wages will 
take into account wages paid to the youth while a qualified 
summer youth employee.
            (6) Qualified veteran
    A qualified veteran is a veteran who is a member of a 
family certified as receiving assistance under: (1) AFDC for a 
period of at least nine months part of which is during the 12-
month period ending on the hiring date, or (2) a food stamp 
program under the Food Stamp Act of 1977 for a period of at 
least three months part of which is during the 12-month period 
ending on the hiring date. For these purposes, members of a 
family are defined to include only those individuals taken into 
account for purposes of determining eligibility for: (I) the 
AFDC or its successor program, and (ii) a food stamp program 
under the Food Stamp Act of 1977, respectively.
    Further, a qualified veteran is an individual who has 
served on active duty (other than for training) in the Armed 
Forces for more than 180 days or who has been discharged or 
released from active duty in the Armed Forces for a service-
connected disability. However, any individual who has served 
for a period of more than 90 days during which the individual 
was on active duty (other than for training) is not an eligible 
employee if any of this active duty occurred during the 60-day 
period ending on the date the individual was hired by the 
employer. This latter rule is intended to prevent employers who 
hire current members of the armed services (or those departed 
from service within the last 60 days) from receiving the 
credit.
            (7) Families receiving food stamps
    An eligible recipient is an individual aged 18 but not yet 
25 certified by a designated local employment agency as being a 
member of a family receiving assistance under a food stamp 
program under the Food Stamp Act of 1977 for a period of at 
least six months ending on the hiring date. In the case of 
families that cease to be eligible for food stamps under 
section 6(o) of the Food Stamp Act of 1977, the six-month 
requirement is replaced with a requirement that the family has 
been receiving food stamps for at least three of the five 
months ending on the date of hire. For these purposes, members 
of the family are defined to include only those individuals 
taken into account for purposes of determining eligibility for 
a food stamp program under the Food Stamp Act of 1977.

Minimum employment period

    No credit is allowed for wages paid unless the eligible 
individual is employed by the employer for at least 180 days 
(20 days in the case of a qualified summer youth employee) or 
400 hours (120 hours in the case of a qualified summer youth 
employee).

Expiration date

    The credit is effective for wages paid to, or incurred with 
respect to, a qualified individual who begins work for an 
employer after September 30, 1996, and before October 1, 1997.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that a short-term extension of the 
work opportunity tax credit program with modifications will 
provide the Congress and the Treasury and Labor Departments an 
opportunity to assess fully the operation and effectiveness of 
the credit as a hiring incentive. The Act also will extend 
application of the credit to a larger group of eligible 
individuals pending that evaluation.

                        Explanation of Provision

Extension

    The work opportunity tax credit is extended for nine months 
(through June 30, 1998).

Targeted categories

    Eligibility is extended to: (1) members of families 
receiving AFDC benefits for any nine months during the eighteen 
month period ending on the hiring date, and (2) individuals 
receiving supplemental security income (``SSI'') benefits under 
Title XVI of the Social Security Act.

Minimum employment period

    The minimum employment period is reduced from 400 to 120 
hours.

Credit percentage

    The Act provides a two-tier credit. The credit percentage 
is 25 percent for employment of less than 400 hours and 40 
percent for employment of 400 or more hours. To illustrate, 
assume that two eligible individuals (A and B) begin work for 
their employer before July 1, 1998 for a $6 hourly wage. 
Assume, further that A completes 300 hours of employment and B 
completes 500 hours of employment. The employer will be 
entitled to a credit of $450 for A (25 percent of $1,800) and 
$1,200 for B (40 percent of $3,000).

                             Effective Date

    Generally, the provision is effective for wages paid to, or 
incurred with respect to, qualified individuals who begin work 
for the employer after September 30, 1997, and before July 1, 
1998.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $140 million in 1998, $131 million in 1999, 
$73 million in 2000, $28 million in 2001, $11 million in 2002, 
and $2 million in 2003.\106\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \106\ The estimate includes interaction with the welfare-to-work 
tax credit; see explanation of section 801 of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

  D. Orphan Drug Tax Credit (sec. 604 of the Act and sec. 45C of the 
                                 Code)

                               Prior Law

    Prior to May 31, 1997, a 50-percent nonrefundable tax 
credit was allowed for qualified clinical testing expenses 
incurred in testing of certain drugs for rare diseases or 
conditions, generally referred to as ``orphan drugs.'' 
Qualified testing expenses are costs incurred to test an orphan 
drug after the drug has been approved for human testing by the 
Food and Drug Administration (``FDA'') but before the drug has 
been approved for sale by the FDA. A rare disease or condition 
is defined as one that (1) affects less than 200,000 persons in 
the United States, or (2) affects more than 200,000 persons, 
but for which there is no reasonable expectation that 
businesses could recoup the costs of developing a drug for such 
disease or condition from U.S. sales of the drug. These rare 
diseases and conditions include Huntington's disease, 
myoclonus, ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease), Tourette's syndrome, and 
Duchenne's dystrophy (a form of muscular dystrophy).
    As with other general business credits (sec. 38), taxpayers 
are allowed to carry back unused credits to three years 
preceding the year the credit is earned (but not to a taxable 
year ending before July 1, 1996) and to carry forward unused 
credits to 15 years following the year the credit is earned. 
The credit cannot be used to offset a taxpayer's alternative 
minimum tax liability.
    The orphan drug tax credit expired and did not apply to 
expenses paid or incurred after May 31, 1997.\107\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \107\ The orphan drug tax credit originally was enacted in 1983 and 
was extended on several occasions. The credit expired after December 
31, 1994, and later was reinstated for the period July 1, 1996, through 
May 31, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed it appropriate to reinstate the 
orphan drug tax credit.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The orphan drug tax credit provided for by section 45C is 
permanently extended.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for qualified clinical testing 
expenses paid or incurred after May 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $29 million in 1998, $28 million in 1999, 
$30 million in 2000, $32 million in 2001, $34 million in 2002, 
$35 million in 2003, $37 million in 2004, $39 million in 2005, 
$40 million in 2006, and $42 million in 2007.
             TITLE VII. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TAX INCENTIVES

       (sec. 701 of the Act and new secs. 1400-1400C of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

Empowerment zones and enterprise communities

    Pursuant to the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 
(OBRA 1993), the Secretaries of the Department of Housing and 
Urban Development (HUD) and the Department of Agriculture 
designated a total of nine empowerment zones and 95 enterprise 
communities on December 21, 1994. The 1997 Act provides for the 
designation of 22 additional empowerment zones.\108\ Designated 
empowerment zones and enterprise communities were required to 
satisfy certain eligibility criteria, including specified 
poverty rates and population and geographic size limitations. 
Portions of the District of Columbia were designated as an 
enterprise community in 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \108\ The Act authorizes the designation of two additional urban 
empowerment zones that would be eligible for the tax incentives 
available in empowerment zones designated under OBRA 1993. The Act also 
authorizes the designation of an additional 20 empowerment zones. 
Within these additional empowerment zones, qualified enterprise zone 
businesses are eligible to receive up to $20,000 of additional section 
179 expensing and to utilize special tax-exempt financing benefits. 
However, such businesses are not eligible to receive the present-law 
wage credit. The 20 additional empowerment zones are described in 
detail in Act secs. 951-956, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The following tax incentives are available for certain 
businesses located in empowerment zones designated under OBRA 
1993: (1) an annual 20-percent wage credit for the first 
$15,000 of wages paid to a zone resident who works in the zone; 
(2) an additional $20,000 of expensing under Code section 179 
for qualified zone property placed in service by an enterprise 
zone business; and (3) special tax-exempt financing for certain 
zone facilities. These incentives are described under Act secs. 
951-956, below.
    The 95 enterprise communities are eligible for the special 
tax-exempt financing benefits but not the other tax incentives 
available in the empowerment zones. In addition, OBRA 1993 
provided that Federal grants would be made to designated 
empowerment zones and enterprise communities. Under the Act, 
the so-called ``brownfields'' tax incentive (described in Act 
sec. 941, below) that allows taxpayers to expense certain 
environmental remediation expenditures is available in 
enterprise communities, as well as in empowerment zones. In 
addition, certain schools located in empowerment zones or 
enterprise communities may be able to benefit from the issuance 
of so-called ``zone academy bonds'' (described under Act sec. 
226, above) under the Act.
    The tax incentives for empowerment zones and enterprise 
communities generally are available during the 10-year period 
that the designation remains in effect.

Taxation of capital gains

    In general, gain or loss reflected in the value of an asset 
is not recognized for income tax purposes until a taxpayer 
disposes of the asset. On the sale or exchange of capital 
assets, the net capital gain generally is taxed at the same 
rate as ordinary income, except that, for individuals, the 
maximum rate of tax is limited to 20 percent of the net capital 
gain.\109\ Net capital gain is the excess of the net long-term 
capital gain for the taxable year over the net short-term 
capital loss for the year. Gain or loss is treated as long-term 
if the asset is held for more than one year. The maximum 20-
percent rate generally applies to capital assets held for more 
than 18 months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \109\ The Act generally reduces the maximum rate of tax on the net 
capital gain of an individual from 28 percent to 20 percent, and makes 
certain other modifications to the maximum capital gains rates 
applicable to certain assets. These modifications are described in 
detail under Act sec. 311, above. In addition, Code section 1202 
provides a 50-percent exclusion for gain from the sale of certain small 
business stock acquired at original issue and held for at least five 
years. However, the lower rates provided by the Act do not apply to the 
includable portion of the gain from the qualifying sale of small 
business stock. (See Act sec. 313, above, for a detailed description of 
the modifications made by the Act to the small business stock rules.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Capital losses generally are deductible in full against 
capital gains. In addition, individual taxpayers may deduct 
capital losses against up to $3,000 of ordinary income in each 
year. Any remaining unused capital losses may be carried 
forward indefinitely to another taxable year.
    A capital asset generally means any property except (1) 
inventory, stock in trade, or property held primarily for sale 
to customers in the ordinary course of the taxpayer's trade or 
business, (2) depreciable or real property used in the 
taxpayer's trade or business, (3) specified literary or 
artistic property, (4) business accounts or notes receivable, 
and (5) certain publications of the Federal Government.
    In addition, the net gain from the disposition of certain 
property used in the taxpayer's trade or business is treated as 
long-term capital gain. Gain from the disposition of 
depreciable personal property is not treated as capital gain to 
the extent of all previous depreciation allowances. Gain from 
the disposition of depreciable real property generally is not 
treated as capital gain to the extent of the depreciation 
allowances in excess of the allowances that would have been 
available under the straight-line method. Under the Act, gain 
from the sale of depreciable real property, to the extent that 
it is ``unrecaptured section 1250 gain,'' is subject to a 
maximum rate of 25 percent.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the District of Columbia faces 
two key problems--inability to attract and retain a stable 
residential base and insufficient economic activity. To this 
end, the Congress provided certain tax incentives to attract 
new homeowners to the District and to encourage economic 
development in those areas of the District where development 
has been inadequate.

                       Explanation of Provisions

Designation of D.C. Enterprise Zone

    The Act designates certain economically depressed census 
tracts within the District of Columbia as the ``D.C. Enterprise 
Zone,'' within which businesses and individual residents are 
eligible for special tax incentives. The census tracts that 
compose the D.C. Enterprise Zone are (1) all census tracts that 
presently are part of the D.C. enterprise community designated 
under section 1391 (i.e., portions of Anacostia, Mt. Pleasant, 
Chinatown, and the easternmost part of the District) and (2) 
all additional census tracts within the District of Columbia 
where the poverty rate is not less than 20 percent.\110\ The 
D.C. Enterprise Zone designation generally will remain in 
effect for five years for the period from January 1, 1998, 
through December 31, 2002.\111\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \110\ A technical correction is necessary to clarify that the 
determination of whether a census tract in the District of Columbia 
satisfies the applicable poverty criteria for inclusion in the D.C. 
Enterprise Zone for purposes of the wage credit, expensing, and special 
tax-exempt financing incentives (poverty rate of not less than 20 
percent) or for purposes of the zero-percent capital gains rate 
(poverty rate of not less than 10 percent), is based on 1990 decennial 
census data. A provision to this effect is included in Title VI (sec. 
607) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed 
by the House on November 5, 1997. This technical correction would 
clarify that data from the 2000 decennial census will not result in the 
expansion or other reconfiguration of the D.C. Enterprise Zone.
    \111\ The status of certain census tracts within the District as an 
enterprise community designated under section 1391 also terminates on 
December 31, 2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Empowerment zone wage credit, expensing, and tax-exempt financing

            In general
    The following tax incentives that are available under 
present law in certain empowerment zones are available in the 
D.C. Enterprise Zone (modified as described below): (1) a 20-
percent wage credit for the first $15,000 of wages paid to 
District residents who work in the D.C. Enterprise Zone; (2) an 
additional $20,000 of expensing under Code section 179 for 
qualified zone property; and (3) special tax-exempt financing 
for certain zone facilities. In addition, Federal tax 
incentives that are generally available in designated 
empowerment zones also are available in the D.C. Enterprise 
Zone (e.g., expensing of certain environmental remediation 
expenditures (the so-called ``brownfields'' provision), and the 
tax credit for holders of qualified ``zone academy 
bonds'').\112\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \112\ Similarly, one category of targeted individuals for purposes 
of the work opportunity tax credit is ``high risk youth,'' defined as 
individuals certified by the designated local agency as being 18-24 
years old, and having a principal place of abode in an empowerment zone 
or enterprise community. Accordingly, individuals between the ages of 
18 and 24 who live in the portions of the District that are designated 
as the D.C. Enterprise Zone may qualify as members of a targeted group 
for purposes of the work opportunity tax credit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            D.C. employer wage credit
    A 20-percent credit against income tax liability is 
available to all employers for the first $15,000 of qualified 
wages paid to each employee who (1) is a District resident 
(i.e., his or her principal place of abode is within the 
District), and (2) performs substantially all employment 
services within the D.C. Zone in a trade or business of the 
employer.\113\ The D.C. wage credit rate remains at 20 percent 
for the D.C. Enterprise Zone for the period 1998 through 
2002.\114\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \113\ Proposed Treasury regulations provide that an employer may 
use either each pay period or the entire calendar year as the relevant 
period in determining whether a particular employee satisfies the 
``location-of-services'' requirement. For each taxable year, the 
employer must use the same method for all its employees. Prop. Treas. 
Reg. sec. 1.1396-1. Under the proposed regulations, an employee would 
not satisfy the ``location of services'' requirement during the 
applicable period (either the pay period or the calendar year) unless 
substantially all of the services performed by the employee for the 
employer during that period are performed within the zone in a trade or 
business of the employer. Prop. Treas. Reg. sec. 1.1396-1(b)(1)(ii) and 
Prop. Treas. Reg. sec. 1.1396-1(b)(2)(ii).
    \114\ Thus, the D.C. wage credit does not phase down to 15 percent 
in the year 2002 as does the empowerment zone wage credit under 
present-law section 1396(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The maximum D.C. wage credit per qualified employee is 
$3,000 per year (20 percent of $15,000). Wages paid to a 
qualified employee continue to be eligible for the D.C. wage 
credit if the employee earns more than $15,000, although only 
the first $15,000 of wages will be eligible for the D.C. wage 
credit.\115\ The D.C. wage credit is available with respect to 
a qualified employee, regardless of the number of other 
employees who work for the employer. In general, any taxable 
business carrying out activities in the D.C. Zone may claim the 
D.C. wage credit, regardless of whether the employer meets the 
definition of a ``D.C. Zone business'' (which applies for the 
increased section 179 expensing, the tax-exempt financing, and 
the zero-percent capital gains rate provisions, described 
below).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \115\ To prevent avoidance of the $15,000 limit, all employers of a 
controlled group of corporations (or partnerships or proprietorships 
under common control) will be treated as a single employer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Qualified wages include the first $15,000 of ``wages,'' 
defined to include (1) salary and wages as generally defined 
for FUTA purposes, and (2) certain training and educational 
expenses paid on behalf of a qualified employee, provided that 
(a) the expenses are paid to an unrelated third party and are 
excludable from gross income of the employee under section 127, 
or (b) in the case of an employee under age 19, the expenses 
are incurred by the employer in operating a youth training 
program in conjunction with local education officials.
    The D.C. wage credit is allowed with respect to full-time 
and part-time employees. However, the employee must be employed 
by the employer for a minimum period of at least 90 days. Wages 
are not eligible for the D.C. wage credit if paid to certain 
relatives of the employer or, if the employer is a corporation 
or partnership, certain relatives of a person who owns more 
than 50 percent of the business. In addition, wages are not 
eligible for the D.C. wage credit if paid to a person who owns 
more than five percent of the stock (or capital or profits 
interests) of the employer. Finally, the wage credit is not 
available with respect to any individual employed at any 
facility described in present-law section 144(c)(6)(B) (i.e., a 
private or commercial golf course, country club, massage 
parlor, hot tub facility, suntan facility, racetrack or other 
facility used for gambling, or any store the principal business 
of which is the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off 
premises). In addition, the wage credit is not available with 
respect to any individual employed by a trade or business the 
principal activity of which is farming (within the meaning of 
subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 2032A(e)(5)), but only if, 
as of the close of the preceding taxable year, the sum of the 
aggregate unadjusted bases (or, if greater, the fair market 
value) of assets of the farm exceed $500,000.\116\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \116\ Code secs. 1396(d)(2)(D) and (E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    An employer's deduction otherwise allowed for wages paid is 
reduced by the amount of D.C. wage credit claimed for that 
taxable year.\117\ Wages are not to be taken into account for 
purposes of the D.C. wage credit if taken into account in 
determining the employer's work opportunity tax credit under 
section 51 or the welfare-to-work credit under section 
51A.\118\ In addition, the $15,000 cap is reduced by any wages 
taken into account in computing the work opportunity tax credit 
or the welfare-to-work credit.\119\ The D.C. wage credit may be 
used to offset up to 25 percent of alternative minimum tax 
liability.\120\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \117\ Code sec. 280C(a).
    \118\ Code sec. 1396(c)(3)(A) and Code sec. 51A(d)(2).
    \119\ Code sec. 1396(c)(3)(B) and Code sec. 51A(d)(2).
    \120\ Code sec. 38(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The wage credit is effective for wages paid (or incurred) 
to a qualified individual for services performed after December 
31, 1997, and before January 1, 2003.
            Increased expensing under Code section 179
    For a ``qualified D.C. Zone business'' (defined below), the 
expensing allowance for certain depreciable business property 
provided under section 179 is increased by the lesser of: (1) 
$20,000 or (2) the cost of section 179 property that is 
``qualified zone property'' and that is placed in service 
during the taxable year.
    To qualify for the increased expensing, property must be 
both section 179 property and ``qualified zone property.'' 
Section 179 property generally is depreciable tangible personal 
property as well as certain other property. Buildings and their 
structural components are not section 179 property. ``Qualified 
zone property'' is depreciable tangible property that satisfies 
three tests: (1) it must be acquired by purchase after December 
31, 1997; (2) the original use of the property in the D.C. Zone 
must commence with the taxpayer (however, used property that 
has been used elsewhere may qualify); and (3) substantially all 
of the use of the property must be in the active conduct of a 
trade or business by the taxpayer within the D.C. Zone. A 
special rule provides that, in the case of property that is 
``substantially renovated'' by the taxpayer, such property need 
not be acquired by the taxpayer after December 31, 1997, nor 
need the original use of such property in the D.C. Enterprise 
Zone commence with the taxpayer. Rather, substantially all of 
the use of such property during substantially all of the 
taxpayer's holding period (after it has been substantially 
renovated) must be in the active conduct of a qualified D.C. 
Zone business of the taxpayer in the D.C. Enterprise Zone. For 
this purpose, property is treated as ``substantially 
renovated'' if, prior to January 1, 2003, additions to basis 
with respect to such property in the hands of the taxpayer 
during any 24-month period beginning after December 31, 1997, 
exceed the greater of (1) an amount equal to the adjusted basis 
at the beginning of such 24-month period in the hands of the 
taxpayer, or (2) $5,000.
    As under present law, the section 179 expensing allowance 
is phased out for certain taxpayers with investment in 
qualified property during the taxable year in excess of 
$200,000. However, the present-law phase-out range is applied 
by taking into account only one-half of the cost of qualified 
zone property that is section 179 property. In applying the 
section 179 phaseout, the cost of section 179 property that is 
not qualified zone property is not reduced. The amount 
permitted to be expensed and deducted under Code section 179 
may not exceed the taxable income derived from the active 
conduct of a trade or business.
    In general, all other provisions of present-law section 179 
apply to the increased expensing for qualified D.C. Zone 
businesses. Thus, all component members of a controlled group 
are treated as one taxpayer for purposes of the expensing 
allowance and the application of the phaseout range (sec. 
179(d)(6)). The limitations apply at both the partnership (and 
S corporation) and partner (and shareholder) levels. The 
increased expensing allowance is allowed for purposes of the 
alternative minimum tax (i.e., it is not treated as an 
adjustment for purposes of the alternative minimum tax). The 
section 179 expensing deduction may be recaptured if the 
property is not used predominantly in a qualified D.C. Zone 
business (under rules similar to present-law section 
179(d)(10)).
    Accordingly, qualified D.C. Zone businesses with a 
sufficiently small amount of annual investment may elect to 
deduct currently (as opposed to depreciate over time) up to 
$38,500 in 1998 of the cost of qualifying property placed in 
service for the taxable year. The maximum will increase as the 
base amount permitted to be expensed under Code section 179 
increases each year, up to a maximum amount of $44,000 in 2001 
and 2002.
    The increased expensing under Code section 179 is effective 
for qualified D.C. Zone property placed in service periods 
beginning after December 31, 1997, and before January 1, 2003.
    Qualified D.C. Zone business.--For purposes of the 
increased expensing under Code section 179 (as well as 
generally for purposes of the tax-exempt financing provisions 
and the zero-percent capital gains rate described below), a 
qualified D.C. Zone business generally is defined in the same 
manner as is an ``enterprise zone business'' under section 
1397B.\121\ However, the Act eliminates the requirement that at 
least 35 percent of the employees of a qualified D.C. Zone 
business must be residents of the D.C. Zone.\122\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \121\ The requirements of an ``enterprise zone business'' under 
section 1397B were developed as part of OBRA 1993 in the context of 
authorizing the designation of nine unspecified empowerment zones 
located throughout the nation. Congress may wish to reconsider the 
applicability of certain of these requirements in defining a qualified 
D.C. Zone business given the nature of the District's economy and the 
type of economic activity that Congress intended to encourage.
    \122\ Section 1400(e) eliminates this requirement contained in 
section 1397B(b)(6) with respect to corporations and partnerships and 
in section 1397B(c)(5) with respect to proprietorships.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Accordingly, for purposes of the increased expensing under 
section 179, a corporation or partnership is a qualified D.C. 
Zone business if: (1) the sole trade or business \123\ of the 
corporation or partnership is the active conduct of a 
``qualified business'' (defined below) within the D.C. Zone; 
\124\ (2) at least 50 percent of the total gross income of such 
entity is derived from the active conduct of a qualified 
business within the D.C. Zone; \125\ (3) a substantial portion 
of the use of the entity's tangible property (whether owned or 
leased) is within the D.C. Zone; (4) a substantial portion of 
the entity's intangible property is used in the active conduct 
of such business; (5) a substantial portion of the services 
performed for such entity by its employees are performed within 
the D.C. Zone; and (6) less than 5 percent of the average of 
the aggregate unadjusted bases of the property of such entity 
is attributable to (a) certain financial property,\126\ or (b) 
collectibles not held primarily for sale to customers in the 
ordinary course of an active trade or business. Similar rules 
apply to a qualified business carried on by an individual as a 
proprietorship.\127\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \123\ A technical correction may be necessary to clarify that, for 
purposes of this provision, as well as for purposes of defining a 
``qualified business'', the term ``trade or business'' encompasses 
activities carried out on a not-for-profit, as well as on a for-profit 
basis. For example, a trade association could be a qualified D.C. Zone 
business if it satisfies all of the requirements enumerated above.
    \124\ This requirement does not apply to a business carried on by 
an individual as a proprietorship.
    \125\ Regulations issued under section 1394 give an example of a 
business that would satisfy this test. The regulations describe a mail 
order clothing business which is located in an empowerment zone. The 
business purchases its supplies from suppliers located both within and 
outside of the zone and expects that orders will be received both from 
customers who will reside or work within the zone and from others 
outside of the zone. All orders are received and filled at, and are 
shipped from, the clothing business located in the zone. Under the 
regulations, this clothing business meets the requirement that at least 
80 percent (as required under prior law) of its gross income is derived 
from the active conduct of business within the zone. Treas. Reg. sec. 
1.1394-1(p), Example (3).
    \126\ Nonqualified financial property is defined in Code section 
1397B(e) to mean debt, stock, partnership interest, options, futures 
contracts, forward contracts, warrants, notional principal contracts, 
annuities, and other similar property. The term does not include 
reasonable amounts of working capital held in cash, cash equivalents, 
or debt instruments with a term of 18 months or less, or accounts or 
notes receivable acquired in the ordinary course of trade or business 
for services rendered or from the sale of inventory property.
    \127\ For purposes of determining status as a qualified D.C. Zone 
business, limited liability companies will be characterized as 
corporations or partnerships in accordance with the so-called ``check-
the-box'' regulations (Treas. Reg. sec. 301.7701-3). A single member 
limited liability company that is disregarded for Federal income tax 
purposes under the check-the-box regulations would be treated as a 
proprietorship or branch for purposes of determining its status as a 
qualified D.C. Zone business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In general, a ``qualified business'' means any trade or 
business. However, a ``qualified business'' does not include 
any trade or business that consists predominantly of the 
development or holding of intangibles for sale or license. In 
addition, a qualified business does not include any private or 
commercial golf course, country club, massage parlor, hot tub 
facility, suntan facility, racetrack or other facility used for 
gambling, liquor store, or certain large farms (so-called 
``excluded businesses''). The rental of residential real estate 
is not a qualified business. The rental of commercial real 
estate is a qualified business only if at least 50 percent of 
the gross rental income from the real property is from 
qualified D.C. Zone businesses. The rental of tangible personal 
property to others also is not a qualified business unless at 
least 50 percent of the rental of such property is by qualified 
D.C. Zone businesses or by residents of the D.C. Zone.
    A special rule applies to businesses located on contiguous 
real property that straddles census tract lines. If the amount 
of real property located within the D.C. Zone is substantial 
compared to the amount of real property that is not within the 
D.C. Zone, then all of the services performed by employees, all 
business activities, all tangible property and all intangible 
propertyof the business entity or proprietorship that occur in 
or is located on the real property is treated as occurring or situated 
in the D.C. Zone.\128\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \128\ Code section 1397B(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Activities of legally separate (even if related) parties 
are not aggregated for purposes of determining whether an 
entity qualifies as a D.C. Zone business.
            Tax-exempt financing
    A qualified D.C. Zone business (as defined below) is 
permitted to borrow proceeds from the issuance of qualified 
enterprise zone facility bonds (as defined in section 1394) by 
the District of Columbia.\129\ Such bonds are subject to the 
District's annual private activity bond volume limitation of 
$150 million.\130\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \129\ Portions of the District of Columbia were designated as an 
enterprise community under section 1391 in 1994. Accordingly, the 
District was entitled to issue tax-exempt enterprise zone facility 
bonds under section 1394. In fact, however, the District did not issue 
any such bonds.
    \130\ The exception to the volume cap that is available with 
respect to new empowerment zone facility bonds (described in section 
1394(f)) does not apply to D.C. enterprise zone facility bonds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Generally, qualified enterprise zone facility bonds for the 
District are bonds 95 percent or more of the net proceeds of 
which are used to finance: (1) qualified D.C. Zone property the 
principal user \131\ of which is a qualified D.C. Zone 
business, and (2) functionally related and subordinate land 
located in the D.C. Enterprise Zone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \131\ In general, the term ``principal user'' means the owner of 
the financed property. However, in the case of rental property, if an 
owner of real property financed with enterprise zone facility bonds is 
not an enterprise zone business, but the rental of the property is a 
qualified business (i.e., 50 percent of the gross rental income is 
derived from enterprise zone businesses), then the term ``principal 
user'' for purposes of sections 1394 (b) and (e) means the lessee(s). 
Treas. Reg. sec. 1.1394-1(j). See also Treas. Reg. sec. 1.1394-1(p), 
Example (8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ``Qualified D.C. Zone property'' for these purposes 
generally has the same definition as ``qualified zone 
property'' for purposes of the increased expensing under 
section 179. Thus, it is depreciable tangible property that 
satisfies three tests: (1) it must be acquired by purchase 
after December 31, 1997; (2) the original use of the property 
in the D.C. Zone must commence with the taxpayer (however, 
property that has been used elsewhere may qualify); \132\ and 
(3) substantially all of the use of the property must be in the 
active conduct of a trade or business by the taxpayer within 
the D.C. Zone. A special rule provides that, in the case of 
business property that is ``substantially renovated,'' such 
property need not be acquired by the taxpayer after December 
31, 1997, nor need the original use of such property in the 
D.C. Enterprise Zone commence with the taxpayer. Solely for 
purposes of the tax-exempt financing provisions, property is 
treated as ``substantially renovated'' if, prior to January 1, 
2003, additions to basis with respect to such property in the 
hands of the taxpayer during any 24-month period beginning 
after December 31, 1997, exceed the greater of (1) an amount 
equal to 15 percent of the adjusted basis at the beginning of 
such 24-month period in the hands of the taxpayer, or (2) 
$5,000.\133\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \132\ Treas. Reg. sec. 1.1394-1(h) defines the term ``original 
use'' to mean the first use to which the property is put within the 
zone. Under a special rule, if property is vacant for at least a one-
year period including the date of the zone designation, then use prior 
to that period is disregarded for purposes of determining original use.
    \133\ Code section 1394(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Similarly, the term ``D.C. Zone business'' generally is 
defined as for purposes of the increased expensing under 
section 179. However, a qualified D.C. Zone business for 
purposes of the tax-exempt financing provisions includes a 
business located in the D.C. Zone that would qualify as a D.C. 
Zone business if it were separately incorporated.\134\ In 
addition, under a special rule applicable only for purposes of 
the tax-exempt financing rules, a business is not required to 
satisfy the requirements applicable to a D.C. Zone business 
until the end of a startup period if, at the beginning of the 
startup period, there is a reasonable expectation that the 
business will be a qualified D.C. Zone business at the end of 
the startup period and the business makes bona fide efforts to 
be such a business. With respect to each property financed by a 
bond issue, the startup period ends at the beginning of the 
first taxable year beginning more than two years after the 
later of (1) the date of the bond issue financing such 
property, or (2) the date the property was placed in service 
(but in no event more than three years after the date of bond 
issuance). In addition, if a business satisfies certain 
requirements applicable to a qualified D.C. Zone business for a 
three-year testing period following the end of the start-up 
period and thereafter continues to satisfy certain business 
requirements,\135\ then it will be treated as a qualified D.C. 
Zone business for all years after the testing period 
irrespective of whether it satisfies all of the requirements of 
a qualified D.C. Zone business.\136\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \134\ For example, an establishment that is part of a national 
chain could qualify as a D.C. Zone business for purposes of the tax-
exempt financing incentive, provided that such establishment would 
satisfy the definition of a D.C. Zone business if it were separately 
incorporated.
    \135\ To be eligible for this special rule after the end of the 3-
year testing period, a business must remain a trade or business that 
does not (1) consist predominantly of the development or holding of 
intangibles for sale or license, (2) involve the operation of a private 
or commercial golf course, country club, massage parlor, hot tub 
facility, suntan facility, racetrack or other facility used for 
gambling, or liquor store, and (3) have as its principal activity 
farming with respect to certain large farms.
    \136\ Section 1394(b)(3)(B)(iii) waives all of the requirements of 
an enterprise zone business described in sections 1397B(b) or (c) for 
certain businesses after the prescribed testing period except the 
requirement that at least 35 percent of the employees of such business 
be residents of the empowerment zone or enterprise community. However, 
the 35-percent zone resident requirement does not apply with respect to 
qualified D.C. Zone businesses (sec. 1400(e)). Accordingly, a technical 
correction is necessary to clarify that qualified D.C. Zone businesses 
that take advantage of the special tax-exempt financing incentives do 
not become subject to a 35-percent zone resident requirement after the 
close of the testing period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The aggregate face amount of all outstanding qualified 
enterprise zone bonds per qualified D.C. Zone business may not 
exceed $15 million. However, the $15 million-per-D.C. Zone 
business requirement should not limit issuance of a single 
issue of bonds (in excess of $15 million) for more than one 
qualified facility, provided that the $15 million limit is 
satisfied with respect to each qualified D.C. Zone business. In 
addition, total outstanding qualified enterprise zone bond 
financing for each principal user of these bonds may not exceed 
$20 million for all empowerment zones and enterprise 
communities, including the D.C. Enterprise Zone. For purposes 
of these determinations, the aggregate amount of outstanding 
enterprise zone facility bonds allocable to any business shall 
be determined under rules similar to rules contained in section 
144(a)(10).
    Qualified enterprise zone facility bonds are exempt from 
the general restrictions on financing the acquisition of 
existing property set forth in section 147(d). Additionally, 
these bonds are exempted from the general restriction in 
section 147(c)(1)(A) on financing land (or an interest therein) 
with 25 percent or more of the net proceeds of a bond issue. 
Unless otherwise noted, all other tax-exempt bond rules 
relating to exempt facility bonds (including the restrictions 
on bank deductibility of interest allocable to tax-exempt 
bonds) apply to qualified enterprise zone facility bonds.
    Certain so-called ``change-in-use'' rules apply to 
qualified enterprise zone facility bonds. Accordingly, interest 
on all bond-financed loans to a business that no longer 
qualifies as a D.C. Zone business, or on loans to finance 
property that ceases to be used by the business in the D.C. 
Zone, becomes nondeductible, effective from the first day of 
the taxable year in which the disqualification or cessation of 
use occurs. This penalty is waived if: (1) the issuer and 
principal user in good faith attempted to meet these 
requirements and (2) any failure to meet such requirements is 
corrected within a reasonable period after such failure is 
first discovered. This penalty does not apply solely by reason 
of the termination or revocation of the District's designation 
as the D.C. Enterprise Zone. The good faith rule described 
above also applies to certain other requirements of qualified 
enterprise zone facility bonds.
    These bonds may only be issued while the D.C. Enterprise 
Zone designation is in effect. Thus, the special tax-exempt 
bond provisions apply to bonds issued after December 31, 1997, 
and prior to January 1, 2003.
            Zero-percent capital gains rate
    The Act provides a zero-percent capital gains rate for 
capital gains from the sale of certain qualified D.C. Zone 
assets held for more than five years. In general, qualified 
``D.C. Zone assets'' mean stock or partnership interests held 
in, or tangible property held by, a D.C. Zone business. For 
purposes of the zero-percent capital gains rate, the D.C. 
Enterprise Zone is defined to include all census tracts within 
the District of Columbia where the poverty rate is not less 
than 10 percent.
    For purposes of the zero-percent capital gains rate, the 
definition of qualified D.C. Zone business generally is the 
same as the definition applicable for purposes of the increased 
expensing under section 179, described above.\137\ However, 
solely for purposes of the zero-percent capital gains rate, a 
qualified D.C. Zone business must derive at least 80 percent 
(as opposed to 50 percent) of its total gross income from the 
active conduct of a qualified business within the D.C. 
Enterprise Zone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \137\ A technical correction to section 1400B(c) is necessary to 
clarify that a proprietorship can constitute a D.C. Zone business for 
purposes of the zero-percent capital gains rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ``D.C. Zone business stock'' is stock in a domestic 
corporation originally issued after December 31, 1997, that, at 
the time of issuance\138\ and during substantially all of the 
taxpayer's holding period, was a qualified D.C. Zone business, 
provided that such stock was acquired by the taxpayer on 
original issue from the corporation solely in exchange for cash 
before January 1, 2003.\139\ A ``D.C. Zone partnership 
interest'' is a domestic partnership interest originally issued 
after December 31, 1997, that is acquired by the taxpayer from 
the partnership solely in exchange for cash before January 1, 
2003, provided that, at the time such interest was 
acquired\140\ and during substantially all of the taxpayer's 
holding period, the partnership was a qualified D.C. Zone 
business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \138\ In the case of a new corporation, it is sufficient if the 
corporation is being organized for purposes of being a qualified D.C. 
Zone business.
    \139\ D.C. Zone business stock does not include any stock acquired 
from a corporation which made substantial stock redemption of 
distribution (without a bona fide business purpose therefor) in an 
attempt to avoid the purposes of the provision. A similar rule applies 
with respect to D.C. Zone partnership interests.
    \140\ In the case of a new partnership, it is sufficient if the 
partnership is being formed for purposes of being a qualified D.C. Zone 
business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Finally, ``D.C. Zone business property'' is tangible 
property\141\ acquired by the taxpayer by purchase (within the 
meaning of present law section 179(d)(2)) after December 31, 
1997, and before January 1, 2003, provided that the original 
use of such property in the D.C. Enterprise Zone commences with 
the taxpayer and substantially all of the use of such property 
during substantially all of the taxpayer's holding period was 
in a qualified D.C. Zone business of the taxpayer. A special 
rule provides that, in the case of a building that is 
``substantially renovated'' (including any land on which such 
building is located), such property need not be acquired by the 
taxpayer after December 31, 1997, nor need the original use of 
such property in the D.C. Enterprise Zone commence with the 
taxpayer. Rather, substantially all of the use of such property 
during substantially all of the taxpayer's holding period 
(after it has been substantially renovated) must be in a 
qualified D.C. Zone business of the taxpayer. For these 
purposes, property is treated as ``substantially renovated'' 
if, prior to January 1, 2003, additions to basis with respect 
to such property in the hands of the taxpayer during any 24-
month period beginning after December 31, 1997, exceed the 
greater of (1) an amount equal to the adjusted basis at the 
beginning of such 24-month period in the hands of the taxpayer, 
or (2) $5,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \141\ D.C. Zone business property is limited to tangible property. 
Thus, for example, D.C. Zone businesses that are qualified 
proprietorships cannot claim the zero-percent rate on capital gain from 
the sale of any intangible property. Similarly, corporations or 
partnerships cannot claim the zero-percent rate on capital gain from 
the direct sale of intangible property. However, the zero-percent rate 
does apply to qualified gain from the sale of D.C. Zone business stock 
or a D.C. Zone partnership interest that is attributable to the value 
of intangible assets held by the entity, provided such assets are an 
integral part of a D.C. Zone business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     In addition, qualified D.C. Zone assets include property 
that was a qualified D.C. Zone asset in the hands of a prior 
owner,\142\ provided that at the time of acquisition, and 
during substantially all of the subsequent purchaser's holding 
period, either (1) substantially all of the use of the property 
is in a qualified D.C. Zone business, or (2) the property is an 
ownership interest in a qualified D.C. Zone business.\143\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \142\ A technical correction is necessary to clarify that there is 
no requirement that D.C. Zone business property be acquired by a 
subsequent purchaser prior to January 1, 2003, to be eligible for this 
special rule.
    \143\ The termination of the D.C. Zone designation will not, by 
itself, result in property failing to be treated as a qualified D.C. 
Zone asset. However, capital gain eligible for the zero-percent capital 
gains rate does not include any gain attributable to periods after 
December 31, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In general, gain eligible for the zero-percent tax rate 
means gain from the sale or exchange of a qualified D.C. Zone 
asset that is (1) a capital asset or (2) property used in the 
trade or business as defined in section 1231(b). Gain that is 
attributable to real property, or to intangible assets, 
qualifies for the zero-percent rate, provided that such real 
property or intangible asset is an integral part of a qualified 
D.C. Zone business.\144\ However, no gain attributable to 
periods before January 1, 1998, and after December 31, 2007, is 
qualified capital gain. In addition, no gain that is 
attributable, directly or indirectly, to a transaction with a 
related person is eligible for the zero-percent rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \144\ However, as described above, sole proprietorships and other 
taxpayers selling assets directly cannot claim the zero-percent rate on 
capital gain from the sale of any intangible property (i.e., the 
integrally related test does not apply).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Act provides that property that ceases to be a 
qualified D.C. Zone asset because the property is no longer 
used in (or no longer represents an ownership interest in) a 
qualified D.C. Zone business after the five-year period 
beginning on the date the taxpayer acquired such property 
continues to be treated as a qualified D.C. Zone asset. Under 
this rule, the amount of gain eligible for the zero-percent 
capital gains rate cannot exceed the amount which would be 
qualified capital gain had the property been sold on the date 
of such cessation.
    Under a special rule, the zero-percent capital gains rate 
applies to any amount that is included in a taxpayer's gross 
income by reason of holding an interest in a pass-thru entity 
(i.e., a partnership, S corporation, regulated investment 
company, and common trust fund) if the amount is attributable 
to qualified capital gain recognized on the sale or exchange of 
a qualified D.C. Zone asset by the pass-thru entity. This flow-
through of the zero-percent capital gains rate applies only to 
qualified D.C. Zone assets that were held by the pass-thru 
entity for more than five years and were acquired and disposed 
of by the pass-thru entity while the taxpayer held an interest 
in the pass-thru entity. In addition, the amount of gain to 
which this rule applies is limited based on the interest of the 
taxpayer in the pass-thru entity on the date that the qualified 
D.C. Zone asset was acquired.\145\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \145\ Code secs. 1400B(f) and 1202(g). The legislative history of 
the Act incorrectly describes the operation of this special rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Act also provides that in the case of a transfer of a 
qualified D.C. Zone asset by gift, at death, or from a 
partnership to a partner that held an interest in the 
partnership at the time that the qualified D.C. Zone asset was 
acquired, (1) the transferee is to be treated as having 
acquired the asset in the same manner as the transferor, and 
(2) the transferee's holding period includes that of the 
transferor. In addition, rules similar to those contained in 
section 1202(i)(2) regarding treatment of contributions to 
capital after the original issuance date and section 1202(j) 
regarding treatment of certain short positions apply.

First-time home buyer tax credit

    The Act provides first-time homebuyers of a principal 
residence in the District a tax credit of up to $5,000 of the 
amount of the purchase price.\146\ The $5,000 maximum credit 
amount applies both to individuals and married couples. Married 
individuals filing separately can claim a maximum credit of 
$2,500 each. The credit phases out for individual taxpayers 
with adjusted gross income between $70,000 and $90,000 
($110,000-$130,000 for joint filers). The Secretary of Treasury 
may prescribe regulations allocating the credit among unmarried 
purchasers of a residence.\147\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \146\ A technical correction is necessary to clarify that the term 
``purchase price'' means the adjusted basis of the principal residence 
on the date the residence is purchased. A newly constructed residence 
is treated as purchased by the taxpayer on the date the taxpayer first 
occupies such residence. Provisions to this effect are included in 
Title VI (sec. 607) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 
1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
    \147\ The provision of the Act that excludes sales of certain 
personal residences from the real estate transaction reporting 
requirement (see Act sec. 312, above) may not apply to sales of 
personal residences in the District of Columbia. In this regard, the 
Congress anticipated that the Secretary of Treasury will require such 
information as may be necessary to verify eligibility for the D.C. 
first-time homebuyer credit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A ``first-time homebuyer'' means any individual if such 
individual (and, if married, such individual's spouse) did not 
have a present ownership interest in a principal residence in 
the District of Columbia during the one-year period ending on 
the date of the purchase of the principal residence to which 
the credit applies.\148\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \148\ A technical correction is required to clarify the statute in 
this regard. A provision to this effect is included in Title VI (sec. 
607) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed 
by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A taxpayer will be treated as a first-time homebuyer with 
respect to only one residence--i.e., the credit may be claimed 
one time only. The credit is available with respect to 
purchases of existing property as well as new construction. A 
taxpayer's basis in a property is reduced by the amount of any 
homebuyer tax credit claimed with respect to such property.
    The first-time homebuyer credit is a nonrefundable personal 
credit that is claimed after the credits described in Code 
sections 25 (credit for interest on certain home mortgages) and 
23 (adoption credit).\149\ The credit cannot be used to offset 
an alternative minimum tax liability. Any excess credit may be 
carried forward indefinitely to succeeding taxable years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \149\ A technical correction is required to clarify the statute in 
this regard. A provision to this effect is included in Title VI (sec. 
607) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed 
by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     The first-time homebuyer credit is available only for 
property purchased after August 4, 1997, and before January 1, 
2001. Thus, the credit is available to first-time home 
purchasers who acquire title to a qualifying principal 
residence on or after August 5, 1997, and on or before December 
31, 2000, irrespective of the date the purchase contract was 
entered into.\150\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \150\ A technical correction is required to clarify the statute in 
this regard. A provision to this effect is included in Title VI (sec. 
607) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed 
by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The D.C. wage credit is effective for wages paid (or 
incurred) to a qualified individual for services performed 
after December 31, 1997, and before January 1, 2003. The 
increased expensing under Code section 179 is effective for 
qualified D.C. Zone property placed in service in periods 
beginning after December 31, 1997, and before January 1, 2003. 
The special tax-exempt bond provisions apply to bonds issued 
after December 31, 1997, and prior to January 1, 2003. The 
zero-percent capital gains rate generally is effective for 
acquisitions of qualified D.C. Zone assets after December 31, 
1997, and before January 1, 2003. The first-time homebuyer 
credit applies to purchases after the date of enactment (August 
5, 1997) and before January 1, 2001.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision designating the D.C. Enterprise Zone (wage 
credit, increased expensing under section 179, and expanded 
tax-exempt financing) is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal 
year budget receipts by $71 million in 1998, $110 million in 
1999, $113 million in 2000, $118 million in 2001, $127 million 
in 2002, and $45 million in 2003; to increase Federal fiscal 
year budget receipts by $3 million in 2004 and by $2 million in 
2005; and to reduce Federal fiscal year budget receipts by less 
than $500,000 in 2006 and by $2 million in 2007.
    The provision providing a zero-percent capital gains rate 
for certain property is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million in 1998, $5 million in 1999, $12 
million in 2000, $21 million in 2001, $33 million in 2002, $48 
million in 2003, $85 million in 2004, $90 million in 2005, $99 
million in 2006, and $107 million in 2007.
    The first-time homebuyer tax credit provision is estimated 
to reduce Federal fiscal year budget receipts by $10 million in 
1998, $21 million in 1999, $27 million in 2000, $16 million in 
2001, and by less than $500,000 per year in each of 2002 
through 2007.
                 TITLE VIII. WELFARE-TO-WORK TAX CREDIT

           (sec. 801 of the Act and new sec. 51A of the Code)

                              Present Law

    The work opportunity tax credit is available on an elective 
basis for employers hiring individuals from one or more of 
seven targeted groups. The credit generally is equal to 35 
percent of qualified wages. Generally, qualified wages consist 
of wages attributable to service rendered by a member of a 
targeted group during the one-year period beginning with the 
day the individual begins work for the employer.
    For purposes of the work opportunity tax credit, the 
targeted groups for which the credit is available include: (1) 
families receiving Aid to Families with Dependent Children 
(``AFDC''); (2) qualified ex-felons; (3) high-risk youth; (4) 
vocational rehabilitation referrals; (5) qualified summer youth 
employees; (6) qualified veterans; and (7) families receiving 
food stamps.
    Generally, no more than $6,000 of wages during the first 
year of employment is permitted to be taken into account with 
respect to any individual. Thus, the maximum credit per 
individual is $2,100. With respect to qualified summer youth 
employees, the maximum credit is 35 percent of up to $3,000 of 
qualified first-year wages, for a maximum credit of $1,050.
    The deduction for wages is reduced by the amount of the 
credit.
    The work opportunity tax credit is effective for wages paid 
or incurred to a qualified individual who begins work for an 
employer after September 30, 1996, and before October 1, 1997.

                           Reasons for Change

    One goal of the Personal Responsibility and Work 
Opportunity Reform Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-193) was to move 
individuals from welfare to work. The Congress believed that 
the welfare-to-work credit will provide to employers an 
additional incentive to hire these categories of individuals. 
This incentive is intended to ease the transition from welfare 
to work for the targeted categories of individuals by 
increasing access to employment. It is also intended to provide 
certain employee benefits to these individuals to encourage 
training, health coverage, dependent care and ultimately better 
job attachment.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides to employers a tax credit on the first 
$20,000 of eligible wages paid to qualified long-term family 
assistance (AFDC or its successor program) recipients during 
the first two years of employment. The credit is 35 percent of 
the first $10,000 of eligible wages in the first year of 
employment and 50 percent of the first $10,000 of eligible 
wages in the second year of employment. The maximum credit is 
$8,500 per qualified employee.
    Qualified long-term family assistance recipients are: (1) 
members of a family that has received family assistance for at 
least 18 consecutive months ending on the hiring date; (2) 
members of a family that has received family assistance for a 
total of at least 18 months (whether or not consecutive) after 
the date of enactment of this credit if they are hired within 2 
years after the date that the 18-month total is reached; and 
(3) members of a family who are no longer eligible for family 
assistance because of either Federal or State time limits, if 
they are hired within 2 years after the Federal or State time 
limits made the family ineligible for family assistance.
    Eligible wages include cash wages paid to an employee plus 
amounts paid by the employer for the following: (1) educational 
assistance excludable under a section 127 program (or that 
would be excludable but for the expiration of sec. 127); (2) 
health plan coverage for the employee, but not more than the 
applicable premium defined under section 4980B(f)(4); and (3) 
dependent care assistance excludable under section 129.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for wages paid or incurred to a 
qualified individual who begins work for an employer on or 
after January 1, 1998, and before May 1, 1999.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $13 million in 1998, $31 million in 1999, 
$29 million in 2000, $15 million in 2001, $10 million in 2002, 
$4 million in 2003, $2 million in 2004, and $1 million in 
2005.\151\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \151\ The estimate includes interaction with the work opportunity 
tax credit; see explanation of section 603 of the Act.
                   TITLE IX. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

                        A. Excise Tax Provisions

1. Transfer of General Fund highway fuels tax revenues to the Highway 
        Trust Fund (sec. 901 of the bill and sec. 9503 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Federal excise taxes are imposed on highway motor fuels to 
finance the Highway Trust Fund (currently, through September 
30, 1999). Prior to October 1, 1997, the Highway Trust Fund 
motor fuels tax rates were 14 cents per gallon on highway 
gasoline and special motor fuels, 20 cents per gallon on 
highway diesel fuel, and 3 cents per gallon on diesel fuel used 
by intercity buses. Reduced tax rates apply to ethanol and 
methanol fuels. Excise taxes of 14 cents per gallon also apply 
to gasoline and special motor fuels used in motorboats, which 
goes first into the Highway Trust Fund. In addition, prior to 
October 1, 1997, a permanent General Fund tax of 4.3 cents per 
gallon was imposed on highway and other motor fuels (other than 
intercity bus gasoline and recreational motorboat diesel fuel, 
which were and are not subject to the tax, and rail diesel 
fuel, which paid a General Fund tax of 5.55 cents per gallon).
    Under prior law, amounts equivalent to 2 cents per gallon 
of the Highway Trust Fund motor fuels tax revenues were 
credited to the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund 
for capital-related expenditures on mass transit programs; the 
balance of the highway motor fuels tax revenues were and are 
credited to the Highway Account of the Trust Fund for highway-
related programs generally.
    Under prior law, transfers were made from the Highway Trust 
Fund of $1 million per fiscal year to the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund, plus up to $70 million per fiscal year 
(through September 30, 1997) to the Boat Safety Account of the 
Aquatic Resources Trust Fund of amounts equivalent to 11.5 
cents per gallon from recreational motorboat gasoline and 
special motor fuels tax revenues. Any excess revenues 
attributable to the tax on motorboat fuels were and are 
transferred from the Highway Trust Fund to the Sport Fish 
Restoration Account in the Aquatic Resources Trust Fund.
    Excise taxes imposed on gasoline, diesel and special motor 
fuels generally must be paid to the Treasury in semi-monthly 
deposits, which are credited to tax liability reported on 
quarterly excise tax returns. Subject to special rules for 
deposits attributable to taxes for the period September 16-26, 
deposits generally must be made 9 days after the end of each 
semi-monthly period (14 days for gasoline and diesel fuel taxes 
deposited by an independent refiner or small producer).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress determined that, consistent with the 
historical user tax principle of the highway motor fuels taxes, 
the existing 4.3-cents-per-gallon General Fund excise tax on 
highway fuels should be transferred to the Highway Trust Fund. 
These monies will be available for needed Highway Trust Fund 
programs in the future, to the extent consistent with overall 
budgetary spending levels.

                        Explanation of Provision

Transfer of revenues to Highway Trust Fund

    The Act transfers the prior-law General Fund excise tax of 
4.3 cents per gallon on all highway motor fuels to the Highway 
Trust Fund, beginning on October 1, 1997. Under the Act, 0.85 
cents per gallon of the 4.3 cents per gallon motor fuels tax 
revenues are to be credited to the Mass Transit Account of the 
Highway Trust Fund (for a total of 2.85 cents per gallon).\152\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \152\ Historically, the Mass Transit Account has received 20 
percent of the increase in motor fuels tax. 20 percent of 4.3 cents is 
0.86 cents. To effectuate this, a technical correction to credit 2.86 
cents per gallon to the Mass Transit Account is included in Title VI 
(sec. 608(b)) the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by 
the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Deposit rules for highway motor fuels

    The Act provides that the excise taxes on gasoline, diesel 
fuel, special motor fuels, and kerosene that otherwise would be 
required to be deposited with the Treasury after July 31, 1998, 
and before October 1, 1998, are not required to be deposited 
until October 5, 1998.
    The changes to the deposits to the Highway Trust Fund may 
not be used to cause an increase in the allocations under 
section 157 of Title 23 of the U.S. Code or any other spending 
increase in direct spending other than by enactment of future 
legislation in compliance with the Budget Enforcement Act.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on October 1, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    This provision has no net effect on Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts.

2. Repeal excise tax on diesel fuel used in recreational motorboats 
        (sec. 902 of the Act and secs. 4041 and 6427 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Before a temporary suspension through December 31, 1997 was 
enacted in 1996, diesel fuel used in recreational motorboats 
was subject to a generally applicable 24.4-cents-per-gallon 
diesel fuel excise tax. Revenues from this tax were retained in 
the General Fund. The tax was enacted by the Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act of 1993 as a revenue offset for repeal of 
the excise tax on certain luxury boats.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress was informed that many marinas had found it 
uneconomical to carry both undyed (taxed) and dyed (untaxed) 
diesel fuel because the majority of their market is for uses 
not subject to tax. As a result, some recreational boaters had 
experienced difficulty finding fuel. In 1996, the Congress 
suspended imposition of the tax on recreational boating while 
alternative collection methods were evaluated. No satisfactory 
alternative was found; therefore, the Congress determined that 
competing needs for boat fuel availability and preservation of 
the integrity of the diesel fuel tax compliance structure are 
best served by repealing the diesel fuel tax on recreational 
motorboat use.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act repeals the application of the diesel fuel tax to 
fuel used in recreational motorboats.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for fuel sold after December 31, 
1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $4 million in 1998, $5 million per year in 
1999 and 2000, and $1 million per year in 2001 through 2007.

3. Continued application of tax on imported recycled halon-1211 (sec. 
        903 of the Act and sec. 4682 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    An excise tax is imposed on the sale or use by the 
manufacturer or importer of certain ozone-depleting chemicals 
(Code sec. 4681). The amount of tax generally is determined by 
multiplying the base tax amount applicable for the calendar 
year by an ozone-depleting factor assigned to each taxable 
chemical. The base tax amount is $6.25 per pound in 1997, and 
is scheduled to increase by 45 cents per pound per year 
thereafter. The ozone-depleting factors for taxable halons are 
3 for halon-1211, 10 for halon-1301, and 6 for halon-2402.
    Taxable chemicals that are recovered and recycled within 
the United States are exempt from tax. In addition, exemption 
is provided for imported recycled halon-1301 and halon-2402 if 
such chemicals are imported from countries that are signatories 
to the Montreal Protocol onSubstances that Deplete the Ozone 
Layer. Present law further provides that exemption is to be provided 
for imported recycled halon-1211, for such chemicals imported from 
countries that are signatories to the Montreal Protocol on Substances 
that Deplete the Ozone Layer after December 31, 1997.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress understood that in response to the profit 
incentive created by the higher price for ozone-depleting 
chemicals that has resulted from the tax on these chemicals, 
entrepreneurs have developed and are marketing a substitute for 
halon-1211 that is not ozone depleting. The Congress believed 
permitting imported recycled halon-1211 to compete in the 
market tax free may destroy this entrepreneurial and 
environmental success story.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act repeals the prior-law exemption for imported 
recycled halon-1211.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 in each fiscal year from 
1997 through 2007. The aggregate increase in Federal fiscal 
year budget receipts for the period 1997-2007 is estimated to 
be $1 million.

4. Uniform rate of excise tax on vaccines (sec. 904 of the Act and 
        secs. 4131 and 4132 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A manufacturer's excise tax is imposed on certain vaccines 
routinely recommended for administration to children. Under 
prior law the rates of tax were as follows: DPT (diphtheria, 
pertussis, tetanus,), $4.56 per dose; DT (diphtheria, tetanus), 
$0.06 per dose; MMR (measles, mumps, or rubella), $4.44 per 
dose; and polio, $0.29 per dose. In general, if any vaccine was 
administered by combining more than one of the listed taxable 
vaccines, the amount of tax imposed was the sum of the amounts 
of tax imposed for each taxable vaccine. However, in the case 
of MMR and its components, any component vaccine of MMR was 
taxed at the same rate as the MMR-combined vaccine.
    Amounts equal to net revenues from this excise tax are 
deposited in the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund to 
finance compensation awards under the Federal Vaccine Injury 
Compensation Program for individuals who suffer certain 
injuries following administration of the taxable vaccines.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress understood that the prior-law tax rates 
applicable to taxable vaccines were chosen to reflect estimated 
probabilities of adverse reactions and the severity of the 
injury that might result from such reactions. The Congress 
understood that medical researchers believe that there is 
insufficient data to support fine gradations of estimates of 
potential harm from the various different childhood vaccines. 
In the light of this scientific assessment, the Congress 
believed some simplicity can be achieved by taxing such 
vaccines at the same rate per dose.
    The Congress further believed it was appropriate to review 
the list of taxable vaccines from time to time as medical 
science advances. The Center for Disease Control has 
recommended that the vaccines for HIB (haemophilus influenza 
type B), Hepatitis B, and varicella (chicken pox) be widely 
administered among the nation's children. In light of the 
growing number of immunizations using these vaccines, the 
Congress added these vaccines to the list of taxable vaccines.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act replaces the prior-law excise tax rates, that 
differed by vaccine, with a single rate tax of $0.75 per dose 
on any listed vaccine component. Under the Act, the tax applies 
to any vaccine that is a combination of vaccine components is 
75 cents times the number of components in the combined 
vaccine. For example, the MMR vaccine is taxed at a rate of 
$2.25 per dose and the DT vaccine is taxed at rate of $1.50 per 
dose.
    In addition, the Act adds three new taxable vaccines to the 
present-law taxable vaccines: (1) HIB (haemophilus influenza 
type B); (2) Hepatitis B; and (3) varicella (chickenpox). The 
three newly listed vaccines also are subject to the 75-cents 
per dose excise tax.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for sales after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997). No floor stocks tax was imposed, or 
floor stocks refunds permitted, for vaccines held on the 
effective date. For the purpose of determining the amount of 
refund of tax on a vaccine returned to the manufacturer or 
importer, for vaccines returned after the date of enactment and 
before January 1, 1999, the amount of tax assumed to have been 
paid on the initial purchase of the returned vaccine is not to 
exceed $0.75 per dose.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $16 million in 1998, $15 million in 1999, 
$15 million in 2000, $15 million in 2001, $14 million in 2002, 
$14 million in 2003, $14 million in 2004, $14 million in 2005, 
$14 million in 2006, and $14 million in 2007.

5. Treat certain gasoline ``chain retailers'' as wholesale distributors 
        under the gasoline excise tax refund rules (sec. 905 of the Act 
        and sec. 6416 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Gasoline is taxed at 18.4 cents per gallon upon removal 
from a registered pipeline or barge terminal facility. Before 
reinstatement of a 0.1-cent-per-gallon tax rate (dedicated to 
the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund) by the Act, 
gasoline was taxed at 18.3 cents per gallon. The position 
holder in the terminal at the time of removal is liable for 
payment of the tax. Certain uses of gasoline, including use by 
States and local governments, are exempt from tax. In general, 
these exemptions are realized by refunds to the exempt users of 
tax paid by the party that removed the gasoline from a terminal 
facility. Present law includes an exception to the general rule 
that refunds are made to consumers in the case of gasoline sold 
to States and local governments and certain other exempt users. 
In those cases, wholesale distributors sell the gasoline net of 
tax previously paid and receive the refunds. The term wholesale 
distributor includes only persons that sell gasoline to 
producers, retailers, or to users in bulk quantities.

                           Reasons for Change

    During recent years, States and local governments 
increasingly have purchased gasoline for their fleets by credit 
card purchases from retail outlets. Previously, these purchases 
were through bulk deliveries to tanks supplying private pumps 
at government installations. Currently, wholesale distributors 
are eligible to claim gasoline tax refunds on behalf of these 
customers. The Congress determined that allowing refunds to 
retail businesses of comparable size would adapt the gasoline 
tax rules to current market conditions without creating new 
opportunities for tax evasion.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The definition of wholesale distributor is expanded to 
include certain ``chain retailers''--retailers that make retail 
sales from 10 or more retail gasoline outlets. This 
modification conforms the definition of wholesale distributor 
to that which existed before 1987 when the point of collection 
of the gasoline tax was moved from the wholesale distribution 
level to removal from a terminal facility.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective after the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

6. Exemption of electric and other clean-fuel motor vehicles from 
        luxury automobile classification (sec. 906 of the Act and secs. 
        4001 and 4003 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Present law imposes an excise tax on the sale of 
automobiles whose price exceeds a designated threshold, 
currently $36,000. The excise tax is imposed at a rate of 8 
percent for 1997 on the excess of the sales price above the 
designated threshold. The 8-percent rate declines by one 
percentage point per year until reaching 3 percent in 2002, and 
no tax thereafter. The $36,000 threshold is indexed for 
inflation. The present-law indexed threshold of $36,000 is the 
result of adjusting a $30,000 threshold specified in the Code 
for inflation occurring after 1990 (sec. 4001(e)).
    The tax generally applies only to the first retail sale 
after manufacture, production, or importation of an automobile. 
It does not apply to subsequent sales of taxable automobiles. A 
tax, at the same rate, is imposed on the separate purchase of 
parts and accessories for a vehicle within six months of the 
first retail sale when the sum of the separate purchases of the 
vehicle, parts, and accessories exceeds the luxury tax 
threshold (sec. 4003).
    The tax applies to sales before January 1, 2003.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the price of a clean-burning 
fuel vehicle or an electric vehicle does not necessarily 
represent the consumer's purchase of a luxury good in the sense 
intended with the enactment of the luxury excise tax on 
automobiles in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990. 
Rather, the higher price of such vehicles often represents the 
cost of the technology required to produce an automobile 
designed to provide certain environmental benefits. The 
Congress believed the cost of this technology should not be 
considered a luxury for the purpose of the luxury excise tax on 
automobiles. Therefore, the Congress determined it appropriate 
to modify the threshold above which the luxury automobile 
excise tax applies in the case of certain clean-burning fuel 
vehicles and electric vehicles.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act modifies the threshold above which the luxury 
excise tax on automobiles will apply for each of two identified 
classes of automobiles both in the case of a purchase of a 
vehicle and in the case of the separate purchase of a vehicle 
and parts and accessories therefor. First, for an automobile 
that is not a clean-burning fuel vehicle to which retrofit 
parts and components are installed to make the vehicle a clean-
burning vehicle, the threshold would be $30,000, as adjusted 
for inflation under present law, plus an amount equal to the 
increment to the retail value of the automobile attributable to 
the retrofit parts and components installed.
    In the case of a passenger vehicle designed to be propelled 
primarily by electricity and built by an original equipment 
manufacturer, the threshold applicable for any year is modified 
to equal 150 percent of $30,000, with the result increased for 
inflation occurring after 1990 and rounded to next lowest 
multiple of $2,000.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for sales and installations 
occurring after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 for the 1997 fiscal year, 
by $1 million for the 1998 fiscal year, by $1 million for the 
1999 fiscal year, by less than $500,000 for each fiscal year 
from 2000 through 2003, and to have no effect on Federal 
receipts thereafter (provision expires December 31, 2002). The 
aggregate reduction in Federal fiscal year budget receipts for 
fiscal year 1997 through fiscal year 2007 is estimated to be $2 
million.

7. Tax certain alternative fuels based on energy equivalency to 
        gasoline (sec. 907 of the Act and secs. 4041 and 9503 of the 
        Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Excise taxes are imposed on gasoline, diesel fuel, and 
special motor fuels used in highway vehicles. Before enactment 
of the Act, 4.3 cents per gallon of each of these taxes was 
retained in the General Fund, with the balance of the revenues 
being dedicated to one or more Trust Funds.\153\ The tax on 
gasoline is 18.4 cents per gallon; the tax on diesel fuel is 
24.4 cents per gallon; and the tax on special motor fuels 
generally is 18.4 cents per gallon. Taxable special motor fuels 
include liquefied petroleum gas (``propane''), liquefied 
natural gas (``LNG''), and methanol from natural gas. 
Compressed natural gas (``CNG'') also is taxed when used as a 
fuel in highway vehicles. Special rates apply to methanol from 
natural gas (exempt from 7 cents of the prior-law 14-cents-per-
gallon Highway Trust Fund component of the special motor fuels 
tax), and compressed natural gas (exempt from the entire prior-
law Highway Trust Fund component of the tax).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \153\ Section 901 of the Act provides that revenues from all but 
0.1-cent-per gallon of the taxes on highway fuels is to be deposited in 
the Highway Trust Fund; the remaining 0.1-cent-per gallon (which was 
reinstated by sec. 1033 of the Act) is dedicated to the Leaking 
Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In general, these four special fuels contain less energy 
(i.e., fewer Btu's) per gallon than does gasoline.

                           Reasons for Change

    Under prior law, the largest portion of the excise tax on 
propane, LNG, and methanol from natural gas was imposed to 
finance Federal highway programs through the Highway Trust 
Fund. Under the Act, these revenues are dedicated exclusively 
to the Highway Trust Fund. A basic principle of the highway 
taxes is that users of the highway system should be taxed in 
relation to their use of the system. The Congress believed that 
adjusting the tax rates on these three special fuels is 
consistent with that principle because consumers must purchase 
more gallons of these lower-energy-content fuels than gallons 
of gasoline to travel the same number of miles.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act adjusts the tax rates on propane, LNG, and methanol 
from natural gas to reflect the respective energy equivalence 
of the fuels to gasoline. The revised Highway Trust Fund tax 
rates on these fuels are: propane, 13.6 cents per gallon; LNG 
11.9 cents per gallon, and methanol from natural gas, 9.15 
cents per gallon.
    The Act provides that revenues from the Highway Trust Fund 
portion of these taxes and the tax on CNG will be divided 
between the Highway and Mass Transit Accounts of that Trust 
Fund in the same proportion as applies to the Highway Trust 
Fund tax on gasoline.\154\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \154\ A technical correction may be necessary to implement this 
provision. Such a correction is included in Title VI of H.R. 2676, the 
Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House November 
5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for fuels sold or used after 
September 30, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $2 million in 1997, $15 million in 1998, $16 
million per year in 1999 and 2000, $17 million in 2001, $18 
million in 2002, $19 million in 2003, $20 million in 2004, $21 
million in 2005, $22 million in 2006, and $23 million in 2007.

8. Reduced rate of alcohol excise tax on certain hard ciders (sec. 908 
        of the Act and sec. 5041 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Distilled spirits are taxed at a rate of $13.50 per proof 
gallon; beer is taxed at a rate of $18 per barrel 
(approximately 58 cents per gallon); and still wines of 14 
percent alcohol or less are taxed at a rate of $1.07 per wine 
gallon. The Code defines still wines as wines containing not 
more than 0.392 gram of carbon dioxide per hundred milliliters 
of wine. Higher rates of tax are applied to wines with greater 
alcohol content, to sparkling wines (e.g., champagne), and to 
artificially carbonated wines.
    Certain small wineries may claim a credit against the 
excise tax on wine of 90 cents per wine gallon on the first 
100,000 gallons of wine produced annually (i.e., net tax rate 
of 17 cents per wine gallon). Certain small breweries pay a 
reduced tax of $7.00 per barrel (approximately 22.6 cents per 
gallon) on the first 60,000 barrels of beer produced annually.
    Apple cider containing alcohol (``hard cider'') is 
classified as wine, and was taxed as wine under prior law.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress understood that as an alcoholic beverage, hard 
cider competes more as a substitute for beer than as a 
substitute for still, or table, wine. If most consumers of 
alcoholic beverages choose between hard cider and beer, rather 
than between hard cider and wine, taxing hard cider at tax 
rates imposed on other wine products may distort consumer 
choice and unfairly disadvantage producers of hard cider in the 
market place. The Congress also understood that producers of 
hard cider generally are small businesses and concluded that it 
would improve market efficiency and fairness to tax this 
beverage at a rate equivalent to the tax imposed on the 
production of beer by small brewers.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act adjusts the tax rate on ``hard cider'' that was 
taxed as a still wine under prior law (i.e., a cider containing 
not more than 0.392 gram of carbon dioxide per hundred 
milliliters),\155\ to 22.6 cents per gallon for those persons 
who produce more than 100,000 gallons of ``hard cider'' during 
a calendar year. The provision defines ``hard cider'' as being 
fermented solely from apples or apple concentrate and water, 
containing no other fruit product and containing at least one-
half of 1 percent and less than 7 percent alcohol by volume. 
Once fermented, eligible hard cider may not be altered by the 
addition of other fruit juices, flavor, or other ingredient 
that alters the flavor that results from the fermentation 
process. Thus, for example, cider fermented from apples, but 
which has raspberry flavor added to it prior to bottling and 
marketing to the public, will not be eligible for the 22.6 
cents-per-gallon tax rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \155\ A technical correction may be required to clarify that the 
reduced rate of tax provided by this provision applies only to apple 
cider taxable as a still wine under prior law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Qualifying small producers that produce 250,000 gallons or 
less of hard cider and other wines in a calendar year may claim 
a credit of 5.6 cents per wine gallon on the first 100,000 
gallons of hard cider produced. This credit produces an 
effective tax rate of 17 cents per gallon, the same effective 
rate as under prior law that applied to small producers who 
were permitted to claim the 90 cents-per-gallon credit for 
small wineries. Hard cider production will continue to be 
counted in determining whether other production of a producer 
qualifies for the tax credit for small producers of wine. The 
Act does not change the classification of qualifying hard cider 
as wine.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for hard cider removed after 
September 30, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by approximately $1 million in each fiscal year 
from 1998 through fiscal year 2007, and an estimated total 
reduction in Federal receipts of $7 million for the period 
1998-2007.

9. Study feasibility of moving collection point for distilled spirits 
        excise tax (sec. 909 of the Act)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Distilled spirits are subject to tax at $13.50 per proof 
gallon. (A proof gallon is a liquid gallon consisting of 50 
percent alcohol.) In the case of domestically produced 
distilled spirits and distilled spirits imported in to the 
United States in bulk containers for domestic bottling, the tax 
is collected on removal of the beverage from the distillery 
(without regard to whether a sale occurs at that time). Bottled 
distilled spirits that are imported into the United States 
comprise approximately 15 percent of the current market for 
these beverages; tax is collected on these imports when the 
distilled spirits are removed from the first customs bonded 
warehouse in which they are deposited upon entry into the 
United States.
    In the case of certain distilled spirits products, a tax 
credit for alcohol derived from fruit is allowed. This credit 
reduces the effective tax paid on those beverages. The credit 
is determined when the tax is paid (i.e., at the distillery or 
on importation).

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act directs the Treasury Department to study options 
for changing the point at which the distilled spirits excise 
tax is collected. One of the options evaluated should be 
collecting the tax at the point at which the distilled spirits 
are removed from registered wholesale warehouses. As part of 
this study, the Treasury is to focus on administrative issues 
associated with identified options, including the effects on 
tax compliance. For example, the Treasury is to evaluate the 
actual compliance record of wholesale dealers that currently 
pay the excise tax on imported bottled distilled spirits and 
the compliance effects of allowing additional wholesale dealers 
to be distilled spirts taxpayers. The study also is to address 
the number of taxpayers involved, the types of financial 
responsibility requirements that might be needed, and any 
special requirements regarding segregation of non-tax-paid 
distilled spirits from other products carried by the potential 
new taxpayers. The study further is to review the effects of 
the options on Treasury staffing and other budgetary resources 
as well as projections of the time between when tax currently 
is collected and the time when tax otherwise would be 
collected.
    The study is required to be completed and transmitted to 
the Senate Committee on Finance and the House Committee on Ways 
and Means no later than March 31, 1998.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.

10. Codify Treasury Department regulations regulating wine labels (sec. 
        910 of the Act and sec. 5388 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Code includes provisions regulating the labeling of 
wine when it is removed from a winery for marketing. In 
general, the regulations under these provisions allow the use 
of semi-generic names for wine that reflect geographic 
identifications understood in the industry, provided that the 
labels include clear indication of any deviation from that 
which is generally understood as to the source of the grapes or 
the process by which the wine is produced.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress determined that the Treasury Department 
regulations governing the use of semi-generic designations such 
as ``Chablis'' and ``burgundy'' in wine labeling should be 
codified to add clarity to the existing Code provisions.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act codifies the Treasury Department regulations 
governing the use of semi-generic wine designations which 
reflect geographic origin into the Code's wine labeling 
provisions.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.

                     B. Disaster Relief Provisions

1. Authority to postpone certain tax-related deadlines by reason of 
        presidentially declared disaster (sec. 911 of the Act and sec. 
        7508A of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In the case of a Presidentially declared disaster, the 
Secretary of the Treasury has the authority to postpone some 
(but not all) tax-related deadlines.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the Secretary should have the 
authority to postpone additional tax-related deadlines.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Secretary of the Treasury may specify that certain 
deadlines are postponed for a period of up to 90 days in the 
case of a taxpayer determined to be affected by a 
Presidentially declared disaster. The deadlines that may be 
postponed are the same as are postponed by reason of service in 
a combat zone. The provision does not apply for purposes of 
determining interest on any overpayment or underpayment. 
However, section 915 of the Act provides for the abatement of 
interest in the case of individuals living in an area that has 
been declared a disaster area by the President during 1997.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for any period for performing 
an act that had not expired before the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by a negligible amount.

2. Use of certain appraisals to establish amount of disaster loss (sec. 
        912 of the Act and sec. 165 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In order to claim a disaster loss, a taxpayer must 
establish the amount of the loss. This may, for example, be 
done through the use of an appraisal.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that no impediment should exist to 
utilizing alternate types of acceptable appraisals as proof to 
establish the amount of loss.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Nothing in the Code will be construed to prohibit Treasury 
from issuing guidance providing that an appraisal for the 
purpose of obtaining a Federal loan or Federal loan guarantee 
as the result of a Presidentially declared disaster may be used 
to establish the amount of a disaster loss.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by a negligible amount.

3. Treatment of livestock sold on account of weather-related conditions 
        (sec. 913 of the bill and secs. 451 and 1033 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In general, cash-method taxpayers report income in the year 
it is actually or constructively received. However, present law 
contains two special rules applicable to livestock sold on 
account of drought conditions. Code section 451(e) provides 
that a cash-method taxpayer whose principal trade or business 
is farming who is forced to sell livestock due to drought 
conditions may elect to include income from the sale of the 
livestock in the taxable year following the taxable year of the 
sale. This elective deferral of income is available only if the 
taxpayer establishes that, under the taxpayer's usual business 
practices, the sale would not have occurred but for drought 
conditions that resulted in the area being designated as 
eligible for Federal assistance. This exception is generally 
intended to put taxpayers who receive an unusually high amount 
of income in one year in the position they would have been in 
absent the drought.
    In addition, the sale of livestock (other than poultry) 
that is held for draft, breeding, or dairy purposes in excess 
of the number of livestock that would have been sold but for 
drought conditions is treated as an involuntary conversion 
under section 1033(e). Consequently, gain from the sale of such 
livestock could be deferred by reinvesting the proceeds of the 
sale in similar property within a two-year period.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the present-law exceptions to 
gain recognition for livestock sold on account of drought 
should apply to livestock sold on account of floods and other 
weather-related conditions as well.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act amends Code section 451(e) to provide that a cash-
method taxpayer whose principal trade or business is farming 
and who is forced to sell livestock due not only to drought (as 
under present law), but also to floods or other weather-related 
conditions, may elect to include income from the sale of the 
livestock in the taxable year following the taxable year of the 
sale. This elective deferral of income is available only if the 
taxpayer establishes that, under the taxpayer's usual business 
practices, the sale would not have occurred but for the 
drought, flood or other weather-related conditions that 
resulted in the area being designated as eligible for Federal 
assistance.
    In addition, the Act amends Code section 1033(e) to provide 
that the sale of livestock (other than poultry) that are held 
for draft, breeding, or dairy purposes in excess of the number 
of livestock that would have been sold but for drought (as 
under present law), flood or other weather-related conditions 
is treated as an involuntary conversion.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to sales and exchanges after December 
31, 1996.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $12 million in 1998, $2 million in 1999, $2 
million in 2000, $2 million in 2001, $1 million in 2002, $1 
million in 2003, $1 million in 2004, $1 million in 2005, $1 
million in 2006, and $1 million in 2007.

4. Mortgage bond financing for residences located in Presidentially 
        declared disaster areas (sec. 914 of the Act and sec. 143 of 
        the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Qualified mortgage bonds are private activity tax-exempt 
bonds issued by States and local governments acting as conduits 
to provide mortgage loans to first-time home buyers who satisfy 
specified income limits and who purchase homes that cost less 
than statutory maximums.
    Present and prior law waives these three buyer targeting 
requirements for a portion of the loans made with proceeds of a 
qualified mortgage bond issue if the loans are made to finance 
homes in statutorily prescribed economically distressed areas.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that qualified mortgage bond 
financing is an appropriate tool to assist persons experiencing 
losses in Presidentially declared disasters to repair or 
replace their homes.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act waives the first-time homebuyer requirement, and 
treats the affected areas as economically distressed areas for 
purposes of applying the income limits, and the purchase price 
limits in the case of loans to finance homes damaged as a 
result of certain Presidentially declared disasters.\156\ The 
waiver applies only during the two-year period following the 
date of the disaster declaration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \156\ A technical correction may be necessary to clarify the 
circumstances in which homebuyers qualify for these exceptions from the 
qualified mortgage bond financing rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to loans financed with bonds issued 
after December 31, 1996, and before January 1, 1999.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $3 million in 1998, $7 million in 1999, $8 
million in 2000, $8 million in 2001, $7 million in 2002, $6 
million in 2003, $6 million in 2004, $5 million in 2005, $4 
million in 2006, and $4 million in 2007.

5. Requirement to abate interest by reason of Presidentially declared 
        disaster (sec. 915 of the Act)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In the case of a Presidentially declared disaster, the 
Secretary of the Treasury has the authority to postpone some 
tax-related deadlines, but there is no authority to abate 
interest.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the abatement of interest should 
accompany the Secretary's authority to postpone the filing and 
payment deadlines, in the case of certain Presidentially 
declared disasters.

                        Explanation of Provision

    If the Secretary of the Treasury extends the filing date of 
an individual tax return for individuals living in an area that 
has been declared a disaster area by the President during 1997, 
no interest shall be charged as a result of the failure of an 
individual taxpayer to file an individual tax return, or pay 
the taxes shown on such return, during the extension. For this 
purpose, an individual tax return does not include the return 
of a trust or estate.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to declarations 
during 1997 that an area warrants assistance by the Federal 
Government under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
Emergency Assistance Act.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $5 million in 1997.

               C. Provisions Relating to Employment Taxes

1. Clarification of standard to be used in determining tax status of 
        retail securities brokers (sec. 921 of the Act)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, whether a worker is an 
employee or independent contractor is generally determined 
under a common-law facts and circumstances test. An employer-
employee relationship is generally found to exist if the 
service recipient has not only the right to control the result 
to be accomplished by the work, but also the means by which the 
result is to be accomplished. The Internal Revenue Service 
(``IRS'') generally takes the position that the presence and 
extent of instructions is important in reaching a conclusion as 
to whether a business retains the right to direct and control 
the methods by which a worker performs a job, but that it is 
also important to consider the weight to be given those 
instructions if they are imposed by the business only in 
compliance with governmental or governing body regulations. The 
IRS training manual provides that if a business requires its 
workers to comply with rules established by a third party 
(e.g., municipal building codes related to construction), the 
fact that such rules are imposed should be given little weight 
in determining the worker's status.

                           Reasons for Change

    Broker-dealers are required to supervise the activities of 
their affiliated registered representatives in order to comply 
with certain investor protection laws. The Congress believed 
that such supervision should not be taken into account in 
determining the status of a broker for Federal tax purposes.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, in determining the status of a registered 
representative of a broker-dealer for Federal tax purposes, no 
weight may be given to instructions from the service recipient 
which are imposed only in compliance with governmental investor 
protection standards or investor protection standards imposed 
by a governing body pursuant to a delegation by a Federal or 
State agency.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to services 
performed after December 31, 1997. No inference is intended 
that the treatment under the proposal is not present law.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

2. Clarification of exemption from self-employment tax for certain 
        termination payments received by former insurance salesmen 
        (sec. 922 of the Act and sec. 1402 of the Code)

                       Present Law and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, as part of the Federal 
Insurance Contributions Act (``FICA'') a tax is imposed on 
employees and employers. The tax consists of two parts: old-
age, survivor, and disability insurance (``OASDI'') and 
Medicare Hospital Insurance (``HI''). For wages paid in 1997, 
the OASDI tax rate is 6.2 percent of wages up to $65,400 
(indexed for inflation) on both the employer and employee. The 
HI tax rate on both the employer and the employee is 1.45 
percent of wages (with no wage cap).
    Similarly, under the self-employment contributions act 
(``SECA''), taxes are imposed on an individual's net earnings 
from self employment. In general, net earnings from self 
employment means the gross income derived by an individual from 
any trade or business carried on by such individual, less the 
deductions allowed which are attributable to such trade or 
business. The SECA tax rate is the same as the combined 
employer and employee FICA rates (i.e., 12.4 percent for OASDI 
and 2.9 percent for HI) and the maximum amount of earnings 
subject to the OASDI portion of SECA taxes is coordinated with 
and is set at the same level as the maximum level of wages and 
salaries subject to the OASDI portion of FICA taxes. There is 
no limit on the amount of self-employment income subject to the 
HI portion of the tax.
    Certain insurance salesmen are independent contractors and 
therefore subject to tax under SECA.
    Under case law, certain payments received by former 
insurance salesmen who had sold insurance as independent 
contractors are not net earnings from self employment and 
therefore are not subject to SECA. See, e.g., Jackson v. 
Comm'r, 108 TC ____ No. 10 (1997); Gump v. U.S., 86 F. 3d 1126 
(CA FC 1996); Milligan v. Comm'r, 38 F. 3d 1094 (9th Cir. 
1994).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that clarifying the SECA tax 
treatment of certain payments would provide greater certainty 
to taxpayers and would reduce the need for further litigation.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act codifies case law by providing that net earnings 
from self employment do not include any amount received during 
the taxable year from an insurance company on account of 
services performed by such individual as an insurance salesman 
for such company if (1) such amount is received after 
termination of the individual's agreement to perform services 
for the company, (2) the individual performs no services for 
the company after such termination and before the close of the 
taxable year, (3) the amount of the payment depends primarily 
on policies sold by or credited to the account of the 
individual during the last year of the service agreement and/or 
the extent to which such policies remain in force for some 
period after such termination, and does not depend on the 
length of service or overall earnings from services performed 
for the company, and (4) the payments are conditioned upon the 
salesman agreeing not to compete with the company for at least 
one year following such termination. Eligibility for the 
payments can be based on length of service or overall earnings.
    The Act also amends the Social Security Act to provide that 
such termination payments are not treated as earnings for 
purposes of determining social security benefits.
    No inference is intended with respect to the SECA tax 
treatment of payments that are not described in the proposal.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to payments after 
December 31, 1997. No inference is intended that the proposal 
is not present law.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

               D. Provisions Relating to Small Businesses

1. Delay imposition of penalties for failure to make payments 
        electronically through EFTPS (sec. 931 of the Act and sec. 6302 
        of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Employers are required to withhold income taxes and FICA 
taxes from wages paid to their employees. Employers also are 
liable for their portion of FICA taxes, excise taxes, and 
estimated payments of their corporate income tax liability.
    The Code requires the development and implementation of an 
electronic fund transfer system to remit these taxes and convey 
deposit information directly to the Treasury (Code sec. 6302(h) 
\157\). The Electronic Federal Tax Payment System (``EFTPS'') 
was developed by Treasury in response to this requirement.\158\ 
Employers must enroll with one of two private contractors hired 
by the Treasury. After enrollment, employers generally initiate 
deposits either by telephone or by computer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \157\ This requirement was enacted in 1993 (sec. 523 of P.L. 103-
182).
    \158\ Treasury had earlier developed TAXLINK as the prototype for 
EFTPS. TAXLINK has been operational for several years; EFTPS is 
currently operational. Employers currently using TAXLINK will 
ultimately be required to participate in EFTPS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The new system is phased in over a period of years by 
increasing each year the percentage of total taxes subject to 
the new EFTPS system. For fiscal year 1994, 3 percent of the 
total taxes are required to be made by electronic fund 
transfer. These percentages increased gradually for fiscal 
years 1995 and 1996. For fiscal year 1996, the percentage was 
20.1 percent (30 percent for excise taxes and corporate 
estimated tax payments). For fiscal year 1997, these 
percentages increased significantly, to 58.3 percent (60 
percent for excise taxes and corporate estimated tax payments). 
The specific implementation method required to achieve the 
target percentages is set forth in Treasury regulations. 
Implementation began with the largest depositors.
    Treasury originally implemented the 1997 percentages by 
requiring that all employers who deposit more than $50,000 in 
1995 must begin using EFTPS by January 1, 1997. The Small 
Business Job Protection Act of 1996 provided that the increase 
in the required percentages for fiscal year 1997 (which, 
pursuant to Treasury regulations, was to take effect on January 
1, 1997) will not take effect until July 1, 1997.\159\ This was 
done to provide additional time prior to implementation of the 
1997 requirements so that employers could be better informed 
about their responsibilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \159\ Section 1809 of P.L. 104-188.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On June 2, 1997, the IRS announced \160\ that it will not 
impose penalties through December 31, 1997, on businesses that 
make timely deposits using paper federal tax deposit coupons 
while converting to the EFTPS system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \160\ IR-97-32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that it is necessary to provide small 
businesses with additional time prior to implementation of the 
requirements so that these employers may be better informed 
about their responsibilities.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that no penalty shall be imposed solely by 
reason of a failure to use EFTPS prior to July 1, 1998, if the 
taxpayer was first required to use the EFTPS system on or after 
July 1, 1997.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.

2. Home office deduction: clarification of definition of principal 
        place of business (sec. 932 of the Act and sec. 280A of the 
        Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A taxpayer's business use of his or her home may give rise 
to a deduction for the business portion of expenses related to 
operating the home (e.g., a portion of rent or depreciation and 
repairs). Code section 280A(c)(1) provides, however, that 
business deductions generally are allowed only with respect to 
a portion of a home that is used exclusively and regularly in 
one of the following ways: (1) as the principal place of 
business for a trade or business; (2) as a place of business 
used to meet with patients, clients, or customers in the normal 
course of the taxpayer's trade or business; or (3) in 
connection with the taxpayer's trade or business, if the 
portion so used constitutes a separate structure not attached 
to the dwelling unit. In the case of an employee, the Code 
further requires that the business use of the home must be for 
the convenience of the employer (sec. 280A(c)(1)).\161\ These 
rules apply to houses, apartments, condominiums, mobile homes, 
boats, and other similar property used as the taxpayer's home 
(sec. 280A(f)(1)). Under Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 
rulings, the deductibility of expenses incurred for local 
transportation between a taxpayer's home and a work location 
sometimes depends on whether the taxpayer's home office 
qualifies under section 280A(c)(1) as a principal place of 
business (see Rev. Rul. 94-47, 1994-29 I.R.B. 6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \161\ If an employer provides access to suitable space on the 
employer's premises for the conduct by an employee of particular 
duties, then, if the employee opts to conduct such duties at home as a 
matter of personal preference, the employee's use of the home office is 
not ``for the convenience of the employer.'' See, e.g., W. Michael 
Mathes, T.C. Memo 1990-483.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Prior to 1976, expenses attributable to the business use of 
a residence were deductible whenever they were ``appropriate 
and helpful'' to the taxpayer's business. In 1976, Congress 
adopted section 280A, in order to provide a narrower scope for 
the home office deduction, but did not define the term 
``principal place of business.'' In Commissioner v. Soliman, 
113 S.Ct. 701 (1993), the Supreme Court reversed lower court 
rulings and upheld an IRS interpretation of section 280A that 
disallowed a home office deduction for a self-employed 
anesthesiologist who practiced at several hospitals but was not 
provided office space at the hospitals. Although the 
anesthesiologist used a room in his home exclusively to perform 
administrative and management activities for his profession 
(i.e., he spent two or three hours a day in his home office on 
bookkeeping, correspondence, reading medical journals, and 
communicating with surgeons, patients, and insurance 
companies), the Supreme Court upheld the IRS position that the 
``principal place of business'' for the taxpayer was not the 
home office, because the taxpayer performed the ``essence of 
the professional service'' at the hospitals.\162\ Because the 
taxpayer did not meet with patients at his home office and the 
room was not a separate structure, a deduction was not 
available under the second or third exception under section 
280A(c)(1) (described above).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \162\ In response to the Supreme Court's decision in Soliman, the 
IRS revised its Publication 587, Business Use of Your Home, to more 
closely follow the comparative analysis used in Soliman by focusing on 
the following two primary factors in determining whether a home office 
is a taxpayer's principal place of business: (1) the relative 
importance of the activities performed at each business location; and 
(2) the amount of time spent at each location.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Section 280A(c)(2) contains a special rule that allows a 
home office deduction for business expenses related to a space 
within a home that is used on a regular (even if not exclusive) 
basis as a storage unit for the inventory or product samples of 
the taxpayer's trade or business of selling products at retail 
or wholesale, but only if the home is the sole fixed location 
of such trade or business.
    Home office deductions may not be claimed if they create 
(or increase) a net loss from a business activity, although 
such deductions may be carried over to subsequent taxable years 
(sec. 280A(c)(5)).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the Supreme Court's decision in 
Soliman unfairly denied a home office deduction to a growing 
number of taxpayers who manage their business activities from 
their homes. Thus, the statutory modification adopted by the 
Congress will reduce the prior-law bias in favor of taxpayers 
who manage their business activities from outside their homes, 
thereby enabling more taxpayers to work efficiently at home, 
save commuting time and expenses, and spend additional time 
with their families. Moreover, the statutory modification is an 
appropriate response to the computer and information 
revolution, which has made it more practical for taxpayers to 
manage trade or business activities from a home office.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Section 280A is amended to specifically provide that a home 
office qualifies as the ``principal place of business'' if (1) 
the office is used by the taxpayer to conduct administrative or 
management activities of a trade or business and (2) there is 
no other fixed location of the trade or business where the 
taxpayer conducts substantial administrative or management 
activities of the trade or business. As under present law, 
deductions will be allowed for a home office meeting the above 
two-part test only if the office is exclusively used on a 
regular basis as a place of business by the taxpayer and, in 
the case of an employee, only if such exclusive use is for the 
convenience of the employer.
    Thus, under the provision, a home office deduction is 
allowed (subject to the present-law ``convenience of the 
employer'' rule governing employees) if a portion of a 
taxpayer's home is exclusively and regularly used to conduct 
administrative or management activities for a trade or business 
of the taxpayer, who does not conduct substantial 
administrative or management activities at any other fixed 
location of the trade or business, regardless of whether 
administrative or management activities connected with his 
trade or business (e.g., billing activities) are performed by 
others at other locations. The fact that a taxpayer also 
carries out administrative or management activities at sites 
that are not fixed locations of the business, such as a car or 
hotel room, will not affect the taxpayer's ability to claim a 
home office deduction under the provision. Moreover, if a 
taxpayer conducts some administrative or management activities 
at a fixed location of the business outside the home, the 
taxpayer still is eligible to claim a deduction so long as the 
administrative or management activities conducted at any fixed 
location of the business outside the home are not substantial 
(e.g., the taxpayer occasionally does minimal paperwork at 
another fixed location of the business). In addition, a 
taxpayer's eligibility to claim a home office deduction under 
the provision will not be affected by the fact that the 
taxpayer conducts substantial non-administrative or non-
management business activities at a fixed location of the 
business outside the home (e.g., meeting with, or providing 
services to, customers, clients, or patients at a fixed 
location of the business away from home).
    If a taxpayer in fact does not perform substantial 
administrative or management activities at any fixed location 
of the business away from home, then the second part of the 
test will be satisfied, regardless of whether or not the 
taxpayer opted not to use an office away from home that was 
available for the conduct of such activities. However, in the 
case of an employee, the question whether an employee chose not 
to use suitable space made available by the employer for 
administrative activities is relevant to determining whether 
the present-law ``convenience of the employer'' test is 
satisfied. In cases where a taxpayer's use of a home office 
does not satisfy the provision's two-part test, the taxpayer 
nonetheless may be able to claim a home office deduction under 
the present-law ``principal place of business'' exception or 
any other provision of section 280A.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to taxable years beginning after 
December 31, 1998.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $119 million in 1999, $244 million in 2000, 
$253 million in 2001, $263 million in 2002, $274 million in 
2003, $285 million in 2004, $295 million in 2005, $306 million 
in 2006, and $318 million in 2007.

3. Income averaging for farmers (sec. 933 of the Act and sec. 1301 of 
        the Code)

                               Prior Law

    The ability of an individual taxpayer to reduce his or her 
tax liability by averaging his or her income over a number of 
years was repealed by the Tax Reform Act of 1986.

                        Explanation of Provision

    In general, an individual taxpayer is allowed to elect to 
compute his or her current year tax liability by averaging, 
over the prior three-year period, all or a portion of his or 
her taxable income from the trade or business of farming.
    The provision operates such that an electing eligible 
taxpayer (1) designates all or a portion of his or her taxable 
income attributable to any farming business \163\ of the 
taxpayer from the current year as ``elected farm income;'' 
\164\ (2) allocates one-third of such ``elected farm income'' 
to each of the prior three taxable years; and (3) determines 
his or her current year section 1 tax liability by determining 
the sum of (a) his or her current year section 1 liability 
without the elected farm income allocated to the three prior 
taxable years plus (b) the increases in the section 1 tax for 
each of the three prior taxable years by taking into account 
the allocable share of the elected farm income for such years. 
If a taxpayer elects the operation of the provision for a 
taxable year, the allocation of elected farm income among 
taxable years pursuant to the election shall apply for purposes 
of any election in a subsequent taxable year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \163\ The term ``farming business'' has the same meaning given such 
term by sec. 263A(e)(4).
    \164\ The amount of elected farm income of a taxpayer for a taxable 
year may not exceed the taxable income attributable to any farming 
business for the year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Taxable income attributable to any farming business may 
include gain from the sale or other disposition of property 
(other than land) regularly used by the taxpayer in his or her 
farming business for a substantial period.
    The provision does not apply for employment tax purposes, 
or to an estate or a trust. Further, the provision does not 
apply for purposes of the alternative minimum tax under section 
55. Finally, the provision does not require the recalculation 
of the tax liability of any other taxpayer, including a minor 
child required to use the tax rates of his or her parents under 
section 1(g).
    The election shall be made in the manner prescribed by the 
Secretary of the Treasury and, except as provided by the 
Secretary, shall be irrevocable. In addition, the Secretary of 
the Treasury shall prescribe such regulations as are necessary 
to carry out the purposes of the provision, including 
regulations regarding the order and manner in which items of 
income, gain, deduction, loss, and credits (and any limitations 
thereon) are to be taken into account for purposes of the 
provision and the application of the provision to any short 
taxable year. It is expected that such regulations will deny 
the multiple application of items that carry over from one 
taxable year to the next (e.g., net operating loss or tax 
credit carryovers).

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997, and before January 1, 2001.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million in 1997, $10 million in 1998, $53 
million in 1999, $54 million in 2000, and $50 million in 2001.

4. Increase deduction for health insurance costs of self-employed 
        individuals (sec. 934 of the Act and sec. 162(l) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, self-employed individuals are 
entitled to deduct a portion of the amount paid for health 
insurance for the self-employed individual and the individual's 
spouse and dependents. Under prior law, the deduction was 40 
percent in 1997; 45 percent in 1998 through 2002; 50 percent in 
2003; 60 percent in 2004; 70 percent in 2005; and 80 percent in 
2006 and thereafter. Under present and prior law, the deduction 
for health insurance expenses of self-employed individuals is 
not available for any month in which the taxpayer is eligible 
to participate in a subsidized health plan maintained by the 
employer of the taxpayer or the taxpayer's spouse.
    Under present and prior law employees can exclude from 
income 100 percent of employer-provided health insurance.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that it was appropriate to continue 
to increase the amount self-employed individuals are entitled 
to deduct for their health insurance expenses.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act permits self-employed individuals to deduct a 
higher percentage of the amount paid for health insurance is as 
follows: the deduction is 40 percent in 1997, 45 percent in 
1998 and 1999, 50 percent in 2000 and 2001, 60 percent in 2002, 
80 percent in 2003 through 2005, 90 percent in 2006, and 100 
percent in 2007 and all years thereafter.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1996.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $39 million in 2000, $120 million in 2001, 
$224 million in 2002, $605 million in 2003, $882 million in 
2004, $601 million in 2005, $404 million in 2006, and $604 
million in 2007.

5. Moratorium on regulations regarding employment taxes of limited 
        partners (sec. 935 of the Act and sec. 1402 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under the Self-Employment Contributions Act, taxes are 
imposed on an individual's net earnings from self employment. A 
limited partner's net earnings from self employment include 
guaranteed payments made to the individual for services 
actually rendered and do not include a limited partner's 
distributive share of the income or loss of the partnership. 
The Department of the Treasury issued proposed regulations 
defining a limited partner for this purpose. These regulations 
provided, among other things, that an individual is not a 
limited partner if the individual participates in the 
partnership business for more than 500 hours during the taxable 
year. The regulations were proposed to be effective with the 
individual's first taxable year beginning on or after the date 
the regulations are published in the Federal Register.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Any regulations relating to the definition of a limited 
partner for self-employment tax purposes cannot be issued or 
effective before July 1, 1998.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.

            E. Expensing of Environmental Remediation Costs

        (``Brownfields'') (sec. 941 of the Act and new sec. 198

                              of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Code section 162 allows a deduction for ordinary and 
necessary expenses paid or incurred in carrying on any trade or 
business. Treasury Regulations provide that the cost of 
incidental repairs which neither materially add to the value of 
property nor appreciably prolong its life, but keep it in an 
ordinarily efficient operating condition, may be deducted 
currently as a business expense. Section 263(a)(1) limits the 
scope of section 162 by prohibiting a current deduction for 
certain capital expenditures. Treasury Regulations define 
``capital expenditures'' as amounts paid or incurred to 
materially add to the value, or substantially prolong the 
useful life, of property owned by the taxpayer, or to adapt 
property to a new or different use. Amounts paid for repairs 
and maintenance do not constitute capital expenditures. The 
determination of whether an expense is deductible or 
capitalizable is based on the facts and circumstances of each 
case.
    Treasury regulations provide that capital expenditures 
include the costs of acquiring or substantially improving 
buildings, machinery, equipment, furniture, fixtures and 
similar property having a useful life substantially beyond the 
current year. In INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79 
(1992), the Supreme Court required the capitalization of legal 
fees incurred by a taxpayer in connection with a friendly 
takeover by one of its customers on the grounds that the merger 
would produce significant economic benefits to the taxpayer 
extending beyond the current year; capitalization of the costs 
thus would match the expenditures with the income produced. 
Similarly, the amount paid for the construction of a filtration 
plant, with a life extending beyond the year of completion, and 
as a permanent addition to the taxpayer's mill property, was a 
capital expenditure rather than an ordinary and necessary 
current business expense. Woolrich Woolen Mills v. United 
States, 289 F.2d 444 (3d Cir. 1961) .
    Although Treasury regulations provide that expenditures 
that materially increase the value of property must be 
capitalized, they do not set forth a method of determining how 
and when value has been increased. In Plainfield-Union Water 
Co. v. Commissioner, 39 T.C. 333 (1962), nonacq., 1964-2 C.B. 
8, the U.S. Tax Court held that increased value was determined 
by comparing the value of an asset after the expenditure with 
its value before the condition necessitating the expenditure. 
The Tax Court stated that ``an expenditure which returns 
property to the state it was in before the situation prompting 
the expenditure arose, and which does not make the relevant 
property more valuable, more useful, or longer-lived, is 
usually deemed a deductible repair.''
    In several Technical Advice Memoranda (TAM), the Internal 
Revenue Service (IRS) declined to apply the Plainfield-Union 
valuation analysis, indicating that the analysis represents 
just one of several alternative methods of determining 
increases in the value of an asset. In TAM 9240004 (June 29, 
1992), the IRS required certain asbestos removal costs to be 
capitalized rather than expensed. In that instance, the 
taxpayer owned equipment that was manufactured with insulation 
containing asbestos; the taxpayer replaced the asbestos 
insulation with less thermally efficient, non-asbestos 
insulation. The IRS concluded that the expenditures resulted in 
a material increase in the value of the equipment because the 
asbestos removal eliminated human health risks, reduced the 
risk of liability to employees resulting from the 
contamination, and made the property more marketable. 
Similarly, in TAM 9411002 (November 19, 1993), the IRS required 
the capitalization of expenditures to remove and replace 
asbestos in connection with the conversion of a boiler room to 
garage and office space. However, the IRS permitted deduction 
of costs of encapsulating exposed asbestos in an adjacent 
warehouse.
    In 1994, the IRS issued Rev. Rul. 94-38, 1994-1 C.B. 35, 
holding that soil remediation expenditures and ongoing water 
treatment expenditures incurred to clean up land and water that 
a taxpayer contaminated with hazardous waste are deductible. In 
this ruling, the IRS explicitly accepted the Plainfield-Union 
valuation analysis.\165\ However, the IRS also held that costs 
allocable to constructing a groundwater treatment facility are 
capital expenditures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \165\ Rev. Rul. 94-38 generally rendered moot the holding in TAM 
9315004 (December 17, 1992) requiring a taxpayer to capitalize certain 
costs associated with the remediation of soil contaminated with 
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 1995, the IRS issued TAM 9541005 (October 13, 1995) 
requiring a taxpayer to capitalize certain environmental study 
costs, as well as associated consulting and legal fees. The 
taxpayer acquired the land and conducted activities causing 
hazardous waste contamination. After the contamination, but 
before it was discovered, the company donated the land to the 
county to be developed into a recreational park. After the 
county discovered the contamination, it reconveyed the land to 
the company for $1. The company incurred the costs in 
developing a remediation strategy. The IRS held that the costs 
were not deductible under section 162 because the company 
acquired the land in a contaminated state when it purchased the 
land from the county. In January, 1996, the IRS revoked and 
superseded TAM 9541005 (TAM 9627002). Noting that the company's 
contamination of the land and liability for remediation were 
unchanged during the break in ownership by the county, the IRS 
concluded that the break in ownership should not, in and of 
itself, operate to disallow a deduction under section 162.

                           Reasons for Change

    To encourage the cleanup of contaminated sites, as well as 
to eliminate uncertainty regarding the appropriate treatment of 
environmental remediation expenditures for Federal tax law 
purposes, the Congress believed that it is appropriate to 
provide clear and consistent rules regarding the Federal tax 
treatment of certain environmental remediation expenses.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that taxpayers can elect to treat certain 
environmental remediation expenditures that would otherwise be 
chargeable to capital account as deductible in the year paid or 
incurred. The deduction applies for both regular and 
alternative minimum tax purposes. The expenditure must be 
incurred in connection with the abatement or control of 
hazardous substances at a qualified contaminated site. In 
general, any expenditure for the acquisition of depreciable 
property used in connection with the abatement or control of 
hazardous substances at a qualified contaminated site does not 
constitute a qualified environmental remediation expenditure. 
However, depreciation deductions allowable for such property, 
which would otherwise be allocated to the site under the 
principles set forth in Commissioner v. Idaho Power Co.\166\ 
and section 263A, are treated as qualified environmental 
remediation expenditures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \166\ Commissioner v. Idaho Power Co., 418 U.S. 1 (1974) (holding 
that equipment depreciation allocable to the taxpayer's construction of 
capital facilities must be capitalized under section 263(a)(1)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A ``qualified contaminated site'' generally is any property 
that (1) is held for use in a trade or business, for the 
production of income, or as inventory; (2) is certified by the 
appropriate State environmental agency to be located within a 
targeted area; and (3) contains (or potentially contains) a 
hazardous substance (so-called ``brownfields''). Targeted areas 
are defined as: (1) empowerment zones and enterprise 
communities as designated under present law and under the Act 
\167\ (including any supplemental empowerment zone designated 
on December 21, 1994); (2) sites announced before February, 
1997, as being subject to one of the 76 Environmental 
Protection Agency (``EPA'') Brownfields Pilots; (3) any 
population census tract with a poverty rate of 20 percent or 
more; and (4) certain industrial and commercial areas that are 
adjacent to tracts described in (3) above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \167\ Thus, the 22 additional empowerment zones authorized to be 
designated under the Act, as well as the D.C. Enterprise Zone 
established under Title VII of the Act, are ``targeted areas'' for 
purposes of this provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Both urban and rural sites qualify. However, sites that are 
identified on the national priorities list under the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
Liability Act of 1980 (``CERCLA'') cannot qualify as targeted 
areas. The chief executive officer of a State, in consultation 
with the Administrator of the EPA, could designate an 
appropriate State environmental agency. If no State 
environmental agency was so designated within 60 days of the 
date of enactment, the appropriate environmental agency for 
such State shall be designated by the Administrator of the EPA. 
Hazardous substances generally are defined by reference to 
sections 101(14) and 102 of CERCLA, subject to additional 
limitations applicable to asbestos and similar substances 
within buildings, certain naturally occurring substances such 
as radon, and certain other substances released into drinking 
water supplies due to deterioration through ordinary use.
    The Act further provides that, in the case of property to 
which a qualified environmental remediation expenditure 
otherwise would have been capitalized, any deduction allowed 
under the Act is treated as a depreciation deduction and the 
property is treated as section 1245 property. Thus, deductions 
for qualified environmental remediation expenditures are 
subject to recapture as ordinary income upon sale or other 
disposition of the property. The Act also provides that 
sections 280B (demolition of structures) and 468 (special rules 
for mining and solid waste reclamation and closing costs) shall 
not apply to amounts which are treated as expenses under this 
provision.
    Finally, the Congress clarified that providing current 
deductions for certain environmental remediation expenditures 
under the Act creates no inference as to the proper treatment 
of other remediation expenditures not described in the Act.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies only to eligible expenditures paid or 
incurred in taxable years ending after August 5, 1997 (the date 
of enactment), and before January 1, 2001.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $57 million in 1998, $132 million in 1999, 
$165 million in 2000, and $63 million in 2001. The provision is 
estimated to increase Federal fiscal year budget receipts by 
less than $500,000 in 2002, $2 million in 2003, $9 million in 
2004, $17 million in 2005, $19 million in 2006, and $18 million 
in 2007.

            F. Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities

      (secs. 951-956 of the Act and secs. 1391, 1392, 1394, 1396,

                  1397A, 1397B, and 1397C of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

In general

    Pursuant to the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 
(OBRA 1993), the Secretaries of the Department of Housing and 
Urban Development (HUD) and the Department of Agriculture 
designated a total of nine empowerment zones and 95 enterprise 
communities on December 21, 1994. As required by law, six 
empowerment zones are located in urban areas (with aggregate 
population for the six designated urban empowerment zones 
limited to 750,000) and three empowerment zones are located in 
rural areas.\168\ Of the enterprise communities, 65 are located 
in urban areas and 30 are located in rural areas (sec. 1391). 
Designated empowerment zones and enterprise communities were 
required to satisfy certain eligibility criteria, including 
specified poverty rates and population and geographic size 
limitations (sec. 1392).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \168\ The six designated urban empowerment zones are located in New 
York City, Chicago, Atlanta, Detroit, Baltimore, and Philadelphia-
Camden (New Jersey). The three designated rural empowerment zones are 
located in Kentucky Highlands (Clinton, Jackson, and Wayne counties, 
Kentucky), Mid-Delta Mississippi (Bolivar, Holmes, Humphreys, Leflore 
counties, Mississippi), and Rio Grande Valley Texas (Cameron, Hidalgo, 
Starr, and Willacy counties, Texas).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The following tax incentives are available for certain 
businesses located in empowerment zones: (1) a 20-percent wage 
credit for the first $15,000 of wages paid to a zone resident 
who works in the zone;\169\ (2) an additional $20,000 of 
section 179 expensing for ``qualified zone property'' placed in 
service by an ``enterprise zone business'' (accordingly, 
certain businesses operating in empowerment zones are allowed 
up to $38,000 of expensing for section 179 property placed in 
service in 1997); and (3) special tax-exempt financing for 
certain zone facilities (described in more detail below).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \169\ For wages paid in calendar years during the period 1994 
through 2001, the credit rate is 20 percent. The credit rate will be 
reduced to 15 percent for calendar year 2002, 10 percent for calendar 
year 2003, and 5 percent for calendar year 2004. No wage credit will be 
available after 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The 95 enterprise communities are eligible for the special 
tax-exempt financing benefits but not the other tax incentives 
available in the nine empowerment zones. In addition to these 
tax incentives, OBRA 1993 provided that Federal grants would be 
made to designated empowerment zones and enterprise 
communities.
    The tax incentives for empowerment zones and enterprise 
communities generally are available during the period that the 
designation remains in effect--i.e., the 10-year period of 1995 
through 2004.

Definition of ``qualified zone property''

    Section 1397C defines ``qualified zone property'' as 
depreciable tangible property provided that: (1) the property 
is acquired by the taxpayer (from an unrelated party) after the 
zone or community designation took effect; (2) the original use 
of the property in the zone or community commences with the 
taxpayer; and (3) substantially all of the use of the property 
is in the zone or community in the active conduct of a trade or 
business by the taxpayer in the zone or community. In the case 
of property which is substantially renovated by the taxpayer, 
however, the property need not be acquired by the taxpayer 
after zone or community designation or originally used by the 
taxpayer within the zone or community if, during any 24-month 
period after zone or community designation, the additions to 
the taxpayer's basis in the property exceed 100 percent of the 
taxpayer's basis in the property at the beginning of the 
period, or $5,000 (whichever is greater).

Definition of ``enterprise zone business''

    Prior to enactment of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (the 
Act), section 1397B defined the term ``enterprise zone 
business'' as a corporation or partnership (or proprietorship) 
if for the taxable year: (1) every trade or business of the 
corporation or partnership is the active conduct of a qualified 
business within an empowerment zone or enterprise 
community;\170\ (2) at least 80 percent of the total gross 
income is derived from the active conduct of a ``qualified 
business'' within a zone or community; (3) substantially all of 
the business's tangible property is used within a zone or 
community; (4) substantially all of the business's intangible 
property is used in, and exclusively related to, the active 
conduct of such business; (5) substantially all of the services 
performed by employees are performed within a zone or 
community; (6) at least 35 percent of the employees are 
residents of the zone or community; and (7) no more than 5 
percent of the average of the aggregate unadjusted bases of the 
property owned by the business is attributable to (a) certain 
financial property, or (b) collectibles not held primarily for 
sale to customers in the ordinary course of an active trade or 
business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \170\ A qualified proprietorship is not required to meet a 
requirement that every trade or business of the proprietor is the 
active conduct of a qualified business within the empowerment zone or 
enterprise community.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A ``qualified business'' is defined as any trade or 
business other than a trade or business that consists 
predominantly of the development or holding of intangibles for 
sale or license.\171\ In addition, the leasing of real property 
that is located within the empowerment zone or community to 
others is treated as a qualified business only if (1) the 
leased property is not residential property, and (2) at least 
50 percent of the gross rental income from the real property is 
from enterprise zone businesses. Prior to enactment of the Act, 
the rental of tangible personal property to others was not a 
qualified business unless substantially all of the rental of 
such property was by enterprise zone businesses or by residents 
of an empowerment zone or enterprise community.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \171\ Also, a qualified business does not include certain 
facilities described in section 144(c)(6)(B)(i.e., a private or 
commercial golf course, country club, massage parlor, hot tub facility, 
suntan facility, racetrack or other facility used for gambling, or any 
store the principal business of which is the sale of alcoholic 
beverages for consumption off premises) or certain large farms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tax-exempt financing rules

    Tax-exempt private activity bonds may be issued to finance 
certain facilities in empowerment zones and enterprise 
communities. These bonds, along with most private activity 
bonds, are subject to an annual private activity bond State 
volume cap equal to $50 per resident of each State, or (if 
greater) $150 million per State.
    Qualified enterprise zone facility bonds are bonds 95 
percent or more of the net proceeds of which are used to 
finance (1) ``qualified zone property'' (as defined 
above),\172\ the principal user of which is an ``enterprise 
zone business'' (also defined above), or (2) functionally 
related and subordinate land located in the empowerment zone or 
enterprise community. These bonds may only be issued while an 
empowerment zone or enterprise community designation is in 
effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \172\ For purposes of the tax-exempt financing rules, an 
``enterprise zone business'' also includes a business located in a zone 
or community which would qualify as an enterprise zone business if it 
were separately incorporated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The aggregate face amount of all qualified enterprise zone 
bonds for each qualified enterprise zone business may not 
exceed $3 million per zone or community. In addition, total 
qualified enterprise zone bond financing for each principal 
user of these bonds may not exceed $20 million for all zones 
and communities.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that it is appropriate to provide for 
the designation of additional empowerment zones and to 
liberalize the definition of ``enterprise zone business'' and 
tax-exempt financing rules that apply for purposes of all 
empowerment zones and enterprise communities. In addition, in 
view of the unique characteristics of the States of Alaska and 
Hawaii, and the economically depressed areas within those 
States, the Congress believed that the generally applicable 
criteria for designation of empowerment zones and enterprise 
communities should be modified in the event of future 
designations of such zones or communities in those States.

                        Explanation of Provision

Two additional empowerment zones with same tax incentives as previously 
        designated empowerment zones

    The Act authorizes the Secretary of HUD to designate two 
additional empowerment zones located in urban areas (thereby 
increasing to eight the total number of empowerment zones 
located in urban areas) with respect to which apply the same 
tax incentives (i.e., the wage credit, additional expensing, 
and special tax-exempt financing) as are available within the 
empowerment zones authorized by OBRA 1993.\173\ The two 
additional empowerment zones are subject to the same 
eligibility criteria under present-law section 1392 that 
applied to the original six urban empowerment zones. In order 
to permit designation of these two additional empowerment 
zones, the aggregate population cap applicable to empowerment 
zones located in urban areas is increased from 750,000 to a cap 
of one million aggregate population for the eight urban 
empowerment zones.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \173\ The wage credit available in the two new urban empowerment 
zones is modified slightly to provide that the credit rate will be 20 
percent for calendar years 2000-2004, 15 percent for calendar year 
2005, 10 percent for calendar year 2006, and 5 percent for calendar 
year 2007. No wage credit will be available in the two new urban 
empowerment zones after 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The two additional empowerment zones must be designated 
within 180 days after enactment (i.e., the designations must be 
made by February 1, 1998). However, a special rule provides 
that the designations of these two additional empowerment zones 
will not take effect until January 1, 2000 (and generally will 
remain in effect for 10 years).

Designation of additional 20 empowerment zones

    The Act also authorizes the Secretaries of HUD and 
Agriculture to designate an additional 20 empowerment zones (no 
more than 15 in urban areas and no more than five in rural 
areas).\174\ With respect to these additional empowerment 
zones, the present-law eligibility criteria are expanded 
slightly in comparison to the eligibility criteria provided for 
by OBRA 1993. First, the general square mileage limitations 
(i.e., 20 square miles for urban areas and 1,000 square miles 
for rural areas) are expanded to allow the empowerment zones to 
include an additional 2,000 acres. This additional acreage, 
which could be developed for commercial or industrial purposes, 
is not subject to the poverty rate criteria and may be divided 
among up to three noncontiguous parcels. In addition, the 
general requirement that at least half of the nominated area 
consist of census tracts with poverty rates of 35 percent or 
more does not apply to the 20 additional empowerment zones. 
However, under present-law section 1392(a)(4), at least 90 
percent of the census tracts within a nominated area must have 
a poverty rate of 25 percent or more, and the remaining census 
tracts must have a poverty rate of 20 percent or more.\175\ For 
this purpose, census tracts with populations under 2,000 are 
treated as satisfying the 25-percent poverty rate criteria if 
(1) at least 75 percent of the tract was zoned for commercial 
or industrial use, and (2) the tract is contiguous to one or 
more other tracts that actually have a poverty rate of 25 
percent or more.\176\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \174\ In contrast to OBRA 1993, areas located within Indian 
reservations are eligible for designation as one or more of the 
additional 20 empowerment zones under the Act.
    \175\ In lieu of the poverty criteria, out migration may be taken 
into account in designating one rural empowerment zone.
    \176\ A special rule enacted as part of the Act modifies the 
present-law empowerment zone and enterprise community designation 
criteria so that any zones or communities designated in the future in 
the States of Alaska or Hawaii will not be subject to the general size 
limitations, nor will such zones or communities be subject to the 
general poverty-rate criteria. Instead, nominated areas in either State 
will be eligible for designation as an empowerment zone or enterprise 
community if, for each census tract or block group within such area, at 
least 20 percent of the families have incomes which are 50 percent or 
less of the State-wide median family income. Such zones and communities 
will be subject to the population limitations under present-law section 
1392(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Within the 20 additional empowerment zones, qualified 
``enterprise zone businesses'' are eligible to receive up to 
$20,000 of additional section 179 expensing \177\ and to 
utilize special tax-exempt financing benefits. In addition the 
so-called ``brownfields'' tax incentive (provided for by the 
Act, see E., above) is available. This incentive allows 
taxpayers to expense (rather than capitalize) certain 
environmental remediation expenditures incurred before January 
1, 2001, at contaminated sites located within new or previously 
designated empowerment zones or enterprise communities, as well 
as certain other targeted areas. However, businesses within the 
20 additional empowerment zones are not eligible to receive the 
present-law wage credit available within the 11 other 
designated empowerment zones (i.e., the wage credit is 
available only within in the nine zones designated under OBRA 
1993 and the two urban zones designated under the Act that are 
eligible for the same tax incentives as are available in the 
nine zones designated under OBRA 1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \177\ However, the additional section 179 expensing is not 
available for any property substantially all the use of which is within 
the additional 2,000 acres allowed to be included under the Act within 
an empowerment zone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The 20 additional empowerment zones are required to be 
designated before 1999, and the designations generally will 
remain in effect for 10 years.

Modification of definition of enterprise zone business

    The Act modifies the prior-law requirement of section 1397B 
that an entity may qualify as an ``enterprise zone business'' 
only if (in addition to the other criteria) at least 80 percent 
of the total gross income of such entity is derived from the 
active conduct of a qualified business within an empowerment 
zone or enterprise community. The Act liberalizes this 
requirement by reducing the percentage threshold so that an 
entity may qualify as an enterprise zone business if at least 
50 percent of the total gross income of such entity is derived 
from the active conduct of a qualified business within an 
empowerment zone or enterprise community (assuming that the 
other criteria of section 1397B are satisfied). In addition, 
section 1397B is modified so that rather than requiring that 
``substantially all'' tangible and intangible property (and 
employee services) of an enterprise zone business be used (and 
performed) within a designated empowerment zone or enterprise 
community, a ``substantial portion'' of tangible and intangible 
property (and employee services) of an enterprise zone business 
must be used (and performed) within a designated zone or 
community. Moreover, the Act further amends the section 1397B 
rule governing intangible assets so that a substantial portion 
of an entity's intangible property must be used in the active 
conduct of a qualified business within an empowerment zone or 
enterprise community, but there is no need (as under prior law) 
to determine whether the use of such assets is ``exclusively 
related to'' such business.
    Thus, as a result of the modifications made by the Act, 
section 1397B defines the term ``enterprise zone business'' as 
a corporation or partnership (or proprietorship) if for the 
taxable year: (1) every trade or business \178\ of the 
corporation or partnership is the active conduct of a qualified 
business within an empowerment zone or enterprise community; 
(2) at least 50 percent of the total gross income is derived 
from the active conduct of a ``qualified business'' within a 
zone or community; (3) a substantial portion of the business's 
tangible property is used within a zone or community; (4) a 
substantial portion of the business's intangible property is 
used in the active conduct of such business; (5) a substantial 
portion of the services performed by employees are performed 
within a zone or community; (6) at least 35 percent of the 
employees are residents of the zone or community; and (7) less 
than five percent of the average of the aggregate unadjusted 
bases of the property owned by the business is attributable to 
(a) certain financial property, or (b) collectibles not held 
primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of an 
active trade or business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \178\ A technical correction may be necessary to clarify that, for 
purposes of this provision, as well as for purposes of defining the 
term ``qualified business,'' the term ``trade or business'' encompasses 
activities carried on a not-for-profit, as well as a for-profit basis. 
For example, a trade association could be an ``enterprise zone 
business'' if all the requirements of section 1397B were satisfied.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As under prior law, section 1397B(d)(4) continues to 
provide that a ``qualified business'' does not include any 
trade or business consisting predominantly of the development 
or holding of intangibles for sale or license. The Act also 
clarifies that an enterprise zone business that leases to 
others commercial real property within a zone or community may 
rely on a lessee's certification that the lessee is an 
enterprise zone business. Finally, the Act provides that the 
rental to others of tangible personal property shall be treated 
as a qualified business if and only if at least 50 percent of 
the rental of such property is by enterprise zone businesses or 
by residents of a zone or community (rather than the prior-law 
requirement that ``substantially all'' tangible personal 
property rentals of an enterprise zone business satisfy this 
test).
    This modified ``enterprise zone business'' definition is 
effective for taxable years beginning on or after August 5, 
1997, with respect to all previously designated empowerment 
zones and enterprise communities, the two urban empowerment 
zones to be designated under theAct with the same tax 
incentives as the previously designated empowerment zones, and the 20 
additional empowerment zones to be designated under the Act.\179\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \179\ In addition, the modifications to the enterprise zone 
business definition generally apply (with certain exceptions) for 
purposes of defining a ``D.C. Zone business'' under certain provisions 
of the Act that provide tax incentives for the District of Columbia (as 
described in Title VII, above).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tax-exempt financing rules

            Exceptions to volume cap and issue size
    So-called ``new empowerment zone facility bonds'' are 
allowed to be issued for qualified enterprise zone businesses 
in the 20 additional empowerment zones authorized to be 
designated under the Act. These ``new empowerment zone facility 
bonds'' are not subject to the State private activity bond 
volume caps or the special limits on issue size generally 
applicable to qualified enterprise zone facility bonds under 
section 1394(c).\180\ The maximum amount of these bonds that 
may be issued is limited to $60 million per rural zone, $130 
million per urban zone with a population of less than 100,000, 
and $230 million per urban zone with a population of 100,000 or 
more.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \180\ ``New empowerment zone facility bonds'' may not be issued 
with respect to the two urban empowerment zones to be designated under 
the Act with the same tax incentives as the previously designated 
empowerment zones.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Changes to certain rules applicable to both empowerment 
                    zone facility bonds and qualified enterprise 
                    community facility bonds
    Qualified enterprise zone businesses located in newly 
designated empowerment zones and enterprise communities--as 
well as qualified enterprise zone businesses located in 
previously designated empowerment zones and enterprise 
communities--are eligible for special tax-exempt bond financing 
under prior-law rules, subject to the modifications described 
below (and the exceptions to the volume cap and issue size 
described above for the 20 additional empowerment zones 
authorized to be designated under the Act).
    The Act waives until the end of a ``startup period'' the 
requirement that 95 percent or more of the proceeds of bond 
issue be used by a qualified enterprise zone business. With 
respect to each property, the startup period ends at the 
beginning of the first taxable year beginning more than two 
years after the later of (1) the date of the bond issue 
financing such property, or (2) the date the property was 
placed in service (but in no event more than three years after 
the date of bond issuance). This waiver is available only if, 
at the beginning of the startup period, there is a reasonable 
expectation that the use by a qualified enterprise zone 
business would be satisfied at the end of the startup period 
and the business makes bona fide efforts to satisfy the 
enterprise zone business definition.
    The Act also waives the requirements of an enterprise zone 
business (other than the requirement that at least 35 percent 
of the business' employees be residents of the zone or 
community) for all years after a prescribed testing period 
equal to first three taxable years after the startup period.
    Finally, the Act relaxes the rehabilitation requirement for 
financing existing property with qualified enterprise zone 
facility bonds. In the case of property which is substantially 
renovated by the taxpayer, the property need not be acquired by 
the taxpayer after empowerment zone or enterprise community 
designation or originally used by the taxpayer within the zone 
if, during any 24-month period after empowerment zone or 
enterprise community designation, the additions to the 
taxpayer's basis in the property exceed 15 percent of the 
taxpayer's basis at the beginning of the period, or $5,000 
(whichever is greater).

                             Effective Date

    The two additional urban empowerment zones (within which 
would be available the same tax incentives as are available in 
the empowerment zones designated pursuant to OBRA 1993) must be 
designated by February 1, 1998, but the designation will not 
take effect until January 1, 2000. The 20 additional 
empowerment zones (within which the wage credit will not be 
available) are to be designated after enactment of the Act but 
prior to January 1, 1999. For purposes of the additional 
section 179 expensing available within empowerment zones, the 
modifications to the definition of ``enterprise zone business'' 
are effective for taxable years beginning on or after the date 
of enactment of the Act (i.e., August 5, 1997).
    The modifications to the tax-exempt financing rules are 
effective for qualified enterprise zone facility bonds and the 
new empowerment zone facility bonds issued after August 5, 
1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provisions are estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $82 million in 1998, $121 million in 1999, 
$159 million in 2000, $185 million in 2001, $171 million in 
2002, $154 million in 2003, $122 million in 2004, $94 million 
in 2005, $64 million in 2006, and $38 million in 2007.

                          G. Other Provisions

1. Shrinkage estimates for inventory accounting (sec. 961 of the Act 
        and sec. 471 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Section 471(a) provides that ``(w)henever in the opinion of 
the Secretary the use of inventories is necessary in order 
clearly to determine the income of any taxpayer, inventories 
shall be taken by such taxpayer on such basis as the Secretary 
may prescribe as conforming as nearly as may be to the best 
accounting practice in the trade or business and as most 
clearly reflecting income.'' Where a taxpayer maintains book 
inventories in accordance with a sound accounting system, the 
net value of the inventory will be deemed to be the cost basis 
of the inventory, provided that such book inventories are 
verified by physical inventories at reasonable intervals and 
adjusted to conform therewith.\181\ The physical count is used 
to determine and adjust for certain items, such as undetected 
theft, breakage, and bookkeeping errors, collectively referred 
to as ``shrinkage.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \181\ Treas. Reg. sec. 1.471-2(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Some taxpayers verify and adjust their book inventories by 
a physical count taken on the last day of the taxable year. 
Other taxpayers may verify and adjust their inventories by 
physical counts taken at other times during the year. Still 
other taxpayers take physical counts at different locations at 
different times during the taxable year (cycle counting).
    If a physical inventory is taken at year-end, the amount of 
shrinkage for the year is known. If a physical inventory is not 
taken at year-end, shrinkage through year-end will have to be 
based on an estimate, or not taken into account until the 
following year. In the first decision in Dayton Hudson v. 
Commissioner,\182\ the U.S. Tax Court held that a taxpayer's 
method of accounting may include the use of an estimate of 
shrinkage occurring through year-end, provided the method is 
sound and clearly reflects income. In the second decision in 
Dayton Hudson v. Commissioner,\183\ the U.S. Tax Court adhered 
to this holding. However, the U.S. Tax Court in the second 
decision determined that this taxpayer had not established that 
its method of accounting clearly reflected income. Other cases 
decided by the U.S. Tax Court \184\ have held that taxpayers' 
methods of accounting that included shrinkage estimates do 
clearly reflect income.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \182\ 101 T.C. 462 (1993).
    \183\ T.C. Memo 1997-260.
    \184\ Wal-Mart v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 1997-1 and Kroger v. 
Commissioner, T.C. Memo 1997-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The U.S. Tax Court in the second Dayton Hudson opinion 
noted that ``(i)n most cases, generally accepted accounting 
principles (GAAP), consistently applied, will pass muster for 
tax purposes. The Supreme Court has made clear, however, that 
GAAP does not enjoy a presumption of accuracy that must be 
rebutted by the Commissioner.''

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that inventories should be kept in a 
manner that clearly reflects income. The Congress also believed 
that it is inappropriate to require a physical count of a 
taxpayer's entire inventory to be taken exactly at year-end, 
provided that physical counts are taken on a regular and 
consistent basis. Where physical inventories are not taken at 
year-end, the Congress believed that income will be more 
clearly reflected if the taxpayer makes a reasonable estimate 
of the shrinkage occurring through year-end. In the case of 
retail trade inventories, the Congress believed that the 
availability of a safe harbor shrinkage calculation would 
facilitate the clear reflection of income.
    The Congress believed that a taxpayer should have the 
opportunity to change its method of accounting to a method that 
keeps inventories using shrinkage estimates, so long as such 
method is sound and clearly reflects income.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that a method of keeping inventories will 
not be considered unsound, or to fail to clearly reflect 
income, solely because it includes an adjustment for the 
shrinkage estimated to occur through year-end, based on 
inventories taken other than at year-end. Such an estimate must 
be based on actual physical counts. Where such an estimate is 
used in determining ending inventory balances, the taxpayer is 
required to take a physical count of inventories at each 
location on a regular and consistent basis. A taxpayer is 
required to adjust its ending inventory to take into account 
all physical counts performed through the end of its taxable 
year.
    The Secretary of the Treasury is expected to issue guidance 
establishing one or more safe harbor methods for the estimation 
of inventory shrinkage that will be deemed to result in a clear 
reflection of income, provided such safe harbor method is 
consistently applied and the taxpayer's inventory methods 
otherwise satisfy the clear reflection of income standard.
    For taxpayers primarily engaged in retail trade (the resale 
of personal property to the general public), Congress 
anticipates that a safe harbor method that will use a 
historical ratio of shrinkage to sales, multiplied by total 
sales between the date of the last physical inventory and year-
end will be available, provided physical inventories are 
normally taken at each location at least annually. The Congress 
anticipates that this historical ratio will be based on the 
actual shrinkage established by all physical inventories taken 
during the most recent three taxable years and the sales for 
related periods. The historical ratio should be separately 
determined for each store or department in a store of the 
taxpayer. The historical ratio, or estimated shrinkage 
determined using the historical ratio, cannot be adjusted by 
judgmental or other factors (e.g., floors or caps). The 
Congress expects that estimated shrinkage determined in 
accordance with the consistent application of the safe harbor 
method will not be required to be recalculated, through a 
lookback adjustment or otherwise, to reflect the results of 
physical inventories taken after year-end.
    In the case of a new store or department in a store that 
has not verified shrinkage by a physical inventory in each of 
the most recent three taxable years, it is anticipated that the 
historical ratio for that store or department will be the 
average of the historical ratios of the retailer's other stores 
or departments. Retailers using last in, first out (LIFO) 
methods of inventory are expected to be required to allocate 
shrinkage among their various inventory pools in a reasonable 
and consistent manner.
    The Congress expects that the Secretary of the Treasury 
should provide procedures to allow an automatic election of 
such method of accounting for a taxpayer's first taxable year 
ending after the date of enactment. It is expected that any 
adjustment required by section 481 as a result of the change in 
method of accounting generally will be taken into account over 
a period of four years.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for taxable years ending after 
the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).
    A taxpayer is permitted to change its method of accounting 
by this section if the taxpayer is currently using a method 
that does not utilize estimates of inventory shrinkage and 
wishes to change to a method for inventories that includes 
shrinkage estimates based on physical inventories taken other 
than at year-end. Congress also anticipates that a taxpayer 
primarily engaged in retail trade will be permitted to change 
its method of accounting to the safe harbor method described 
herein, without regard to whether the taxpayer is currently 
using a method that utilizes estimates of inventory shrinkage. 
Changes made pursuant to this provision are treated as 
voluntary changes in method of accounting, initiated by the 
taxpayer with the consent of the Secretary of the Treasury, 
provided the taxpayer changes to a permissible method of 
accounting (including the described safe harbor method, if the 
taxpayer is eligible). The period for taking into account any 
adjustment required under section 481 as a result of such a 
change in method is 4 years.
    No inference is intended with regard to whether any 
particular method of accounting for inventories is permissible 
under prior law.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $7 million in 1998, $21 million in 1999, $23 
million in 2000, $25 million in 2001, $27 million in 2002, $29 
million in 2003, $31 million in 2004, $33 million in 2005, $35 
million in 2006 and $37 million in 2007.

2. Treatment of workmen's compensation liability under rules for 
        certain personal injury liability assignments (sec. 962 of the 
        Act and sec. 130 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present law, an exclusion from gross income is 
provided for amounts received for agreeing to a qualified 
assignment to the extent that the amount received does not 
exceed the aggregate cost of any qualified funding asset (sec. 
130). A qualified assignment means any assignment of a 
liability to make periodic payments as damages (whether by suit 
or agreement) on account of a personal injury or sickness (in a 
case involving physical injury or physical sickness), provided 
the liability is assumed from a person who is a party to the 
suit or agreement, and the terms of the assignment satisfy 
certain requirements. Generally, these requirements are that 
(1) the periodic payments are fixed as to amount and time; (2) 
the payments cannot be accelerated, deferred, increased, or 
decreased by the recipient; (3) the assignee's obligation is no 
greater than that of the assignor; and (4) the payments are 
excludable by the recipient under section 104(a)(2) as damages 
on account of personal injuries or sickness. Present and prior 
law provide a separate exclusion under section 104(a)(1) for 
the recipient of amounts received under workmen's compensation 
acts as compensation for personal injuries or sickness, but 
under prior law, a qualified assignment under section 130 did 
not include the assignment of a liability to make such 
payments.

                           Reasons for Change

    Structured settlement arrangements are essentially conduit 
arrangements in which the assignor of a liability, the assignee 
(the structured settlement company) and the claimant (recipient 
of benefits) share the economic benefit of the exclusion from 
income provided under present law. The Congress understood that 
some workmen's compensation payments involve periodic payments 
(rather than lump sum payments). The Congress was persuaded 
that additional economic security would be provided to 
workmen's compensation claimants who receive periodic payments 
if the payments are made through a structured settlement 
arrangement, where the payor is generally subject to State 
insurance company regulation that is aimed at maintaining 
solvency of the company, in lieu of being made directly by 
self-insuring employers that may not be subject to comparable 
solvency-related regulation.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act extends the exclusion for qualified assignments 
under Code section 130 to amounts assigned for assuming a 
liability to pay compensation under any workmen's compensation 
act. The provision requires that the assignee assume the 
liability from a person who is a party to the workmen's 
compensation claim, and requires that the periodic payment be 
excludable from the recipient's gross income under section 
104(a)(1), in addition to the requirements of present law.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for workmen's compensation 
claims filed after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million in 1998, $2 million in 1999, $5 
million in 2000, $8 million in 2001, $12 million in 2002, $17 
million in 2003, $23 million in 2004, $29 million in 2005, $32 
million in 2006, and $36 million in 2007.

3. Tax-exempt status for certain State workmen's compensation act 
        companies (sec. 963 of the Act and sec. 501(c)(27) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In general, the Internal Revenue Service (``IRS'') takes 
the position that organizations that provide insurance for 
their members or other individuals are not considered to be 
engaged in a tax-exempt activity. The IRS maintains that such 
insurance activity is either (1) a regular business of a kind 
ordinarily carried on for profit, or (2) an economy or 
convenience in the conduct of members' businesses because it 
relieves the members from obtaining insurance on an individual 
basis.
    Certain insurance risk pools have qualified for tax 
exemption under Code section 501(c)(6). In general, these 
organizations (1) assign any insurance policies and 
administrative functions to their member organizations 
(although they may reimburse their members for amounts paid and 
expenses); (2) serve an important common business interest of 
their members; and (3) must be membership organizations 
financed, at least in part, by membership dues.
    State insurance risk pools may also qualify for tax exempt 
status under section 501(c)(4) as a social welfare organization 
or under section 115 as serving an essential governmental 
function of a State. In seeking qualification under section 
501(c)(4), insurance organizations generally are constrained by 
the restrictions on the provision of ``commercial-type 
insurance'' contained in section 501(m). Section 115 generally 
provides that gross income does not include income derived from 
the exercise of any essential governmental function and 
accruing to a State or any political subdivision thereof.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that eliminating uncertainty 
concerning the eligibility of certain State workmen's 
compensation act companies for tax-exempt status would assist 
States in ensuring workmen's compensation coverage for 
uninsured employers with respect to employees in the State. 
While tax exemption may have been available under prior law for 
many of these entities, the Congress believed that it was 
appropriate to clarify standards for tax-exempt status.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act clarifies the tax-exempt status of any organization 
that is created by State law, and organized and operated 
exclusively to provide workmen's compensation insurance and 
related coverage that is incidental to workmen's compensation 
insurance,\185\ and that meets certain additional requirements. 
The workmen's compensation insurance must be required by State 
law, or be insurance with respect to which State law provides 
significant disincentives if it is not purchased by an employer 
(such as loss of exclusive remedy or forfeiture of affirmative 
defenses such as contributory negligence). The organization 
must provide workmen's compensation to any employer in the 
State (for employees in the State or temporarily assigned out-
of-State) seeking such insurance and meeting other reasonable 
requirements. The State must either extend its full faith and 
credit to the initial debt of the organization or provide the 
initial operating capital of such organization. For this 
purpose, the initial operating capital can be provided by 
providing the proceeds of bonds issued by a State authority; 
the bonds may be repaid through exercise of the State's taxing 
authority, for example. For periods after the date of 
enactment, either the assets of the organization must revert to 
the State upon dissolution, or State law must not permit the 
dissolution of the organization absent an act of the State 
legislature. Should dissolution of the organization become 
permissible under applicable State law, then the requirement 
that the assets of the organization revert to the State upon 
dissolution applies. Finally, the majority of the board of 
directors (or comparable oversight body) of the organization 
must be appointed by an official of the executive branch of the 
State or by the State legislature, or by both.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \185\ Related coverage that is incidental to workmen's compensation 
insurance includes liability under Federal workmen's compensation laws, 
the Jones Act, and the Longshore and Harbor Workers Compensation Act, 
for example.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    No inference is intended that the benefit plans of 
organizations described in the provision are not properly 
maintained by the organization. It is anticipated that Federal 
regulatory agencies will take appropriate action to address 
transition issues faced by organizations to conform their 
benefit plans under the provision. For example, it is intended 
that an organization that has been maintaining a section 457 
plan as an agency or instrumentality of a State could (without 
creating any inference with respect to prior-law treatment) 
freeze future contributions to the section 457 plan and 
establish a retirement arrangement (e.g., a section 401(k) 
plan) that is consistent with the treatment of the organization 
as a tax-exempt employer under the provision.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997. Many organizations described in the 
provision have been operating as tax-exempt organizations. No 
inference is intended that organizations described in the 
provision are not tax-exempt under prior law.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 in each of 1998 and 1999, 
and by $1 million per year in each of 2000 through 2007.

4. Election for 1987 partnerships to continue exception from treatment 
        of publicly traded partnerships as corporations (sec. 964 of 
        the Act and sec. 7704 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A publicly traded partnership generally is treated as a 
corporation for Federal tax purposes (sec. 7704). An exception 
to the rule treating the partnership as a corporation applies 
if 90 percent of the partnership's gross income consists of 
``passive-type income,'' which includes (1) interest (other 
than interest derived in a financial or insurance business, or 
certain amounts determined on the basis of income or profits), 
(2) dividends, (3) real property rents (as defined for purposes 
of the provision), (4) gain from the sale or other disposition 
of real property, (5) income and gains relating to minerals and 
natural resources (as defined for purposes of the provision), 
and (6) gain from the sale or disposition of a capital asset 
(or certain trade or business property) held for the production 
of income of the foregoing types (subject to an exception for 
certain commodities income).
    The exception for publicly traded partnerships with 
``passive-type income'' does not apply to any partnership that 
would be described in section 851(a) of the Code (relating to 
regulated investment companies, or ``RICs''), if that 
partnership were a domestic corporation. Thus, a publicly 
traded partnership that is registered under the Investment 
Company Act of 1940 generally is treated as a corporation under 
the provision. Nevertheless, if a principal activity of the 
partnership consists of buying and selling of commodities 
(other than inventory or property held primarily for sale to 
customers) or futures, forwards and options with respect to 
commodities, and 90 percent of the partnership's income is such 
income, then the partnership is not treated as a corporation.
    A publicly traded partnership is a partnership whose 
interests are (1) traded on an established securities market, 
or (2) readily tradable on a secondary market (or the 
substantial equivalent thereof).
    Treasury regulations provide detailed guidance as to when 
an interest is treated as readily tradable on a secondary 
market or the substantial equivalent. Generally, an interest is 
so treated ``if, taking into account all of the facts and 
circumstances, the partners are readily able to buy, sell, or 
exchange their partnership interests in a manner that is 
comparable, economically, to trading on an established 
securities market'' (Treas. Reg. sec. 1.7704-1(c)(1)).
    When the publicly traded partnership rules were enacted in 
1987, a 10-year grandfather rule provided that the provisions 
apply to certain existing partnerships only for taxable years 
beginning after December 31, 1997.\186\ An existing publicly 
traded partnership is any partnership, if (1) it was a publicly 
traded partnership on December 17, 1987, (2) a registration 
statement indicating that the partnership was to be a publicly 
traded partnership was filed with the Securities and Exchange 
Commission with respect to the partnership on or before 
December 17, 1987, or (3) with respect to the partnership, an 
application was filed with a State regulatory commission on or 
before December 17, 1987, seeking permission to restructure a 
portion of a corporation as a publicly traded partnership. A 
partnership that otherwise would be treated as an existing 
publicly traded partnership ceases to be so treated as of the 
first day after December 17, 1987, on which there has been an 
addition of a substantial new line of business with respect to 
such partnership. A rule is provided to coordinate this 
grandfather rule with the exception to the rule treating the 
partnership as a corporation that applies if 90 percent of the 
partnership's gross income consists of passive-type income. The 
coordination rule provides that passive-type income exception 
applies only after the grandfather rule ceases to apply 
(whether by passage of time or because the partnership ceases 
to qualify for the grandfather rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \186\ Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-203), 
sec. 10211(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that, in important respects, publicly 
traded partnerships generally resemble corporations and should 
be subject to tax as corporations, so long as the current 
corporate income tax applies to corporate entities. 
Nevertheless, in the case of certain publicly traded 
partnerships that were existing on December 17, 1987, and that 
are treated as partnerships under the grandfather rule until 
December 31, 1997, it is appropriate to permit the continuation 
of their status as partnerships, so long as they elect to be 
subject to a tax that is intended to approximate the corporate 
tax they would pay if they were treated as corporations for 
Federal tax purposes.

                        Explanation of Provision

    In the case of an electing 1987 partnership that elects to 
be subject to a tax on gross income from the active conduct of 
a trade or business, the rule of present law treating a 
publicly traded partnership as a corporation does not apply. An 
electing 1987 partnership means any publicly traded 
partnership, if (1) it is an existing partnership within the 
meaning of section 10211(c)(2) of the 1987 Act, (2) it has not 
been treated as a corporation for taxable years beginning after 
December 31, 1987, and before January 1, 1998 (and would not 
have been treated as a corporation even without regard to 
section 7704(c), the exception for partnerships with ``passive-
type'' income), and (3) the partnership elects under the 
provision to be subject to a tax on gross income from the 
active conduct of a trade or business. An electing 1987 
partnership ceases to be treated as such as of the first day 
after December 31, 1997, on which there has been the addition 
of a substantial new line of business with respect to the 
partnership. The election to be subject to the tax on gross 
trade or business income, once made, remains in effect until 
revoked by the partnership, and cannot be reinstated.
    The tax is 3.5 percent of the partnership's gross income 
from the active conduct of a trade or business. The 
partnership's gross trade or business income includes its share 
of gross trade or business income of any lower-tier 
partnership. The tax imposed under the provision may not be 
offset by tax credits, by either the partnership or the 
partners; nor is the tax deductible by the partnership or the 
partners (sec. 275).

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated neither to increase nor reduce 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts for the years 1998 through 
2007.

5. Exclusion from UBIT for certain corporate sponsorship payments (sec. 
        965 of the Act and new sec. 513(i) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Although generally exempt from Federal income tax, tax-
exempt organizations are subject to the unrelated business 
income tax (``UBIT'') on income derived from a trade or 
business regularly carried on that is not substantially related 
to the performance of the organization's tax-exempt functions 
(secs. 511-514). Contributions or gifts received by tax-exempt 
organizations generally are not subject to the UBIT. However, 
present-law section 513(c) provides that an activity (such as 
advertising) does not lose its identity as a separate trade or 
business merely because it is carried on within a larger 
complex of other endeavors.\187\ If a tax-exempt organization 
receives sponsorship payments in connection with an event or 
other activity, the solicitation and receipt of such 
sponsorship payments may be treated as a separate activity. The 
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has taken the position that, 
under some circumstances, such sponsorship payments are subject 
to the UBIT.\188\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \187\ See United States v. American College of Physicians, 475 U.S. 
834 (1986) (holding that the activity of selling advertising in a 
medical journal was not substantially related to the organization's 
exempt purposes and, as a separate business under section 513(c), was 
subject to tax).
    \188\ See Prop. Treas. Reg. sec. 1.513-4 (issued January 19, 1993, 
EE-74-92, IRB 1993-7, 71). These proposed regulations generally exclude 
from the UBIT financial arrangements under which the tax-exempt 
organization provides so-called ``institutional'' or ``good will'' 
advertising.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    In order to reduce the uncertainty regarding the treatment 
for UBIT purposes of corporate sponsorship payments received by 
tax-exempt organizations, the Congress believed that it is 
appropriate to distinguish sponsorship payments for which the 
donor receives no substantial return benefit other than the use 
or acknowledgment of the donor's name or logo as part of a 
sponsored event (which should not be subject to the UBIT) from 
payments made in exchange for advertising provided by the 
recipient organization (which should be subject to the UBIT).

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, qualified sponsorship payments received by a 
tax-exempt organization (or State college or university 
described in section 511(a)(2)(B)) are exempt from the UBIT.
    ``Qualified sponsorship payments'' are defined as any 
payment made by a person engaged in a trade or business with 
respect to which the person will receive no substantial return 
benefit other than the use or acknowledgment of the name or 
logo (or product lines) of the person's trade or business in 
connection with the organization's activities.\189\ Such a use 
or acknowledgment does not include advertising of such person's 
products or services--meaning qualitative or comparative 
language, price information or other indications of savings or 
value, or an endorsement or other inducement to purchase, sell, 
or use such products or services. Thus, for example, if, in 
return for receiving a sponsorship payment, an organization 
promises to use the sponsor's name or logo in acknowledging the 
sponsor's support for an educational or fundraising event 
conducted by the organization, such payment will not be subject 
to the UBIT. In contrast, if the organization provides 
advertising of a sponsor's products, the payment made to the 
organization by the sponsor in order to receive such 
advertising will be subject to the UBIT (provided that the 
other, present-law requirements for UBIT liability are 
satisfied).\190\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \189\ In determining whether a payment is a qualified sponsorship 
payment, it is irrelevant whether the sponsored activity is related or 
unrelated to the organization's exempt purpose.
    \190\ As provided under Prop. Treas. Reg. sec. 1.513-4, the use of 
promotional logos or slogans that are an established part of the 
sponsor's identity would not, by itself, constitute advertising for 
purposes of determining whether a payment is a qualified sponsorship 
payment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The term ``qualified sponsorship payment'' does not include 
any payment where the amount of such payment is contingent, by 
contract or otherwise, upon the level of attendance at an 
event, broadcast ratings, or other factors indicating the 
degree of public exposure to an activity. However, the fact 
that a sponsorship payment is contingent upon an event actually 
taking place or being broadcast, in and of itself, will not 
cause the payment to fail to be a qualified sponsorship 
payment. Moreover, mere distribution or display of a sponsor's 
products by the sponsor or the tax-exempt organization to the 
general public at a sponsored event, whether for free or for 
remuneration, will be considered to be ``use or 
acknowledgment'' of the sponsor's product lines (as opposed to 
advertising), and thus will not affect the determination of 
whether a payment made by the sponsor is a qualified 
sponsorship payment.
    The provision does not apply to payments that entitle the 
payor to the use or acknowledgment of the payor's trade or 
business name or logo (or product lines) in tax-exempt 
organization periodicals. Such payments are outside the 
qualified sponsorship payment provision's safe-harbor 
exclusion, and, therefore, will be governed by present-law 
rules that determine whether the payment is subject to the 
UBIT. Thus, for example, payments that entitle the payor to a 
depiction of the payor's name or logo in a tax-exempt 
organization periodical may or may not be subject to the UBIT 
depending on the application of present-law rules regarding 
periodical advertising and nontaxable donor recognition.\191\ 
For this purpose, the term ``periodical'' means regularly 
scheduled and printed material published by (or on behalf of) 
the payee organization that is not related to and primarily 
distributed in connection with a specific event conducted by 
the payee organization.\192\ In addition, the safe-harbor 
exclusion provided for by the provision does not apply to 
payments made in connection with ``qualified convention or 
trade show activities,'' as defined in present-law section 
513(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \191\ For guidance regarding the treatment of periodical 
advertising under the UBIT, see section 513(c), United States v. 
American College of Physicians, 475 U.S. 834 (1986); Treas. Reg. 1.513-
1(d)(4)(iv), Example 7; Rev. Rul. 82-139, 1982-2 C.B. 108; Rev. Rul. 
74-38, 1974-1 C.B. 144; PLR 9137049; and PLR 9234002. For guidance 
regarding the treatment of donor acknowledgments under the UBIT, see 
Rev. Rul. 76-93, 1976-1 C.B. 170; PLR 8749085; and PLR 9044071. In the 
interest of administrative convenience, the Treasury Department is 
encouraged to permit tax-exempt entities to provide combined reporting 
of payments that are both qualified sponsorship payments and nontaxable 
payments made in exchange for donor acknowledgments in a periodical or 
in connection with a qualified convention or trade show. In addition, 
to the extent tax-exempt entities are required to allocate portions of 
payments, the Treasury Department is encouraged to minimize the 
reporting burden associated with any such allocation.
    \192\ For example, the provision will not apply to payments that 
lead to acknowledgments in a monthly journal, but will apply if a 
sponsor receives an acknowledgment in a program or brochure distributed 
at a sponsored event.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The provision specifically provides that, to the extent 
that a portion of a payment would (if made as a separate 
payment) be a qualified sponsorship payment, such portion of 
the payment will be treated as a separate payment. Thus, if a 
sponsorship payment made to a tax-exempt organization entitles 
the sponsor to both product advertising and use or 
acknowledgment of the sponsor's name or logo by the 
organization, then the UBIT will not apply to the amount of 
such payment that exceeds the fair market value of the product 
advertising provided to the sponsor. Moreover, the provision of 
facilities, services or other privileges by an exempt 
organization to a sponsor or the sponsor's designees (e.g., 
complimentary tickets, pro-am playing spots in golf 
tournaments, or receptions for major donors) in connection with 
a sponsorship payment will not affect the determination of 
whether the payment is a qualified sponsorship payment. Rather, 
the provision of such goods or services will be evaluated as a 
separate transaction in determining whether the organization 
has unrelated business taxable income from the event. In 
general, if such services or facilities do not constitute a 
substantial return benefit or if the provision of such services 
or facilities is a related business activity, then the payments 
attributable to such services or facilities will not be subject 
to the UBIT. Moreover, just as the provision of facilities, 
services or other privileges by a tax-exempt organization to a 
sponsor or the sponsor's designees (complimentary tickets, pro-
am playing spots in golf tournaments, or receptions for major 
donors) will be treated as a separate transaction that does not 
affect the determination of whether a sponsorship payment is a 
qualified sponsorship payment, a sponsor's receipt of a license 
to use an intangible asset (e.g., trademark, logo, or 
designation) of the tax-exempt organization likewise will be 
treated as separate from the qualified sponsorship transaction 
in determining whether the organization has unrelated business 
taxable income.
    The exemption provided by the provision will be in addition 
to other present-law exceptions from the UBIT (e.g., the 
exceptions for activities substantially all the work for which 
is performed by volunteers and for activities not regularly 
carried on). No inference is intended as to whether any 
sponsorship payment received prior to 1998 was subject to the 
UBIT.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to qualified sponsorship payments 
solicited or received after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible revenue 
effect on Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

6. Timeshare associations (sec. 966 of the Act and sec 528 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

Taxation of homeowners associations making the section 528 election

    Under present law (sec. 528), condominium management 
associations and residential real estate management 
associations may elect to be taxed at a 30-percent rate on 
their ``homeowners association income'' if they meet certain 
income, expenditure, and organizational requirements.
     ``Homeowners association income'' is the excess of the 
association's gross income, excluding ``exempt function 
income,'' over allowable deductions directly connected with 
non-exempt function gross income. ``Exempt function income'' 
includes membership dues, fees, and assessments for a common 
activity undertaken by association members or owners of 
residential units in the condominium or subdivision. Homeowners 
association income includes passive income (e.g., interest and 
dividends) earned on reserves and fees for use of association 
property (e.g., swimming pools, meeting rooms, etc.).
     For an association to qualify for this treatment: (1) at 
least 60 percent of the association's gross income must consist 
of membership dues, fees, or assessments on owners; (2) at 
least 90 percent of its expenditures must be for the 
acquisition, management, maintenance, or care of ``association 
property;'' and (3) no part of its net earnings can inure to 
the benefit of any private shareholder. ``Association 
property'' means: (1) property held by the association; (2) 
property commonly held by association members; (3) property 
within the association privately held by association members; 
and (4) property held by a governmental unit for the benefit of 
association members. In addition to these statutory 
requirements, Treasury regulations require that the units of 
the association be used for residential purposes. Use is not a 
residential use if the unit is occupied by a person or series 
of persons less than 30 days for more than half of the 
association's taxable year. Treas. Reg. sec. 1.528-4(d).

Taxation of homeowners associations not making the section 528 election

    Homeowners associations that do not (or cannot) make the 
section 528 election are taxed either as tax-exempt social 
welfare organizations under section 501(c)(4) or as regular C 
corporations. In order for an organization to qualify as a tax-
exempt social welfare organization, the organization must meet 
the following three requirements: (1) the association must 
serve a ``community'' which bears a reasonable, recognizable 
relationship to an area ordinarily identified as a governmental 
subdivision or unit; (2) the association may not conduct 
activities directed to exterior maintenance of any private 
residence, and (3) common areas of association facilities must 
be for the use and enjoyment of the general public (Rev. Rul. 
74-99, 1974-1 C.B. 131).
     Non-exempt homeowners associations are taxed as C 
corporations, except that: (1) the association may exclude 
excess assessments that it refunds to its members or applies to 
the subsequent year's assessments (Rev. Rul. 70-604, 1970-2 
C.B. 9); (2) gross income does not include special assessments 
held in a special bank account (Rev. Rul. 75-370, 75-2 C.B. 
25); and (3) assessments for capital improvements are treated 
as non-taxable contributions to capital (Rev. Rul. 75-370, 
1975-2 C.B. 25).

Taxation of timeshare associations

    Under prior law, timeshare associations are taxed as 
regular C corporations because (1) they cannot meet the 
requirement of the Treasury regulations for the section 528 
election that the units be used for residential purposes (i.e., 
the 30-day rule) and they have relatively large amount of 
services performed for its owners (e.g., maid and janitorial 
services) and (2) they cannot meet any of requirements of Rev. 
Rul. 74-99 for tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(4).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress understood that the IRS recently had 
challenged the exclusions from gross income of timeshare 
associations of refunds of excess assessments, special 
assessments held in a segregated account, and capital 
assessments as contributions to capital. See P.L.R. 9539001 
(June 8, 1995). The Congress believed that the activities of 
timeshare associations are sufficiently similar to those of 
homeowners associations that they should be similarly taxed. 
Accordingly, the Act extends the rules for the taxation of 
homeowners associations to timeshare associations, except that 
the rate of tax on timeshare associations is 32 percent, 
instead of the 30-percent rate that applies to homeowner's 
associations.

                        Explanation of Provision

In general

    The Act amends section 528 to permit timeshare associations 
to qualify for taxation under that section. Timeshare 
associations will have to meet the requirements of section 528 
(e.g., the 60-percent gross income, 90-percent expenditure, and 
the non-profit organizational and operational requirements). 
Timeshare associations electing to be taxed under section 528 
are subject to a tax on their ``timeshare association income'' 
at a rate of 32 percent.

60-percent test

    A qualified timeshare association must receive at least 60 
percent of its income from membership dues, fees and 
assessments from owners of either (a) timeshare rights to use 
of, or (b) timeshare ownership in, property of the timeshare 
association.

90-percent test

    At least 90 percent of the expenditures of the timeshare 
association must be for the acquisition, management, 
maintenance, or care of ``association property,'' and 
activities provided by the association to, or on behalf of, 
members of the timeshare association. ``Activities provided to 
or on behalf of members of the [timeshare] association'' 
include events located on association property (e.g., members' 
meetings at the association's meeting room, parties at the 
association's swimming pool, golf lessons on association's golf 
range, transportation to and from association property, etc.). 
Association property includes property in which a timeshare 
association or members of the association have rights arising 
out of recorded easements, covenants, and other recorded 
instruments to use property related to the timeshare project.

Organizational and operational tests

    No part of the net earnings of the timeshare association 
can inure to the benefit (other than by acquiring, 
constructing, or providing management, maintenance, and care of 
property of the timeshare association or rebate of excess 
membership dues, fees, or assessments) of any private 
shareholder or individual. A member of a qualified timeshare 
association must hold a timeshare right to use (or timeshare 
ownership in) real property of the association. A qualified 
timeshare association cannot be a condominium management 
association. Lastly, the timeshare association must elect to be 
taxed under section 528.

                             Effective Date

     The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1996.

                             Revenue Effect

     The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million in each of the years 1998 through 
2001 and by $2 million for each of the years 2002 through 2007.

7. Modification of advance refunding rules for certain tax-exempt bonds 
        issued by the Virgin Islands (sec. 967 of the Act and sec. 149 
        of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

In general

     Interest on State and local government bonds generally is 
excluded from gross income for purposes of the regular 
individual and corporate income taxes if the proceeds of the 
bonds are used to finance direct activities of these 
governmental units (Code sec. 103).
     Unlike the interest on governmental bonds, described 
above, interest on private activity bonds generally is taxable. 
A private activity bond is a bond issued by a State or local 
governmental unit acting as a conduit to provide financing for 
private parties in a manner violating either (1) a private 
business use and payment test or (2) a private loan 
restriction. However, interest on private activity bonds is not 
taxable if (1) the financed activity is specified in the Code 
and (2) at least 95 percent of the net proceeds of the bond 
issue is used to finance the specified activity.
     Issuers of State and local government bonds must satisfy 
numerous other requirements, including arbitrage restrictions 
(for all such bonds) and annual State volume limitations (for 
most private activity bonds) for the interest on these bonds to 
be excluded from gross income.

Advance refundings

    Generally, a governmental bond originally issued after 
December 31, 1985, may be advance refunded one time. An advance 
refunding is any refunding where all of the refunded bonds are 
not redeemed within 90 days after the refunding bonds are 
issued. Private activity bonds may not be advance refunded.

Virgin Island bonds

     Under prior law, the Virgin Islands was required to secure 
its bonds with a priority first lien claim on specified revenue 
streams rather than being permitted to issue multiple bond 
issues secured on a parity basis by a common pool of revenues. 
Under a recent non-tax law change, the priority lien 
requirement was repealed.

                           Reasons for Change

     The Congress believed that allowing an additional advance 
refunding is appropriate to accommodate made changes to other, 
nontax Federal restrictions on these bonds.

                        Explanation of Provision

     Under the Act, one additional advance refunding is allowed 
for governmental bonds issued by the Virgin Islands that were 
advance refunded before June 9, 1997.

                             Effective Date

     The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

     The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $2 million in 1998, $4 million in 1999, $5 
million in 2000, $5 million in 2001, $5 million in 2002, $3 
million in 2003, $1 million in 2004, $3 million in 2005, $4 
million in 2006, and $4 million in 2007.

8. Deferral of gain on certain sales of farm product refiners and 
        processors (sec. 968 of the Act (canceled pursuant to Line Item 
        Veto Act) and sec. 1042 of the Code)

                          Present and Prior Law

     Under present law, if certain requirements are satisfied, 
a taxpayer may defer recognition of gain on the sale of 
qualified securities to an employee stock ownership plan 
(``ESOP'') or an eligible worker-owned cooperative to the 
extent that the taxpayer reinvests the proceeds in qualified 
replacement property (sec. 1042). Gain is recognized when the 
taxpayer disposes of the qualified replacement property. One of 
the requirements that must be satisfied for deferral to apply 
is that, immediately after the sale, the ESOP must own at least 
30 percent of the stock of the corporation issuing the 
qualified securities. In general, qualified securities are 
securities issued by a domestic C corporation that has no stock 
outstanding that is readily tradeable on an established 
securities market. Deferral treatment does not apply to gain on 
the sale of qualified securities by a C corporation.

                           Reasons for Change

     The Congress understood that much of the final value of 
farm products often is generated not in their production on the 
farm, but during the processing or refining of farm products 
after those products leave the farm. The Congress believed 
that, in order for farmers to share more of that final value, 
farmers must directly or indirectly own some of the processing 
or refining facilities. The Congress believed it appropriate to 
facilitate the transfer of refiners and processors to farmers' 
cooperatives by providing for the tax-free rollover of gain on 
the sale of stock of a corporation that owns farm product 
processing or refining facilities if the stock was sold to a 
cooperative which was selling farm produce for refining or 
processing in those facilities.

                    Explanation of Canceled Provision

    As passed by Congress, the Act extended the deferral 
provided under section 1042 to the sale of stock of a qualified 
refiner or processor to an eligible farmers' cooperative. A 
qualified refiner or processor is a domestic corporation 
substantially all of the activities of which consist of the 
active conduct of the trade or business of refining or 
processing agricultural or horticultural products and which 
purchases more than one-half of the products to be refined or 
processed from farmers who make up the cooperative (or the 
cooperative itself) which is purchasing the stock for at least 
one year prior to the sale. An eligible farmers' cooperative is 
an organization which is treated as a cooperative for Federal 
income tax purposes and which is engaged in the marketing of 
agricultural or horticultural products.
     The deferral of gain is available only if, immediately 
after the sale, the eligible farmers' cooperative owns 100 
percent of the qualified refiner or processor. The provision 
applies even if the stock of the qualified refiner or processor 
is publicly traded. In addition, the provision applies to gain 
on the sale of stock by a C corporation.

                             Effective Date

     The provision would have applied to sales after December 
31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

     The provision was estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $2 million in 1998, $68 million in 1999, $5 
million per year in 2000 and 2001, and $4 million per year in 
each of the years 2002 through 2007.

                        Effect of Line Item Veto

     This provision was identified by the Joint Committee on 
Taxation as a limited tax benefit within the meaning of the 
Line Item Veto Act. The President canceled this provision 
pursuant to the Line Item Veto Act.\193\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \193\ A modified version of this provision is included in H.R. 2513 
as passed by the House on November 8, 1997. (See report of the House 
Committee on Ways and Means; H. Rept. 105-318, Part I, October 9, 
1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

9. Increased deduction for business meals while operating under 
        Department of Transportation hours of service limitations (sec. 
        969 of the Act and sec. 274 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Ordinary and necessary business expenses, as well as 
expenses incurred for the production of income, are generally 
deductible, subject to a number of restrictions and 
limitations. Generally, the amount allowable as a deduction for 
food and beverage is limited to 50 percent of the otherwise 
deductible amount. Exceptions to this 50 percent rule are 
provided for food and beverages provided to crew members of 
certain vessels and offshore oil or gas platforms or drilling 
rigs.

                           Reasons for Change

    Individuals subject to the hours of service limitations of 
the Department of Transportation are frequently forced to eat 
meals away from home in circumstances where their choice is 
limited, prices comparatively high and the opportunity for 
lavish meals remote. The Congress believed that it is 
appropriate to allow a higher percentage of the cost of food 
and beverages consumed while away from home on business by 
these individuals to be deducted than is allowed under the 
general rule.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act increased to 80 percent the deductible percentage 
of the cost of food and beverages consumed while away from home 
by an individual during, or incident to, a period of duty 
subject to the hours of service limitations of the Department 
of Transportation.
    Individuals subject to the hours of service limitations of 
the Department of Transportation include:
    (1) certain air transportation employees such as pilots, 
crew, dispatchers, mechanics, and control tower operators 
pursuant to Federal Aviation Administration regulations,
    (2) interstate truck operators and interstate bus drivers 
pursuant to Department of Transportation regulations,
    (3) certain railroad employees such as engineers, 
conductors, train crews, dispatchers and control operations 
personnel pursuant to Federal Railroad Administration 
regulations, and
    (4) certain merchant mariners pursuant to Coast Guard 
regulations.
    The increase in the deductible percentage is phased in 
according to the following schedule:


                                                                        
                                                              Deductible
                Taxable years beginning in--                  percentage
                                                                        
1998, 1999.................................................           55
2000, 2001.................................................           60
2002, 2003.................................................           65
2004, 2005.................................................           70
2006, 2007.................................................           75
2008 and thereafter........................................           80
                                                                        

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    This provision and Act sec. 970 (described following) are 
estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year budget receipts by $8 
million in 1998, $17 million in 1999, $27 million in 2000, $37 
million in 2001, $49 million in 2002, $62 million in 2003, $76 
million in 2004, $91 million in 2005, $108 million in 2006 and 
$125 million in 2007.

10. Deductibility of meals provided for the convenience of the employer 
        (sec. 970 of the Act and sec. 132 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In general, subject to several exceptions, only 50 percent 
of business meal and entertainment expenses are allowed as a 
deduction (sec. 274(n)). Under one exception, the value of 
meals that are excludable from employees' incomes as a de 
minimis fringe benefit (sec. 132) are fully deductible by the 
employer.
    In addition, the courts that have considered the issue have 
held that if meals are provided for the convenience of the 
employer pursuant to section 119 they are fully deductible 
pursuant to sec. 274(n)(2)(B), provided they satisfy the 
relevant section 132 requirements (Boyd Gaming Corp. v. 
Commissioner \194\ and Gold Coast Hotel & Casino v. I.R.S. 
\195\).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \194\ 106 T.C. 343 (1996).
    \195\ U.S. D.C. Nev. CV-5-94-1146-HDM (LRL) (September 26, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that it is consistent with the case 
law to provide for full deductibility of business meals that 
are excludible from employees' incomes because they are 
provided for the convenience of the employer.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that meals that are excludable from 
employees' incomes because they are provided for the 
convenience of the employer pursuant to section 119 of the 
Code, provided they satisfy the relevant section 132 
requirements, are excludable as a de minimis fringe benefit and 
therefore are fully deductible by the employer. No inference is 
intended as to whether such meals are fully deductible under 
present law.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The effect of this provision on Federal fiscal year budget 
receipts is included in the estimate of the effect of the 
provision allowing an increased deduction for business meals 
while operating under Department of Transportation hours of 
service limitations (Act sec. 969, above).

11. Modify limits on depreciation of luxury automobiles for certain 
        clean-burning fuel and electric vehicles (sec. 971 of the Act 
        and sec. 280F of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The amount the taxpayer may claim as a depreciation 
deduction for any passenger automobile is limited to: $2,560 
for the first taxable year in the recovery period; $4,100 for 
the second taxable year in the recovery period; $2,450 for the 
third taxable year in the recovery period; and $1,475 for each 
succeeding taxable year in the recovery period. Each of the 
dollar limitations is indexed for inflation after October 1987 
by the automobile component of the Consumer Price Index. 
Consequently, the depreciation deduction limitations applicable 
for 1997 are $3,160, $5,000, $3,050, and $1,775.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the price of a clean-burning 
fuel vehicle or an electric vehicle does not necessarily 
represent the consumer's purchase of a luxury automobile. 
Rather, the higher price of such vehicles often represents the 
cost of the technology required to produce an automobile 
designed to provide certain environmental benefits. The 
Congress believed the cost of this technology should not be 
considered a luxury for the purpose of the limitation on 
depreciation that may be claimed on passenger automobiles. 
Therefore, the Congress believed it is appropriate to modify 
the limitation on depreciation that may be claimed on passenger 
automobiles in the case of certain clean-burning fuel vehicles 
and electric vehicles.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act modifies the limitation on depreciation in the case 
of qualified clean-burning fuel vehicles and certain electric 
vehicles. With respect to qualified clean-burning fuel 
vehicles, those that are modified to permit such vehicles to be 
propelled by a clean burning fuel, the Act generally applies 
the limitation to that portion of the vehicles' cost not 
represented by the installed qualified clean-burning fuel 
property. The taxpayer may claim an amount otherwise allowable 
as a depreciation deduction on the installed qualified clean-
burning fuel property, without regard to the limitation. 
Generally, this has the same effect as only subjecting the cost 
of the vehicle before modification to the limitations.
    In the case of a passenger vehicle designed to be propelled 
primarily by electricity and built by an original equipment 
manufacturer, the base-year limitation amounts of $2,560 for 
the first taxable year in the recovery period, $4,100 for the 
second taxable year in the recovery period, $2,450 for the 
third taxable year in the recovery period, and $1,475 for each 
succeeding taxable year in the recovery period are tripled to 
$7,680, $12,300, $7,350, and $4,425, respectively, and then 
adjusted for inflation after October 1987 by the automobile 
component of the Consumer Price Index.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for property placed in service 
after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997) and before January 
1, 2005.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to result in a negligible 
reduction in Federal fiscal year budget receipts for years 1997 
through 2007.

12. Temporary suspension of income limitations on percentage depletion 
        for production from marginal wells (sec. 972 of the Act and 
        sec. 613A of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Code permits taxpayers to recover their investments in 
oil and gas wells through depletion deductions. In the case of 
certain properties, the deductions may be determined using the 
percentage depletion method. Among the limitations that apply 
in calculating percentage depletion deductions is a restriction 
that, for oil and gas properties, the amount deducted may not 
exceed 100 percent of the net income from that property in any 
year (sec. 613(a)).
    Specific percentage depletion rules apply to oil and gas 
production from ``marginal'' properties (sec. 613A(c)(6)). 
Marginal production is defined as domestic crude oil and 
natural gas production from stripper well property or from 
property substantially all of the production from which during 
the calendar year is heavy oil. Stripper well property is 
property from which the average daily production is 15 barrel 
equivalents or less, determined by dividing the average daily 
production of domestic crude oil and domestic natural gas from 
producing wells on theproperty for the calendar year by the 
number of wells. Heavy oil is domestic crude oil with a weighted 
average gravity of 20 degrees API or less (corrected to 60 degrees 
Fahrenheit).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that a temporary suspension of the 
net income property limitation for marginal oil and gas 
production was an appropriate part of overall national energy 
security policy.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The 100-percent-of-net-income property limitation is 
suspended for domestic oil and gas production from marginal 
properties during taxable years beginning after December 31, 
1997, and before January 1, 2000.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $21 million in 1998, $35 million in 1999, 
and $14 million in 2000.

13. Increase in standard mileage rate for purposes of computing 
        charitable deduction (sec. 973 of the Act and sec. 170(I) of 
        the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In computing taxable income, individuals who do not elect 
the standard deduction may claim itemized deductions, including 
a deduction (subject to certain limitations) for charitable 
contributions or gifts made during the taxable year to a 
qualified charitable organization or governmental entity (sec. 
170). Individuals who elect the standard deduction may not 
claim a deduction for charitable contributions made during the 
taxable year.
    No charitable contribution deduction is allowed for a 
contribution of services. However, unreimbursed expenditures 
made incident to the rendition of donated services to a 
qualified charitable organization--such as out-of-pocket 
transportation expenses necessarily incurred in performing 
donated services--may constitute a deductible contribution 
(Treas. Reg. sec. 1.170A-1(g)).\196\ However, no charitable 
contribution deduction is allowed for traveling expenses 
(including expenses for meals and lodging) while away from 
home, whether paid directly or by reimbursement, unless there 
is no significant element of personal pleasure, recreation, or 
vacation in such travel (sec. 170(j)). Moreover, a taxpayer may 
not deduct as a charitable contribution out-of-pocket 
expenditures incurred on behalf of a charity if such 
expenditures are made for the purposes of influencing 
legislation (sec. 170(f)(6)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \196\ Treasury Regulation section 1.170A-1(g) allows taxpayers to 
deduct only their own unreimbursed expenses incurred in performing 
services for a qualified charitable organization, and not expenses 
incident to a third party's performance of services. See Davis v. 
United States, 495 U.S. 472 (1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under prior law, for purposes of computing the charitable 
contribution deduction for the use of a passenger automobile 
(including vans, pickups, and panel trucks) in connection with 
rendering donated services to a qualified charitable 
organization, the standard mileage rate was 12 cents per mile 
(sec. 170(i)).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that it is appropriate to increase 
the standard mileage rate for purposes of the charitable 
contribution deduction.

                        Explanation of Provision

    For purposes of computing the charitable contribution 
deduction for the use of a passenger automobile in connection 
with rendering donated services to a qualified charitable 
organization, the standard mileage rate is increased to 14 
cents per mile.
    As an alternative to claiming the standard mileage rate, 
taxpayers will continue to have the option of claiming a 
deduction for actual out-of-pocket transportation expenses 
necessarily incurred in performing donated services (i.e., 
operating expenses for use of an automobile, but not general 
maintenance, depreciation, or insurance costs), provided that 
the taxpayer maintains adequate records or other evidence for 
substantiation. See Rev. Proc. 96-63, 1996-2 C.B. 420. Parking 
fees and tolls attributable to the use of an automobile for 
charitable purposes may be deducted as separate items. Id.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $8 million in 1998, $56 million in 1999, $58 
million in 2000, $61 million in 2001, $64 million in 2002, $68 
million in 2003, $71 million in 2004, $75 million in 2005, $78 
million in 2006, and $82 million in 2007.

14. Purchases of receivables by tax-exempt hospital cooperative service 
        organizations (sec. 974 of the Act and sec. 501(e) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Section 501(e) provides that an organization organized on a 
cooperative basis by tax-exempt hospitals will itself be tax-
exempt if the organization is operated solely to perform, on a 
centralized basis, one or more of certain enumerated services 
for its members. These services are: data processing, 
purchasing (including the purchase of insurance on a group 
basis), warehousing, billing and collection, food, clinical, 
industrial engineering, laboratory, printing, communications, 
record center, and personnel services. An organization does not 
qualify under section 501(e) if it performs services other than 
the enumerated services. (Treas. Reg. sec. 1.501(e)-1(c)).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that it is important to clarify that 
permissible billing and collection services that can be carried 
out by hospital cooperative service organizations under section 
501(e) include the purchase of patron accounts receivable on a 
recourse basis.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act clarifies that, for purposes of section 501(e), 
billing and collection services include the purchase of patron 
accounts receivable on a recourse basis. Thus, hospital 
cooperative service organizations are permitted to advance cash 
on the basis of member accounts receivable, provided that each 
member hospital retains the risk of non-payment with respect to 
its accounts receivable.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1996. No inference is intended with respect 
to taxable years prior to the effective date.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible revenue 
effect on Federal fiscal year budget receipts in each of 1997 
through 2007.

15. Provide above-the-line deduction for certain business expenses in 
        connection with service performed by certain officials (sec. 
        975 of the Act and sec. 62 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, individuals may generally 
deduct ordinary and necessary business expenses in determining 
adjusted gross income (``AGI''). Under prior law, this 
deduction did not apply in the case of any individual 
performing services as an employee. Employee business expenses 
generally were deductible only as a miscellaneous itemized 
deduction, i.e., only to the extent all the taxpayer's 
miscellaneous itemized deductions exceed 2 percent of the 
taxpayer's AGI. Employee business expenses were not allowed as 
a deduction for alternative minimum tax purposes.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress was aware that certain State and local 
government officials are compensated (in whole or in part) on a 
fee basis to provide certain services to the government. These 
officials hire employees and incur expenses in connection with 
their official duties. These expenses may be subject, under 
prior law, to the 2-percent floor on itemized deductions. The 
Congress believed these expenses should be deductible.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, employee business expenses relating to 
service as an official of a State or local government (or 
political subdivision thereof) are deductible in computing AGI 
(``above the line''), provided the official is compensated in 
whole or in part on a fee basis. Consequently, such expenses 
are also deductible for minimum tax purposes.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to expenses paid or incurred in 
taxable years beginning after December 31, 1986.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce fiscal year budget 
receipts by $10 million in 1998, $4 million in 1999, $4 million 
in 2000, $4 million in 2001, $5 million in 2002, $5 million in 
2003, $6 million in 2004, $6 million in 2005, $7 million in 
2006, and $7 million in 2007.

16. Combined employment tax reporting demonstration project (sec. 976 
        of the Act)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Traditionally, Federal tax forms are filed with the Federal 
government and State tax forms are filed with individual 
states. This necessitates duplication of items common to both 
returns. Some States have recently been working with the IRS to 
implement combined State and Federal reporting of certain types 
of items on one form as a way of reducing the burdens on 
taxpayers. The State of Montana and the IRS have cooperatively 
developed a system to combine State and Federal employment tax 
reporting on one form. The one form would contain exclusively 
Federal data, exclusively State data, and information common to 
both: the taxpayer's name, address, TIN, and signature.
    The Internal Revenue Code prohibits disclosure of tax 
returns and return information, except to the extent 
specifically authorized by the Internal Revenue Code (sec. 
6103). Unauthorized disclosure is a felony punishable by a fine 
not exceeding $5,000 or imprisonment of not more than five 
years, or both (sec. 7213). An action for civil damages also 
may be brought for unauthorized disclosure (sec. 7431). No tax 
information may be furnished by the Internal Revenue Service 
(``IRS'') to another agency unless the other agency establishes 
procedures satisfactory to the IRS for safeguarding the tax 
information it receives (sec. 6103(p)).
    Implementation of the combined Montana-Federal employment 
tax reporting project has been hindered because section 6103 
can be interpreted to apply that provision's restrictions on 
disclosure to information common to both the State and Federal 
portions of the combined form, although these restrictions 
would not apply to the State with respect to the State's use of 
State-requested information if that information were supplied 
separately to both the State and the IRS.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that it is appropriate to permit a 
demonstration project to assess the feasibility and 
desirability of expanding combined reporting in the future.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act permits implementation of a demonstration project 
to assess the feasibility and desirability of expanding 
combined reporting in the future. There are several limitations 
on the demonstration project. First, it is limited to the State 
of Montana and the IRS. Second, it is limited to employment tax 
reporting. Third, it is limited to disclosure of the name, 
address, TIN, and signature of the taxpayer, which is 
information common to both the Montana and Federal portions of 
the combined form. Fourth, it is limited to a period of five 
years.
    The Congress intended that the State of Montana be allowed 
to use the data collected through the demonstration project as 
if it had collected it separately.\197\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \197\ A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this intent. See Title VI (sec. 608(c)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax 
Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 
5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997), and will expire on the date five years after 
the date of enactment (August 5, 2002).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.

17. Elective carryback of existing net operating losses of the National 
        Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) (sec. 977 of the Act)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Generally, under prior law, net operating losses could be 
carried back to the three taxable years of the taxpayer that 
precede the year of loss (10 taxable years in certain 
circumstances). Section 1082 of the Act limits this carryback 
period to two years for losses arising in taxable years 
beginning after August 5, 1997.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the provision of viable 
intercity passenger rail service by Amtrak is an important 
national objective. At present, that objective is threatened by 
capital needs of Amtrak, the principal passenger rail service 
provider.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides elective procedures that allow Amtrak to 
consider the tax attributes of its predecessors, those 
railroads that were relieved of their responsibility to provide 
intercity rail passenger service as a result of the Rail 
Passenger Service Act of 1970, in the use of Amtrak's net 
operating losses. The benefit allowable under these procedures 
is limited to the least of: (1) 35 percent of Amtrak's existing 
qualified carryovers, (2) the net tax liability for the 
carryback period, or (3) $2,323,000,000. One half of the amount 
so calculated will be treated as a payment of the tax imposed 
by chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for the 
Amtrak's taxable year ending December 31, 1997, and a similar 
amount for Amtrak's taxable year ending December 31, 1998.
    The existing qualified carryovers are the net operating 
loss carryovers that are available under section 172(b) in 
Amtrak's first taxable year ending after September 30, 1997. 
The net tax liability for the carryback period is the aggregate 
of the net tax liability of Amtrak's railroad predecessors for 
all taxable years beginning before January 1, 1971, for which 
there is a net Federal tax liability. Amtrak's railroad 
predecessors are those railroads that were relieved of their 
responsibility to provide intercity rail passenger service as a 
result of the Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970, and their 
predecessors. In the case of a railroad predecessor who joined 
in the filing of a consolidated tax return, the net tax 
liability of the predecessor will be the net tax liability of 
the consolidated group.
    The net operating losses of Amtrak are required to be 
reduced by an amount equal to the amount obtained by Amtrak 
under this provision, divided by 0.35. The Secretary of the 
Treasury is to adjust, as he deems appropriate, the tax account 
of each predecessor railroad for the carryback period to 
reflect the utilization of the net operating losses. The amount 
of the adjustment is equal to the amount of the benefit and is 
to be taken into consideration on the tax accounts of the 
predecessor railroads on a first-in, first-out basis, starting 
with balances for the earliest year for which any predecessor 
railroad has a net tax liability. No additional refund to any 
taxpayer other than Amtrak is to be allowed as a result of 
these adjustments.
    The availability of the elective procedures is conditioned 
on Amtrak (1) agreeing to make payments of one percent of the 
amount it receives to each of the non-Amtrak States to offset 
certain transportation related expenditures and (2) using the 
balance for certain qualified expenses. Non-Amtrak States are 
those States that are not receiving Amtrak service at any time 
during the period beginning on the date of enactment and ending 
on the date of payment.
    No deduction is allowed with respect to any qualified 
expense whose payment is attributable to the proceeds made 
available as a result of this provision. The basis of any 
property must be reduced by the portion of its cost that is 
attributable to such proceeds. An item of cost or expense is 
attributable to such proceeds if it is (1) paid from the 
proceeds of the refund or (2) to the extent the principal and 
interest of any borrowings are paid from the proceeds of the 
refund, from the proceeds of such borrowings.
    Amtrak's earnings and profits will be increased by the 
amount of the refund. However, Congress expects that this 
amount will not be included in adjusted current earnings for 
alternative minimum tax purposes, consistent with Treas. Reg. 
sec. 1.56(g)-1(c)(4) (ii).

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997). However, no refund shall be made as a result 
of this provision earlier than the date of enactment of Federal 
legislation which authorizes reforms of Amtrak.\198\ No 
interest shall accrue with respect to the payment of any refund 
due as a result of this provision until 45 days after the 
latest of (1) the enactment of such reform legislation, (2) the 
filing by Amtrak of a Federal income tax return which includes 
the election to use the procedures described in this provision, 
or (3) the original due date of such return.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \198\ Section 301(b) of the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act of 
1997 (P.L. 105-134), passed by the House and Senate on November 13, 
1997 and signed by the President on December 2, 1997, states that such 
Act constitutes Amtrak reform legislation within the meaning of this 
provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1,162 million in 1998 and $1,162 million in 
1999.

         H. Extension of Duty-Free Treatment Under Generalized

        System of Preferences (sec. 981 of the Act and sec. 505

                       of the Trade Act of 1974)

                               Prior Law

    Title V of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (Generalized 
System of Preferences) (``GSP''), grants authority to the 
President to provide duty-free treatment on imports of eligible 
articles from designated beneficiary developing countries, 
subject to specific conditions and limitations. To qualify for 
GSP privileges each beneficiary country is subject to various 
mandatory and discretionary eligibility criteria. Import 
sensitive products are ineligible for GSP. The President's 
authority to grant GSP benefits expired after May 31, 1997.

                           Reasons for Change

    The GSP program promotes three broad policy goals: (1) to 
foster economic development in developing economies and 
economies in transition through increased trade, rather than 
foreign aid; (2) to promote U.S. trade interests by encouraging 
beneficiaries to open their markets and comply more fully with 
international trading rules; and (3) to help maintain U.S. 
international competitiveness by lowering costs for U.S. 
business, as well as lowering prices for American consumers. 
Recent short-term extensions of the program have been highly 
disruptive to U.S. companies who rely on GSP products, and to 
the economic development of beneficiary countries. Budgetary 
effects of the program, however, precluded a longer term 
extension. So that there will be no gap in duty-free treatment, 
the provision provides for an extension that is retroactive to 
May 31, 1997, through a refund procedure upon request of an 
importer.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act reauthorizes the GSP program for 13 months, to 
expire after June 30, 1998. The provision provides for refunds, 
upon request of the importer, of any duty paid between May 31, 
1997 and the date of enactment.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $378 million in 1998, and to have no revenue 
effect in fiscal years 1999 through 2007.
                  TITLE X. REVENUE-INCREASE PROVISIONS

                         A. Financial Products

1. Require recognition of gain on certain appreciated financial 
        positions in personal property (sec. 1001(a) of the Act and 
        sec. 1259 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In general, gain or loss is taken into account for tax 
purposes when realized. Gain or loss generally is realized with 
respect to a capital asset at the time the asset is sold, 
exchanged, or otherwise disposed of. Gain or loss is determined 
by comparing the amount realized with the adjusted basis of the 
particular property sold. In the case of corporate stock, the 
basis of shares purchased at different dates or different 
prices generally is determined by reference to the actual lot 
sold if it can be identified. Special rules under the Code can 
defer or accelerate recognition in certain situations.
    The recognition of gain or loss is postponed for open 
transactions. For example, in the case of a ``short sale'' 
(i.e., when a taxpayer sells borrowed property such as stock 
and closes the sale by returning identical property to the 
lender), no gain or loss on the transaction is recognized until 
the closing of the borrowing.
    Under prior law, transactions designed to reduce or 
eliminate risk of loss on financial assets generally did not 
cause realization. For example, a taxpayer could lock in gain 
on securities by entering into a ``short sale against the 
box,'' i.e., when the taxpayer owned securities that were the 
same as, or substantially identical to, the securities borrowed 
and sold short. The form of the transaction was respected for 
income tax purposes and gain on the substantially identical 
property was not recognized at the time of the short sale. 
Pursuant to rules that allow specific identification of 
securities delivered on a sale, the taxpayer could obtain open 
transaction treatment by identifying the borrowed securities as 
the securities delivered. When it was time to close out the 
borrowing, the taxpayer could choose to deliver either the 
securities held or newly-purchased securities. The Code 
provided rules only to prevent taxpayers from using short sales 
against the box to accelerate loss or to convert short-term 
capital gain into long-term capital gain or long-term capital 
loss into short-term capital loss (sec. 1233(b)).
    Taxpayers also can lock in gain on certain property by 
entering into offsetting positions in the same or similar 
property. Under the straddle rules, when a taxpayer realizes a 
loss on one offsetting position in actively-traded personal 
property, the taxpayer generally can deduct this loss only to 
the extent the loss exceeds the unrecognized gain in the other 
positions in the straddle. In addition, rules similar to the 
short sale rules prevent taxpayers from changing the tax 
character of gains and losses recognized on the offsetting 
positions in a straddle (sec. 1092).
    Taxpayers may engage in other arrangements, such as 
``futures contracts,'' ``forward contracts,'' ``equity swaps'' 
and other ``notional principal contracts'' where the risk of 
loss and opportunity for gain with respect to property are 
shifted to another party (the ``counterparty''). Under prior 
law, these arrangements did not result in the recognition of 
gain by the taxpayer.
    The Code accelerates the recognition of gains and losses in 
certain cases. For example, taxpayers are required each year to 
mark to market certain regulated futures contracts, foreign 
currency contracts, non-equity options, and dealer equity 
options, and to take any capital gain or loss thereon into 
account as 40 percent short-term gain and 60 percent long-term 
gain (sec. 1256).

                           Reasons for Change

    In general, a taxpayer cannot completely eliminate risk of 
loss (and opportunity for gain) with respect to property 
without disposing of the property in a taxable transaction. In 
recent years, however, several financial transactions have been 
developed or popularized which allow taxpayers to substantially 
reduce or eliminate their risk of loss (and opportunity for 
gain). Like most taxable dispositions, many of these 
transactions also provide the taxpayer with cash or other 
property in return for the interest that the taxpayer has given 
up.
    One of these transactions is the ``short sale against the 
box.'' In such a transaction, a taxpayer borrows and sells 
shares identical to the shares the taxpayer holds. By holding 
two precisely offsetting positions, the taxpayer is insulated 
from economic fluctuations in the value of the stock. While the 
short against the box is in place, the taxpayer generally can 
borrow a substantial portion of the value of the appreciated 
stock so that, economically, the transaction strongly resembles 
a sale of the long stock.
    Other transactions that have been used by taxpayers to 
transfer risk of loss (and opportunity for gain) involve 
entering into notional principal contracts or futures or 
forward contracts to deliver the same stock. For example, a 
taxpayer holding appreciated stock may enter into an ``equity 
swap'' which requires the taxpayer to make payments equal to 
the dividends and any increase in the stock's value for a 
specified period, and entitles the taxpayer to receive payments 
equal to any depreciation in value. The terms of such swaps 
also frequently entitle the shareholder to receive payments 
during the swap period of a market rate of return (e.g., the 
Treasury-bill rate) on a notional principal amount equal to the 
value of the shareholder's appreciated stock, making the 
transaction strongly resemble a taxable exchange of the 
appreciated stock for an interest-bearing asset.

                        Explanation of Provision

General rules

    The Act requires a taxpayer to recognize gain (but not 
loss) upon entering into a constructive sale of any appreciated 
position in stock, a partnership interest or certain debt 
instruments as if such position were sold, assigned or 
otherwise terminated at its fair market value on the date of 
the constructive sale.
    If the requirements for a constructive sale are met, the 
taxpayer recognizes gain in a constructive sale as if the 
position were sold at its fair market value on the date of the 
sale and immediately repurchased. Except as provided in 
Treasury regulations, a constructive sale generally is not 
treated as a sale for other Code purposes; an appropriate 
adjustment in the basis of the appreciated financial position 
is made in the amount of any gain recognized on a constructive 
sale, and a new holding period of such position begins as if 
the taxpayer had acquired the position on the date of the 
constructive sale.
    A taxpayer is treated as making a constructive sale of an 
appreciated position when the taxpayer (or, in certain 
circumstances, a person related to the taxpayer) does one of 
the following: (1) enters into a short sale of the same 
property, (2) enters into an offsetting notional principal 
contract with respect to the same property, or (3) enters into 
a futures or forward contract to deliver the same property. A 
constructive sale under any part of the definition occurs if 
the two positions are in property that, although not the same, 
is substantially identical. In addition, in the case of an 
appreciated financial position that is a short sale, a notional 
principal contract or a futures or forward contract, the holder 
is treated as making a constructive sale when it acquires the 
same property as the underlying property for the position. 
Finally, to the extent provided in Treasury regulations, a 
taxpayer is treated as making a constructive sale when it 
enters into one or more other transactions, or acquires one or 
more other positions, that have substantially the same effect 
as any of the transactions described.
    Whether any part of the constructive sale definition is met 
by one or more appreciated financial positions and offsetting 
transactions generally will be determined as of the date the 
last of such positions or transactions is entered into. The 
positions of two related persons are treated as together 
resulting in a constructive sale if the relationship is one 
described in section 267 or section 707(b) and the transaction 
is entered into with a view toward avoiding the purposes of the 
provision.
    The Act provides an exception from constructive sale 
treatment for any transaction that is closed before the end of 
the 30th day after the close of the taxable year in which it 
was entered into (the ``extended taxable year''). The exception 
is available only if (1) the taxpayer holds the appreciated 
financial position to which the transaction relates (e.g., the 
stock where the offsetting transaction is a short sale) 
throughout the 60-day period beginning on the date the 
transaction is closed and (2) at no time during such 60-day 
period is the taxpayer's risk of loss reduced (under the 
principles of section 246(c)(4)) by holding positions with 
respect to substantially similar or related property. These 
requirements do not apply to a transaction that is closed 
during the extended taxable year where a substantially similar 
transaction is reopened during the 60-day period beginning on 
the closing date, so long as the reopened transaction is closed 
during the extended taxable year and the requirements of the 
previous sentence are met after such closing.
    A transaction that has resulted in a constructive sale of 
an appreciated financial position (e.g., a short sale) is not 
treated as resulting in a constructive sale of another 
appreciated financial position so long as the taxpayer holds 
the position which was treated as constructively sold. However, 
when that position is assigned, terminated or disposed of by 
the taxpayer, the taxpayer immediately thereafter is treated as 
entering into the transaction that resulted in the constructive 
sale (e.g., the short sale) if it remains open at that time. 
Thus, the transaction can cause a constructive sale of another 
appreciated financial position at any time thereafter. For 
example, assume a taxpayer holds two appreciated stock 
positions and one offsetting short sale, and the taxpayer 
identifies the short sale as offsetting one of the stock 
positions. If the taxpayer then sells the stock position that 
was identified, the identified short position would cause a 
constructive sale of the taxpayer's other stock position at 
that time.

Definitions

    An appreciated financial position is defined as any 
position with respect to any stock, debt instrument, or 
partnership interest, if there would be gain upon a taxable 
disposition of the position for its fair market value. A 
``position'' is defined as an interest, including a futures or 
forward contract, short sale, or option. The Congress intended 
that a ``position'' include a notional principal contract or 
other derivative instrument that provides that a taxpayer make 
or receive payments (or contractual credits) that approximate 
the economic effect of ownership of stock, a debt instrument or 
a partnership interest. For example, a contract that provides a 
right to receive payments (or contractual credits) based on a 
calculation having the effect of interest on a notional 
principal amount will be treated as a position with respect to 
a debt instrument.
    An appreciated financial position does not include a 
position with respect to a debt instrument that has an 
unconditionally payable principal amount, that is not 
convertible into the stock of the issuer or a related person, 
and the interest on which is either fixed, payable at certain 
variable rates (Treas. reg. sec. 1.860G-1(a)(3)) or based on 
certain interest payments on a pool of mortgages. A position 
that is a hedge of a position that meets these requirements 
also qualifies for this exception.\199\ A hedge for this 
purpose includes any position that reduces the taxpayer's risk 
of interest rate or price changes or currency fluctuation with 
respect to another position. Other debt positions, including 
those identified as part of a hedging or straddle transaction, 
can be appreciated financial positions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \199\ A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this intent. See Title VI (sec. 609(a)(1)) of H.R. 2676, the 
Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, passed by the House on November 
5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A trust instrument that is actively traded is generally 
treated as stock for purposes of determining whether the 
instrument is an appreciated financial position. However, an 
exception provides that a trust instrument will not be treated 
as stock if substantially all (by value) of the property held 
by the trust is debt that qualifies for the exception for 
certain debt positions described above.
    A notional principal contract is treated as an offsetting 
notional principal contract, and thus results in a constructive 
sale of an appreciated financial position, if it requires the 
holder of the appreciated financial position to pay (or provide 
a contractual credit for) all or substantially all of the 
investment yield and appreciation on the position for a 
specified period and also gives the holder a right to be 
reimbursed for (or receive credit for) all or substantially all 
of any decline in value of the position.
    A forward contract results in a constructive sale of an 
appreciated financial position only if the forward contract 
provides for delivery, or for cash settlement, of a 
substantially fixed amount of property and a substantially 
fixed price.\200\ Thus, a forward contract providing for 
delivery of property, such as shares of stock, the amount of 
which is subject to significant variation under the contract 
terms does not result in a constructive sale. The Congress did 
not intend that an agreement that is not a contract for 
purposes of applicable contract law, or which is subject to 
very substantial contingencies, will be treated as a forward 
contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \200\ A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this intent. See Title VI (sec. 609(a)(2)) of H.R. 2676, the 
Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, passed by the House on November 
5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Special rules

    A constructive sale does not include a transaction 
involving an appreciated financial position that is marked to 
market, including positions governed by section 475 (mark to 
market for securities and commodities dealers and traders) or 
section 1256 (mark to market for futures contracts, options and 
currency contracts). Nor does a constructive sale include any 
contract for sale of an appreciated financial position which is 
not a ``marketable security'' (as defined in section 453(f)) if 
the contract settles within one year after the date it is 
entered into.
    More than one appreciated financial position or more than 
one offsetting transaction can be aggregated to determine 
whether a constructive sale has occurred. For example, it is 
possible that no constructive sale would result if one 
appreciated financial position and one offsetting transaction 
were considered in isolation, but that a constructive sale 
would result if the appreciated financial position were 
considered in combination with two transactions. Where the 
standard for a constructive sale is met with respect to only a 
pro rata portion of a taxpayer's appreciated financial position 
(e.g., some, but not all, shares of stock), that portion will 
be treated as constructively sold under the provision. If there 
is a constructive sale of less than all of any type of property 
held by the taxpayer, the specific property deemed sold will be 
determined under the rules governing actual sales, after 
adjusting for previous constructive sales under the Act. Under 
the regulations to be issued by the Treasury, either a 
taxpayer's appreciated financial position or an offsetting 
transaction might in some circumstances be treated as 
disaggregated on a non-pro rata basis for purposes of the 
constructive sale determination. The Congress intended that 
this authority be used only where such disaggregated treatment 
reflects the economic reality of the transaction and is 
administratively feasible. For example, one transaction for 
which disaggregated treatment might be appropriate is an equity 
swap that references a small group of stocks, where the 
transaction is entered into by a taxpayer owning only one of 
the stocks.\201\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \201\ A standard similar to that of Treas. reg. sec. 1.246-5 would 
be appropriate for determining whether the relationship between the 
stock held and the group of stocks shorted is sufficient for 
constructive sale purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Congress intended that the constructive sale provision 
generally will apply to transactions that are identified 
hedging or straddle transactions under other Code provisions 
(secs. 1092 (a)(2), (b)(2) and (e), 1221 and 1256(e)). Where 
either position in such an identified transaction is an 
appreciated financial position and a constructive sale of such 
position results from acquiring the other position, the 
Congress intended that the constructive sale will be treated as 
having occurred immediately before the identified transaction. 
The constructive sale will not, however, prevent qualification 
of the transaction as an identified hedging or straddle 
transaction. Where, after the establishment of such an 
identified transaction, there is a constructive sale of either 
position in the transaction, gain will generally be recognized 
and accounted for under the relevant hedging or straddle 
provision. However, the Congress intended that future Treasury 
regulations may except certain transactions from the 
constructive sale provision where the gain recognized would be 
deferred under an identified hedging or straddle provision 
(e.g. Treas. reg. sec. 1.446-4(b)).

Treasury guidance

    The Act provides regulatory authority to the Treasury to 
treat as constructive sales certain transactions that have 
substantially the same effect as those specified (i.e., short 
sales, offsetting notional principal contracts and futures or 
forward contracts to deliver the same or substantially similar 
property).
    The Congress anticipated that future Treasury regulations 
will treat as constructive sales other financial transactions 
that, like those specified in the provision, have the effect of 
eliminating substantially all of the taxpayer's risk of loss 
and opportunity for income and gain with respect to the 
appreciated financial position. Because this standard requires 
reduction of both risk of loss and opportunity for gain, the 
Congress intended that transactions that reduce only risk of 
loss or only opportunity for gain will not be covered. Thus, 
for example, the Congress did not intend that a taxpayer who 
holds an appreciated financial position in stock will be 
treated as having made a constructive sale when the taxpayer 
enters into a put option with an exercise price equal to the 
current market price (an ``at the money'' option). Because such 
an option reduces only the taxpayer's risk of loss, and not its 
opportunity for gain, the above standard would not be met.
    The Congress did not intend that risk of loss and 
opportunity for gain be considered separately for purposes of 
the provision. Thus, if a transaction has the effect of 
eliminating a portion of the taxpayer's risk of loss and a 
portion of the taxpayer's opportunity for gain with respect to 
an appreciated financial position which, taken together, are 
substantially all of the taxpayer's risk of loss and 
opportunity for gain, the Congress intended that Treasury 
regulations will treat this transaction as a constructive sale 
of the position.
    The Congress anticipated that the Treasury regulations, 
when issued, will provide specific standards for determining 
whether several common transactions will be treated as 
constructive sales. One such transaction is a ``collar.'' In a 
collar, a taxpayer commits to an option requiring him to sell a 
financial position at a fixed price (the ``call strike price'') 
and has the right to have his position purchased at a lower 
fixed price (the ``put strike price''). For example, a 
shareholder may enter into a collar for a stock currently 
trading at $100 with a put strike price of $95 and a call 
strike price of $110. The effect of the transaction is that the 
seller has transferred the rights to all gain above the $110 
call strike price and all loss below the $95 put strike price; 
the seller has retained all risk of loss and opportunity for 
gain in the price range between $95 and $110. A collar can be a 
single contract or can be effected by using a combination of 
put and call options.
    In order to determine whether collars have substantially 
the same effect as the transactions specified in the provision, 
the Congress anticipated that Treasury regulations will provide 
specific standards that take into account various factors with 
respect to the appreciated financial position, including its 
volatility. It is expected that several aspects of the collar 
transaction will be relevant, including the spread between the 
put and call prices, the period of the transaction, and the 
extent to which the taxpayer retains the right to periodic 
payments on the appreciated financial position (e.g., the 
dividends on collared stock). The Congress intended that the 
Treasury regulations with respect to collars will be applied 
prospectively, except in cases to prevent abuse.
    Another common transaction for which a specific regulatory 
standard may be appropriate is a so-called ``in-the-money'' 
option, i.e., a put option where the strike price is 
significantly above the current market price or a call option 
where the strike price is significantly below the current 
market price. For example, if a shareholder purchases a put 
option with a strike price of $120 with respect to stock 
currently trading at $100, the shareholder has eliminated all 
risk of loss on the position for the option period. The 
shareholder may also effectively have transferred substantially 
all of the potential gain on the stock because only if its 
value rises above $120 can there be any gain to the 
shareholder. In determining whether such a transaction will be 
treated as a constructive sale, the Congress anticipated that 
Treasury regulations will provide a specific standard that 
takes into account many of the factors described above with 
respect to collars, including the yield and volatility of the 
stock and the period and other terms of the option.
    For collars, options and some other transactions, one 
approach that Treasury might take in issuing regulations is to 
rely on option prices and option pricing models. The price of 
an option represents the payment the market requires to 
eliminate risk of loss (for a put option) and to purchase the 
right to receive yield and gain (for a call option). Thus, 
option pricing offers one model for quantifying both the total 
risk of loss and opportunity for gain with respect to an 
appreciated financial position, as well as the proportions of 
these total amounts that the taxpayer has retained.
    In addition to setting specific standards for treatment of 
these and other transactions, it may be appropriate for 
Treasury regulations to establish ``safe harbor'' rules for 
common financial transactions that do not result in 
constructive sale treatment. An example might be a collar with 
a sufficient spread between the put and call prices, a 
sufficiently limited period and other relevant terms such that, 
regardless of the particular characteristics of the stock, the 
collar probably would not transfer substantially all risk of 
loss and opportunity for gain.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for constructive sales entered 
into after June 8, 1997. A special rule is provided for 
transactions before this date which would have been 
constructive sales under the provision. The positions in such a 
transaction will not be taken into account in determining 
whether a constructive sale after June 8, 1997, has occurred, 
provided that the taxpayer identified the offsetting positions 
of the earlier transaction before the close of the 30-day 
period beginning on the date of enactment (or a later date 
provided in Treasury regulations). The special rule will cease 
to apply on the date the taxpayer ceases to hold any of the 
offsetting positions so identified.
    In the case of a decedent dying after June 8, 1997, if (1) 
a constructive sale of an appreciated financial position (as 
defined in the provision) occurred before such date, (2) the 
transaction remains open (a) for not less than two years and 
(b) at some time during the three-year period ending on the 
decedent's death and (3) the transaction was not closed in a 
taxable transaction within 30 days after the date of 
enactment,\202\ each of the appreciated financial position and 
the transaction resulting in the constructive sale will, if 
held at the time of the taxpayer's death, be treated as 
property constituting rights to receive income in respect of a 
decedent (``IRD'') under section 691. However, where a 
constructive sale transaction that is subject to this rule is 
closed prior to death, gain that accrues after the transaction 
is closed will not be treated as IRD. The effect of these rules 
is generally to preserve the unrealized gain at the time the 
constructive sale transaction is entered into and to tax a net 
amount equal to such gain to the taxpayer and/or his heirs or 
legatees under the IRD rules (sec. 691).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \202\ ``A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this intent. See Title VI (sec. 609(a)(4)) of H.R. 2676, of 
the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, passed by the House on 
November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For example, consider a ``short against the box'' 
transaction involving stock with a basis of $10 that was 
entered into when the stock was worth $100. Assume first that 
the taxpayer does not close the transaction and dies when the 
stock is worth $1,000, and assume for simplicity no changes in 
the stock value after the taxpayer's death. Under the IRD 
rules, the taxpayer's heirs will receive no step up in the 
stock's basis. When the heirs close the transaction by 
delivering the stock, they will recognize $990 of gain on the 
stock and a loss on the short position of $900, for a net 
recognized gain of $90, which is the same as the unrealized 
gain when the ``short against the box'' was entered into ($100 
minus $10). As a second example, assume the taxpayer in the 
first example closed the ``short against the box'' (three years 
or less prior to his death) when the stock was worth $500 by 
delivering additional stock purchased in the market. The 
taxpayer would recognize a loss of $400 on the short position. 
If, at the time of taxpayer's death, he owns the stock that was 
the long position in the transaction, $490 of the gain on the 
stock would be treated as IRD. The taxpayer's heirs would 
receive no step up in basis for this amount and thus would 
recognize gain of $490 when they sell the stock. On a combined 
basis, the decedent and his heirs are taxed on gain of $90 
($490 minus $400), which is equal to the unrealized gain when 
the transaction was entered into.

                             Revenue Effect

    Sections 1001 and 1002 of the Act are estimated on a 
combined basis to increase Federal fiscal year budget receipts 
by $367 million in 1998, $121 million in 1999, $68 million in 
2000, $73 million in 2001, $79 million in 2002, $85 million in 
2003, $94 million in 2004, $111 million in 2005, $118 million 
in 2006 and $127 million in 2007.

2. Election of mark to market for securities traders and for traders 
        and dealers in commodities (sec. 1001(b) of the Act and secs. 
        475(e) and (f) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A dealer in securities must compute its income pursuant to 
a mark-to-market method of accounting (sec. 475). Any security 
that is inventory must be included in inventory at its fair 
market value, and any security that is not inventory and that 
is held at year end is treated as sold for its fair market 
value. There is an exception to mark-to-market treatment for 
any security identified as held for investment or not held for 
sale to customers (or a hedge of such a security). For this 
purpose, a ``dealer in securities'' is a person who (1) 
regularly purchases securities from or sells securities to 
customers in the ordinary course of a trade or business, or (2) 
regularly offers to enter into, assume, offset, assign or 
otherwise terminate positions in securities with customers in 
the ordinary course of a trade or business. For this purpose, 
``security'' means any stock in a corporation; any partnership 
or beneficial ownership interest in a widely-held or publicly-
traded partnership or trust; any note, bond, debenture, or 
other evidence of indebtedness; an interest rate, currency or 
equity notional principal contract; any evidence of an interest 
in, or a derivative financial instrument of any security 
described above; and certain positions identified as hedges of 
any of the above. Any gain or loss taken into account under 
these provisions generally is treated as ordinary gain or loss.
    Traders in securities generally are taxpayers who engage in 
a trade or business involving active sales or exchanges of 
securities on the market, rather than to customers. Under prior 
law, the mark-to-market treatment applicable to securities 
dealers did not apply to traders in securities or to dealers in 
other property.

                           Reasons for Change

    Mark-to-market accounting generally provides a clear 
reflection of income with respect to assets that are traded in 
established markets. For market-valued assets, mark-to-market 
accounting imposes few burdens and offers few opportunities for 
manipulation. Securities and exchange-traded commodities have 
determinable market values, and securities traders and 
commodities traders and dealers regularly calculate year-end 
values of their assets in determining their income for 
financial statement purposes. Many commodities dealers also 
utilize year-end values in adjusting their inventory using the 
lower-of-cost-or-market method for Federal income tax purposes.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act allows securities traders and commodities traders 
and dealers to elect application of the mark-to-market 
accounting rules, which applied only to securities dealers 
under prior law. All securities held by an electing taxpayer in 
connection with a trade or business as a securities trader, and 
all commodities held by an electing taxpayer in connection with 
a trade or business as a commodities trader, are subject to 
mark-to-market treatment. The taxpayer is allowed to identify 
property not held in connection with its trade or business as 
not subject to the election. Gain or loss recognized by an 
electing taxpayer under the provision generally is ordinary 
gain or loss. The Congress intended that gain or loss that is 
treated as ordinary solely by reason of the election would not 
be treated as other than gain or loss from a capital asset for 
purposes of determining an individual's net earnings from self-
employment under the Self-Employment Contributions Act (sec. 
1402) or determining whether the passive-type income exception 
to the publicly-traded partnership rules is met (sec. 
7704(c)).\203\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \203\ A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this intent. See Title VI (sec. 609(a)(3)) the Tax Technical 
Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    With respect to a commodities dealer, all of the rules of 
prior law section 475 apply as if commodities were securities. 
A commodity for purposes of the provision includes any 
commodity that is actively traded (within the meaning of 
section 1092(d)(1)), any option, forward contract, futures 
contract, short position, notional principal contract or 
derivative instrument that references such a commodity, and any 
other evidence of an interest in such a commodity. Also 
included are positions that hedge one of the items listed and 
that are identified by the taxpayer under rules similar to the 
rules for securities.
    The Congress anticipated that Treasury regulations applying 
section 475(b)(4), which prevents a dealer from treating 
certain notional principal contracts and other derivative 
financial instruments as held for investment, will in the case 
of a commodities trader or dealer apply only to contracts and 
instruments referenced to commodities.
    For a securities trader that elects application of the 
provision, all securities held in connection with its trade or 
business will be subject to mark-to-market accounting. An 
exception is provided for securities that have no connection 
with activities as a trader and that are identified on the day 
acquired (or at such other times as provided in Treasury 
regulations). The Congress did not intend that an electing 
taxpayer would be entitled to mark-to-market loans made to 
customers or receivables or debt instruments acquired from 
customers that are not received or acquired in connection with 
a trade or business as a securities trader. Any position that 
is properly subject to the mark-to-market regime will not be 
taken into account for purposes of the constructive sale rules 
of section 1259. Similar rules apply to commodities traders.
    Because the Congress was concerned about issues of taxpayer 
selectivity, it was intended that an electing taxpayer must be 
able to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that a 
security bears no relation to activities as a trader in order 
to be identified as not subject to the mark-to-market regime. 
Any security that hedges another security that is held in 
connection with the taxpayer's trade or business as a trader 
will be treated as so held. The Congress also intended that the 
Secretary of the Treasury use his regulatory authority under 
section 475(g)(1) to prevent electing traders from effectively 
selecting the securities that are subject to mark-to-market 
treatment through use of related entities or other 
arrangements. Similar rules should apply to commodities 
traders.
    The election is to be made separately with respect to the 
taxpayer's entire business as (1) a securities trader, (2) a 
commodities trader, or (3) a commodities dealer. Thus, a 
taxpayer that is both a commodities dealer and a securities 
trader may make the election with respect to one business, but 
not the other. The election will be made in the time and manner 
prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury and will be 
effective for the taxable year for which it is made and all 
subsequent taxable years, unless revoked with the consent of 
the Secretary.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to taxable years of traders or 
dealers ending after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997). 
For a taxpayer making the election for a taxable year that 
includes the date of enactment, the taxpayer must have 
identified the securities or commodities to which the election 
applies within 30 days of the date of enactment. For elections 
for taxable years including the date of enactment, the 
adjustments required under section 481 as a result of the 
change in accounting method are required to be taken into 
account ratably over the four-year period beginning in the 
first taxable year for which the election is in effect.
    Any elections made for taxable years beginning after the 
date of enactment will be governed by rules and procedures 
established by the Secretary of the Treasury.

                             Revenue Effect

    The combined revenue effect of sections 1001 and 1002 of 
the Act is presented in the discussion of section 1001(a) of 
the Act above.

3. Limitation on exception for investment companies under section 351 
        (sec. 1002 of the Act and sec. 351(e) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A contribution of property to a corporation does not result 
in gain or loss to the contributing shareholder if the 
contributor is part of a group of contributors who have 80 
percent control (as defined in sec. 368(c)). A contribution of 
property to a partnership generally does not result in 
recognition of gain or loss to the contributing partner.
    Certain Code sections provide exceptions to the general 
rule for deferral of pre-contribution gain and loss. Gain or 
loss is recognized upon a contribution by a shareholder to a 
corporation that is an investment company (sec. 351(e)(1)). 
Gain, but not loss, is recognized upon a contribution by a 
partner to a partnership that would be treated as an investment 
company if the partnership were a corporation (sec. 721(b)). 
Under Treasury regulations, a contribution of property by a 
shareholder to a corporation, or by a partner to a partnership, 
is treated as a transfer to an investment company only if (1) 
the contribution results, directly or indirectly, in a 
diversification of the transferor's interests, and (2) the 
transferee is (a) a regulated investment company (``RIC''), (b) 
a real estate investment trust (``REIT''), or (c) a corporation 
more than 80 percent of the assets of which by value (excluding 
cash and non-convertible debt instruments) are readily 
marketable stocks or securities or interests in RICs or REITs 
that are held for investment (Treas. reg. sec. 1.351-1(c)(1)).

                           Reasons for Change

    Under prior law and regulations, a partnership or a 
corporation was not treated as an investment company even 
though more than 80 percent of its assets were a combination of 
stock and securities and other high-quality investment assets 
of determinable values, such as non-convertible debt 
instruments, notional principal contracts, foreign currency and 
interests in metals. Thus, under prior law, a partner could 
contribute stock, securities or other assets to an investment 
partnership, and a shareholder could contribute such assets to 
a corporation (e.g., a RIC) and, without current taxation, 
receive an interest in an entity that was essentially a pool of 
high-quality investment assets. Where, as a result of such a 
transaction, the partner or shareholder diversified or 
otherwise changed the nature of the financial assets in which 
it had an interest, the transaction had the effect of a taxable 
exchange. Of particular concern to the Congress was the 
reappearance of so-called ``swap funds,'' which are 
partnerships or RICs that are structured to fall outside the 
definition of an investment company, and thereby allow 
contributors to make tax-free contributions of stock and 
securities in exchange for an interest in an entity that holds 
similar assets.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act modified the definition of an investment company 
for purposes of determining whether a transfer of property to a 
partnership or corporation results in gain recognition (secs. 
351(e) and 721(b)) by requiring that certain assets be taken 
into account for purposes of the definition, in addition to 
readily marketable stock and securities as under prior law.
    Under the Act, an investment company includes a RIC or REIT 
as under prior law. In addition, under the Act, an investment 
company includes any corporation or partnership if more than 80 
percent of its assets by value consist of money, stocks and 
other equity interests in a corporation (whether or not readily 
marketable), evidences of indebtedness, options, forward or 
futures contracts, notional principal contracts or derivatives, 
foreign currency, certain interests in precious metals, 
interests in REITs, RICs, common trust funds and publicly-
traded partnerships or other interests in non-corporate 
entities that are convertible into or exchangeable for any of 
the assets listed. Other assets that count toward the 80-
percent test are an interest in an entity substantially all of 
the assets of which are assets listed above, and to the extent 
provided in Treasury regulations, interests in other entities, 
but only to the extent of the value of the interest that is 
attributable to listed assets.\204\ Finally, the Act granted 
regulatory authority to the Treasury Department to add other 
assets to the list set out in the provision, or, under 
appropriate circumstances, to remove items from the list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \204\ Until such regulations are issued, it is intended that the 
Treasury regulations promulgated under the similar provisions of 
section 731(c)(2) generally will apply. Specifically, it is intended 
that an entity will meet the ``substantially all'' requirement if 90 
percent or more of its assets are listed assets (Treas. Reg. sec. 
1.731-2(c)(3)(i)). Similarly, with respect to partnerships and other 
non-corporate entities, it is intended that, where 20 percent or more 
(but less than 90 percent) of the entity's assets consist of listed 
assets, a pro rata portion of the interest in the entity will be 
treated as a listed asset (Treas. Reg. sec. 1.731-2(c)(3)(ii)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Congress intended that the Act would change only the 
types of assets considered in the definition of an investment 
company in the present Treasury regulations (Treas. Reg. sec. 
1.351-1(c)(1)(ii)) and not to override the other provisions of 
those regulations. For example, the Act did not override the 
requirement that only assets held for investment are considered 
for purposes of the definition (Treas. Reg. sec. 1.351-
1(c)(1)(ii)). Thus, stock, securities or other listed assets 
held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of 
business or used in a trade or business of banking, insurance, 
brokerage or a similar trade or business are not counted toward 
the 80-percent test (Treas. Reg. sec. 1.351-1(c)(3)). 
Similarly, the Act did not override the rule that, for purposes 
of determining whether a corporation or partnership is an 
investment company, the assets of a corporation are treated as 
owned proportionally by any shareholder (whether a corporation 
or other entity) owning 50 percent or more of its stock (Treas. 
Reg. sec. 1.351-1(c)(4)). The Act also did not override the 
requirement that the investment company determination consider 
any plan with regard to an entity's assets in existence at the 
time of transfer (Treas. Reg. sec. 1.351-1(c)(2)). For example, 
although under the Act, money is counted toward the 80-percent 
test, where money is contributed to a corporation or 
partnership and, pursuant to a plan, either (1) assets not 
counted toward the 80-percent test are purchased or contributed 
to the entity or (2) the entity makes expenditures not 
resulting in the acquisition of an asset (e.g. salaries), the 
investment company determination would be made on the basis of 
the entity's assets after such events. Finally, the Act did not 
override the requirement that a contribution of property to an 
investment company result in diversification in order for gain 
to be recognized (Treas. Reg. sec. 1.351-1(c)(1)(i)).

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to all transfers after June 8, 1997, 
in taxable years ending after such date. An exception is 
provided for transfers of a fixed amount of securities made 
pursuant to a binding written contract in effect on June 8, 
1997, and at all times thereafter until the transfer.

                             Revenue Effect

    The combined revenue effect of sections 1001 and 1002 of 
the Act is presented in the discussion of section 1001(a) of 
the Act above.

4. Gains and losses from certain terminations with respect to property 
        (sec. 1003 of the Act and secs. 1233(h), 1234A, 1271(b) of the 
        Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

Extinguishment treated as exchange

    Treatment of gains and losses.--Gain from the ``sale or 
other disposition'' of property is the excess of the amount 
realized therefrom over its adjusted basis; loss is the excess 
of adjusted basis over the amount realized.
    Definition of capital gain or loss.--The definition of 
capital gains and losses in section 1222 requires that there be 
a ``sale or exchange'' of a capital asset.\205\ The U.S. 
Supreme Court has held that the term ``sale or exchange'' is a 
narrower term than ``sale or other disposition.'' \206\ Thus, 
it is possible for there to be taxable income from a sale or 
other disposition of an asset without that income being treated 
as a capital gain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \205\ Code section 1221 defines a capital asset to mean property 
held by the taxpayer other than (1) property properly includible in 
inventory of the taxpayer or primarily held for sale to customers in 
the ordinary course of the taxpayer's trade or business, (2) 
depreciable and real property used in the taxpayer's trade or business, 
(3) a copyright, a literary musical, or artistic composition, letter or 
memorandum, or similar property that was created by the taxpayer (or 
whose basis is determined, in whole or in part, by reference to the 
basis of the creator), (4) accounts or notes receivable acquired in the 
ordinary course of the taxpayer's trade or business, and (5) a 
publication of the United States Government which was received from the 
Government other than by sale.
    \206\ Helvering v. William Flaccus Oak Leather Co., 313 U.S. 247 
(1941).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Court decisions interpreting the ``sale or exchange'' 
requirement.--There has been a considerable amount of 
litigation dealing with whether a modification of the legal 
relationship between taxpayers is treated as a ``sale or 
exchange.'' For example, in Douglass Fairbanks v. U.S., 306 
U.S. 436 (1939), the U.S. Supreme Court held that gain realized 
on the redemption of bonds before their maturity is not 
entitled to capital gain treatment because the redemption was 
not a ``sale or exchange''.\207\ Several court decisions 
interpreted the ``sale or exchange'' requirement to mean that a 
disposition that occurs as a result of a lapse, cancellation, 
or abandonment is not a sale or exchange of a capital asset, 
but produces ordinary income or loss. For example, in 
Commissioner v. Pittston Co., 252 F. 2d 344 (2d Cir), cert. 
denied, 357 U.S. 919 (1958), a payment received by the taxpayer 
for terminating a long-term right to purchase the coal output 
from another company's mine was treated as ordinary income on 
the grounds that the payment was in lieu of subsequent profits 
that would have been taxed as ordinary income. Similarly, in 
Commissioner v. Starr Brothers, 205 F. 2d 673 (1953), the 
Second Circuit held that a payment received by a retail 
distributor from a manufacturer in exchange for waiving a 
contract provision prohibiting the manufacturer from selling to 
the distributor's competition was not a sale or exchange. 
Likewise, in General Artists Corp. v. Commissioner, 205 F. 2d 
360, cert. denied 346 U.S. 866 (1953), the Second Circuit held 
that amounts received by a booking agent for cancellation of a 
contract to be the exclusive agent of a singer were not from a 
sale or exchange. In National-Standard Company v. Commissioner, 
749 F. 2d 369, the Sixth Circuit held that a loss incurred on 
the transfer of foreign currency to discharge the taxpayer's 
liability was an ordinary loss, since the transfer was not a 
``sale or exchange'' of that currency. More recently, in 
Stoller v. Commissioner, 994 F. 2d 855 (1993), the Court of 
Appeals for the District of Columbia held, in a transaction 
that preceded the effective date of section 1234A, that losses 
incurred on the cancellation of forward contracts to buy and 
sell short-term Government securities that formed a straddle 
were ordinary because the cancellation of the contracts was not 
a ``sale or exchange.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \207\ The result in this case was overturned by enactment in 1934 
of the predecessor of present law section 1271(a); see below. See 
section 117 of the Revenue Act of 1934, 28 Stat. 680, 714-715.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The U.S. Tax Court has held that the abandonment of 
property subject to non-recourse indebtedness is a ``sale'' 
and, therefore, any resulting loss is a capital loss. Freeland 
v. Commissioner, 74 T.C. 970 (1980); Middleton v. Commissioner, 
77 T.C. 310 (1981), aff'd per curiam 693 F.2d 124 (11th Cir. 
1982); and Yarbro v. Commissioner, 45 T.C.M. 170, aff'd. 737 
F.2d 479 (5th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1189 (1985).
    Extinguishment treated as sale or exchange.--The Internal 
Revenue Code contains provisions that deem certain transactions 
to be a sale or exchange and, therefore, any resulting gain or 
loss is to be treated as a capital gain or loss. These rules 
generally provide for ``sale or exchange'' treatment as a way 
of extending capital gain or loss treatment to those 
transactions.
    Under one special provision, gains and losses attributable 
to the cancellation, lapse, expiration, or other termination of 
a right or obligation with respect to certain personal property 
are treated as gains or losses from the sale of a capital asset 
(sec. 1234A). Personal property subject to this rule is (1) 
personal property of a type which is actively traded \208\ and 
which is, or would be on acquisition, a capital asset in the 
hands of the taxpayer (other than stock that is not part of 
straddle or of a corporation that is not formed or availed of 
to take positions which offset positions in personal property 
of its shareholders) and (2) a ``section 1256 contract'' \209\ 
which is a capital asset in the hands of the taxpayer.\210\ 
Section 1234A does not apply to the retirement of a debt 
instrument.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \208\ Treasury Regulations generally define ``actively traded'' as 
any personal property for which there is an established financial 
market. In addition, those regulations provide that a ``notional 
principal contract constitutes personal property of a type that is 
actively traded if contracts based on the same or substantially similar 
specified indices are purchased, sold, or entered into on an 
established financial market'' and that ``rights and obligations of a 
party to a notional principal contract are rights and obligations with 
respect to personal property and constitute an interest in personal 
property.'' Treas. Reg. sec. 1.1092(d)-1(c).
    \209\ A ``section 1256 contract'' means any (1) regulated futures 
contract, (2) foreign currency contract, (3) nonequity option, or (4) 
dealer equity option.
    \210\ The present-law provision (sec. 1234A) which treats 
cancellation, lapse, expiration, or other termination of a right or 
obligation with respect to personal property as a sale of a capital 
asset was added by Congress in 1981 when Congress adopted a number of 
provisions dealing with tax straddles. These are two components or 
``legs'' to a straddle, where the value of one leg changes inversely 
with the value of the other leg. Without a special rule, taxpayers were 
able to ``leg-out'' of the loss leg of the straddle, while retaining 
the gain leg, resulting in the creation of an ordinary loss. In 1981, 
Congress believed that the effective ability of taxpayers to elect the 
character of a gain or loss leg of a straddle was unwarranted and 
provided the present law rule. However, since straddles were the focus 
of the 1981 legislation, that legislation was limited to types of 
property which were the subject of straddles, i.e., personal property 
(other than stock) of a type which is actively traded which is, or 
would be on acquisition, a capital asset in the hands of the taxpayer. 
The provision subsequently was extended to section 1256 contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Treatment of capital gains and losses.--Under prior law, 
long-term capital gains of individuals are subject to a maximum 
rate of tax of 28 percent. Capital losses of individuals are 
allowed to the extent of capital gains or the lower of those 
gains or $3,000.
    Long-term capital gains of corporations are subject to the 
same rate of tax as ordinary income. Capital losses of 
corporations are allowed only to the extent of the 
corporation's capital gains; excess capital losses may be 
carried back to the 3 preceding years and carried forward for 5 
succeeding years.
    In the case of gains and losses from the sale or exchange 
of property used in a trade or business, net gains generally 
are treated as capital gain while net losses are treated as 
ordinary losses (sec. 1231).

Short positions that become substantially worthless

    In the case of a ``short sale'' (i.e., where the taxpayer 
sells borrowed property (such as stock) and later closes the 
sale by repaying the lender with identical property), any gain 
or loss on the closing transaction is considered gain or loss 
from the sale or exchange of a capital asset if the property 
used to close the short sale is a capital asset in the hands of 
the taxpayer (sec. 1233(a)), but the gain ordinarily is treated 
as short-term gain (sec. 1233(b)(1)). Entering into a contract 
to sell generally is treated as a short sale for purposes of 
these rules.

Character of gain on retirement of debt obligations

    Amounts received on the retirement of any debt instrument 
are treated as amounts received in exchange therefor (sec. 
1271(a)(1)). In addition, gain on the sale or exchange of a 
debt instrument with original issue discount (OID) \211\ 
generally is treated as ordinary income to the extent of its 
OID if there was an intention at the time of its issuance to 
call the debt instrument before maturity (sec. 1271(a)(2)). 
These rules do not apply to (1) debt issued by a natural person 
or (2) debt issued before July 2, 1982, by a noncorporate or 
nongovernment issuer. As a result of this exemption, the 
character of gain or loss realized on retirement of an 
obligation issued by a natural person under prior law was 
governed by case law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \211\ The issuer of a debt instrument with OID generally accrues 
and deducts the discount, as interest, over the life of the obligations 
even though the amount of such interest is not paid until the debt 
matures. The holder of such a debt instrument also generally includes 
the OID in income as it accrues as interest. The mandatory inclusion of 
OID in income does not apply, among other exceptions, to obligations 
issued by a natural person before March 2, 1984, and loans of less than 
$10,000 between natural persons if such loan is not made in the 
ordinary course of business of the lender (secs. 1272(a)(2)(D) and 
(E)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    Extinguishment treated as sale or exchange.--In general, 
the Congress believed that prior law was deficient since (1) it 
taxed similar economic transactions differently and (2) it 
effectively provided some, but not all, taxpayers with an 
election. Its lack of certainty made the tax laws unnecessarily 
difficult to administer.
    The Congress believed that some transactions, such as 
settlements of contracts to deliver a capital asset, are 
economically equivalent to a sale or exchange of such contracts 
since the value of any asset is the present value of the future 
income that such asset will produce. In addition, to the extent 
that prior law treated modifications of property rights as not 
being a sale or exchange, prior law effectively provided 
taxpayers with an election to treat a transaction as giving 
rise to capital gain, subject to more favorable rates than 
ordinary income, or an ordinary loss that could offset higher-
taxed ordinary income and not be subject to limitations on use 
of capital losses. The effect of an election could be achieved 
by selling the property right if the resulting transaction 
resulted in a gain or by providing for the extinguishment of 
the property right if the resulting transaction resulted in a 
loss.
    Courts have given different answers as to whether 
transactions which terminate contractual interests are treated 
as a ``sale or exchange.'' This lack of uniformity caused 
uncertainty to both taxpayers and the Internal Revenue Service 
in the administration of the tax laws.
    Accordingly, the Act treats the cancellation, lapse, 
expiration, or other termination of a right or obligation with 
respect to any type of property which is (or on acquisition 
would be) a capital asset in the hands of the taxpayer as a 
``sale or exchange.'' A major effect of the Act would be to 
remove the effective ability of a taxpayer to elect the 
character of gains and losses from certain transactions. 
Another significant effect of the Act would be to reduce the 
uncertainty concerning the tax treatment of modifications of 
property rights.
    Short positions that become substantially worthless.--
Congress also was concerned with the ability to postpone 
indefinitely gain on short positions where the underlying 
property becomes substantially worthless by simply not closing 
out the short position. The Congress believed that gain on the 
short position has been realized when the underlying property 
becomes substantially worthless and should be recognized at 
that time.
    Character of gain on retirement of debt obligations issued 
by natural persons.--Similar objections can be raised about the 
prior law rule which exempts debt of natural persons from the 
deemed sale or exchange rule applicable to debt of other 
taxpayers. The Congress believed that the debt of natural 
persons and other taxpayers is sufficiently economically 
similar to be similarly taxed upon their retirement. 
Accordingly, the Congress believed that the exception to the 
deemed sale or exchange rule on retirement of debt of a natural 
person should be repealed.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Extension of relinquishment rule to all types of 
property.--The Act extends to all types of property that is a 
capital asset in the hands of the taxpayer the rule of present 
law that treats gain or loss from the cancellation, lapse, 
expiration, or other termination of a right or obligation with 
respect to personal property or section 1256 contracts which is 
(or on acquisition would be) a capital asset in the hands of 
the taxpayer, as gain or loss from the sale of a capital asset.
    Thus, the extension of the ``sale or exchange rule'' of 
prior law section 1234A to all property that is a capital asset 
in the hands of the taxpayer affects capital assets that are 
(1) interests in real property and (2) non-actively traded 
personal property. An example of the first type of property 
interest that will be affected by the Act is the tax treatment 
of amounts received to release a lessee from a requirement that 
the premises be restored on termination of the lease.\212\ An 
example of the second type of property interest that is 
affected by the Act is the forfeiture of a down payment under a 
contract to purchase stock.\213\ The Act does not affect 
whether a right is property or whether property is a capital 
asset.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \212\ See Billy Rose Diamond Horseshoe, Inc. v. Commissioner, 448 
F.2d 549 (1971), where the Second Circuit held that payments were not 
entitled to capital gain treatment because there was no sale or 
exchange. See also, Sirbo Holdings, Inc. v. Commissioner, 509 F.2d 1220 
(2d Cir. 1975).
    \213\ See U.S. Freight Co. v. U.S., 422 F.2d 887 (Ct. Cl. 1970), 
holding that forfeiture was an ordinary loss.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Short positions that become substantially worthless.--In 
addition, the Act provides that if a taxpayer enters into a 
short sale of property and such property becomes substantially 
worthless, the taxpayer shall recognize gain as if the short 
sale were closed when the property becomes substantially 
worthless. The Act also extends the statute of limitations with 
respect to such gain recognition to the earlier of: (1) three 
years after the Treasury Secretary is notified that the 
position has become substantially worthless; or (2) six years 
after the date of filing of the income tax return for the 
taxable year during which the position became substantially 
worthless. To the extent provided in Treasury regulations, 
similar gain recognition rules apply to any option with respect 
to property, any offsetting notional principal contract with 
respect to property, any futures or forward contract to deliver 
property, or with respect to any similar transaction or 
position that becomes substantially worthless.
    Character of gain on retirement of debt obligations issued 
by natural persons.--The Act repeals the provision that exempts 
debt obligations issued by natural persons effective for 
obligations issued after June 8, 1997, from the rule which 
treats retirement as an exchange. In addition, the Act 
terminates the grandfather of debt issued before July 2, 1982, 
by noncorporations or nongovernments from the rule that treats 
gain or loss realized on retirement of such debt as gain or 
loss realized on an exchange, effective for obligations 
acquired by purchase (within the meaning of section 1272(d)(1)) 
after June 8, 1997. Thus, under the Act, gain or loss on the 
retirement of such debt will be capital gain or loss.

                             Effective Date

    Extension of relinquishment rule to all types of 
property.--The extension of the extinguishment rule applies to 
terminations occurring more than 30 days after the date of 
enactment of the Act (August 5, 1997).
    Short positions that become substantially worthless.--The 
provision applies to property that becomes substantially 
worthless after the date of enactment of the Act (August 5, 
1997). No inference is intended as to the proper treatment of 
these or similar transactions or positions under prior law.
    Character of gain on retirement of debt obligations issued 
by natural persons.--The provision applies to sales, exchanges 
and retirements after date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $15 million in 1998, $27 million in 1999, 
and $25 million per year in each of the years 2000 through 
2007.

5. Determination of original issue discount where pooled debt 
        obligations subject to acceleration (sec. 1004 of the Act and 
        sec. 1272 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

Inclusion of interest income, in general

    A taxpayer generally must include in gross income the 
amount of interest received or accrued within the taxable year 
on indebtedness held by the taxpayer. If the principal amount 
of an indebtedness may be paid without interest by a specified 
date (as is the case with certain credit card balances), under 
present law, the holder of the indebtedness is not required to 
accrue interest until after the specified date has passed.

Original issue discount

    The holder of a debt instrument with original issue 
discount (``OID'') generally accrues and includes in gross 
income, as interest, the OID over the life of the obligation, 
even though the amount of the interest may not be received 
until the maturity of the instrument.
    The amount of OID with respect to a debt instrument is the 
excess of the stated redemption price at maturity over the 
issue price of the debt instrument. The stated redemption price 
at maturity includes all amounts payable at maturity. The 
amount of OID in a debt instrument is allocated over the life 
of the instrument through a series of adjustments to the issue 
price for each accrual period. The adjustment to the issue 
price is determined by multiplying the adjusted issue price 
(i.e., the issue price increased by adjustments prior to the 
accrual period) by the instrument's yield to maturity, and then 
subtracting the interest payable during the accrual period. 
Thus, in order to compute the amount of OID and the portion of 
OID allocable to a period, the stated redemption price at 
maturity and the time of maturity must be known. Issuers of OID 
instruments accrue and deduct the amount of OID as interest 
expense in the same manner as the holder.
    Special rules for determining the amount of OID allocated 
to a period apply to certain instruments that may be subject to 
prepayment. First, if a borrower can reduce the yield on a debt 
by exercising a prepayment option, the OID rules assume that 
the borrower will prepay the debt. In addition, in the case of 
(1) any regular interest in a REMIC, (2) qualified mortgages 
held by a REMIC, or (3) any other debt instrument if payments 
under the instrument may be accelerated by reason of 
prepayments of other obligations securing the instrument, the 
daily portions of the OID on such debt instruments are 
determined by taking into account an assumption regarding the 
prepayment of principal for such instruments.

                           Reasons for Change

    Interest income generally accrues over the period an amount 
is borrowed and repaid. Certain debt instruments, such as 
credit card receivables, do not require the debtors to pay 
interest if they pay their accounts by a specified date. The 
operation of the OID and interest accrual rules of prior law 
provided that, in such instances, the holder of the debt could 
assume that the debtors would remit their balances in a timely 
manner and thus avoid the interest charges. In the case of a 
large pool of such debt instruments, this prepayment 
assumption, as applied to all debtors in the pool, was 
unrealistic and may have resulted in the mismeasurement of 
income with respect to the interest charged to those debtors 
that did not prepay their account balances.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act applies the special OID rule applicable to any 
regular interest in a REMIC, qualified mortgages held by a 
REMIC, or certain other debt instruments to any pool of debt 
instruments the payments on which may be affected by reason of 
prepayments. Thus, under the Act, if a taxpayer holds a pool of 
credit card receivables that require interest to be paid if the 
borrowers do not pay their accounts by a specified date, the 
taxpayer would be required to accrue interest or OID on such 
pool based upon a reasonable assumption regarding the timing of 
the payments of the accounts in the pool. In cases where the 
payments in the pool occur soon after year end and before the 
taxpayer files its tax return for the taxable year that 
includes such year end, the taxpayer may accrue interest based 
on its actual experience rather than based upon reasonable 
assumptions.
    The Act operates as follows: Assume that a calendar year 
taxpayer issues credit cards, the terms of which provide that 
if the cardholder pays his or her balance in full within 25 
days after the close of the monthly billing cycle, no interest 
will accrue with respect to such charges. However, if the 
balances are not paid within this 25-day grace period, interest 
will accrue from the date of the charge until the balance is 
paid. Further assume that the taxpayer issues a significant 
number of such credit cards and the cardholders incur charges 
of $10 million during the billing cycle that runs from December 
16, 1998 to January 15, 1999. Under prior law (depending upon 
the taxpayer's accounting method), the taxpayer was not 
required to include any interest income in 1998 with respect to 
the billing cycle that includes December 31, 1998, because it 
is possible each credit cardholder will pay his or her balance 
in full before the end of the 25-day grace period (i.e., by 
February 10, 1998), and therefore no one will any incur any 
related finance charges. Under the Act, the taxpayer, in 
computing its 1998 taxable income, is required to make a 
reasonable assumption as to what portion of the $10 million 
cumulative balance attributable to 1998 will not be paid off 
within the 25-day grace period and is required to accrue 
interest income through December 31, 1998, with respect to such 
portion. The taxpayer would then adjust such accrual in 1999 to 
reflect the extent to which such prepayment assumption 
reflected the actual payments received during the grace period.
    In addition, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to 
provide appropriate exemptions from the provision, including 
exemptions for taxpayers that hold a limited amount of debt 
instruments, such as small retailers.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after the date of enactment (i.e., after August 5, 1997). If a 
taxpayer is required to change its method of accounting under 
the Act, such change is treated as initiated by the taxpayer 
with the consent of the Secretary of the Treasury and any 
section 481 adjustment is included in income ratably over a 
four-year period. It is understood that some taxpayers 
presently use a method of accounting similar to the method 
required to be used under the Act and have asked the Secretary 
of the Treasury for permission to change to a different method 
for pre-effective date years. It is within the discretion of 
the Secretary whether or not to grant these pending 
requests.\214\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \214\ See, IRS Notice 97-67, issued November 14, 1997, advising of 
upcoming guidance providing procedures for automatically changing 
methods of accounting with respect to grace period interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $76 million in 1998, $275 million in 1999, 
$358 million in 2000, $319 million in 2001, $283 million in 
2002, $100 million in 2003, $105 million in 2004, $109 million 
in 2005, $114 million in 2006, and $118 million in 2007.

6. Deny interest deduction on certain debt instruments (sec. 1005 of 
        the Act and sec. 163 of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Whether an instrument qualifies for tax purposes as debt or 
equity is determined under all the facts and circumstances 
based on principles developed in case law. If an instrument 
qualifies as equity, the issuer generally does not receive a 
deduction for dividends paid and the holder generally includes 
such dividends in income (although corporate holders generally 
may obtain a dividends-received deduction of at least 70 
percent of the amount of the dividend). If an instrument 
qualifies as debt, the issuer may receive a deduction for 
accrued interest and the holder generally includes interest in 
income, subject to certain limitations.
    Original issue discount (``OID'') on a debt instrument is 
the excess of the stated redemption price at maturity over the 
issue price of the instrument. An issuer of a debt instrument 
with OID generally accrues and deducts the discount as interest 
over the life of the instrument even though interest may not be 
paid until the instrument matures. The holder of such a debt 
instrument also generally includes the OID in income on an 
accrual basis.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress was concerned that corporate taxpayers may 
issue instruments denominated as debt but that more closely 
resemble equity transactions for which an interest deduction is 
not appropriate.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, no deduction is allowed for interest or OID 
on an instrument issued by a corporation (or issued by a 
partnership to the extent of its corporate partners) that is 
payable in stock of the issuer or a related party (within the 
meaning of sections 267(b) and 707(b)), including an instrument 
a substantial portion of which is mandatorily convertible or 
convertible at the issuer's option into stock of the issuer or 
a related party. In addition, an instrument is to be treated as 
payable in stock if a substantial portion of the principal or 
interest is required to be determined, or may be determined at 
the option of the issuer or related party, by reference to the 
value of stock of the issuer or related party. An instrument 
also is treated as payable in stock if it is part of an 
arrangement that is reasonably expected to result in such 
payment of the instrument with or by reference to such stock, 
such as in the case of certain issuances of a forward contract 
in connection with the issuance of debt, nonrecourse debt that 
is secured principally by such stock, or certain debt 
instruments that are convertible at the holder's option when it 
is substantially certain that the right will be exercised. For 
example, it is not expected that the provision will affect debt 
with a conversion feature where the conversion price is 
significantly higher than the market price of the stock on the 
issue date of the debt. The Act does not affect the treatment 
of a holder of an instrument.
    For purposes of the provision, principal or interest shall 
be treated as required to be paid in, converted to, or 
determined with reference to the value of equity if it may be 
so required at the option of the holder or a related party and 
there is a substantial certainty that the option will be 
exercised.
    The Act is not intended to affect the characterization of 
instruments as debt or equity under present or prior law; and 
no inference is intended as to the treatment of any instrument 
under prior law.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for instruments issued after 
June 8, 1997, but will not apply to such instruments (1) issued 
pursuant to a written agreement which was binding on such date 
and at all times thereafter, (2) described in a ruling request 
submitted to the Internal Revenue Service on or before such 
date, or (3) described in a public announcement or filing with 
the Securities and Exchange Commission on or before such date.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $5 million in 1998, $16 million in 1999, $29 
million in 2000, $43 million in 2001, $55 million in 2002, $62 
million in 2003, $63 million in 2004, $64 million in 2005, $65 
million in 2006, and $67 million in 2007.

             B. Corporate Organizations and Reorganizations

1. Require gain recognition for certain extraordinary dividends (sec. 
        1011 of the Act and sec. 1059 of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    A corporate shareholder generally can deduct at least 70 
percent of a dividend received from another corporation. This 
dividends received deduction is 80 percent if the corporate 
shareholder owns at least 20 percent of the distributing 
corporation and generally 100 percent if the shareholder owns 
at least 80 percent of the distributing corporation.
    Section 1059 of the Code requires a corporate shareholder 
that receives an ``extraordinary dividend'' to reduce the basis 
of the stock with respect to which the dividend was received by 
the nontaxed portion of the dividend. Whether a dividend is 
``extraordinary'' is determined, among other things, by 
reference to the size of the dividend in relation to the 
adjusted basis of the shareholder's stock. Also, a dividend 
resulting from a non pro rata redemption or a partial 
liquidation is an extraordinary dividend. If the reduction in 
basis of stock exceeds the basis in the stock with respect to 
which an extraordinary dividend is received, the excess is 
taxed as gain on the sale or disposition of such stock, but not 
until that time (sec. 1059(a)(2)). The reduction in basis for 
this purpose occurs immediately before any sale or disposition 
of the stock (sec. 1059(d)(1)(A)). The Treasury Department has 
general regulatory authority to carry out the purposes of the 
section.
    Except as provided in regulations, the extraordinary 
dividend provisions do not apply to result in a double 
reduction in basis in the case of distributions between members 
of an affiliated group filing consolidated returns, where the 
dividend is eliminated or excluded under the consolidated 
return regulations. Double inclusion of earnings and profits 
(i.e., from both the dividend and from gain on the disposition 
of stock with a reduced basis) also should generally be 
prevented.\215\ Treasury regulations provide for application of 
the provision when a corporation is a partner in a partnership 
that receives a distribution.\216\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \215\ See H. Rept. 99-841, II-166, 99th Cong. 2d Sess. (September 
18, 1986).
    \216\ See Treas. Reg. sec. 1.701-2(f), Example (2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In general, a distribution in redemption of stock is 
treated as a dividend, rather than as a sale of the stock, if 
it is essentially equivalent to a dividend (sec. 302). A 
redemption of the stock of a shareholder generally is 
essentially equivalent to a dividend if it does not result in a 
meaningful reduction in the shareholder's proportionate 
interest in the distributing corporation. Section 302(b) also 
contains several specific tests (e.g., a substantial reduction 
computation and a termination test) to identify redemptions 
that are not essentially equivalent to dividends. The 
determination whether a redemption is essentially equivalent to 
a dividend includes reference to the constructive ownership 
rules of section 318, including the option attribution rules of 
section 318(a)(4). The rules relating to treatment of cash or 
other property received in a reorganization contain a similar 
reference (sec. 356(a)(2)).

                           Reasons for Change

    Corporate taxpayers have attempted to dispose of stock of 
other corporations in transactions structured as redemptions, 
where the redeemed corporate shareholder apparently expects to 
take the position that the transactions are dividends that 
qualify for the dividends received deduction. Thus, the 
redeemed corporate shareholder attempts to exclude from income 
a substantial portion of the amount received. In some cases, it 
appears that the taxpayers' interpretations of the option 
attribution rules of section 318(a)(4) are important to the 
taxpayers' contentions that their interests in the distributing 
corporation are not meaningfully reduced, and are, therefore, 
dividends.\217\ Some taxpayers may argue that certain options 
have sufficient economic reality that they should be recognized 
as stock ownership for purposes of determining whether a 
taxpayer has substantially reduced its ownership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \217\ For example, it has been reported that Seagram Corporation 
intends to take the position that the corporate dividends-received 
deduction will eliminate tax on significant distributions received from 
DuPont Corporation in a redemption of almost all the DuPont stock held 
by Seagram, coupled with the issuance of certain rights to reacquire 
DuPont stock. See e.g., Landro and Shapiro, ``Hollywood Shuffle,'' Wall 
Street Journal, pp. A1 and A11 (April 7, 1995); Sloan, ``For Seagram 
and DuPont, a Tax Deal that No One Wants to Brandy About,'' Washington 
Post, p. D3 (April 11, 1995); Sheppard, ``Can Seagram Bail Out of 
DuPont without Capital Gain Tax,'' Tax Notes Today, (April 10, 1995, 95 
TNT 75-4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Even in the absence of options, the present law rules 
dealing with extraordinary dividends may permit inappropriate 
deferral of gain recognition when the portion of the 
distribution that is excluded due to the dividends received 
deduction exceeds the basis of the stock with respect to which 
the extraordinary dividend is received.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, except as provided in regulations, a 
corporate shareholder recognizes gain immediately with respect 
to any redemption treated as a dividend (in whole or in part) 
when the nontaxed portion of the dividend exceeds the basis of 
the shares surrendered, if the redemption is treated as a 
dividend due to options being counted as stock ownership.\218\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \218\ Thus, for example, where a portion of such a distribution 
would not have been treated as a dividend due to insufficient earnings 
and profits, the rule applies to the portion treated as a dividend.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition, the Act requires immediate gain recognition 
whenever the basis of stock with respect to which any 
extraordinary dividend was received is reduced below zero. The 
reduction in basis of stock is treated as occurring at the 
beginning of the ex-dividend date of the extraordinary dividend 
to which the reduction relates.\219\ Except as provided in 
regulations, it is not expected that the provision will cause 
current gain recognition in consolidated return situations to 
the extent that the consolidated return regulations require the 
creation or increase of an excess loss account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \219\ For redemptions, the reduction in basis of stock is treated 
as occurring at the beginning of the date holders of the stock become 
entitled to receive the redemption proceeds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Reorganizations or other exchanges involving amounts that 
are treated as dividends under section 356 of the Code are 
treated as redemptions for purposes of applying the rules 
relating to redemptions under section 1059(e). For example, if 
a recapitalization or other transaction that involves a 
dividend under section 356 has the effect of a non pro rata 
redemption or is treated as a dividend due to options being 
counted as stock, the rules of section 1059 apply. Redemptions 
of shares, or other extraordinary dividends on shares, held by 
a partnership will be subject to section 1059 to the extent 
there are corporate partners (e.g., appropriate adjustments to 
the basis of the shares held by the partnership and to the 
basis of the corporate partner's partnership interest will be 
required).
    Under continuing section 1059(g) of present law, the 
Treasury Department is authorized to issue regulations where 
necessary to carry out the purposes and prevent the avoidance 
of the provision.

                             Effective Date

    The provision generally is effective for distributions 
after May 3, 1995, unless made pursuant to the terms of a 
written binding contract in effect on May 3, 1995, and at all 
times thereafter before such distribution, or a tender offer 
outstanding on May 3, 1995.\220\ However, in applying the new 
gain recognition rules to any distribution that is not a 
partial liquidation, a non pro rata redemption, or a redemption 
that is treated as a dividend by reason of options, September 
13, 1995 is substituted for May 3, 1995 in applying the 
transition rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \220\ Thus, for example, in the case of a distribution prior to the 
effective date, the provisions of present law would continue to apply, 
including the provisions of present-law sections 1059(a) and 
1059(d)(1), requiring reduction in basis immediately before any sale or 
disposition of the stock, and requiring recognition of gain at the time 
of such sale or disposition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    No inference is intended regarding the tax treatment under 
prior law of any transaction within the scope of the provision, 
including transactions utilizing options.
    In addition, no inference is intended regarding the rules 
under prior law (or in any case where the treatment is not 
specified in the provision) for determining the shares of stock 
with respect to which a dividend is received or that experience 
a basis reduction.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $44 million in 1998, to decrease Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts by $93 million in 1999, $54 million 
in 2000, and $10 million in 2001, and to increase Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts by $45 million in 2002, $77 million 
in 2003, $81 million in 2004, $89 million in 2005, $95 million 
in 2006, and $101 million in 2007.

2. Require gain recognition on certain distributions of controlled 
        corporation stock (sec. 1012 of the Act and secs. 355, 358, 
        351(c), and 368(a)(2)(H) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    A corporation generally is required to recognize gain on 
the distribution of property (including stock of a subsidiary) 
as if such property had been sold for its fair market value. 
The shareholders generally treat the receipt of property as a 
taxable event as well. Section 355 of the Internal Revenue Code 
provides an exception to this rule for certain ``spin-off'' 
type distributions of stock of a controlled corporation, 
provided that various requirements are met, including certain 
restrictions relating to acquisitions and dispositions of stock 
of the distributing corporation (``distributing'') or the 
controlled corporation (``controlled'') prior and subsequent to 
a distribution.
    In cases where the form of the transaction involves a 
contribution of assets to the particular controlled corporation 
that is distributed in connection with the distribution, there 
are specific Code requirements that distributing corporation's 
shareholders own ``control'' of the distributed corporation 
immediately after the distribution. Control is defined for this 
purpose as 80 percent of the voting power of all classes of 
stock entitled to vote and 80 percent of each other class of 
stock (secs. 368(a)(1)(D), 368(c), and 351(a) and (c)). In 
addition, it is a requirement for qualification of any section 
355 distribution that the distributing corporation distribute 
control of the controlled corporation (defined by reference to 
the same 80-percent test).\221\ Present law has the effect of 
imposing more restrictive requirements on certain types of 
acquisitions or other transfers following a distribution if the 
company acquired is the controlled corporation rather than the 
distributing corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \221\ If a controlled corporation is acquired after a distribution, 
an issue may arise whether the acquisition can be viewed under step-
transaction concepts as having occurred before the distribution, with 
the result that the distributing corporation would not be viewed as 
having distributed the necessary 80 percent control. The Internal 
Revenue Service had indicated that it would not rule on requests for 
section 355 treatment in cases in which there have been negotiations, 
agreements, or arrangements with respect to transactions or events 
which, if consummated before the distribution, would result in the 
distribution of stock or securities of a corporation which is not 
``controlled'' by the distributing corporation. Rev. Proc. 96-39, 1996-
33 I.R.B. 11, as incorporated in Rev. Proc. 97-3, 1997-1 I.R.B. 85 at 
sec. 5.17, modified by Rev. Proc. 97-53, 1997-47 I.R.B. 10 to delete 
sec. 5.17; see also Rev. Rul. 96-30, 1996-1 C.B. 36; Rev. Rul. 70-225, 
1970-1 C.B. 80.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    After a spin-off transaction, the amount of a stockholder's 
basis in the stock of the distributing corporation is generally 
allocated between the stock of distributing and controlled 
received by that shareholder, in proportion to their relative 
fair market values (sec. 358(c); see Treas. reg. sec. 1.358-2). 
In the case of an affiliated group of corporations filing a 
consolidated return, this basis allocation rule generally 
eliminates any excess loss account in the stock of a controlled 
corporation that is distributed within the group, and its basis 
is generally determined with reference to the basis of the 
distributing corporation.\222\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \222\ Excess loss accounts in consolidation generally are created 
when a subsidiary corporation makes a distribution (or has a loss that 
is used by other members of the group) that exceeds the parent's basis 
in the stock of the subsidiary. In general, such excess loss accounts 
in consolidation are permitted to be deferred rather than causing 
immediate taxable gain. Nevertheless, they are recaptured when a 
subsidiary leaves the group or in certain other situations. However, 
such excess loss accounts are not recaptured in certain cases where 
there is an internal spin-off prior to the subsidiary leaving the 
group. See, Treas. Reg. sec. 1.1502-19(g). In addition, an excess loss 
account may not be created at all in certain cases that are similar 
economically to a distribution that would reduce the stock basis of the 
distributing subsidiary corporation, if the distribution from the 
subsidiary is structured to meet the form of a section 355 
distribution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The treatment of basis of the distributing and controlled 
corporations in a section 355 distribution differs from a 
distribution of stock that is not a qualified section 355 spin-
off. In a non-qualified distribution within an affiliated group 
of corporations filing a consolidated return, not only is gain 
generally recognized (though deferred) on the excess of value 
over basis at the distributing corporation level, the basis of 
the distributing corporation's stock is increased by any gain 
recognized in the distribution (when that gain is taken into 
account under the relevant regulations), and reduced by the 
fair market value of the distribution if the distribution is 
within an affiliated group filing a consolidated return. The 
basis of the stock of the distributed corporation within the 
group is a fair market value basis. In the case of a 
nonqualified distribution between members of an affiliated 
group that is not filing a consolidated return, the 
distribution causes a reduction of basis of the distributing 
corporation only to the extent it exceeds the earnings and 
profits of the distributing corporation or it is an 
extraordinary dividend.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that section 355 was intended to 
permit the tax-free division of existing business arrangements 
among existing shareholders. In cases in which it is intended 
that new shareholders will acquire ownership of a business in 
connection with a spin-off, the transaction more closely 
resembles a corporate level disposition of the portion of the 
business that is acquired.
    The Congress also believed that the difference in treatment 
of certain transactions following a spin-off, depending upon 
whether the distributing or controlled corporation engages in 
the transaction, should be minimized.
    The Congress also was concerned that spin-off transactions 
within a single corporate group can have the effect of avoiding 
other present law rules that create or recapture excess loss 
accounts in affiliated groups filing consolidated returns. Some 
intra-group distributions may have the effect of permitting 
inappropriate basis increases (or preventing basis decreases) 
following a distribution, due to the differences between the 
basis allocation rules that govern spin-offs and those that 
apply to other distributions. In the case of an affiliated 
group not filing a consolidated return, it is also possible 
that section 355 distributions could in effect permit similar 
inappropriate basis results.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act adopts additional restrictions under section 355 on 
acquisitions and dispositions of the stock of the distributing 
or controlled corporation.
    Under the Act, if either the controlled or distributing 
corporation is acquired pursuant to a plan or arrangement in 
existence on the date of distribution, gain is recognized as of 
the date of the distribution.
    In the case of an acquisition of either the distributing 
corporation or the controlled corporation, the amount of gain 
recognized is the amount that the distributing corporation 
would have recognized had the stock of the controlled 
corporation been sold for fair market value on the date of the 
distribution. Such gain is recognized immediately before the 
distribution and is treated as long-term capital gain. No 
adjustment to the basis of the stock or assets of either 
corporation is allowed by reason of the recognition of the 
gain.\223\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \223\ There is no intention to limit the otherwise applicable 
Treasury regulatory authority under section 336(e) of the Code. There 
is also no intention to limit the otherwise applicable provisions of 
section 1367 with respect to the effect on shareholder stock basis of 
gain recognized by an S corporation under this provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Whether a corporation is acquired is determined under rules 
similar to those of present law section 355(d), except that 
acquisitions would not be restricted to ``purchase'' 
transactions. Thus, an acquisition occurs if one or more 
persons acquire 50 percent or more of the vote or value of the 
stock of the controlled or distributing corporation pursuant to 
a plan or arrangement. For example, assume a corporation 
(``P'') distributes the stock of its wholly owned subsidiary 
(``S'') to its shareholders in a transaction that otherwise 
qualifies as a section 355 spin-off. If, pursuant to a plan or 
arrangement, 50 percent or more of the vote or value of either 
P or S is acquired by one or more persons, the Act requires 
gain recognition by the distributing corporation. Except as 
provided in Treasury regulations, if the assets of the 
distributing or controlled corporation are acquired by a 
successor in a merger or other transaction under section 
368(a)(1)(A), (C) or (D) of the Code, the shareholders 
(immediately before the acquisition) of the corporation 
acquiring such assets are treated as acquiring stock in the 
corporation from which the assets were acquired. Under Treasury 
regulations, other asset transfers also could be subject to 
this rule.
    Under the Act, certain aggregation and attribution rules 
apply for determining whether one or more persons has acquired 
a 50-percent or greater interest in distributing or controlled. 
The aggregation rules of section 355(d)(7)(A) apply. In 
addition, except as provided in regulations, section 
318(a)(2)(C) applies without regard to the amount of stock 
ownership of the corporation.
    A public offering of sufficient size can result in an 
acquisition that causes gain recognition under the provision.
    Acquisitions occurring within the four-year period 
beginning two years before the date of distribution are 
presumed to have occurred pursuant to a plan or arrangement. 
Taxpayers can avoid gain recognition by showing that an 
acquisition occurring during this four-year period was 
unrelated to the distribution.
    The Treasury Department is authorized to prescribe 
regulations as necessary to carry out the purposes of the Act, 
including regulations to provide for the application of the 
changes made by the Act in the case of multiple transactions.

Certain transactions not considered acquisitions

    Under the Act, certain specific types of transactions do 
not cause gain recognition or are not counted as acquisitions 
for purposes of determining whether there has been an 
acquisition of a 50-percent or greater interest in the 
distributing or the controlled corporation.
            Single affiliated group
    Under the Act, a plan (or series of related transactions) 
is not one that will cause gain recognition if, immediately 
after the completion of such plan or transactions, the 
distributing corporation and all controlled corporations are 
members of a single affiliated group of corporations (as 
defined in section 1504 without regard to subsection (b) 
thereof).
    Example 1: P corporation is a member of an affiliated group 
of corporations that includes subsidiary corporation S and 
subsidiary corporation S1. P owns all the stock of S. S owns 
all the stock of S1. P corporation is merged into unrelated X 
corporation in a transaction in which the former shareholders 
of X corporation will own 50 percent or more of the vote or 
value of the stock of surviving X corporation after the merger. 
As part of the plan of merger, S1 will be distributed by S to 
X, in a transaction that otherwise qualifies under section 355. 
After this distribution, S, S1, and X will remain members of a 
single affiliated group of corporations under section 1504 
(without regard to whether any of the corporations is a foreign 
corporation, an insurance company, a tax exempt organization, 
or an electing section 936 company). Even though there has been 
an acquisition of P, S, and S1 by X, and a distribution of S1 
by S that is part of a plan or series of related transactions, 
the plan is not treated as one that requires gain recognition 
on the distribution of S1 to X. This is because the 
distributing corporation S and the controlled corporation S1 
remain within a single affiliated group after the distribution 
(even though the P group has changed ownership).
            Continuing direct or indirect ownership
    Under the Act, except as provided in Treasury regulations, 
certain acquisitions are not taken into account in determining 
whether a 50-percent or greater interest in distributing or 
controlled has been acquired. Generally, in any transaction, 
stock received directly or indirectly by former shareholders of 
distributing or controlled, in a successor or new controlling 
corporation of either, is not treated as acquired stock if it 
is attributable to such shareholders' stock in distributing or 
controlled that was not acquired as part of a plan or 
arrangement to acquire 50 percent or more of such successor or 
other corporation.
    Section 355(e)(3)(A)(iv) of the Act, as originally enacted, 
provided that an acquisition does not require gain recognition 
if the same persons own 50 percent or more of both 
corporations, directly or indirectly (rather than merely 
indirectly, as in the House bill and Senate amendment), before 
and after the acquisition and distribution, provided the stock 
owned before the acquisition was not acquired as part of a plan 
(or series of related transactions) to acquire a 50-percent or 
greater interest in either distributing or controlled. The 
intention of Congress, however, was that the acquisition of 
stock in the distributing corporation or any controlled 
corporation is disregarded to the extent that the percentage of 
stock owned directly or indirectly in such corporation by each 
person owning stock in such corporation immediately before the 
acquisition does not decrease.\224\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \224\ A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this result. See Title VI (sec. 609(b)(2)) of H.R. 2676, the 
Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on 
November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Example 2: Individual A owns all the stock of P 
corporation. P owns all the stock of a subsidiary corporation, 
S. Subsidiary S is distributed to individual A in a transaction 
that otherwise qualifies under section 355. As part of a plan, 
P then merges with corporation X, alsoowned entirely by 
individual A. There is not an acquisition that requires gain 
recognition under the provision, because individual A owns directly or 
indirectly 100 percent of all the stock of both X, the successor to P, 
and S before and after the transaction.\225\ The same result would 
occur if P were contributed to a holding company, all the stock of 
which is owned by A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \225\ The example assumes that A did not acquire his or her stock 
in P as part of a plan or series of related transactions that results 
in the direct or indirect ownership of 50 percent or more of S or P 
separately by A. If A's stock in P was acquired as part of such a plan, 
the transaction would be one requiring gain recognition on the spin-off 
of S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Example 3: Assume the facts are the same as in Example 2 
except that corporations P and X are each owned by the same 20 
individual 5-percent shareholders (rather than wholly by 
individual A). The transaction described in Example 2, in which 
S is spun off by P to P's shareholders and P is acquired by X, 
would not cause gain recognition, because each shareholder that 
owned stock of distributing and controlled before the 
transaction continues to own the same percentage of stock of 
each corporation after the transaction.
    Example 4: Shareholder A owns 10 percent of the vote and 
value of the stock of corporation D (which owns all of 
corporation C). There are nine other equal shareholders of D. A 
also owns 100 percent of the vote and value of the stock of 
unrelated corporation P. D distributes C pro rata to all the 
shareholders of D. Thereafter, pursuant to a plan or series of 
related transactions, D (worth 100x) merges with corporation P 
(worth 900x). After the merger, each of the former shareholders 
of corporation D owns stock of the merged entity reflecting the 
vote and value attributable to that shareholder's respective 10 
percent former stock ownership in D. Each of the former 
shareholders of D owns 1 percent of the stock of the merged 
corporation, except that shareholder A (who owned 100 percent 
of corporation P and 10 percent of corporation D before the 
merger) now owns 91 percent of the stock of the merged 
corporation. In determining whether a 50-percent or greater 
interest in D has been acquired, the interest of each of the 
continuing shareholders is disregarded only to the extent there 
has been no decrease in such shareholder's direct or indirect 
ownership. Thus, the 10-percent interest of A, and the 1-
percent interest of each of the nine other former shareholders 
of D, is not counted. The remaining 81-percent ownership of the 
merged corporation, representing a decrease of nine percent in 
the interests of each of the nine former shareholders other 
than A, is counted in determining the extent of an acquisition. 
Therefore, a 50-percent or greater interest in D has been 
acquired.\226\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \226\ This example reflects the technical correction contained in 
Title VI (sec. 609(b)(2)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections 
Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Except as provided in Treasury regulations, certain other 
acquisitions also are not taken into account. For example, 
under section 355(e)(3)(A), the following other types of 
acquisitions of stock are not subject to the provision, 
provided that the stock owned before the acquisition was not 
acquired pursuant to a plan or series of related transactions 
to acquire a 50-percent or greater ownership interest in either 
distributing or controlled:
    First, the acquisition of stock in the controlled 
corporation by the distributing corporation (as one example, in 
the case of a contribution of property by the distributing 
corporation to the controlled corporation in exchange for the 
stock of the controlled corporation);
    Second, the acquisition by a person of stock in any 
controlled corporation by reason of holding stock or securities 
in the distributing corporation (as one example, the receipt by 
a distributing corporation shareholder of controlled 
corporation stock in a distribution--including a split-off 
distribution in which a shareholder that did not own 50 percent 
of the stock of distributing owns 50 percent or more of the 
stock of controlled); and
    Third, the acquisition by a person of stock in any 
successor corporation of the distributing corporation or any 
controlled corporation by reason of holding stock or securities 
in such distributing or controlled corporation (for example, 
the receipt by former shareholders of distributing of 50 
percent or more of the stock of a successor corporation in a 
merger of distributing).
    The Act does not apply to distributions that would 
otherwise be subject to section 355(d) of present law, which 
imposes corporate level tax on certain disqualified 
distributions.
    The Act does not apply to a distribution pursuant to a 
title 11 or similar case.

Section 355(f)

    The Act provides that, except as provided in Treasury 
regulations, section 355 (or so much of section 356 as relates 
to section 355) shall not apply to the distribution of stock 
from one member of an affiliated group of corporations (as 
defined in section 1504(a)) to another member of such group (an 
``intragroup spin-off'') if such distribution is part of a plan 
(or series of related transactions) described in subsection 
(e)(2)(A)(ii), pursuant to which one or more persons acquire 
directly or indirectly stock representing a 50-percent or 
greater interest in the distributing corporation or any 
controlled corporation.
    Example 5: P corporation owns all the stock of subsidiary 
corporation S. S owns all the stock of subsidiary corporation 
T. S distributes the stock of T corporation to P as part of a 
plan or series of related transactions in which P then 
distributes S to its shareholders and then P is merged into 
unrelated X corporation. After the merger, former shareholders 
of X corporation own 50 percent or more of the voting power or 
value of the stock of the merged corporation. Because the 
distribution of T by S is part of a plan or series of related 
transactions in which S is distributed by P outside the P 
affiliated group and P is then acquired under section 355(e), 
section 355 in its entirety does not apply to the intragroup 
spin-off of T to P, under section 355(f). Also, the 
distribution of S by P is subject to section 355(e).
    In determining whether an acquisition described in 
subsection (e)(2)(A)(ii) occurs, all the provisions of new 
subsection 355(e) are applied. For example, an intragroup spin-
off in connection with an overall transaction that does not 
cause gain recognition under section 355(e) because it is 
described in section 355(e)(2)(C), or because of section 
355(e)(3), or because of the effective date of section 355(e), 
is not subject to the rule of section 355(f).
    The Treasury Department has regulatory authority to vary 
the result that the intragroup distribution under section 
355(f) does not qualify for section 355 treatment. In this 
connection, the Treasury Department could by regulation 
eliminate some or all of the gain recognition required under 
section 355(f) in connection with the issuance of regulations 
that would cause appropriate basis results with respect to the 
stock of S and T in the above example so that concerns 
regarding present law section 355 basis rules (described below 
in connection with section 358(c)) would be eliminated.\227\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \227\ Examples of approaches that the Treasury Department may 
consider are discussed in connection with section 358(g), infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Treasury regulatory authority under section 358(g)

    The Act provides that in the case of any distribution of 
stock of one member of an affiliated group of corporations to 
another member under section 355 (``intragroup spin-off''), the 
Secretary of the Treasury is authorized under section 358(g) to 
provide adjustments to the basis of any stock in a corporation 
which is a member of such group, to reflect appropriately the 
proper treatment of such distribution. It is understood that 
the approach of any such regulations applied to intragroup 
spin-offs that do not involve an acquisition may also be 
applied under the Treasury regulatory authority to modify the 
rule of section 355(f) as may be appropriate.
    Congress believed that the concerns relating to basis 
adjustments in the case of intragroup spin offs are essentially 
similar, whether or not an acquisition is currently intended as 
part of a plan or series of related transactions. The concerns 
include the following. First, under present law consolidated 
return regulations, it is possible that an excess loss account 
of a lower tier subsidiary may be eliminated. This creates the 
potential for the subsidiary to leave the group without 
recapture of the excess loss account, even though the group has 
benefitted from the losses or distributions in excess of basis 
that led to the existence of the excess loss account.
    Second, under present law, a shareholder's stock basis in 
its stock of the distributing corporation is allocated after a 
spin-off between the stock of the distributing and controlled 
corporations, in proportion to the relative fair market values 
of the stock of those companies. If a disproportionate amount 
of asset basis (as compared to value) is in one of the 
companies (including but not limited to a shift of value and 
basis through a borrowing by one company and contribution of 
the borrowed cash to the other), present law rules under 
section 358(c) can produce an increase in stock basis relative 
to asset basis in one corporation, and a correspondingdecrease 
in stock basis relative to asset basis in the other company. Because 
the spin-off has occurred within the corporate group, the group can 
continue to benefit from high inside asset basis either for purposes of 
sale or depreciation, while also choosing to benefit from the 
disproportionately high stock basis in the other corporation. If, for 
example, both corporations were sold at a later date, a prior 
distribution can result in a significant decrease in the amount of gain 
recognized than would have occurred if the two corporations had been 
sold together without a prior spin off (or separately, without a prior 
spin-off).
    Example 6: P owns all the stock of S1 and S1 owns all the 
stock of S2. P's basis in the stock of S1 is 50; the inside 
asset basis of S1's assets is 50; and the total value of S1's 
stock and assets (including the value of S2) is 150. S1's basis 
in the stock of S2 is 0; the inside basis of S2's assets is 0; 
and the value of S2's stock and assets is 100. If S1 were sold, 
holding S2, the total gain would be 100. S1 distributes S2 to P 
in a section 355 transaction. After this spin-off, under 
present law, P's basis in the stock of S1 is approximately 17 
(50/150 times the total 50 stock basis in S1 prior to the spin-
off) and the inside asset basis of S1 is 50. P's basis in the 
stock of S2 is 33 (100/150 times the total 50 stock basis in S1 
prior to the spin-off) and the inside asset basis of S2 is 0. 
After a period of time, S2 can be sold for its value of 100, 
with a gain of 67 rather than 100. Also, since S1 remains in 
the corporate group, the full 50 inside asset basis can 
continue to be used. S1's assets could be sold for 50 with no 
gain or loss. Thus, S1 and S2 can be sold later at a total gain 
of 67, rather than the total gain of 100 that would have 
occurred had they been sold without the spin-off.
    As one variation on the foregoing concern, taxpayers have 
attempted to utilize spin-offs to extract significant amounts 
of asset value and basis, (including but not limited to 
transactions in which one corporation decreases its value by 
incurring debt, and increases the asset basis and value of the 
other corporation by contributing the proceeds of the debt to 
the other corporation) without creation of an excess loss 
account or triggering of gain, even when the extraction is in 
excess of the basis in the distributing corporation's stock.
    The Treasury Department may promulgate any regulations 
necessary to address these concerns and other collateral 
issues. As one example, the Treasury Department may consider 
providing rules that require a carryover basis within the group 
(or stock basis conforming to asset basis as appropriate) for 
the distributed corporation (including a carryover of an excess 
loss account, if any, in a consolidated return). Similarly, the 
Treasury Department may provide a reduction in the basis of the 
stock of the distributing corporation to reflect the change in 
the value and basis of the distributing corporation's assets. 
The Treasury Department may determine that the aggregate stock 
basis of distributing and controlled after the distribution may 
be adjusted to an amount that is less than the aggregate basis 
of the stock of the distributing corporation before the 
distribution, to prevent inappropriate potential for artificial 
losses or diminishment of gain on disposition of any of the 
corporations involved in the spin-off. The Treasury Department 
may provide separate regulations for corporations in affiliated 
groups filing a consolidated return and for affiliated groups 
not filing a consolidated return, as appropriate to each 
situation.

Control requirement for certain transactions

    The Act also modifies certain rules for determining control 
immediately after a distribution in the case of certain 
divisive transactions in which a controlled corporation is 
distributed and the transaction meets the requirements of 
section 355. In such cases, under section 351 and modified 
section 368(a)(2)(H) with respect to certain reorganizations 
under section 368(a)(1)(D), those shareholders receiving stock 
in the distributed corporation are treated as in control of the 
distributed corporation immediately after the distribution if 
they hold stock representing a greater than 50 percent interest 
in the vote and value of stock of the distributed corporation.
    The Act does not change the present-law requirement under 
section 355 that the distributing corporation must distribute 
80 percent of the voting power and 80 percent of each other 
class of stock of the controlled corporation. It is expected 
that this requirement will be applied by the Internal Revenue 
Service taking account of the provisions of the Act regarding 
plans that permit certain types of planned restructuring of the 
distributing corporation following the distribution, and to 
treat similar restructurings of the controlled corporation in a 
similar manner. Thus, the 80-percent control requirement is 
expected to be administered in a manner that would prevent the 
tax-free spin-off of a less-than-80-percent controlled 
subsidiary, but generally would not impose additional 
restrictions on post-distribution restructurings of the 
controlled corporation if such restrictions would not apply to 
the distributing corporation.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is generally effective for distributions 
after April 16, 1997. However, the part of the provision 
providing a greater-than-50-percent control requirement 
immediately after certain section 351 and 368(a)(1)(D) 
distributions is effective for transfers after August 5, 1997.
    The provision does not apply to a distribution after April 
16, 1997 that is part of an acquisition that would otherwise 
cause gain recognition to the distributing or controlled 
corporation under new section 355(e) or (f), if such 
acquisition is (1) made pursuant to a written agreement which 
was binding on April 16, 1997 and at all times thereafter; (2) 
described in a ruling request submitted to the Internal Revenue 
Service on or before such date; or (3) described on or before 
such date in a public announcement or in a filing with the 
Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'') required solely by 
reason of the distribution or acquisition. Any written 
agreement, ruling request, or public announcement or SEC filing 
is not within the scope of these transition provisions unless 
it identifies the acquiror of the distributing corporation or 
of any controlled corporation, whichever is applicable.
    The part of the provision providing a greater-than-50-
percent control provision for certain transfers after the date 
of enactment will not apply if such transfer meets the 
requirements of (1), (2), or (3) of the preceding paragraph.
    An acquisition of stock that occurs on or before April 16, 
1997, will not cause gain recognition under the provision, even 
if there is a distribution after that date that is part of a 
plan or series of related transactions that would otherwise be 
subject to the provision.
    Any contract that is, in fact, binding under State law as 
of April 16, 1997, even though not written, is eligible for 
transition relief. It would be expected, in such a case, that 
some form of contemporaneous written evidence of such contract 
would be in existence. As one example, if under State law 
acceptance of the terms and conditions of a contract by a 
corporate board of directors creates a binding contract with an 
acquiror, then such contract, and the terms and conditions 
presented to the board, could satisfy the requirement for 
binding contract transitional relief under the conference 
agreement. If there was such an offer and acceptance on or 
before April 16, 1997, and a ruling request filed on or before 
April 16, 1997, with respect to a proposed spin-off and 
acquisition, which identifies the acquiror as one of a list of 
prospective acquirors, then the transaction may be eligible for 
relief under the transition rules.
    Finally, with respect to the Treasury Department regulatory 
authority under section 358(g) as applied to intragroup spin-
off transactions that are not part of a plan or series of 
related transactions under new section 355(f), the provision 
applies to distributions after April 16, 1997.\228\ However, 
Congress expects that any Treasury regulations will be applied 
prospectively, except in cases to prevent abuse.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \228\ A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this result. See Title VI (sec. 609(b)(1)) of H.R. 2676, the 
Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on 
November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase fiscal year budget 
receipts by $301 million in 1998, $243 million in 1999, $216 
million in 2000, $187 million in 2001, $158 million in 2002, 
$130 million in 2003, $101 million in 2004, $73 million in 
2005, $46 million in 2006, and $10 million in 2007.

3. Reform tax treatment of certain corporate stock transfers (sec. 1013 
        of the Act and secs. 304 and 1059 of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Under section 304, if one corporation purchases stock of a 
related corporation, the transaction generally is 
recharacterized as a redemption. In determining whether a 
transaction so recharacterized is treated as a sale or a 
dividend, reference is made to the changes in the selling 
corporation's ownership of stock in the issuing corporation 
(applying the constructive ownership rules of section 318(a) 
with modifications under section 304(c)). Sales proceeds 
received by a corporate transferor that are characterized as a 
dividend may qualify for the dividends received deduction under 
section 243, and such dividend may bring with it foreign tax 
credits under section 902. Section 304 does not apply to 
transfers of stock between members of a consolidated group.
    Section 1059 applies to ``extraordinary dividends,'' 
including certain redemption transactions treated as dividends 
qualifying for the dividends received deduction. If a 
redemption results in an extraordinary dividend, section 1059 
generally requires the shareholder to reduce its basis in the 
stock of the redeeming corporation by the nontaxed portion of 
such dividend.

                           Reasons for Change

    Section 304 is directed primarily at preventing a 
controlling shareholder from claiming basis recovery and 
capital gain treatment on transactions that result in a 
withdrawal of earnings from corporate solution. These concerns 
are most relevant where the shareholder is an individual. 
Different concerns may be present if the shareholder is a 
corporation, due in part to the availability of the dividends 
received deduction. A corporation often may prefer a 
transaction to be characterized as a dividend, as opposed to a 
sale or exchange. Accordingly, a corporation may intentionally 
seek to apply section 304 to a transaction which is in 
substance a sale or exchange. Corporations that are related for 
purposes of section 304 need not be 80-percent controlled by a 
common parent. The separate rules for corporations filing a 
consolidated return, that would generally reduce basis for 
untaxed dividends received, do not apply. Furthermore, in some 
situations where the selling corporation does not in fact own 
any stock of the acquiring corporation before or after the 
transaction (except by attribution), it is possible that 
current law may lead to inappropriate results.
    As one example, in certain related-party sales the selling 
corporation may take the position that its basis in any shares 
of stock it may have retained (or possibly in any shares of the 
acquiring corporation that it may own) need not be reduced by 
the amount of its dividends received deduction. This could 
result in an inappropriate shifting of basis. The result can be 
artificial reduction of gain or creation of loss on disposition 
of any such retained shares.
    For example, assume that domestic corporation X owns 70 
percent of the shares of domestic corporation S and all the 
shares of domestic corporation B. S owns all the shares of 
domestic corporation T with a basis of $100. Assume that 
corporation B has sufficient earnings and profits so that any 
distribution of property would be treated as a dividend. Assume 
that S sells all but one of its shares in T to B for $99, their 
fair market value. The transfer is treated as a redemption of 
shares of B, which redemption is treated as a dividend to S 
because, even though S in fact owns no shares of B, it is 
deemed to own all the shares of B before and after the 
transaction through attribution from X. In such a case, 
taxpayers may have contended that the one share of T retained 
(worth $1) retains the entire original basis of $100. Although 
S has received $99 from B for its other shares of T, and has 
not paid full tax on that receipt due to the dividends received 
deduction, S may now attempt to claim a $99 loss on disposing 
of the remaining share of T.
    In international cases, a U.S. corporation owned by a 
foreign corporation may inappropriately claim foreign tax 
credits from a section 304 transaction. For example, if a 
foreign-controlled domestic corporation sells the stock of a 
subsidiary to a foreign sister corporation, the domestic 
corporation may have taken the position that it is entitled to 
credit foreign taxes that were paid by the foreign sister 
corporation. See Rev. Rul. 92-86, 1992-2 C.B. 199; Rev. Rul. 
91-5, 1991-1 C.B. 114. However, if the foreign sister 
corporation had actually distributed its earnings and profits 
to the common foreign parent, no foreign tax credits would have 
been available to the domestic corporation.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, to the extent that a section 304 transaction 
is treated as a distribution under section 301, the transferor 
and the acquiring corporation are treated as if (1) the 
transferor had transferred the stock involved in the 
transaction to the acquiring corporation in exchange for stock 
of the acquiring corporation in a transaction to which section 
351(a) applies,\229\ and (2) the acquiring corporation had then 
redeemed the stock it is treated as having issued. Thus, the 
acquiring corporation is treated for all purposes as having 
redeemed the stock it is treated as having issued to the 
transferor. In addition, the Act amends section 1059 so that, 
if the section 304 transaction is treated as a dividend to 
which the dividends received deduction applies, the dividend is 
treated as an extraordinary dividend in which only the basis of 
the transferred shares would be taken into account under 
section 1059.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \229\ In determining the holding period of stock deemed to have 
been contributed and redeemed under the provision, the tacking of 
holding period rules applicable under section 351 apply for purposes of 
the provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under the Act, a special rule applies to section 304 
transactions involving acquisitions by foreign corporations. 
The Act limits the earnings and profits of the acquiring 
foreign corporation that are taken into account in applying 
section 304. The earnings and profits of the acquiring foreign 
corporation to be taken into account will not exceed the 
portion of such earnings and profits that (1) is attributable 
to stock of such acquiring corporation held by a corporation or 
individual who is the transferor (or a person related thereto) 
and who is a U.S. shareholder (within the meaning of sec, 
951(b)) of such corporation, and (2) was accumulated during 
periods in which such stock was owned by such person while such 
acquiring corporation was a controlled foreign corporation. For 
purposes of this rule, except as otherwise provided by the 
Secretary of the Treasury, the rules of section 1248(d) 
(relating to certain exclusions from earnings and profits) 
would apply. The Secretary of the Treasury is to prescribe 
regulations as appropriate, including regulations determining 
the earnings and profits that are attributable to particular 
stock of the acquiring corporation.
    No inference is intended as to the treatment of any 
transaction under prior law.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for distributions or 
acquisitions after June 8, 1997, except that the provision will 
not apply to any such distribution or acquisition (1) made 
pursuant to a written agreement which was binding on such date 
and at all times thereafter, (2) described in a ruling request 
submitted to the Internal Revenue Service on or before such 
date, or (3) described in a public announcement or filing with 
the Securities and Exchange Commission on or before such date.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $10 million in 1998, $10 million in 1999, 
and $5 million in each of the years 2000 through 2007.

4. Treat certain preferred stock as ``boot'' (sec. 1014 of the Act and 
        secs. 351, 354, 355, 356, and 1036 of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    In reorganization transactions within the meaning of 
section 368 and certain other restructurings, no gain or loss 
is recognized except to the extent ``other property'' (often 
called ``boot'') is received, that is, property other than 
certain stock, including preferred stock. Thus, preferred stock 
would be received tax-free in a reorganization. Upon the 
receipt of ``other property,'' gain (or, in some situations, 
loss) is recognized. A special rule permits debt securities to 
be received tax-free, but only to the extent debt securities of 
no lesser principal amount are surrendered in the exchange. 
Other than this securities-for-securities rule, similar rules 
generally apply to transactions under section 351.

                           Reasons for Change

    Certain preferred stocks have been widely used in corporate 
transactions to afford taxpayers non-recognition treatment, 
even though the taxpayer may receive relatively secure 
instruments in exchange for relatively risky instruments.
    As one example, a shareholder of a corporation that is to 
be acquired for cash may not wish to recognize gain on a sale 
of his or her stock at that time. Transactions are structured 
so that a new holding company is formed, to which the 
shareholder contributes common stock of the company to be 
acquired, and receives in exchange preferred stock. The 
acquiring corporation contributes cash to a holding company, 
which uses the cash to acquire the stock of the other 
shareholders. Similar results might also be obtained if the 
corporation to be acquired recapitalized by issuing the 
preferred stock in exchange for the common stock of the 
shareholder. Features such as puts and calls may effectively 
determine the period within which total payment is to occur. In 
the case of an individual shareholder, the preferred stock may 
be puttable or redeemable only at death, in which case the 
shareholder would obtain a basis step-up and never recognize 
gain on the transaction.
    Similarly, as another type of example, so called ``auction 
rate'' preferred stock has a mechanism to reset the dividend 
rate on preferred stock so that it tracks changes in interest 
ratesover the term of the instrument, thus diminishing any risk 
that the ``principal'' amount of stock would change if interest rates 
changed.
    The Congress believed that when such preferred stock 
instruments are received in certain exchange transactions, it 
is appropriate to view such instruments as taxable 
consideration since the investor has often obtained a more 
secure form of investment.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act amends the relevant provisions (secs. 351, 354, 
355, 356 and 1036) to treat certain preferred stock as ``other 
property'' (i.e., ``boot'') subject to certain exceptions. 
Thus, when a taxpayer exchanges property for this preferred 
stock in a transaction that qualifies under either section 351, 
355, 368, or 1036, gain (or in some instances loss) is 
recognized.
    For purposes of section 351, nonqualified preferred stock 
is treated as ``boot'' under section 351(b). The transferor 
receiving such stock thus is not treated as receiving 
nonrecognition treatment under section 351(a). However, the 
nonqualified preferred stock continues to be treated as stock 
received by a transferor for purposes of qualification of a 
transaction under section 351(a), unless and until regulations 
may provide otherwise.
    Section 351(b) applies to a transferor who transfers 
property in a section 351 exchange and receives nonqualified 
preferred stock in addition to stock that is not treated as 
``other property'' under that section. Thus, if a transferor of 
loss property received only nonqualified preferred stock but 
the transaction in the aggregate otherwise qualified as a 
section 351 exchange, such a transferor would recognize loss 
under section 1001 of the Code and the basis of the 
nonqualified preferred stock and of the property in the hands 
of the transferee corporation would reflect the transaction in 
the same manner as if that particular taxpayer had received 
solely ``other property'' of any other type.\230\ However, as 
with any other loss, this loss could be disallowed by the 
application of section 267 or by the application of any other 
provision that would disallow or defer the recognition of a 
loss.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \230\ A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this intent. See Title VI (sec. 609(c)(1)) of H.R. 2676, the 
Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on 
November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For example, if A contributes appreciated property to new 
corporation X for all the common stock (representing 90 percent 
of the value and all the voting power) of X stock and B 
contributes appreciated property for nonqualified preferred 
stock representing 10 percent of the value of X stock, B has 
received ``boot,'' but the preferred stock is still treated as 
stock for purposes of sections 351(a) and 368(c), unless and 
until Treasury Regulations are issued requiring a different 
result. Thus, the transaction as a whole (apart from B's 
treatment with respect to nonqualified preferred stock) 
qualifies for non-recognition under section 351 and A does not 
recognize gain. If B had received other stock in addition to 
nonqualified preferred stock, B would be required to recognize 
gain only to the extent of the fair market value of the 
nonqualified preferred stock B receives.
    The Act applies to preferred stock (i.e., stock that is 
limited and preferred as to dividends and does not participate 
in corporate growth to any significant extent), where (1) the 
holder has the right to require the issuer or a related person 
(within the meaning of secs. 267(b) and 707(b)) to redeem or 
purchase the stock, (2) the issuer or a related person is 
required to redeem or purchase the stock, (3) the issuer (or a 
related person) has the right to redeem or purchase the stock 
and, as of the issue date, it is more likely than not that such 
right will be exercised, or (4) the dividend rate on the stock 
varies in whole or in part (directly or indirectly) with 
reference to interest rates, commodity prices, or other similar 
indices, regardless of whether such varying rate is provided as 
an express term of the stock (for example, in the case of an 
adjustable rate stock) or as a practical result of other 
aspects of the stock (for example, in the case of auction rate 
stock). Factors (1), (2) or (3) above will cause an instrument 
to be nonqualified preferred stock only if the right or 
obligation may be exercised within 20 years of the date the 
instrument is issued and such right or obligation is not 
subject to a contingency which, as of the issue date, makes 
remote the likelihood of the redemption or purchase. In 
addition, a right or obligation is disregarded if it may be 
exercised only upon the death, disability, or mental 
incompetency of the holder, but only if neither the stock 
surrendered nor the stock received in the exchange is stock of 
a corporation any class of stock of which (or of a related 
corporation) is readily tradable on an established securities 
market or otherwise.\231\ For this purpose, stock of a 
corporation is treated as stock that is readily tradable on an 
established securities market or otherwise if such exchange is 
part of a transaction or series of transactions in which such 
corporation is to become a corporation that has, or a related 
corporation of which has, readily tradable stock. Also, a right 
or obligation is disregarded in the case of stock transferred 
in connection with the performance of services if it may be 
exercised only upon the holder's separation from service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \231\ Conversely, in a case involving a corporation that has (or 
any related corporation of which has) any class of readily tradable 
stock, or that is to become such a corporation, suppose a shareholder 
(A) exchanges appreciated common stock of corporation X for preferred 
stock of corporation Y in a transaction otherwise qualifying as a 
section 351 exchange. The preferred stock is limited and preferred as 
to dividends, does not participate in corporate growth to any 
significant extent, and is redeemable at the end of 21 years from the 
date of issuance or upon the death of A. At the time of the exchange, A 
is 80 years old (or is in ill health). If, under actuarial tables or 
under the facts and circumstances of A's case the contingency of A's 
death (which is certain to occur) is likely to occur within 20 years of 
the date of the exchange, then the preferred stock is nonqualified 
preferred stock if corporation X or Y (or any related corporation of 
corporation X or Y) has any class of stock that is readily tradable, or 
if X or Y (or any related corporation of X or Y) is to become such a 
corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In no event will a conversion privilege into stock of the 
issuer automatically be considered to constitute participation 
in corporate growth to any significant extent. Stock that is 
convertible or exchangeable into stock of a corporation other 
than the issuer (including, for example, stock of a parent 
corporation or other related corporation) is not considered to 
be stock that participates in corporate growth to any 
significant extent for purposes of the provision.
    The following exchanges are excluded from gain recognition 
under the provisions of sections 354, 355 and 356: (1) certain 
exchanges of preferred stock for comparable preferred stock of 
the same or lesser value; (2) an exchange of preferred stock 
for common stock; (3) certain exchanges of debt securities for 
preferred stock of the same or lesser value; and (4) exchanges 
of stock in certain recapitalizations of family-owned 
corporations.
    Exclusions (1), (2) and (3) result from the fact that 
nonqualified preferred stock is treated as ``other property'' 
under sections 354, 355 and 356 only if received in exchange 
for stock (or, under section 355, with respect to stock) that 
is not nonqualified preferred stock. Thus, if nonqualified 
preferred stock is received for or with respect to other 
nonqualified preferred stock, or for debt securities, gain 
recognition is not required. The receipt of nonqualified 
preferred stock for comparable nonqualified preferred stock of 
the same or lesser value, or the exchange of debt securities 
for nonqualified preferred stock of the same or lesser value, 
are considered to be exchanges ``for'' or ``with respect to'' 
such stock that are permitted. Similarly, the exchange of 
nonqualified preferred stock for common stock would not be 
within the scope of the provision because in such a 
transaction, nonqualified preferred stock is not received in 
the exchange.
    For purposes of the exception for exchanges in certain 
recapitalizations of family owned corporations, a family-owned 
corporation is defined as any corporation if at least 50 
percent of the total voting power and value of the stock of 
such corporation is owned by members of the same family for 
five years preceding the recapitalization. In addition, a 
recapitalization does not qualify for the exception if the same 
family does not own 50 percent of the total voting power and 
value of the stock throughout the three-year period following 
the recapitalization. Members of the same family are defined by 
reference to the definition in section 447(e). Thus, a family 
includes children, parents, brothers, sisters, and spouses, 
with a limited attribution for directly and indirectly owned 
stock of the corporation. Shares held by a family member are 
treated as not held by a family member to the extent a non-
family member had a right, option or agreement to acquire the 
shares (directly or indirectly, for example, through 
redemptions by the issuer), or with respect to shares as to 
which a family member has reduced its risk of loss with respect 
to the share, for example, through an equity swap. Even though 
the provision excepts certain family recapitalizations, the 
special valuation rules of section 2701 for estate and gift tax 
consequences continue to apply.
    The statutory period for the assessment of any deficiency 
attributable to a corporation failing to be a family-owned 
corporation shall not expire before the expiration of three 
years after the date the Secretary of the Treasury is notified 
by the corporation (in such manner as the Secretary may 
prescribe) of such failure, and such deficiency may be assessed 
before the expiration of such three-year period notwithstanding 
the provisions of any other law or rule of law which would 
otherwise prevent such assessment.\232\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \232\ A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this intent. See Title VI (sec. 609(c)(2)) of H.R. 2676, the 
Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on 
November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    An exchange of nonqualified preferred stock for 
nonqualified preferred stock in an acquiring corporation may 
qualify for tax-free treatment under section 354, but not 
section 351. In cases in which both sections 354 and 351 may 
apply to a transaction, section 354 generally will apply for 
purposes of the provision. Thus, in that situation, the 
exchange would be tax free.
    The Treasury Secretary has regulatory authority under the 
provision, including, for example, authority to (1) apply 
installment sale-type rules to preferred stock that is subject 
to the provision in appropriate cases and (2) prescribe 
treatment of preferred stock subject to this provision under 
other provisions of the Code (e.g., secs. 304, 306, 318, and 
368(c)). Until regulations are issued, preferred stock that is 
subject to the proposal shall continue to be treated as stock 
under other provisions of the Code.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for transactions after June 8, 
1997, but will not apply to such transactions (1) made pursuant 
to a written agreement which was binding on such date and at 
all times thereafter, (2) described in a ruling request 
submitted to the Internal Revenue Service on or before such 
date, or (3) described in a public announcement or filing with 
the Securities and Exchange Commission on or before such date.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $35 million in 1998, $37 million in 1999, 
$39 million in 2000, $41 million in 2001, $43 million in 2002, 
$10 million in 2003, $10 million in 2004, $11 million in 2005, 
$11 million in 2006, and $12 million in 2007.

5. Modify holding period for dividends-received deduction (sec. 1015 of 
        the Act and sec. 246(c) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    If an instrument issued by a U.S. corporation is classified 
for tax purposes as stock, a corporate holder of the instrument 
generally is entitled to a dividends received deduction for 
dividends received on that instrument. This deduction is 70 
percent of dividends received if the recipient owns less than 
20 percent (by vote and value) of stock of the payor. If the 
recipient owns more than 20 percent of the stock the deduction 
is increased to 80 percent. If the recipient owns more than 80 
percent of the payor's stock, the deduction is further 
increased to 100 percent for qualifying dividends.
    The dividends-received deduction is allowed to a corporate 
shareholder only if the shareholder satisfies a 46-day holding 
period for the dividend-paying stock (or a 91-day period for 
certain dividends on preferred stock). The 46- or 91-day 
holding period generally does not include any time in which the 
shareholder is protected from the risk of loss otherwise 
inherent in the ownership of an equity interest. The holding 
period must be satisfied only once, rather than with respect to 
each dividend received.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress was concerned that dividend-paying stocks can 
be marketed to corporate investors with accompanying attempts 
to hedge or relieve the holder from risk for much of the 
holding period of the stock, after the initial holding period 
has been satisfied. In addition, because of the limited 
application of section 1059 of the Code requiring basis 
reduction, many investors whose basis includes a price paid 
with the expectation of a dividend may be able to sell the 
stock after the receipt of a dividend not subject to tax at an 
artificial loss, even though the holder may actually have been 
relieved of the risk of loss for much of the period it has held 
the stock.
    The Congress believed that no deduction for a distribution 
on stock should be allowed when the owner of stock does not 
bear the risk of loss otherwise inherent in the ownership of an 
equity interest at a time proximate to the time the 
distribution is made.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that a taxpayer is not entitled to a 
dividends-received deduction if the taxpayer's holding period 
for the dividend-paying stock is not satisfied over a period 
immediately before or immediately after the taxpayer becomes 
entitled to receive the dividend.

                             Effective Date

    The Act is generally effective for dividends paid or 
accrued after the 30th day after the date of enactment. 
However, the provision does not apply to dividends received 
within two years of the date of enactment if: (1) the dividend 
is paid with respect to stock held on June 8, 1997, and all 
times thereafter until the dividend is received; (2) the stock 
is continuously subject to a position described in section 
246(c)(4) on June 8, 1997, and all times thereafter until the 
dividend is received; and (3) such stock and related position 
is identified by the taxpayer within 30 days after enactment of 
this Act (i.e., before September 5, 1997). A stock will not be 
considered to be continuously subject to a position if such 
position is sold, closed or otherwise terminated and is 
reestablished.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase fiscal year budget 
receipts by $11 million in 1998, $13 million in 1999, $15 
million in 2000, $16 million in 2001, $16 million in 2002, $16 
million in 2003, $17 million in 2004, $17 million in 2005, $17 
million in 2006, and $18 million in 2007.

                      C. Administrative Provisions

1. Reporting of certain payments made to attorneys (sec. 1021 of the 
        Act and sec. 6045 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Information reporting is required by persons engaged in a 
trade or business and making payments in the course of that 
trade or business of ``rent, salaries, wages, . . . or other 
fixed or determinable gains, profits, and income'' (Code sec. 
6041(a)). Treas. reg. sec. 1.6041-1(d)(2) provides that 
attorney's fees are required to be reported if they are paid by 
a person in a trade or business in the course of a trade or 
business. Reporting is required to be done on Form 1099-Misc. 
If, on the other hand, the payment is a gross amount and it is 
not known what portion is the attorney's fee, no reporting is 
required on any portion of the payment.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that there would be a positive impact 
on compliance with the tax laws by requiring additional 
information reporting. Although some might consider it 
inappropriate to single out payments to one profession for 
additional information reporting, requiring reporting was 
considered to be appropriate in this instance because attorneys 
are generally the only professionals who receive this type of 
payment, a portion of which may be income to them and a portion 
of which may belong to their client.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act requires gross proceeds reporting on all payments 
to attorneys made by a trade or business in the course of that 
trade or business. It is anticipated that gross proceeds 
reporting would be required on Form 1099-B (currently used by 
brokers to report gross proceeds). The only exception to this 
new reporting requirement would be for any payments reported on 
either Form 1099-Misc under section 6041 (reports of payment of 
income) or on Form W-2 under section 6051 (payments of wages).
    In addition, the present exception in the regulations 
exempting from reporting any payments made to corporations will 
not apply to payments made to attorneys. Treasury regulation 
section 1.6041-3(c) exempts payments to corporations generally 
(although payments to most corporations providing medical 
services must be reported). Reporting will be required under 
both Code sections 6041 and 6045 (as proposed) for payments to 
corporations that provide legal services. The exception of 
Treasury regulation section 1.6041-3(g) exempting from 
reporting payments of salaries or profits paid or distributed 
by a partnership to the individual partners would continue to 
apply to both sections (since these amounts are required to be 
reported on Form K-1).
    First, the provision applies to payments made to attorneys 
regardless of whether the attorney is the exclusive payee. 
Second, payments to law firms are payments to attorneys, and 
therefore are subject to this reporting provision. Third, 
attorneys are required to promptly supply their TINs to persons 
required to file these information reports, pursuant to section 
6109. Failure to do so could result in the attorney being 
subject to penalty under section 6723 and the payments being 
subject to backup withholding under section 3406. Fourth, the 
IRS should administer this provision so that there is no 
overlap between reporting under section 6041 and reporting 
under section 6045. For example, if two payments are 
simultaneously made to an attorney, one of which represents the 
attorney's fee and the second of which represents the 
settlement with the attorney's client, the first payment would 
be reported under section 6041 and the second payment would not 
be reported under either section 6041 or section 6045, since it 
is known that the entire payment represents the settlement with 
the client (and therefore no portion of it represents income to 
the attorney). Fifth, it is anticipated that the IRS will 
administer this provision so that it will not apply to foreign 
attorneys who can clearly demonstrate that they are not subject 
to U.S. tax.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for payments made after December 
31, 1997. Consequently, the first information reports will be 
filed with the IRS (and copies will be provided to recipients 
of the payments) in 1999, with respect to payments made in 
1998.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $3 million in 1999, $3 million in 2000, $3 
million in 2001, $3 million in 2002, $3 million in 2003, $4 
million in 2004, $4 million in 2005, $4 million in 2006, and $4 
million in 2007.

2. Information reporting on persons receiving contract payments from 
        certain Federal agencies (sec. 1022 of the Act and sec. 6041A 
        of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A service recipient (i.e., a person for whom services are 
performed) engaged in a trade or business who makes payments of 
remuneration in the course of that trade or business to any 
person for services performed must file with the IRS an 
information return reporting such payments (and the name, 
address, and taxpayer identification number of the recipient) 
if the remuneration paid to the person during the calendar year 
is $600 or more (sec. 6041A(a)). A similar statement must also 
be furnished to the person to whom such payments were made 
(sec. 6041A(e)). Treasury regulations explicitly exempt from 
this reporting requirement payments made to a corporation 
(Treas. reg. sec. 1.6041A-1(d)(2)).
    The head of each Federal executive agency must file an 
information return indicating the name, address, and taxpayer 
identification number (TIN) of each person (including 
corporations) with which the agency enters into a contract 
(sec. 6050M). The Secretary of the Treasury has the authority 
to require that the returns be in such form and be made at such 
time as is necessary to make the returns useful as a source of 
information for collection purposes. The Secretary is given the 
authority both to establish minimum amounts for which no 
reporting is necessary as well as to extend the reporting 
requirements to Federal license grantors and subcontractors of 
Federal contracts. Treasury regulations provide that no 
reporting is required if the contract is for $25,000 or less 
(Treas. reg. sec. 1.6050M-1(c)(1)(i)).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress determined that lowering the information 
reporting threshold from $25,000 to $600 will improve 
compliance because additional, small-dollar value contracts 
will be reported.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act requires reporting of all payments of $600 or more 
made by a Federal executive agency to any person (including a 
corporation) for services. In addition, the provision requires 
that a copy of the information return be sent by the Federal 
agency to the recipient of the payment. An exception is 
provided for certain classified or confidential contracts.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for returns the due date for 
which (without regard to extensions) is more than 90 days after 
the date of enactment.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $7 million in 1999, $8 million in 2000, $9 
million in 2001, $10 million in 2002, $11 million in 2003, $11 
million in 2004, $12 million in 2005, $12 million in 2006, and 
$13 million in 2007.

3. Disclosure of tax return information for administration of certain 
        veterans programs (sec. 1023 of the Act and sec. 6103 of the 
        Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Internal Revenue Code prohibits disclosure of tax 
returns and return information, except to the extent 
specifically authorized by the Internal Revenue Code (sec. 
6103). Unauthorized disclosure is a felony punishable by a fine 
not exceeding $5,000 or imprisonment of not more than five 
years, or both (sec. 7213). An action for civil damages also 
may be brought for unauthorized disclosure (sec. 7431). No tax 
information may be furnished by the Internal Revenue Service 
(``IRS'') to another agency unless the other agency establishes 
procedures satisfactory to the IRS for safeguarding the tax 
information it receives (sec. 6103(p)).
    Among the disclosures permitted under the Code is 
disclosure to the Department of Veterans Affairs (``DVA'') of 
self-employment tax information and certain tax information 
supplied to the IRS and Social Security Administration by third 
parties. Disclosure is permitted to assist DVA in determining 
eligibility for, and establishing correct benefit amounts 
under, certain of its needs-based pension, health care, and 
other programs (sec. 6103(1)(7)(D)(viii)). The income tax 
returns filed by the veterans themselves are not disclosed to 
DVA.
    The DVA is required to comply with the safeguards currently 
contained in the Code and in section 1137(c) of the Social 
Security Act (governing the use of disclosed tax information). 
These safeguards include independent verification of tax data, 
notification to the individual concerned, and the opportunity 
to contest agency findings based on such information.
    The DVA disclosure provision is scheduled to expire after 
September 30, 1998.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress determined that it is appropriate to permit 
disclosure of otherwise confidential tax information to ensure 
the correctness of government benefits payments.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act extends the DVA disclosure provision through 
September 30, 2003.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $22 million in 1999, $27 million in 2000, 
$31 million in 2001, $36 million in 2002, $36 million in 2003. 
The provision is not estimated to change Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts in 2004 through 2007.

4. Establish IRS continuous levy and improve debt collection (secs. 
        1024, 1025, and 1026 of the Act and secs. 6103, 6331, and 6334 
        of the Code)

            a. Continuous levy

                         Present and Prior Law

    If any person is liable for any internal revenue tax and 
does not pay it within 10 days after notice and demand \233\ by 
the IRS, the IRS may then collect the tax by levy upon all 
property and rights to property belonging to the person,\234\ 
unless there is an explicit statutory restriction on doing so. 
A levy is the seizure of the person's property or rights to 
property. Property that is not cash is sold pursuant to 
statutory requirements.\235\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \233\ Notice and demand is the notice given to a person liable for 
tax stating that the tax has been assessed and demanding that payment 
be made. The notice and demand must be mailed to the person's last 
known address or left at the person's dwelling or usual place of 
business (Code sec. 6303).
    \234\ Code sec. 6331.
    \235\ Code sec. 6335-6343.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In general, a levy does not apply to property acquired 
after the date of the levy,\236\ regardless of whether the 
property is held by the taxpayer or by a third party (such as a 
bank) on behalf of a taxpayer. Successive seizures may be 
necessary if the initial seizure is insufficient to satisfy the 
liability.\237\ The only exception to this rule is for salary 
and wages.\238\ A levy on salary and wages is continuous from 
the date it is first made until the date it is fully paid or 
becomes unenforceable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \236\ Code sec. 6331(b).
    \237\ Code sec. 6331(c).
    \238\ Code sec. 6331(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A minimum exemption is provided for salary and wages.\239\ 
It is computed on a weekly basis by adding the value of the 
standard deduction plus the aggregate value of personal 
exemptions to which the taxpayer is entitled, divided by 
52.\240\ For a family of four for taxable year 1996, the weekly 
minimum exemption is $325.\241\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \239\ Code sec. 6334(a)(9).
    \240\ Code sec. 6334(d).
    \241\ Standard deduction of $6,700 plus four personal exemptions at 
$2,550 each equals $16,900, which when divided by 52 equals $325.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress determined that the extension of the 
continuous levy provisions will substantially ease the 
administrative burdens of collecting taxes by levy. The 
Congress anticipated that taxpayers who already comply with the 
tax laws will have a positive view of increased collections of 
taxes owed by taxpayers who have not complied with the tax 
laws.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act amends the Code to provide that a continuous levy 
is also applicable to non-means tested recurring Federal 
payments. This is defined as a Federal payment for which 
eligibility is not based on the income and/or assets of a 
payee. For example, Social Security payments, which are subject 
to levy under present law, would become subject to continuous 
levy.
    In addition, the Act provides that this levy would attach 
up to 15 percent of any specified payment due the taxpayer. 
This rule explicitly replaces the other specifically enumerated 
exemptions from levy in the Code. A continuous levy of up to 15 
percent would also apply to unemployment benefits and means-
tested public assistance.
    The Act also permits the disclosure of otherwise 
confidential tax return information to the Treasury 
Department's Financial Management Service only for the purpose 
of, and to the extent necessary in, implementing these levy 
provisions.
    Use of a continuous levy is at the discretion of the 
Secretary of the Treasury and its use must be approved by the 
Internal Revenue Service before it takes effect.\242\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \242\ See Title VI (sec. 609(d)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical 
Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for levies issued after the 
date of enactment (August 5, 1997).
            b. Modifications of levy exemptions

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Code exempts from levy workmen's compensation payments 
\243\ and annuity or pension payments under the Railroad 
Retirement Act and benefits under the Railroad Unemployment 
Insurance Act \244\ described above, unemployment benefits 
\245\ and means-tested public assistance.\246\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \243\ Code sec. 6334(a)(7).
    \244\ Code sec. 6334(a)(6).
    \245\ Sec. 6334(a)(4).
    \246\ Sec. 6334(a)(11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that if wages are subject to levy, 
wage replacement payments should also be subject to levy. In 
addition, the Congress believed that it is inappropriate to 
exempt from levy one type of annuity or pension payment while 
most other types of these payments are subject to levy.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that the following property is not exempt 
from levy if the Secretary of the Treasury (or his delegate) 
approves the levy of such property:
    (1) workmen's compensation payments;
    (2) annuity or pension payments under the Railroad 
Retirement Act and benefits under the Railroad Unemployment 
Insurance Act;
    (3) unemployment benefits; and
    (4) means-tested public assistance.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to levies issued after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $332 million in 1998, $327 million in 1999, 
$256 million in 2000, $213 million in 2001, $157 million in 
2002, $117 million in 2003, $102 million in 2004, $86 million 
in 2005, $82 million in 2006, and $78 million in 2007.

5. Consistency rule for beneficiaries of trusts and estates (sec. 1027 
        of the Act and sec. 6034A of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    An S corporation is required to file a return for the 
taxable year and is required to furnish to its shareholders a 
copy of certain information shown on such return. The 
shareholder is required to file its return in a manner that is 
consistent with the information received from the S 
corporation, unless the shareholder files with the Secretary of 
the Treasury a notification of inconsistent treatment (sec. 
6037(c)). Similar rules apply in the case of partnerships and 
their partners (sec. 6222).
    The fiduciary of an estate or trust that is required to 
file a return for any taxable year is required to furnish to 
beneficiaries certain information shown on such return 
(generally via a Schedule K-1) (sec. 6034A). In addition, a 
U.S. person that is treated as the owner of any portion of a 
foreign trust is required to ensure that the trust files a 
return for the taxable year and furnishes certain required 
information to each U.S. person who is treated as an owner of a 
portion of the trust or who receives any distribution from the 
trust (sec. 6048(b)). However, under prior law, rules 
comparable to the consistency rules that apply to S corporation 
shareholders and partners in partnerships were not specified in 
the case of beneficiaries of estates and trusts.

                           Reasons for Change

    Both partners in partnerships and shareholders of S 
corporations are required either to file their returns on a 
basis that is consistent with the information received from the 
partnership or S corporation or to identify any inconsistent 
treatment. The Congress believed it appropriate to apply such 
requirement also to beneficiaries of estates and trusts.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, a beneficiary of an estate or trust is 
required to file its return in a manner that is consistent with 
the information received from the estate or trust, unless the 
beneficiary files with its return a notification of 
inconsistent treatment identifying the inconsistency.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for returns filed after the date 
of enactment (after August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $3 million per year in each of 1998 through 
2003, and $4 million per year in each of 2004 through 2007.

6. Registration of confidential corporate tax shelters and substantial 
        understatement penalty (sec. 1028 of the Act and secs. 6111, 
        6662, and 6707 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

Tax shelter registration

    An organizer of a tax shelter is required to register the 
shelter with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) (sec. 6111). If 
the principal organizer does not do so, the duty may fall upon 
any other participant in the organization of the shelter or any 
person participating in its sale or management. The shelter's 
identification number must be furnished to each investor who 
purchases or acquires an interest in the shelter. Failure to 
furnish this number to the tax shelter investors will subject 
the organizer to a $100 penalty for each such failure (sec. 
6707(b)).
    A penalty may be imposed against an organizer who fails 
without reasonable cause to timely register the shelter or who 
provides false or incomplete information with respect to it. 
The penalty is the greater of one percent of the aggregate 
amount invested in the shelter or $500. Any person claiming any 
tax benefit with respect to a shelter must report its 
registration number on her return. Failure to do so without 
reasonable cause will subject that person to a $250 penalty 
(sec. 6707(b)(2)).
    A person who organizes or sells an interest in a tax 
shelter subject to the registration rule or in any other 
potentially abusive plan or arrangement must maintain a list of 
the investors (sec. 6112). A $50 penalty may be assessed for 
each name omitted from the list. The maximum penalty per year 
is $100,000 (sec. 6708).
    For this purpose, a tax shelter is defined as any 
investment that meets two requirements. First, the investment 
must be (1) required to be registered under a Federal or state 
law regulating securities, (2) sold pursuant to an exemption 
from registration requiring the filing of a notice with a 
Federal or state agency regulating the offering or sale of 
securities, or (3) a substantial investment. Second, it must be 
reasonable to infer that the ratio of deductions and 350 
percent of credits to investment for any investor (i.e., the 
tax shelter ratio) may be greater than two to one as of the 
close of any of the first five years ending after the date on 
which the investment is offered for sale. An investment that 
meets these requirements will be considered a tax shelter 
regardless of whether it is marketed or customarily designated 
as a tax shelter (sec. 6111(c)(1)).

Accuracy-related penalty

    The accuracy-related penalty, which is imposed at a rate of 
20 percent, applies to the portion of any underpayment that is 
attributable to (1) negligence, (2) any substantial 
understatement of income tax, (3) any substantial valuation 
misstatement, (4) any substantial overstatement of pension 
liabilities, or (5) any substantial estate or gift tax 
valuation understatement.
    The substantial understatement penalty applies in the 
following manner. If the correct income tax liability of a 
taxpayer for a taxable year exceeds that reported by the 
taxpayer by the greater of 10 percent of the correct tax or 
$5,000 ($10,000 in the case of most corporations), then a 
substantial understatement exists and a penalty may be imposed 
equal to 20 percent of the underpayment of tax attributable to 
the understatement. In determining whether a substantial 
understatement exists, the amount of the understatement is 
reduced by any portion attributable to an item if (1) the 
treatment of the item on the return is or was supported by 
substantial authority, or (2) facts relevant to the tax 
treatment of the item were adequately disclosed on the return 
or on a statement attached to the return and there was a 
reasonable basis for the tax treatment of the item. Special 
rules apply to tax shelters.
    With respect to tax shelter items of non-corporate 
taxpayers, the penalty may be avoided only if the taxpayer 
establishes that, in addition to having substantial authority 
for his position, he reasonably believed that the treatment 
claimed was more likely than not the proper treatment of the 
item. This reduction in the penalty is unavailable to corporate 
tax shelters. The reduction in the understatement for items 
disclosed on the return is inapplicable to both corporate and 
non-corporate tax shelters. For this purpose, a tax shelter is 
a partnership or other entity, plan, or arrangement the 
principal purpose of which is the avoidance or evasion of 
Federal income tax.
    The Secretary may waive the penalty with respect to any 
item if the taxpayer establishes reasonable cause for his 
treatment of the item and that he acted in good faith.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress concluded that the provision will improve 
compliance with the tax laws by giving the Treasury Department 
earlier notification than it generally receives under present 
law of transactions that may not comport with the tax laws. In 
addition, the provision will improve compliance by discouraging 
taxpayers from entering into questionable transactions. Also, 
the provision will improve economic efficiency, because 
investments that are not economically motivated, but that are 
instead tax-motivated, may reduce the supply of capital 
available for economically motivated activities, which could 
cause a loss of economic efficiency.

                        Explanation of Provision

Tax shelter registration

    The Act requires a promoter of a corporate tax shelter to 
register the shelter with the Secretary. Registration is 
required not later than the next business day after the day 
when the tax shelter is first offered to potential users. If 
the promoter is not a U.S. person, or if a required 
registration is not otherwise made, then any U.S. participant 
is required to register the shelter. An exception to this 
special rule provides that registration would not be required 
if the U.S. participant notifies the promoter in writing not 
later than 90 days after discussions began that the U.S. 
participant will not participate in the shelter and the U.S. 
person does not in fact participate in the shelter.
    A corporate tax shelter is any investment, plan, 
arrangement or transaction (1) a significant purpose of the 
structure of which is tax avoidance or evasion by a corporate 
participant, (2) that is offered to any potential participant 
under conditions of confidentiality, and (3) for which the tax 
shelter promoters may receive total fees in excess of $100,000.
    A transaction is offered under conditions of 
confidentiality if: (1) an offeree (or any person acting on its 
behalf) has an understanding or agreement with or for the 
benefit of any promoter to restrict or limit its disclosure of 
the transaction or any significant tax features of the 
transaction; or (2) the promoter claims, knows or has reason to 
know (or the promoter causes another person to claim or 
otherwise knows or has reason to know that a party other than 
the potential offeree claims) that the transaction (or one or 
more aspects of its structure) is proprietary to the promoter 
or any party other than the offeree, or is otherwise protected 
from disclosure or use. The promoter includes specified related 
parties.
    Registration will require the submission of information 
identifying and describing the tax shelter and the tax benefits 
of the tax shelter, as well as such other information as the 
Treasury Department may require.
    Tax shelter promoters are required to maintain lists of 
those who have signed confidentiality agreements, or otherwise 
have been subjected to nondisclosure requirements, with respect 
to particular tax shelters. In addition, promoters must retain 
lists of those paying fees with respect to plans or 
arrangements that have previously been registered (even though 
the particular party may not have been subject to 
confidentiality restrictions).
    All registrations will be treated as taxpayer information 
under the provisions of section 6103 and will therefore not be 
subject to any public disclosure.
    The penalty for failing to timely register a corporate tax 
shelter is the greater of $10,000 or 50 percent of the fees 
payable to any promoter with respect to offerings prior to the 
date of late registration (i.e., this part of the penalty does 
not apply to fee payments with respect to offerings after late 
registration). A similar penalty is applicable to actual 
participants in any corporate tax shelter who were required to 
register the tax shelter but did not. With respect to 
participants, however, the 50-percent penalty is based only on 
fees paid by that participant. Intentional disregard of the 
requirement to register by either a promoter or a participant 
increases the 50-percent penalty to 75 percent of the 
applicable fees.

Substantial understatement penalty

    The Act makes two modifications to the substantial 
understatement penalty. The first modification affects the 
reduction in the amount of the understatement which is 
attributable to an item if there is a reasonable basis for the 
treatment of the item. The provision provides that in no event 
would a corporation have a reasonable basis for its tax 
treatment of an item attributable to a multi-party financing 
transaction if such treatment does not clearly reflect the 
income of the corporation. No inference is intended that such a 
multi-party financing transaction could not also be a tax 
shelter as defined under the modification described below or 
under present law.
    The second modification affects the special tax shelter 
rules, which define a tax shelter as an entity the principal 
purpose of which is the avoidance or evasion of Federal income 
tax. The provision instead provides that a significant purpose 
(rather than the principal purpose) of the entity must be the 
avoidance or evasion of Federal income tax for the entity to be 
considered a tax shelter. This modification conforms the 
definition of tax shelter for purposes of the substantial 
understatement penalty to the definition of tax shelter for 
purposes of these new confidential corporate tax shelter 
registration requirements.

Treasury report

    The provision also directs the Treasury Department, in 
consultation with the Department of Justice, to issue a report 
to the tax-writing committees on the following tax shelter 
issues: (1) a description of enforcement efforts under section 
7408 of the Code (relating to actions to enjoin promoters of 
abusive tax shelters) with respect to corporate tax shelters 
and the lawyers, accountants, and others who provide opinions 
(whether or not directly addressed to the taxpayer) regarding 
aspects of corporate tax shelters; (2) an evaluation of whether 
the penalties regarding corporate tax shelters are generally 
sufficient; and (3) an evaluation of whether confidential tax 
shelter registration should be extended to transactions where 
the investor (or potential investor) is not a corporation. The 
report is due one year after the date of enactment.

                             Effective Date

    The tax shelter registration provision applies to any tax 
shelter offered to potential participants after the date the 
Treasury Department issues guidance with respect to the filing 
requirements. The modifications to the substantial 
understatement penalty apply to items with respect to 
transactions entered into after the date of enactment (August 
5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $15 million in 1998, $37 million in 1999, 
$38 million in 2000, $39 million in 2001, $41 million in 2002, 
$42 million in 2003, $43 million in 2004, $44 million in 2005, 
$46 million in 2006, and $47 million in 2007.

                D. Excise and Employment Tax Provisions

1. Extension and modification of Airport and Airway Trust Fund excise 
        taxes (sec. 1031 of the Act and secs. 4081, 4091, and 4261 of 
        the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A variety of excise taxes have been imposed on air 
transportation under present and prior law to finance the 
Airport and Airway Trust Fund programs administered by the 
Federal Aviation Administration (the ``FAA''). In general, the 
full cost of FAA capital programs is financed from the Airport 
and Airway Trust Fund, while only a portion of FAA operational 
expenses is Trust Fund-financed. Overall, the portion of total 
FAA expenditures that has been financed from the Trust Fund 
declined from 75 percent through the early 1990s to 62 percent 
for the 1997 fiscal year. The balance is financed by general 
taxpayers, rather than directly by program users. Under prior 
law, each of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund excise taxes was 
scheduled to expire after September 30, 1997.

Commercial air passenger transportation taxes

    Under prior law, domestic air passenger transportation was 
subject to an ad valorem excise tax equal to 10 percent of the 
amount paid for the transportation. Under both prior law and 
present law, taxable domestic air transportation includes both 
travel within the United States, certain travel between the 
United States and points in Canada or Mexico that are within 
225 miles of the U.S. border (the ``225-mile zone''), and 
certain transportation within the 225-mile zone.
    International air passenger transportation was subject to a 
$6 departure excise tax imposed on passengers departing the 
United States for other countries under prior law. No tax was 
imposed on passengers arriving in the United States from other 
countries. Both present law and prior law define international 
transportation to include separate domestic flights from which 
passengers connect to international flights, provided that 
stopover time at any point within the United States does not 
exceed 12 hours. Thus, passengers traveling on these ``domestic 
legs'' associated with international transportation (e.g., a 
flight from Los Angeles to New York from which the passenger 
boards a connecting flight to London) are exempt from the 
excise tax otherwise imposed on such transportation between two 
domestic points even though other passengers traveling on the 
same flights without continuing to a foreign point are subject 
to tax.
    Because both the domestic and international air passenger 
excise taxes have been imposed only on transportation for which 
an amount is paid under both present law and prior law, no tax 
is imposed on passengers engaged in ``free'' travel (e.g., 
frequent flyer travel and airline industry employee travel for 
which the passenger is not directly charged).
    The air passenger transportation excise taxes are imposed 
on passengers; transportation providers (generally airlines) 
are responsible for collecting and remitting the taxes to the 
Federal Government. Under prior law, air carriers were not 
liable for payment of the tax itself. In general, both the 
domestic and international air passenger transportation excise 
taxes are imposed without regard to whether the transportation 
is purchased in the United States. An exception provides that 
travel between the United States and points within the 225-mile 
zone and certain transportation within the 225-mile zone is 
taxed as domestic transportation only if it is purchased within 
the United States.
    The Code requires all advertising for taxable air passenger 
transportation either (1) to state the fare on a tax-inclusive 
basis or (2) if the Federal tax is stated separately, to state 
the amount of the tax at least as prominently as the underlying 
air fare and to identify that amount as ``user taxes to pay for 
airport construction and airway safety and operations'' (sec. 
7275(b)).
    The amount of air passenger transportation excise tax to be 
collected from a passenger must be stated on the ticket.

Commercial air cargo transportation

    Under both present law and prior law, domestic air cargo 
transportation is subject to a 6.25-percent ad valorem excise 
tax. This tax, like the air passenger transportation excise 
taxes, is imposed on the consumer, with the transportation 
provider being required to collect and remit the tax to the 
Federal Government. However, there is no requirement that the 
tax be stated separately on shipping invoices.

Noncommercial aviation

    Noncommercial aviation, or transportation on private 
aircraft which is not ``for hire,'' is subject to excise taxes 
imposed on fuel in lieu of the commercial air passenger ticket 
and air cargo excise taxes. Under prior law, the Airport and 
Airway Trust Fund tax rates on these fuels were 15 cents per 
gallon on aviation gasoline and 17.5 cents per gallon on jet 
fuel.
    The aviation gasoline excise tax is imposed on removal of 
the fuel from a registered terminal facility (the same point of 
collection as the highway gasoline excise tax). The jet fuel 
excise tax is imposed on sale of the fuel by a wholesale 
distributor. Many larger airports have dedicated pipeline 
facilities that directly service aircraft; in such a case, the 
tax effectively is imposed at the retail level. The person 
removing the gasoline from a terminal facility or the wholesale 
distributor of the jet fuel is liable for these taxes.

General Fund aviation fuels excise tax

    Under both present law and prior law, fuels used in air 
transportation are subject to a 4.3-cents-per-gallon excise tax 
(in addition to any fuels tax described above). Under prior 
law, receipts from this tax were retained in the General Fund. 
This fuels tax is identical to taxes also imposed on motor 
fuels used in other transportation sectors, including highway, 
inland waterway, and rail.

Deposit of air transportation excise taxes

    Under present law and prior law, the air passenger ticket 
and freight excise taxes are collected from passengers and 
freight shippers by the commercial air carriers. After 
collecting tax, air carriers remit the funds to the Treasury 
Department; however, the carriers are not required to remit 
monies immediately. Excise tax returns are filed quarterly 
(similar to annual income tax returns) with taxes being 
deposited on a semi-monthly basis (similar to estimated income 
taxes). For air transportation sold during a semi-monthly 
period, air carriers may elect to treat the taxes as collected 
on the last day of the first week of the second following semi-
monthly period. Under these ``deemed collected'' rules, for 
example, the taxes on air transportation sold between August 1 
and August 15, are treated as collected by the air carriers on 
or before September 7, with the amounts generally being 
deposited with the Treasury Department by September 10. A 
special rule requires certain taxes on air transportation sold 
during the first half of September to be deposited by September 
29.
    Semi-monthly deposits and quarterly excise tax returns also 
are required with respect to the fuels excise taxes imposed on 
air transportation.

Overflight user fees

    Non-tax user fees are imposed on air transportation (both 
commercial and noncommercial aviation) that travels through 
airspace for which the United States provides air traffic 
control services, but that neither lands in nor takes off from 
a point in the United States. These fees are imposed and 
collected by the FAA with respect to mileage actually flown, 
and apply both to travel within U.S. territorial airspace and 
to travel within international oceanic airspace for which the 
United States is responsible for providing air traffic control 
services.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress determined that provisions to ensure a long-
term, stable funding source for the Airport and Airway Trust 
Fund should be enacted at this time. Events shortly before 
enactment of the Act when a shortfall in fiscal year 1997 FAA 
funding was narrowly averted by an emergency extension of the 
prior-law excise taxes through September 30, 1997 (H.R. 668), 
\247\ illustrated the need for a longer-term resolution of 
these funding needs. Therefore, the Act extends (with certain 
modifications) the prior-law Airport and Airway Trust Fund 
excise taxes for a 10-year period, in order to address for this 
period, concerns about the structure of these taxes and the 
availability of adequate user tax revenues to fund the portion 
of FAA programs to be appropriated from the Airport and Airway 
Trust Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \247\ See Part One of this pamphlet for a description of H.R. 668 
(P.L. 105-2; February 28, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Congress determined that limited modifications to the 
commercial air passenger excise tax structure are warranted as 
part of this longer-term resolution of Airport and Airway Trust 
Fund financing requirements. First, the structure of the tax is 
modified by the Act to include a reducedad valorem rate plus a 
fixed dollar amount tax rate applicable to all revenue passengers. The 
Act further clarifies that tax is imposed on payments to air carriers 
(and related parties) from credit card and other companies in exchange 
for the right to frequent flyer or other reduced-cost air travel 
rights. In addition, the Congress determined that the perceived 
fairness of the passenger air transportation excise taxes will be 
improved if certain currently untaxed payments for air transportation 
are taxed to help support the FAA programs. In furtherance of this 
goal, the Act extends the international air passenger transportation 
tax to internationally arriving passengers.

                       Explanation of Provisions

Extension of Airport and Airway Trust Fund taxes

    The Act extends the Airport and Airway Trust Fund excise 
taxes, as modified below, for 10 years, for the period October 
1, 1997, through September 30, 2007. The taxes that are 
extended include the domestic and international air passenger 
excise taxes, the air cargo excise tax, and the noncommercial 
aviation fuels taxes. Gross receipts from these taxes will 
continue to be deposited in the Airport and Airway Trust Fund 
throughout this period.

Modification of commercial air passenger transportation taxes

    Domestic passenger tax rates.--The prior-law 10-percent 
domestic air passenger excise tax is changed to a tax equal to 
the total of 7.5 percent of the gross amount paid by the 
passenger for the transportation plus a $3 fixed dollar amount 
per flight segment. Both the ad valorem rate and fixed-dollar 
flight segment tax are phased in, as follows:
          October 1, 1997-September 30, 1998: 9 percent of the 
        fare, plus $1 per domestic flight segment;
          October 1, 1998-September 30, 1999: 8 percent of the 
        fare, plus $2 per domestic flight segment;
          October 1, 1999-December 31, 1999: 7.5 percent of the 
        fare, plus $2.25 per domestic flight segment.
    After December 31, 1999, the ad valorem rate will remain at 
7.5 percent. The domestic flight segment component of the tax 
will increase to $2.50 (January 1, 2000-December 31, 2000), to 
$2.75 (January 1, 2001-December 31, 2001), and to $3 (January 
1, 2002-December 31, 2002). On January 1, 2003, and on each 
January 1 thereafter, the fixed dollar amount per flight 
segment will be indexed annually for inflation occurring after 
2001, measured by changes in the Consumer Price Index (the 
``CPI'') rounded to the nearest 10 cents. Inflation adjustments 
will be effective for transportation provided beginning after 
December 31, 2002, and in each subsequent calendar year.
    The term ``flight segment'' is defined as transportation 
involving a single take-off and a single landing.\248\ The Act 
provides a rule of administrative convenience that there is no 
change in the number of flight segment taxes imposed (increase 
or decrease) if a passenger's route between two locations is 
changed (with a resulting change in the number of actual flight 
segments) and there is no change in the fare charged (including 
no imposition of an additional administrative or other fee 
associated with the route change). Generally, this rule applies 
to flight changes for travel between the same origin and 
destination as a result of, e.g., aircraft mechanical problems. 
The rule similarly covers itinerary changes such as a diversion 
to another intermediate or destination airport as a result of 
inclement weather conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \248\ For example, travel from New York to San Francisco, with an 
intermediate stop in Chicago, would consist of two flights segments 
(without regard to whether the passenger changed aircraft in Chicago).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    All transportation between points within the 48 contiguous 
States (and within Hawaii or Alaska), other than domestic 
segments associated with uninterrupted international 
transportation, is subject to tax at the revised ad valorem and 
flight segment rates.
    International passenger tax rates.--The prior-law $6 
international departure tax is increased to $12 per departure, 
and an identical $12 per passenger tax is imposed on arrivals 
in the United States from international locations. The 
international departure and arrival taxes are indexed for 
inflation occurring after 1997, measured by changes in the CPI 
rounded to the nearest 10 cents. Inflation adjustments will be 
effective for transportation provided beginning after December 
31, 1998, and each subsequent calendar year. The Congress 
believed that this increased tax level is consistent with the 
user tax principles of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund taxes 
which include the recovery from international passengers of a 
greater percentage of the costs those passengers impose on FAA 
programs than were collected by the prior-law international 
departure tax, so that purely domestic passengers and the 
General Fund will not be required to subsidize the costs 
imposed by international travelers to the extent that occurred 
under prior law.
    Special rules applicable to certain transportation.--As 
under prior law, certain air transportation between the United 
States and points within the 225-mile zone of Canada or Mexico 
or within the 225-mile zone is taxed as domestic transportation 
when the transportation is purchased in the United States. 
Identical transportation purchased in either Canada or Mexico 
is subject to the revised tax on international departures and 
arrivals.
    Transportation between the 48 contiguous States and Alaska 
or Hawaii (or between those States) remains subject to the 
special rules provided in prior law. Thus, this transportation 
is taxed on apportioned mileage in U.S. territorial airspace 
(and a fixed dollar per domestic flight segment tax), plus a 
single international passenger tax per one-way flight segment 
(despite the fact that the flight both departs into and arrives 
from international airspace). In addition, under a special 
rule, the applicable international tax rate forthis 
transportation is $6 (rather than $12) per passenger. As with the 
domestic flight segment tax and the $12 international tax rates, the $6 
rate is indexed for inflation using the CPI.
    A further special rule is provided for certain flight 
segments to or from qualified rural airports. A qualified rural 
airport is an airport that (1) in the second preceding calendar 
year had fewer than 100,000 commercial passenger enplanements 
(i.e., departures), and (2) either (a) is not located within 75 
miles of another airport that had more than 100,000 such 
passenger enplanements in that year, or (b) is eligible for 
payments under the Federal ``essential air services'' program 
(as that program was in effect on the date of the Act's 
enactment). Flight segments to or from a qualified rural 
airport are subject to the fully phased-in 7.5 percent ad 
valorem rate effective after September 30, 1997, and the fixed 
dollar flight segment component of the domestic passenger 
transportation tax does not apply to such segments.\249\ The 
otherwise applicable ad valorem rate and the flight segment 
component of the tax apply in full to flight segments other 
than those departing from or arriving at qualified rural 
airports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \249\ The Act directs the Treasury Department to publish an annual 
list of qualified rural airports, based on passenger enplanements for 
the requisite calendar year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The term flight segment means transportation involving a 
single take-off and a single landing. In the case of 
transportation involving multiple flight segments, the portion 
of the fare allocable to the rural segment for purposes of 
applying the reduced ad valorem tax rate is determined based on 
the number of Great Circle miles in the rural flight segment as 
compared to the aggregate number of such miles in all of the 
flight segments.
    Extension of tax to certain previously exempt passengers.--
As described above, revenue passengers arriving in the United 
States from other countries, who were the only group of 
travelers under prior law whose transportation was subject 
neither to an excise tax nor a user fee for U.S.-provided 
aviation services, are subject to a $12 international passenger 
tax on their arriving international flights.
    The Act also clarifies that any amounts paid to air 
carriers (in cash or in kind) for the right to award or 
otherwise distribute free or reduced-rate air transportation 
are treated as amounts paid for taxable air transportation, 
subject to the 7.5 percent ad valorem tax rate. This tax 
applies to payments, whether made within the United States or 
elsewhere, if the rights to transportation for which payments 
are made can be used in whole or in part for transportation 
that, if purchased directly, would be subject to either the 
domestic or international passenger taxes. Also, except as 
described below, the tax applies without regard to whether 
transportation ultimately is provided pursuant to the 
transferred rights. Examples of amounts taxable under this 
provision include (1) payments for frequent flyer miles 
(including other rights to air transportation) purchased by 
credit card companies, telephone companies, rental car 
companies, television networks, restaurants and hotels, air 
carriers (or related parties), mutual funds, and other 
businesses, and (2) amounts received by airlines (whether paid 
in cash or in kind) pursuant to joint venture credit card or 
other air transportation marketing arrangements as compensation 
for the right to air transportation. The Act further 
specifically authorizes the Treasury Department to disregard 
accounting allocations or other arrangements which have the 
effect of reducing artificially the base to which the 7.5-
percent tax is applied. The Act includes an exception to this 
general rule in the case of payments for air transportation 
rights between corporations that are members of a 100-percent 
commonly owned controlled group (e.g., transportation purchased 
from an air carrier by a 100-percent commonly owned corporation 
operating a frequent flyer award program for the air carrier).
    The Congress was aware that consumers accrue mileage awards 
from numerous sources, including actual air travel as well as 
programs giving rise to taxable payments under this provision. 
Once awarded to consumers, these miles are commingled in the 
consumer's account such that any miles that ultimately may be 
used for a specific purpose may not be traceable to the source 
which gave rise to them. The Act authorizes the Treasury 
Department to develop regulations excluding from the tax base a 
portion of otherwise taxable payments, if any, with respect to 
awarded frequent flyer miles if the Treasury determines that a 
portion properly can be allocated (traced) to miles that are 
used by consumers for purposes other than air transportation. 
Miles that are unused should not be treated as used for 
purposes other than air transportation. As part of any 
rulemaking process it undertakes, the Treasury is authorized to 
review airline frequent flyer programs and other information 
from all available sources, including industry and third-party 
data, in determining whether mileage awards can be adequately 
traced to support allocations based on the ultimate use of the 
awards. The Congress intended that any adjustment to the tax 
base will be prescribed only if the Treasury finds a consistent 
pattern of non-air transportation usage by consumers at levels 
indicating that significant mileage awarded pursuant to 
payments taxable under this provision is being used for 
purposes other than air transportation. In making any such 
adjustment, the Treasury Department should treat mileage used 
for otherwise non-taxable air transportation or for non-air 
transportation purposes as coming first from mileage awarded to 
consumers from actual air travel (and other sources not subject 
to tax under this provision).
    No inference is intended from this provision as to the 
proper treatment of these payments under prior law.
    Advertising requirements.--The Act retains the prior-law 
Code advertising requirements governing statement of taxes in 
advertisements and passenger tickets. These requirements apply 
equally to the reduced ad valorem rate and the fixed dollar per 
flight segment component of the tax.
    Liability for tax.--The prior-law provision imposing 
liability for the tax on passengers (with transportation 
providers being liable for collecting and remitting revenues to 
the Federal Government) is modified to impose liability for 
uncollected tax (including tax on sales of frequent flyer miles 
and similar rights to reduced-cost air transportation) on air 
carriers. In the case of transportation for which payment is 
made outside the United States, this liability is imposed on 
the air carrier carrying the passenger on the first flight 
segment in the United States.

Transfer of 4.3-cents-per-gallon fuels excise tax to Airport and Airway 
        Trust Fund

    The 4.3-cents-per-gallon excise tax on aviation gasoline 
and jet fuel will be deposited in the Airport and Airway Trust 
Fund, rather than in the General Fund, beginning with fuels 
sold or removed after September 30, 1997.

Modify air passenger excise tax deposit rules

    The deposit rules with respect to the commercial air 
passenger excise taxes are modified to permit taxes that 
otherwise would have been required to be deposited during the 
period August 15, 1997, through September 30, 1997, to be 
deposited on October 10, 1997. Additionally, the Act provides 
that deposits of commercial air passenger taxes that otherwise 
would be required after August 14, 1998, and before October 1, 
1998, will be due on October 5, 1998. Deposits of the 
commercial air cargo and aviation fuels taxes that otherwise 
would be required to be made after July 31, 1998, and before 
October 1, 1998, will be due on October 5, 1998.

                             Effective Date

    These provisions generally are effective on the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997), for air transportation beginning 
after September 30, 1997. The modifications to the domestic air 
passenger transportation tax did not apply to transportation 
purchased before October 1, 1997, and the modifications to the 
international passenger tax did not apply to transportation 
purchased before eight days after the date of the Act's 
enactment (i.e., before August 13, 1997), if the transportation 
began after September 30, 1997.
    The extension of the general aviation fuels excise taxes is 
effective for fuels removed or sold after September 30, 1997.
    The provision relating to certain amounts paid for the 
right to award air transportation is effective for amounts paid 
(or benefits transferred) after September 30, 1997, except 
payments (or transfers) between related parties occurring after 
June 11, 1997 and before October 1, 1997, are subject to tax if 
the payments relate to rights to transportation to be awarded 
or otherwise distributed after September 30, 1997.
    The provision transferring the 4.3-cents-per-gallon General 
Fund fuels tax revenues to the Airport and Airway Trust Fund 
was effective for taxes received after September 30, 1997. The 
provision modifying the commercial air passenger excise tax 
deposit rules was effective on the date of enactment.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to decrease Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1,017 million in 1997 and to increase 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts by $5,649 million in 1998, 
$7,434 million in 1999, $6,498 million in 2000, $7,014 million 
in 2001, $7,580 million in 2002,$8,124 million in 2003, $8,676 
million in 2004, $9,267 million in 2005, $9,901 million in 2006, and 
$10,566 million in 2007.

2. Extend diesel fuel excise tax rules to kerosene (sec. 1032 of the 
        Act and secs. 4081-4083 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Diesel fuel used as a transportation motor fuel generally 
is taxed at 24.4 cents per gallon.\250\ This tax is collected 
on all diesel fuel upon removal from a pipeline or barge 
terminal unless the fuel is indelibly dyed and is destined for 
a nontaxable use. Diesel fuel also commonly is used as heating 
oil; diesel fuel used as heating oil is not subject to tax. 
Certain other uses also are exempt from tax, and some 
transportation uses (e.g., rail and intercity buses) are taxed 
at reduced rates. Both exemptions and reduced-rates are 
realized through credits or refund claims if undyed diesel fuel 
is used in a qualifying use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \250\ The tax rate was 24.3 cents per gallon before reinstatement 
of the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund rate as of October 
1, 1997, by section 1033 of the Act. (See item D.3., following.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Before October 1, 1997, aviation gasoline and jet fuel 
(both commercial and noncommercial use) were subject to a 4.3-
cents-per-gallon General Fund tax rate. In addition, through 
September 30, 1997, gasoline and jet fuel used in noncommercial 
aviation were subject to an additional 15-cents-per-gallon rate 
(gasoline) and 17.5-cents-per-gallon rate (jet fuel), 
respectively, for the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. These 
combined rates produced an aggregate tax of 21.8 cents per 
gallon on noncommercial aviation jet fuel and 19.3 cents per 
gallon on noncommercial aviation gasoline. Separate provisions 
of the Act provided for transfer of revenues from the 4.3-
cents-per-gallon fuels tax to the Airport and Airway Trust 
Fund, and increased the aggregate tax rate by 0.1-percent per 
gallon (reflecting reinstatement of the Leaking Underground 
Storage Tank Trust Fund rate). The tax on non-gasoline aviation 
fuel is imposed on the sale of the fuel by a ``producer,'' 
typically a wholesale distributor. Thus, this tax is imposed at 
a point in the fuel distribution chain subsequent to removal 
from a terminal facility. The tax on aviation gasoline is 
imposed on removal of the gasoline from a pipeline or barge 
terminal facility.
    Kerosene is used both as a transportation fuel and as an 
aviation fuel. Kerosene also is blended with diesel fuel 
destined both for taxable (highway) and nontaxable (heating 
oil) uses to, among other things, prevent gelling of the diesel 
fuel in colder temperatures. Under present law, kerosene is not 
subject to excise tax unless it is blended with taxable diesel 
fuel or is sold for use as aviation fuel. When kerosene is 
blended with dyed diesel fuel to be used in a nontaxable use, 
the dye concentration of the fuel mixture must be adjusted to 
ensure that it meets Treasury Department requirements for 
untaxed, dyed diesel fuel. Clear, low-sulphur kerosene (K-1) 
also is used in space heaters, and often is sold for this 
purpose at retail service stations. As with other heating oil 
uses, kerosene used in space heaters is not subject to Federal 
excise tax.
    Although heating oil often has minor amounts of kerosene 
blended with it in colder weather, this blending typically 
occurs before removal of the fuel from the terminal facilities 
where Federal excise taxes are imposed. However, it may be 
necessary during periods of extreme or unseasonably cold 
weather to add kerosene to heating oil after its removal from 
the terminal. Other nontaxable uses of kerosene include 
feedstock use in the petrochemical industry.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress was informed that the Internal Revenue Service 
has discovered significant evidence that kerosene was being 
blended with taxable highway diesel fuel during periods when 
the blending is not necessary due to colder weather conditions. 
Some wholesale distributors of diesel fuel also suggested that 
their competitors were not paying the tax on the kerosene that 
they blended with diesel fuel for highway use. These reports of 
increased use of kerosene as a taxable highway fuel without 
payment of tax coincided with implementation of enhanced diesel 
fuel tax compliance measures that significantly reduced 
opportunities to evade that tax. The Congress determined, 
therefore, that these same compliance measures should be 
extended to kerosene.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act extends the diesel fuel excise tax collection rules 
to kerosene. Thus, kerosene is taxed when it is removed from a 
registered terminal unless it is indelibly dyed and destined 
for a nontaxable use. However, aviation-grade kerosene that is 
removed from the terminal by a registered producer of aviation 
fuel (e.g., fuel by such a producer for delivery to a retail 
fixed-base operator for use in noncommercial aviation) is not 
subject to the dyeing requirement and will continue to be taxed 
under the prior- and present-law rules applicable to aviation 
fuel. Feedstock kerosene that a registered industrial user 
receives by pipeline or vessel also is exempt from the dyeing 
requirement. Other feedstock kerosene would be exempt from the 
dyeing requirement to the extent and under conditions 
(including satisfaction of registration and certification 
requirements) prescribed by Treasury Department regulation.
    To accommodate State safety regulations that require the 
use of clear (K-1) kerosene in certain space heaters, a refund 
procedure is provided under which registered ultimate vendors 
may claim refunds of the tax paid on kerosene sold for that 
use. In addition, the Internal Revenue Service is given 
discretion to refund to a registered ultimate vendor the tax 
paid on kerosene that is blended with heating oil for use 
during periods of extreme or unseasonable cold.
    Further, to ensure that registered terminals offer untaxed 
dyed kerosene and diesel fuel to customers, the Code provisions 
governing eligibility of terminals to receive non-tax-paid fuel 
are modified to require that a terminal offer both dyed and 
undyed kerosene (if it receives non-tax-paid kerosene 
(including kerosene aviation jet fuel and diesel fuel #1) as a 
condition of receiving non-tax-paid kerosene and that terminals 
offer both dyed and undyed diesel fuel as a condition of 
receiving non-tax-paid diesel fuel.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for kerosene removed from 
terminal facilities after June 30, 1998. Appropriate floor 
stocks taxes will be imposed on kerosene held beyond the point 
of taxation on July 1, 1998.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $44 million in 1998, $43 million in 1999, 
$49 million in 2000, $46 million in 2001, $44 million in 2002, 
$43 million in 2003, $44 million in 2004, $47 million in 2005, 
$49 million in 2006, and $52 million in 2007.

3. Reinstate Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund excise tax 
        (sec. 1033 of the Act and secs. 4041(d), 4081(a)(2), and 
        4081(d)(2) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Before January 1, 1996, an excise tax of 0.1 cent per 
gallon was imposed on gasoline, diesel fuel (including train 
diesel fuel), special motor fuels (other than liquefied 
petroleum gas), aviation fuels, and inland waterways fuels. 
Revenues from the tax were dedicated to the Leaking Underground 
Storage Tank Trust Fund to finance cleanups of leaking 
underground storage tanks.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress determined that the Leaking Underground 
Storage Tank Trust Fund excise tax should be reinstated to 
ensure the availability of funds to pay cleanup costs of 
leaking underground storage tanks.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act reinstates the prior-law Leaking Underground 
Storage Tank Trust Fund excise tax through March 31, 2005.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on October 1, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    This provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $129 million in 1998 and 1999, $128 million 
in 2000, $129 million in 2001, $131 million in 2002, $134 
million in 2003, $136 million in 2004, and $67 million in 2005.

4. Application of communications excise tax to prepaid telephone cards 
        (sec. 1034 of the Act and sec. 4251 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A 3-percent excise tax is imposed on amounts paid for local 
and toll (long-distance) telephone service and teletypewriter 
exchange service. The tax is collected by the provider of the 
service from the consumer (business and personal service).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress understood that communications service 
providers sometimes sell units of telephone service to third 
parties who, in turn, resell or distribute these units of 
telephone service to the ultimate customer in the form of 
prepaid telephone cards or similar arrangements. The Congress 
believed that such payments clearly represent payments for 
telephone service and clarified that such payments are subject 
to the communications excise tax.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, any amounts paid to communications service 
providers (in cash or in kind) for the right to award or 
otherwise distribute telephone service (i.e., local or toll 
telephone service) are treated as amounts paid for taxable 
communications services, subject to the 3-percent ad valorem 
tax rate. Examples of such taxable amounts include (1) prepaid 
telephone cards offered through service stations, convenience 
stores and other businesses to their customers and others and 
(2) amounts received by communications service providers 
pursuant to joint venture credit card or other marketing 
arrangements.\251\ The Treasury Department is authorized 
specifically to disregard accounting allocations or other 
arrangements which have the effect of reducing artificially the 
base to which the 3-percent tax is applied.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \251\ A technical correction may be required to clarify that 
payments to a communications service provider from a third party such 
as a joint venture credit card company are treated as payments made by 
the holder of the credit card to obtain communications services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Act also clarifies that the base to which the 
communications tax applies in the case of prepaid telephone 
cards and similar arrangements is the retail value of the 
service provided by the use of the card or arrangement. The 
Congress understood that at the time the Act was enacted, 
prepaid telephone cards were offered to the public in two 
forms. The first type of prepaid telephone card can be called a 
``dollar value card.'' In this case, the final customer 
purchases a card or account which allows him to utilize $X 
worth of telephone service provided by an underlying 
telecommunications carrier. In this case, the Act provides that 
the 3-percent communications excise tax will apply to the value 
X at the time the prepaid telephone card is sold by a 
telecommunications carrier to a person who is not a 
telecommunications carrier.
    The second type of prepaid telephone card may be called a 
``unit card'' or a ``minute card.'' In this case the final 
customer purchases a card or account which allows him to use Y 
number of units or minutes of telephone service provided by an 
underlying telecommunications carrier. The Congress intended 
that the tax applicable to such cards be based on the retail 
value of the telephone service offered to a consumer and the 
Act grants the Treasury Department regulatory authority to 
determine the appropriate retail value. The legislative history 
notes that at the time the Act was enacted, the Federal 
Communications Commission generally required telecommunications 
carriers to file a tariff listing the prices of their various 
service offerings including the price of units or minutes 
offered via prepaid telephone cards. For this case, the 
legislative history provides that the 3-percent communications 
excise tax will apply to Y (the number of units or minutes) 
multiplied by the tariffed price of those units or minutes at 
the time the prepaid telephone card is sold by a 
telecommunications carrier to a person who is not a 
telecommunications carrier.
    The legislative history recognizes that such a tariffed 
value may not in all cases correspond to the over-the-counter 
price that a final customer may pay for the card. However, the 
legislative history states that looking to the tariffed price, 
at present, is the best way to achieve neutral treatment of 
``dollar cards'' and ``unit'' or ``minute cards.'' The 
legislative history provides that, where a prepaid telephone 
card does not have an underlying tariff that applies to that 
particular card, tariffs for comparable telephone service shall 
be applied. The legislative history expresses Congress's 
preference that tariffs should continue to be filed for service 
offered by prepaid telephone cards, but if, in the future, 
tariff filings are not generally filed the Act authorizes the 
Treasury Department to develop alternative standards for 
determining the appropriate retail value of the units or 
minutes of service offered on such cards.
    The Act recognizes that sometimes a communications service 
provider may require certain customers to prepay for their 
service as assurance that payment is made by the customer for 
services to be provided. The legislative history accompanying 
the Act states that such arrangements do not constitute payment 
for communications services for the purposes of this provision 
if the customer is entitled to a full refund, in cash, for the 
value of any unused service. The legislative history considers 
such arrangements to be deposits to assure payment for service 
to be provided in the future. However, if such payments are 
nonrefundable, or only partially refundable, then such payments 
are subject to the communications excise tax at the time they 
are made.
    No inference is intended from this provision as to the 
proper treatment of payments received by communications service 
providers for prepaid telephone cards and amounts received by 
communications service providers pursuant to joint venture 
credit card or other marketing arrangements under prior law.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for cards sold on or after the 
first day of the month which commences more than 60 days after 
the date of enactment (i.e., effective on November 1, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $19 million in 1998, $28 million in 1999, 
$38 million in 2000, $49 million in 2001, $60 million in 2002, 
$71 million in 2003, $83 million in 2004, $101 million in 2005, 
$113 million in 2006, $124 million in 2007.

5. Extension of temporary Federal unemployment surtax (sec. 1035 of the 
        Act and sec. 3301 of the Code)

                              Present Law

    The Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) imposes a 6.2-
percent gross tax rate on the first $7,000 paid annually by 
covered employers to each employee. Employers in States with 
programs approved by the Federal Government and with no 
delinquent Federal loans may credit 5.4-percentage points 
against the 6.2-percent tax rate, making the minimum, net 
Federal unemployment tax rate 0.8 percent. Since all States 
have approved programs, 0.8 percent is the Federal tax rate 
that generally applies. This Federal revenue finances 
administration of the system, half of the Federal-State 
extended benefits program, and a Federal account for State 
loans. The States use the revenue turned back to them by the 
5.4-percent credit to finance their regular State programs and 
half of the Federal-State extended benefits program.
    In 1976, Congress passed a temporary surtax of 0.2 percent 
of taxable wages to be added to the permanent FUTA tax rate. 
Thus, the current 0.8-percent FUTA tax rate has two components: 
a permanent tax rate of 0.6 percent, and a temporary surtax 
rate of 0.2 percent. The temporary surtax subsequently has been 
extended through 1998.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress determined that the surtax extension is needed 
in order to increase funds for the Federal Unemployment Trust 
Fund to provide a cushion against future Trust Fund 
expenditures. The monies retained in the Federal Unemployment 
Account of the Federal Unemployment Trust Fund can then be used 
to make loans to the 53 State Unemployment Compensation benefit 
accounts as needed.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act extends the temporary surtax rate through December 
31, 2007. It also increases the limit from 0.25 percent to 0.50 
percent of covered wages on the Federal Unemployment Account 
(FUA) in the Federal Unemployment Trust Fund.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for labor performed on or after 
January 1, 1999.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1,063 million in 1999, $1,763 million in 
2000, $1,797 million in 2001, $1,733 million in 2002, $661 
million in 2003, and to decrease Federal fiscal year budget 
recipts by $73 million in 2004, $71 million in 2005, $74 
million in 2006, and $73 million in 2007.

           E. Provisions Relating to Tax-Exempt Organizations

1. Extend UBIT rules to second-tier subsidiaries and amend control test 
        (sec. 1041 of the Act and sec. 512(b)(13) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In general, interest, rents, royalties and annuities are 
excluded from the unrelated business income (``UBI'') of tax-
exempt organizations. However, section 512(b)(13) treats 
otherwise excluded rent, royalty, annuity, and interest income 
as UBI if such income is received from a taxable or tax-exempt 
subsidiary that is 80 percent controlled by the parent tax-
exempt organization.\252\ In the case of a stock subsidiary, 
the 80 percent control test is met if the parent organization 
owns 80 percent or more of the voting stock and all other 
classes of stock of the subsidiary.\253\ In the case of a non-
stock subsidiary, the applicable Treasury regulations look to 
factors such as the representation of the parent corporation on 
the board of directors of the nonstock subsidiary, or the power 
of the parent corporation to appoint or remove the board of 
directors of the subsidiary.\254\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \252\ For this purpose, a ``controlled organization'' is defined 
under section 368(c). Under present law, rent, royalty, annuity, and 
interest payments are treated as UBI when received by the parent 
organization based on the percentage of the subsidiary's income that is 
UBI (either in the hands of the subsidiary if the subsidiary is tax-
exempt, or in the hands of the parent organization if the subsidiary is 
taxable).
    \253\ Treas. Reg. sec. 1.512(b)-1(l)(4)(I)(a).
    \254\ Treas. Reg. sec. 1.512(b)-1(l)(4)(I)(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The control test under section 512(b)(13) does not, 
however, incorporate any indirect ownership rules.\255\ 
Consequently, rents, royalties, annuities and interest derived 
from second-tier subsidiaries generally do not constitute UBI 
to the tax-exempt parent organization.\256\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \255\ See PLR 9338003 (June 16, 1993) (holding that because no 
indirect ownership rules are applicable under section 512(b)(13), rents 
paid by a second-tier taxable subsidiary are not UBI to a tax-exempt 
parent organization). In contrast, an example of an indirect ownership 
rule can be found in Code section 318. Section 318(a)(2)(C) provides 
that if 50 percent or more in value of the stock in a corporation is 
owned, directly or indirectly, by or for any person, such person shall 
be considered as owning the stock owned, directly or indirectly by or 
for such corporation, in the proportion the value of the person's stock 
ownership bears to the total value of all stock in the corporation.
    \256\ See PLR 9542045 (July 28, 1995) (holding that first-tier 
holding company and second-tier operating subsidiary were organized 
with bona fide business functions and were not agents of the tax-exempt 
parent organization; therefore, rents, royalties, and interest received 
by tax-exempt parent organization from second-tier subsidiary were not 
UBI).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    Section 512(b)(13) was enacted, in part, to prevent 
subsidiaries of tax-exempt organizations from reducing their 
otherwise taxable income by borrowing, leasing, or licensing 
assets from a tax-exempt parent organization at inflated 
levels. In addition, however, even if such payments arguably 
could satisfy an arm's-length standard, section 512(b)(13) is 
intended to prevent a tax-exempt parent from obtaining what is, 
in effect, a tax-free return on capital invested in its 
subsidiary. Because section 512(b)(13) was narrowly drafted, 
organizations were able to circumvent its application through, 
for example, the issuance of 21 percent of nonvoting stock with 
nominal value to a separate friendly party or through the use 
of tiered or brother/sister subsidiaries. The Congress believed 
that modifications to the control requirement and inclusion of 
attribution rules will ensure that section 512(b)(13) operates 
consistent with its intended purposes.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act modifies the test for determining control for 
purposes of section 512(b)(13). Under the Act, ``control'' 
means (in the case of a stock corporation) ownership by vote or 
value of more than 50 percent of the stock. In the case of a 
partnership or other entity, control means ownership of more 
than 50 percent of the profits, capital or beneficial 
interests.
    In addition, the Act applies the constructive ownership 
rules of section 318 for purposes of section 512(b)(13). Thus, 
a parent exempt organization is deemed to control any 
subsidiary in which it holds more than 50 percent of the voting 
power or value, directly (as in the case of a first-tier 
subsidiary) or indirectly (as in the case of a second-tier 
subsidiary).
    The Act also makes technical modifications to the method 
provided in section 512(b)(13) for determining how much of an 
interest, rent, annuity, or royalty payment made by a 
controlled entity to a tax-exempt organization is includable in 
the latter organization's UBI.\257\ Such payments are subject 
to the unrelated business income tax to the extent the payment 
reduces the net unrelated income (or increases any net 
unrelated loss) of the controlled entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \257\ In this regard, a technical correction is required to 
correctly cross reference section 513(a) in the parenthetical contained 
in section 512(b)(13)(B)(i)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provision generally applies to taxable years beginning 
after the date of enactment. The provision does not apply to 
any amount paid or accrued during the first two taxable years 
beginning on or after the date of enactment if such amount is 
paid or accrued pursuant to a binding written contract in 
effect on June 8, 1997, and at all times thereafter before such 
amount is paid or accrued.\258\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \258\ A technical correction is required to clarify the statute in 
this regard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 in each of 1998 through 
2000, $3 million in 2001, $5 million in 2002, $5 million in 
2003, and $4 million per year in each of 2004 through 2007.

2. Repeal grandfather rule with respect to pension business of certain 
        insurers (sec. 1042 of the 1997 Act and sec. 1012(c) of the Tax 
        Reform Act of 1986)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Present law provides that an organization described in 
sections 501(c)(3) or (4) of the Code is exempt from tax only 
if no substantial part of its activities consists of providing 
commercial-type insurance. When this rule was enacted in 1986, 
certain treatment (described below) applied to Blue Cross and 
Blue Shield organizations providing health insurance that (1) 
were in existence on August 16, 1986; (2) were determined at 
any time to be tax-exempt under a determination that had not 
been revoked; and (3) were tax-exempt for the last taxable year 
beginning before January 1, 1987 (when the present-law rule 
became effective), provided that no material change occurred in 
the structure or operations of the organizations after August 
16, 1986, and before the close of 1986 or any subsequent 
taxable year.
    The treatment applicable to such Blue Cross and Blue Shield 
organizations, which became taxable organizations under the 
provision, is as follows. A special deduction applies with 
respect to health business equal to 25 percent of the claims 
and expenses\259\ incurred during the taxable year less the 
adjusted surplus at the beginning of the year. An exception is 
provided for such organizations from the application of the 20-
percent reduction in the deduction for increases in unearned 
premiums that applies generally to property and casualty 
insurance companies. A fresh start was provided with respect to 
changes in accounting methods resulting from the change from 
tax-exempt to taxable status. Thus, no adjustment was made 
under section 481 on account of an accounting method change. 
Such an organization was required to compute its ending 1986 
loss reserves without artificial changes that would reduce 1987 
income. Thus, any reserve weakening after August 16, 1986 was 
treated as occurring in the organization's first taxable year 
beginning after December 31, 1986. The basis of such an 
organization's assets was deemed to be equal to the amount of 
the assets' fair market value on the first day of the 
organization's taxable year beginning after December 31, 1986, 
for purposes of determining gain or loss (but not for 
determining depreciation or for other purposes).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \259\ Section 1604(d) of the 1997 Act clarifies this rule to 
provide that, for purposes of the section 833 deduction, liabilities 
incurred during the taxable year under cost-plus contracts are added to 
claims incurred, and expenses incurred under cost-plus contracts are 
added to expenses incurred.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Grandfather rules were provided in the 1986 Act relating to 
the provision. It was provided that the provision does not 
apply to that portion of the business of the Teachers Insurance 
Annuity Association-College Retirement Equities Fund which is 
attributable to pension business, nor did the provision apply 
with respect to that portion of the business of Mutual of 
America which is attributable to pension business. Pension 
business means the administration of any plan described in 
section 401(a) of the Code which includes a trust exempt from 
tax under section 501(a), and plan under which amounts are 
contributed by an individual's employer for an annuity contract 
described in section 403(b) of the Code, any individual 
retirement plan described in section 408 of the Code, and any 
eligible deferred compensation plan to which section 457(a) of 
the Code applies.

                           Reasons for Change

     The Congress was concerned that the continued tax-exempt 
status of certain organizations that engage in insurance 
activities gives such organizations an unfair competitive 
advantage. The Congress believed that the provision of 
insurance at a price sufficient to cover the costs of insurance 
generally constitutes an activity that is commercial. Thus, the 
Congress believed it no longer appropriate to continue the 
grandfather rule that permits certain organizations to retain 
tax-exempt status with respect to pension business that 
constitutes commercial-type insurance.

                        Explanation of Provision

     The Act repeals the grandfather rules applicable to that 
portion of the business of the Teachers Insurance Annuity 
Association and College Retirement Equities Fund which is 
attributable to pension business and to that portion of the 
business of Mutual of America which is attributable to pension 
business. The Teachers Insurance Annuity Association and 
College Retirement Equities Fund and Mutual of America are to 
be treated for Federal tax purposes as life insurance 
companies.
    A fresh start is provided with respect to changes in 
accounting methods resulting from the change from tax-exempt to 
taxable status. Thus, no adjustment is made under section 481 
on account of an accounting method change. The Teachers 
Insurance Annuity Association and College Retirement Equities 
Fund and Mutual of America are required to compute ending 1997 
loss reserves without artificial changes that would reduce 1998 
income. Thus, any reserve weakening after June 8, 1997, is 
treated as occurring in the organization's first taxable year 
beginning after December 31, 1997. The basis of assets of 
Teachers Insurance Annuity Association and College Retirement 
Equities Fund and Mutual of America is deemed to be equal to 
the amount of the assets' fair market value on the first day of 
the organization's taxable year beginning after December 31, 
1997, for purposes of determining gain or loss (but not for 
determining depreciation, amortization, or for other purposes).

                             Effective Date

     The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 in 1998, $82 million in 
1999, $116 million in 2000, $124 million in 2001, $128 million 
in 2002, $133 million in 2003, $140 million in 2004, $149 
million in 2005, $160 million in 2006, and $174 million in 
2007.

                         F. Foreign Provisions

1. Inclusion of income from notional principal contracts and stock 
        lending transactions under subpart F (sec. 1051 of the Act and 
        sec. 954 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under the subpart F rules, the U.S. 10-percent shareholders 
of a controlled foreign corporation (``CFC'') are subject to 
U.S. tax currently on certain income earned by the CFC, whether 
or not such income is distributed to the shareholders. The 
income subject to current inclusion under the subpart F rules 
includes, among other things, ``foreign personal holding 
company income.''
    Foreign personal holding company income generally consisted 
of the following: dividends, interest, royalties, rents and 
annuities; net gains from sales or exchanges of (1) property 
that gives rise to the foregoing types of income, (2) property 
that does not give rise to income, and (3) interests in trusts, 
partnerships, and REMICs; net gains from commodities 
transactions; net gains from foreign currency transactions; and 
income that is equivalent to interest. Income from notional 
principal contracts referenced to commodities, foreign 
currency, interest rates, or indices thereon was treated as 
foreign personal holding company income; under prior law, 
income from equity swaps or other types of notional principal 
contracts was not treated as foreign personal holding company 
income. Under prior law, income derived from transfers of debt 
securities (but not equity securities) pursuant to the rules 
governing securities lending transactions (sec. 1058) was 
treated as foreign personal holding company income.
    Income earned by a CFC that is a regular dealer in the 
property sold or exchanged generally was excluded from the 
definition of foreign personal holding company income. However, 
under prior law, no exception was available for a CFC that is a 
regular dealer in financial instruments referenced to 
commodities.
    A U.S. shareholder of a passive foreign investment company 
(``PFIC'') is subject to U.S. tax and an interest charge with 
respect to certain distributions from the PFIC and gains on 
dispositions of the stock of the PFIC, unless the shareholder 
elects to include in income currently for U.S. tax purposes its 
share of the earnings of the PFIC. A foreign corporation is a 
PFIC if it satisfies either a passive income test or a passive 
assets test. For this purpose, passive income is defined by 
reference to foreign personal holding company income.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress understood that income from notional principal 
contracts and stock-lending transactions is economically 
equivalent to types of income that were treated as foreign 
personal holding company income under prior law. Accordingly, 
the Congress believed that the categories of foreign personal 
holding company income should be expanded to cover such income. 
In addition, the Congress believed that an exception from the 
foreign personal holding company income rules should be 
available for dealers in financial instruments referenced to 
commodities.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act treats net income from all types of notional 
principal contracts as a new category of foreign personal 
holding company income. However, income, gain, deduction or 
loss from a notional principal contract entered into to hedge 
an item of income in another category of foreign personal 
holding company income is included in that other category. 
Although net income from notional principal contracts is added 
as a new category of foreign personal holding company income, 
amounts with respect to a notional principal contract entered 
into to hedge an item described in another category of foreign 
personal holding company income are taken into account under 
the rules of such other category. In this regard, gains and 
losses from transactions in inventory property are covered by 
an exclusion from the category of personal holding company 
income for net gains from property transactions; income from a 
notional principal contract entered into to hedge inventory 
property is taken into account under such category and thus 
similarly is excluded from foreign personal holding company 
income.
    The Act treats payments in lieu of dividends derived from 
equity securities lending transactions pursuant to section 1058 
as another new category of foreign personal holding company 
income.
    The Act provides an exception from foreign personal holding 
company income for certain income, gain, deduction, or loss 
from transactions (including hedging transactions) entered into 
in the ordinary course of a CFC's business as a regular dealer 
in property, forward contracts, options, notional principal 
contracts, or similar financial instruments (including 
instruments referenced to commodities).
    These modifications to the definition of foreign personal 
holding company income apply for purposes of determining a 
foreign corporation's status as a PFIC.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to taxable years beginning after the 
date of enactment (after August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $9 million in 1998, $20 million in 1999, $21 
million in 2000, $21 million in 2001, $21 million in 2002, $21 
million in 2003, $22 million in 2004, $22 million in 2005, $22 
million in 2006, and $23 million in 2007.

2. Restrict like-kind exchange rules for certain personal property 
        (sec. 1052 of the Act and sec. 1031 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

Like-kind exchanges

    An exchange of property, like a sale, generally is a 
taxable event. However, no gain or loss is recognized if 
property held for productive use in a trade or business or for 
investment is exchanged for property of a ``like-kind'' which 
is to be held for productive use in a trade or business or for 
investment (sec. 1031). In general, any kind of real estate is 
treated as of a like-kind with other real property as long as 
the properties are both located either within or outside the 
United States. In addition, certain types of property, such as 
inventory, stocks and bonds, and partnership interests, are not 
eligible for nonrecognition treatment under section 1031.
    If section 1031 applies to an exchange of properties, the 
basis of the property received in the exchange is equal to the 
basis of the property transferred, decreased by any money 
received by the taxpayer, and further adjusted for any gain or 
loss recognized on the exchange.

Application of depreciation rules

    Tangible personal property that is used predominantly 
outside the United States generally is accorded a less 
favorable depreciation regime than is property that is used 
predominantly within the United States. Thus, under present 
law, if a taxpayer exchanges depreciable U.S. property with a 
low adjusted basis (relative to its fair market value) for 
similar property situated outside the United States, the 
adjusted basis of the acquired property will be the same as the 
adjusted basis of the relinquished property, but the 
depreciation rules applied to such acquired property generally 
will be different than the rules that were applied to the 
relinquished property.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the depreciation and other rules 
applicable to foreign- and domestic-use property are 
sufficiently dissimilar so as to treat such property as not 
``like-kind'' property for purposes of section 1031.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that personal property predominantly used 
within the United States and personal property predominantly 
used outside the United States are not ``like-kind'' 
properties. For this purpose, the use of the property 
surrendered in the exchange will be determined based upon the 
predominant use during the 24 months immediately prior to the 
exchange. Similarly, for section 1031 to apply, property 
received in the exchange must continue in the same predominant 
use (i.e., foreign or domestic) for the 24 months immediately 
after the exchange.
    The 24-month period is reduced to such lesser time as the 
taxpayer held the property, unless such shorter holding period 
is a result of a transaction (or series of transactions) 
structured to avoid the purposes of the provision. Property 
described in section 168(g)(4) (generally, property used both 
within and without the United States that is eligible for 
accelerated depreciation as if used in the United States) will 
be treated as property predominantly used in the United States.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for exchanges after June 8, 
1997, unless the exchange is pursuant to a binding contract in 
effect on such date and all times thereafter. A contract will 
not fail to be considered to be binding solely because (1) it 
provides for a sale in lieu of an exchange or (2) either the 
property to be disposed of as relinquished property or the 
property to be acquired as replacement property (whichever is 
applicable) was not identified under the contract before June 
9, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $4 million in 1998, $8 million in 1999, $11 
million in 2000, $13 million in 2001, $15 million in 2002, $17 
million in 2003, $19 million in 2004, $21 million in 2005, $23 
million in 2006, and $25 million in 2007.

3. Impose holding period requirement for claiming foreign tax credits 
        with respect to dividends (sec. 1053 of the Act and new sec. 
        901(k) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A U.S. person that receives a dividend from a foreign 
corporation generally is entitled to a credit for income taxes 
paid to a foreign government on the dividend. This credit was 
allowed under prior law without regard to the U.S. person's 
holding period for the foreign corporation's stock. A U.S. 
corporation that receives a dividend from a foreign corporation 
in which it has a 10-percent or greater voting interest may be 
entitled to a credit for the foreign taxes paid by the foreign 
corporation. This credit also was allowed under prior law 
without regard to the U.S. shareholder's holding period for the 
foreign corporation's stock (secs. 902 and 960).
    As a consequence of the foreign tax credit limitations of 
the Code, certain taxpayers are unable to utilize their 
creditable foreign taxes to reduce their U.S. tax liability. 
U.S. shareholders that are tax-exempt receive no U.S. tax 
benefit for foreign taxes paid on dividends they receive.

                           Reasons for Change

    Although prior law imposed a holding period requirement for 
the dividends-received deduction for a corporate shareholder 
(sec. 246), there was no similar holding period requirement for 
foreign tax credits with respect to dividends. As a result, 
some U.S. persons engaged in tax-motivated transactions 
designed to transfer foreign tax credits from persons that were 
unable to benefit from such credits (such as a tax-exempt 
entity or a taxpayer whose use of foreign tax credits was 
prevented by the limitation) to persons that could use such 
credits. These transactions sometimes involved a short-term 
transfer of ownership of dividend-paying shares. Other 
transactions involved the use of derivatives to allow a person 
that could not benefit from foreign tax credits with respect to 
a dividend to retain the economic benefit of the dividend while 
another person received the foreign tax credit benefits.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act denies a shareholder the foreign tax credits 
normally available with respect to a dividend from a 
corporation or a regulated investment company (``RIC'') if the 
shareholder has not held the stock for a minimum period during 
which it is not protected from risk of loss. Under the Act, the 
minimum holding period for dividends on common stock is 16 
days. The minimum holding period for dividends on certain 
preferred stock is 46 days.
    Where the holding period requirement is not met with 
respect to a dividend from a foreign corporation, the Act 
disallows the foreign tax credits for the foreign withholding 
taxes that are paid with respect to the dividend. A withholding 
tax for purposes of the provision includes any tax determined 
on a gross basis, but does not include any tax which is in the 
nature of a prepayment of a tax imposed on a net basis.
    Where the holding period requirement is not met, the Act 
denies foreign tax credits for withholding taxes both to the 
recipient of the dividend and any other taxpayer (i.e., an 
indirect shareholder) who would otherwise be entitled to claim 
such foreign tax credits. It was intended that, in addition to 
actual dividend payments, the provision apply to additional 
dividend amounts that are deemed to be paid with respect to the 
dividend under an applicable U.S. tax treaty. Furthermore, the 
Act applies to indirect foreign tax credits otherwise allowable 
for taxes paid by a lower-tier foreign corporation and for 
foreign tax credits of a RIC that elects to treat its foreign 
taxes as paid by the shareholders. The Act denies such credits 
where any of the stock in the chain of ownership that is a 
requirement for claiming the credits is held for less than the 
required holding period.
    The Act denies these same foreign tax credit benefits, 
regardless of the shareholder's holding period for the stock, 
to the extent that the shareholder has an obligation to make 
payments related to the dividend (whether pursuant to a short 
sale or otherwise) with respect to substantially similar or 
related property.
    The 16-day holding period for common stock dividends must 
be satisfied during the 30-day period beginning on the date 
which is 15 days before the date on which the share becomes ex-
dividend. The 46-day holding period for preferred stock 
dividends must be satisfied during the 90-day period beginning 
on the date which is 45 days before the date on which the share 
becomes ex-dividend. For purposes of determining whether the 
required holding period is met, section 246(c)(3) applies such 
that the day the taxpayer disposes of the stock is taken into 
account, but the day the taxpayer acquires the stock is not. In 
addition, any period during which the shareholder has protected 
itself from risk of loss (under the rules of section 246(c)(4)) 
is disregarded. For example, assume a taxpayer buys foreign 
common stock. Assume also that, the day after the stock is 
purchased, the taxpayer enters into an equity swap under which 
the taxpayer is entitled to receive payments equal to the 
losses on the stock, and the taxpayer retains the swap position 
for the entire period it holds the stock. Under the Act, the 
taxpayer would not be able to claim any foreign tax credits 
with respect to dividends on the stock because the taxpayer's 
holding period is limited to two days as a result of the equity 
swap (see Treas. Reg. sec. 1.246-3(d)(2)(ex.1)). For purposes 
of entitlement to indirect foreign tax credits (secs. 902 and 
960), if a taxpayer's holding period is reduced as a result of 
a contract for a bona fide sale of stock, the determination of 
whether the holding period requirement is met is made as of the 
date such contract is entered into; thus, the holding period 
requirement for common stock would be met if the taxpayer held 
the stock for 16 days or more as of the date the contract was 
entered into. It was intended that the bona fide contract 
exception apply only to periods during which the contract is in 
effect.
    The Act also provides an exception for foreign tax credits 
with respect to certain dividends received by active dealers in 
securities. In order to qualify for the exception, the 
following requirements must be met: (1) the dividend must be 
received by the entity on stock which it holds in its capacity 
as a dealer in securities, (2) the entity must be subject to 
net income taxation on the dividend (on either a residence or 
worldwide income basis) in the foreign country in which it 
actively conducts a securities business, and (3) the full 
amount of the foreign taxes to which the exception applies must 
be creditable under the foreign country's tax system. A 
securities dealer for purposes of the exception is an entity 
which (1) is engaged in the active conduct of a securities 
business in a foreign country and (2) is registered as a 
securities broker or dealer under the Securities Exchange Act 
of 1934 or is licensed or authorized to conduct securities 
activities in such foreign country and subject to bona fide 
regulation by the securities regulatory authority of the 
foreign country. The Congress intended that the requirements of 
active conduct of a securities business by a securities dealer 
and of registration or licensing under U.S. or foreign law 
would be interpreted in the manner provided in the regulations 
proposed under section 1296(b)(3) (as in effect prior to the 
enactment of the Act). See Prop. Treas. Reg. sec. 1.1296-6. 
Under the Act, the Secretary of the Treasury is granted 
authority to issue regulations appropriate to carry out the 
exception for securities dealers, including regulations to 
prevent abuse of the exception and to treat other taxes as 
qualifying for the exception. The Congress anticipated that 
this regulatory authority could be used to treat as qualifying 
for the exception internal withholding taxes imposed by a 
foreign country on persons that are taxed on a residence basis 
as a result of doing business in the foreign country.
    If a taxpayer is denied foreign tax credits under the Act 
because the 16- or 46-day holding period requirement is not 
satisfied, the taxpayer would be entitled to a deduction for 
the foreign taxes for which the credit is disallowed. This 
deduction would be available even if the taxpayer claimed the 
foreign tax credit for other taxes in the same taxable year.
    No inference is intended as to the treatment under prior 
law of tax-motivated transactions intended to transfer foreign 
tax credit benefits.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for dividends paid or accrued 
more than 30 days after the date of enactment. Where a dividend 
is paid or accrued prior to the effective date, the provision 
does not apply to additional dividend amounts that are deemed 
to be paid with respect to the dividend under an applicable 
U.S. tax treaty.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $23 million in 1998, $48 million in 1999, 
$50 million in 2000, $53 million in 2001, $56 million in 2002, 
$58 million in 2003, $61 million in 2004, $64 million in 2005, 
$68 million in 2006 and $71 million in 2007.

4. Limitation on treaty benefits for payments to hybrid entities (sec. 
        1054 of the Act and new sec. 894(c) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Nonresident alien individuals and foreign corporations 
(collectively, foreign persons) that are engaged in business in 
the United States are subject to U.S. tax on the income from 
such business in the same manner as a U.S. person. In addition, 
the United States imposes tax on certain types of U.S. source 
income, including interest, dividends and royalties, of foreign 
persons not engaged in business in the United States. Such tax 
is imposed on a gross basis and is collected through 
withholding. The statutory rate of this withholding tax is 30 
percent. However, most U.S. income tax treaties provide for a 
reduction in the rate, or elimination, of this withholding tax. 
Treaties generally provide for different applicable withholding 
tax rates for different types of income. Moreover, the 
applicable withholding tax rates differ among treaties. The 
specific withholding tax rates pursuant to a treaty are the 
result of negotiations between the United States and the treaty 
partner.
    The application of the withholding tax is more complicated 
in the case of income derived through an entity, such as a 
limited liability company, that is treated as a partnership for 
U.S. tax purposes but may be treated as a corporation for 
purposes of the tax laws of a treaty partner. The Treasury 
regulations include specific rules that apply in the case of 
income derived through an entity that is treated as a 
partnership for U.S. tax purposes. In the case of a payment of 
an item of U.S. source income to a U.S. partnership, the 
partnership is required to impose the withholding tax to the 
extent the item of income is includible in the distributive 
share of a partner who is a foreign person. Tax-avoidance 
opportunities could arise in applying the reduced rates of 
withholding tax provided under a treaty to cases involving 
income derived through a limited liability company or other 
hybrid entity (e.g., an entity that is treated as a partnership 
for U.S. tax purposes but as a corporation for purposes of the 
treaty partner's tax laws).
    Following the passage of the House bill and the Senate 
amendment, proposed and temporary regulations were issued 
addressing the application of the reduced rates of withholding 
tax provided under a treaty in cases involving a hybrid entity. 
Temp. Treas. Reg. sec. 1.894-1T.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress was concerned about the potential tax-
avoidance opportunities available for foreign persons that 
invest in the United States through hybrid entities. In 
particular, the Congress understood that the interaction of the 
tax laws and the applicable tax treaty could provide a business 
structuring opportunity that would allow Canadian corporations 
with U.S. subsidiaries to avoid both U.S. and Canadian income 
taxes with respect to those U.S. operations. The Congress 
believed that such tax-avoidance opportunities should be 
eliminated.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act limits the availability of a reduced rate of 
withholding tax pursuant to an income tax treaty in order to 
prevent tax avoidance. Under the Act, a foreign person is not 
entitled to a reduced rate of withholding tax under a treaty 
with a foreign country on an item of income derived through an 
entity that is treated as a partnership (or is otherwise 
treated as fiscally transparent) for U.S. tax purposes if (1) 
such item is not treated for purposes of the taxation laws of 
such foreign country as an item of income of such person, (2) 
the foreign country does not impose tax on an actual 
distribution of such item of income from such entity to such 
person, and (3) the treaty itself does not contain a provision 
addressing the applicability of the treaty in the case of 
income derived through a partnership or other fiscally 
transparent entity. In this regard, the foreign country will be 
considered to impose tax on a distribution even though such tax 
may be reduced or eliminated by reason of deductions or credits 
otherwise available to the taxpayer. In addition, the Secretary 
of the Treasury is authorized to prescribe regulations to 
determine, in situations other than the situation specifically 
described in the statutory provision, the extent to which a 
taxpayer shall not be entitled to benefits under an income tax 
treaty of the United States with respect to any payment 
received by, or income attributable to activities of, an entity 
that is treated as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax 
purposes (or is otherwise treated as fiscally transparent for 
such purposes) but is treated as fiscally non-transparent for 
purposes of the tax laws of the jurisdiction of residence of 
the taxpayer.
    The Act addresses a potential tax-avoidance opportunity for 
Canadian corporations with U.S. subsidiaries that arose because 
of the interaction between the U.S. tax law, the Canadian tax 
law, and the income tax treaty between the United States and 
Canada. Through the use of a U.S. limited liability company, 
which is treated as a partnership for U.S. tax purposes but as 
a corporation for Canadian tax purposes, a payment of interest 
(which is deductible for U.S. tax purposes) may be converted 
into a dividend (which is excludable for Canadian tax 
purposes). Accordingly, interest paid by a U.S. subsidiary 
through a U.S. limited liability company to a Canadian parent 
corporation would be deducted by the U.S. subsidiary for U.S. 
tax purposes and would be excluded by the Canadian parent 
corporation for Canadian tax purposes; the only tax on such 
interest would be a U.S. withholding tax, which could have been 
imposed at a reduced rate of 10 percent (rather than the full 
statutory rate of 30 percent) pursuant to the income tax treaty 
between the United States and Canada. Under the Act, 
withholding tax is imposed at the full statutory rate of 30 
percent in such case. The Act would not apply if the U.S.-
Canadian income tax treaty is amended to include a provision 
reaching a similar result. Moreover, the Act would not apply if 
Canada were to impose tax on the Canadian parent on dividends 
received from the U.S. limited liability company.
    The Congress noted that on June 30, 1997 the Secretary 
issued proposed and temporary regulations addressing the 
availability of treaty benefits in cases involving hybrid 
entities. The Congress believed that these regulations are 
consistent with the provision in the Act. The Congress also 
believed that the provision in the Act and the temporary and 
proposed regulations are consistent with U.S. treaty 
obligations. Such provision and such regulations represent 
interpretations of U.S. treaties clarifying those situations 
involving hybrid entities in which taxpayers are entitled to 
treaty benefits and those situations in which they are not. The 
United States has recognized authority to implement its tax 
treaties so as to avoid abuses.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997). Accordingly, the provision applies to items 
of income received by the partnership (or other fiscally 
transparent entity) on or after August 5, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million per year in each of the years 
1998 through 2007.

5. Interest on underpayments that are reduced by foreign tax credit 
        carrybacks (sec. 1055 of the Act and secs. 6601 and 6611 of the 
        Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    U.S. persons may credit foreign taxes against U.S. tax on 
foreign source income. The amount of foreign tax credits that 
can be claimed in a year is subject to a limitation that 
prevents taxpayers from using foreign tax credits to offset 
U.S. tax on U.S. source income. Separate limitations are 
applied to specific categories of income. The amount of 
creditable taxes paid or accrued in any taxable year which 
exceeds the foreign tax credit limitation is permitted to be 
carried back two years and carried forward five years.
    For purposes of the computation of interest on overpayments 
of tax, if an overpayment for a taxable year results from a 
foreign tax credit carryback from a subsequent taxable year, 
the overpayment is deemed not to arise prior to the filing date 
for the subsequent taxable year in which the foreign taxes were 
paid or accrued (sec. 6611(g)). Accordingly, interest does not 
accrue on the overpayment prior to the filing date for the year 
of the carryback that effectively created such overpayment. In 
a decision that was subsequently overturned following enactment 
of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (the ``Act''), the Court of 
Federal Claims held that in the case of an underpayment of tax 
(rather than an overpayment) for a taxable year that was 
eliminated by a foreign tax credit carryback from a subsequent 
taxable year, interest did not accrue on the underpayment that 
was eliminated by the foreign tax credit carryback. Fluor Corp. 
v. United States, 35 Fed. Cl. 520 (1996), rev'd, No. 96-5130 
(Fed. Cir. 1997). The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 
held that interest continued to accrue on the underpayment of 
tax that was eliminated by the foreign tax credit carryback, 
and remanded the case for determination of the date on which 
such interest ceased to accrue.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the application of the interest 
rules in the case of a deficiency that is reduced or eliminated 
by a foreign tax credit carryback must be consistent with the 
application of the interest rules in the case of an overpayment 
that is created by a foreign tax credit carryback. The Congress 
believed that in such cases the deficiency cannot be considered 
to have been eliminated, and the overpayment cannot be 
considered to have been created, until the filing date for the 
taxable year in which the foreign tax credit carryback arises. 
Accordingly, interest should continue to accrue on the 
deficiency through such date. In addition, the Congress 
believed that it is appropriate to clarify the interest rules 
that apply in the case of a foreign tax credit carryback that 
is itself triggered by another carryback from a subsequent 
year.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, if an underpayment for a taxable year is 
reduced or eliminated by a foreign tax credit carryback from a 
subsequent taxable year, such carryback does not affect the 
computation of interest on the underpayment for the period 
ending with the filing date for such subsequent taxable year in 
which the foreign taxes were paid or accrued. The Act also 
clarifies the application of the interest rules of both section 
6601 and section 6611 in the case of a foreign tax credit 
carryback that is triggered by a net operating loss or net 
capital loss carryback; in such a case, a deficiency is not 
considered to have been reduced, and an overpayment is not 
considered to have been created, until the filing date for the 
subsequent year in which the loss carryback arose. No inference 
is intended regarding the computation of interest under prior 
law in the case of a foreign tax credit carryback (including a 
foreign tax credit carryback that is triggered by a net 
operating loss or net capital loss carryback).

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for foreign taxes actually paid 
or accrued in taxable years beginning after the date of 
enactment (after August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $8 million in 1998, $10 million in 1999, $2 
million in 2000, and $1 million per year in each of 2001 
through 2007.

6. Determination of period of limitations relating to foreign tax 
        credits (sec. 1056 of the Act and sec. 6511(d) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    U.S. persons may credit foreign taxes against U.S. tax on 
foreign source income. The amount of foreign tax credits that 
can be claimed in a year is subject to a limitation that 
prevents taxpayers from using foreign tax credits to offset 
U.S. tax on U.S. source income. Separate limitations are 
applied to specific categories of income. The amount of 
creditable taxes paid or accrued in any taxable year which 
exceeds the foreign tax credit limitation is permitted to be 
carried back two years and carried forward five years.
    For purposes of the period of limitations on filing claims 
for credit or refund, in the case of a claim relating to an 
overpayment attributable to foreign tax credits, the 
limitations period is ten years from the filing date for the 
taxable year with respect to which the claim is made. The 
Internal Revenue Service has taken the position that, in the 
case of a foreign tax credit carryforward, the period of 
limitations is determined by reference to the year in which the 
foreign taxes were paid or accrued (and not the year to which 
the foreign tax credits are carried) (Rev. Rul. 84-125, 1984-2 
C.B. 125). However, the court in Ampex Corp. v. United States, 
620 F.2d 853 (Ct. Cl.1980), held that, in the case of a foreign 
tax credit carryforward, the period of limitations is 
determined by reference to the year to which the foreign tax 
credits are carried (and not the year in which the foreign 
taxes were paid or accrued).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that it is appropriate to identify 
clearly the date on which the ten-year period of limitations 
for claims with respect to foreign tax credits begins.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, in the case of a claim relating to an 
overpayment attributable to foreign tax credits, the 
limitations period is determined by reference to the year in 
which the foreign taxes were paid or accrued (and not the year 
to which the foreign tax credits are carried). No inference is 
intended regarding the determination of such limitations period 
under prior law.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for foreign taxes paid or 
accrued in taxable years beginning after the date of enactment 
(after August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million in 1998, $2 million in 1999, and 
$1 million per year in each of 2000 through 2007.

7. Repeal special exception to foreign tax credit limitation for 
        alternative minimum tax purposes (sec. 1057 of the Act and sec. 
        59 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Present law imposes a minimum tax on a corporation to the 
extent the taxpayer's minimum tax liability exceeds its regular 
tax liability. The corporate minimum tax is imposed at a rate 
of 20 percent on alternative minimum taxable income in excess 
of a phased-out $40,000 exemption amount.
    The combination of the taxpayer's net operating loss 
carryover and foreign tax credits cannot reduce the taxpayer's 
alternative minimum tax liability by more than 90 percent of 
the amount determined without these items.
    The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 (``1989 
Act'') provided a special exception to the limitation on the 
use of the foreign tax credit against the tentative minimum 
tax. In order to qualify for this exception, a corporation must 
have met four requirements. First, more than 50 percent of both 
the voting power and value of the stock of the corporation must 
have been owned by U.S. persons who were not members of an 
affiliated group which included such corporation. Second, all 
of the activities of the corporation must have been conducted 
in one foreign country with which the United States had an 
income tax treaty in effect and such treaty must have provided 
for the exchange of information between such country and the 
United States. Third, the corporation generally must have 
distributed to its shareholders all current earnings and 
profits (except for certain amounts utilized for normal 
maintenance or capital expenditures related to its existing 
business). Fourth, all of such distributions which were 
received by U.S. persons must have been utilized by such 
persons in a U.S. trade or business. This exception applied to 
taxable years beginning after March 31, 1990 (with a proration 
rule effective for certain taxable years which included March 
31, 1990).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that all taxpayers should be treated 
the same with respect to the foreign tax credit limitation of 
the alternative minimum tax.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act repeals the special exception provided in the 1989 
Act regarding the use of foreign tax credits for purposes of 
the alternative minimum tax.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after the date of enactment (i.e., after August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $2 million in 1998, $5 million in 1999, $5 
million in 2000, $5 million in 2001, $5 million in 2002, $5 
million in 2003, $5 million in 2004, $5 million in 2005, $5 
million in 2006, and $5 million in 2007.

                       G. Partnership Provisions

1. Allocation of basis of properties distributed to a partner by a 
        partnership (sec. 1061 of the 1997 Act and sec. 732(c) of the 
        Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

In general

    The partnership provisions generally permit partners to 
receive distributions of partnership property without 
recognition of gain or loss (sec. 731).\260\ Rules are provided 
for determining the basis of the distributed property in the 
hands of the distributee, and for allocating basis among 
multiple properties distributed, as well as for determining 
adjustments to the distributee partner's basis in its 
partnership interest. Property distributions are tax-free to a 
partnership. Adjustments to the basis of the partnership's 
remaining undistributed assets are not required unless the 
partnership has made an election that requires basis 
adjustments both upon partnership distributions and upon 
transfers of partnership interests (sec. 754).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \260\ Exceptions to this nonrecognition rule apply: (1) when money 
(and the fair market value of marketable securities) received exceeds a 
partner's adjusted basis in the partnership (sec. 731(a)(1)); (2) when 
only money, inventory and unrealized receivables are received in 
liquidation of a partner's interest and loss is realized (sec. 
731(a)(2)); (3) to certain disproportionate distributions involving 
inventory and unrealized receivables (sec. 751(b)); and (4) to certain 
distributions relating to contributed property (secs. 704(c) and 737). 
In addition, if a partner engages in a transaction with a partnership 
other than in its capacity as a member of the partnership, the 
transaction generally is considered as occurring between the 
partnership and one who is not a partner (sec. 707).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Partner's basis in distributed properties and partnership interest

    Present law provides two different rules for determining a 
partner's basis in distributed property, depending on whether 
the distribution is in liquidation of the partner's interest in 
the partnership. Generally, a substituted basis rule applies to 
property distributed to a partner in liquidation. Thus, the 
basis of property distributed in liquidation of a partner's 
interest is equal to the partner's adjusted basis in its 
partnership interest (reduced by any money distributed in the 
same transaction) (sec. 732(b)).
    By contrast, generally, a carryover basis rule applies to 
property distributed to a partner other than in liquidation of 
its partnership interest, subject to a cap (sec. 732(a)). Thus, 
in a non-liquidating distribution, the distributee partner's 
basis in the property is equal to the partnership's adjusted 
basis in the property immediately before the distribution, but 
not to exceed the partner's adjusted basis in its partnership 
interest (reduced by any money distributed in the same 
transaction). In a non-liquidating distribution, the partner's 
basis in its partnership interest is reduced by the amount of 
the basis to the distributee partner of the property 
distributed and is reduced by the amount of any money 
distributed (sec. 733).

Allocating basis among distributed properties

    In the event that multiple properties are distributed by a 
partnership, allocation rules are provided for determining 
their bases in the distributee partner's hands. An allocation 
rule is needed when the substituted basis rule for liquidating 
distributions applies, in order to assign a portion of the 
partner's basis in its partnership interest to each distributed 
asset. An allocation rule is also needed in a non-liquidating 
distribution of multiple assets when the total carryover basis 
would exceed the partner's basis in its partnership interest, 
so a portion of the partner's basis in its partnership interest 
is assigned to each distributed asset.
    Prior law provided for allocation in proportion to the 
partnership's adjusted basis. The rule allocated basis first to 
unrealized receivables and inventory items in an amount equal 
to the partnership's adjusted basis (or if the allocated basis 
is less than partnership basis, then in proportion to the 
partnership's basis), and then among other properties in 
proportion to their adjusted bases to the partnership (sec. 
732(c)).\261\ Under this allocation rule, in the case of a 
liquidating distribution, the distributee partner was able to 
have a basis in the distributed property that exceeded the 
partnership's basis in the property.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \261\ A special rule allows a partner that acquired a partnership 
interest by transfer within two years of a distribution to elect to 
allocate the basis of property received in the distribution as if the 
partnership had a section 754 election in effect (sec. 732(d)). The 
special rule also allows the Service to require such an allocation 
where the value at the time of transfer of the property received 
exceeds 110 percent of its adjusted basis to the partnership (sec. 
732(d)). Treas. Reg. sec. 1.732-1(d)(4) generally requires the 
application of section 732(d) where the allocation of basis under 
section 732(c) upon a liquidation of the partner's interest would have 
resulted in a shift of basis from non-depreciable property to 
depreciable property.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The prior-law rule providing that distributee partners 
allocate basis in proportion to the partnership's adjusted 
basis in the distributed property has given rise to problems in 
application.\262\ The Congress was concerned that the prior-law 
rule permitted basis shifting transactions in which basis is 
allocated so as to increase basis artificially, giving rise to 
inflated depreciation deductions or artificially large losses, 
for example. The Congress believed that these problems would be 
significantly reduced by taking into account the fair market 
value of property distributed by a partnership for purposes of 
allocating basis in the hands of the distributee partner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \262\ ``The failure of these rules to take fair market value into 
account puts a high premium on tax planning in connection with in-kind 
liquidating distributions. Allocation of the portion of the basis in 
excess of the partnerships basis in the distributed assets according to 
their relative market values would be a conceptually sound approach, 
and would eliminate the strange results and manipulation possibilities 
. . .'' W. McKee, W. Nelson and R. Whitmire, Federal Taxation of 
Partnerships and Partners (3rd ed. 1997), sec. 19.06.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Explanation of Provision

    The provision modifies the basis allocation rules for 
distributee partners. It allocates a distributee partner's 
basis adjustment among distributed assets first to unrealized 
receivables and inventory items in an amount equal to the 
partnership's basis in each such property (as under present 
law). If the basis to be allocated is less than the sum of the 
adjusted bases of the properties in the hands of the 
partnership, then, to the extent a decrease is required to make 
the total adjusted bases of the properties equal the basis to 
be allocated, the decrease is allocated as described below for 
adjustments that are decreases.
    Under the provision, to the extent of any basis not 
allocated under the above rules, basis is allocated first to 
the extent of each distributed property's adjusted basis to the 
partnership. Any remaining basis adjustment, if an increase, is 
allocated among properties with unrealized appreciation in 
proportion to their respective amounts of unrealized 
appreciation (to the extent of each property's appreciation), 
and then in proportion to their respective fair market values. 
For example, assume that a partnership with two assets, A and 
B, distributes them both in liquidation to a partner whose 
basis in its interest is 55. Neither asset consists of 
inventory or unrealized receivables. Asset A has a basis to the 
partnership of 5 and a fair market value of 40, and asset B has 
a basis to the partnership of 10 and a fair market value of 10. 
Under the provision, basis is first allocated to asset A in the 
amount of 5 and to asset B in the amount of 10 (their adjusted 
bases to the partnership). The remaining basis adjustment is an 
increase totaling 40 (the partner's 55 basis minus the 
partnership's total basis in distributed assets of 15). Basis 
is then allocated to asset A in the amount of 35, its 
unrealized appreciation, with no allocation to asset B 
attributable to unrealized appreciation because its fair market 
value equals the partnership's adjusted basis. The remaining 
basis adjustment of 5 is allocated in the ratio of the assets' 
fair market values, i.e., 4 to asset A (for a total basis of 
44) and 1 to asset B (for a total basis of 11).
    If the remaining basis adjustment is a decrease, it is 
allocated among properties with unrealized depreciation in 
proportion to their respective amounts of unrealized 
depreciation (to the extent of each property's depreciation), 
and then in proportion to their respective adjusted bases 
(taking into account the adjustments already made). A remaining 
basis adjustment that is a decrease arises under the provision 
when the partnership's total adjusted basis in the distributed 
properties exceeds the amount of the partner's basis in its 
partnership interest, and the latter amount is the basis to be 
allocated among the distributed properties. For example, assume 
that a partnership with two assets, C and D, distributes them 
both in liquidation to a partner whose basis in its partnership 
interest is 20. Neither asset consists of inventory or 
unrealized receivables. Asset C has a basis to the partnership 
of 15 and a fair market value of 15, and asset D has a basis to 
the partnership of 15 and a fair market value of 5. Under the 
provision, basis is first allocated to the extent of the 
partnership's basis in each distributed property, or 15 to each 
distributed property, for a total of 30. Because the partner's 
basis in its interest is only 20, a downward adjustment of 10 
(30 minus 20) is required. The entire amount of the 10 downward 
adjustment is allocated to the property D, reducing its basis 
to 5. Thus, the basis of property C is 15 in the hands of the 
distributee partner, and the basis of property D is 5 in the 
hands of the distributee partner.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to partnership distributions after 
the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $26 million in 1998, $52 million in 1999, 
$55 million in 2000, $57 million in 2001, $59 million in 2002, 
$61 million in 2003, $64 million in 2004, $66 million in 2005, 
$69 million in 2006, and $72 million in 2007.

2. Treatment of inventory items of a partnership (sec. 1062 of the 1997 
        Act and sec. 751 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under prior law, upon the sale or exchange of a partnership 
interest, any amount received that is attributable to 
unrealized receivables, or to inventory that has substantially 
appreciated, is treated as an amount realized from the sale or 
exchange of property that is not a capital asset (sec. 751(a)).
    Present and prior law provide a similar rule to the extent 
that a distribution is treated as a sale or exchange of a 
partnership interest. A distribution by a partnership in which 
a partner receives substantially appreciated inventory or 
unrealized receivables in exchange for its interest in certain 
other partnership property (or receives certain other property 
in exchange for its interest in substantially appreciated 
inventory or unrealized receivables) is treated as a taxable 
sale or exchange of property, rather than as a nontaxable 
distribution (sec. 751(b)).
    For purposes of these rules, inventory of a partnership 
generally is treated as substantially appreciated if the fair 
market value of the inventory exceeds 120 percent of adjusted 
basis of the inventory to the partnership (sec. 751(d)(1)(A)). 
In applying this rule, inventory property is excluded from the 
calculation if a principal purpose for acquiring the inventory 
property was to avoid the rules relating to inventory (sec. 
751(d)(1)(B)).

                           Reasons for Change

    The substantial appreciation requirement with respect to 
inventory of a partnership has been criticized as ineffective 
at properly treating income attributable to inventory as 
ordinary income under the section 751 rules for partnerships 
with profit margins below 20 percent.\263\ Because the Congress 
believed that income attributable to inventory should be 
treated as ordinary income, the Act repeals the substantial 
appreciation requirement with respect to inventory, in the case 
of partnership sales or exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \263\ The 1984 ALI study on partnership rules referred to the 
substantial appreciation requirement as subject to manipulation and tax 
planning (American Law Institute, Federal Income Tax Project: 
Subchapter K: Proposals on the Taxation of Partners, (R. Cohen, 
reporter, 1984), 26. In 1993 the definition of substantially 
appreciated inventory was modified, and the present-law test relating 
to a principal purpose of avoidance was added (Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act of 1993, P.L. 103-66, sec. 13206(e)(1)). 
Nevertheless, the substantial appreciation requirement is still 
criticized as ineffective (W. McKee, W. Nelson and R. Whitmire, Federal 
Taxation of Partners and Partnerships, (3rd ed. 1997) sec. 16.04[2]).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act eliminates the requirement that inventory be 
substantially appreciated in order to give rise to ordinary 
income in the case of sales or exchanges of partnership 
interests under section 751(a) of the Code, but not in the case 
of distributions under section 751(b) of the Code. Thus, 
present law is retained with respect to distributions governed 
by section 751(b). This conforms the treatment of inventory to 
the treatment of unrealized receivables under the rules 
relating to sales or exchanges of partnership interests.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for sales, exchanges, and 
distributions after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997), 
except that the provision does not apply to any sale or 
exchange pursuant to a written binding contract in effect on 
June 8, 1997, and at all times thereafter before such sale or 
exchange.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $30 million in 1998, $66 million in 1999, 
$69 million in 2000, $73 million in 2001, $77 million in 2002, 
$80 million in 2003, $84 million in 2004, $89 million in 2005, 
$93 million in 2006, and $98 million in 2007.

3. Treatment of appreciated property contributed to a partnership (sec. 
        1063 of the 1997 Act and secs. 704(c)(1)(B) and 737 of the 
        Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present law, if a partner contributes appreciated 
property to a partnership, no gain is recognized to the 
contributing partner at the time of the contribution. The 
contributing partner's basis in its partnership interest is 
increased by the basis of the contributed property at the time 
of the contribution. The pre-contribution gain is reflected in 
the difference between the partner's capital account and its 
basis in its partnership interest (``book/tax differential''). 
Income, gain, loss, and deduction with respect to the 
contributed property must be shared among the partners so as to 
take account of the variation between the basis of the property 
to the partnership and its fair market value at the time of 
contribution (sec. 704(c)(1)(A)).
    If the property is subsequently distributed to another 
partner within 5 years of the contribution, the contributing 
partner generally recognizes gain as if the property had been 
sold for its fair market value at the time of the distribution 
(sec. 704(c)(1)(B)). Similarly, the contributing partner 
generally includes pre-contribution gain in income to the 
extent that the value of other property distributed by the 
partnership to that partner exceeds its adjusted basis in its 
partnership interest, if the distribution by the partnership is 
made within 5 years after the contribution of the appreciated 
property (sec. 737).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress was concerned that the inconsistency in 
treatment of partnership sales and partnership distributions of 
property contributed by partners makes it possible for partners 
to circumvent the rule requiring pre-contribution gain on 
contributed property to be allocated to the contributing 
partner. In order to limit the inconsistency and to reduce 
opportunities for circumventing this rule, the Congress 
believed that the contributing partner should recognize pre-
contribution gain when the contributed property is distributed 
to another partner, or the partnership distributes to the 
contributing partner other property whose value exceeds that 
partner's basis in its partnership interest, within 7 years 
after the contribution of the appreciated property.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act extends to 7 years the period in which a partner 
recognizes pre-contribution gain with respect to property 
contributed to a partnership. Thus, under the provision, a 
partner that contributes appreciated property to a partnership 
generally recognizes pre-contribution gain in the event that 
the partnership distributes the contributed property to another 
partner, or distributes to the contributing partner other 
property whose value exceeds that partner's basis in its 
partnership interest, if the distribution occurs within 7 years 
after the contribution to the partnership.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for property contributed to a 
partnership after June 8, 1997, except that the provision does 
not apply to any property contributed to a partnership pursuant 
to a written binding contract in effect on June 8, 1997, and at 
all times thereafter before such contribution, if the contract 
provides for the contribution of a fixed amount of property.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated neither to increase nor reduce 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts in 1998, 1999, 2000, and 
2001, and to increase Federal fiscal year budget receipts by $2 
million in 2002, $10 million in 2003, $11 million in 2004, $11 
million in 2005, $12 million in 2006, and $12 million in 2007.

               H. Pension and Employee Benefit Provisions

1. Cashout of certain accrued benefits (sec. 1071 of the Act and sec. 
        411(a)(11) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, in the case of an employee 
whose plan participation terminates, a qualified plan may 
involuntarily ``cash out'' the benefit (i.e., pay out the 
balance to the credit of a plan participant without the 
participant's consent, and, if applicable, the consent of the 
participant's spouse) if the present value of the benefit does 
not exceed a specified dollar amount. Under prior law, this 
dollar amount was $3,500. Under present and prior law, if a 
benefit is cashed out under this rule and the participant 
subsequently returns to employment covered by the plan, then 
service taken into account in computing benefits payable under 
the plan after the return need not include service with respect 
to which benefits were cashed out unless the employee ``buys 
back'' the benefit. If the present value determined at the time 
of a distribution to the participant exceeds the dollar limit, 
then the present value at any subsequent time is deemed to 
exceed the dollar limit.
    Generally, a cash-out distribution from a qualified plan to 
a plan participant can be rolled over, tax free, to an IRA or 
to another qualified plan.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the limit on involuntary cash-
outs should be raised to $5,000 in recognition of the effects 
of inflation and the value of small benefits payable under a 
qualified pension plan.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act increases the limit on involuntary cash-outs to 
$5,000 from $3,500 and permits plan amendments to increase the 
cashout limit to up to $5,000 without violating the anti-
cutback rules (sec. 411(d)(6)).\264\ All other rules applicable 
to cash-outs remain unchanged. For example, if, at the time of 
a distribution the present value of a participant's benefit 
exceeds $5,000, the benefit may not be involuntarily cashed out 
even if the actual value of the benefit falls below $5,000. 
Similarly, benefits of terminated vested participants can be 
cashed out, as long as a cashout would have been permitted 
under prior law if $5,000 were substituted for $3,500.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \264\ See section 1541 of the Act relating to adoption of plan 
amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for plan years beginning after 
the date of enactment.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 in 1997, $2 million in 
1998, $6 million in 1999, $7 million in 2000, 2001 and 2002, $8 
million in 2003 and 2004, $9 million in 2005 and 2006, and $10 
million in 2007.

2. Election to receive taxable cash compensation in lieu of nontaxable 
        parking benefits (sec. 1072 of the Act and sec. 132(f) of the 
        Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, up to $170 per month of 
employer-provided parking is excludable from gross income. 
Under prior law, in order for the exclusion to apply, the 
parking had to be provided in addition to and not in lieu of 
any compensation otherwise payable to the employee. Under 
present and prior law, employer-provided parking cannot be 
provided as part of a cafeteria plan.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that it was appropriate to permit 
employees to choose between employer-provided parking and cash.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that no amount is includible in the income 
of an employee merely because the employer offers the employee 
a choice between cash and employer-provided parking. The amount 
of cash offered is includible in income only if the employee 
chooses the cash instead of parking.
    Under this provision, parking may be provided through 
salary reduction. As under prior law, employer-provided parking 
cannot be provided as part of a cafeteria plan.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to taxable years 
beginning after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $3 million in 1998, $8 million in 1999, $11 
million in 2000, $12 million in 2001, $12 million in 2002, $13 
million in 2003, $14 million in 2004, $14 million in 2005, $15 
million in 2006, and $16 million in 2007.

3. Repeal of excess distribution and excess retirement accumulation 
        taxes (sec. 1073 of the Act and sec. 4980A of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Under prior law, a 15-percent excise tax was imposed on 
excess distributions from qualified retirement plans, tax-
sheltered annuities, and IRAs. Excess distributions were 
generally defined as the aggregate amount of retirement 
distributions from such plans during any calendar year in 
excess of $160,000 (for 1997) or 5 times that amount in the 
case of a lump-sum distribution. The 15-percent excise tax did 
not apply to distributions received in 1997, 1998, and 1999.
    An additional 15-percent estate tax was imposed on an 
individual's excess retirement accumulations. Excess retirement 
accumulations were generally defined as the balance in 
retirement plans in excess of the present value of a benefit 
that would not be subject to the 15-percent tax in excess 
distributions.

                           Reasons for Change

    The excess distribution and retirement accumulation taxes 
were designed to limit the overall tax-deferred savings by 
individuals, as well as to help ensure that tax-favored 
retirement vehicles were used primarily for retirement 
purposes. The Congress believed that the limits on 
contributions and benefits applicable to each type of vehicle 
are sufficient limits on tax-deferred savings. Additional 
penalties are unnecessary, and may also deter individuals from 
saving. The excess accumulation and distribution taxes also 
inappropriately penalize favorable investment returns.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act repeals both the 15-percent excise tax on excess 
distributions and the 15-percent estate tax on excess 
retirement accumulations.

                             Effective Date

    The provision repealing the excess distribution tax is 
effective with respect to excess distributions received after 
December 31, 1996. The repeal of the excess accumulation tax is 
effective with respect to decedents dying after December 31, 
1996.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $18 million in 1998, $19 million in 1999, $7 
million in 2000, and increase such receipts by $18 million in 
2001, $18 million in 2002, $16 million in 2003, $16 million in 
2004, $14 million in 2005, $13 million in 2006, and $11 million 
in 2007.

4. Tax on prohibited transactions (sec. 1074 of the Act and sec. 4975 
        of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Present and prior law prohibit certain transactions 
(prohibited transactions) between a qualified plan and a 
disqualified person in order to prevent persons with a close 
relationship to the qualified plan from using that relationship 
to the detriment of plan participants and beneficiaries. A two-
tier excise tax is imposed on prohibited transactions. Under 
prior law, the initial level tax was equal to 10-percent of the 
amount involved with respect to the transaction. Under present 
and prior law, if the transaction is not corrected within a 
certain period, a tax equal to 100 percent of the amount 
involved may be imposed.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed it is appropriate to increase the 
initial level prohibited transaction tax to discourage 
disqualified persons from engaging in such transactions.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act increases the initial-level prohibited transaction 
tax from 10-percent to 15-percent.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to prohibited 
transactions occurring after the date of enactment (August 5, 
1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $2 million in 1998, and $4 million per year 
during the period 1999 through 2007.

5. Basis recovery rules (sec. 1075 of the Act and sec. 72 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, amounts received as an annuity 
under a tax-qualified pension plan generally are includible in 
income in the year received, except to the extent the amount 
received represents return of the recipient's investment in the 
contract (i.e., basis). The portion of each annuity payment 
that represents a return of basis generally is determined by a 
simplified method. Under this method, the portion of each 
annuity payment that is a return to basis is equal to the 
employee's total basis as of the annuity starting date, divided 
by the number of anticipated payments under a specified table, 
shown below. The number of anticipated payments listed in the 
table is based on the age of the primary annuitant on the 
annuity starting date.


                                                                        
                                                             Number of  
                Age of primary annuitant                     payments   
                                                                        
55 or less..............................................             360
56-60...................................................             310
61-65...................................................             260
66-70...................................................             210
71 or more..............................................             160
                                                                        

    If the number of payments is fixed under the terms of the 
annuity, that number is used instead of the number of 
anticipated payments listed in the table. The simplified method 
is not available if the primary annuitant has attained age 75 
on the annuity starting date unless there are fewer than 5 
years of guaranteed payments under the annuity. If, in 
connection with commencement of annuity payments, the recipient 
receives a lump-sum payment that is not part of the annuity 
stream, such payment is taxable under the rules relating to 
annuities (sec. 72) as if received before the annuity starting 
date, and the investment in the contract used to calculate the 
simplified exclusion ratio for the annuity payments is reduced 
by the amount of the payment. In no event is the total amount 
excluded from income as nontaxable return of basis greater than 
the recipient's total investment in the contract.

                           Reasons for Change

    The table for determining anticipated payments does not 
differ depending on whether the annuity is payable in the form 
of a single life annuity or a joint and survivor annuity. 
Applying the table for single life annuities to joint and 
survivor annuities understates the expected payments under a 
joint and survivor annuity.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, the prior-law table would apply to benefits 
based on the life of one annuitant. A separate table applies to 
benefits based on the life of more than one annuitant, as 
follows:


                                                                        
                                                             Number of  
               Combined age of annuitants                    payments   
                                                                        
110 or less.............................................             410
111-120.................................................             360
121-130.................................................             310
131-140.................................................             260
141 and over............................................             210
                                                                        

    The new table applies to benefits based on the life of more 
than one annutitant, even if the amount of the annuity varies 
by annuitant. Thus, for example, the new table applies to a 50-
percent joint and survivor annuity. The new table does not 
apply to an annuity paid on a single life merely because it has 
additional features, e.g., a term certain.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to annuity starting 
dates beginning after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million in 1998, $3 million in 1999, $6 
million in 2000, $9 million in 2001, $11 million in 2002, $15 
million in 2003, $18 million in 2004, $21 million in 2005, $24 
million in 2006, and $27 million in 2007.

                  I. Other Revenue-Increase Provisions

1. Phase out suspense accounts for certain large farm corporations 
        (sec. 1081 of the Act and sec. 447 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A corporation (or a partnership with a corporate partner) 
engaged in the trade or business of farming must use an accrual 
method of accounting for such activities unless such 
corporation (or partnership), for each prior taxable year 
beginning after December 31, 1975, did not have gross receipts 
exceeding $1 million. If a farm corporation is required to 
change its method of accounting, the section 481 adjustment 
resulting from such change is included in gross income ratably 
over a 10-year period, beginning with the year of change. This 
rule does not apply to a family farm corporation.
    A provision of the Revenue Act of 1987 (``1987 Act'') 
requires a family corporation (or a partnership with a family 
corporation as a partner) to use an accrual method of 
accounting for its farming business unless, for each prior 
taxable year beginning after December 31, 1985, such 
corporation (and any predecessor corporation) did not have 
gross receipts exceeding $25 million. A family corporation is 
one where at 50 percent or more of the stock of the corporation 
is held by one (or in some limited cases, two or three) 
families.
    A family farm corporation that must change to an accrual 
method of accounting as a result of the 1987 Act provision is 
to establish a suspense account in lieu of including the entire 
amount of the section 481 adjustment in gross income. The 
initial balance of the suspense account equals the lesser of 
(1) the section 481 adjustment otherwise required for the year 
of change, or (2) the section 481 adjustment computed as if the 
change in method of accounting had occurred as of the beginning 
of the taxable year preceding the year of change.
    The amount of the suspense account is required to be 
included in gross income if the corporation ceases to be a 
family corporation. In addition, if the gross receipts of the 
corporation attributable to farming for any taxable year 
declined to an amount below the lesser of (1) the gross 
receipts attributable to farming for the last taxable year for 
which an accrual method of accounting was not required, or (2) 
the gross receipts attributable to farming for the most recent 
taxable year for which a portion of the suspense account was 
required to be included in income, a portion of the suspense 
account was required to be included in gross income.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that an accrual method of accounting 
more accurately measures the economic income of a corporation 
than does the cash receipts and disbursements method and that 
changes from one method of accounting to another should be 
taken into account under section 481. However, the Congress 
believed that it may be appropriate for a family farm 
corporation to retain the use of the cash method of accounting 
until such corporation reaches a certain size. At that time, 
the corporation should be subject to tax accounting rules to 
which other corporations are subject. In addition, the Congress 
believed that the present-law suspense account provision 
applicable to large family farm corporations may effectively 
provide an exclusion for, rather than a deferral of, amounts 
otherwise properly taken into account under section 481 upon 
the required change in the method of accounting for such 
corporations. However, the Congress recognized that requiring 
the recognition of previously established suspense accounts may 
impose liquidity concerns upon some farm corporations. Thus, 
the Congress provided an extended period over which existing 
suspense accounts must be restored to income and provided 
further deferral where the corporation has insufficient income 
for the year.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act repeals the ability of a family farm corporation to 
establish a suspense account when it is required to change to 
an accrual method of accounting. Thus, under the Act, any 
family farm corporation required to change to an accrual method 
of accounting would restore the section 481 adjustment 
applicable to the change in gross income ratably over a 10-year 
period beginning with the year of change.
    In addition, any taxpayer with an existing suspense account 
is required to restore the account into income ratably over a 
20-year period beginning in the first taxable year beginning 
after June 8, 1997, subject to the requirement to restore such 
accounts more rapidly when the corporation ceases to be a 
qualified family farm corporation. The amount required to be 
restored to income for a taxable year pursuant to the 20-year 
spread period shall not exceed the net operating loss of the 
corporation for the year (in the case of a corporation with a 
net operating loss) or 50 percent of the net income of the 
taxpayer for the year (for corporations with taxable income). 
For this purpose, a net operating loss or taxable income is 
determined without regard to the amount restored to income 
under the Act. Any reduction in the amount required to be 
restored to income is taken into account ratably over the 
remaining years in the 20-year period or, if applicable, after 
the end of the 20-year period. Amounts that extend beyond the 
20-year period remain subject to the net operating loss and 50-
percent-of-taxable income rules. The net operating loss and 50-
percent-of-taxable income rules do not apply to restorations of 
suspense accounts that are required when the corporation ceases 
to be a qualified family farm corporation. In the case of a 
family farm corporation that elects to be an S corporation for 
a taxable year, the net operating loss and 50 percent of 
taxable income limitations shall be determined by taking into 
account all the items of income, gain, deduction and loss of 
the corporation, whether or not such items are separately 
stated under section 1366.
    Finally, the Act repealed the present-law requirement to 
accelerate the recovery of suspense accounts when the gross 
receipts of the taxpayer diminishes.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years ending after 
June 8, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $29 million in 1998, $33 million in 1999, 
$35 million in 2000, $36 million in 2001, $37 million in 2002, 
$39 million in 2003, $40 million in 2004, $41 million in 2005, 
$43 million in 2006, and $44 million in 2007.

2. Modify net operating loss carryback and carryforward rules (sec. 
        1082 of the Act and sec. 172 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under prior law, the net operating loss (``NOL'') of a 
taxpayer (generally, the amount by which the business 
deductions of a taxpayer exceeds its gross income) could be 
carried back three years and carried forward 15 years to offset 
taxable income in such years. A taxpayer may elect to forgo the 
carryback of an NOL. Special rules apply to real estate 
investment trusts (``REITs'') (no carrybacks), specified 
liability losses (10-year carryback), and excess interest 
losses (no carrybacks).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress recognized that while Federal income tax 
reporting requires a taxpayer to report income and file returns 
based on a 12-month period, the natural business cycle of a 
taxpayer may exceed 12 months. However, the Congress believed 
that allowing a two-year carryback of NOLs is sufficient to 
account for these business cycles, particularly since (1) many 
deductions allowed for tax purposes relate to future, rather 
than past, income streams and (2) certain deductions that do 
relate to past income streams are granted special, longer 
carryback periods under present law (which are retained by the 
Act). In order to compensate for the shortening of the 
carryback period, the Act extends the NOL carryforward period 
to 20 years.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act limits the NOL carryback period to two years and 
extends the NOL carryforward period to 20 years. The Act does 
not apply to the carryback rules relating to REITs, specified 
liability losses, excess interest losses, and corporate capital 
losses.
    The Act does not apply to NOLs arising from casualty losses 
of individual taxpayers. In addition, the Act does not apply to 
NOLs attributable to losses incurred in Presidentially declared 
disaster areas by taxpayers engaged in a farming business or a 
small business. For this purpose, a ``small business'' means 
any trade or business (including one conducted in or through a 
corporation, partnership, or sole proprietorship) the average 
annual gross receipts (as determined under sec. 448(c)) of 
which are $5 million or less, and a ``farming business'' is 
defined as in section 263A(e)(4).

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for NOLs for taxable years 
beginning after the date of enactment (i.e., after August 5, 
1997). The provision does not apply to NOLs carried forward 
from prior taxable years.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $42 million in 1998, $303 million in 1999, 
$361 million in 2000, $256 million in 2001, $179 million in 
2002, $136 million in 2003, $112 million in 2004, $100 million 
in 2005, $93 million in 2006, and $90 million in 2007.

  3. Modify general business credit carryback and carryforward rules 
             (sec. 1083 of the Act and sec. 38 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A qualified taxpayer is allowed to claim the rehabilitation 
credit, the energy credit, the reforestation credit, the work 
opportunity credit, the alcohol fuels credit, the research 
credit, the low-income housing credit, the enhanced oil 
recovery credit, the disabled access credit, the renewable 
electricity production credit, the empowerment zone employment 
credit, the Indian employment credit, the employer social 
security credit, and the orphan drug credit (collectively, 
known as the general business credit), subject to certain 
limitations based on tax liability for the year. Under prior 
law, unused general business credits generally could be carried 
back three years and carried forward 15 years to offset tax 
liability of such years, subject to the same limitations.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act limits the carryback period for the general 
business credit to one year and extends the carryforward period 
to 20 years.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for credits arising in taxable 
years beginning after December 31, 1997. The provision does not 
apply to credits carried forward from prior taxable years.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $182 million in 1998, $300 million in 1999, 
and $81 million in 2000; to decrease Federal fiscal year budget 
receipts by $60 million in 2001, $32 million in 2002, and $9 
million in 2003; and to increase Federal fiscal year budget 
receipts by $5 million in 2004, $15 million in 2005, $21 
million in 2006, and $25 million in 2007.

  4. Expand the limitations on deductibility of interest and premiums 
 with respect to life insurance, endowment and annuity contracts (sec. 
               1084 of the Act and sec. 264 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

Exclusion of inside buildup and amounts received by reason of death

    No Federal income tax generally is imposed on a 
policyholder with respect to the earnings under a life 
insurance contract (``inside buildup'').\265\ Further, an 
exclusion from Federal income tax is provided for amounts 
received under a life insurance contract paid by reason of the 
death of the insured (sec. 101(a)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \265\ This favorable tax treatment is available only if the 
policyholder has an insurable interest in the insured when the contract 
is issued and if the life insurance contract meets certain requirements 
designed to limit the investment character of the contract (sec. 7702). 
Distributions from a life insurance contract (other than a modified 
endowment contract) that are made prior to the death of the insured 
generally are includible in income, to the extent that the amounts 
distributed exceed the taxpayer's investment in the contract; such 
distributions generally are treated first as a tax-free recovery of the 
investment in the contract, and then as income (sec. 72(e)). In the 
case of a modified endowment contract, however, in general, 
distributions are treated as income first, loans are treated as 
distributions (i.e., income rather than basis recovery first), and an 
additional 10 percent tax is imposed on the income portion of 
distributions made before age 59\1/2\ and in certain other 
circumstances (secs. 72(e) and (v)). A modified endowment contract is a 
life insurance contract that does not meet a statutory ``7-pay'' test, 
i.e., generally is funded more rapidly than 7 annual level premiums 
(sec. 7702A). Certain amounts received under a life insurance contract 
on the life of a terminally or chronically ill individual, and certain 
amounts paid for the sale or assignment to a viatical settlement 
provider of a life insurance contract on the life of a terminally ill 
or chronically ill individual, are treated as excludable as if paid by 
reason of the death of the insured (sec. 101(g)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Premium deduction limitation

    Under prior law, no deduction was permitted for premiums 
paid on any life insurance policy covering the life of any 
officer or employee, or of any person financially interested in 
any trade or business carried on by the taxpayer, when the 
taxpayer is directly or indirectly a beneficiary under such 
policy (sec. 264(a)(1)).

Interest deduction disallowance with respect to life insurance

    Generally, no deduction is allowed for interest paid or 
accrued on any indebtedness with respect to one or more life 
insurance contracts or annuity or endowment contracts owned by 
the taxpayer covering any individual (the ``COLI'' rules). 
Under prior law, this limitation applied with respect to an 
individual who is or was (1) an officer or employee of, or (2) 
financially interested in, any trade or business currently or 
formerly carried on by the taxpayer.
    This interest deduction disallowance rule generally does 
not apply to interest on debt with respect to contracts 
purchased on or before June 20, 1986; rather, an interest 
deduction limit based on Moody's Corporate Bond Yield Average--
Monthly Average Corporates applies in the case of such 
contracts.\266\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \266\ In the case of contracts purchased after June 20, 1986, 
phase-in generally apply with respect to otherwise deductible interest 
paid or accrued after December 31, 1995, and before January 1, 1999, in 
the case of debt incurred before January 1, 1996. In addition, 
transition rules apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    An exception to this interest disallowance rule is provided 
for interest on indebtedness with respect to life insurance 
policies covering up to 20 key persons. A key person is an 
individual who is either an officer or a 20-percent owner of 
the taxpayer. The number of individuals that can be treated as 
key persons may not exceed the greater of (1) 5 individuals, or 
(2) the lesser of 5 percent of the total number of officers and 
employees of the taxpayer, or 20 individuals. For determining 
who is a 20-percent owner, all members of a controlled group 
are treated as one taxpayer. Interest paid or accrued on debt 
with respect to a contract covering a key person is deductible 
only to the extent the rate of interest does not exceed Moody's 
Corporate Bond Yield Average--Monthly Average Corporates for 
each month beginning after December 31, 1995, that interest is 
paid or accrued.
    The foregoing interest deduction limitation was added in 
1996 to existing interest deduction limitations with respect to 
life insurance and similar contracts.\267\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \267\ Since 1942, a limitation has applied to the deductibility of 
interest with respect to single premium contracts (sec. 264(a)(2)). For 
this purpose, a contract is treated as a single premium contract if (1) 
substantially all the premiums on the contract are paid within a period 
of 4 years from the date on which the contract is purchased, or (2) an 
amount is deposited with the insurer for payment of a substantial 
number of future premiums on the contract. Further, under a limitation 
added in 1964, no deduction is allowed for any amount paid or accrued 
on debt incurred or continued to purchase or carry a life insurance, 
endowment, or annuity contract pursuant to a plan of purchase that 
contemplates the systematic direct or indirect borrowing of part or all 
of the increases in the cash value of the contract (sec. 264(a)(3)). An 
exception to the latter rule is provided, permitting deductibility of 
interest on bona fide debt that is part of such a plan, if no part of 4 
of the annual premiums due during the first 7 years is paid by means of 
debts (the ``4-out-of-7 rule'') (sec. 264(c)(1)). In addition to the 
specific disallowance rules of section 264, generally applicable 
principles of tax law apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interest deduction limitation with respect to tax-exempt interest 
        income

    No deduction is allowed for interest on debt incurred or 
continued to purchase or carry obligations the interest on 
which is wholly exempt from Federal income tax (sec. 
265(a)(2)). In addition, in the case a financial institution, a 
proration rule provides that no deduction is allowed for that 
portion of the taxpayer's interest that is allocable to tax-
exempt interest (sec. 265(b)). The portion of the interest 
deduction that is disallowed under this rule generally is the 
portion determined by the ratio of the taxpayer's (1) average 
adjusted bases of tax-exempt obligations acquired after August 
7, 1986, to (2) the average adjusted bases for all of the 
taxpayer's assets (sec. 265(b)(2)).\268\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \268\ Special rules apply for certain tax-exempt obligations of 
small issuers (sec. 265(b)(3)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress understood that, under applicable State laws, 
the holder of a life insurance policy generally is required to 
have an insurable interest in the life of the insured 
individual only when the policyholder purchases the life 
insurance policy. The Congress understood that under State laws 
relating to insurable interests, a taxpayer generally has an 
insurable interest in the lives of its debtors. Further, rules 
governing permitted investments of financial institutions may 
allow the institutions to acquire cash value life insurance 
covering the lives of debtors, as well as the lives of 
individuals with other relationships to the taxpayer such as 
shareholders, employees or officers. In addition, insurable 
interest laws in many States have been expanded in recent 
years, and States could decide in the future to expand further 
the range of persons in whom a taxpayer has an insurable 
interest.
    For example, a business could purchase cash value life 
insurance on the lives of its debtors, and increase the 
investment in these contracts as the debt diminishes and even 
after the debt is repaid. If a mortgage lender can (under 
applicable State law and banking regulations) buy a cash value 
life insurance policy on the lives of mortgage borrowers, the 
lender may be able to deduct premiums or interest on debt with 
respect to such a contract, if no other deduction disallowance 
rule or principle of tax law applies to limit the deductions. 
The premiums or interest could be deductible even after the 
individual's mortgage loan is sold to another lender or to a 
mortgage pool. If the loan were sold to a second lender, the 
second lender might also be able to buy a cash value life 
insurance contract on the life of the same borrower, and to 
deduct premiums or interest with respect to that contract. The 
Act addresses this issue by providing that no deduction is 
allowed for premiums on any life insurance policy, or endowment 
or annuity contract, if the taxpayer is directly or indirectly 
a beneficiary under the policy or contract, and by providing 
that no deduction is allowed for interest paid or accrued on 
any indebtedness with respect to a life insurance policy, or an 
endowment or annuity contract, covering the life of any 
individual.
    In addition, the Congress understood that taxpayers may be 
seeking new means of deducting interest on debt that in 
substance funds the tax-free inside build-up of life insurance 
or the tax-deferred inside buildup of annuity and endowment 
contracts.\269\ The Congress believed that present law was not 
intended to promote tax arbitrage by allowing financial or 
other businesses that have the ongoing ability to borrow funds 
from depositors, bondholders, investors or other lenders to 
concurrently invest a portion of their assets in cash value 
life insurance contracts, or endowment or annuity contracts. 
Therefore, the Act provides that, for taxpayers other than 
natural persons, no deduction is allowed for the portion of the 
taxpayer's interest expense that is allocable to unborrowed 
policy cash values of any life insurance policy or annuity or 
endowment contract issued after June 8, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \269\ See ``Fannie Mae Designing a Program to Link Life Insurance, 
Loans,'' Washington Post, p. E3, February 8, 1997; ``Fannie Mae 
Considers Whether to Bestow Mortgage Insurance,'' Wall St. Journal, p. 
C1, April 22, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Explanation of Provision

Expansion of premium deduction limitation to individuals in whom 
        taxpayer has an insurable interest

    Under the provision, the prior-law premium deduction 
limitation is modified to provide that no deduction is 
permitted for premiums paid on any life insurance, annuity or 
endowment contract, if the taxpayer is directly or indirectly a 
beneficiary under the contract.
    The premium deduction limitation does not apply to premiums 
with respect to any annuity contract described in section 
72(s)(5) (relating to certain qualified pension plans, certain 
retirement annuities, individual retirement annuities, and 
qualified funding assets), nor to premiums with respect to any 
annuity to which section 72(u) applies (relating to current 
taxation of income on the contract in the case of an annuity 
contract held by a person who is not a natural person).

Expansion of interest disallowance to individuals in whom taxpayer has 
        insurable interest

    Under the provision, no deduction is allowed for interest 
paid or accrued on any indebtedness with respect to a life 
insurance policy, or endowment or annuity contract, covering 
the life of any individual. Thus, the provision limits interest 
deductibility in the case of such a contract covering any 
individual in whom the taxpayer has an insurable interest under 
applicable State law when the contract is first issued, except 
as otherwise provided under present law with respect to key 
persons and pre-1986 contracts.
    The Act specifies the treatment of certain interest to 
which the provision providing for expansion of interest 
disallowance to individuals in whom taxpayer has insurable 
interest otherwise would apply. The Act provides that in the 
case of a transfer for valuable consideration of a life 
insurance contract or any interest therein described in section 
101(a)(2), the amount of the death benefit excluded from gross 
income under section 101(a) may not exceed an amount equal to 
the sum of the actual value of the consideration, premiums, 
interest disallowed as a deduction under new section 264(a)(4), 
and other amounts subsequently paid by the transferee. Thus, 
under the provision, in the case of the transfer for value of a 
life insurance contract, the interest with respect to the 
contract that otherwise would be disallowed under new section 
264(a)(4) is capitalized, reducing the amount included in 
income by the transferee upon receipt by the transferee of the 
amounts paid by reason of the death of the insured.

Pro rata disallowance of interest on debt to fund life insurance

    In the case of a taxpayer other than a natural person, no 
deduction is allowed for the portion of the taxpayer's interest 
expense that is allocable to unborrowed policy cash surrender 
values with respect to any life insurance policy or annuity or 
endowment contract issued after June 8, 1997. Interest expense 
is allocable to unborrowed policy cash values based on the 
ratio of (1) the taxpayer's average unborrowed policy cash 
values of life insurance policies, and annuity and endowment 
contracts, issued after June 8, 1997, to (2) the sum of (a) in 
the case of assets that are life insurance policies or annuity 
or endowment contracts, the average unborrowed policy cash 
values, and (b) in the case of other assets, the average 
adjusted bases for all such other assets of the taxpayer.
    An exception is provided for any policy or contract \270\ 
owned by an entity engaged in a trade or business, which covers 
one individual who (at the time first insured under the policy 
or contract) is (1) a 20-percent owner of the entity, or (2) an 
individual (who is not a 20-percent owner) who is an officer, 
director or employee of the trade or business. The exception 
also applies in the case of a joint-life policy or contract 
under which the sole insureds are a 20-percent owner and the 
spouse of the 20-percent owner. A joint-life contract under 
which the sole insureds are a 20-percent owner and his or her 
spouse is the only type of policy or contract with more than 
one insured that comes within the exception. Thus, for example, 
if the insureds under a contract include an individual 
described in the exception (e.g., an employee, officer, 
director, or 20-percent owner) and any individual who is not 
described in the exception (e.g., a debtor of the entity), then 
the exception does not apply to the policy or contract. For 
purposes of this exception, a 20-percent owner has the same 
meaning as under present-law section 264(d)(4). In addition, 
the Act provides that the pro rata interest disallowance rule 
does not apply to any annuity contract to which section 72(u) 
applies (relating to current taxation of income on the contract 
in the case of an annuity contract held by a person who is not 
a natural person). The Act provides that any policy or contract 
that is not subject to the pro rata interest disallowance rule 
by reason of this exception (for 20-percent owners, their 
spouses, employees, officers and directors, and in the case of 
an annuity contract to which section 72(u) applies) is not 
taken into account in applying the ratio to determine the 
portion of the taxpayer's interest expense that is allocable to 
unborrowed policy cash values.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \270\ It was intended that if coverage for each insured individual 
under a master contract is treated as a separate contract for purposes 
of sections 817(h), 7702, and 7702A of the Code, then coverage for each 
such insured individual is treated as a separate contract, for purposes 
of the exception to the pro rata interest disallowance rule for a 
policy or contract covering an individual who is a 20-percent owner, 
employee, officer or director of the trade or business at the time 
first covered. A master contract does not include any contract if the 
contract (or any insurance coverage provided under the contract) is a 
group life insurance contract within the meaning of Code section 
848(e)(2). No inference was intended that coverage provided under a 
master contract, for each such insured individual, is not treated as a 
separate contract for each such individual for other purposes under 
present law. A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this intent. See Title VI of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical 
Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The unborrowed policy cash values means the cash surrender 
value of the policy or contract determined without regard to 
any surrender charge, reduced by the amount of any loan with 
respect to the policy or contract. The cash surrender value is 
to be determined without regard to any other contractual or 
noncontractual arrangement that artificially depresses the cash 
value of a contract.
    If a trade or business (other than a sole proprietorship or 
a trade or business of performing services as an employee) is 
directly or indirectly the beneficiary under any policy or 
contract, then the policy or contract is treated as held by the 
trade or business. For this purpose, the amount of the 
unborrowed cash value is treated as not exceeding the amount of 
the benefit payable to the trade or business. In the case of a 
partnership or S corporation, the provision applies at the 
partnership or corporate level. The amount of the benefit is 
intended to take into account the amount payable to the 
business under the contract (e.g., as a death benefit) or 
pursuant to another agreement (e.g., under a split dollar 
agreement). The amount of the benefit is intended also to 
include any amount by which liabilities of the business would 
be reduced by payments under the policy or contract (e.g., when 
payments under the policy reduce the principal or interest on a 
liability owed to or by the business).
    It is intended that the above exception under new section 
264(f)(4)(A) (in the case of an employee, officer, director, or 
20-percent owner) not be precluded from applying merely because 
the trade or business holds an economic interest in the policy 
but does not own an interest in the policy, for example, in the 
case of collateral assignment split dollar insurance. \271\ 
This situation may arise if an individual employee owns a 
policy but the trade or business holds an interest in the 
policy by reason of being directly or indirectly a beneficiary 
under the policy pursuant to a collateral assignment split 
dollar arrangement. No inference is intended as to the 
treatment under present law of any other aspect of the 
arrangement (including, without limitation, the tax treatment 
of the individual or the trade or business with respect to the 
actual or constructive transfer of funds to the individual to 
pay premiums).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \271\ A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this intent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The issuer or policyholder of the life insurance policy or 
endowment or annuity contract is required to report such 
information as is necessary to carry out this rule. The 
required reporting to the Treasury Secretary is an information 
return (within the meaning of sec. 6724(d)(1)), and any 
reporting required to be made by any other person is a payee 
statement (within the meaning of sec. 6724(d)(2)\272\). The 
Treasury Secretary may require reporting by the issuer or 
policyholder of any relevant information either by regulations 
or by any other appropriate guidance (including but not limited 
to publication of a form). This statutory reporting requirement 
does not supersede the authority of the Treasury Secretary 
under section 6001 of the Code to require reporting necessary 
to apply the premium or interest deduction limitations of the 
Act, for example, reporting by businesses that own life 
insurance, endowment or annuity contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \272\ A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this intent. See Title VI of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical 
Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    If interest expense is disallowed under other provisions of 
section 264 (limiting interest deductions with respect to life 
insurance policies or endowment or annuity contracts) or under 
section 265 (relating to tax-exempt interest), then the 
disallowed interest expense is not taken into account under 
this provision, and the average adjusted bases of assets is 
reduced by the amount of debt, interest on which is so 
disallowed. The provision is applied before present-law rules 
relating to capitalization of certain expenses where the 
taxpayer produces property (sec. 263A).
    An aggregation rule is provided, treating related persons 
as one for purposes of the provision. This aggregation rule is 
intended to prevent taxpayers from avoiding the pro rata 
interest limitation by owning life insurance, endowment or 
annuity contracts, while incurring interest expense through a 
related person.
    The provision does not apply to any insurance company 
subject to tax under subchapter L of the Code. Rather, the 
rules reducing certain deductions for losses incurred, in the 
case of property and casualty companies, and reducing reserve 
deductions or dividends received deductions of life insurance 
companies, are modified to take into account the increase in 
cash values of life insurance policies or annuity or endowment 
contracts held by insurance companies. For purposes of those 
rules, an increase in the policy cash value for any policy or 
contract is (1) the amount of the increase in the adjusted cash 
value, reduced by (2) the gross premiums received with respect 
to the policy or contract during the taxable year, and 
increased by (3) distributions under the policy or contract to 
which section 72(e) apply (other than amounts includable in the 
policyholder's gross income). For this purpose, the adjusted 
cash value means the cash surrender value of the policy or 
contract, increased by (1) commissions payable with respect to 
the policy or contract for the taxable year, and (2) asset 
management fees, surrender and mortality charges, and any other 
fees or charges, specified in regulations, which are imposed 
(or would be imposed if the policy or contract were surrendered 
or canceled) with respect to the policy or contract for the 
taxable year.

                             Effective Date

    The provisions apply with respect to contracts issued after 
June 8, 1997.
    To the extent of additional covered lives after June 8, 
1997 under certain master contracts, the coverage of each 
additional insured individual is treated as a new contract. 
This treatment of additional covered lives applies only with 
respect to coverage provided under a master contract, provided 
that coverage for each insured individual is treated as a 
separate contract (because such coverage is treated as a 
separate contract for purposes of sections 817(h), 7702 and 
7702A, and the master contract or any coverage provided 
thereunder is not a group life insurance contract within the 
meaning of section 848(e)(2)).\273\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \273\ This rule is consistent with the intended treatment of 
coverage of insured individuals under master contracts under the 
provision (as described above). A technical correction may be needed so 
that the statute reflects this intent. See Title VI of H.R. 2676, the 
Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on 
November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For purposes of the effective date, a material increase in 
the death benefit or other material change in the contract 
causes the contract to be treated as a new contract. In the 
case of an increase in the death benefit of a contract that is 
converted to extended term insurance pursuant to nonforfeiture 
provisions, in a transaction to which section 501(d)(2) of the 
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 
(``HIPAA'') applies, the contract is not treated as a new 
contract. It was not intended that a new contract is required 
to be issued in connection with such a transaction, but rather, 
it was intended that the increase in the death benefit of the 
contract so converted in such a transaction not cause the 
contract to be treated as a new contract for purposes of this 
effective date.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $20 million in 1998, $53 million in 1999, 
$93 million in 2000, $140 million in 2001, $193 million in 
2002, $247 million in 2003, $299 million in 2004, $349 million 
in 2005, $399 million in 2006, and $447 million in 2007.

5. Earned income credit compliance provisions (secs. 1085(a), (b) and 
        (d) of the Act and sec. 32 of the Code)

                                Overview

    Certain eligible low-income workers are entitled to claim a 
refundable earned income credit on their income tax return. A 
refundable credit is a credit that not only reduces an 
individual's tax liability but allows refunds to the individual 
in excess of income tax liability. The amount of the credit an 
eligible individual may claim depends upon whether the 
individual has one, more than one, or no qualifying children, 
and is determined by multiplying the credit rate by the 
individual's \274\ earned income up to an earned income amount. 
The maximum amount of the credit is the product of the credit 
rate and the earned income amount. The credit is reduced by the 
amount of the alternative minimum tax (``AMT'') the taxpayer 
owes for the year. The credit is phased out above certain 
income levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \274\ In the case of a married individual who files a joint return 
with his or her spouse, the income for purposes of these tests is the 
combined income of the couple.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For individuals with earned income (or AGI, if greater) in 
excess of the beginning of the phaseout range, the maximum 
credit amount is reduced by the phaseout rate multiplied by the 
amount of earned income (or AGI, if greater) in excess of the 
beginning of the phaseout range. For individuals with earned 
income (or AGI, if greater) in excess of the end of the 
phaseout range, no credit is allowed. The definition of AGI 
used for phasing out the earned income credit disregards 
certain losses. The losses disregarded are: (1) net capital 
losses (if greater than zero); (2) net losses from trusts and 
estates; (3) net losses from nonbusiness rents and royalties; 
and (4) 50 percent of the net losses from business, computed 
separately with respect to sole proprietorships (other than in 
farming), sole proprietorships in farming, and other 
businesses. Also, an individual is not eligible for the earned 
income credit if the aggregate amount of ``disqualified 
income'' of the taxpayer for the taxable year exceeds $2,250. 
Disqualified income is the sum of: (1) interest (taxable and 
tax-exempt); (2) dividends; (3) net rent and royalty income (if 
greater than zero); (4) capital gain net income; and (5) net 
passive income (if greater than zero) that is not self-
employment income. The earned income amount, the phaseout 
amount and the disqualified income amount are indexed for 
inflation.
    The parameters for the credit depend upon the number of 
qualifying children the individual claims. For 1997, the 
parameters are given in the following table:

               Present-Law Earned Income Credit Parameters              
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Two or                          
                                         more         One         No    
                                      qualifying  qualifying  qualifying
                                       children      child     children 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Credit rate (percent)...............       40.00       34.00        7.65
Earned income amount................      $9,140      $6,500      $4,340
Maximum credit......................      $3,656      $2,210        $332
Phaseout begins.....................     $11,930     $11,930      $5,430
Phaseout rate (percent).............       21.06       15.98        7.65
Phaseout ends.......................     $29,290     $25,760      $9,770
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to claim the credit, an individual must either 
have a qualifying child or meet other requirements. A 
qualifying child must meet a relationship test, an age test, an 
identification test, and a residence test. In order to claim 
the credit without a qualifying child, an individual must not 
be a dependent and must be over age 24 and under age 65.
            a. Deny EIC eligibility for prior acts of recklessness or 
                    fraud (sec. 1085(a)(1) of Act and new sec. 32(k)(1) 
                    of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The accuracy-related penalty, which is imposed at a rate of 
20 percent, applies to the portion of any underpayment that is 
attributable to (1) negligence, (2) any substantial 
understatement of income tax, (3) any substantial valuation 
overstatement, (4) any substantial overstatement of pension 
liabilities, or (5) any substantial estate or gift tax 
valuation understatement (sec. 6662). Negligence includes any 
careless, reckless, or intentional disregard of rules or 
regulations, as well as any failure to make a reasonable 
attempt to comply with the provisions of the Code.
    The fraud penalty, which is imposed at a rate of 75 
percent, applies to the portion of any underpayment that is 
attributable to fraud (sec. 6663).
    Neither the accuracy-related penalty nor the fraud penalty 
is imposed with respect to any portion of an underpayment if it 
is shown that there was a reasonable cause for that portion and 
that the taxpayer acted in good faith with respect to that 
portion.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that taxpayers who fraudulently claim 
the EIC or recklessly or intentionally disregard EIC rules or 
regulations should be penalized for doing so.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, a taxpayer who fraudulently claims the 
earned income credit (EIC) is ineligible to claim the EIC for a 
subsequent period of 10 years. In addition, a taxpayer who 
erroneously claims the EIC due to reckless or intentional 
disregard of rules or regulations is ineligible to claim the 
EIC for a subsequent period of two years. These sanctions are 
in addition to any other penalty imposed under present law. The 
determination of fraud or of reckless or intentional disregard 
of rules or regulations are made in a deficiency proceeding 
(which provides for judicial review).

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1996.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provisions relating to (a) the denial of EIC 
eligibility for prior acts of recklessness or fraud, (b) the 
recertification requirement when a taxpayer has been found 
eligible for the EIC in the past, and (c) the due diligence 
requirements for paid preparers are estimated to increase 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts by less than $500,000 in 
1998, $18 million in 1999, $25 million in 2000, $24 million in 
2001, $21 million in 2002, $21 million in 2003, $21 million in 
2004, $21 million in 2005, $21 million in 2006, and $21 million 
in 2007.
            b. Recertification required when taxpayer found to be 
                    ineligible for EIC in past (sec. 1085(a)(1) of the 
                    Act and new sec. 32(k)(2) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    If an individual fails to provide a correct TIN and claims 
the EIC, such omission is treated as a mathematical or clerical 
error. Also, if an individual who claims the EIC with respect 
to net earnings from self employment fails to pay the proper 
amount of self-employment tax on such net earnings, the failure 
is treated as a mathematical or clerical error for purposes of 
the amount of EIC claims. Generally, taxpayers have 60 days in 
which they can either provide a correct TIN or request that the 
IRS follow the current-law deficiency procedures. If a taxpayer 
fails to respond within this period, he or she must file an 
amended return with a correct TIN or clarify that any self-
employment tax has been paid in order to obtain the EIC 
originally claimed.
    The IRS must follow deficiency procedures when 
investigating other types of questionable EIC claims. Under 
these procedures, contact letters are first sent to the 
taxpayer. If the necessary information is not provided the 
taxpayer, a statutory notice of deficiency is sent by certified 
mail, notifying the taxpayer that the adjustment will be 
assessed unless the taxpayer files a petition in Tax Court 
within 90 days. If a petition is not filed within that time and 
there is no other response to the statutory notice, the 
assessment is made and the EIC is denied.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the requirement of additional 
information to determine EIC eligibility is prudent for 
taxpayers who have incorrectly claimed the EIC in the past.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under Act, a taxpayer who has been denied the EIC as a 
result of deficiency procedures is ineligible to claim the EIC 
in subsequent years unless evidence of eligibility for the 
credit is provided by the taxpayer. To demonstrate current 
eligibility, the taxpayer is required to meet evidentiary 
requirements established by the Secretary of the Treasury. 
Failure to provide this information when claiming the EIC is 
treated as a mathematical or clerical error. If a taxpayer is 
recertified as eligible for the credit, the taxpayer is not 
required to provide this information in the future unless the 
IRS again denies the EIC as a result of a deficiency procedure. 
Ineligibility for the EIC under the provision is subject to 
review by the courts.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1996.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provisions relating to: (a) the denial of EIC 
eligibility for prior acts of recklessness or fraud, (b) the 
recertification requirement when a taxpayer has been found 
eligible for the EIC in the past, and (c) the due diligence 
requirements for paid preparers are estimated to increase 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts by less than $500,000 in 
1998, $18 million in 1999, $25 million in 2000, $24 million in 
2001, $21 million in 2002, $21 million in 2003, $21 million in 
2004, $21 million in 2005, $21 million in 2006, and $21 million 
in 2007.
            c. Due diligence requirements for paid preparers (sec. 
                    1085(a)(2) of the Act and new sec. 6695(g) of the 
                    Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Several penalties apply in the case of an understatement of 
tax that is caused by an income tax return preparer. First, if 
any part of an understatement of tax on a return or claim for 
refund is attributable to a position for which there was not a 
realistic possibility of being sustained on its merits and if 
any person who is an income tax return preparer with respect to 
such return or claim for refund knew (or reasonably should have 
known) of such position and such position was not disclosed or 
was frivolous, then that return preparer is subject to a 
penalty of $250 with respect to that return or claim (sec. 
6694(a)). The penalty is not imposed if there is reasonable 
cause for the understatement and the return preparer acted in 
good faith.
    In addition, if any part of an understatement of tax on a 
return or claim for refund is attributable to a willful attempt 
by an income tax return preparer to understate the tax 
liability of another person or to any reckless or intentional 
disregard of rules or regulations by an income tax return 
preparer, then the income tax return preparer is subject to a 
penalty of $1,000 with respect to that return or claim (sec. 
6694(b)).
    Also, a penalty for aiding and abetting the understatement 
of tax liability is imposed in cases where any person aids, 
assists in, procures, or advises with respect to the 
preparation or presentation of any portion of a return or other 
document if (1) the person knows or has reason to believe that 
the return or other document will be used in connection with 
any material matter arising under the tax laws, and (2) the 
person knows that if the portion of the return or other 
document were so used, an understatement of the tax liability 
of another person would result (sec. 6701).
    Additional penalties are imposed on return preparers with 
respect to each failure to (1) furnish a copy of a return or 
claim for refund to the taxpayer, (2) sign the return or claim 
for refund, (3) furnish his or her identifying number, (4) 
retain a copy or list of the returns prepared, and (5) file a 
correct information return (sec. 6695). The penalty is $50 for 
each failure and the total penalties imposed for any single 
type of failure for any calendar year are limited to $25,000.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that more thorough efforts by return 
preparers are important to improving EIC compliance.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, return preparers are required to fulfill 
certain due diligence requirements with respect to returns they 
prepare claiming the EIC. The penalty for failure to meet these 
requirements is $100. This penalty is in addition to any other 
penalty imposed under present law.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1996.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provisions relating to: (a) the denial of EIC 
eligibility for prior acts of recklessness or fraud, (b) the 
recertification requirement when a taxpayer has been found 
eligible for the EIC in the past, and (c) the due diligence 
requirements for paid preparers are estimated to increase 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts by less than $500,000 in 
1998, $18 million in 1999, $25 million in 2000, $24 million in 
2001, $21 million in 2002, $21 million in 2003, $21 million in 
2004, $21 million in 2005, $21 million in 2006, and $21 million 
in 2007.
            d. Modify the definition of AGI used to phase out the EIC 
                    (secs. 1085(b) and (d) of the Act and sec. 32(c)(5) 
                    of the Code)

                              Present Law

    The EIC is phased out above certain income levels. For 
individuals with earned income (or AGI, if greater) in excess 
of the beginning of the phaseout range, the maximum credit 
amount is reduced by the phaseout rate multiplied by the amount 
of earned income (or AGI, if greater) in excess of the 
beginning of the phaseout range. For individuals with earned 
income (or AGI, if greater) in excess of the end of the 
phaseout range, no credit is allowed. The definition of AGI 
used for the phaseout of the earned income credit disregards 
certain losses. The losses disregarded are: (1) net capital 
losses (if greater than zero); (2) net losses from trusts and 
estates; (3) net losses from nonbusiness rents and royalties; 
and (4) 50 percent of the net losses from business, computed 
separately with respect to sole proprietorships (other than in 
farming), sole proprietorships in farming, and other 
businesses.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed it could improve the targeting of the 
credit by expanding the definition of income used in phasing 
out the credit. The Congress believed that the definition of 
AGI used currently in phasing out the credit is too narrow and 
disregards other components of ability-to-pay. Tax-exempt 
interest and nontaxable distributions from pensions, annuities 
and individual retirement arrangements increase individuals' 
ability-to-pay and reduce the need for a tax credit. The 
Congress also believed that denying more business losses would 
more closely conform the definition of modified AGI to real 
economic income.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act modifies the definition of modified AGI used for 
phasing out the EIC by adding two items of nontaxable income 
and changing the percentage of certain losses disregarded. The 
two items added are: (1) tax-exempt interest, and (2) 
nontaxable distributions from pensions, annuities, and 
individual retirement arrangements (but only if not rolled over 
into similar vehicles during the applicable rollover period). 
The Act also increases the disregarded amount of net business 
losses from 50 percent to 75 percent, computed separately with 
respect to sole proprietorships (other than farming), sole 
proprietorships in farming, and other businesses.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 in 1998, $72 million in 
1999, $75 million in 2000, $79 million in 2001, $85 million in 
2002, $89 million in 2003, $92 million in 2004, $94 million in 
2005, $99 million in 2006, and $102 million in 2007.\275\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \275\ This estimate includes outlay reduction of $254 million for 
1997-2002 and $650 million for 1997-2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. Treatment of amounts received under the work requirements of the 
        Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 (sec. 
        1085(c) of the Act and sec. 32(c)(2)(B) of the Code)

                              Present Law

Workfare payments

    Generally under the Personal Responsibility and Work 
Opportunity Act of 1996, the receipt of certain government 
assistance payments is denied unless the recipient meets 
certain work requirements. The tax treatment of payments 
received with respect to these work requirements (``workfare 
payments'') was not specified in that legislation.

Earned income credit

    Certain eligible low-income workers are entitled to claim a 
refundable earned income credit on their income tax return. The 
amount of the credit an eligible individual may claim depends 
upon whether the individual has one, more than one, or no 
qualifying children, and is generally determined by multiplying 
the credit rate by the individual's earned income up to an 
earned income amount. The maximum amount of the credit is the 
product of the credit rate and the earned income amount. The 
credit is reduced by the amount of the alternative minimum tax 
(``AMT'') the taxpayer owes for the year. The credit is phased 
out above certain income levels. For individuals with earned 
income (or AGI, if greater) in excess of the beginning of the 
phaseout range, the maximum credit amount is reduced by the 
phaseout rate multiplied by the amount of earned income (or 
AGI, if greater) in excess of the beginning of the phaseout 
range. For individuals with earned income (or AGI, if greater) 
in excess of the end of the phaseout range, no credit is 
allowed. For these purposes, both earned income and AGI are 
defined to include wages. There is no explicit provision 
whether workfare payments are wages for purposes of the earned 
income credit.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed it inappropriate to provide the 
earned income credit for workfare payments.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that workfare payments are not wages for 
purposes of the earned income credit. There is no inference 
intended with respect to whether workfare payments otherwise 
qualify as wages for purposes of income and employment taxes or 
as wages for purposes of an employer's eligibility for the work 
opportunity tax credit and the welfare-to-work tax credit. 
Also, there is no inference intended with respect to whether 
workfare payments are wages for purposes of the earned income 
credit before enactment of this provision.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

7. Eligibility for income forecast method (sec. 1086 of the Act and 
        secs. 167 and 168 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A taxpayer generally recovers the cost of property used in 
a trade or business through depreciation or amortization 
deductions over time. Tangible property generally is 
depreciated under the modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System 
(``MACRS'') of section 168, which applies specific recovery 
periods and depreciation methods to the cost of various types 
of depreciable property. Acquired intangible property generally 
is amortized under section 197, which applies a 15-year 
recovery period and the straight-line method to the cost of 
applicable property.
    MACRS does not apply to certain property, including any 
motion picture film, video tape, or sound recording or to any 
other property if the taxpayer properly elects to exclude such 
property from MACRS and the taxpayer properly applies a unit-
of-production method or other appropriate method of 
depreciation not expressed in a term of years. Section 197 does 
not apply to certain intangible property, including property 
produced by the taxpayer or any interest in a film, sound 
recording, video tape, book or similar property not acquired in 
transaction (or a series of related transactions) involving the 
acquisition of assets constituting a trade or business or 
substantial portion thereof. Thus, the cost of a film, video 
tape, or similar property that is produced by the taxpayer or 
is acquired on a ``stand-alone'' basis by the taxpayer may not 
be recovered under either the MACRS depreciation provisions or 
under the section 197 amortization provisions. The cost of such 
property may be depreciated under the ``income forecast'' 
method.
    The income forecast method is considered to be a method of 
depreciation not expressed in a term of years. Under the income 
forecast method, the depreciation deduction for a taxable year 
for a property is determined by multiplying the cost of the 
property (less estimated salvage value) by a fraction, the 
numerator of which is the income generated by the property 
during the year and the denominator of which is the total 
forecasted or estimated income to be derived from the property 
during its useful life. The income forecast method has been 
held to be applicable for computing depreciation deductions for 
motion picture films, television films and taped shows, books, 
patents, master sound recordings and video games.\276\ Most 
recently, the income forecast method has been held applicable 
to consumer durable property subject to short-term ``rent-to-
own'' leases.\277\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \276\ See, e.g., Rev. Rul. 60-358, 1960-2 C.B. 68; Rev. Rul. 64-
273, 1964-2 C.B. 62; Rev. Rul 79-285, 1979-2 C.B. 91; and Rev. Rul. 89-
62, 1989-1 C.B. 78.
    \277\ See, ABC Rentals of San Antonio v. Comm., 97 F.3d 392 (10th 
Cir., 1996), pet. for rehg. filed (Nov. 16, 1996) where the Tenth 
Circuit decision reversed the holding of ABC Rentals of San Antonio v. 
Comm., 68 TCM 1362 (1994) and held that consumer durable property 
subject to short-term, ``rent-to-own'' leases were eligible for the 
income forecast method. For decisions supporting the Tax Court 
memorandum decision denying eligibility for certain tangible personal 
property, see El Charro TV Rental v. Comm., 79 F.3d 1145 (5th Cir., 
1996) (rent-to-own property not eligible) and Carland, Inc. v. Comm., 
90 T.C. 505 (1988), aff'd on this issue, 909 F.2d 1101 (8th Cir., 1990) 
(railroad rolling stock subject to a lease not eligible).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    Depreciation allowances attempt to measure the decline in 
the value of property due to wear, tear, and obsolescence and 
to match the cost recovery for the property with the income 
stream produced by the property. The Congress believed that the 
income forecast method of depreciation is, in theory, an 
appropriate method to match the recovery of cost of property 
with the income stream produced by the property. However, when 
compared to MACRS, the income forecast method involves 
significant complexities, including the determination of the 
income estimated to be generated by the property, the 
determination of the residual value of the property, and the 
application of the look-back method. Thus, the Congress 
believed that the availability of the income forecast method 
should be limited to instances where the economic depreciation 
of the property cannot be adequately reflected by the passage 
of time alone or where the income stream from the property is 
sufficiently unpredictable or uneven such that the application 
of another method of depreciation may result in the distortion 
of income. In addition, because the income forecast method is 
elective, the Congress was concerned about taxpayer 
selectivity.
    Finally, the Congress provided a MACRS class life for 
consumer durables subject to rent-to-own contracts, in order to 
avoid future controversies with respect to the proper treatment 
of such property.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act clarifies the types of property to which the income 
forecast method may be applied. Under the Act, the income 
forecast method is available to motion picture films, 
television films and taped shows, books, patents, master sound 
recordings, copyrights, and other such property as designated 
by the Secretary of the Treasury. It is expected that the 
Secretary will exercise this authority such that the income 
forecast method will be available to property the economic 
depreciation of which cannot be adequately measured by the 
passage of time alone or to property the income from which is 
sufficiently unpredictable or uneven so as to result in the 
distortion of income. The mere fact that property is subject to 
a lease should not make the property eligible for the income 
forecast method. The income forecast method is not to be 
applicable to property to which section 197 applies.
    In addition, consumer durables subject to rent-to-own 
contracts are provided a three-year recovery period and a four-
year class life for MACRS purposes (and would not be eligible 
for the income forecast method). Such property generally is 
described in Rev. Proc. 95-38, 1995-2 C.B. 397. In addition, 
the special 3-year recovery period may apply to any property 
generally used in the home for personal, but not business, use. 
Congress understood that certain rent-to-own property, 
including computer and peripheral equipment, may be used in the 
home for either personal or business purposes, and the taxpayer 
may not be aware of how its customers may use the property. So 
as not to increase the administrative burdens of taxpayers, the 
Congress intended that if such dual-use property does not 
represent a significant portion of a taxpayer's leasing 
property and if such other leasing property predominantly is 
qualified rent-to-own property, then such dual-use property 
generally also would be qualified rent-to-own property. 
However, if such dual-use property represents a significant 
portion of the taxpayer's leasing property, the Congress 
intended that the burden of proof be placed on the taxpayer to 
show that such property is qualified rent-to-own property. 
Further, the definition of ``rent-to-own contract'' includes 
leases that provide for level regular periodic payments or 
decreasing regular periodic payments, where no payment is less 
than 40 percent of the largest payment.
    Finally, the Congress clarified that the 3-year recovery 
period provided by the Act only applies to property subject to 
leases and no inference is intended as to whether any 
arrangement constitutes a lease for tax purposes.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for property placed in service 
after the date of enactment (after August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $29 million in 1998, $41 million in 1999, 
$62 million in 2000, $78 million in 2001, $38 million in 2002, 
$27 million in 2003, $25 million in 2004, $17 million in 2005, 
$17 million in 2006, and $18 million in 2007.

 8. Modify the exception to the related party rule of section 1033 for 
 individuals to only provide an exception for de minimis amounts (sec. 
               1087 of the Act and sec. 1033 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under section 1033, gain realized by a taxpayer from 
certain involuntary conversions of property is deferred to the 
extent the taxpayer purchases property similar or related in 
service or use to the converted property within a specified 
replacement period of time. Pursuant to a provision of Public 
Law 104-7, subchapter C corporations (and certain partnerships 
with corporate partners) are not entitled to defer gain under 
section 1033 if the replacement property or stock is purchased 
from a related person. A person is treated as related to 
another person if the person bears a relationship to the other 
person described in section 267(b) or 707(b)(1). An exception 
to this related party rule provides that a taxpayer could 
purchase replacement property or stock from a related person 
and defer gain under section 1033 to the extent the related 
person acquired the replacement property or stock from an 
unrelated person within the replacement period.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that, except for de minimis cases, 
individuals should be subject to the same rules with respect to 
the acquisition of replacement property from a related person 
as are other taxpayers.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act expands the present-law denial of the application 
of section 1033 to any other taxpayer (including an individual) 
that acquires replacement property from a related party (as 
defined by secs. 267(b) and 707(b)(1)) unless the taxpayer has 
aggregate realized gain of $100,000 or less for the taxable 
year with respect to converted property with aggregate realized 
gains. In the case of a partnership (or S corporation), the 
annual $100,000 limitation applies to both the partnership (or 
S corporation) and each partner (or shareholder).

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to involuntary conversions occurring 
after June 8, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million in 1998, $4 million in 1999, $6 
million in 2000, $8 million in 2001, $11 million in 2002, $13 
million in 2003, $15 million in 2004, $17 million in 2005, $19 
million in 2006, and $21 million in 2007.

 9. Repeal of exception for certain sales by manufacturers to dealers 
  (sec. 1088 of the Act and sec. 811(c) of the Tax Reform Act of 1986)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In general, under present law, the installment method of 
accounting may not be used by dealers in personal property. 
Prior law provided an exception which permits the use of the 
installment method for installment obligations arising from the 
sale of tangible personal property by a manufacturer of the 
property (or an affiliate of the manufacturer) to a 
dealer,\278\ but only if the dealer was obligated to make 
payments of principal only when the dealer resold (or rented) 
the property, the manufacturer had the right to repurchase the 
property at a fixed (or ascertainable) price after no longer 
than a 9-month period following the sale to the dealer, and 
certain other conditions were met. In order to meet the other 
conditions, the aggregate face amount of the installment 
obligations that otherwise qualified for the exception must 
have equaled at least 50 percent of the total sales to dealers 
that gave rise to such receivables (the ``50-percent test'') in 
both the taxable year and the preceding taxable year, except 
that, if the taxpayer met all of the requirements for the 
exception in the preceding taxable year, the taxpayer would not 
have been treated as failing to meet the 50-percent test before 
the second consecutive year in which the taxpayer did not 
actually meet the test. In addition, these requirements must 
have been met by the taxpayer in its first taxable year 
beginning after October 22, 1986, except that obligations 
issued before that date were treated as meeting the applicable 
requirements if such obligations were conformed to the 
requirements of the provision within 60 days of that date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \278\ I.e., the sale of the property must be intended to be for 
resale or leasing by the dealer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the special exception that 
permitted certain dealers to use the installment method was no 
longer necessary or appropriate and the installment sale method 
of accounting should not be available to such dealers. 
Accordingly, the Act repeals that exception.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act repeals the exception that permits the use of the 
installment method of accounting for certain sales by 
manufacturers to dealers.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning one 
year after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997). Any 
resulting adjustment from a required change in accounting will 
be includible ratably over the 4 taxable years beginning after 
that date.\279\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \279\ A technical correction is necessary to accomplish this 
result.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $44 million in 1999, $97 million in 2000, 
$106 million in both 2001 and 2002, $64 million in 2003, $21 
million in 2004, $22 million in 2005, $23 million in 2006, and 
$24 million in 2007.

10. Treatment of charitable remainder trusts (sec. 1089 of the Act and 
        sec. 664 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

In general

    Sections 170(f), 2055(e)(2) and 2522(c)(2) of present law 
disallow a charitable deduction for income, estate or gift tax 
purposes, respectively, where the donor transfers an interest 
in property to a charity (e.g., a remainder) while also either 
retaining an interest in that property (e.g., an income 
interest) or transferring an interest in that property to a 
noncharity for less than full and adequate consideration. 
Exceptions to this general rule are provided for: (1) remainder 
interests in charitable remainder annuity trusts, charitable 
remainder unitrusts, pooled income funds, farms, and personal 
residences; (2) present interests in the form of a guaranteed 
annuity or a fixed percentage of the annual value of the 
property; (3) an undivided portion of the donor's entire 
interest in the property; and (4) a qualified conservation 
easement.

Charitable remainder annuity trusts and charitable remainder unitrusts

    A charitable remainder annuity trust is a trust which is 
required to pay a fixed dollar amount, not less often than 
annually, of at least 5 percent of the initial value of the 
trust to a non-charity for the life of an individual or a 
period of years not to exceed 20 years, with the remainder 
passing to charity. A charitable remainder unitrust is a trust 
which generally is required to pay, at least annually, a fixed 
percentage of the fair market value of the trust's assets 
determined at least annually to a noncharity for the life of an 
individual or a period of years not to exceed 20 years, with 
the remainder passing to charity (sec. 664(d)).
    Distributions from a charitable remainder annuity trust or 
charitable remainder unitrust are treated first as ordinary 
income to the extent of the trust's current and previously 
undistributed ordinary income for the trust's year in which the 
distribution occurred; second, as capital gains to the extent 
of the trust's current capital gain and previously 
undistributed capital gain for the trust's year in which the 
distribution occurred; third, as other income (e.g., tax-exempt 
income) to the extent of the trust's current and previously 
undistributed other income for the trust's year in which the 
distribution occurred; and, fourth, as corpus (sec. 664(b)).
    Distributions are includible in the income of the 
beneficiary for the year that the annuity or unitrust amount is 
required to be distributed even though the annuity or unitrust 
amount is not distributed until after the close of the trust's 
taxable year. Treas. Reg. sec. 1.664-1(d)(4).
    On April 18, 1997, the Treasury Department proposed 
regulations providing additional rules under sections 664 and 
2702 to address the abuse described below and other perceived 
abuses involving distributions from charitable remainder 
trusts. One of those proposed rules would require that payment 
of any required annuity or unitrust amount by a charitable 
remainder trust (other than an ``income only'' unitrust) be 
made by the close of the trust's taxable year in which such 
payments are due. See Prop. Treas. Reg. secs. 1.664-2(a)(1)(i) 
and 1.664-3(a)(1)(i).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress was concerned that the interplay of the rules 
governing the timing of income from distributions from 
charitable remainder trusts (i.e., Treas. Reg. sec. 1.664-
1(d)(4) and the rules governing the character of distributions 
(i.e., sec. 664(b)) created opportunities for abuse where the 
required annual payments are a large portion of the trust and 
realization of income and gain can be postponed until a year 
later than the accrual of such large payments. For example, 
some taxpayers have been creating charitable remainder 
unitrusts with a requiredannual payout of 80 percent of the 
trust's assets and then funding the trust with highly appreciated 
nondividend paying stock which the trust sells in a year subsequent to 
when the required distribution is includible in the beneficiary's 
income and using proceeds from that sale to pay the required 
distribution attributable to the prior year. Those taxpayers have 
treated the distribution of 80 percent of the trust's assets 
attributable to the trust's first required distribution as non-taxable 
distributions of corpus because the trust had not realized any income 
in its first taxable year. The Congress believed that such treatment is 
abusive and is inconsistent with the purpose of the charitable 
remainder trust rules. In order to limit this kind of abuse, the Act 
provides that a trust cannot be a charitable remainder trust if the 
required payout is greater than 50 percent of the initial fair market 
value of the trust's assets (in the case of a charitable remainder 
annuity trust) or 50 percent of the annual value of the trust's assets 
(in the case of a charitable remainder unitrust).
    In addition, the Congress was concerned that certain 
charitable remainder trusts had been created primarily to 
obtain the tax benefit of the trust's exemption from income tax 
under section 664(c) and not to provide for charity. The 
Congress was aware that many charitable remainder trusts have 
been created where the actuarial value of the charitable 
remainder interest at the time of creation is insignificant. 
The Congress believed that requiring that the actuarial value 
of the charitable remainder interest be at least 10 percent of 
any transfers to the trust will insure that any benefits from 
the creation of charitable remainder trusts be available only 
where there is a significant benefit to charity.
    The Congress intended that the provision of the Act not 
limit or alter the validity of regulations proposed by the 
Treasury Department on April 18, 1997, or the Treasury 
Department's authority to address this or other abuses of the 
rules governing the taxation of charitable remainder trusts or 
their beneficiaries.

                        Explanation of Provision

50-percent payout limitation

    Under the Act, a trust cannot be a charitable remainder 
annuity trust if the annuity for any year is greater than 50 
percent of the initial fair market value of the trust's assets 
or be a charitable remainder unitrust if the percentage of 
assets that are required to be distributed at least annually is 
greater than 50 percent. Any trust that fails this 50-percent 
rule will not be a charitable remainder trust whose taxation is 
governed under section 664, but will be treated as a complex 
trust and, accordingly, all its income will be taxed to its 
beneficiaries or to the trust.

10-percent minimum value of remainder interest

    In addition, the Act requires that the value of the 
charitable remainder with respect to any transfer to a 
qualified charitable remainder annuity trust or charitable 
remainder unitrust be at least 10 percent of the net fair 
market value of such property transferred in trust on the date 
of the contribution to the trust. The 10-percent test is 
measured on each transfer to the charitable remainder trust 
and, consequently, a charitable remainder trust which meets the 
10-percent test on the date of transfer will not subsequently 
fail to meet that test if interest rates have declined between 
the trust's creation and the death of a measuring life. 
Similarly, where a charitable remainder trust is created for 
the joint lives of two individuals with a remainder to charity, 
the trust will not cease to qualify as a charitable remainder 
trust because the value of the charitable remainder was less 
than 10 percent of the trust's assets at the first death of 
those two individuals.
    The Act provided additional rules in order to provide 
relief for trusts that do not meet the 10-percent rule. First, 
where a transfer is made after July 28, 1997, to a charitable 
remainder trust that fails the 10-percent test, the trust is 
treated as meeting the 10-percent requirement if the governing 
instrument of the trust is changed by reformation, amendment, 
construction, or otherwise to meet such requirement by reducing 
the payout rate or duration (or both) of any noncharitable 
beneficiary's interest to the extent necessary to satisfy such 
requirement so long as the reformation is commenced within the 
period permitted for reformations of charitable remainder 
trusts under section 2055(e)(3). The statute of limitations 
applicable to a deficiency of any tax resulting from 
reformation of the trust does not expire before the date one 
year after the Treasury Department is notified that the trust 
has been reformed. In substance, this rule relaxes the 
requirements of section 2055(e)(3)(B) to the extent necessary 
for the reformation for the trust to meet the 10-percent 
requirement.
    Second, a transfer to a trust will be treated as if the 
transfer never had been made where a court having jurisdiction 
over the trust subsequently declares the trust void (because, 
e.g., the application of the 10-percent rule frustrates the 
purposes for which the trust was created) and judicial 
proceedings to revoke the trust are commenced within the period 
permitted for reformations of charitable remainder trusts under 
section 2055(e)(3). Under this provision, the effect of 
``unwinding'' the trust is that any transactions made by the 
trust with respect to the property transferred (e.g., income 
earned on the assets transferred to the trust and capital gains 
generated by the sales of the property transferred) would be 
income and capital gain of the donor (or the donor's estate if 
the trust was testamentary), and the donor (or the donor's 
estate if the trust was testamentary) would not be permitted a 
charitable deduction with respect to the transfer. The statute 
of limitations applicable to a deficiency of any tax resulting 
from ``unwinding'' the trust does not expire before the date 
one year after the Treasury Department is notified that the 
trust has been revoked.
    Third, where an additional contribution is made after July 
28, 1997, to a charitable remainder unitrust created before 
July 29, 1997, and that unitrust would not meet the 10-percent 
requirement with respect to the additional contribution, the 
Act provides that such additional contribution will be treated, 
under regulations to be issued by the Secretary of the 
Treasury, as if it had been made to a new trust that does not 
meet the 10-percent requirement, but which does not affect the 
status of the original unitrust as a charitable remainder 
trust.

                             Effective Date

50-percent payout limitation

    The provision that requires that the payout rate of a 
qualified charitable remainder trust be not exceed 50 percent 
applies to transfers to a trust made after June 18, 1997.

10-percent minimum value of remainder interest

    The requirement that the value of the charitable remainder 
with respect to any transfer to a qualified remainder trust be 
at least 10 percent of the fair market value of the assets 
transferred in trust applies to transfers to a trust made after 
July 28, 1997. However, the 10-percent requirement does not 
apply to a charitable remainder trust created by a testamentary 
instrument (e.g., a will or revocable trust) executed before 
July 29, 1997, if the instrument is not modified after that 
date and the settlor dies before January 1, 1999, or could not 
be modified after July 28, 1997, because the settlor was under 
a mental disability on that date (i.e., July 28, 1997) and all 
times thereafter.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $6 million per year for each of the years 
from 1997 through 2007.

11. Expanded SSA records for tax enforcement (secs. 1090(a)(1) and sec. 
        1090(b) of the Act and secs. 205(c)(2) and 454(e) of the Social 
        Security Act)

                              Present Law

    Under the Family Support Act of 1988, States must require 
each parent to furnish their social security number (SSN) for 
birth records. Parents can apply directly to the Social 
Security Administration (SSA) for an SSN for their child; or, 
in most states, they may apply for the child's SSN when 
obtaining a birth certificate. On an individual's SSN 
application, the SSA currently requires the mother's maiden 
name but not her SSN.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress anticipates that the Internal Revenue Service 
(IRS) will use this information to identify questionable claims 
for the earned income credit, the dependent exemption, and 
other tax benefits, before tax refunds are paid out.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, the SSA is required to obtain social 
security numbers (SSNs) of both parents on minor children's 
applications for SSNs. Also, the SSA will provide this 
information to the IRS as part of the Data Master File (``DM-1 
file'').

                             Effective Date

    The provision was generally effective on the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997). The requirement that the SSA obtain 
SSNs of both parents on minor children's applications for SSNs, 
however, is effective for applications made 180 days after the 
date of enactment.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $10 million per year from 1999 through 2007.

12. Using Federal case registry of child support orders for tax 
        enforcement purposes (secs. 1090(a)(2) and 1090(a)(3) of the 
        Act and sec. 453(h) of the Social Security Act)

                              Present Law

    The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity 
Reconciliation Act of 1996 mandated the creation of a Federal 
Case Registry of Child Support Orders (the FCR) by October 1, 
1998. Although HHS has not yet issued final regulations, the 
FCR is required to include the names, and the State case 
identification numbers of individuals who are owed or who owe 
child support or for whom paternity is being established. It 
may also include the social security numbers (SSNs) of these 
individuals.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the data collected by the State 
and local governments and incorporated into the FCR can be 
useful to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Therefore, the 
provision makes this information available to the IRS to 
enforce the tax law.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Not later than October 1, 1998, the Secretary of the 
Treasury will have access to the Federal Case Registry of Child 
Support Orders. Also, by October 1, 1999, the data elements on 
the State Case Registry will include the SSNs of children 
covered by cases in the Registry, and the States will provide 
the SSNs of these children to the FCR.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective on October 1, 1998.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $10 million in 2001, $20 million in 2002, 
$30 million in 2003, $40 million in 2004, $60 million in 2005, 
$85 million in 2006, and $105 million in 2007.

13. Modification of estimated tax safe harbors (sec. 1091 of the Act 
        and sec. 6654 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present law, an individual taxpayer generally is 
subject to an addition to tax for any underpayment of estimated 
tax. An individual generally does not have an underpayment of 
estimated tax if he or she makes timely estimated tax payments 
at least equal to: (1) 100 percent of the tax shown on the 
return of the individual for the preceding year (the ``100 
percent of last year's liability safe harbor'') or (2) 90 
percent of the tax shown on the return for the current year. 
Under prior law, the 100 percent of last year's liability safe 
harbor was modified to be a 110 percent of last year's 
liability safe harbor for any individual with an AGI of more 
than $150,000 as shown on the return for the preceding taxable 
year. If a married individual filed a separate return for the 
year for which an estimated tax installment payment was due, 
the $150,000 amount became $75,000.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act changes the 110 percent of last year's liability 
safe harbor to be a 100 percent of last year's liability safe 
harbor for taxable years beginning in 1998, a 105 percent of 
last year's liability safe harbor for taxable years beginning 
in 1999, 2000, and 2001, and a 112 percent of last year's 
liability safe harbor for taxable years beginning in 2002.
    In addition, no estimated tax penalties will be imposed 
under section 6654 or section 6655 (relating to estimated tax 
payments of individuals and corporations, respectively) for any 
period before January 1, 1998, for any payment the due date of 
which is before January 16, 1998, with respect to an 
underpayment to the extent the underpayment is created or 
increased by a provision of the Act.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $7,400 million in 1998, increase fiscal year 
budget receipts by $4,000 million in 1999, increase fiscal year 
budget receipts by $4,400 million in 2002, and reduce fiscal 
year budget receipts by $1,000 million in 2003.
                    TITLE XI. FOREIGN TAX PROVISIONS

                         A. General Provisions

1. Simplify foreign tax credit limitation for individuals (sec. 1101 of 
        the Act and sec. 904 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In order to compute the foreign tax credit, a taxpayer 
computes foreign source taxable income and foreign taxes paid 
in each of the applicable separate foreign tax credit 
limitation categories. In the case of an individual, under 
prior law, this required the filing of IRS Form 1116.
    In many cases, individual taxpayers who are eligible to 
credit foreign taxes may have only a modest amount of foreign 
source gross income, all of which is income from investments. 
Taxable income of this type ordinarily is includible in the 
single foreign tax credit limitation category for passive 
income. However, under certain circumstances, the Code treats 
investment-type income (e.g., dividends and interest) as income 
in one of several other separate limitation categories (e.g., 
high withholding tax interest income or general limitation 
income). For this reason, any taxpayer with foreign source 
gross income was required to provide sufficient detail on IRS 
Form 1116 to ensure that foreign source taxable income from 
investments, as well as all other foreign source taxable 
income, was allocated to the correct limitation category.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that a significant number of 
individuals are entitled to credit relatively small amounts of 
foreign tax imposed at modest effective tax rates on foreign 
source investment income. For taxpayers in this class, the 
applicable foreign tax credit limitations typically exceed the 
amounts of taxes paid. Therefore, exempting these taxpayers 
from the foreign tax credit limitation rules significantly 
reduces the complexity of the tax law without significantly 
altering actual tax liabilities. At the same time, however, the 
Congress believed that this exemption should be limited to 
those cases where the taxpayer receives a payee statement 
showing the amount of the foreign source income and the foreign 
tax.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act allows individuals with no more than $300 ($600 in 
the case of married persons filing jointly) of creditable 
foreign taxes, and no foreign source income other than passive 
income, an exemption from the foreign tax credit limitation 
rules. (The Congress intended that an individual electing this 
exemption will not be required to file IRS Form 1116 in order 
to obtain the benefit of the foreign tax credit.) An individual 
making this election is not entitled to any carryover of excess 
foreign taxes to or from a taxable year to which the election 
applies.
    For purposes of this election, passive income generally is 
defined to include all types of income that is foreign personal 
holding company income under the subpart F rules, plus income 
inclusions from foreign personal holding companies and passive 
foreign investment companies, provided that the income is shown 
on a payee statement furnished to the individual. For purposes 
of this election, creditable foreign taxes include only foreign 
taxes that are shown on a payee statement furnished to the 
individual.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to taxable years beginning after 
December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $1 million in 1998 and by $1 
million per year in each of the years 1999 through 2007.

2. Simplify translation of foreign taxes (sec. 1102 of the Act and 
        secs. 905(c) and 986 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

Translation of foreign taxes

    Foreign income taxes paid in foreign currencies are 
required to be translated into U.S. dollar amounts using the 
exchange rate as of the time such taxes are paid to the foreign 
country or U.S. possession. This rule applies to foreign taxes 
paid directly by U.S. taxpayers, which taxes are creditable in 
the year paid or accrued, and to foreign taxes paid by foreign 
corporations that are deemed paid by a U.S. corporation that is 
a shareholder of the foreign corporation, and hence creditable, 
in the year that the U.S. corporation receives a dividend or 
has an income inclusion from the foreign corporation.

Redetermination of foreign taxes

    Under prior law, for taxpayers that utilize the accrual 
basis of accounting for determining creditable foreign taxes, 
accrued and unpaid foreign tax liabilities denominated in 
foreign currencies were translated into U.S. dollar amounts at 
the exchange rate as of the last day of the taxable year of 
accrual. If a difference existed between the dollar value of 
accrued foreign taxes and the dollar value of those taxes when 
paid, a redetermination of foreign taxes arose. A foreign tax 
redetermination could occur in the case of a refund of foreign 
taxes. A foreign tax redetermination also could arise because 
the amount of foreign currency units actually paid differed 
from the amount of foreign currency units accrued. In addition, 
a redetermination could arise due to fluctuations in the value 
of the foreign currency relative to the dollar between the date 
of accrual and the date of payment.
    As a general matter, a redetermination of foreign tax paid 
or accrued directly by a U.S. person required notification of 
the Internal Revenue Service and a redetermination of U.S. tax 
liability for the taxable year for which the foreign tax was 
claimed as a credit. The Treasury regulations provide 
exceptions to this rule for de minimis cases. In the case of a 
redetermination of foreign taxes that qualify for the indirect 
(or ``deemed-paid'') foreign tax credit under sections 902 and 
960, the Treasury regulations generally require taxpayers to 
make appropriate adjustments to the payor foreign corporation's 
pools of earnings and profits and foreign taxes.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the administrative burdens 
associated with the foreign tax credit can be reduced 
significantly by permitting foreign taxes to be translated 
using reasonably accurate average translation rates for the 
period in which the tax payments are made. This approach will 
reduce, sometimes substantially, the number of translation 
calculations that are required to be made. In addition, the 
Congress believed that taxpayers that are on the accrual basis 
of accounting for purposes of determining creditable foreign 
taxes should be permitted to translate those taxes into U.S. 
dollar amounts in the year to which those taxes relate, and 
should not be required to make adjustments or redetermination 
to those translated amounts, if actual tax payments are made 
within a reasonably short period of time after the close of 
such year. Moreover, the Congress believed that it is 
appropriate to use an average exchange rate for the taxable 
year with respect to which such foreign taxes relate for 
purposes of translating those taxes. On the other hand, the 
Congress believed that a foreign tax not paid within a 
reasonably short period after the close of the year to which 
the taxes relate should not be treated as a foreign tax for 
such year. By drawing a bright line between those foreign tax 
payment delays that do and do not require a redetermination, 
the Congress believed that a reasonable degree of certainty and 
clarity will be added to the law in this area.

                        Explanation of Provision

Translation of foreign taxes

            Translation of certain accrued foreign taxes
    With respect to taxpayers that take foreign income taxes 
into account when accrued, the Act generally provides for 
foreign taxes to be translated at the average exchange rate for 
the taxable year to which such taxes relate. This rule does not 
apply (1) to any foreign income tax paid after the date two 
years after the close of the taxable year to which such taxes 
relate, (2) with respect to taxes of an accrual-basis taxpayer 
that are actually paid in a taxable year prior to the year to 
which they relate, or (3) to tax payments that are denominated 
in an inflationary currency (as defined by regulations).
            Translation of all other foreign taxes
    Under the Act, foreign taxes not eligible for application 
of the preceding rule generally are translated into U.S. 
dollars using the exchange rates as of the time such taxes are 
paid. The Act provides the Secretary of the Treasury with 
authority to issue regulations that would allow foreign tax 
payments to be translated into U.S. dollar amounts using an 
average exchange rate for a specified period.

Redetermination of foreign taxes

    Under the Act, a redetermination is required if: (1) 
accrued taxes when paid differ from the amounts claimed as 
credits by the taxpayer, (2) accrued taxes are not paid before 
the date two years after the close of the taxable year to which 
such taxes relate, or (3) any tax paid is refunded in whole or 
in part. Thus, for example, the Act provides that if at the 
close of the second taxable year after the taxable year to 
which an accrued tax relates, any portion of the tax so accrued 
has not yet been paid, a foreign tax redetermination under 
section 905(c) is required for the amount representing the 
unpaid portion of that accrued tax. In other words, the 
previous accrual of any tax that is unpaid as of that date is 
denied. Similarly, if the amount of foreign taxes paid exceeds 
the amount accrued and claimed as a credit, a foreign tax 
redetermination under section 905(c) is required for the 
additional amount of such taxes. In cases where a 
redetermination is required, as under prior law, the Act 
specifies that the taxpayer must notify the Secretary, who will 
redetermine the amount of the tax for the year or years 
affected. In the case of indirect foreign tax credits, 
regulatory authority is granted to prescribe appropriate 
adjustments to the foreign corporation's pools of post-1986 
foreign income taxes and post-1986 undistributed earnings in 
lieu of such a redetermination.
    The Act provides specific rules for the treatment of 
accrued taxes that are paid more than two years after the close 
of the taxable year to which such taxes relate. In the case of 
the direct foreign tax credit, any such taxes subsequently paid 
are taken into account for the taxable year to which such taxes 
relate, but are translated into U.S. dollar amounts using the 
exchange rates in effect as of the time such taxes are paid. In 
the case of the indirect foreign tax credit, any such taxes 
subsequently paid are taken into account for the taxable year 
in which paid, and are translated into U.S. dollar amounts 
using the exchange rates as of the time such taxes are paid.
    For example, assume that in year 1 a taxpayer accrues 1,000 
units of foreign tax that relate to year 1 and that give rise 
to a foreign tax credit under section 901 and assume that the 
currency involved is not inflationary. Further assume that as 
of the end of year 1 the tax is unpaid. In this case, the Act 
provides that the taxpayer translates 1,000 units of accrued 
foreign tax into U.S. dollars at the average exchange rate for 
year 1. If the 1,000 units of tax are paid by the taxpayer in 
either year 2 or year 3, no redetermination of foreign tax is 
required. If any portion of the tax so accrued remains unpaid 
as of the end of year 3, however, the taxpayer is required to 
redetermine its foreign tax accrued in year 1 to eliminate the 
accrued but unpaid tax, thereby reducing its foreign tax credit 
for such year. If the taxpayer pays the disallowed taxes in 
year 4, the taxpayer again redetermines its foreign taxes (and 
foreign tax credit) for year 1, but the taxes paid in year 4 
are translated into U.S. dollars at the exchange rate for year 
4.

                             Effective Date

    The provision generally is effective for foreign taxes paid 
(in the case of taxpayers using the cash basis for determining 
the foreign tax credit) or accrued (in the case of taxpayers 
using the accrual basis for determining the foreign tax credit) 
in taxable years beginning after December 31, 1997. The 
provision's changes to the foreign tax redetermination rules 
apply to foreign taxes which relate to taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $1 million per year in each of the 
years 1998 through 2007.

3. Election to use simplified foreign tax credit limitation for 
        alternative minimum tax purposes (sec. 1103 of the Act and sec. 
        59 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Computing foreign tax credit limitations requires the 
allocation and apportionment of deductions between items of 
foreign source income and items of U.S. source income. Foreign 
tax credit limitations must be computed both for regular tax 
purposes and for purposes of the alternative minimum tax 
(``AMT''). Under prior law, the allocation and apportionment of 
deductions was required to be done separately for regular tax 
foreign tax credit limitation purposes and AMT foreign tax 
credit limitation purposes.

                           Reasons for Change

    The process of allocating and apportioning deductions for 
purposes of calculating the regular and AMT foreign tax credit 
limitations can be complex. Taxpayers that had allocated and 
apportioned deductions for regular foreign tax credit purposes 
generally were required to reallocate and reapportion the same 
deductions for AMT foreign tax credit purposes, based on assets 
and income that reflect AMT adjustments (including 
depreciation). However, the differences between regular taxable 
income and alternative minimum taxable income often are 
relevant primarily to U.S. source income. The Congress believed 
that permitting taxpayers to use foreign source regular taxable 
income in computing their AMT foreign tax credit limitation 
will provide an appropriate simplification of the necessary 
computations by eliminating the need to reallocate and 
reapportion every deduction.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act permits taxpayers to elect to use as their AMT 
foreign tax credit limitation fraction the ratio of foreign 
source regular taxable income to entire alternative minimum 
taxable income, rather than the ratio of foreign source 
alternative minimum taxable income to entire alternative 
minimum taxable income. Under this election, foreign source 
regular taxable income is used, however, only to the extent it 
does not exceed entire alternative minimum taxable income. In 
the event that foreign source regular taxable income does 
exceed entire alternative minimum taxable income, and the 
taxpayer has income in more than one foreign tax credit 
limitation category, the Congress intended that the foreign 
source taxable income in each such category generally will be 
reduced by a pro rata portion of that excess.
    The election is available only in the first taxable year 
beginning after December 31, 1997 for which the taxpayer claims 
an AMT foreign tax credit. The Congress intended that a 
taxpayer will be treated, for this purpose, as claiming an AMT 
foreign tax credit for any taxable year for which the taxpayer 
chooses to have the benefits of the foreign tax credit and in 
which the taxpayer is subject to the AMT or would be subject to 
the AMT but for the availability of the AMT foreign tax credit. 
The election, once made, will apply to all subsequent taxable 
years, and may be revoked only with the consent of the 
Secretary of the Treasury.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to taxable years beginning after 
December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $1 million per year in each of the 
years 1998 through 2007.

4. Simplify treatment of personal transactions in foreign currency 
        (sec. 1104 of the Act and sec. 988 of the Code)

                              Present Law

    When a U.S. taxpayer makes a payment in a foreign currency, 
gain or loss (referred to as ``exchange gain or loss'') 
generally arises from any change in the value of the foreign 
currency relative to the U.S. dollar between the time the 
currency was acquired (or the obligation to pay was incurred) 
and the time that the payment is made. Gain or loss results 
because foreign currency, unlike the U.S. dollar, is treated as 
property for Federal income tax purposes.
    Exchange gain or loss can arise in the course of a trade or 
business or in connection with an investment transaction. 
Exchange gain or loss also can arise where foreign currency was 
acquired for personal use. For example, the IRS has ruled that 
a taxpayer who convertsU.S. dollars to a foreign currency for 
personal use while traveling abroad realizes exchange gain or loss on 
reconversion of appreciated or depreciated foreign currency (Rev. Rul. 
74-7, 1974-1 C.B. 198).
    Prior to the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (``1986 Act''), most of 
the rules for determining the Federal income tax consequences 
of foreign currency transactions were embodied in a series of 
court cases and revenue rulings issued by the IRS. Additional 
rules of limited application were provided by Treasury 
regulations. Pre-1986 law was believed to be unclear regarding 
the character, the timing of recognition, and the source of 
gain or loss due to fluctuations in the exchange rate of 
foreign currency. The 1986 Act provided a comprehensive set of 
rules for the U.S. tax treatment of transactions involving 
foreign currencies.
    However, the 1986 Act provisions designed to clarify the 
treatment of currency transactions, primarily found in section 
988 of the Code, apply to transactions entered into by an 
individual only to the extent that expenses attributable to 
such transactions are deductible under section 162 (as a trade 
or business expense) or section 212 (as an expense of producing 
income). Therefore, the principles of pre-1986 law continue to 
apply to personal currency transactions.

                           Reasons for Change

    An individual who lives or travels abroad generally cannot 
use U.S. dollars to make all of the purchases incident to daily 
life. If an individual must treat foreign currency in this 
instance as property giving rise to U.S.-dollar income or loss 
every time the individual, in effect, ``barters'' the foreign 
currency for goods or services, the U.S. individual living in 
or visiting a foreign country will have a significant 
administrative burden that may bear little or no relation to 
whether U.S.-dollar measured income has increased or decreased. 
The Congress believed that individuals should be given relief 
from the requirement to keep track of exchange gains on a 
transaction-by-transaction basis in de minimis cases.

                        Explanation of Provision

    If an individual acquires foreign currency and disposes of 
it in a personal transaction and the exchange rate changes 
between the acquisition and disposition of such currency, the 
Act applies nonrecognition treatment to any resulting exchange 
gain, provided that such gain does not exceed $200. 
Transactions entered into in connection with a business trip 
constitute personal transactions for purposes of this 
provision, and exchange gain resulting from such transactions 
is eligible for nonrecognition treatment under this provision. 
The provision does not change the treatment of exchange losses. 
The Congress understood that under other Code provisions such 
losses typically are not deductible by individuals (e.g., sec. 
165(c)).

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to taxable years beginning after 
December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $1 million per year in each of the 
years 1998 through 2007.

  5. Simplify foreign tax credit limitation for dividends from 10/50 
       companies (sec. 1105 of the Act and sec. 904 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    U.S. persons may credit foreign taxes against U.S. tax on 
foreign source income. The amount of foreign tax credits that 
can be claimed in a year is subject to a limitation that 
prevents taxpayers from using foreign tax credits to offset 
U.S. tax on U.S. source income. Separate limitations are 
applied to specific categories of income.
    Special foreign tax credit limitation rules apply in the 
case of dividends received from a foreign corporation in which 
the taxpayer owns at least 10 percent of the stock by vote and 
which is not a controlled foreign corporation (a so-called 
``10/50 company''). Under prior law, dividends received by the 
taxpayer from each 10/50 company were subject to a separate 
foreign tax credit limitation.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress found that the prior-law rule that subjects 
the dividends received from each so-called 10/50 company to a 
separate foreign tax credit limitation imposes a substantial 
record-keeping burden on companies and has the additional 
negative effect of discouraging minority-position joint 
ventures abroad. Indeed, the Congress was aware that recent 
academic research suggests that the present-law requirements 
may distort the form and amount of overseas investment 
undertaken by U.S.-based enterprises. The research findings 
suggest that the prior-law limitation ``greatly reduces the 
attractiveness of joint ventures to American investors, 
particularly ventures in low-tax foreign countries. Aggregate 
data indicate that U.S. participation in international joint 
ventures fell sharply after [enactment of prior law in] 1986. 
The decline in U.S. joint venture activity is most pronounced 
in low-tax countries. . . . Moreover, joint ventures in low-tax 
countries use more debt and pay greater royalties to their U.S. 
parents after 1986, which reflects their incentives to 
economize on dividend payments.'' \280\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \280\ See, Mihir A. Desai and James R. Hines, Jr., `` `Basket' 
Cases: International Joint Ventures after the Tax Reform Act of 1986,'' 
National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper #5755, September 
1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Congress believed that the joint venture can be an 
efficient way for American business to exploit its know-how and 
technology in foreign markets. If the prior-law limitation was 
discouraging such joint ventures or altering the structure of 
new ventures, the ability of American business to succeed 
abroad could be diminished. The Congress believed it is 
appropriate to modify the prior-law limitation to promote 
simplicity and the ability of American business to compete 
abroad.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act generally provides for look-through treatment to 
apply in characterizing dividends from 10/50 companies for 
foreign tax credit limitation purposes. Under the Act, any 
dividend from a 10/50 company paid out of earnings and profits 
accumulated in a taxable year beginning after December 31, 2002 
is treated as income in a foreign tax credit limitation 
category in proportion to the ratio of the earnings and profits 
attributable to income in such foreign tax credit limitation 
category to the total earnings and profits.
    In the case of dividends from a 10/50 company paid out of 
earnings and profits accumulated in a taxable year beginning 
before January 1, 2003, the Act provides that a single foreign 
tax credit limitation generally applies to all such dividends 
from all 10/50 companies. However, separate foreign tax credit 
limitations continue to apply to any such dividends received by 
the taxpayer from each 10/50 company that qualifies as a 
passive foreign investment company.
    For purposes of this provision, the rules of section 316 
apply. Accordingly, distributions are treated as made from the 
most recently accumulated earnings and profits. In addition, 
for purposes of this provision, regulatory authority is granted 
to provide rules regarding the treatment of distributions out 
of earnings and profits for periods prior to the taxpayer's 
acquisition of such stock.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 2002.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $57 million in 2003, $241 million in 2004, 
$215 million in 2005, $227 million in 2006, and $242 million in 
2007.

    B. General Provisions Affecting Treatment of Controlled Foreign 
Corporations (secs. 1111-1113 of the Act and secs. 902, 904, 951, 952, 
               959, 960, 961, 964, and 1248 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    If an upper-tier controlled foreign corporation (``CFC'') 
sells stock of a lower-tier CFC, the gain generally is included 
in the income of U.S. 10-percent shareholders as subpart F 
income and such U.S. shareholder's basis in the stock of the 
first-tier CFC is increased to account for the inclusion. The 
inclusion was not characterized for foreign tax credit 
limitation purposes by reference to the nature of the income of 
the lower-tier CFC; instead it generally was characterized as 
passive income.
    For purposes of the foreign tax credit limitations 
applicable to so-called 10/50 companies, under prior law, a CFC 
was not treated as a 10/50 company with respect to any 
distribution out of its earnings and profits for periods during 
which it was a CFC and, except as provided in regulations, the 
recipient of the distribution was a U.S. 10-percent shareholder 
in such corporation.
    If subpart F income of a lower-tier CFC was included in the 
gross income of a U.S. 10-percent shareholder, no provision of 
prior law allowed adjustment of the basis of the upper-tier 
CFC's stock in the lower-tier CFC.
    The subpart F income earned by a foreign corporation during 
its taxable year is taxed to the persons who are U.S. 10-
percent shareholders of the corporation on the last day, in 
that year, on which the corporation is a CFC. In the case of a 
U.S. 10-percent shareholder who acquired stock in a CFC during 
the year, such inclusions are reduced by all or a portion of 
the amount of dividends paid in that year by the foreign 
corporation to any person other than the acquiror with respect 
to that stock.
    As a general rule, subpart F income does not include income 
earned from sources within the United States if the income is 
effectively connected with the conduct of a U.S. trade or 
business by the CFC. This general rule does not apply, however, 
if the income is exempt from, or subject to a reduced rate of, 
U.S. tax pursuant to a provision of a U.S. treaty.
    A U.S. corporation that owns at least 10 percent of the 
voting stock of a foreign corporation is treated as if it had 
paid a share of the foreign income taxes paid by the foreign 
corporation in the year in which the foreign corporation's 
earnings and profits become subject to U.S. tax as dividend 
income of the U.S. shareholder. A U.S. corporation also may be 
deemed to have paid taxes paid by a second- or third-tier 
foreign corporation if certain conditions are satisfied; under 
prior law, a U.S. corporation was not deemed to have paid taxes 
paid by a fourth- or lower-tier foreign corporation.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that complexities were caused by 
uncertainties and gaps in the prior-law statutory schemes for 
taxing gains on dispositions of stock in CFCs as dividend 
income or subpart F income. The Congress believed it 
appropriate to reduce complexities by rationalizing these 
rules.
    The Congress also understood that certain arbitrary 
limitations placed on the operation of the indirect foreign tax 
credit may have resulted in taxpayers undergoing burdensome and 
sometimes costly corporate restructuring. In other cases, there 
was concern that these limitations may have contributed to 
decisions by U.S. companies against acquiring foreign 
subsidiaries. The Congress deemed it appropriate to ease these 
restrictions.

                        Explanation of Provision

Lower-tier CFCs

            Characterization of gain on stock disposition
    Under the Act, if a CFC is treated as having gain from the 
sale or exchange of stock in a foreign corporation, the gain is 
treated as a dividend to the same extent that it would have 
been so treated under section 1248 if the CFC were a U.S. 
person. This provision, however, does not affect the 
determination of whether the corporation whose stock is sold or 
exchanged is a CFC.
    Thus, for example, if a U.S. corporation owns 100 percent 
of the stock of a foreign corporation, which owns 100 percent 
of the stock of a second foreign corporation, then under the 
Act, any gain of the first corporation upon a sale or exchange 
of stock of the second corporation is treated as a dividend for 
purposes of subpart F income inclusions to the U.S. 
shareholder, to the extent of earnings and profits of the 
second corporation attributable to periods in which the first 
foreign corporation owned the stock of the second foreign 
corporation while the latter was a CFC with respect to the U.S. 
shareholder.
    Gain on disposition of stock in a related corporation 
created or organized under the laws of, and having a 
substantial part of its assets in a trade or business in, the 
same foreign country as the gain recipient, even if 
recharacterized as a dividend under the proposal, is not 
excluded from foreign personal holding company income under the 
same-country exception that applies to actual dividends.
    Under the Act, for purposes of this rule, a CFC is treated 
as having sold or exchanged stock if, under any provision of 
subtitle A of the Code, the CFC is treated as having gain from 
the sale or exchange of such stock. Thus, for example, if a CFC 
distributes to its shareholder stock in a foreign corporation, 
and the distribution results in gain being recognized by the 
CFC under section 311(b) as if the stock were sold to the 
shareholder for fair market value, the Act makes clear that, 
for purposes of this rule, the CFC is treated as having sold or 
exchanged the stock.
    The Act also repeals a provision added to the Code by the 
Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988 that, except as 
provided by regulations, requires a recipient of a distribution 
from a CFC to have been a U.S. 10-percent shareholder of that 
CFC for the period during which the earnings and profits which 
gave rise to the distribution were generated in order to avoid 
treating the distribution as one coming from a 10/50 company. 
Thus, under the Act, a CFC is not treated as a 10/50 company 
with respect to any distribution out of its earnings and 
profits for periods during which it was a CFC, whether or not 
the recipient of the distribution was a U.S. 10-percent 
shareholder of the corporation when the earnings and profits 
giving rise to the distribution were generated.
            Adjustments to basis of stock
    Under the Act, when a lower-tier CFC earns subpart F 
income, and stock in that corporation is later disposed of by 
an upper-tier CFC, the resulting income inclusion of the U.S. 
10-percent shareholders, under regulations, is to be adjusted 
to account for previous inclusions, in a manner similar to the 
adjustments provided to the basis of stock in a first-tier CFC. 
Thus, just as the basis of a U.S. 10-percent shareholder in a 
first-tier CFC rises when subpart F income is earned and falls 
when previously taxed income is distributed, so as to avoid 
double taxation of the income on a later disposition of the 
stock of that company, the subpart F income from gain on the 
disposition of a lower-tier CFC generally is reduced by income 
inclusions of earnings that were not subsequently distributed 
by the lower-tier CFC.
    For example, assume that a U.S. person is the owner of all 
of the stock of a first-tier CFC which, in turn, is the sole 
shareholder of a second-tier CFC. In year 1, the second-tier 
CFC earns $100 of subpart F income which is included in the 
U.S. person's gross income for that year. In year 2, the first-
tier CFC disposes of the second-tier CFC's stock and recognizes 
$300 of income with respect to the disposition. All of that 
income constitutes subpart F foreign personal holding company 
income. Under the Act, the Secretary is granted regulatory 
authority to reduce the U.S. person's year 2 subpart F 
inclusion by $100--the amount of year 1 subpart F income of the 
second-tier CFC that was included, in that year, in the U.S. 
person's gross income. Such an adjustment, in effect, allows 
for a step-up in the basis of the stock of the second-tier CFC 
to the extent of its subpart F income previously included in 
the U.S. person's gross income.

Subpart F inclusions in year of acquisition

    If a U.S. 10-percent shareholder acquires the stock of a 
CFC from another U.S. 10-percent shareholder during a taxable 
year of the CFC in which it earns subpart F income, the Act 
reduces the acquiror's subpart F income inclusion for that year 
by a portion of the amount of the dividend deemed (under sec. 
1248) to be received by the transferor. The portion by which 
the inclusion is reduced (as is the case if a dividend was paid 
to theprevious owner of the stock) does not exceed the lesser 
of the amount of dividends with respect to such stock deemed received 
(under sec. 1248) by other persons during the year or the amount 
determined by multiplying the subpart F income for the year by the 
proportion of the year during which the acquiring shareholder did not 
own the stock.

Treatment of U.S. income earned by a CFC

    Under the Act, an exemption or reduction by treaty of the 
branch profits tax that would be imposed under section 884 on a 
CFC does not affect the general statutory exemption from 
subpart F income that is granted for U.S. source effectively 
connected income. For example, assume a CFC earns income of a 
type that generally would be subpart F income, and that income 
is earned from sources within the United States in connection 
with business operations therein. Further assume that 
repatriation of that income is exempted from the U.S. branch 
profits tax under a provision of an applicable U.S. income tax 
treaty. The Act provides that, notwithstanding the treaty's 
effect on the branch tax, the income is not treated as subpart 
F income as long as it is not exempt from U.S. taxation (or 
subject to a reduced rate of tax) under any other treaty 
provision.

Extension of indirect foreign tax credit

    The Act extends the application of the indirect foreign tax 
credit (secs. 902 and 960) to taxes paid or accrued by certain 
fourth-, fifth-, and sixth-tier foreign corporations. In 
general, three requirements are required to be satisfied by a 
foreign company at any of these tiers to qualify for the 
credit. First, the company must be a CFC. Second, the U.S. 
corporation claiming the credit under section 902(a) must be a 
U.S. shareholder (as defined in sec. 951(b)) with respect to 
the foreign company. Third, the product of the percentage 
ownership of voting stock at each level from the U.S. 
corporation down must equal at least 5 percent. The Act limits 
the application of the indirect foreign tax credit below the 
third tier to taxes paid in taxable years during which the 
payor is a CFC. Foreign taxes paid below the sixth tier of 
foreign corporations remain ineligible for the indirect foreign 
tax credit.

                            Effective Dates

    Lower-tier CFCs.--The provision that treats gains on 
dispositions of stock in lower-tier CFCs as dividends under 
section 1248 principles applies to gains recognized on 
transactions occurring after the date of enactment (after 
August 5, 1997).
    The provision that expands look-through treatment, for 
foreign tax credit limitation purposes, of dividends from CFCs 
is effective for distributions after the date of enactment.
    The provision that provides for regulatory adjustments to 
U.S. shareholder inclusions, with respect to gains of CFCs from 
dispositions of stock in lower-tier CFCs, is effective for 
determining inclusions for taxable years of U.S. shareholders 
beginning after December 31, 1997. Thus, the Act permits 
regulatory adjustments to an inclusion occurring after the 
effective date to account for income that was previously taxed 
under the subpart F provisions either prior to or subsequent to 
the effective date.
    Subpart F inclusions in year of acquisition.--The provision 
that permits dispositions of stock to be taken into 
consideration in determining a U.S. shareholder's subpart F 
inclusion for a taxable year is effective with respect to 
dispositions occurring after the date of enactment.
    Treatment of U.S. source income earned by a CFC.--The 
provision concerning the effect of treaty exemptions from, or 
reductions of, the branch profits tax on the determination of 
subpart F income is effective for taxable years beginning after 
December 31, 1986.
    Extension of indirect foreign tax credit.--The provision 
that extends application of the indirect foreign tax credit to 
certain CFCs below the third tier is effective for foreign 
taxes of CFCs for taxable years of such corporations beginning 
after the date of enactment. However, the effective date rule 
was not intended to preclude the creditability of foreign taxes 
that were creditable when paid or accrued (e.g., foreign taxes 
paid before the effective date by a third-tier CFC that 
subsequently becomes a fourth-tier subsidiary).
    In the case of any chain of foreign corporations, the taxes 
of which would be eligible for the indirect foreign tax credit, 
under prior law or under the Act, but for the denial of 
indirect credits below the third or sixth tier, as the case may 
be, no liquidation, reorganization, or similar transaction in a 
taxable year beginning after the date of enactment will have 
the effect of permitting taxes to be taken into account under 
the indirect foreign tax credit provisions of the Code which 
could not have been taken into account under those provisions 
but for such transaction. It was intended that no such 
transaction will have the effect of permitting credits for 
taxes which, but for such transaction, would have been 
noncreditable because they are taxes of a fourth-, fifth-, or 
sixth-tier corporation for a taxable year beginning before the 
date of enactment.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $2 million in 1998, $5 million in 1999, $7 
million in 2000, $9 million in 2001, $10 million in 2002, $10 
million in 2003, $11 million in 2004, $12 million in 2005, $13 
million in 2006, and $14 million in 2007.

  C. Modification of Passive Foreign Investment Company Provisions to 
Eliminate Overlap with Subpart F, to Allow Mark-to-Market Election, and 
 to Require Measurement Based on Value for PFIC Asset Test (secs. 1121-
            1124 of the Act and secs. 1291-1298 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

Overview

    U.S. citizens and residents and U.S. corporations 
(collectively, ``U.S. persons'') are taxed currently by the 
United States on their worldwide income, subject to a credit 
against U.S. tax on foreign income based on foreign income 
taxes paid with respect to such income. A foreign corporation 
generally is not subject to U.S. tax on its income from 
operations outside the United States.
    Income of a foreign corporation generally is taxed by the 
United States when it is repatriated to the United States 
through payment to the corporation's U.S. shareholders, subject 
to a foreign tax credit. However, a variety of regimes imposing 
current U.S. tax on income earned through a foreign corporation 
have been reflected in the Code. Today the principal anti-
deferral regimes set forth in the Code are the controlled 
foreign corporation rules of subpart F (secs. 951-964) and the 
passive foreign investment company rules (secs. 1291-1297). 
Additional anti-deferral regimes set forth in the Code are the 
foreign personal holding company rules (secs. 551-558); the 
personal holding company rules (secs. 541-547); the accumulated 
earnings tax (secs. 531-537); and the foreign investment 
company and electing foreign investment company rules (secs. 
1246-1247). The anti-deferral regimes included in the Code 
overlap such that a given taxpayer may be subject to multiple 
sets of anti-deferral rules.

Controlled foreign corporations

    A controlled foreign corporation (``CFC'') is defined 
generally as any foreign corporation if U.S. persons own more 
than 50 percent of the corporation's stock (measured by vote or 
value), taking into account only those U.S. persons that own at 
least 10 percent of the stock (measured by vote only) (sec. 
957). Stock ownership includes not only stock owned directly, 
but also stock owned indirectly or constructively (sec. 958).
    Certain income of a CFC (referred to as ``subpart F 
income'') is subject to current U.S. tax. The United States 
generally taxes the U.S. 10-percent shareholders of a CFC 
currently on their pro rata shares of the subpart F income of 
the CFC. In effect, the Code treats those U.S. shareholders as 
having received a current distribution out of the CFC's subpart 
F income. Such shareholders also are subject to current U.S. 
tax on their pro rata shares of the CFC's earnings invested in 
U.S. property. The foreign tax credit may reduce the U.S. tax 
on these amounts.

Passive foreign investment companies

    The Tax Reform Act of 1986 established an anti-deferral 
regime for passive foreign investment companies (``PFICs''). A 
PFIC is any foreign corporation if (1) 75 percent or more of 
its gross income for the taxable year consists of passive 
income, or (2) 50 percent or more of the average fair market 
value of its assets consists of assets that produce, or are 
held for the production of, passive income. For purposes of 
applying the PFIC asset test, the assets of a CFC were required 
under prior law to be measured using adjusted basis; the assets 
of a foreign corporation that is not a CFC were measured under 
prior law using fair market value unless the corporation elects 
to use adjusted basis.
    Two alternative sets of income inclusion rules apply to 
U.S. persons that are shareholders in a PFIC. One set of rules 
applies to PFICs that are ``qualified electing funds,'' under 
which electing U.S. shareholders include currently in gross 
income their respective shares of the PFIC's total earnings, 
with a separate election to defer payment of tax, subject to an 
interest charge, on income not currently received. The second 
set of rules applies to PFICs that are not qualified electing 
funds (``nonqualified funds''), under which the U.S. 
shareholders pay tax on income realized from the PFIC and an 
interest charge that is attributable to the value of deferral.

Overlap between subpart F and the PFIC provisions

    A foreign corporation that is a CFC is also a PFIC if it 
meets the passive income test or the passive asset test 
described above. In such a case, under prior law, the U.S. 10-
percent shareholders were subject both to the subpart F 
provisions (which require current inclusion of certain earnings 
of the corporation) and to the PFIC provisions (which impose an 
interest charge on amounts distributed from the corporation and 
gains recognized upon the disposition of the corporation's 
stock, unless an election is made to include currently all of 
the corporation's earnings).

                           Reasons for Change

    The anti-deferral rules for U.S. persons owning stock in 
foreign corporations are very complex. Moreover, the 
interactions between the anti-deferral regimes cause additional 
complexity. The overlap between the subpart F rules and the 
PFIC provisions was of particular concern to the Congress. The 
PFIC provisions, which do not require a threshold level of 
ownership by U.S. persons, apply where the U.S.-ownership 
requirements of subpart F are not satisfied. However, the PFIC 
provisions also applied to a U.S. shareholder that is subject 
to the current inclusion rules of subpart F with respect to the 
same corporation. The Congress believed that the additional 
complexity caused by this overlap was unnecessary.
    The Congress also understood that the interest-charge 
method for income inclusion provided in the PFIC rules is a 
substantial source of complexity for shareholders of PFICs. 
Even without eliminating the interest-charge method, 
significant simplification could be achieved by providing an 
alternative income inclusion method for shareholders of PFICs. 
Further, some taxpayers argued that they would have preferred 
choosing the current-inclusion method afforded by the qualified 
fund election, but were unable to do so because they could not 
obtain the necessary information from the PFIC. Accordingly, 
the Congress believed that a mark-to-market election would 
provide PFIC shareholders with a fair alternative method for 
including income with respect to the PFIC.

                        Explanation of Provision

Elimination of overlap between subpart F and the PFIC provisions

    In the case of a PFIC that is also a CFC, the Act generally 
treats the corporation as not a PFIC with respect to certain 
10-percent shareholders. This rule applies if the corporation 
is a CFC (within the meaning of section 957(a)) and the 
shareholder is a U.S. shareholder (within the meaning of 
section 951(b)) of such corporation (i.e., if the shareholder 
is subject to the current inclusion rules of subpart F with 
respect to such corporation).\281\ Moreover, the rule applies 
for that portion of the shareholder's holding period with 
respect to the corporation's stock which is after December 31, 
1997 and during which the corporation is a CFC and the 
shareholder is a U.S. shareholder. Accordingly, a shareholder 
that is subject to current inclusion under the subpart F rules 
with respect to stock of a PFIC that is also a CFC generally is 
not subject also to the PFIC provisions with respect to the 
same stock. The PFIC provisions continue to apply in the case 
of a PFIC that is also a CFC to shareholders that are not 
subject to subpart F (i.e., to shareholders that are U.S. 
persons and that own (directly, indirectly, or constructively) 
less than 10 percent of the corporation's stock by vote).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \281\ In the case of an optionholder, a technical correction may be 
necessary to reflect this intent that the elimination of the overlap 
apply only to the extent the person is subject to the current inclusion 
rules of subpart F with respect to the corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    If a shareholder of a PFIC is subject to the rules 
applicable to nonqualified funds before becoming eligible for 
the special rules provided under the provision for shareholders 
that are subject to subpart F, the stock held by such 
shareholder continues to be treated as PFIC stock unless the 
shareholder makes an election to pay tax and an interest charge 
with respect to the unrealized appreciation in the stock or the 
accumulated earnings of the corporation. Under section 
1298(b)(1), stock of a corporation that was a PFIC that was not 
a qualified electing fund continues to be treated as stock of a 
PFIC unless the shareholder makes a recognition election under 
rules similar to the rules of section 1291(d)(2). Pursuant to 
section 1291(d)(2), the shareholder may elect either to 
recognize gain as if such stock were sold or, in the case of a 
CFC, to include in income the post-1986 earnings and profits of 
the corporation attributable to the stock.281a 
Accordingly, the provision eliminating the overlap between the 
PFIC and CFC provisions does not apply to a shareholder of a 
corporation that was a PFIC with respect to such shareholder 
and that was a nonqualified fund unless the shareholder makes 
such an election.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \281a\ In light of this Congressional intent to allow an election 
with respect to either unrealized appreciation or accumulated earnings, 
it is hoped that the provision of the Treasury regulations which limits 
the availability of the latter election will be withdrawn. See Treas. 
Reg. sec. 1.129111-9(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    If, under the Act, a shareholder is not subject to the PFIC 
provisions because the shareholder is subject to subpart F and 
the shareholder subsequently ceases to be subject to subpart F 
with respect to the corporation, for purposes of the PFIC 
provisions, the shareholder's holding period for such stock is 
treated as beginning immediately after such cessation. 
Accordingly, in applying the rules applicable to PFICs that are 
not qualified electing funds, the earnings of the corporation 
are not attributed to the period during which the shareholder 
was subject to subpart F with respect to the corporation and 
was not subject to the PFIC provisions.
    For purposes of the PFIC provisions, attribution rules 
apply to the extent that the effect is to treat stock of a PFIC 
as owned by a U.S. person. In general, if 50 percent or more in 
value of the stock of a corporation is owned (directly or 
indirectly) by or for any person, such person is considered as 
owning a proportionate part of the stock owned directly or 
indirectly by or for such corporation, determined based on the 
person's proportionate interest in the value of such 
corporation's stock. However, this 50-percent limitation does 
not apply in the case of a corporation that is a PFIC; a person 
that is a shareholder of a PFIC is considered as owning a 
proportionate part of the stock owned directly or indirectly by 
or for such PFIC, without regard to whether such shareholder 
owns at least 50 percent of the PFIC's stock by value. It was 
intended that these attribution rules apply without regard to 
this provision treating a corporation as a non-PFIC with 
respect to a shareholder. Accordingly, stock owned directly or 
indirectly by or for a corporation that is not treated as a 
PFIC under this provision for the qualified portion of the 
shareholder's holding period nevertheless is attributed to such 
shareholder, regardless of the shareholder's ownership 
percentage of such corporation.\282\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \282\ A technical correction may be necessary to clarify this 
result. See Title VI (sec. 10(b)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical 
Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mark-to-market election

    The Act allows a shareholder of a PFIC to make a mark-to-
market election with respect to the stock of the PFIC, provided 
that such stock is marketable (as defined below). Under such an 
election, the shareholder includes in income each year an 
amount equal to the excess, if any, of the fair market value of 
the PFIC stock as of the close of the taxable year over the 
shareholder's adjusted basis in such stock. The shareholder is 
allowed a deduction for the excess, if any, of the adjusted 
basis of the PFIC stock over its fair market value as of the 
close of the taxable year. However, deductions are allowable 
under this rule only to the extent of any net mark-to-market 
gains with respect to the stock included by the shareholder for 
prior taxable years.
    Under the Act, this mark-to-market election is available 
only for PFIC stock that is ``marketable.'' For this purpose, 
PFIC stock is considered marketable if it is regularly tradedon 
a national securities exchange that is registered with the Securities 
and Exchange Commission or on the national market system established 
pursuant to section 11A of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. In 
addition, PFIC stock is considered marketable if it is regularly traded 
on any exchange or market that the Secretary of the Treasury determines 
has rules sufficient to ensure that the market price represents a 
legitimate and sound fair market value. Any option on stock that is 
considered marketable under the foregoing rules is treated as 
marketable, to the extent provided in regulations. PFIC stock also is 
treated as marketable, to the extent provided in regulations, if the 
PFIC offers for sale (or has outstanding) stock of which it is the 
issuer and which is redeemable at its net asset value in a manner 
comparable to a U.S. regulated investment company (RIC).
    In addition, the Act treats as marketable any PFIC stock 
owned by a RIC that offers for sale (or has outstanding) any 
stock of which it is the issuer and which is redeemable at its 
net asset value. The Act treats as marketable any PFIC stock 
held by any other RIC that otherwise publishes net asset 
valuations at least annually, except to the extent provided in 
regulations. It is believed that even for RICs that do not make 
a market in their own stock, but that do regularly report their 
net asset values in compliance with the securities laws, 
inaccurate valuation may bring exposure to legal liabilities, 
and this exposure may ensure the reliability of the values such 
RICs assign to the PFIC stock they hold.
    The shareholder's adjusted basis in the PFIC stock is 
adjusted to reflect the amounts included or deducted under this 
election. In the case of stock owned indirectly by a U.S. 
person through a foreign entity (as discussed below), the basis 
adjustments for mark-to-market gains and losses apply to the 
basis of the PFIC in the hands of the intermediary owner, but 
only for purposes of the subsequent application of the PFIC 
rules to the tax treatment of the indirect U.S. owner. In 
addition, similar basis adjustments are made to the adjusted 
basis of the property actually held by the U.S. person by 
reason of which the U.S. person is treated as owning PFIC 
stock.
    Amounts included in income pursuant to a mark-to-market 
election, as well as gain on the actual sale or other 
disposition of the PFIC stock, are treated as ordinary income. 
Ordinary loss treatment also applies to the deductible portion 
of any mark-to-market loss on PFIC stock, as well as to any 
loss realized on the actual sale or other disposition of PFIC 
stock to the extent that the amount of such loss does not 
exceed the net mark-to-market gains previously included with 
respect to such stock. The source of amounts with respect to a 
mark-to-market election generally is determined in the same 
manner as if such amounts were gain or loss from the sale of 
stock in the PFIC.
    An election to mark to market applies to the taxable year 
for which made and all subsequent taxable years, unless the 
PFIC stock ceases to be marketable or the Secretary of the 
Treasury consents to the revocation of such election.
    Under constructive ownership rules, U.S. persons that own 
PFIC stock through certain foreign entities may make this 
election with respect to the PFIC. These constructive ownership 
rules apply to treat PFIC stock owned directly or indirectly by 
or for a foreign partnership, trust, or estate as owned 
proportionately by the partners or beneficiaries, except as 
provided in regulations. Stock in a PFIC that is thus treated 
as owned by a person is treated as actually owned by that 
person for purposes of again applying the constructive 
ownership rules. In the case of a U.S. person that is treated 
as owning PFIC stock by application of this constructive 
ownership rule, any disposition by the U.S. person or by any 
other person that results in the U.S. person being treated as 
no longer owning the PFIC stock, as well as any disposition by 
the person actually owning the PFIC stock, is treated as a 
disposition by the U.S. person of the PFIC stock.
    In addition, a CFC that owns stock in a PFIC is treated as 
a U.S. person that may make the election with respect to such 
PFIC stock. Any amount includible (or deductible) in the CFC's 
gross income pursuant to this mark-to-market election is 
treated as foreign personal holding company income (or a 
deduction allocable to foreign personal holding company 
income). The source of such amounts, however, is determined by 
reference to the actual residence of the CFC.
    In the case of a taxpayer that makes the mark-to-market 
election with respect to stock in a PFIC that is a nonqualified 
fund after the beginning of the taxpayer's holding period with 
respect to such stock, a coordination rule applies to ensure 
that the taxpayer does not avoid the interest charge with 
respect to amounts attributable to periods before such 
election. A similar rule applies to RICs that make the mark-to-
market election under the Act after the beginning of their 
holding period with respect to PFIC stock (to the extent that 
the RIC had not previously marked to market the stock of the 
PFIC).
    Except as provided in the coordination rules described 
above, the rules of section 1291 (with respect to nonqualified 
funds) do not apply to a shareholder of a PFIC if a mark-to-
market election is in effect for the shareholder's taxable 
year. Moreover, in applying section 1291 in a case where a 
mark-to-market election was in effect for any prior taxable 
year, the shareholder's holding period for the PFIC stock is 
treated as beginning immediately after the last taxable year 
for which such election applied.
    A special rule applicable in the case of a PFIC shareholder 
that becomes a U.S. person treats the adjusted basis of any 
PFIC stock held by such person on the first day of the year in 
which such shareholder becomes a U.S. person as equal to the 
greater of its fair market value on such date or its adjusted 
basis on such date. Such rule applies only for purposes of the 
mark-to-market election.

Application of PFIC asset test

    Under the Act, if the stock of a foreign corporation is 
publicly traded for the taxable year, the PFIC asset test is 
applied using fair market value for purposes of measuring the 
PFIC's assets. For this purpose, the stock of a foreign 
corporation is treated as publicly traded if such stock is 
readily tradeable on a national securities exchange that is 
registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the 
national market system established pursuant to section 11A of 
the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, or any other exchange 
or market that the Secretary of the Treasury determines has 
rules sufficient to ensure that the market price represents a 
sound fair market value. Because the PFIC asset test is applied 
based on quarterly measurements of the corporation's assets, 
the Congress intended that a corporation the stock of which is 
publicly traded on each such quarterly measurement date during 
the taxable year will be eligible for this asset measurement 
rule for such taxable year. In applying the PFIC asset test, 
the Congress intended that the total value of a publicly-traded 
foreign corporation's assets generally will be treated as equal 
to the sum of the aggregate value of its outstanding stock plus 
its liabilities.
    The Act did not change the rules applicable to non-
publicly-traded foreign corporations for purposes of the 
measurement of assets in applying the PFIC asset test. 
Accordingly, CFCs that are not publicly traded continue to be 
required to measure their assets using adjusted basis, and any 
other foreign corporations that are not publicly traded 
continue to measure their assets using fair market value unless 
they elect to use adjusted basis.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years of U.S. 
persons beginning after December 31, 1997, and taxable years of 
foreign corporations ending with or within such taxable years 
of U.S. persons.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $24 million in 1998, $23 million in 1999, 
$24 million in 2000, $26 million in 2001, $27 million in 2002, 
$28 million in 2003, $29 million in 2004, $31 million in 2005, 
$33 million in 2006, and $35 million in 2007.

  D. Simplify Formation and Operation of International Joint Ventures 
 (secs. 1131, 1141-1145, and 1151 of the Act and secs. 367, 721, 1491-
   1494, 6031, 6038, 6038B, 6046A, 6501, 6679, and 7701 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under prior-law section 1491, an excise tax generally was 
imposed on transfers of property by a U.S. person to a foreign 
corporation as paid-in surplus or as a contribution to capital 
or to a foreign partnership, estate or trust. The tax was 35 
percent of the amount of gain inherent in the property 
transferred but not recognized for income tax purposes at the 
time of the transfer. However, several exceptions to the 
section 1491 excise tax were available. Under prior-law section 
1494(c), a substantial penalty applied in the case of a failure 
to report a transfer described in section 1491.
    Section 367 applies to require gain recognition upon 
certain transfers by U.S. persons to foreign corporations. 
Under section 367(d), a U.S. person that contributes intangible 
property to a foreign corporation is treated as having sold the 
property to the corporation and is treated as receiving deemed 
royalty payments from the corporation. Under prior law, these 
deemed royalty payments were treated as U.S. source income. A 
U.S. person could elect to apply similar rules to a transfer of 
intangible property to a foreign partnership that otherwise 
would have been subject to the prior-law section 1491 excise 
tax.
    A foreign partnership may be required to file a partnership 
return. If a foreign partnership fails to file a required 
return, losses and credits with respect to the partnership may 
be disallowed to the partnership. A U.S. person that acquires 
or disposes of an interest in a foreign partnership, or whose 
proportional interest in the partnership changes substantially, 
may be required to file an information return with respect to 
such event.
    A partnership generally is considered to be a domestic 
partnership if it is created or organized in the United States 
or under the laws of the United States or any State. A foreign 
partnership generally is any partnership that is not a domestic 
partnership.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress understood that the prior-law rules imposing 
an excise tax on certain transfers of appreciated property to a 
foreign entity unless the requirements for an exception from 
such excise tax were satisfied operated as a trap for the 
unwary. The Congress further understood that the special source 
rule of prior law for deemed royalty payments with respect to a 
transfer of an appreciated intangible to a foreign corporation 
was intended to discourage such transfers. The Congress 
believed that the imposition of enhanced information reporting 
obligations with respect to both foreign partnerships and 
foreign corporations would eliminate the need for both of these 
sets of rules.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act repealed the sections 1491-1494 excise tax and 
information reporting rules that applied to certain transfers 
of appreciated property by a U.S. person to a foreign entity. 
Instead of the excise tax that applied under prior law to 
transfers to a foreign estate or trust, gain recognition is 
required upon a transfer of appreciated property by a U.S. 
person to a foreign estate or trust, except as provided in 
regulations. This rule does not apply to a transfer to a trust 
to the extent that any person is treated as the owner of the 
trust under section 679. For purposes of this recognition 
provision, a U.S. trust that becomes a foreign trust is treated 
as having transferred all of its assets to a foreign trust. 
Instead of the excise tax that applied under prior law to a 
transfer by a U.S. person to a foreign corporation as paid-in 
surplus or as a contribution to capital in a transaction not 
otherwise described in section 367 (e.g., a capital 
contribution by a non-shareholder), regulatory authority is 
granted under section 367 to treat such transfer as a fair 
market value sale and to require gain recognition thereon. 
Instead of the excise tax that applied under prior law to 
transfers to foreign partnerships, regulatory authority is 
granted to provide for gain recognition on a transfer of 
appreciated property to a partnership in cases where such gain 
otherwise would be transferred to a foreign partner. In 
addition, regulatory authority is granted to deny the 
nonrecognition treatment that is provided under section 1035 to 
certain exchanges of insurance policies, where the transfer is 
to a foreign person.
    The Act repealed the rule that treated as U.S. source 
income any deemed royalty arising under section 367(d). Under 
the Act, in the case of a transfer of intangible property to a 
foreign corporation, the deemed royalty payments under section 
367(d) are treated as foreign source income to the same extent 
that an actual royalty payment would be considered to be 
foreign source income. Regulatory authority is granted to 
provide similar treatment in the case of a transfer of 
intangible property to a partnership.
    The Act provides detailed information reporting rules in 
the case of foreign partnerships. Under the Act, a foreign 
partnership generally is required to file a partnership return 
for a taxable year if the partnership has U.S. source income or 
is engaged in a U.S. trade or business, except to the extent 
provided in regulations. Regulatory authority is granted to 
provide simplified filing procedures for foreign partnerships 
required to file under this rule.
    Under the Act, reporting rules similar to those applicable 
in the case of controlled foreign corporations apply in the 
case of foreign partnerships. A U.S. partner that controls a 
foreign partnership is required to file an annual information 
return with respect to such partnership. For this purpose, a 
U.S. partner is considered to control a foreign partnership if 
the partner holds more than a 50 percent interest in the 
capital, profits, or, to the extent provided in regulations, 
losses, of the partnership; a partner's interest in a 
partnership is determined with application of constructive 
ownership rules similar to those provided in section 267(c) 
(other than paragraph (3)). Similar information reporting also 
will be required from a U.S. 10-percent partner of a foreign 
partnership that is controlled by U.S. 10-percent partners. A 
$10,000 penalty applies to a failure to comply with these 
reporting requirements; additional penalties of up to $50,000 
apply in the case of continued noncompliance after notification 
by the Secretary of the Treasury. Under the Act, the penalties 
for failure to report information with respect to a controlled 
foreign corporation are conformed with these penalties. Where 
under these rules more than one U.S. person would be required 
to file an information return with respect to the same foreign 
entity, the Secretary of the Treasury may by regulations 
provide that such information is required only from one person.
    Under the Act, reporting by a U.S. person of an acquisition 
or disposition of an interest in a foreign partnership, or a 
change in the person's proportional interest in the 
partnership, is required only in the case of acquisitions, 
dispositions, or changes involving at least a 10-percent 
interest. A $10,000 penalty applies to a failure to comply with 
these reporting requirements; additional penalties of up to 
$50,000 apply in the case of continued noncompliance after 
notification by the Secretary. Under the Act, the penalties for 
failure to report information with respect to an interest in a 
foreign corporation are conformed with these penalties.
    Under the Act, reporting rules similar to those applicable 
in the case of transfers by U.S. persons to foreign 
corporations apply in the case of transfers to foreign 
partnerships. These reporting rules apply in the case of a 
transfer to a foreign partnership only if the U.S. person holds 
at least a 10-percent interest in the partnership or the value 
of the property transferred by such person to the partnership 
during a 12-month period exceeded $100,000. A penalty equal to 
10 percent of the value of the property transferred applies to 
a failure to comply with these reporting requirements. However, 
this penalty is subject to a cap of $100,000 except in cases 
where the failure to comply with the reporting requirements is 
due to intentional disregard. Under the Act, the penalty for 
failure to report transfers to a foreign corporation is 
conformed with this penalty. In the case of a transfer to a 
foreign partnership, failure to comply also results in gain 
recognition with respect to the property transferred.
    Under the Act, in the case of a failure to report required 
information with respect to a foreign corporation, partnership, 
or trust, the statute of limitations with respect to any event 
or period, as the case may be, to which such information 
relates does not expire before the date that is three years 
after the date on which such information is provided.
    Under the Act, regulatory authority is granted to provide 
rules treating a partnership as a domestic or foreign 
partnership, where such treatment is more appropriate, without 
regard to where the partnership is created or organized. 
Regulations issued under this grant of regulatory authority 
generally will apply only to partnerships created or organized 
after the date such regulations are filed with the Federal 
Register (or, if earlier, the date of a public notice 
substantially describing the expected contents of the 
regulations). Section 7805(b)(2), which allows regulations to 
have retroactive effect if issued within eighteen months of 
enactment of the relevant statutory provision, is not 
applicable in this case. Accordingly, regulations issued under 
this grant of regulatory authority generally will not be 
applied to reclassify pre-existing partnerships. The Congress 
intended that the general rule for classifying a partnership as 
domestic or foreign will continue to be the place where the 
partnership is created or organized (or the laws under which it 
is created or organized), and that the regulations will provide 
a different classification result only in unusual cases. The 
Congress also expected that any regulations will avoid period-
by-period reclassifications of partnerships. It is expected 
that a recharacterization of a partnership under such 
regulations will be based only on material factors such as the 
residence of the partners and the extent to which the 
partnership is engaged in business in the United States or 
earns U.S. source income. It also is expected that such 
regulations will provide guidance regarding the determination 
of whether an entity that is a partnership for Federal income 
tax purposes is to be considered to be created or organized in 
the United States or under the law of the United States or any 
State.

                             Effective Date

    The provisions with respect to the repeal of sections 1491-
1494 were effective on the date of enactment (August 5, 1997). 
The provisions with respect to the source of a deemed royalty 
under section 367(d) are effective both for transfers made, and 
for royalties deemed received, on or after the date of 
enactment.
    The provisions regarding information reporting with respect 
to foreign partnerships generally are effective for partnership 
taxable years beginning after the date of enactment. The 
provisions regarding information reporting with respect to 
interests in, and transfers to, foreign partnerships are 
effective for transfers to, and changes in interests in, 
foreign partnerships after the date of enactment. Taxpayers may 
elect to apply these rules to transfers made after August 20, 
1996 (and thereby avoid a penalty under section 1494(c)) and 
the Secretary may prescribe simplified reporting requirements 
for these cases. The provision with respect to the statute of 
limitations in the case of noncompliance with reporting 
requirements is effective for information returns due after the 
date of enactment.
    Regulations issued under the provision granting regulatory 
authority with respect to the treatment of partnerships as 
foreign or domestic will apply only to partnerships created or 
organized after the date such regulations are filed with the 
Federal Register or described in a public notice.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 in 1998, less than 
$500,000 in 1999, $1 million in 2000, $1 million in 2001, $1 
million in 2002, $1 million in 2003, $1 million in 2004, $1 
million in 2005, $1 million in 2006, and $2 million in 2007.

       E. Modification of Reporting Threshold for Stock Ownership

           of a Foreign Corporation (sec. 1146 of the Act and

                         sec. 6046 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Several provisions of the Code require U.S. persons to 
report information with respect to a foreign corporation in 
which they are shareholders or officers or directors. Sections 
6038 and 6035 generally require every U.S. citizen or resident 
who is an officer or director, or who owns at least 10 percent 
of the stock, of a foreign corporation that is a controlled 
foreign corporation or a foreign personal holding company to 
file Form 5471 annually.
    Section 6046 mandates the filing of information returns by 
certain U.S. persons with respect to a foreign corporation upon 
the occurrence of certain events. Under prior law, the U.S. 
persons required to file these information returns were those 
who acquired 5 percent or more of the value of the stock of a 
foreign corporation, others who became U.S. persons while 
owning that percentage of the stock of a foreign corporation, 
and U.S. citizens and residents who were officers or directors 
of foreign corporations with such U.S. ownership.
    A failure to file the required information return under 
section 6038 may result in monetary penalties or reduction of 
foreign tax credit benefits. A failure to file the required 
information returns under sections 6035 or 6046 may result in 
monetary penalties.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed it appropriate to make the stock 
ownership threshold at which reporting with respect to an 
ownership interest in a foreign corporation is required 
generally parallel to the thresholds that apply in the case of 
other annual information reporting with respect to foreign 
corporations. The Congress believed that increasing the 
threshold for such reporting from 5 percent to 10 percent will 
reduce the compliance burdens on taxpayers.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act increases the threshold for stock ownership of a 
foreign corporation that results in information reporting 
obligations under section 6046 from 5 percent (based on value) 
to 10 percent (based on vote or value).

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for reportable transactions 
occurring after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $1 million in 1998, $1 million in 
1999, $2 million per year in each of 2000 through 2004, and $3 
million per year in each of 2005 through 2007.

               F. Other Foreign Simplification Provisions

 1. Transition rule for certain trusts (sec. 1161 of the Act and sec. 
                        7701(a)(30) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under rules enacted pursuant to the Small Business Job 
Protection Act of 1996, a trust is considered to be a U.S. 
trust if two criteria are met. First, a court within the United 
States must be able to exercise primary supervision over the 
administration of the trust. Second, U.S. persons must have the 
authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust. A 
trust that does not satisfy both of these criteria is 
considered to be a foreign trust. These rules for defining a 
U.S. trust generally are effective for taxable years of a trust 
that begin after December 31, 1996. A trust that qualified as a 
U.S. trust under prior law could fail to qualify as a U.S. 
trust under these new criteria.

                           Reasons for Change

    The change in the criteria for qualification as a U.S. 
trust could cause large numbers of existing domestic trusts to 
become foreign trusts, unless they are able to make the 
modifications necessary to satisfy the new criteria. The 
Congress believed that an election is appropriate for those 
existing domestic trusts that prefer to continue to be subject 
to tax as U.S. trusts.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, the Secretary of the Treasury is granted 
authority to allow nongrantor trusts that had been treated as 
U.S. trusts under prior law to elect to continue to be treated 
as U.S. trusts, notwithstanding the new criteria for 
qualification as a U.S. trust.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1996.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million in 1998, $3 million in 1999, and 
$5 million per year in each of 2000 through 2007.

2. Simplify stock and securities trading safe harbor (sec. 1162 of the 
        Act and sec. 864(b)(2)(A) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A nonresident alien individual or foreign corporation that 
is engaged in a trade or business within the United States is 
subject to U.S. taxation at graduated rates on its net income 
that is effectively connected with the trade or business. Under 
a ``safe harbor'' rule, foreign persons that trade in stocks or 
securities for their own accounts are not treated as engaged in 
a U.S. trade or business for this purpose.
    For a foreign corporation to qualify for the safe harbor, 
it must not be a dealer in stocks or securities. In addition, 
under prior law, if the principal business of the foreign 
corporation was trading in stocks or securities for its own 
account, the safe harbor generally did not apply if the 
principal office of the corporation was in the United States.
    For foreign persons who invest in securities trading 
partnerships, the safe harbor applies only if the partnership 
is not a dealer in stocks and securities. In addition, under 
prior law, if the principal business of the partnership was 
trading in stocks or securities for its own account, the safe 
harbor generally did not apply if the principal office of the 
partnership was in the United States.
    Under Treasury regulations which apply to both corporations 
and partnerships, the determination of the location of the 
entity's principal office turns on the location of various 
functions relating to the operation of the entity, including 
communication with investors and the general public, 
solicitation and acceptance of sales of interests, and 
maintenance and audits of its books of account (Treas. reg. 
sec. 1.864-2(c)(2)(ii) and (iii)). Under the regulations, the 
location of the entity's principal office does not depend on 
the location of the entity's management or where investment 
decisions are made.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the foreign principal office 
requirement did not promote any important tax policy and had 
been easily circumvented. The stock and securities trading safe 
harbor serves to promote foreign investment in U.S. capital 
markets. The Congress believed that the elimination of the 
principal office rule would facilitate foreign investment in 
U.S. markets. In this regard, the Congress noted that, because 
the location of a partnership's or foreign corporation's 
principal office was determined by the location of certain 
administrative functions rather than the location of management 
and investment decisions, the requirement of a foreign 
principal office was met even if only administrative functions 
were performed abroad.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act modifies the stock and securities trading safe 
harbor by eliminating the requirement for both partnerships and 
foreign corporations that trade stocks or securities for their 
own accounts that the entity's principal office not be within 
the United States.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 per year in each of 1998 
through 2007.

3. Clarification of determination of foreign taxes deemed paid (sec. 
        1163(a) of the Act and sec. 902 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under section 902, a domestic corporation that receives a 
dividend from a foreign corporation in which it owns 10 percent 
or more of the voting stock is deemed to have paid a portion of 
the foreign taxes paid by such foreign corporation. The 
domestic corporation that receives a dividend is deemed to have 
paid a portion of the foreign corporation's post-1986 foreign 
income taxes based on the ratio of the amount of such dividend 
to the foreign corporation's post-1986 undistributed earnings. 
The foreign corporation's post-1986 foreign income taxes is the 
sum of the foreign income taxes with respect to the taxable 
year in which the dividend is distributed plus certain foreign 
income taxes with respect to prior taxable years (beginning 
after December 31, 1986).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed it appropriate to clarify the 
determination of foreign taxes deemed paid for purposes of the 
indirect foreign tax credit.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act clarifies that, for purposes of the deemed paid 
credit under section 902 for a taxable year, a foreign 
corporation's post-1986 foreign income taxes includes foreign 
income taxes with respect to prior taxable years (beginning 
after December 31, 1986) only to the extent such taxes are not 
attributable to dividends distributed by the foreign 
corporation in prior taxable years. No inference is intended 
regarding the determination of foreign taxes deemed paid under 
prior law.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 per year in each of the 
years 1998 through 2007.

4. Clarification of foreign tax credit limitation for financial 
        services income (sec. 1163(b) of the Act and sec. 904 of the 
        Code)

                              Present Law

    Under section 904, separate foreign tax credit limitations 
apply to various categories of income. Two of these separate 
limitation categories are passive income and financial services 
income. For purposes of the separate foreign tax credit 
limitation applicable to passive income, certain income that is 
treated as high-taxed income is excluded from the definition of 
passive income. For purposes of the separate foreign tax credit 
limitation applicable to financial services income, the 
definition of financial services income generally incorporates 
passive income as defined for purposes of the separate 
limitation applicable to passive income.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed it appropriate to clarify that high-
taxed income is not excluded from the separate foreign tax 
credit limitation for financial services income.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act clarifies that the exclusion of income that is 
treated as high-taxed income does not apply for purposes of the 
separate foreign tax credit limitation applicable to financial 
services income. No inference is intended regarding the 
treatment of high-taxed income for purposes of the separate 
foreign tax credit limitation applicable to financial services 
income under prior law.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 in each of the years 1998 
through 2007.

                      G. Other Foreign Provisions

1. Eligibility of licenses of computer software for foreign sales 
        corporation benefits (sec. 1171 of the Act and sec. 927 of the 
        Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under special tax provisions that provide an export 
benefit, a portion of the foreign trade income of an eligible 
foreign sales corporation (``FSC'') is exempt from Federal 
income tax. Foreign trade income is defined as the gross income 
of a FSC that is attributable to foreign trading gross 
receipts. The term ``foreign trading gross receipts'' includes 
the gross receipts of a FSC from the sale, lease, or rental of 
export property and from services related and subsidiary to 
such sales, leases, or rentals.
    For purposes of the FSC rules, export property is defined 
as property (1) which is manufactured, produced, grown, or 
extracted in the United States by a person other than a FSC; 
(2) which is held primarily for sale, lease, or rental in the 
ordinary conduct of a trade or business by or to a FSC for 
direct use, consumption, or disposition outside the United 
States; and (3) not more than 50 percent of the fair market 
value of which is attributable to articles imported into the 
United States. Intangible property generally is excluded from 
the definition of export property for purposes of the FSC 
rules; this exclusion applies to copyrights other than films, 
tapes, records, or similar reproductions for commercial or home 
use. The temporary Treasury regulations provide that a license 
of a master recording tape for reproduction outside the United 
States is not excluded from the definition of export property 
(Temp. Treas. Reg. sec. 1.927(a)-1T(f)(3)). Under prior law, 
the statutory exclusion for intangible property did not contain 
any specific reference to computer software. However, the 
temporary Treasury regulations provided that a copyright on 
computer software did not constitute export property, and that 
standardized, mass marketed computer software constitutes 
export property if such software is not accompanied by a right 
to reproduce for external use (Temp. Treas. Reg. sec. 1.927(a)-
1T(f)(3)).

                           Reasons for Change

    For purposes of the FSC provisions, films, tapes, records 
and similar reproductions explicitly were included within the 
definition of export property. In light of technological 
developments, the Congress believed that computer software is 
virtually indistinguishable from the enumerated films, tapes, 
and records. Accordingly, the Congress believed that the 
benefits of the FSC provisions similarly should be available to 
computer software.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that computer software licensed for 
reproduction abroad is not excluded from the definition of 
export property for purposes of the FSC provisions. 
Accordingly, computer software that is exported with a right to 
reproduce is eligible for the benefits of the FSC provisions. 
In light of the rapid innovations in the computer and software 
industries, the Congress intended that the term ``computer 
software'' be construed broadly to accommodate technological 
changes in the products produced by both industries. No 
inference is intended regarding the qualification as export 
property of computer software licensed for reproduction abroad 
under prior law.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to gross receipts from computer 
software licenses attributable to periods after December 31, 
1997. Accordingly, in the case of a multi-year license, the 
provision applies to gross receipts attributable to the period 
of such license that is after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $27 million in 1998, $42 million in 1999, 
$146 million in 2000, $173 million in 2001, $180 million in 
2002, $191 million in 2003, $202 million in 2004, $227 million 
in 2005, $252 million in 2006, and $277 million in 2007.

2. Increase dollar limitation on section 911 exclusion (sec. 1172 of 
        the Act and sec. 911 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    U.S. citizens generally are subject to U.S. income tax on 
all their income, whether derived in the United States or 
elsewhere. A U.S. citizen who earns income in a foreign country 
also may be taxed on such income by that foreign country. A 
credit against the U.S. income tax imposed on foreign source 
income is allowed for foreign taxes paid on such income.
    U.S. citizens living abroad may be eligible to exclude from 
their income for U.S. tax purposes certain foreign earned 
income and foreign housing costs. In order to qualify for these 
exclusions, a U.S. citizen must be either (1) a bona fide 
resident of a foreign country or countries for an uninterrupted 
period that includes an entire taxable year or (2) present in a 
foreign country or countries for 330 days out of any 12 
consecutive month period. In addition, the taxpayer must have 
his or her tax home in a foreign country.
    The exclusion for foreign earned income generally applies 
to income earned from sources outside the United States as 
compensation for personal services actually rendered by the 
taxpayer. Under prior law, the maximum exclusion for foreign 
earned income for a taxable year was $70,000.
    The exclusion for housing costs applies to reasonable 
expenses, other than deductible interest and taxes, paid or 
incurred by or on behalf of the taxpayer for housing for the 
taxpayer and his or her spouse and dependents in a foreign 
country. The exclusion amount for housing costs for a taxable 
year is equal to the excess of such housing costs for the 
taxable year over an amount computed pursuant to a specified 
formula.
    The combined earned income exclusion and housing cost 
exclusion may not exceed the taxpayer's total foreign earned 
income. The taxpayer's foreign tax credit is reduced by the 
amount of the credit that is attributable to excluded income.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress recognized that for U.S. businesses to be 
effective competitors overseas it is necessary to dispatch U.S. 
citizens or residents to sites of foreign operations. Being 
stationed abroad typically imposes additional financial burdens 
on the employee and his or her family. These burdens may arise 
from maintaining two homes (one in the United States and one 
abroad), additional personal travel to maintain family ties, or 
the added expenses of living in a foreign location that has a 
high cost of living. Businesses often remunerate their 
employees for these additional burdens by paying higher wages. 
Because the increased remuneration is offset by larger burdens, 
the remuneration does not truly reflect an increase in economic 
well being. The Congress, therefore, believed that the 
exclusion of section 911 is a simple way to prevent taxpayers 
from facing an increased tax burden when there has been no 
increase in economic well being by accepting an overseas 
assignment.
    The Congress further observed that the prior-law $70,000 
exclusion remained unchanged for the past 10 years, while the 
extra costs from working abroad have increased with worldwide 
inflation. The Congress, therefore, believed it appropriate to 
increase the exclusion permitted under section 911. In 
addition, as a rough measure for the increased burden that may 
be expected to arise from future inflation, the Congress 
believed it appropriate to index the level of the section 911 
exclusion amount to future changes in the domestic cost of 
living.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, the $70,000 limitation on the exclusion for 
foreign earned income is increased to $80,000, in increments of 
$2,000 each year beginning in 1998. Under the Act, the 
limitation on the exclusion for foreign earned income then is 
indexed for inflation beginning in 2008 (for inflation after 
2006).

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $15 million in 1998, $30 million in 1999, 
$50 million in 2000, $67 million in 2001, $82 million in 2002, 
$97 million in 2003, $103 million in 2004, $111 million in 
2005, $119 million in 2006, and $127 million in 2007.

3. Treatment of certain securities positions under the subpart F 
        investment in U.S. property rules (sec. 1173 of the Act and 
        sec. 956 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under the rules of subpart F (secs. 951-964), the U.S. 10-
percent shareholders of a controlled foreign corporation (CFC) 
are required to include in income currently for U.S. tax 
purposes certain earnings of the CFC, whether or not such 
earnings are distributed currently to the shareholders. The 
U.S. 10-percent shareholders of a CFC are subject to current 
U.S. tax on their shares of certain income earned by the CFC 
(referred to as ``subpart F income''). The U.S. 10-percent 
shareholders also are subject to current U.S. tax on their 
shares of the CFC's earnings to the extent invested by the CFC 
in certain U.S. property.
    A shareholder's current income inclusion with respect to a 
CFC's investment in U.S. property for a taxable year is based 
on the CFC's average investment in U.S. property for such year. 
For this purpose, the U.S. property held by the CFC must be 
measured as of the close of each quarter in the taxable year. 
U.S. property generally is defined to include tangible property 
located in the United States, stock of a U.S. corporation, 
obligations of a U.S. person, and the right to use certain 
intellectual property in the United States. Exceptions are 
provided for, among other things, obligations of the United 
States, U.S. bank deposits, certain trade or business 
obligations, and stock or debts of certain unrelated U.S. 
corporations. For purposes of these rules, the term 
``obligation'' generally includes any bond, note, debenture, 
certificate, bill receivable, note receivable, open account, or 
other indebtedness, whether or not issued at a discount and 
whether or not bearing interest. Temp. Treas. Reg. section 
1.956-2T(d)(2).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that guidance is needed regarding the 
treatment of certain transactions entered into by securities 
dealers in the ordinary course of business under the investment 
in U.S. property provisions of subpart F. The Congress believed 
that deposits of collateral or margin in the ordinary course of 
business should not give rise to an income inclusion as an 
investment in U.S. property under the provisions of subpart F. 
Similarly, the Congress believed that repurchase agreements 
entered into in the ordinary course of business should not give 
rise to an income inclusion as an investment in U.S. property.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides two additional exceptions from the 
definition of U.S. property for purposes of the subpart F 
rules. Both exceptions relate to transactions entered into by a 
securities or commodities dealer in the ordinary course of its 
business as a securities or commodities dealer.
    The first exception covers the deposit of collateral or 
margin by a securities or commodities dealer, or the receipt of 
such a deposit by a dealer in securities or commodities, if 
such deposit is made or received on commercial terms in the 
ordinary course of the dealer's business as a securities or 
commodities dealer. This exception applies to deposits of 
margin or collateral for securities loans, notional principal 
contracts, options contracts, forward contracts, futures 
contracts, and any other financial transaction with respect to 
which the Secretary of the Treasury determines that the posting 
of collateral or margin is customary.
    The second exception covers repurchase agreement 
transactions and reverse repurchase agreement transactions 
entered into by or with a dealer in securities or commodities 
in the ordinary course of its business as a securities or 
commodities dealer. The exception applies only to the extent 
that the obligation under the transaction does not exceed the 
fair market value of readily marketable securities transferred 
or otherwise posted as collateral.
    For purposes of these two additional exceptions under 
section 956, the term ``dealer in securities'' has the meaning 
provided under section 475 and the term ``dealer in 
commodities'' means futures commission merchants and dealers in 
commodities within the meaning of the new definition that is 
added to section 475 by the Act. No inference is intended 
regarding the treatment of these transactions under prior law. 
In addition, the addition of these two exceptions under section 
956 is not intended to create any inference regarding the 
treatment of an obligation of a U.S. person to return stock 
that is borrowed pursuant to a securities loan.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years of foreign 
corporations beginning after December 31, 1997, and taxable 
years of U.S. shareholders with or within which such taxable 
years of foreign corporations end.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million in 1998 and by $2 million per 
year in each of the years 1999 through 2007.

4. Treat service income of nonresident alien individuals earned on 
        foreign ships as foreign source income and disregard the U.S. 
        presence of such individuals (sec. 1174 of the Act and secs. 
        861, 863, 872, 3401, and 7701 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Nonresident alien individuals generally are subject to U.S. 
taxation and withholding on their U.S. source income. 
Compensation for labor and personal services performed within 
the United States was considered U.S. source unless such income 
qualified for a de minimis exception. To qualify for the 
exception, the compensation paid to a nonresident alien 
individual must not exceed $3,000, the compensation must 
reflect services performed on behalf of a foreign employer, and 
the individual must be present in the United Sates for not more 
than 90 days during the taxable year. Special rules apply to 
exclude certain items from the gross income of a nonresident 
alien. An exclusion applies to gross income derived by a 
nonresident alien individual from the international operation 
of a ship if the country in which such individual is resident 
provides a reciprocal exemption for U.S. residents. However, 
this exclusion does not apply to income from personal services 
performed by an individual crew member on board a ship. 
Consequently, under prior law, wages exceeding $3,000 in a 
taxable year that were earned by nonresident alien individual 
crew members of a foreign ship while the vessel was within U.S. 
territory were subject to income taxation by the United States.
    U.S. residents are subject to U.S. tax on their worldwide 
income. In general, a non-U.S. citizen is considered to be a 
resident of the United States if the individual (1) has entered 
the United States as a lawful permanent U.S. resident or (2) is 
present in the United States for 31 or more days during the 
current calendar year and has been present in the United States 
for a substantial period of time--183 or more days--during a 
three-year period computed by weighting toward the present year 
(the ``substantial presence test''). An individual generally is 
treated as present in the United States on any day if such 
individual is physically present in the United States at any 
time during the day. Certain categories of individuals (e.g., 
foreign government employees and certain students) are not 
treated as U.S. residents even if they are present in the 
United States for the requisite period of time. Under prior 
law, crew members of a foreign vessel who were on board the 
vessel while it was stationed within U.S. territorial waters 
were treated as present in the United States.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress understood that U.S. tax rules impose a 
significant compliance burden on nonresident alien individuals 
who are present in the United States for short periods of time 
as members of the regular crew of a foreign vessel and who may 
not be permitted to leave such vessel during those periods. The 
Congress believed that an exemption from U.S. tax is 
appropriate for the income earned by a nonresident alien 
individual from personal services performed as a member of the 
regular crew of a foreign vessel. Moreover, the Congress 
believed that such an individual's presence in the United 
States as a regular crew member of a foreign vessel should not 
be taken into account for purposes of determining whether the 
individual is treated as a resident alien for U.S. tax 
purposes.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act treats gross income of a nonresident alien 
individual, who is present in the United States as a member of 
the regular crew of a foreign vessel, from the performance of 
personal services in connection with the international 
operation of a ship as income from foreign sources. Thus, such 
income is exempt from U.S. income and withholding tax. However, 
the treatment of income of a nonresident alien crew member of a 
foreign vessel as foreign source income will not apply for 
purposes of the pension rules and certain employee benefit 
provisions. In addition, for purposes of determining whether an 
individual is a U.S. resident under the substantial presence 
test, the Act provides that any day that such individual is 
present as a member of the regular crew of a foreign vessel is 
disregarded if the individual does not otherwise engage in 
trade or business within the United States on such day.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $2 million in 1998, $4 million in 1999, and 
$3 million per year in each of 2000 through 2007.

5. Exceptions under subpart F for active financing income (sec. 1175 of 
        the Act (canceled pursuant to Line Item Veto Act) and sec. 954 
        of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under the subpart F rules, certain U.S. shareholders of a 
controlled foreign corporation (``CFC'') are subject to U.S. 
tax currently on certain income earned by the CFC, whether or 
not such income is distributed to the shareholders. The income 
subject to current inclusion under the subpart F rules 
includes, among other things, ``foreign personal holding 
company income'' and insurance income. The U.S. 10-percent 
shareholders of a CFC also are subject to current inclusion 
with respect to their shares of the CFC's foreign base company 
services income (i.e., income derived from services performed 
for a related person outside the country in which the CFC is 
organized).
    Foreign personal holding company income generally consisted 
of the following: dividends, interest, royalties, rents and 
annuities; net gains from sales or exchanges of (1) property 
that gives rise to the preceding types of income, (2) property 
that does not give rise to income, and (3) interests in trusts, 
partnerships, and REMICs; net gains from commodities 
transactions; net gains from foreign currency transactions; and 
income that is equivalent to interest. The Act added two 
additional categories of foreign personal holding company 
income: income from notional principal contracts and payments 
in lieu of dividends.
    Insurance income subject to current inclusion under the 
subpart F rules includes any income of a CFC attributable to 
the issuing or reinsuring of any insurance or annuity contract 
in connection with risks located in a country other than the 
CFC's country of organization. Subpart F insurance income also 
includes income attributable to an insurance contract in 
connection with risks located within the CFC's country of 
organization, as the result of an arrangement under which 
another corporation receives a substantially equal amount of 
consideration for insurance of other-country risks. Investment 
income of a CFC that is allocable to any insurance or annuity 
contract related to risks located outside the CFC's country of 
organization is taxable as subpart F insurance income (Prop. 
Treas. reg. sec. 1.953-1(a)). Investment income allocable to 
risks located within the CFC's country of organization 
generally is taxable as foreign personal holding company 
income.
    Special rules apply with respect to certain captive 
insurance companies. The definition of CFC and the application 
of the current inclusion rules to U.S. shareholders are 
broadened in the case of such a captive.

                           Reasons for Change

    The subpart F rules historically have been aimed at 
requiring current inclusion by the U.S. shareholders of income 
of a CFC that is either passive or easily moveable. Prior to 
the enactment of the 1986 Act, exceptions from foreign personal 
holding company income were provided for income derived in the 
conduct of a banking, financing, or similar business or derived 
from certain investments made by an insurance company. The 
Congress was concerned that the 1986 Act's repeal of these 
exceptions resulted in the extension of the subpart F 
provisions to income that is neither passive nor easily 
moveable. The Congress believed that the provision of 
exceptions from foreign personal holding company income for 
income from the active conduct of an insurance, banking, 
financing or similar business is appropriate.

                   Explanation of Canceled Provision

    Under the Act, a temporary exception from foreign personal 
holding company income would have applied to income that is 
derived in the active conduct of a banking, financing or 
similar business by a CFC that is predominantly engaged in the 
active conduct of such business. For this purpose, income 
derived in the active conduct of a banking, financing, or 
similar business generally would have been determined under the 
principles applicable in determining financial services income 
for foreign tax credit limitation purposes. However, in the 
case of a corporation that is engaged in the active conduct of 
a banking or securities business, the income that is eligible 
for this exception would have been determined under the 
principles applicable in determining the income which is 
treated as nonpassive income for purposes of the passive 
foreign investment company provisions. The Congress generally 
intended that the income of a corporation engaged in the active 
conduct of a banking or securities business that would have 
been eligible for this exception would have been the income 
that is treated as nonpassive under the regulations proposed 
under prior law section 1296(b). See Prop. Treas. Reg. secs. 
1.1296-4 and 1.1296-6. In this regard, the Congress intended 
that eligible income would have included income or gains with 
respect to foreclosed property which is incident to the active 
conduct of a banking business. The Act would have directed the 
Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations applying 
look-through treatment in characterizing for this purpose 
dividends, interest, income equivalent to interest, rents, and 
royalties from related persons.
    For purposes of the temporary exception, a corporation 
would have been considered to be predominantly engaged in the 
active conduct of a banking, financing, or similar business if 
it is engaged in the active conduct of a banking or securities 
business or is a qualified bank affiliate or qualified 
securities affiliate. In this regard, the Congress intended 
that a corporation would have been considered to be engaged in 
the active conduct of a banking or securities business if the 
corporation would be treated as so engaged under the 
regulations proposed under prior law section 1296(b); the 
Congress further intended that qualified bank affiliates and 
qualified securities affiliates would have been as determined 
under such proposed regulations. See Prop. Treas. Reg. secs. 
1.1296-4 and 1.1296-6.
    Alternatively, a corporation would have been considered to 
be engaged in the active conduct of a banking, financing or 
similar business if more than 70 percent of its gross income is 
derived from such business from transactions with unrelated 
persons located within the country under the laws of which the 
corporation is created or organized. For this purpose, income 
derived by a qualified business unit of a corporation from 
transactions with unrelated persons located in the country in 
which the qualified business unit maintains its principal 
office and conducts substantial business activity would have 
been treated as derived by the corporation from transactions 
with unrelated persons located within the country in which the 
corporation is created or organized. A person other than a 
natural person would have been considered to be located within 
the country in which it maintains an office through which it 
engages in a trade or business and by which the transaction is 
effected. A natural person would have been treated as located 
within the country in which such person is physically located 
when such person enters into the transaction.
    The Act would have provided a temporary exception from 
foreign personal holding company income for certain investment 
income of a qualifying insurance company with respect to risks 
located within the CFC's country of creation or organization. 
The rules of this provision of the Act differ from the rules of 
present-law section 953 of the Code, which determines the 
subpart F inclusions of a U.S. shareholder relating to 
insurance income of a CFC. Such insurance income under section 
953 generally is computed in accordance with the rules of 
subchapter L of the Code. The Congress believed that review of 
the rules of this provision would be appropriate when final 
guidance under section 953 is published by the Treasury 
Department.
    The Act would have provided a temporary exception for 
income (received from a person other than a related person) 
from investments made by a qualifying insurance company of its 
reserves or 80 percent of its unearned premiums (as defined for 
purposes of the provision). For this purpose, in the case of 
contracts regulated in the country in which sold as property, 
casualty, or health insurance contracts, unearned premiums and 
reserves would havebeen defined as unearned premiums and 
reserves for losses incurred determined using the methods and interest 
rates that would be used if the qualifying insurance company were 
subject to tax under subchapter L of the Code. Thus, for this purpose, 
unearned premiums would have been determined in accordance with section 
832(b)(4), and reserves for losses incurred would have been determined 
in accordance with section 832(b)(5) and 846 of the Code (as well as 
any other rules applicable to a U.S. property and casualty insurance 
company with respect to such amounts).
    In the case of a contract regulated in the country in which 
sold as a life insurance or annuity contract, the following 
three alternative rules for determining reserves would have 
been provided under the Act. The Congress intended that any one 
of the three rules could have been elected with respect to a 
particular line of business.
    First, reserves for such contracts could have been 
determined generally under the rules applicable to domestic 
life insurance companies under subchapter L of the Code, using 
the methods there specified, but substituting for the interest 
rates in Code section 807(d)(2)(B) an interest rate determined 
for the country in which the qualifying insurance company was 
created or organized, calculated in the same manner as the mid-
term applicable Federal interest rate (``AFR'') (within the 
meaning of section 1274(d)).
    Second, the reserves for such contracts could have been 
determined generally using a preliminary term foreign reserve 
method, except that the interest rate to be used would be the 
interest rate determined for the country in which the 
qualifying insurance company was created or organized, 
calculated in the same manner as the mid-term AFR. If a 
qualifying insurance company uses such a preliminary term 
method with respect to contracts insuring risks located in the 
country in which the company is created or organized, then such 
method would have been the method that applies for purposes of 
this election.
    Third, reserves for such contracts could have been 
determined to be equal to the net surrender value of the 
contract (as defined in section 807(e)(1)(A)).
    In no event could the reserve for any contract at any time 
have exceeded the foreign statement reserve for the contract, 
reduced by any catastrophe or deficiency reserve. This rule 
would have applied, whether the contract is regulated as a 
property, casualty, health, life insurance, annuity, or any 
other type of contract.
    The Act also would have provided a temporary exception for 
income from investment of assets equal to (1) one-third of 
premiums earned during the taxable year on insurance contracts 
regulated in the country in which sold as property, casualty, 
or health insurance contacts, and (2) the greater of 10 percent 
of reserves, or, in the case of a qualifying insurance company 
that is a startup company, $10 million. For this purpose, a 
startup company would have been a company (including any 
predecessor) that has not been engaged in the active conduct of 
an insurance business for more than 5 years. The Congress 
intended that the 5-year period would have commenced when the 
foreign company first is engaged in the active conduct of an 
insurance business. If the foreign company was formed before 
being acquired by the U.S. shareholder, the 5-year period would 
have commenced when the acquired company first was engaged in 
the active conduct of an insurance business. The Congress 
intended that in the event of the acquisition of a book of 
business from another company through an assumption or 
indemnity reinsurance transaction, the period would have 
commenced when the acquiring company first engaged in the 
active conduct of an insurance business, except that if more 
than a substantial part (e.g., 80 percent) of the business of 
the ceding company is acquired, then the 5-year period would 
have commenced when the ceding company first engaged in the 
active conduct of an insurance business. In addition, the 
Congress did not intend that reinsurance transactions among 
related persons be used to multiply the number of 5-year 
periods.
    To prevent the shifting of relatively high-yielding assets 
to generate investment income that qualifies under this 
temporary exception, the Act would have provided that, under 
rules prescribed by the Secretary, income is allocated to 
contracts as follows. In the case of contracts that are 
separate-account-type contracts (including variable contracts 
not meeting the requirements of sec. 817), only the income 
specifically allocable to such contracts would have been taken 
into account. In the case of other contracts, income not 
specifically allocable would have been allocated ratably among 
such contracts.
    Under the Act, a qualifying insurance company would have 
been defined as any entity which: (1) is regulated as an 
insurance company under the laws of the country in which it is 
incorporated; (2) derives at least 50 percent of its net 
written premiums from the insurance or reinsurance of risks 
situated within its country of incorporation; and (3) is 
engaged in the active conduct of an insurance business and 
would be subject to tax under subchapter L if it were a 
domestic corporation.
    The Act would have provided that this provision does not 
apply to investment income (includable in the income of a U.S. 
shareholder of a CFC pursuant to section 953) allocable to 
contracts that insure related party risks or risks located in a 
country other than the country in which the qualifying 
insurance company is created or organized.
    The Act would have provided an anti-abuse rule applicable 
for purposes of these temporary exceptions. For purposes of 
applying these exceptions, items with respect to a transaction 
or series of transactions would have been disregarded if one of 
the principal purposes of the transaction or transactions is to 
qualify income or gain for these exceptions, including any 
change in the method of computing reserves or any other 
transaction or transactions one of the principal purposes of 
which is the acceleration or deferral of any item in order to 
claim the benefits of these exceptions.
    The Act also would have provided an exception from foreign 
base company services income for income derived from services 
performed in connection with the active conduct of a banking, 
financing, insurance or similar business by a CFC that is 
predominantly engaged in the active conduct of such business or 
is a qualifying insurance company.
    The Congress recognized that insurance, banking, financing, 
and similar businesses are businesses the active conduct of 
which involves the generation of income, such as interest and 
dividends, of a type that generally is treated as passive for 
purposes of subpart F. For purposes of this temporary 
provision, the Congress intended to delineate the income 
derived in the active conduct of such businesses, while 
retaining the anti-deferral rules of subpart F with respect to 
income not derived in the active conduct of these financial 
services businesses. However, the Congress recognized that the 
line between income derived in the active conduct of such 
businesses and income otherwise derived by entities so engaged 
can be difficult to draw. The Congress believed that the issues 
of the determination of income derived in the active conduct of 
such businesses and the potential mobility of the business 
activity and income recognition of insurance, banking, 
financing, and similar businesses require further study. In the 
event that it became necessary to consider a possible extension 
of the provision in the future, the Congress invited the 
comments of taxpayers and the Treasury Department regarding 
these issues.

                             Effective Date

    The provision would have applied only to taxable years of 
foreign corporations beginning in 1998, and to taxable years of 
United States shareholders with or within which such taxable 
years of foreign corporations end.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision was estimated to have reduced Federal fiscal 
year budget receipts by $23 million in 1998, $68 million in 
1999, and $3 million in 2000.

                         Line Item Veto Action

    This provision was identified by the Joint Committee on 
Taxation as a limited tax benefit within the meaning of the 
Line Item Veto Act. The President canceled this provision 
pursuant to the Line Item Veto Act. A modified version of the 
provision was included in H.R. 2513, which was passed by the 
House on November 8, 1997.\283\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \283\ See report of the House Committee on Ways and Means, H. Rept. 
105-318, Part I, October 9, 1997.
   TITLE XII. SIMPLIFICATION PROVISIONS RELATING TO INDIVIDUALS AND 
                               BUSINESSES

                 A. Provisions Relating to Individuals

1. Modifications to standard deduction of dependents; AMT treatment of 
        certain minor children (sec. 1201 of the Act and secs. 63(c) 
        and 59(j) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Standard deduction of dependents.--Under present law, the 
standard deduction of a taxpayer for whom a dependency 
exemption is allowed on another taxpayer's return can not 
exceed the lesser of (1) the standard deduction for an 
individual taxpayer (projected to be $4,250 for 1998) or (2) 
the greater of $500 (indexed) \284\ or the dependent's earned 
income (sec. 63(c)(5)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \284\ Projected to be $700 for 1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Taxation of unearned income of children under age 14.--The 
tax on a portion of the unearned income (e.g., interest and 
dividends) of a child under age 14 is the additional tax that 
the child's custodial parent would pay if the child's unearned 
income were included in that parent's income. The portion of 
the child's unearned income which is taxed at the parent's top 
marginal rate is the amount by which the child's unearned 
income is more than the sum of (1) $500 \285\ (indexed) plus 
(2) the greater of (a) $500 \286\ (indexed) or (b) the child's 
itemized deductions directly connected with the production of 
the unearned income (sec. 1(g)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \285\ Projected to be $700 for 1998.
    \286\ Projected to be $700 for 1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Alternative minimum tax (``AMT'') exemption for children 
under age 14.--Single taxpayers are entitled to an exemption 
from the alternative minimum tax (``AMT'') of $33,750. However, 
in the case of a child under age 14, his exemption from the 
AMT, in substance, is the unused alternative minimum tax 
exemption of the child's custodial parent, limited to the sum 
of earned income and $1,000 (indexed) \287\ (sec. 59(j)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \287\ Projected to be $1,400 for 1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that significant simplification of 
the existing income tax system could be achieved by providing 
larger exemptions such that taxpayers with incomes less than 
the exemption are not required to compute and pay any tax. The 
Congress particularly believed that the present-law exemptions 
of dependent children were too small.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Standard deduction of dependents.--The Act increases the 
standard deduction for a taxpayer with respect to whom a 
dependency exemption is allowed on another taxpayer's return to 
the lesser of (1) the standard deduction for individual 
taxpayers or (2) the greater of: (a) $500 \288\ (indexed for 
inflation as under present law), or (b) the individual's earned 
income plus $250. The $250 amount is indexed for inflation 
after 1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \288\ Projected to be $700 for 1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Alternative minimum tax exemption for children under age 
14.--The Act increases the AMT exemption amount for a child 
under age 14 to the lesser of (1) $33,750 or (2) the sum of the 
child's earned income plus $5,000. The $5,000 amount is indexed 
for inflation after 1998.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to decrease Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $2 million in 1998, $38 million in 1999, $35 
million per year in each of years 2000 through 2004, $38 
million in 2005, $37 million in 2006, and $36 million in 2007.

2. Increase de minimis threshold for estimated tax to $1,000 for 
        individuals (sec. 1202 of the Act and sec. 6654 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    An individual taxpayer generally is subject to an addition 
to tax for any underpayment of estimated tax (sec. 6654). An 
individual generally does not have an underpayment of estimated 
tax if he or she makes timely estimated tax payments at least 
equal to: (1) 100 percent of the tax shown on the return of the 
individual for the preceding year (the ``100 percent of last 
year's liability safe harbor'') or (2) 90 percent of the tax 
shown on the return for the current year. The 100 percent of 
last year's liability safe harbor is modified to be a 110 
percent of last year's liability safe harbor for any individual 
with an AGI of more than $150,000 as shown on the return for 
the preceding taxable year. These percentages are further 
modified for certain years. For example, see section 1091 of 
the Act. Income tax withholding from wages is considered to be 
a payment of estimated taxes. In general, payment of estimated 
taxes must be made quarterly. The addition to tax is not 
imposed where the total tax liability for the year, reduced by 
any withheld tax, is less than $500.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress determined that raising the individual 
estimated tax de minimis threshold will simplify the tax laws 
for a number of taxpayers.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act increases the $500 individual estimated tax de 
minimis threshold to $1,000.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $134 million in 1998, $17 million in 1999, 
$18 million in 2000, $19 million in 2001, $20 million in 2002, 
$21 million in 2003, $22 million in 2004, $24 million in 2005, 
$25 million in 2006, and $26 million in 2007.

3. Treatment of certain reimbursed expenses of rural letter carrier's 
        vehicles (sec. 1203 of the Act and sec. 162 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A taxpayer who uses his or her automobile for business 
purposes may deduct the business portion of the actual 
operation and maintenance expenses of the vehicle, plus 
depreciation (subject to the limitations of sec. 280F). 
Alternatively, the taxpayer may elect to utilize a standard 
mileage rate in computing the deduction allowable for business 
use of an automobile that has not been fully depreciated. Under 
this election, the taxpayer's deduction equals the applicable 
rate multiplied by the number of miles driven for business 
purposes and is taken in lieu of deductions for depreciation 
and actual operation and maintenance expenses.
    An employee of the U.S. Postal Service may compute his 
deduction for business use of an automobile in performing 
services involving the collection and delivery of mail on a 
rural route by using, for all business use mileage, 150 percent 
of the standard mileage rate.
    Rural letter carriers are paid an equipment maintenance 
allowance (EMA) to compensate them for the use of their 
personal automobiles in delivering the mail. The tax 
consequences of the EMA are determined by comparing it with the 
automobile expense deductions that each carrier is allowed to 
claim (using either the actual expenses method or the 150 
percent of the standard mileage rate). If the EMA exceeds the 
allowable automobile expense deductions, the excess generally 
is subject to tax. If the EMA falls short of the allowable 
automobile expense deductions, a deduction is allowed only to 
the extent that the sum of this shortfall and all other 
miscellaneous itemized deductions exceeds two percent of the 
taxpayer's adjusted gross income.

                           Reasons for Change

    The filing of tax returns by rural letter carriers can be 
complex. Under prior law, those who are reimbursed at more than 
the 150 percent rate must report their reimbursement as income 
and deduct their expenses as miscellaneous itemized deductions 
(subject to the two-percent floor). Permitting the income and 
expenses to wash, so that neither will have to be reported on 
the rural letter carrier's tax return, will simplify these tax 
returns.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act repeals the special rate for Postal Service 
employees of 150 percent of the standard mileage rate. In its 
place, the Act requires that the rate of reimbursement provided 
by the Postal Service to rural letter carriers be considered to 
be equivalent to their expenses. The rate of reimbursement that 
is considered to be equivalent to their expenses is the rate of 
reimbursement contained in the 1991 collective bargaining 
agreement, which may be increased by no more than the rate of 
inflation.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to decrease Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 in 1998, $1 million in 
1999, $1 million in 2000, $1 million in 2001, $1 million in 
2002, $1 million in 2003, $1 million in 2004, $1 million in 
2005, $1 million in 2006, and $1 million in 2007.

4. Travel expenses of Federal employees participating in a Federal 
        criminal investigation (sec. 1204 of the Act and sec. 162 of 
        the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Unreimbursed ordinary and necessary travel expenses paid or 
incurred by an individual in connection with temporary 
employment away from home (e.g., transportation costs and the 
cost of meals and lodging) are generally deductible, subject to 
the two-percent floor on miscellaneous itemized deductions. 
Travel expenses paid or incurred in connection with indefinite 
employment away from home, however, are not deductible. A 
taxpayer's employment away from home in a single location is 
indefinite rather than temporary if it lasts for one year or 
more; thus, no deduction is permitted for travel expenses paid 
or incurred in connection with such employment (sec. 162(a)). 
If a taxpayer's employment away from home in a single location 
lasts for less than one year, whether such employment is 
temporary or indefinite is determined on the basis of the facts 
and circumstances.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that it would be inappropriate if 
this provision in the tax laws were to be a hindrance to the 
investigation of a Federal crime.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The one-year limitation with respect to deductibility of 
expenses while temporarily away from home does not include any 
period during which a Federal employee is certified by the 
Attorney General (or the Attorney General's designee) as 
traveling on behalf of the Federal Government in a temporary 
duty status to investigate or provide support services to the 
investigation of a Federal crime. Thus, expenses for these 
individuals during these periods are fully deductible, 
regardless of the length of the period for which certification 
is given (provided that the other requirements for 
deductibility are satisfied). Prosecuting a Federal crime or 
providing support services to the prosecution of a Federal 
crime is considered part of investigating a Federal crime.\289\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \289\ See Title VI (sec. 611(a)) of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical 
Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for amounts paid or incurred 
with respect to taxable years ending after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to decrease Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 in each of 1998 through 
2007.

5. Payment of taxes by commercially acceptable means (sec. 1205 of the 
        Act and sec. 6311 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Payment of taxes may be made by checks or money orders, to 
the extent and under the conditions provided by Treasury 
regulations (sec. 6311).

                           Reasons for Change

    Additional payment mechanisms (such as credit cards, debit 
cards, and charge cards) have become commonly used and reliable 
forms of payment. Some taxpayers may find paying taxes by these 
mechanisms more convenient than paying by check or money order.

                        Explanation of Provision

In general

    The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is engaged in a long-
term modernization of its information systems, the Tax Systems 
Modernization (TSM) Program. This modernization is intended to 
address deficiencies in the current IRS information systems and 
to plan effectively for future information system needs and 
requirements. The systems changes are designed to reduce the 
burden on taxpayers, generate additional revenue through 
improved voluntary compliance, and achieve productivity gains 
throughout the IRS. One key element of this program is 
electronic filing of tax returns.
    At the present time, increasing reliance is being placed 
upon electronic funds transfers for payment of obligations. In 
light of this, the IRS seeks to integrate these payment methods 
in its TSM program, including electronic filing of returns, as 
well as into its traditional collection functions. The Act 
allows the IRS to accept payment by any commercially acceptable 
means that the Secretary deems appropriate, to the extent and 
under the conditions provided in Treasury regulations. This 
will include, for example, electronic funds transfers, 
including those arising from credit cards, debit cards, and 
charge cards.
    The IRS contemplates that it will proceed to negotiate 
contracts to implement this provision with one or more private 
sector credit and debit card systems. The Act provides that the 
IRS may not pay any fees or provide any other consideration 
with respect to any such contracts.

Billing error resolution

    In the course of processing these transactions, it will be 
necessary to resolve billing errors and other disputes. The 
Internal Revenue Code contains mechanisms for the determination 
of tax liability, defenses and other taxpayer protections, and 
the resolution of disputes with respect to those liabilities. 
The Truth-in-Lending Act contains provisions for determination 
of credit card liabilities, defenses and other consumer 
protections, and the resolution of disputes with respect to 
these liabilities.
    The Act excludes credit card, debit card, and charge card 
issuers and processing mechanisms from the resolution of tax 
liability, but makes IRS subject to the Truth-in-Lending 
provisions insofar as those provisions impose obligations and 
responsibilities with regard to the ``billing error'' 
resolution process. It is not intended that consumers obtain 
additional ways to dispute their tax liabilities under the 
Truth-in-Lending provisions.
    The Act also specifically includes the use of debit cards 
in this provision and provides that the corresponding defenses 
and ``billing error'' provisions of the Electronic Fund 
TransferAct will apply in a similar manner.
    The Act adds new section 6311(d)(3) to the Code. This 
section describes the circumstances under which section 161 of 
the Truth-in-Lending Act (``TILA'') and section 908 of the 
Electronic Fund Transfer Act (``EFTA'') apply to disputes that 
may arise in connection with payments of taxes made by credit 
card or debit card. Subsections (A) through (C) recognize that 
``billing errors'' relating to the credit card account, such as 
an error arising from a credit card transaction posted to a 
cardholder's account without the cardholder's authorization, an 
amount posted to the wrong cardholder's account, or an 
incorrect amount posted to a cardholder's account as a result 
of a computational error or numerical transposition, are 
governed by the billing error provisions of section 161 of 
TILA. Similarly, subsections 6311(d)(3)(A)-(C) provide that 
errors such as those described above which arise in connection 
with payments of internal revenue taxes made by debit card, are 
governed by section 908 of EFTA.
    The Internal Revenue Code provides that refunds are only 
authorized to be paid to the person who made the overpayment 
(generally the taxpayer). Subsection 6311(d)(3)(E), however, 
provides that where a taxpayer is entitled to receive funds as 
a result of the correction of a billing error made under 
section 161 of TILA in connection with a credit card 
transaction, or under section 908 of EFTA in connection with a 
debit card transaction, the IRS is authorized to utilize the 
appropriate credit card or debit card system to initiate a 
credit to the taxpayer's credit card or debit card account. The 
IRS may, therefore, provide such funds through the taxpayer's 
credit card or debit card account rather than directly to the 
taxpayer.
    On the other hand, subsections 6311(d)(3)(A)-(C) provide 
that any alleged error or dispute asserted by a taxpayer 
concerning the merits of the taxpayer's underlying tax 
liability or tax return is governed solely by existing tax 
laws, and is not subject to section 161 or section 170 of TILA, 
section 908 of EFTA, or any similar provisions of State law. 
Absent the exclusion from section 170 of TILA, in a collection 
action brought against the cardholder by the card issuer the 
cardholder might otherwise assert as a defense that the IRS had 
incorrectly computed his tax liability. A collection action 
initiated by a credit card issuer against the taxpayer/
cardholder will be an inappropriate vehicle for the 
determination of a taxpayer's tax liability, especially since 
the United States will not be a party to such an action.
    Similarly, without the exclusion from section 161 of TILA 
and section 908 of EFTA, a taxpayer could contest the merits of 
his tax liability by putting the charge which appears on the 
credit card bill in dispute. Pursuant to TILA or EFTA, the 
taxpayer's card issuer will have to investigate the dispute, 
thereby finding itself in the middle of a dispute between the 
IRS and the taxpayer. It is believed that it is improper to 
attempt to resolve tax disputes through the billing process. It 
is also noted that the taxpayer retains the traditional, 
existing remedies for resolving tax disputes, such as resolving 
the dispute administratively with the IRS, filing a petition 
with the Tax Court after receiving a statutory notice of 
deficiency, or paying the disputed tax and filing a claim for 
refund (and subsequently filing a refund suit if the claim is 
denied or not acted upon).

Creditor status

    The TILA imposes various responsibilities and obligations 
on creditors. Although the definition of the term ``creditor'' 
set forth in 15 U.S.C. sec. 1602 is limited, and will generally 
not include the IRS, in the case of an open-end credit plan 
involving a credit card, the card issuer and any person who 
honors the credit card are, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. sec. 1602(f), 
creditors.
    In addition, 12 CFR sec. 226.12(e) provides that the 
creditor must transmit a credit statement to the card issuer 
within 7 business days from accepting the return or forgiving 
the debt. There is a concern that the response deadlines 
otherwise imposed by 12 CFR sec. 226.12(e), if applicable, will 
be difficult for the IRS to comply with (given the volume of 
payments the IRS is likely to receive in peak periods). This 
could subject the IRS to unwarranted damage actions. 
Consequently, the bill generally provides an exception to 
creditor status for the IRS.

Privacy protections

    The Act also addresses privacy questions that arise from 
the IRS' participation in credit card processing systems. It is 
believed that taxpayers expect that the maximum possible 
protection of privacy will be accorded any transactions they 
have with the IRS. Accordingly, the Act provides the greatest 
possible protection of taxpayers' privacy that is consistent 
with developing and operating an efficient tax administration 
system. It is expected that the principle will be fully 
observed in the implementation of this provision.
    A key privacy issue is the use and redisclosure of tax 
information by financial institutions for purposes unrelated to 
the processing of credit card charges, i.e., marketing and 
related uses. To accept credit card charges by taxpayers, the 
IRS will have to disclose tax information to financial 
institutions to obtain payment and to resolve billing disputes. 
To obtain payment, the IRS will have to disclose, at a minimum, 
information on the ``credit slip,'' i.e., the dollar amount of 
the payment and the taxpayer's credit card number.
    The resolution of billing disputes may require the 
disclosure of additional tax information to financial 
institutions. In most cases, providing a copy of the credit 
slip and verifying the transaction amount will be sufficient. 
Conceivably, financial institutions could require some 
information regarding the underlying liability even where the 
dispute concerns a ``billing dispute'' matter. This additional 
information will not necessarily be shared as widely as the 
initial payment data. In lieu of disclosing further 
information, the IRS may elect to allow disputed amounts to be 
charged back to the IRS and to reinstate the corresponding tax 
liability.
    Despite the language in most cardholder agreements that 
permits redisclosure of credit card transaction information, 
the public may be largely unaware of how widely that 
information is shared. For example, some financial institutions 
may share credit, payment, and purchase information with 
private credit bureaus, who, in turn, may sell this information 
to direct mail marketers, and others. Without use and 
redisclosure restrictions, taxpayers may discover that some 
traditionally confidential tax information might be widely 
disseminated to direct mail marketers and others.
    It is intended that credit or debit card transaction 
information will generally be restricted to those uses 
necessary to process payments and resolve billing errors, as 
well as other purposes that are specified in the statute. The 
Act directs the Secretary to issue published procedures on what 
constitutes authorized uses and disclosures. It is anticipated 
that the Secretary's published procedures will prohibit the use 
of transaction information for marketing tax-related services 
by the issuer or any marketing that targets only those who use 
their credit card to pay their taxes. It is also anticipated 
that the published procedures will prohibit the sale of 
transaction information to a third party.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective nine months after the date of 
enactment. The IRS may, in this interim period, conduct 
internal tests and negotiate with card issuers, but may not 
accept credit or debit cards for payment of tax liability.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts in each of 1998 through 
2007.

             B. Provisions Relating to Businesses Generally

1. Modifications to look-back method for long-term contracts (sec. 1211 
            of the Act and secs. 460 and 167(g) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Taxpayers engaged in the production of property under a 
long-term contract generally must compute income from the 
contract under the percentage of completion method. Under the 
percentage of completion method, a taxpayer must include in 
gross income for any taxable year an amount that is based on 
the product of (1) the gross contract price and (2) the 
percentage of the contract completed as of the end of the year. 
The percentage of the contract completed as of the end of the 
year is determined by comparing costs incurred with respect to 
the contract as of the end of the year with estimated total 
contract costs.
    Because the percentage of completion method relies upon 
estimated, rather than actual, contract price and costs to 
determine gross income for any taxable year, a ``look-back 
method'' is applied in the year a contract is completed in 
order to compensate the taxpayer (or the Treasury Department) 
for the acceleration (or deferral) of taxes paid over the 
contract term. The first step of the look-back method is to 
reapply the percentage of completion method using actual 
contract price and costs rather than estimated contract price 
and costs. The second step generally requires the taxpayer to 
recompute its tax liability for each year of the contract using 
gross income as reallocated under the look-back method. If 
there is any difference between the recomputed tax liability 
and the tax liability as previously determined for a year, such 
difference is treated as a hypothetical underpayment or 
overpayment of tax to which the taxpayer applies a rate of 
interest equal to the overpayment rate, compounded daily.\290\ 
The taxpayer receives (or pays) interest if the net amount of 
interest applicable to hypothetical overpayments exceeds (or is 
less than) the amount of interest applicable to hypothetical 
underpayments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \290\ The overpayment rate equals the applicable Federal short-term 
rate plus two percentage points. This rate is adjusted quarterly by the 
IRS. Thus, in applying the look-back method for a contract year, a 
taxpayer may be required to use five different interest rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The look-back method must be reapplied for any item of 
income or cost that is properly taken into account after the 
completion of the contract.
    The look-back method does not apply to any contract that is 
completed within two taxable years of the contract commencement 
date if the gross contract price does not exceed the lesser of 
(1) $1 million or (2) one percent of the average gross receipts 
of the taxpayer for the preceding three taxable years. In 
addition, a simplified look-back method is available to certain 
pass-through entities and, pursuant to Treasury regulations, to 
certain other taxpayers. Under the simplified look-back method, 
the hypothetical underpayment or overpayment of tax for a 
contract year generally is determined by applying the highest 
rate of tax applicable to such taxpayer to the change in gross 
income as recomputed under the look-back method.

                           Reasons for Change

    Prior law may have required multiple applications of the 
look-back method with respect to a single contract or may have 
otherwise subjected contracts to the look-back method even 
though amounts necessitating the look-back calculations were de 
minimis relative to the aggregate contract income. In addition, 
the use of multiple interest rates complicated the mechanics of 
the look-back calculation. The Congress wished to address these 
concerns.

                        Explanation of Provision

Election not to apply the look-back method for de minimis amounts

    The Act provides that a taxpayer may elect not to apply the 
look-back method with respect to a long-term contract if for 
each prior contract year, the cumulative taxable income (or 
loss) under the contract as determined using estimated contract 
price and costs is within 10 percent of the cumulative taxable 
income (or loss) as determined using actual contract price and 
costs.
    Thus, under the election, upon completion of a long-term 
contract, a taxpayer would be required to apply the first step 
of the look-back method (the reallocation of gross income using 
actual, rather than estimated, contract price and costs), but 
is not required to apply the additional steps of the look-back 
method if the application of the first step resulted in de 
minimis changes to the amount of income previously taken into 
account for each prior contract year.
    The election applies to all long-term contracts completed 
during the taxable year for which the election is made and to 
all long-term contracts completed during subsequent taxable 
years, unless the election is revoked with the consent of the 
Secretary of the Treasury.
    Example 1.--A taxpayer enters into a three-year contract 
and upon completion of the contract, determines that annual net 
income under the contract using actual contract price and costs 
is $100,000, $150,000, and $250,000, for Years 1, 2, and 3, 
respectively, under the percentage of completion method. An 
electing taxpayer need not apply the look-back method to the 
contract if it had reported cumulative net taxable income under 
the contract using estimated contract price and costs of 
between $90,000 and $110,000 as of the end of Year 1; and 
between $225,000 and $275,000 as of the end of Year 2.

Election not to reapply the look-back method

    The taxpayer may elect to not reapply the look-back method 
with respect to a contract if, as of the close of any taxable 
year after the year the contract is completed, the cumulative 
taxable income (or loss) under the contract is within 10 
percent of the cumulative look-back income (or loss) as of the 
close of the most recent year in which the look-back method was 
applied (or would have applied but for the other de minimis 
exception described above). In applying this rule, amounts that 
are taken into account after completion of the contract are not 
discounted.
    Thus, an electing taxpayer need not apply or reapply the 
look-back method if amounts that are taken into account after 
the completion of the contract are de minimis.
    The election applies to all long-term contracts completed 
during the taxable year for which the election is made and to 
all long-term contracts completed during subsequent taxable 
years, unless the election is revoked with the consent of the 
Secretary of the Treasury.
    Example 2.--A taxpayer enters into a three-year contract 
and reports taxable income of $12,250, $15,000 and $12,750, for 
Years 1 through 3, respectively, with respect to the contract. 
Upon completion of the contract, cumulative look-back income 
with respect to the contract is $40,000, and 10 percent of such 
amount is $4,000. After the completion of the contract, the 
taxpayer incurs additional costs of $2,500 in each of the next 
three succeeding years (Years 4, 5, and 6) with respect to the 
contract. Under the provision, an electing taxpayer does not 
apply or reapply the look-back method for Year 4 because the 
cumulative amount of contract taxable income ($37,500) is 
within 10 percent of cumulative look-back income as of the 
completion of the contract ($40,000). However, the look-back 
method must be applied for Year 5 because the cumulative amount 
of contract taxable income ($35,000) is not within 10 percent 
of cumulative look-back income as of the completion of the 
contract ($40,000). Finally, the taxpayer does not reapply the 
look-back method for Year 6 because the cumulative amount of 
contract taxable income ($32,500) is within 10 percent of 
cumulative look-back income as of the last application of the 
look-back method ($35,000).

Interest rates used for purposes of the look-back method

    The Act provides that for purposes of the look-back method, 
only one rate of interest is to apply for each accrual period. 
An accrual period with respect to a taxable year begins on the 
day after the return due date (determined without regard to 
extensions) for the taxable year and ends on such return due 
date for the following taxable year. The applicable rate of 
interest is the overpayment rate in effect for the calendar 
quarter in which the accrual period begins.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to contracts completed in taxable 
years ending after the date of enactment (i.e., after August 5, 
1997). The change in the interest rate calculation also applies 
for purposes of the look-back method applicable to the income 
forecast method of depreciation for property placed in service 
after September 13, 1995.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to decrease Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million in 1998, $2 million in 1999, $3 
million in 2000, $4 million in 2001, $4 million in 2002, $4 
million in 2003, $4 million in 2004, $5 million in 2005, $5 
million in 2006, and $5 million in 2007.

2. Minimum tax treatment of certain property and casualty insurance 
        companies (sec. 1212 of the 1997 Act and sec. 56(g)(4)(B) of 
        the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Present and prior law provide that certain property and 
casualty insurance companies may elect to be taxed only on 
taxable investment income for regular tax purposes (sec. 
831(b)). Eligible property and casualty insurance companies are 
those whose net written premiums (or if greater, direct written 
premiums) for the taxable year exceed $350,000 but do not 
exceed $1,200,000.
    All corporations including insurance companies are subject 
to an alternative minimum tax. Alternative minimum taxable 
income is increased by 75 percent of the excess of adjusted 
current earnings over alternative minimum taxable income 
(determined without regard to this adjustment and without 
regard to net operating losses).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that property and casualty companies 
small enough to be eligible to simplify their regular tax 
computation by electing to be taxed only on taxable investment 
income should be accorded comparable simplicity in the 
calculation of their alternative minimum tax. Under prior law, 
the simplicity under the regular tax was nullified because 
electing companies were required to calculate underwriting 
income for tax purposes under the alternative minimum tax. The 
provision thus simplifies the entire Federal income tax 
calculation for a group of small taxpayers whom Congress has 
previously determined merit a simpler tax calculation.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that a property and casualty insurance 
company that elects for regular tax purposes to be taxed only 
on taxable investment income determines its adjusted current 
earnings under the alternative minimum tax without regard to 
any amount not taken into account in determining its gross 
investment income under section 834(b). Thus, adjusted current 
earnings of an electing company is determined without regard to 
underwriting income (or underwriting expense, as provided in 
sec. 56(g)(4)(B)(i)(II)).

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million in 1998, $2 million in 1999, and 
$3 million in each of 2000 through 2007.

3. Treatment of construction allowances provided to lessees (sec. 1213 
        of the bill and new sec. 110 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Depreciation allowances for property used in a trade or 
business generally are determined under the modified 
Accelerated Cost Recovery System (``MACRS'') of section 168. 
Depreciation allowances for improvements made on leased 
property are determined under MACRS, even if the MACRS recovery 
period assigned to the property is longer than the term of the 
lease (sec. 168(i)(8)).\291\ This rule applies whether the 
lessor or lessee places the leasehold improvements in 
service.\292\ If a leasehold improvement constitutes an 
addition or improvement to nonresidential real property already 
placed in service, the improvement is depreciated using the 
straight-line method over a 39-year recovery period, beginning 
in the month the addition or improvement was placed in service 
(secs. 168(b)(3), (c)(1), (d)(2), and (l)(6)). A lessor of 
leased property that disposes of a leasehold improvement that 
was made by the lessor for the lessee of the property may take 
the adjusted basis of the improvement into account for purposes 
of determining gain or loss if the improvement is irrevocably 
disposed of or abandoned by the lessor at the termination of 
the lease (sec. 168(i)(8)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \291\ The Tax Reform Act of 1986 (``1986 Act'') modified the 
Accelerated Cost Recovery System (``ACRS'') to institute MACRS. Prior 
to the adoption of ACRS by the Economic Recovery Act of 1981, taxpayers 
were allowed to depreciate the various components of a building as 
separate assets with separate useful lives. The use of component 
depreciation was repealed upon the adoption of ACRS. The denial of 
component depreciation also applies under MACRS, as provided by the 
1986 Act.
    \292\ Former Code sections 168(f)(6) and 178 provided that in 
certain circumstances, a lessee could recover the cost of leasehold 
improvements made over the remaining term of the lease. These 
provisions were repealed by the 1986 Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The gross income of a lessor of real property does not 
include any amount attributable to the value of buildings 
erected, or other improvements made by, a lessee that revert to 
the lessor at the termination of a lease (sec. 109).
    Issues have arisen as to the proper treatment of amounts 
provided to a lessee by a lessor for property to be constructed 
and used by the lessee pursuant to the lease (``construction 
allowances''). In general, incentive payments are includible in 
income as accessions to wealth.\293\ A coordinated issue paper 
issued by the Internal Revenue Service (``IRS'') on October 7, 
1996, states the IRS position that construction allowances 
generally should be included in income in the year received. 
However, the paper does recognize that amounts received by a 
lessee from a lessor and expended by the lessee on assets owned 
by the lessor were not includible in the lessee's income. The 
issue paper provides that tax ownership is determined by 
applying a ``benefits and burdens of ownership'' test that 
includes an examination of the following factors: (1) whether 
legal title passes; (2) how the parties treat the transaction; 
(3) whether an equity interest was acquired in the property; 
(4) whether the contract creates present obligations on the 
seller to execute and deliver a deed and on the buyer to make 
payments; (5) whether the right of possession is vested; (6) 
who pays property taxes; (7) who bears the risk of loss or 
damage to the property; (8) who receives the profits from the 
operation and sale of the property; (9) who carries insurance 
with respect to the property; (10) who is responsible for 
replacing the property; and (11) who has the benefits of any 
remainder interests in the property.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \293\ John B. White, Inc. v. Comm., 55 T.C. 729 (1971), aff'd per 
curiam 458 F. 2d 989 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 876 (1972). 
However, see, e.g., Federated Department Stores v. Comm., 51 T.C. 500 
(1968) aff'd 426 F. 2d 417 (6th Cir. 1970) and The May Department 
Stores Co. v. Comm., 33 TCM 1128 (1974), aff'd 519 F. 2d 1154 (8th Cir. 
1975) with respect to the application of section 118 to certain 
payments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress understood that it is common industry practice 
for a lessor to custom improve retail space for the use by a 
lessee pursuant to a lease. Such leasehold improvements may be 
provided by the lessor directly constructing the improvements 
to the lessee's specifications. Alternatively, the lessee may 
receive a construction allowance from the lessor pursuant to 
the lease in order for the lessee to build or improve the 
property. The Congress believed that the tax treatment of 
lessors and lessees in either case should be the same. The 
Congress understood that the IRS issue paper reaches a similar 
conclusion in cases where the lessor is treated as the tax 
owner of the constructed or improved property. However, the 
Congress was concerned that the traditional factors cited by 
the IRS in making the determination of who is the tax owner of 
the property may be applied differently by the lessor and the 
lessee and may lead to controversies between the IRS and 
taxpayers. Thus, the Act provides a safe harbor such that it 
will be assumed that a construction allowance is used to 
construct or improve lessor property (and is properly 
excludible by the lessee) when long-lived property is 
constructed or improved and used pursuant to a short-term 
lease. In addition, the Act provides safeguards to ensure that 
lessors and lessees consistently treat the property subject to 
the construction allowance as nonresidential real property 
owned by the lessor.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that the gross income of a lessee does not 
include amounts received in cash (or treated as a rent 
reduction) from a lessor under a short-term lease of retail 
space for the purpose of the lessee's construction or 
improvement of qualified long-term real property for use in the 
lessee's trade or business at such retail space. The exclusion 
only applies to the extent theallowance does not exceed the 
amount expended by the lessee on the construction or improvement of 
qualified long-term real property. For this purpose, ``qualified long-
term real property'' means nonresidential real property that is part 
of, or otherwise present at, retail space used by the lessee and that 
reverts to the lessor at the termination of the lease. A ``short-term 
lease'' means a lease or other agreement for the occupancy or use of 
retail space for a term of 15 years or less (as determined pursuant to 
sec. 168(i)(3)). ``Retail space'' means real property leased, occupied, 
or otherwise used by the lessee in its trade or business of selling 
tangible personal property or services to the general public.
    The Act provides that the lessor must treat the amounts 
expended on the construction allowance as nonresidential real 
property owned by the lessor. However, the lessee's exclusion 
is not dependent upon the lessor's treatment of the property as 
nonresidential real property. The present-law rule that allows 
lessors to take losses with respect to certain leasehold 
improvements abandoned at the end of the term of the lease 
(sec. 168(i)(8)) will apply to property treated as owned by the 
lessor under the Act.
    The Act contains reporting requirements to ensure that both 
the lessor and lessee treat such amounts as nonresidential real 
property owned by the lessor. Under regulations, the lessor and 
the lessee shall, at such times and in such manner as provided 
by the regulations, furnish to the Secretary of the Treasury 
information concerning the amounts received (or treated as a 
rent reduction), the amounts expended on qualified long-term 
real property, and such other information as the Secretary 
deems necessary to carry out the provisions of the Act. It is 
expected that the Secretary, in promulgating such regulations, 
will attempt to minimize the administrative burdens of 
taxpayers while ensuring compliance with the Act.
    No inference is intended as to the treatment of amounts 
that are not subject to the provision, and that the provisions 
of the IRS issue paper and present and prior law (including 
case law) will continue to apply where applicable.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to leases entered into after the date 
of enactment (i.e., after August 5, 1997). No inference is 
intended as to the treatment of amounts that are not subject to 
the provision.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

                C. Partnership Simplification Provisions

1. General provisions

            a. Simplified flow-through for electing large partnerships 
                    (sec. 1221 of the Act and new secs. 771-777 of the 
                    Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

Treatment of partnerships in general

    A partnership generally is treated as a conduit for Federal 
income tax purposes. Each partner takes into account separately 
his distributive share of the partnership's items of income, 
gain, loss, deduction or credit. The character of an item is 
the same as if it had been directly realized or incurred by the 
partner. Limitations affecting the computation of taxable 
income generally apply at the partner level.
    The taxable income of a partnership is computed in the same 
manner as that of an individual, except that no deduction is 
permitted for personal exemptions, foreign taxes, charitable 
contributions, net operating losses, certain itemized 
deductions, or depletion. Elections affecting the computation 
of taxable income derived from a partnership are made by the 
partnership, except for certain elections such as those 
relating to discharge of indebtedness income and the foreign 
tax credit.

Capital gains

    Under prior law, the net capital gain of an individual was 
taxed generally at the same rates applicable to ordinary 
income, subject to a maximum marginal rate of 28 percent.\294\ 
Net capital gain is the excess of net long-term capital gain 
over net short-term capital loss. Individuals with a net 
capital loss generally may deduct up to $3,000 of the loss each 
year against ordinary income. Net capital losses in excess of 
the $3,000 limit may be carried forward indefinitely.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \294\ Section 311 of the 1997 Act, as proposed to be amended by 
Title VI of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 1997, as 
passed by the House on November 5, 1997, provides a 28-percent rate for 
the net capital gain attributable to collectibles, certain gain from 
small business stock, gains and losses from capital assets held more 
than one year but not more than 18 months, the net short-term capital 
loss, and any long-term capital loss carryover. It also provides a 25-
percent rate for the net capital gain attribuable to unrecaptured 
section 1250 depreciation (in the case of section 1231 dispositions, 
this is limited to the net section 1231 gain), reduced by any net loss 
from items taken into account in computing the 28-percent gain. It also 
provides a 20-percent rate on the net capital gain, reduced by the 
amount of the 28-percent rate gain and the unrecaptured section 1250 
depreciation. These provisions generally become effective during 1997. 
Finally, beginning in 2001 and 2006, it also provides two categories of 
gain for certain assets held more than five years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A special rule applies to gains and losses on the sale, 
exchange or involuntary conversion of certain trade or business 
assets (sec. 1231). In general, net gains from such assets are 
treated as long-term capital gains but net losses are treated 
as ordinary losses.
    A partner's share of a partnership's net short-term capital 
gain or loss and net long-term capital gain or loss from 
portfolio investments is separately reported to the partner. A 
partner's share of a partnership's net gain or loss under 
section 1231 generally is also separately reported.

Deductions and credits

    Miscellaneous itemized deductions (e.g., certain investment 
expenses) are deductible only to the extent that, in the 
aggregate, they exceed two percent of the individual's adjusted 
gross income.
    In general, taxpayers are allowed a deduction for 
charitable contributions, subject to certain limitations. The 
deduction allowed an individual generally cannot exceed 50 
percent of the individual's adjusted gross income for the 
taxable year. The deduction allowed a corporation generally 
cannot exceed 10 percent of the corporation's taxable income. 
Excess contributions are carried forward for five years.
    A partner's distributive share of a partnership's 
miscellaneous itemized deductions and charitable contributions 
is separately reported to the partner.
    Each partner is allowed his distributive share of credits 
against his taxable income.

Foreign taxes

    The foreign tax credit generally allows U.S. taxpayers to 
reduce U.S. income tax on foreign income by the amount of 
foreign income taxes paid or accrued with respect to that 
income. In lieu of electing the foreign tax credit, a taxpayer 
may deduct foreign taxes. The total amount of the credit may 
not exceed the same proportion of the taxpayer's U.S. tax which 
the taxpayer's foreign source taxable income bears to the 
taxpayer's worldwide taxable income for the taxable year.

Unrelated business taxable income

    Tax-exempt organizations are subject to tax on income from 
unrelated businesses. Certain types of income (such as 
dividends, interest and certain rental income) are not treated 
as unrelated business taxable income. Thus, for a partner that 
is an exempt organization, whether partnership income is 
unrelated business taxable income depends on the character of 
the underlying income. Income from a publicly traded 
partnership, however, is treated as unrelatedbusiness taxable 
income regardless of the character of the underlying income.

Special rules related to oil and gas activities

    Taxpayers involved in the search for and extraction of 
crude oil and natural gas are subject to certain special tax 
rules. As a result, in the case of partnerships engaged in such 
activities, certain specific information is separately reported 
to partners.
    A taxpayer who owns an economic interest in a producing 
deposit of natural resources (including crude oil and natural 
gas) is permitted to claim a deduction for depletion of the 
deposit as the minerals are extracted. In the case of oil and 
gas produced in the United States, a taxpayer generally is 
permitted to claim the greater of a deduction for cost 
depletion or percentage depletion. Cost depletion is computed 
by multiplying a taxpayer's adjusted basis in the depletable 
property by a fraction, the numerator of which is the amount of 
current year production from the property and the denominator 
of which is the property's estimated reserves as of the 
beginning of that year. Percentage depletion is equal to a 
specified percentage (generally, 15 percent in the case of oil 
and gas) of gross income from production. Cost depletion is 
limited to the taxpayer's basis in the depletable property; 
percentage depletion is not so limited. Once a taxpayer has 
exhausted its basis in the depletable property, it may continue 
to claim percentage depletion deductions (generally referred to 
as ``excess percentage depletion'').
    Certain limitations apply to the deduction for oil and gas 
percentage depletion. First, percentage depletion is not 
available to oil and gas producers who also engage (directly or 
indirectly) in significant levels of oil and gas retailing or 
refining activities (so-called ``integrated producers'' of oil 
and gas). Second, the deduction for percentage depletion may be 
claimed by a taxpayer only with respect to up to 1,000 barrels-
per-day of production. Third, the percentage depletion 
deduction may not exceed 100 percent of the taxpayer's net 
income for the taxable year from the depletable oil and gas 
property. Fourth, a percentage depletion deduction may not be 
claimed to the extent that it exceeds 65 percent of the 
taxpayer's pre-percentage depletion taxable income.
    In the case of a partnership that owns depletable oil and 
gas properties, the depletion allowance is computed separately 
by the partners and not by the partnership. In computing a 
partner's basis in his partnership interest, basis is increased 
by the partner's share of any partnership-related excess 
percentage depletion deductions and is decreased (but not below 
zero) by the partner's total amount of depletion deductions 
attributable to partnership property.
    Intangible drilling and development costs (``IDCs'') 
incurred with respect to domestic oil and gas wells generally 
may be deducted at the election of the taxpayer. In the case of 
integrated producers, no more than 70 percent of IDCs incurred 
during a taxable year may be deducted. IDCs not deducted are 
capitalized and generally are either added to the property's 
basis and recovered through depletion deductions or amortized 
on a straight-line basis over a 60-month period.
    The special treatment granted to IDCs incurred in the 
pursuit of oil and gas may give rise to an item of tax 
preference or (in the case of corporate taxpayers) an adjusted 
current earnings (``ACE'') adjustment for the alternative 
minimum tax. The tax preference item is based on a concept of 
``excess IDCs.'' In general, excess IDCs are the excess of IDCs 
deducted for the taxable year over the amount of those IDCs 
that would have been deducted had they been capitalized and 
amortized on a straight-line basis over 120 months commencing 
with the month production begins from the related well. The 
amount of tax preference is then computed as the difference 
between the excess IDC amount and 65 percent of the taxpayer's 
net income from oil and gas (computed without a deduction for 
excess IDCs). For IDCs incurred in taxable years beginning 
after 1992, the ACE adjustment related to IDCs is repealed for 
taxpayers other than integrated producers. Moreover, beginning 
in 1993, the IDC tax preference generally is repealed for 
taxpayers other than integrated producers. In this case, 
however, the repeal of the excess IDC preference may not result 
in more than a 40 percent reduction (30 percent for taxable 
years beginning in 1993) in the amount of the taxpayer's 
alternative minimum taxable income computed as if that 
preference had not been repealed.

Passive losses

    The passive loss rules generally disallow deductions and 
credits from passive activities to the extent they exceed 
income from passive activities. Losses not allowed in a taxable 
year are suspended and treated as current deductions from 
passive activities in the next taxable year. These losses are 
allowed in full when a taxpayer disposes of the entire interest 
in the passive activity to an unrelated person in a taxable 
transaction. Passive activities include trade or business 
activities in which the taxpayer does not materially 
participate. (Limited partners generally do not materially 
participate in the activities of a partnership.) Passive 
activities also generally include rental activities (regardless 
of the taxpayer's material participation).\295\ Portfolio 
income (such as interest and dividends), and expenses allocable 
to such income, are not treated as income or loss from a 
passive activity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \295\ An indivdiual who actively participates in rental real estate 
activity and holds at least a 10-percent interest may deduct up to 
$25,000 of passive losses. The $25,000 amount phases out as the 
individual's income increases from $100,000 to $150,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The $25,000 allowance also applies to low-income housing 
and rehabilitation credits (on a deduction equivalent basis), 
regardless of whether the taxpayer claiming the credit actively 
participates in the rental real estate activity generating the 
credit. In addition, the income phaseout range for the $25,000 
allowance for rehabilitation credits is $200,000 to $250,000 
(rather than $100,000 to $150,000). For interests acquired 
after December 31, 1989 in partnerships holding property placed 
in service after that date, the $25,000 deduction-equivalent 
allowance is permitted for the low-income housing credit 
without regard to the taxpayer's income.
    A partnership's operations may be treated as multiple 
activities for purposes of the passive loss rules. In such 
case, the partnership must separately report items of income 
and deductions from each of its activities.
    Income, loss and other items from a publicly traded 
partnership are treated as separate from income and loss from 
any other publicly traded partnership, and also as separate 
from any income or loss from passive activities.
    The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 added a rule, 
effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1993, 
treating a taxpayer's rental real estate activities in which he 
materially participates as not subject to limitation under the 
passive loss rules if the taxpayer meets eligibility 
requirements relating to real property trades or businesses in 
which he performs services (sec. 469(c)(7)). Real property 
trade or business means any real property development, 
redevelopment, construction, reconstruction, acquisition, 
conversion, rental, operation, management, leasing, or 
brokerage trade or business. An individual taxpayer generally 
meets the eligibility requirements if (1) more than half of the 
personal services the taxpayer performs in trades or business 
during the taxable year are performed in real property trades 
or businesses in which the taxpayer materially participates, 
and (2) such taxpayer performs more than 750 hours of services 
during the taxable year in real property trades or businesses 
in which the taxpayer materially participates.

REMICs

    A tax is imposed on partnerships holding a residual 
interest in a real estate mortgage investment conduit 
(``REMIC''). The amount of the tax is the amount of excess 
inclusions allocable to partnership interests owned by certain 
tax-exempt organizations (``disqualified organizations'') 
multiplied by the highest corporate tax rate.

Contribution of property to a partnership

    In general, a partner recognizes no gain or loss upon the 
contribution of property to a partnership. However, income, 
gain, loss and deduction with respect to property contributed 
to a partnership by a partner must be allocated among the 
partners so as to take into account the difference between the 
basis of the property to the partnership and its fair market 
value at the time of contribution. In addition, the 
contributing partner must recognize gain or loss equal to such 
difference if the property is distributed to another partner 
within seven years of its contribution (sec. 704(c)), or if 
other property is distributed to the contributor within the 
seven year period (sec. 737).

Election of optional basis adjustments

    In general, the transfer of a partnership interest or a 
distribution of partnership property does not affect the basis 
of partnership assets. A partnership, however, may elect to 
make certain adjustments in the basis of partnership property 
(sec. 754). Under a section 754 election, the transfer of a 
partnership interest generally results in an adjustment in the 
partnership's basisin its property for the benefit of the 
transferee partner only, to reflect the difference between that 
partner's basis for his interest and his proportionate share of the 
adjusted basis of partnership property (sec. 743(b)). Also under the 
election, a distribution of property to a partner in certain cases 
results in an adjustment in the basis of other partnership property 
(sec. 734(b)).

Terminations

    A partnership terminates if either (1) all partners cease 
carrying on the business, financial operation or venture of the 
partnership, or (2) within a 12-month period 50 percent or more 
of the total partnership interests are sold or exchanged (sec. 
708).

                           Reasons for Change

    The requirement that each partner take into account 
separately his distributive share of a partnership's items of 
income, gain, loss, deduction and credit can result in the 
reporting of a large number of items to each partner. The 
schedule K-1, on which such items are reported, contains space 
for more than 40 items. Reporting so many separately stated 
items is burdensome for individual investors with relatively 
small, passive interests in large partnerships. In many 
respects such investments are indistinguishable from those made 
in corporate stock or mutual funds, which do not require 
reporting of numerous separate items.
    In addition, the number of items reported under the current 
regime makes it difficult for the Internal Revenue Service to 
match items reported on the K-1 against the partner's income 
tax return. Matching is also difficult because items on the K-1 
are often modified or limited at the partner level before 
appearing on the partner's tax return.
    By significantly reducing the number of items that must be 
separately reported to partners by an electing large 
partnership, the provision eases the reporting burden of 
partners and facilitates matching by the IRS. Moreover, it is 
understood that the Internal Revenue Service is considering 
restricting the use of substitute reporting forms by large 
partnerships. Reduction of the number of items makes possible a 
short standardized form.

                       Explanation of Provisions

In general

    The Act modifies the tax treatment of an electing large 
partnership (generally, any partnership that elects under the 
provision, if the number of partners in the preceding taxable 
year is 100 or more) and its partners. The provision provides 
that each partner takes into account separately the partner's 
distributive share of the following items, which are determined 
at the partnership level: (1) taxable income or loss from 
passive loss limitation activities; (2) taxable income or loss 
from other activities (e.g., portfolio income or loss); (3) net 
capital gain or loss to the extent allocable to passive loss 
limitation activities and other activities; (4) tax-exempt 
interest; (5) net alternative minimum tax adjustment separately 
computed for passive loss limitation activities and other 
activities; (6) general credits; (7) low-income housing credit; 
(8) rehabilitation credit; (9) credit for producing fuel from a 
nonconventional source; (10) creditable foreign taxes and 
foreign source items; and (11) any other items to the extent 
that the Secretary determines that separate treatment of such 
items is appropriate.\296\ Separate treatment may be 
appropriate, for example, should changes in the law necessitate 
such treatment for any items. For example, special rules may be 
appropriate to coordinate with the separate rates applicable to 
capital gains under the 1997 Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \296\ In determining the amounts required to be separately taken 
into account by a partner, those provisions of the large partnership 
rules governing computations of taxable income are applied separately 
with respect to that partner by taking into account that partner's 
distributive share of the partnership's items of income, gain, loss, 
deduction or credit. This rule permits partnerships to make otherwise 
valid special allocations of partnership items to partners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under the Act, the taxable income of an electing large 
partnership is computed in the same manner as that of an 
individual, except that the items described above are 
separately stated and certain modifications are made. These 
modifications include disallowing the deduction for personal 
exemptions, the net operating loss deduction and certain 
itemized deductions.\297\ All limitations and other provisions 
affecting the computation of taxable income or any credit 
(except for the at risk, passive loss and itemized deduction 
limitations, and any other provision specified in regulations) 
are applied at the partnership (and not the partner) level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \297\ An electing large partnership is allowed a deduction under 
section 212 for expenses incurred for the production of income, subject 
to 70-percent disallowance. No income from an electing large 
partnership is treated as fishing or farming income.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    All elections affecting the computation of taxable income 
or any credit generally are made by the partnership.

Capital gains

    Under the Act, netting of capital gains and losses occurs 
at the partnership level. A partner in a large partnership 
takes into account separately his distributive share of the 
partnership's net capital gain or net capital loss.\298\ Such 
net capital gain or loss is treated as long-term capital gain 
or loss. Special rules may be appropriate for capital gains or 
losses that are subject to differing rates of tax.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \298\ The term ``net capital gain'' has the same meaning as in 
section 1222(11). The term ``net capital loss'' means the excess of the 
losses from sales or exchanges of capital assets over the gains from 
sales or exchanges of capital assets. Thus, the partnership cannot 
offset any portion of capital losses against ordinary income.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Any excess of net short-term capital gain over net long-
term capital loss is consolidated with the partnership's other 
taxable income and is not separately reported.
    A partner's distributive share of the partnership's net 
capital gain is allocated between passive loss limitation 
activities and other activities. The net capital gain is 
allocated to passive loss limitation activities to the extent 
of net capital gain from sales and exchanges of property used 
in connection with such activities, and any excess is allocated 
to other activities. A similar rule applies for purposes of 
allocating any net capital loss.
    Any gains and losses of the partnership under section 1231 
are netted at the partnership level. Net gain is treated as 
long-term capital gain and is subject to the rules described 
above. Net loss is treated as ordinary loss and consolidated 
with the partnership's other taxable income.

Deductions

    The Act contains two special rules for deductions. First, 
miscellaneous itemized deductions are not separately reported 
to partners. Instead, 70 percent of the amount of such 
deductions is disallowed at the partnership level; \299\ the 
remaining 30 percent is allowed at the partnership level in 
determining taxable income, and is not subject to the two-
percent floor at the partner level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \299\ The 70 percent figure is intended to approximate the amount 
of such deductions that would be denied at the partner level as a 
result of the two-percent floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Second, charitable contributions are not separately 
reported to partners under the Act. Instead, the charitable 
contribution deduction is allowed at the partnership level in 
determining taxable income, subject to the limitations that 
apply to corporate donors.

Credits in general

    Under the Act, general credits are separately reported to 
partners as a single item. General credits are any credits 
other than the low-income housing credit, the rehabilitation 
credit and the credit for producing fuel from a nonconventional 
source. A partner's distributive share of general credits is 
taken into account as a current year general business credit. 
Thus, for example, the credit for clinical testing expenses is 
subject to the existing limitations on the general business 
credit. The refundable credit for gasoline used for exempt 
purposes and the refund or credit for undistributed capital 
gains of a regulated investment company are allowed to the 
partnership, and thus are not separately reported to partners.
    In recognition of their special treatment under the passive 
loss rules, the low-income housing and rehabilitation credits 
are separately reported.\300\ In addition, the credit for 
producing fuel from a nonconventional source is separately 
reported.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \300\ It is understood that the rehabilitation and low-income 
housing credits which are subject to the same passive loss rules (i.e., 
in the case of the low-income housing credit, where the partnership 
interest was acquired or the property was placed in service before 
1990) could be reported together on the same line.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Act imposes credit recapture at the partnership level 
and determines the amount of recapture by assuming that the 
credit fully reduced taxes. Such recapture is applied first to 
reduce the partnership's current year credit, if any; the 
partnership is liable for any excess over that amount. Under 
the Act, the transfer of an interest in an electing large 
partnership does not trigger recapture.

Foreign taxes

    The Act retains present-law treatment of foreign taxes. The 
partnership reports to the partner creditable foreign taxes and 
the source of any income, gain, loss or deduction taken into 
account by the partnership. Elections, computations and 
limitations are made by the partner.

Tax-exempt interest

    The Act retains present-law treatment of tax-exempt 
interest. Interest on a State or local bond is separately 
reported to each partner.

Unrelated business taxable income

    The Act retains present-law treatment of unrelated business 
taxable income. Thus, a tax-exempt partner's distributive share 
of partnership items is taken into account separately to the 
extent necessary to comply with the rules governing such 
income.

Passive losses

    Under the Act, a partner in an electing large partnership 
takes into account separately his distributive share of the 
partnership's taxable income or loss from passive loss 
limitation activities. The term ``passive loss limitation 
activity'' means any activity involving the conduct of a trade 
or business (including any activity treated as a trade or 
business under sec. 469(c)(5) or (6)) and any rental activity. 
A partner's share of an electing large partnership's taxable 
income or loss from passive loss limitation activities is 
treated as an item of income or loss from the conduct of a 
trade or business which is a single passive activity, as 
defined in the passive loss rules. Thus, an electing large 
partnership generally is not required to separately report 
items from multiple activities.
    A partner in an electing large partnership also takes into 
account separately his distributive share of the partnership's 
taxable income or loss from activities other than passive loss 
limitation activities. Such distributive share is treated as an 
item of income or expense with respect to property held for 
investment. Thus, portfolio income (e.g., interest and 
dividends) is reported separately and is reduced by portfolio 
deductions and allocable investment interest expense.
    In the case of a partner holding an interest in an electing 
large partnership which is not a limited partnership interest, 
such partner's distributive share of any items are taken into 
account separately to the extent necessary to comply with the 
passive loss rules. Thus, for example, income of an electing 
large partnership is not treated as passive income with respect 
to the general partnership interest of a partner who materially 
participates in the partnership's trade or business.
    Under the Act, the requirement that the passive loss rule 
be separately applied to each publicly traded partnership (sec. 
469(k) of the Code) continues to apply.

Alternative minimum tax

    Under the Act, alternative minimum tax (``AMT'') 
adjustments and preferences are combined at the partnership 
level. An electing large partnership would report to partners a 
net AMT adjustment separately computed for passive loss 
limitation activities and other activities. In determining a 
partner's alternative minimum taxable income, a partner's 
distributive share of any net AMT adjustment is taken into 
account instead of making separate AMT adjustments with respect 
to partnership items. The net AMT adjustment is determined by 
using the adjustments applicable to individuals (in the case of 
partners other than corporations), and by using the adjustments 
applicable to corporations (in the case of corporate partners). 
Except as provided in regulations, the net AMT adjustment is 
treated as a deferral preference for purposes of the section 53 
minimum tax credit.

Discharge of indebtedness income

    If an electing large partnership has income from the 
discharge of any indebtedness, such income is separately 
reported to each partner. In addition, the rules governing such 
income (sec. 108) are applied without regard to the large 
partnership rules. Partner-level elections under section 108 
are made by each partner separately. Thus, for example, the 
large partnership provisions do not affect section 108(d)(6), 
which provides that certain section 108 rules apply at the 
partner level, or section 108(b)(5), which provides for an 
election to reduce the basis of depreciable property. The large 
partnership provisions also do not affect the election under 
108(c) (added by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993) 
to exclude discharge of indebtedness income with respect to 
qualified real property business indebtedness.

REMICs

    For purposes of the tax on partnerships holding residual 
interests in REMICs, all interests in an electing large 
partnership are treated as held by disqualified organizations. 
Thus, an electing large partnership holding a residual interest 
in a REMIC is subject to a tax equal to the excess inclusions 
multiplied by the highest corporate rate. The amount subject to 
tax is excluded from partnership income.

Election of optional basis adjustments

    Under the Act, an electing large partnership may still 
elect to adjust the basis of partnership assets with respect to 
transferee partners. The computation of an electing large 
partnership's taxable income is made without regard to the 
section 743(b) adjustment. The section 743(b) adjustment is 
made only with respect to the transferee partner. In addition, 
an electing large partnership is permitted to adjust the basis 
of partnership property under section 734(b) if property is 
distributed to a partner.

Terminations

    The Act provides that an electing large partnership does 
not terminate for tax purposes solely because 50 percent of its 
interests are sold or exchanged within a 12-month period.

Partnerships and partners subject to large partnership rules

            Definition of electing large partnership
    An ``electing large partnership'' is any partnership that 
elects under the provision, if the number of partners in the 
preceding taxable year is 100 or more. The number of partners 
is determined by counting only persons directly holding 
partnership interests in the taxable year, including persons 
holding through nominees; persons holding indirectly (e.g., 
through another partnership) are not counted. Regulations may 
provide, however, that if the number of partners in any taxable 
year falls below 100, the partnership may not be treated as an 
electing large partnership. The election applies to the year 
for which made and all subsequent years and cannot be revoked 
without the Secretary's consent.
            Special rules for certain service partnerships
    An election under this provision is not effective for any 
partnership if substantially all the partners are: (1) 
individuals performing substantial services in connection with 
the partnership's activities, or personal service corporations 
the owner-employees of which perform such services; (2) retired 
partners who had performed such services; or (3) spouses of 
partners who had performed such services. In addition, the term 
``partner'' does not include any individual performing 
substantial services in connection with the partnership's 
activities and holding a partnership interest, or an individual 
who formerly performed such services and who held a partnership 
interest at the time the individual performed such services.

Exclusion for commodity partnerships

    An election under this provision is not effective for any 
partnership the principal activity of which is the buying and 
selling of commodities (not described in sec. 1221(1)), or 
options,futures or forwards with respect to commodities.

Special rules for partnerships holding oil and gas properties

            Simplified reporting treatment of electing large 
                    partnerships with oil and gas activities
    The Act provides special rules for electing large 
partnerships with oil and gas activities that operate under the 
simplified reporting regime. These partnerships are 
collectively referred to herein as ``oil and gas large 
partnerships.'' Generally, the Act provides that an oil and gas 
large partnership reports information to its partners under the 
general simplified large partnership reporting regime described 
above. To prevent the extension of percentage depletion 
deductions to persons excluded therefrom under present law, 
however, certain partners are treated as disqualified persons 
under the Act.
    The treatment of a disqualified person's distributive share 
of any item of income, gain, loss, deduction, or credit 
attributable to any partnership oil or gas property is 
determined under the Act without regard to the special rules 
applicable to large partnerships. Thus, an oil and gas large 
partnership reports information related to oil and gas 
activities to a partner who is a disqualified person in the 
same manner and to the same extent that it reports such 
information to that partner under present law. The simplified 
reporting rules of the Act, however, apply with respect to 
reporting such a partner's share of items not related to oil 
and gas activities.
    The Act defines two categories of taxpayers as disqualified 
persons. The first category encompasses taxpayers who do not 
qualify for the deduction for percentage depletion under 
section 613A (i.e., integrated producers of oil and gas). The 
second category includes any person whose average daily 
production of oil and gas (for purposes of determining the 
depletable oil and natural gas quantity under section 
613A(c)(2)) is at least 500 barrels for its taxable year in 
which (or with which) the partnership's taxable year ends. In 
making this computation, all production of domestic crude oil 
and natural gas attributable to the partner is taken into 
account, including such partner's proportionate share of any 
production of the large partnership.
    A taxpayer that falls within a category of disqualified 
person has the responsibility of notifying any large 
partnership in which it holds a direct or indirect interest 
(e.g., through a pass-through entity) of its status as such. 
Thus, for example, if an integrated producer owns an interest 
in a partnership which in turn owns an interest in an oil and 
gas large partnership, it is responsible for providing the 
management of the electing large partnership information 
regarding its status as a disqualified person and details 
regarding its indirect interest in the electing large 
partnership.
    Under the Act, an oil and gas large partnership computes 
its deduction for oil and gas depletion under the general 
statutory rules (subject to certain exceptions described below) 
under the assumptions that the partnership is the taxpayer and 
that it qualifies for the percentage depletion deduction. The 
amount of the depletion deduction, as well as other oil and gas 
related items, generally are reported to each partner (other 
than to partners who are disqualified persons) as components of 
that partner's distributive share of taxable income or loss 
from passive loss limitation activities. The Act provides that 
in computing the partnership's oil and gas percentage depletion 
deduction, the 1,000-barrel-per-day limitation does not apply. 
In addition, an oil and gas large partnership is allowed to 
compute percentage depletion under the Act without applying the 
65-percent-of-taxable-income limitation under section 
613A(d)(1).
    An election to deduct IDCs under section 263(c) is made at 
the partnership level. Since the Act treats those taxpayers 
required by the Code (sec. 291) to capitalize 30 percent of 
IDCs as disqualified persons, an oil and gas large partnership 
may pass through a full deduction of IDCs to its partners who 
are not disqualified persons. In contrast to prior law, an oil 
and gas large partnership also has the responsibility with 
respect to its partners who are not disqualified persons for 
making an election under section 59(e) to capitalize and 
amortize certain specified IDCs. Partners who are disqualified 
persons are permitted to make their own separate section 59(e) 
elections under the Act.
    Consistent with the general reporting regime for electing 
large partnerships, the Act provides that a single AMT 
adjustment (under either corporate or non-corporate principles, 
as the case may be) is made and reported to the partners (other 
than disqualified persons) of an oil and gas large partnership 
as a separate item. This separately-reported item is affected 
by the limitation on the repeal of the tax preference for 
excess IDCs. For purposes of computing this limitation, the Act 
treats an oil and gas large partnership as the taxpayer. Thus, 
the limitation on repeal of the IDC preference is applied at 
the partnership level and is based on the cumulative reduction 
in the partnership's alternative minimum taxable income 
resulting from repeal of that preference.
    The Act provides that in making partnership-level 
computations, any item of income, gain, loss, deduction, or 
credit attributable to a partner who is a disqualified person 
is disregarded. For example, in computing the partnership's net 
income from oil and gas for purposes of determining the IDC 
preference (if any) to be reported to partners who are not 
disqualified persons as part of the AMT adjustment, 
disqualified persons' distributive shares of the partnership's 
net income from oil and gas are not to be taken into account.

Regulatory authority

    The Secretary of the Treasury is granted authority to 
prescribe such regulations as may be appropriate to carry out 
the purposes of the provisions.

                             Effective Date

    The provision generally applies to partnership taxable 
years beginning after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $6 million in 1998, $8 million per year in 
each of 1999 through 2002, and $9 million per year in each of 
2003 through 2007.
            b. Simplified audit procedures for electing large 
                    partnerships (sec. 1222 of the Act and secs. 6240, 
                    6241, 6242, 6245, 6246, 6247, 6249, 6251, 6255, and 
                    6256 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

In general

    Prior to 1982, regardless of the size of a partnership, 
adjustments to a partnership's items of income, gain, loss, 
deduction, or credit had to be made in separate proceedings 
with respect to each partner individually. Because a large 
partnership sometimes had many partners located in different 
audit districts, adjustments to items of income, gains, losses, 
deductions, or credits of the partnership had to be made in 
numerous actions in several jurisdictions, sometimes with 
conflicting outcomes.
    The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 
(``TEFRA'') established unified audit rules applicable to all 
but certain small (10 or fewer partners) partnerships. These 
rules require the tax treatment of all ``partnership items'' to 
be determined at the partnership, rather than the partner, 
level. Partnership items are those items that are more 
appropriately determined at the partnership level than at the 
partner level, as provided by regulations.
    Under the TEFRA rules, a partner must report all 
partnership items consistently with the partnership return or 
must notify the IRS of any inconsistency. If a partner fails to 
report any partnership item consistently with the partnership 
return, the IRS may make a computational adjustment and 
immediately assess any additional tax that results.

Administrative proceedings

    Under the TEFRA rules, a partner must report all 
partnership items consistently with the partnership return or 
must notify the IRS of any inconsistency. If a partner fails to 
report any partnership item consistently with the partnership 
return, the IRS may make a computational adjustment and 
immediately assess any additional tax that results.
    The IRS may challenge the reporting position of a 
partnership by conducting a single administrative proceeding to 
resolve the issue with respect to all partners. But the IRS 
must still assess any resulting deficiency against each of the 
taxpayers who were partners in the year in which the 
understatement of tax liability arose.
    Any partner of a partnership can request an administrative 
adjustment or a refund for his own separate tax liability. Any 
partner also has the right to participate in partnership-level 
administrative proceedings. A settlement agreement with respect 
to partnership items binds allparties to the settlement.

Tax Matters Partner

    The TEFRA rules establish the ``Tax Matters Partner'' as 
the primary representative of a partnership in dealings with 
the IRS. The Tax Matters Partner is a general partner 
designated by the partnership or, in the absence of 
designation, the general partner with the largest profits 
interest at the close of the taxable year. If no Tax Matters 
Partner is designated, and it is impractical to apply the 
largest profits interest rule, the IRS may select any partner 
as the Tax Matters Partner.

Notice requirements

    The IRS generally is required to give notice of the 
beginning of partnership-level administrative proceedings and 
any resulting administrative adjustment to all partners whose 
names and addresses are furnished to the IRS. For partnerships 
with more than 100 partners, however, the IRS generally is not 
required to give notice to any partner whose profits interest 
is less than one percent.

Adjudication of disputes concerning partnership items

    After the IRS makes an administrative adjustment, the Tax 
Matters Partner (and, in limited circumstances, certain other 
partners) may file a petition for readjustment of partnership 
items in the Tax Court, the district court in which the 
partnership's principal place of business is located, or the 
Claims Court.

Statute of limitations

    The IRS generally cannot adjust a partnership item for a 
partnership taxable year if more than 3 years have elapsed 
since the later of the filing of the partnership return or the 
last day for the filing of the partnership return.

                           Reasons for Change

    Audit procedures for large partnerships are inefficient and 
more complex than those for other large entities. The IRS must 
assess any deficiency arising from a partnership audit against 
a large number of partners, many of whom cannot easily be 
located and some of whom are no longer partners. In addition, 
audit procedures are cumbersome and can be complicated further 
by the intervention of partners acting individually.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act creates a new audit system for electing large 
partnerships. The provision defines ``electing large 
partnership'' the same way for audit and reporting purposes 
(generally, any partnership that elects under the reporting 
provisions, if the number of partners in the preceding taxable 
year is 100 or more).
    As under prior law, electing large partnerships and their 
partners are subject to unified audit rules. Thus, the tax 
treatment of ``partnership items'' are determined at the 
partnership, rather than the partner, level. The term 
``partnership items'' is defined as under prior law.
    Unlike prior law, however, partnership adjustments 
generally will flow through to the partners for the year in 
which the adjustment takes effect. Thus, the current-year 
partners' share of current-year partnership items of income, 
gains, losses, deductions, or credits will be adjusted to 
reflect partnership adjustments that take effect in that year. 
The adjustments generally will not affect prior-year returns of 
any partners (except in the case of changes to any partner's 
distributive shares).
    In lieu of flowing an adjustment through to its partners, 
the partnership may elect to pay an imputed underpayment. The 
imputed underpayment generally is calculated by netting the 
adjustments to the income and loss items of the partnership and 
multiplying that amount by the highest tax rate (whether 
individual or corporate). A partner may not file a claim for 
credit or refund of his allocable share of the payment. A 
partnership may make this election only if it meets 
requirements set forth in Treasury regulations designed to 
ensure payment (for example, in the case of a foreign 
partnership).
    Regardless of whether a partnership adjustment flows 
through to the partners, an adjustment must be offset if it 
requires another adjustment in a year after the adjusted year 
and before the year the offsetted adjustment takes effect. For 
example, if a partnership expensed a $1,000 item in year 1, and 
it was determined in year 4 that the item should have been 
capitalized and amortized ratably over 10 years, the adjustment 
in year 4 would be $700, apart from any interest or penalty. 
(The $900 adjustment for the improper deduction would be offset 
by $200 of adjustments for amortization deductions.) The year 4 
partners would be required to include an additional $700 in 
income for that year. The partnership may ratably amortize the 
remaining $700 of expenses in years 4-10.
    In addition, the partnership, rather than the partners 
individually, generally is liable for any interest and 
penalties that result from a partnership adjustment. Interest 
is computed for the period beginning on the return due date for 
the adjusted year and ending on the earlier of the return due 
date for the partnership taxable year in which the adjustment 
takes effect or the date the partnership pays the imputed 
underpayment. Thus, in the above example, the partnership would 
be liable for 4 years' worth of interest (on a declining 
principal amount).
    Penalties (such as the accuracy and fraud penalties) are 
determined on a year-by-year basis (without offsets) based on 
an imputed underpayment. All accuracy penalty criteria and 
waiver criteria (such as reasonable cause, substantial 
authority, etc.) are determined as if the partnership were a 
taxable individual. Accuracy and fraud penalties are assessed 
and accrue interest in the same manner as if asserted against a 
taxable individual.
    Any payment (for Federal income taxes, interest, or 
penalties) that an electing large partnership is required to 
make is non-deductible.
    If a partnership ceases to exist before a partnership 
adjustment takes effect, the former partners are required to 
take the adjustment into account, as provided by regulations. 
Regulations are also authorized to prevent abuse and to enforce 
efficiently the audit rules in circumstances that present 
special enforcement considerations (such as partnership 
bankruptcy).

Administrative proceedings

    Under the electing large partnership audit rules, a partner 
is not permitted to report any partnership items inconsistently 
with the partnership return, even if the partner notifies the 
IRS of the inconsistency. The IRS may treat a partnership item 
that was reported inconsistently by a partner as a mathematical 
or clerical error and immediately assess any additional tax 
against that partner.
    As under prior law, the IRS may challenge the reporting 
position of a partnership by conducting a single administrative 
proceeding to resolve the issue with respect to all partners. 
Unlike under prior law, however, partners will have no right 
individually to participate in settlement conferences or to 
request a refund.

Partnership representative

    The Act requires each electing large partnership to 
designate a partner or other person to act on its behalf. If an 
electing large partnership fails to designate such a person, 
the IRS is permitted to designate any one of the partners as 
the person authorized to act on the partnership's behalf. After 
the IRS's designation, an electing large partnership could 
still designate a replacement for the IRS-designated partner.

Notice requirements

    Unlike under prior law, the IRS is not required to give 
notice to individual partners of the commencement of an 
administrative proceeding or of a final adjustment. Instead, 
the IRS is authorized to send notice of a partnership 
adjustment to the partnership itself by certified or registered 
mail. The IRS could give proper notice by mailing the notice to 
the last known address of the partnership, even if the 
partnership had terminated its existence.

Adjudication of disputes concerning partnership items

    As under prior law, an administrative adjustment could be 
challenged in the Tax Court, the district court in which the 
partnership's principal place of business is located, or the 
Claims Court. However, only the partnership, and not partners 
individually, can petition for a readjustment of partnership 
items.
    If a petition for readjustment of partnership items is 
filed by the partnership, the court with which the petition is 
filed will have jurisdiction to determine the tax treatment of 
all partnership items of the partnership for the partnership 
taxable year to which the notice of partnership adjustment 
relates, and the proper allocation of such items among the 
partners. Thus, the court's jurisdiction is not limited to the 
items adjusted in the notice.

Statute of limitations

    Absent an agreement to extend the statute of limitations, 
the IRS generally could not adjust a partnership item of an 
electing large partnership more than 3 years after the later of 
the filing of the partnership return or the last day for the 
filing of the partnership return. Special rules apply to false 
or fraudulent returns, a substantial omission of income, or the 
failure to file a return. The IRS would assess and collect any 
deficiency of a partner that arises from any adjustment to a 
partnership item subject to the limitations period on 
assessments and collection applicable to the year the 
adjustment takes effect (secs. 6248, 6501 and 6502).

Regulatory authority

    The Secretary of the Treasury is granted authority to 
prescribe regulations as may be necessary to carry out the 
simplified audit procedure provisions, including regulations to 
prevent abuse of the provisions through manipulation. The 
regulations may include rules that address transfers of 
partnership interests, in anticipation of a partnership 
adjustment, to persons who are tax-favored (e.g., corporations 
with net operating losses, tax-exempt organizations, and 
foreign partners) or persons who are expected to be unable to 
pay tax (e.g., shell corporations). For example, if prior to 
the time a partnership adjustment takes effect, a taxable 
partner transfers a partnership interest to a nonresident alien 
to avoid the tax effect of the partnership adjustment, the 
rules may provide, among other things, that income related to 
the partnership adjustment is treated as effectively connected 
taxable income, that the partnership adjustment is treated as 
taking effect before the partnership interest was transferred, 
or that the former partner is treated as a current partner to 
whom the partnership adjustment is allocated.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to partnership taxable years 
beginning after December 31, 1997.\301\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \301\ A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this intent. See Title VI of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical 
Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 in each of 1998 through 
2000, and by $1 million per year for 2001 through 2007.
            c. Due date for furnishing information to partners of 
                    electing large partnerships (sec. 1223 of the Act 
                    and sec. 6031(b) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A partnership required to file an income tax return with 
the Internal Revenue Service must also furnish an information 
return to each of its partners on or before the day on which 
the income tax return for the year is required to be filed, 
including extensions. Under regulations, a partnership must 
file its income tax return on or before the fifteenth day of 
the fourth month following the end of the partnership's taxable 
year (on or before April 15, for calendar year partnerships). 
This is the same deadline by which most individual partners 
must file their tax returns.

                           Reasons for Change

    Information returns that are received on or shortly before 
April 15 (or later) are difficult for individuals to use in 
preparing their tax returns (or in computing their payments) 
that are due on that date.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that an electing large partnership must 
furnish information returns to partners by the first March 15 
following the close of the partnership's taxable year. Electing 
large partnerships are those partnerships subject to the 
simplified reporting and audit rules (generally, any 
partnership that elects under the reporting provision, if the 
number of partners in the preceding taxable year is 100 or 
more).
    The provision also provides that, if the partnership is 
required to provide copies of the information returns to the 
Internal Revenue Service on magnetic media, each schedule (such 
as each Schedule K-1) with respect to each partner is treated 
as a separate information return with respect to the corrective 
periods and penalties that are generally applicable to all 
information returns.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for partnership taxable years 
beginning after December 31, 1997.\302\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \302\ A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this intent. See Title VI of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical 
Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.
            d. Partnership returns required on magnetic media (sec. 
                    1224 of the Act and sec. 6011 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Partnerships are permitted, but not required, to provide 
the tax return of the partnership (Form 1065), as well as 
copies of the schedules sent to each partner (Form K-1), to the 
Internal Revenue Service on magnetic media.

                           Reasons for Change

    Most entities that file large numbers of documents with the 
Internal Revenue Service must do so on magnetic media. 
Conforming the reporting provisions for partnerships to the 
generally applicable information reporting rules will 
facilitate intergration of partnership information into already 
existing data systems.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides generally that any partnership is required 
to provide the tax return of the partnership (Form 1065), as 
well as copies of the schedule sent to each partner (Form K-1), 
to the Internal Revenue Service on magnetic media. An exception 
is provided for partnerships with 100 or fewer partners.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for partnership taxable years 
beginning after December 31, 1997.\303\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \303\ A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this intent. See Title VI of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical 
Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible revenue 
effect.
            e. Treatment of partnership items of individual retirement 
                    arrangements (sec. 1225 of the Act and sec. 6012 of 
                    the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

Return filing requirements

    An individual retirement account (``IRA'') is a trust which 
generally is exempt from taxation except for the taxes imposed 
on income from an unrelated trade or business. A fiduciary of a 
trust that is exempt from taxation (but subject to the taxes 
imposed on income from an unrelated trade or business) 
generally is required to file a return on behalf of the trust 
for a taxable year if the trust has gross income of $1,000 or 
more included in computing unrelated business taxable income 
for that year (Treas. Reg. sec. 1.6012-3(a)(5)).
    Unrelated business taxable income is the gross income 
(including gross income from a partnership) derived by an 
exempt organization from an unrelated trade or business, less 
certain deductions which are directly connected with the 
carrying on of such trade or business (sec. 512(a)(1). In 
calculating unrelated business taxable income, exempt 
organizations (including IRAs) generally also are permitted a 
specific deduction of $1,000 (sec. 512(b)(12)).

Unified audits of partnerships

    All but certain small partnerships are subject to unified 
audit rules established by the Tax Equity and Fiscal 
Responsibility Act of 1982. These rules require the tax 
treatment of all ``partnership items'' to be determined at the 
partnership, rather than the partner, level. Partnership items 
are those items that are more appropriately determined at the 
partnership level than at the partner level, including such 
items as gross income and deductions of the partnership.

                           Reasons for Change

    Under prior law, tax returns often were required to be 
filed for IRAs that had no taxable income and, consequently, no 
tax liability. The filing of these returns by taxpayers, and 
the processing of these returns by the IRS, impose significant 
costs. Imposing this burden is unnecessary to the extent that 
the income of the IRA has been derived from an interest in a 
partnership that is subject to partnership-level audit rules. 
In these circumstances, the appropriateness of any deductions 
may be determined at the partnership level, and an additional 
filing is unnecessary to facilitate this determination.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act modifies the filing threshold for an IRA with an 
interest in a partnership that is subject to the partnership-
level audit rules. A fiduciary of such an IRA could treat the 
trust's share of partnership taxable income as gross income, 
for purposes of determining whether the trust meets the $1,000 
gross income filing threshold. A fiduciary of an IRA that 
receives taxable income from a partnership that is subject to 
partnership-level audit rules of less than $1,000 (before the 
$1,000 specific deduction) is not required to file an income 
tax return if the IRA does not have any other income from an 
unrelated trade or business.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to taxable years beginning after 
December 31, 1997.\304\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \304\ A technical correction may be needed so that the statute 
reflects this intent. See Title VI of H.R. 2676, the Tax Technical 
Corrections Act of 1997, as passed by the House on November 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no revenue effect.

2. Other partnership audit rules

            a. Treatment of partnership items in deficiency proceedings 
                    (sec. 1231 of the Act and sec. 6234 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Partnership proceedings under rules enacted in TEFRA \305\ 
must be kept separate from deficiency proceedings involving the 
partners in their individual capacities. Prior to the Tax 
Court's opinion in Munro v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 71 (1989), 
the IRS computed deficiencies by assuming that all items that 
were subject to the TEFRA partnership procedures were correctly 
reported on the taxpayer's return. However, where the losses 
claimed from TEFRA partnerships were so large that they offset 
any proposed adjustments to nonpartnership items, no deficiency 
could arise from a non-TEFRA proceeding, and if the partnership 
losses were subsequently disallowed in a partnership 
proceeding, the non-TEFRA adjustments might be uncollectible 
because of the expiration of the statute of limitations with 
respect to nonpartnership items.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \305\ Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Faced with this situation in Munro, the IRS issued a notice 
of deficiency to the taxpayer that presumptively disallowed the 
taxpayer's TEFRA partnership losses for computational purposes 
only. Although the Tax Court ruled that a deficiency existed 
and that the court had jurisdiction to hear the case, the court 
disapproved of the methodology used by the IRS to compute the 
deficiency. Specifically, the court held that partnership items 
(whether income, loss, deduction, or credit) included on a 
taxpayer's return must be completely ignored in determining 
whether a deficiency exists that is attributable to 
nonpartnership items.

                           Reasons for Change

    The opinion in Munro creates problems for both taxpayers 
and the IRS. For example, a taxpayer would be harmed in the 
case where he has invested in a TEFRA partnership and is also 
subject to the deficiency procedures with respect to 
nonpartnership item adjustments, since computing the tax 
liability without regard to partnership items will have the 
same effect as if the partnership items were disallowed. If the 
partnership items were losses, the effect will be a greatly 
increased deficiency for the nonpartnership items. If, when the 
partnership proceedings are completed, the taxpayer is 
ultimately allowed any part of the losses, the taxpayer will 
receive part of the increased deficiency back in the form of an 
overpayment. However, in the interim, the taxpayer will have 
been subject to assessment and collection of a deficiency 
inflated by items still in dispute in the partnership 
proceeding. In essence, a taxpayer in such a case would be 
deprived of a prepayment forum with respect to the partnership 
item adjustments. The IRS would be harmed if a taxpayer's 
income is primarily from a TEFRA partnership, since the IRS may 
be unable to adjust nonpartnership items such as medical 
expense deductions, home mortgage interest deductions or 
charitable contribution deductions because there would be no 
deficiency since, under Munro, the income must be ignored.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act overrules Munro and allow the IRS to return to its 
prior practice of computing deficiencies by assuming that all 
TEFRA items whose treatment has not been finally determined had 
been correctly reported on the taxpayer's return. This 
eliminates the need to do special computations that involve the 
removal of TEFRA items from a taxpayer's return, and will 
restore to taxpayers a prepayment forum with respect to the 
TEFRA items. In addition, the provision provides a special rule 
to address the factual situation presented in Munro.
    Specifically, the Act provides a declaratory judgment 
procedure in the Tax Court for adjustments to an oversheltered 
return. An oversheltered return is a return that shows no 
taxable income and a net loss from TEFRA partnerships. In such 
a case, the IRS is authorized to issue a notice of adjustment 
with respect to non-TEFRA items, notwithstanding that no 
deficiency would result from the adjustment. However, the IRS 
could only issue such a notice if a deficiency would have 
arisen in the absence of the net loss from TEFRA partnerships.
    The Tax Court is granted jurisdiction to determine the 
correctness of such an adjustment as well as to make a 
declaration with respect to any other item for the taxable year 
to which the notice of adjustment relates, except for 
partnership items and affected items which require partner-
level determinations. No tax is due upon such a determination, 
but a decision of the Tax Court is treated as a final decision, 
permitting an appeal of the decision by either the taxpayer or 
the IRS. An adjustment determined to be correct would thus have 
the effect of increasing the taxable income that is deemed to 
have been reported on the taxpayer's return. If the taxpayer's 
partnership items were then adjusted in a subsequent 
proceeding, the IRS has preserved its ability to collect tax on 
any increased deficiency attributable to the nonpartnership 
items.
    Alternatively, if the taxpayer chooses not to contest the 
notice of adjustment within the 90-day period, the Act provides 
that when the taxpayer's partnership items are finally 
determined, the taxpayer has the right to file a refund claim 
for tax attributable to the items adjusted by the earlier 
notice of adjustment for the taxable year. Although a refund 
claim is not generally permitted with respect to a deficiency 
arising from a TEFRA proceeding, such a rule is appropriate 
with respect to a defaulted notice of adjustment because 
taxpayers may not challenge such a notice when issued since it 
does not require the payment of additional tax.
    In addition, the Act incorporates a number of provisions 
intended to clarify the coordination between TEFRA audit 
proceedings and individual deficiency proceedings. Under these 
provisions, any adjustment with respect to a non-partnership 
item that caused an increase in tax liability with respect to a 
partnership item would be treated as a computational adjustment 
and assessed after the conclusion of the TEFRA proceeding. 
Accordingly, deficiency procedures do not apply with respect to 
this increase in tax liability, and the statute of limitations 
applicable to TEFRA proceedings are controlling.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for partnership taxable years 
ending after the date of enactment.
            b. Partnership return to be determinative of audit 
                    procedures to be followed (sec. 1232 of the Act and 
                    sec. 6231 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    TEFRA established unified audit rules applicable to all 
partnerships, except for partnerships with 10 or fewer 
partners, each of whom is a natural person (other than a 
nonresident alien) or an estate, and for which each partner's 
share of each partnership item is the same as that partner's 
share of every other partnership item. Partners in the exempted 
partnerships are subject to regular deficiency procedures.

                           Reasons for Change

    The IRS often finds it difficult to determine whether to 
follow the TEFRA partnership procedures or the regular 
deficiency procedures. If the IRS determines that there were 
fewer than 10 partners in the partnership but was unaware that 
one of the partners was a nonresident alien or that there was a 
special allocation made during the year, the IRS might 
inadvertently apply the wrong procedures and possibly 
jeopardize any assessment. Permitting the IRS to rely on a 
partnership's return would simplify the IRS' task.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act permits the IRS to apply the TEFRA audit procedures 
if, based on the partnership's return for the year, the IRS 
reasonably determines that those procedures should apply. 
Similarly, the provision permits the IRS to apply the normal 
deficiency procedures if, based on the partnership's return for 
the year, the IRS reasonably determines that those procedures 
should apply.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for partnership taxable years 
ending after the date of enactment.
            c. Provisions relating to statute of limitations
              i. Suspend statute when an untimely petition is filed 
                    (sec. 1233(a) of the Act and sec. 6229 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In a deficiency case, section 6503(a) provides that if a 
proceeding in respect of the deficiency is placed on the docket 
of the Tax Court, the period of limitations on assessment and 
collection is suspended until the decision of the Tax Court 
becomes final, and for 60 days thereafter. The counterpart to 
this provision with respect to TEFRA cases is contained in 
section 6229(d). That section provides that the period of 
limitations is suspended for the period during which an action 
may be brought under section 6226 and, if an action is brought 
during such period, until the decision of the court becomes 
final, and for 1 year thereafter. As a result of this 
difference in language, the running of the statute of 
limitations in a TEFRA case will only be tolled by the filing 
of a timely petition whereas in a deficiency case, the statute 
of limitations is tolled by the filing of any petition, 
regardless of whether the petition is timely.

                           Reasons for Change

    Under prior law, if an untimely petition was filed in a 
TEFRA case, the statute of limitations could expire while the 
case was still pending before the court. To prevent this from 
occurring, the IRS must make assessments against all of the 
investors during the pendency of the action and if the action 
is in the Tax Court, presumably abate such assessments if the 
court ultimately determines that the petition was timely. These 
steps are burdensome to the IRS and to taxpayers.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act conforms the suspension rule for the filing of 
petitions in TEFRA cases with the rule under section 6503(a) 
pertaining to deficiency cases. Under the provision, the 
statute of limitations in TEFRA cases is suspended by the 
filing of any petition under section 6226, regardless of 
whether the petition is timely or valid, and the suspension 
will remain in effect until the decision of the court becomes 
final, and for one year thereafter. Hence, if the statute of 
limitations is open at the time that an untimely petition is 
filed, the limitations period would no longer continue to run 
and possibly expire while the action is pending before the 
court.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to all cases in 
which the period of limitations has not expired under present 
law as of the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).
              ii. Suspend statute of limitations during bankruptcy 
                    proceedings (sec. 1233(b) of the Act and sec. 6229 
                    of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The period for assessing tax with respect to partnership 
items generally is the longer of the periods provided by 
section 6229 or section 6501. For partnership items that 
convert to nonpartnership items, section 6229(f) provides that 
the period for assessing tax shall not expire before the date 
which is 1 year after the date that the items become 
nonpartnership items. Section 6503(h) provides for the 
suspension of the limitations period during the pendency of a 
bankruptcy proceeding. However, this provision only applies to 
the limitations periods provided in sections 6501 and 6502.
    Because the suspension provision in section 6503(h) applies 
only to the limitations periods provided in section 6501 and 
6502, some uncertainty exists as to whether section 6503(h) 
applies to suspend the limitations period pertaining to 
converted items provided in section 6229(f) when a petition 
naming a partner as a debtor in a bankruptcy proceeding is 
filed. As a result, the limitations period provided in section 
6229(f) may continue to run during the pendency of the 
bankruptcy proceeding, notwithstanding that the IRS is 
prohibited from making an assessment against the debtor because 
of the automatic stay provisions of the Bankruptcy Code.

                           Reasons for Change

    The ambiguity in prior law made it difficult for the IRS to 
adjust partnership items that convert to nonpartnership items 
by reason of a partner going into bankruptcy. In addition, any 
uncertainty may have resulted in increased requests for the 
bankruptcy court to lift the automatic stay to permit the IRS 
to make an assessment with respect to the converted items.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act clarifies that the statute of limitations is 
suspended for a partner who is named in a bankruptcy petition. 
The suspension period is for the entire period during which the 
IRS is prohibited by reason of the bankruptcy proceeding from 
making an assessment, and for 60 days thereafter. The provision 
does not purport to create any inference as to the proper 
interpretation of prior law.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to all cases in 
which the period of limitations has not expired under present 
law as of the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).
              iii. Extend statute of limitations for bankrupt TMPs 
                    (sec. 1233(c) of the Act and sec. 6229 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Section 6229(b)(1)(B) provides that the statute of 
limitations is extended with respect to all partners in the 
partnership by an agreement entered into between the tax 
matters partner (TMP) and the IRS. However, Temp. Treas. Reg. 
secs. 301.6231(a)(7)-1T(1)(4) and 301.6231(c)-7T(a) provide 
that upon the filing of a petition naming a partner as a debtor 
in a bankruptcy proceeding, that partner's partnership items 
convert to nonpartnership items, and if the debtor was the tax 
matters partner, such status terminates. These rules are 
necessary because of the automatic stay provision contained in 
11 U.S.C. sec. 362(a)(8). As a result, if a consent to extend 
the statute of limitations is signed by a person who would be 
the TMP but for the fact that at the time that the agreement is 
executed the person was a debtor in a bankruptcy proceeding, 
the consent would not be binding on the other partners because 
the person signing the agreement was no longer the TMP at the 
time that the agreement was executed.

                           Reasons for Change

    The IRS is not automatically notified of bankruptcy filings 
and cannot easily determine whether a taxpayer is in 
bankruptcy, especially if the audit of the partnership is being 
conducted by one district and the taxpayer resides in another 
district, as is frequently the situation in TEFRA cases. If the 
IRS does not discover that a person signing a consent is in 
bankruptcy, the IRS may mistakenly rely on that consent. As a 
result, the IRS may be precluded from assessing any tax 
attributable to partnership item adjustments with respect to 
any of the partners in the partnership.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that unless the IRS is notified of a 
bankruptcy proceeding in accordance with regulations, the IRS 
can rely on a statute extension signed by a person who is the 
tax matters partner but for the fact that said person was in 
bankruptcy at the time that the person signed the agreement. 
Statute extensions granted by a bankrupt TMP in these cases are 
binding on all of the partners in the partnership. The 
provision is not intended to create any inference as to the 
proper interpretation of prior law.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for extension agreements entered 
into after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).
            d. Expansion of small partnership exception (sec. 1234 of 
                    the Act and sec. 6231 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    TEFRA established unified audit rules applicable to all 
partnerships, except for partnerships with 10 or fewer 
partners, each of whom is a natural person (other than a 
nonresident alien) or an estate, and for which each partner's 
share of each partnership item is the same as that partner's 
share of every other partnership item. Partners in the exempted 
partnerships are subject to regular deficiency procedures.

                           Reasons for Change

    The more existence of a C corporation as a partner or of a 
special allocation does not warrant subjecting the partnership 
and its partners of an otherwise small partnership to the TEFRA 
procedures.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act permits a small partnership to have a C corporation 
as a partner or to specially allocate items without 
jeopardizing its exception from the TEFRA rules. However, the 
provision retains the prohibition against having a flow-through 
entity (other than an estate of a deceased partner) as a 
partner for purposes of qualifying for the small partnership 
exception.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for partnership taxable years 
ending after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).
            e. Exclusion of partial settlements from 1-year limitation 
                    on assessment (sec. 1235 of the Act and sec. 
                    6229(f) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The period for assessing tax with respect to partnership 
items generally is the longer of the periods provided by 
section 6229 or section 6501. For partnership items that 
convert to nonpartnership items, section 6229(f) provides that 
the period for assessing tax shall not expire before the date 
which is 1 year after the date that the items become 
nonpartnership items. Section 6231(b)(1)(C) provides that the 
partnership items of a partner for a partnership taxable year 
become nonpartnership items as of the date the partner enters 
into a settlement agreement with the IRS with respect to such 
items.

                           Reasons for Change

    When a partial settlement agreement is entered into, the 
assessment period for the items covered by the agreement may be 
different than the assessment period for the remaining items. 
This fractured statute of limitations poses a significant 
tracking problem for the IRS and necessitates multiple 
computations of tax with respect to each partner's investment 
in the partnership for the taxable year.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that if a partner and the IRS enter into a 
settlement agreement with respect to some but not all of the 
partnership items in dispute for a partnership taxable year and 
other partnership items remain in dispute, the period for 
assessing any tax attributable to the settled items is 
determined as if such agreement had not been entered into. 
Consequently, the limitations period that is applicable to the 
last item to be resolved for the partnership taxable year is 
controlling with respect to all disputed partnership items for 
the partnership taxable year. The provision does not purport to 
create any inference as to the proper interpretation of prior 
law.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for settlements entered into 
after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).
            f. Extension of time for filing a request for 
                    administrative adjustment (sec. 1236 of the Act and 
                    sec. 6227 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    If an agreement extending the statute is entered into with 
respect to a non-TEFRA statute of limitations, that agreement 
also extends the statute of limitations for filing refund 
claims (sec. 6511(c)). There is no comparable provision for 
extending the time for filing refund claims with respect to 
partnership items subject to the TEFRA partnership rules.

                           Reasons for Change

    The absence of an extension for filing refund claims in 
TEFRA proceedings hinders taxpayers that may want to agree to 
extend the TEFRA statute of limitations but want to preserve 
their option to file a refund claim later.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that if a TEFRA statute extension 
agreement is entered into, that agreement also extends the 
statute of limitations for filing refund claims attributable to 
partnership items or affected items until 6 months after the 
expiration of the limitations period for assessments.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective as if included in the amendments 
made by section 402 of the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility 
Act of 1982.
            g. Availability of innocent spouse relief in context of 
                    partnership proceedings (sec. 1237 of the Act and 
                    sec. 6230 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In general, an innocent spouse may be relieved of liability 
for tax, penalties and interest if certain conditions are met 
(sec. 6013(e)). However, existing law does not provide the 
spouse of a partner in a TEFRA partnership with a judicial 
forum to raise the innocent spouse defense with respect to any 
tax or interest that relates to an investment in a TEFRA 
partnership.

                           Reasons for Change

    Providing a forum in which to raise the innocent spouse 
defense with respect to liabilities attributable to adjustments 
to partnership items (including penalties, additions to tax and 
additional amounts) would make the innocent spouse rules more 
uniform.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides both a prepayment forum and a refund forum 
for raising the innocent spouse defense in TEFRA cases.
    With respect to a prepayment forum, the provision provides 
that within 60 days of the date that a notice of computational 
adjustment relating to partnership items is mailed to the 
spouse of a partner, the spouse could request that the 
assessment be abated. Upon receipt of such a request, the 
assessment is abated and any reassessment will be subject to 
the deficiency procedures. If an abatement is requested, the 
statute of limitations does not expire before the date which is 
60 days after the date of the abatement. If the spouse files a 
petition with the Tax Court, the Tax Court only has 
jurisdiction to determine whether the requirements of section 
6013(e) have been satisfied. In making this determination, the 
treatment of the partnership items that gave rise to the 
liability in question is conclusive.
    Alternatively, the Act provides that the spouse of a 
partner could file a claim for refund to raise the innocent 
spouse defense. The claim has to be filed within 6 months from 
the date that the notice of computational adjustment is mailed 
to the spouse. If the claim is not allowed, the spouse could 
file a refund action. For purposes of any claim or suit under 
this provision, the treatment of the partnership items that 
gave rise to the liability in question is conclusive.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective as if included in the amendments 
made by section 402 of the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility 
Act of 1982.
            h. Determination of penalties at partnership level (sec. 
                    1238 of the Act and sec. 6221 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Partnership items include only items that are required to 
be taken into account under the income tax subtitle. Penalties 
are not partnership items since they are contained in the 
procedure and administration subtitle. As a result, penalties 
may only be asserted against a partner through the application 
of the deficiency procedures following the completion of the 
partnership-level proceeding.

                           Reasons for Change

    Many penalties are based upon the conduct of the taxpayer. 
With respect to partnerships, the relevant conduct often occurs 
at the partnership level. In addition, applying penalties at 
the partner level through the deficiency procedures following 
the conclusion of the unified proceeding at the partnership 
level increases the administrative burden on the IRS and can 
significantly increase the Tax Court's inventory.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that the partnership-level proceeding is 
to include a determination of the applicability of penalties at 
the partnership level. However, the provision allows partners 
to raise any partner-level defenses in a refund forum.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for partnership taxable years 
ending after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).
            i. Provisions relating to Tax Court jurisdiction (sec. 1239 
                    of the Act and secs. 6225 and 6226 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Improper assessment and collection activities by the IRS 
during the 150-day period for filing a petition or during the 
pendency of any Tax Court proceeding, ``may be enjoined in the 
proper court.'' Prior law may be unclear as to whether this 
includes the Tax Court.
    For a partner other than the Tax Matters Partner to be 
eligible to file a petition for redetermination of partnership 
items in any court or to participate in an existing case, the 
period for assessing any tax attributable to the partnership 
items of that partner must not have expired. Since such a 
partner would only be treated as a party to the action if the 
statute of limitations with respect to them was still open, the 
law is unclear whether the partner would have standing to 
assert that the statute of limitations had expired with respect 
to them.

                           Reasons for Change

    Clarifying the Tax Court's jurisdiction simplifies the 
resolution of tax cases.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act clarifies that an action to enjoin premature 
assessments of deficiencies attributable to partnership items 
may be brought in the Tax Court. The provision also permits a 
partner to participate in an action or file a petition for the 
sole purpose of asserting that the period of limitations for 
assessing any tax attributable to partnership items has expired 
for that person. Additionally, the provision clarifies that the 
Tax Court has overpayment jurisdiction with respect to affected 
items.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for partnership taxable years 
ending after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).
            j. Treatment of premature petitions filed by notice 
                    partners or 5-percent groups (sec. 1240 of the Act 
                    and sec. 6226 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Tax Matters Partner is given the exclusive right to 
file a petition for a readjustment of partnership items within 
the 90-day period after the issuance of the notice of a final 
partnership administrative adjustment (FPAA). If the Tax 
Matters Partner does not file a petition within the 90-day 
period, certain other partners are permitted to file a petition 
within the 60-day period after the close of the 90-day period. 
There are ordering rules for determining which action goes 
forward and for dismissing other actions.

                           Reasons for Change

    A petition that is filed within the 90-day period by a 
person who is not the Tax Matters Partner is dismissed. Thus, 
if the Tax Matters Partner does not file a petition within the 
90-day period and no timely and valid petition is filed during 
the succeeding 60-day period, judicial review of the 
adjustments set forth in the notice of FPAA is foreclosed and 
the adjustments are deemed to be correct.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act treats premature petitions filed by certain 
partners within the 90-day period as being filed on the last 
day of the following 60-day period under specified 
circumstances, thus affording the partnership with an 
opportunity for judicial review that was not available under 
prior law.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to petitions filed 
after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).
            k. Bonds in case of appeals from certain proceedings (sec. 
                    1241 of the Act and sec. 7485 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A bond must be filed to stay the collection of deficiencies 
pending the appeal of the Tax Court's decision in a TEFRA 
proceeding. The amount of the bond must be based on the court's 
estimate of the aggregate deficiencies of the partners.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Tax Court cannot easily determine the aggregate changes 
in tax liability of all of the partners in a partnership who 
will be affected by the Court's decision in the proceeding. 
Clarifying the calculation of the bond amount would simplify 
the Tax Court's task.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act clarifies that the amount of the bond should be 
based on the Tax Court's estimate of the aggregate liability of 
the parties to the action (and not all of the partners in the 
partnership). For purposes of this provision, the amount of the 
bond could be estimated by applying the highest individual rate 
to the total adjustments determined by the Tax Court and 
doubling that amount to take into account interest and 
penalties.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective as if included in the amendments 
made by section 402 of the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility 
Act of 1982.
            l. Suspension of interest where delay in computational 
                    adjustment resulting from certain settlements (sec. 
                    1242 of the Act and sec. 6601 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Interest on a deficiency generally is suspended when a 
taxpayer executes a settlement agreement with the IRS and 
waives the restrictions on assessments and collections, and the 
IRS does not issue a notice and demand for payment of such 
deficiency within 30 days. Interest on a deficiency that 
results from an adjustment of partnership items in TEFRA 
proceedings, however, is not suspended.

                           Reasons for Change

    Processing settlement agreements and assessing the tax due 
takes a substantial amount of time in TEFRA cases. A taxpayer 
is not afforded any relief from interest during this period.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act suspends interest where there is a delay in making 
a computational adjustment relating to a TEFRA settlement.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to adjustments 
relating to taxable years beginning after the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).
            m. Special rules for administrative adjustment requests 
                    with respect to bad debts or worthless securities 
                    (sec. 1243 of the Act and sec. 6227 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The non-TEFRA statute of limitations for filing a claim for 
credit or refund generally is the later of (1) three years from 
the date the return in question was filed or (2) two years from 
the date the claimed tax was paid, whichever is later (sec. 
6511(b)). However, an extended period of time, seven years from 
the date the return was due, is provided for filing a claim for 
refund of an overpayment resulting from a deduction for a 
worthless security or bad debt (sec. 6511(d)).
    Under the TEFRA partnership rules, a request for 
administrative adjustment (``RAA'') must be filed within three 
years after the later of (1) the date the partnership return 
was filed or (2) the due date of the partnership return 
(determined without regard to extensions) (sec. 6227(a)(1)). In 
addition, the request must be filed before a final partnership 
administrative adjustment (``FPAA'') is mailed for the taxable 
year (sec. 6227(a)(2)). There is no special provision for 
extending the time for filing an RAA that relates to a 
deduction for a worthless security or an entirely worthless bad 
debt.

                           Reasons for Change

    Whether and when a stock or debt becomes worthless is a 
question of fact that may not be determinable until after the 
year in which it appears the loss has occurred. An extended 
statute of limitations allows partners in a TEFRA partnership 
the same opportunity to file a delayed claim for refund in 
these difficult factual situations as other taxpayers are 
permitted.
    Further, on past occasions, the IRS issued FPAAs that did 
not adjust the partnership's tax return. This action created 
wasteful paperwork, and may have, in some cases truncated the 
appeals rights of individual partners. A special rule is 
necessary to permit partners who may have been adversely 
impacted by this past practice of the IRS to avail themselves 
of the extended period irrespective of whether an FPAA has been 
issued.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act extends the time for the filing of an RAA relating 
to the deduction by a partnership for a worthless security or 
bad debt. In these circumstances, in lieu of the three-year 
period provided in sec. 6227(a)(1), the period for filing an 
RAA is seven years from the date the partnership return was due 
with respect to which the request is made (determined without 
regard to extensions). The RAA is still required to be filed 
before the FPAA is mailed for the taxable year.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective as if included in the amendments 
made by section 402 of the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility 
Act of 1982.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provisions included in item 2 (other partnership audit 
rules) are estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year budget 
receipts by $2 million in 1998 and by less than $500,000 per 
year in each of 1999 through 2007.

3. Closing of partnership taxable year with respect to deceased partner 
        (sec. 1246 of the Act and sec. 706(c)(2)(A) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The partnership taxable year closes with respect to a 
partner whose entire interest is sold, exchanged, or 
liquidated. Such year, however, generally does not close upon 
the death of a partner. Thus, a decedent's entire share of 
items of income, gain, loss, deduction and credit for the 
partnership year in which death occurs is taxed to the estate 
or successor in interest rather than to the decedent on his or 
her final income tax return. See Estate of Hesse v. 
Commissioner, 74 T.C. 1307, 1311 (1980).

                           Reasons for Change

    The rule leaving open the partnership taxable year with 
respect to a deceased partner was adopted in 1954 to prevent 
the bunching of income that could occur with respect to a 
partnership reporting on a fiscal year other than the calendar 
year. Without this rule, as many as 23 months of income might 
have been reported on the partner's final return. Legislative 
changes occurring since 1954 have required most partnerships to 
adopt a calendar year, reducing the possibility of bunching. 
Consequently, income and deductions are better matched if the 
partnership taxable year closes upon a partner's death and 
partnership items are reported on the decedent's last return.
    Prior law closed the partnership taxable year with respect 
to a deceased partner only if the partner's entire interest is 
sold or exchanged pursuant to an agreement existing at the time 
of death. By closing the taxable year automatically upon death, 
the provision reduces the need for such agreements.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The provision provides that the taxable year of a 
partnership closes with respect to a partner whose entire 
interest in the partnership terminates, whether by death, 
liquidation or otherwise. The provision does not change prior 
law with respect to the effect upon the partnership taxable 
year of a transfer of a partnership interest by a debtor to the 
debtor's estate (under Chapters 7 or 11 of Title 11, relating 
to bankruptcy).

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to partnership taxable years 
beginning after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 per year in each of 1998 
through 2007.

  D. Modifications of Rules for Real Estate Investment Trusts (secs. 
        1251-1263 of the Act and secs. 856 and 857 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

Overview

    In general, a real estate investment trust (``REIT'') is an 
entity that receives most of its income from passive real 
estate related investments and that receives conduit treatment 
for income that is distributed to shareholders. If an entity 
meets the qualifications for REIT status, the portion of its 
income that is distributed to the investors each year generally 
is taxed to the investors without being subjected to a tax at 
the REIT level; the REIT generally is subject to a corporate 
tax only on the income that it retains and on certain income 
from property that qualifies as foreclosure property.

Election to be treated as a REIT

    In order to qualify as a REIT, and thereby receive conduit 
treatment, an entity must elect REIT status. A newly-electing 
entity generally cannot have earnings and profits accumulated 
from any year in which the entity was in existence and not 
treated as a REIT (sec. 857(a)(3)). To satisfy this 
requirement, the entity must distribute, during its first REIT 
taxable year, any earnings and profits that were accumulated in 
non-REIT years. For this purpose, under prior law, 
distributions by the entity generally are treated as being made 
from the most recently accumulated earnings and profits.

Taxation of REITs

            Overview
    In general, if an entity qualifies as a REIT by satisfying 
the various requirements described below, the entity is taxable 
as a corporation on its ``real estate investment trust taxable 
income'' (``REITTI''), and also is taxable on certain other 
amounts (sec. 857). REITTI is the taxable income of the REIT 
with certain adjustments (sec. 857(b)(2)). The most significant 
adjustment is a deduction for dividends paid. The allowance of 
this deduction is the mechanism by which the REIT becomes a 
conduit for income tax purposes.
            Capital gains
    A REIT that has a net capital gain for a taxable year 
generally is subject to tax on such capital gain under the 
capital gains tax regime generally applicable to corporations 
(sec. 857(b)(3)). However, a REIT may diminish or eliminate its 
tax liability attributable to such capital gain by paying a 
``capital gain dividend'' to its shareholders (sec. 
857(b)(3)(C)). A capital gain dividend is any dividend or part 
of a dividend that is designated by the payor REIT as a capital 
gain dividend in a written notice mailed to shareholders. 
Shareholders who receive capital gain dividends treat the 
amount of such dividends as long-term capital gain regardless 
of the holding period of their stock (sec. 857(b)(3)(C)).
    A regulated investment company (``RIC''), but not a REIT, 
may elect to retain and pay income tax on net long-term capital 
gains it received during the tax year. If a RIC makes this 
election, the RIC shareholders must include in their income as 
long-term capital gains their proportionate share of these 
undistributed long-term capital gains as designated by the RIC. 
The shareholder is deemed to have paid the shareholder's share 
of the tax, which can be credited or refunded to the 
shareholder. Also, the basis of the shareholder's shares is 
increased by the amount of the undistributed long-term capital 
gains (less the amount of capital gains tax paid by the RIC) 
included in the shareholder's long-term capital gains.
            Income from foreclosure property
    In addition to tax on its REITTI, a REIT is subject to tax 
at the highest rate of tax paid by corporations on its net 
income from foreclosure property (sec. 857(b)(4)). Net income 
from foreclosure property is the excess of the sum of gains 
from foreclosure property that is held for sale to customers in 
the ordinary course of a trade or business and gross income 
from foreclosure property (other than income that otherwise 
would qualify under the 75-percent income test described below) 
over all allowable deductions directly connected with the 
production of such income.
    Foreclosure property is any real property or personal 
property incident to such real property that is acquired by a 
REIT as a result of default or imminent default on a lease of 
such property or indebtedness secured by such property, 
provided that (unless acquired as foreclosure property) such 
property was not held by the REIT for sale to customers (sec. 
856(e)). Under prior law, a property generally may be treated 
as foreclosure property for a period of two years after the 
date the property is acquired by the REIT. The IRS may grant 
extensions of the period for treating the property as 
foreclosure property if the REIT establishes that an extension 
of the grace period is necessary for the orderly liquidation of 
the REIT's interest in the property. The grace period cannot be 
extended beyond six years from the date the property is 
acquired by the REIT.
    Property will cease to be treated as foreclosure property 
if, after 90 days after the date of acquisition, the REIT 
operates the foreclosure property in a trade or business other 
than through an independent contractor from whom the REIT does 
not derive or receive any income (sec. 856(e)(4)(C)).
            Income or loss from prohibited transactions
    In general, a REIT must derive its income from passive 
sources and not engage in any active trade or business. 
Accordingly, in addition to the tax on its REITTI and on its 
net income from foreclosure property, a 100 percent tax is 
imposed on the net income of a REIT from ``prohibited 
transactions'' (sec. 857(b)(6)). A prohibited transaction is 
the sale or other disposition of property described in section 
1221(1) of the Code (property held for sale in the ordinary 
course of a trade or business) other than foreclosure property. 
Thus, the 100 percent tax on prohibited transactions helps to 
ensure that the REIT is a passive entity and may not engage in 
ordinary retailing activities such as sales to customers of 
condominium units or subdivided lots in a development project. 
A safe harbor is provided for certain sales that otherwise 
might be considered prohibited transactions (sec. 
857(b)(6)(C)). The safe harbor is limited to seven or fewer 
sales a year or, alternatively, any number of sales provided 
that the aggregate adjusted basis of the property sold does not 
exceed 10 percent of the aggregate basis of all the REIT's 
assets at the beginning of the REIT's taxable year.

Requirements for REIT status

    A REIT must satisfy four tests on a year-by-year basis: 
organizational structure, source of income, nature of assets, 
and distribution of income. These tests are intended to allow 
conduit treatment in circumstances in which a corporate tax 
otherwise would be imposed, only if there really is a pooling 
of investment arrangement that is evidenced by its 
organizational structure, if its investments are basically in 
real estate assets, and if its income is passive income from 
real estate investment, as contrasted with income from the 
operation of business involving real estate. In addition, 
substantially all of the entity's income must be passed through 
to its shareholders on a current basis.

Organizational structure requirements

    To qualify as a REIT, an entity must be for its entire 
taxable year a corporation or an unincorporated trust or 
association that would be taxable as a domestic corporation but 
for the REIT provisions, and must be managed by one or more 
trustees (sec. 856(a)). The beneficial ownership of the entity 
must be evidenced by transferable shares or certificates of 
ownership. Except for the first taxable year for which an 
entity elects to be a REIT, the beneficial ownership of the 
entity must be held by 100 or more persons, and the entity may 
not be so closely held by individuals that it would be treated 
as a personal holding company if all its adjusted gross income 
constituted personal holding company income. Under prior law, a 
REIT is disqualified for any year in which it does not comply 
with regulations to ascertain the actual ownership of the 
REIT's outstanding shares. Treasury regulations require that 
the entity request information from certain shareholders 
regarding shares directly or indirectly owned by them.

Income requirements

            Overview
    In order for an entity to qualify as a REIT, at least 95 
percent of its gross income generally must be derived from 
certain passive sources (the ``95-percent test''). In addition, 
at least 75 percent of its income generally must be from 
certain real estate sources (the ``75-percent test''), 
including rents from real property.
    In addition, under prior law, less than 30 percent of the 
entity's gross income may be derived from gain from the sale or 
other disposition of stock or securities held for less than one 
year, real property held less than four years (other than 
foreclosure property, or property subject to an involuntary 
conversion within the meaning of sec. 1033), and property that 
is sold or disposed of in a prohibited transaction (sec. 
856(c)(4)).
            Definition of rents from real property
    For purposes of the income requirements, rents from real 
property generally include: (1) rents from interests in real 
property; (2) charges for services customarily rendered or 
furnished in connection with the rental of real property, 
whether or not such charges are separately stated; and (3) rent 
attributable to personal property that is leased under or in 
connection with a lease of real property, but only if the rent 
attributable to such personal property does not exceed 15 
percent of the total rent for the year under the lease (sec. 
856(d)(1)).
    Services provided to tenants are regarded as customary if, 
in the geographic market within which the building is located, 
tenants in buildings that are of a similar class (for example, 
luxury apartment buildings) are customarily provided with the 
service. The furnishing of water, heat, light, and air 
conditioning, the cleaning of windows, public entrances, exits, 
and lobbies, the performance of general maintenance, and of 
janitorial and cleaning services, the collection of trash, the 
furnishing of elevator services, telephone answering services, 
incidental storage space, laundry equipment, watchman or guard 
service, parking facilities and swimming pool facilities are 
examples of services that are customarily furnished to tenants 
of a particular class of buildings in many geographical 
marketing areas (Treas. Reg. sec. 1.856-4(b)).
            Exclusion of rents from related tenants
    Amounts are not treated as qualified rent if they are 
received from corporate or noncorporate tenants in which the 
REIT, directly or indirectly, has an ownership interest of 10 
percent or more (sec. 856(d)(2)(B)).
            Exclusion of rents where services to tenants are performed 
                    by related contractors
    Where a REIT furnishes or renders services to the tenants, 
amounts received or accrued with respect to such property 
generally are not treated as qualifying rents unless the 
services are furnished through an independent contractor (sec. 
856(d)(2)(C)). A REIT may furnish or render a service directly, 
however, if the service would not generate unrelated business 
taxable income under section 512(b)(3) if provided by an 
organization described in section 511(a)(2). In general, an 
independent contractor is a person who does not own more than a 
35 percent interest in the REIT (sec. 856(d)(3)(A)), and in 
which no more than a 35 percent interest is held by persons 
with a 35 percent or greater interest in the REIT (sec. 
856(d)(3)(B)).
            Constructive ownership rules involving corporations
    For purposes of determining the REIT's ownership interest 
in a tenant and whether a contractor is independent, the 
attribution rules of section 318 apply, except that 10 percent 
is substituted for 50 percent where it appears in subparagraph 
(C) of section 318(a)(2) and 318(a)(3) (sec. 856(d)(5)). Thus, 
under section 318(a)(2)(C) (as so modified), if 10 or more 
percent of a REIT or other corporation is owned, directly or 
indirectly, by or for a person, that person is treated as 
owning that person's proportionate share of any stock owned 
directly or indirectly by that corporation.
            Constructive ownership rules involving partnerships
    Under section 318, stock owned, directly or indirectly, by 
or for a partnership is considered owned proportionately by its 
partners (sec. 318(a)(2)(A)). In addition, stock owned, 
directly or indirectly, by or for a partner is considered owned 
by the partnership (sec. 318(a)(3)(A)). However, stock 
constructively owned by a partnership is not considered as 
owned for purposes of being constructively owned by partners 
(sec. 318(a)(5)(C)). The following examples illustrate the 
application of these provisions for purposes of the related 
tenant and independent contractor rules.
            Constructive ownership of tenant
    If a REIT owns a 10 percent or greater interest in a person 
that is a tenant of the REIT, rents paid by that person to the 
REIT are not qualifying rents to the REIT (sec. 856(d)(2)(B)).
    Example 1--If 10 percent or more of a REIT's shares are 
owned by a partnership and a partner owning a one-percent 
interest in that partnership also owns a 10-percent or greater 
interest in a person that is a tenant of the REIT, rents paid 
by the tenant to the REIT are not qualifying rents to the REIT; 
the 10-percent or greater interest in the tenant is considered 
owned by the partnership (sec. 318(a)(3)(A)) and in turn by the 
REIT (secs. 318(a)(3)(C) and 856(d)(5)).
    Example 2--If a REIT owns a 30-percent interest in a 
partnership that in turn owns a 40-percent interest in a person 
that is a tenant of the REIT, rents paid by that person to the 
REIT are not qualifying rents to the REIT because the REIT is 
considered to own more than 10 percent of the tenant (sec. 
318(a)(2)(A)).
    Example 3--If 10 percent or more of a REIT's shares are 
owned by persons who are 50-percent partners in a partnership 
whose other partners own the entirety of the interests in a 
tenant of the REIT, none of the interests in the tenant are 
considered owned by the partners who own interests in the REIT 
(sec. 318(a)(5)(C)).
            Constructive ownership of contractor
    If a person providing services to tenants of the REIT owns 
a greater-than-35-percent interest in the REIT, or if another 
person owns a greater-than-35-percent interest in both the REIT 
and a person providing services, amounts received or accrued by 
the REIT with respect to the property are not qualifying rents 
because the service provider does not qualify as an independent 
contractor (sec. 856(d)(3)).
    Example 4--If more than 35 percent of a REIT's shares are 
owned by a partnership and a partner owning a one-percent 
interest in that partnership also owns a greater-than-35-
percent interest in a contractor, that person will not be 
considered an independent contractor because the partnership 
owns more than 35 percent of the REIT's shares and will also be 
considered to own a greater-than-35-percent interest in the 
contractor (sec. 318(a)(3)A)).
    Example 5--If more than 35 percent of a REIT's shares are 
owned by a person who owns a one-percent interest in a 
partnership and another one-percent partner in that partnership 
owns more than 35 percent of the interests in a contractor, the 
independent contractor definition will not be met because the 
partnership will be considered to own more than 35 percent 
interests in both the REIT and the contractor (sec. 318 
(a)(3)(A)).
            Hedging instruments
    Interest rate swaps or cap agreements that protect a REIT 
from interest rate fluctuations on variable rate debt incurred 
to acquire or carry real property are treated as securities 
under the 30-percent test and payments under these agreements 
are treated as qualifying under the 95-percent test (sec. 
856(c)(6)(G)).
            Treatment of shared appreciation mortgages
    For purposes of the income requirements for qualification 
as a REIT, and for purposes of the prohibited transaction 
provisions, any income derived from a ``shared appreciation 
provision'' is treated as gain recognized on the sale of the 
``secured property.'' For these purposes, a shared appreciation 
provision is any provision that is in connection with an 
obligation that is held by the REIT and secured by an interest 
in real property, which provision entitles the REIT to receive 
a specified portion of any gain realized on the sale or 
exchange of such real property (or of any gain that would be 
realized if the property were sold on a specified date). 
Secured property for these purposes means the real property 
that secures the obligation that has the shared appreciation 
provision.
    In addition, for purposes of the income requirements for 
qualification as a REIT, and for purposes of the prohibited 
transactions provisions, the REIT is treated as holding the 
secured property for the period during which it held the shared 
appreciation provision (or, if shorter, the period during which 
the secured property was held by the person holding such 
property), and the secured property is treated as property 
described in section 1221(1) if it is such property in the 
hands of the obligor on the obligation to which the shared 
appreciation provision relates (or if it would be such property 
if held by the REIT). For purposes of the prohibited 
transaction safe harbor, the REIT is treated as having sold the 
secured property at the time that it recognizes income on 
account of the shared appreciation provision, and any 
expenditures made by the holder of the secured property are 
treated as made by the REIT.

Asset requirements

    To satisfy the asset requirements to qualify for treatment 
as a REIT, at the close of each quarter of its taxable year, an 
entity must have at least 75 percent of the value of its assets 
invested in real estate assets, cash and cash items, and 
government securities (sec. 856(c)(5)(A)). Moreover, not more 
than 25 percent of the value of the entity's assets can be 
invested in securities of any one issuer (other than government 
securities and other securities described in the preceding 
sentence). Further, these securities may not comprise more than 
five percent of the entity's assets or more than 10 percent of 
the outstanding voting securities of such issuer (sec. 
856(c)(5)(B)). The term real estate assets is defined to mean 
real property (including interests in real property and 
mortgages on real property) and interests in REITs (sec. 
856(c)(6)(B)).

REIT subsidiaries

    Under present law, all the assets, liabilities, and items 
of income, deduction, and credit of a ``qualified REIT 
subsidiary'' are treated as the assets, liabilities, and 
respective items of the REIT that owns the stock of the 
qualified REIT subsidiary. A subsidiary of a REIT is a 
qualified REIT subsidiary if and only if 100 percent of the 
subsidiary's stock is owned by the REIT at all times that the 
subsidiary is in existence. If at any time the REIT ceases to 
own 100 percent of the stock of the subsidiary, or if the REIT 
ceases to qualify for (or revokes an election of) REIT status, 
such subsidiary is treated as a new corporation that acquired 
all of its assets in exchange for its stock (and assumption of 
liabilities) immediately before the time that the REIT ceased 
to own 100 percent of the subsidiary's stock, or ceased to be a 
REIT as the case may be.

Distribution requirements

    To satisfy the distribution requirement, a REIT must 
distribute as dividends to its shareholders during the taxable 
year an amount equal to or exceeding (i) the sum of 95 percent 
of its REITTI other than net capital gain income and 95 percent 
of the excess of its net income from foreclosure property over 
the tax imposed on that income minus (ii) certain excess 
noncash income. Excess noncash items include (1) the excess of 
the amounts that the REIT is required to include in income 
under section 467 with respect to certain rental agreements 
involving deferred rents, over the amounts that the REIT 
otherwise would recognize under its regular method of 
accounting, (2) in the case of a REIT using the cash method of 
accounting, the excess of the amount of original issue discount 
and coupon interest that the REIT is required to take into 
account with respect to a loan to which section 1274 applies, 
over the amount of money and fair market value of other 
property received with respect to the loan, and (3) income 
arising from the disposition of a real estate asset in certain 
transactions that failed to qualify as like-kind exchanges 
under section 1031.

                       Explanation of Provisions

Overview

    The Act modifies many of the provisions relating to the 
requirements for qualification as, and the taxation of, a REIT. 
In particular, the modifications relate to the general 
requirements for qualification as a REIT, the taxation of a 
REIT, the income requirements for qualification as a REIT, and 
certain other provisions.

Alterative penalty for failure to make requests of shareholders (sec. 
        1251 of the Act)

    The Act replaces the rule that disqualifies a REIT for any 
year in which the REIT failed to comply with Treasury 
regulations to ascertain its ownership, with an intermediate 
penalty for failing to do so. The penalty is $25,000 ($50,000 
for intentional violations) for any year in which the REIT did 
not comply with the ownership regulations. The REIT also is 
required, when requested by the IRS, to send curative demand 
letters.
    In addition, a REIT that complied with the Treasury 
regulations for ascertaining its ownership, and which did not 
know, or have reason to know, that it was so closely held as to 
be classified as a personal holding company, is treated as 
meeting the requirement that it not be a personal holding 
company.

De minimis rule for tenant service income (sec. 1252 of the Act)

    The Act permits a REIT to render a de minimis amount of 
impermissible services to tenants, or in connection with the 
management of property, and still treat amounts received with 
respect to that property as rent. The value of the 
impermissible services may not exceed one percent of the gross 
income from the property. For these purposes, the services may 
not be valued at less than 150 percent of the REIT's direct 
cost of the services.

Attribution rules applicable to tenant ownership (sec. 1253 of the Act)

    The Act modifies the application of the rule attributing 
ownership from partners to partnerships (sec. 318(a)(3)(A)) for 
purposes of defining non-qualifying rent from related persons 
(sec. 856(d)(2)), so that attribution occurs only when a 
partner owns directly or indirectly a 25-percent or greater 
interest in the partnership. Thus, a REIT and a tenant will not 
be treated as related (and, therefore, rents paid by the tenant 
to the REIT will not be treated as non-qualifying rents) if the 
REIT's shares are owned by a partnership and a partner owning a 
directly and indirectly less-than-25-percent interest in that 
partnership also owns an interest in the tenant. The related 
tenant rule (sec. 856(d)(2)(B)) also will not be violated where 
owners of the REIT and owners of the tenant are partners in a 
partnership and either the owners of the REIT or the owners of 
the tenant are directly and indirectly less-than-25-percent 
partners in the partnership.
    In addition, the Act extends, to the definition of an 
independent contractor under section 856(d)(3), the 
modification to the attribution to partnerships of section 
318(a)(3)(A) so that attribution occurs only when a partner 
owns a 25-percent or greater interest in the partnership. Thus, 
a person providing services will not fail to be an independent 
contractor (and, therefore, amounts received or accrued by the 
REIT with respect to the property will not be treated as non-
qualifying rents) where the REIT's shares are owned by a 
partnership and a partner owning a directly and indirectly a 
less-than-25-percent interest in the partnership also owns an 
interest in a contractor. Similarly, a contractor will not fail 
to be an independent contractor where owners of the REIT and 
owners of the contractor are partners in a partnership and 
either the owners of the REIT or owners of the tenant are 
directly and indirectly less-than-25-percent partners in the 
partnership.

Credit for tax paid by REIT on retained capital gains (sec. 1254 of the 
        Act)

    The Act permits a REIT to elect to retain and pay income 
tax on net long-term capital gains it received during the tax 
year, just as a RIC is permitted under present law. Thus, if a 
REIT made this election, the REIT shareholders would include in 
their income as long-term capital gains their proportionate 
share of the undistributed long-term capital gains as 
designated by the REIT. The shareholder would be deemed to have 
paid the shareholder's share of the tax, which would be 
credited or refunded to the shareholder. Also, the basis of the 
shareholder's shares would be increased by the amount of the 
undistributed long-term capital gains (less the amount of 
capital gains tax paid by the REIT) included in the 
shareholder's long-term capital gains.

Repeal of 30-percent gross income requirement (sec. 1255 of the Act)

    The Act repeals the rule that requires less than 30 percent 
of a REIT's gross income be derived from gain from the sale or 
other disposition of stock or securities held for less than one 
year, certain real property held less than four years, and 
property that is sold or disposed of in a prohibited 
transaction.

Modification of earnings and profits for determining whether REIT has 
        earnings and profits from non-REIT year (sec. 1256 of the Act)

    The Act changes the ordering rule for purposes of the 
requirement that newly-electing REITs distribute earnings and 
profits that were accumulated in non-REIT years. Under the Act, 
distributions of accumulated earnings and profits generally are 
treated as made from the entity's earliest accumulated earnings 
and profits, rather than the most recently accumulated earnings 
and profits. These distributions are not treated as 
distributions for purposes of calculating the dividends paid 
deduction.

Treatment of foreclosure property (sec. 1257 of the Act)

    The Act lengthens the original grace period for foreclosure 
property until the last day of the third full taxable year 
following the election. The grace period also can be extended 
for an additional three years by filing a request to the IRS. A 
REIT can revoke an election to treat property as foreclosure 
property for any taxable year by filing a revocation on or 
before its due date for filing its tax return.
    In addition, the Act conforms the definition of independent 
contractor for purposes of the foreclosure property rule (sec. 
856(e)(4)(C)) to the definition of independent contractor for 
purposes of the general rules (sec. 856(d)(2)(C)).

Payments under hedging instruments (sec. 1258 of the Act)

    The Act treats income from all hedges that reduce the 
interest rate risk of REIT liabilities, not just from interest 
rate swaps and caps, as qualifying income under the 95-percent 
test. Thus, payments to a REIT under an interest rate swap, cap 
agreement, option, futures contract, forward rate agreement or 
any similar financial instrument entered into by the REIT to 
hedge its indebtedness incurred or to be incurred (and any gain 
from the sale or other disposition of these instruments) are 
treated as qualifying income for purposes of the 95-percent 
test.

Excess noncash income (sec. 1259 of the Act)

    The Act (1) expands the class of excess noncash items that 
are not subject to the distribution requirement to include 
income from the cancellation of indebtedness and (2) extends 
the treatment of original issue discount and coupon interest as 
excess noncash items to REITs that use an accrual method of 
taxation.

Prohibited transaction safe harbor (sec. 1260 of the Act)

    The Act excludes from the prohibited sales rules property 
that was involuntarily converted.

Shared appreciation mortgages (sec. 1261 of the Act)

    The Act provides that interest received on a shared 
appreciation mortgage is not subject to the tax on prohibited 
transactions where the property subject to the mortgage is sold 
within four years of the REIT's acquisition of the mortgage 
pursuant to a bankruptcy plan of the mortgagor unless the REIT 
acquired the mortgage knew or had reason to know that the 
property subject to the mortgage would be sold in a bankruptcy 
proceeding.

Wholly-owned REIT subsidiaries (sec. 1262 of the Act)

    The Act permits any corporation wholly-owned by a REIT to 
be treated as a qualified subsidiary, regardless of whether the 
corporation had always been owned by the REIT. Where the REIT 
acquired an existing corporation, any such corporation is 
treated as being liquidated as of the time of acquisition by 
the REIT and then reincorporated (thus, any of the subsidiary's 
pre-REIT built-in gain would be subject to tax under the normal 
rules of sec. 337). In addition, any pre-REIT earnings and 
profits of the subsidiary must be distributed before the end of 
the REIT's taxable year.

                             Effective Date

    The provisions are effective for taxable years beginning 
after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provisions are estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $4 million in 1998, $5 million in both 1999 
and 2000, $6 million in 2001, $7 million in both 2002 and 2003, 
$8 million in 2004, $9 million in 2005, $10 million in 2006, 
and $11 million in 2007.

   E. Repeal of the 30-percent (``Short-Short'') Test for Regulated 
 Investment Companies (sec. 1271 of the Act and sec. 851(b)(3) of the 
                                 Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A regulated investment company (``RIC'') generally is 
treated as a conduit for Federal income tax purposes. The Code 
provides conduit treatment by permitting a RIC to deduct 
dividends paid to its shareholders in computing its taxable 
income. In order to qualify for conduit treatment, the RIC must 
be a domestic corporation that, at all times during the taxable 
year, is registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 as 
a management company or as a unit investment trust, or has 
elected to be treated as a business development company under 
that Act (sec. 851(a)). In addition, a corporation must elect 
such status and must satisfy certain tests (sec. 851(b)). In 
particular, under prior law, a corporation must derive less 
than 30 percent of its gross income from the sale or 
disposition of certain investments (including stock, 
securities, options, futures, and forward contracts) held less 
than three months (the ``short-short test'') (sec. 851(b)(3)).

                           Reasons for Change

    The short-short test restricts the investment flexibility 
of RICs. The test can, for example, limit a RIC's ability to 
``hedge'' its investments (e.g., to use options to protect 
against adverse market moves).
    The test also burdens a RIC with significant recordkeeping, 
compliance, and administration costs. The RIC must keep track 
of the holding periods of assets and the relative percentages 
of short-term gain that it realizes throughout the year. The 
Congress believed that the short-short test places unnecessary 
limitations upon a RIC's activities.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The 30-percent test (or short-short test) is repealed.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after the date of enactment (after August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $17 million in 1998, $23 million in 1999, 
$27 million in 2000, $33 million in 2001, $38 million in 2002, 
$45 million in 2003, $53 million in 2004, $61 million in 2005, 
$71 million in 2006, and $82 million in 2007.

                        F. Taxpayer Protections

1. Provide reasonable cause exception for additional penalties (sec. 
        1281 of the Act and secs. 6652, 6683, and 7519 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Many penalties in the Code may be waived if the taxpayer 
establishes reasonable cause. For example, the accuracy-related 
penalty (sec. 6662) may be waived with respect to any item if 
the taxpayer establishes reasonable cause for his treatment of 
the item and that he acted in good faith (sec. 6664(c)).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that it is appropriate to provide a 
reasonable cause exception for several additional penalties 
where one does not currently exist.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that the following penalties may be waived 
if the failure is shown to be due to reasonable cause and not 
willful neglect:
    (1) the penalty for failure to make a report in connection 
with deductible employee contributions to a retirement savings 
plan (sec. 6652(g));
    (2) the penalty for failure to make a report as to certain 
small business stock (sec. 6652(k));
    (3) the penalty for failure of a foreign corporation to 
file a return of personal holding company tax (sec. 6683); and
    (4) the penalty for failure to make required payments for 
entities electing not to have the required taxable year (sec. 
7519).

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for taxable years beginning 
after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

2. Clarification of period for filing claims for refunds (sec. 1282 of 
        the Act and sec. 6512 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Code contains a series of limitations on tax refunds. 
Section 6511 of the Code provides both a limitation on the time 
period in which a claim for refund can be made (section 
6511(a)) and a limitation on the amount that can be allowed as 
a refund (section 6511(b)). Section 6511(a) provides the 
general rule that a claim for refund must be filed within 3 
years of the date of the return or 2 years of the date of 
payment of the taxes at issue, whichever is later. Section 
6511(b) limits the refund amount that can be covered: if a 
return was filed, a taxpayer can recover amounts paid within 2 
years before the claim. Section 6512(b)(3) incorporates these 
rules where taxpayers who challenge deficiency notices in Tax 
Court are found to be entitled to refunds.
    In Commissioner v. Lundy, 116 S. Ct. 647 (1996), the 
taxpayer had not filed a return, but received a notice of 
deficiency within 3 years after the date the return was due and 
challenged the proposed deficiency in Tax Court. The Supreme 
Court held that the taxpayer could not recover overpayments 
attributable to withholding during the tax year, because no 
return was filed and the 2-year ``look back'' rule applied. 
Since over withheld amounts are deemed paid as of the date the 
taxpayer's return was first due (i.e., more than 2 years before 
the notice of deficiency was issued), such overpayments could 
not be recovered. By contrast, if the same taxpayer had filed a 
return on the date the notice of deficiency was issued, and 
then claimed a refund, the 3-year ``look back'' rule would 
apply, and the taxpayer could have obtained a refund of the 
over withheld amounts.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed it appropriate to eliminate this 
disparate treatment.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act permits taxpayers who initially fail to file a 
return, but who receive a notice of deficiency and file suit to 
contest it in Tax Court during the third year after the return 
due date, to obtain a refund of excessive amounts paid within 
the 3-year period prior to the date of the deficiency notice.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to claims for refund with respect to 
taxable years ending after the date of enactment (August 5, 
1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

3. Repeal of authority to disclose whether a prospective juror has been 
        audited (sec. 1283 of the Act and sec. 6103 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In connection with a civil or criminal tax proceeding to 
which the United States is a party, the Secretary must 
disclose, upon the written request of either party to the 
lawsuit, whether an individual who is a prospective juror has 
or has not been the subject of an audit or other tax 
investigation by the Internal Revenue Service (sec. 
6103(h)(5)).

                           Reasons for Change

    This disclosure requirement, as it has been interpreted by 
several recent court decisions, has created significant 
difficulties in the civil and criminal tax litigation process. 
First, the litigation process can be substantially slowed. It 
can take the Secretary a considerable period of time to compile 
the information necessary for a response (some courts have 
required searches going back as far as 25 years). Second, 
providing early release of the list of potential jurors to 
defendants (which several recent court decisions have required, 
to permit defendants to obtain disclosure of the information 
from the Secretary) can provide an opportunity for harassment 
and intimidation of potential jurors in organized crime, drug, 
and some tax protester cases. Third, significant judicial 
resources have been expended in interpreting this procedural 
requirement that might better be spent resolving substantive 
disputes. Fourth, differing judicial interpretations of this 
provision have caused confusion. In some instances, defendants 
convicted of criminal tax offenses have obtained reversals of 
those convictions because of failures to comply fully with this 
provision.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act repeals the requirement that the Secretary 
disclose, upon the written request of either party to the 
lawsuit, whether an individual who is a prospective juror has 
or has not been the subject of an audit or other tax 
investigation by the Internal Revenue Service.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for judicial proceedings 
commenced after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no revenue effect.

4. Clarify statute of limitations for items from pass-through entities 
        (sec. 1284 of the Act and sec. 6501 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Passthrough entities (such as S corporations, partnerships, 
and certain trusts) generally are not subject to income tax on 
their taxable income. Instead, these entities file information 
returns and the entities' shareholders (or beneficial owners) 
report their pro rata share of the gross income and are liable 
for any taxes due.
    Some believe that, prior to 1993, it may have been unclear 
as to whether the statute of limitations for adjustments that 
arise from distributions from passthrough entities should be 
applied at the entity or individual level (i.e., whether the 3-
year statute of limitations for assessments runs from the time 
that the entity files its information return or from the time 
that a shareholder timely files his or her income tax return). 
In 1993, the Supreme Court held that the limitations period for 
assessing the income tax liability of an S corporation 
shareholder runs from the date the shareholder's return is 
filed (Bufferd v. Comm., 113 S. Ct. 927 (1993)).

                           Reasons for Change

    Uncertainty regarding the correct statute of limitations 
hinders the resolution of factual and legal issues and creates 
needless litigation over collateral matters.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act clarifies that the return that starts the running 
of the statute of limitations for a taxpayer is the return of 
the taxpayer and not the return of another person from whom the 
taxpayer has received an item of income, gain, loss, deduction, 
or credit.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for taxable years beginning 
after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no revenue effect.

5. Awarding of administrative costs and attorneys fees (sec. 1285 of 
        the Act and sec. 7430 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Any person who substantially prevails in any action brought 
by or against the United States in connection with the 
determination, collection, or refund of any tax, interest, or 
penalty may be awarded reasonable administrative costs incurred 
before the IRS and reasonable litigation costs incurred in 
connection with any court proceeding.
    No time limit is specified for the taxpayer to apply to the 
IRS for an award of administrative costs. In addition, no time 
limit is specified for a taxpayer to appeal to the Tax Court an 
IRS decision denying an award of administrative costs. Finally, 
the procedural rules for adjudicating a denial of 
administrative costs are unclear.

                           Reasons for Change

    The proper procedures for applying for a cost award are 
uncertain in some instances. Clarifying these procedures will 
decrease litigation over these procedural issues and will 
provide for expedited settlement of these claims.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that a taxpayer who seeks an award of 
administrative costs must apply for such costs within 90 days 
of the date on which the taxpayer was determined to be a 
prevailing party. The Act also provides that a taxpayer who 
seeks to appeal an IRS denial of an administrative cost award 
must petition the Tax Court within 90 days after the date that 
the IRS mails the denial notice.
    The Act clarifies that dispositions by the Tax Court of 
petitions relating only to administrative costs are to be 
reviewed in the same manner as other decisions of the Tax 
Court.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective with respect to costs incurred 
in civil actions or proceedings commenced after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no revenue effect.
     TITLE XIII. ESTATE, GIFT, AND TRUST SIMPLIFICATION PROVISIONS

1. Eliminate gift tax filing requirements for gifts to charities (sec. 
        1301 of the Act and sec. 6019 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A gift tax generally is imposed on lifetime transfers of 
property by gift (sec. 2501). In computing the amount of 
taxable gifts made during a calendar year, a taxpayer generally 
may deduct the amount of any gifts made to a charity (sec. 
2522). Generally, this charitable gift deduction is available 
for outright gifts to charity, as well as gifts of certain 
partial interests in property (such as a remainder interest). A 
gift of a partial interest in property must be in a prescribed 
form in order to qualify for the deduction.
    Individuals who make gifts in excess of $10,000 to any one 
donee during the calendar year generally are required to file a 
gift tax return (sec. 6019). Under prior law, this filing 
requirement applied to all gifts, whether charitable or 
noncharitable, and whether or not the gift qualified for a gift 
tax charitable deduction. Thus, under prior law, a gift tax 
return was required to be filed for gifts to charity in excess 
of $10,000, even though no gift tax was payable on the 
transfer.

                           Reasons for Change

    Because a charitable gift does not give rise to a gift tax 
liability, many donors were unaware of the requirement to file 
a gift tax return for charitable gifts in excess of $10,000. 
Failure to file a gift tax return under these circumstances 
could have exposed the donor to penalties. The Act eliminated 
this potential trap for the unwary.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that gifts to charity are not subject to 
the gift tax filing requirements of section 6019, as long as 
the donor has transferred his entire interest in the property, 
and the transfer qualifies for the gift tax charitable 
deduction under section 2522. The filing requirements for gifts 
of partial interests in property remain unchanged.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for gifts made after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

2. Clarification of waiver of certain rights of recovery (sec. 1302 of 
             the Act and secs. 2207A and 2207B of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    For estate and gift tax purposes, a marital deduction is 
allowed for qualified terminable interest property (QTIP). Such 
property generally is included in the surviving spouse's gross 
estate upon his or her death. The surviving spouse's estate is 
entitled to recover the portion of the estate tax attributable 
to inclusion of QTIP from the person receiving the property, 
unless the spouse directs otherwise by will (sec. 2207A). Under 
prior law, a will provision specifying that all taxes shall be 
paid by the estate was sufficient to waive the right of 
recovery.
    A decedent's gross estate includes the value of previously 
transferred property in which the decedent retains enjoyment or 
the right to income (sec. 2036). The estate is entitled to 
recover from the person receiving the property a portion of the 
estate tax attributable to the inclusion (sec. 2207B). Under 
prior law, this right could be waived only by a provision in 
the will (or revocable trust) specifically referring to section 
2207B.

                           Reasons for Change

    It was understood that persons utilizing standard 
testamentary language often inadvertently waived the right of 
recovery with respect to QTIP. Similarly, persons waiving a 
right to contribution were unlikely to refer to the Code 
section granting the right. Accordingly, the Congress believed 
that allowing the right of recovery (or right of contribution) 
to be waived only by specific reference would simplify the 
drafting of wills by better conforming with the testator's 
likely intent.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that the right of recovery with respect to 
QTIP is waived only to the extent that language in the 
decedent's will or revocable trust specifically so indicates 
(e.g., by a specific reference to QTIP, the QTIP trust, section 
2044, or section 2207A). Thus, a general provision specifying 
that all taxes be paid by the estate is no longer sufficient to 
waive the right of recovery.
    The Act also provides that the right of contribution for 
property over which the decedent retained enjoyment or the 
right to income is waived by a specific indication in the 
decedent's will or revocable trust, but specific reference to 
section 2207B is no longer required.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to decedents dying after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

3. Transitional rule under section 2056A (sec. 1303 of the Act and sec. 
        2056A of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A ``marital deduction'' generally is allowed for estate and 
gift tax purposes for the value of property passing to a 
spouse. The Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988 
(``TAMRA'') denied the marital deduction for property passing 
to an alien spouse outside a qualified domestic trust 
(``QDT''). An estate tax generally is imposed on corpus 
distributions from a QDT.
    TAMRA defined a QDT as a trust that, among other things, 
required all trustees to be U.S. citizens or domestic 
corporations. This provision was modified in the Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Acts of 1989 and 1990 to require that at least 
one trustee be a U.S. citizen or domestic corporation and that 
no corpus distribution be made unless such trustee has the 
right to withhold any estate tax imposed on the distribution 
(the ``withholding requirement'').

                           Reasons for Change

    Wills drafted under the TAMRA rules must be revised to 
conform with the withholding requirement, even though both the 
TAMRA rule and its successor ensure that a U.S. trustee is 
personally liable for the estate tax on a QDT. Reinstatement of 
the TAMRA rule for wills drafted in reliance upon it reduces 
the number of will revisions necessary to comply with statutory 
changes, thereby simplifying estate planning.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that certain trusts created before the 
enactment of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 are 
treated as satisfying the withholding requirement if the 
governing instruments require that all trustees be U.S. 
citizens or domestic corporations.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies as if included in the Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act of 1990.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

4. Treatment for estate tax purposes of short-term obligations held by 
        nonresident aliens (sec. 1304 of the Act and sec. 2105 of the 
        Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The United States imposes estate tax on assets of 
noncitizen nondomiciliaries that were situated in the United 
States at the time of the individual's death. Debt obligations 
of a U.S. person, the United States, a political subdivision of 
a State, or the District of Columbia are considered property 
located within the United States if held by a nonresident not a 
citizen of the United States (sec. 2014(c)).
    Special rules apply to treat certain bank deposits and debt 
instruments the income from which qualifies for the bank 
deposit interest exemption and the portfolio interest exemption 
as property from without the United States despite the fact 
that such items are obligations of a U.S. person, the United 
States, a political subdivision of a State, or the District of 
Columbia (sec. 2105(b)). Income from such items is exempt from 
U.S. income tax in the hands of the nonresident recipient 
(secs. 871(h) and 871(i)(2)(A)). The effect of these special 
rules is to exclude these items from the U.S. gross estate of a 
nonresident not a citizen of the United States. The Tax Reform 
Act of 1986 amended section 871(h) to address the interaction 
of the portfolio interest exemption and the treatment of 
certain interest received by controlled foreign corporations. 
However, because of this amendment, these special rules no 
longer covered obligations that generated short-term OID income 
despite the fact that such income was exempt from U.S. income 
tax in the hands of the nonresident recipient (sec. 
871(g)(1)(B)(i)).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the income and estate tax 
treatments of short-term OID obligations held by nonresident 
aliens should conform. A purpose of exempting short-term OID 
income derived by nonresident aliens from U.S. income tax is to 
enhance the ability of U.S. borrowers to raise funds from 
foreign lenders, and such purpose would have been hindered by 
the lack of a corresponding exemption for U.S. estate tax. 
Moreover, to the extent the interest from such an obligation is 
exempt from U.S. income tax, the inclusion of the instrument in 
the nonresident noncitizen's U.S. estate would have been a trap 
for the unwary.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that any debt obligation, the income from 
which would be eligible for the exemption for short-term OID 
under section 871(g)(1)(B)(i) if such income were received by 
the decedent on the date of his death, is treated as property 
located outside of the United States in determining the U.S. 
estate tax liability of a nonresident not a U.S. citizen. No 
inference is intended with respect to the estate tax treatment 
of such obligations under prior law.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for estates of decedents dying 
after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

5. Certain revocable trusts treated as part of estate (sec. 1305 of the 
        Act and secs. 646 and 2652(b)(1) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Both estates and revocable inter vivos trusts can function 
to settle the affairs of a decedent and distribute assets to 
heirs. In the case of revocable inter vivos trusts, the grantor 
transfers property into a trust which is revocable during his 
or her lifetime. Upon the grantor's death, the power to revoke 
ceases and the trustee then performs the settlement functions 
typically performed by the executor of an estate. While both 
estates and revocable trusts perform essentially the same 
function after the testator or grantor's death, there are a 
number of ways in which an estate and a revocable trust operate 
differently. First, there can be only one estate per decedent 
while there can be more than one revocable trust. Second, 
estates are in existence only for a reasonable period of 
administration; revocable trusts can perform the same 
settlement functions as an estate, but may continue in 
existence thereafter as testamentary trusts.
    Numerous differences presently exist between the income tax 
treatment of estates and revocable trusts, including: (1) 
estates are allowed a charitable deduction for amounts 
permanently set aside for charitable purposes while post death 
revocable trusts are allowed a charitable deduction only for 
amounts paid to charities; (2) the active participation 
requirement of the passive loss rules under section 469 is 
waived in the case of estates (but not revocable trusts) for 
two years after the owner's death; and (3) estates (but not 
revocable trusts) can qualify for section 194 amortization of 
reforestation expenditures.

                           Reasons for Change

    The use of revocable trusts may offer certain non-tax 
advantages for estate planning as compared to a traditional 
estate plan. There are several differences, however, between 
the Federal tax treatment of revocable trusts and an estate. 
These differences may have discouraged individuals from 
utilizing revocable trusts for estate planning where they might 
otherwise be appropriate or efficient. Accordingly, in an 
effort to minimize these tax differences, the Congress believed 
it was appropriate to allow an election to treat a revocable 
trust as part of the decedent's estate during a reasonable 
period of administration.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides an irrevocable election to treat a 
qualified revocable trust as part of the decedent's estate for 
Federal income tax purposes. This elective treatment is 
effective for taxable years ending after the date of the 
decedent's death and before the date which is two years after 
his or her death (if no estate tax return is required) or the 
date which is six months after the final determination of 
estate tax liability (if an estate tax return is required). The 
election must be made by both the executor of the decedent's 
estate (if any) and the trustee of the revocable trust no later 
than the time required for filing the income tax return of the 
estate for its first taxable year, taking into account any 
extensions. A conforming change is made to section 2652(b) for 
generation-skipping transfer tax purposes.
    For this purpose, a qualified revocable trust is any trust 
(or portion thereof) which was treated under section 676 as 
owned by the decedent with respect to whom the election is 
being made, by reason of a power in the grantor (i.e., trusts 
that are treated as owned by the decedent solely by reason of a 
power in a nonadverse party would not qualify).
    The separate share rule (described below) generally will 
apply when a qualified revocable trust is treated as part of 
the decedent's estate.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to decedents dying after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $3 million per year for the years 1998 
through 2007.

6. Distributions during first 65 days of taxable year of estate (sec. 
        1306 of the Act and sec. 663(b) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In general, trusts and estates are treated as conduits for 
Federal income tax purposes; income received by a trust or 
estate that is distributed to a beneficiary in the trust or 
estate's taxable year ``ending with or within'' the taxable 
year of the beneficiary is taxable to the beneficiary in that 
year; income that is retained by the trust or estate is 
initially taxable to the trust or estate. In the case of 
distributions of previously accumulated income by trusts (but 
not estates), there may be additional tax under the so-called 
``throwback'' rules if the beneficiary to whom the 
distributions were made has marginal rates higher than those of 
the trust. Under the ``65-day rule,'' a trust may elect to 
treat distributions paid within 65 days after the close of its 
taxable year as paid on the last day of its taxable year. Under 
prior law, the 65-day rule was not applicable to estates.

                           Reasons for Change

    In order to minimize the tax differences between estates 
and revocable trusts, the Congress believed that the 65-day 
rule should be allowed to estates as well as to trusts.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act extends application of the 65-day rule to 
distributions by estates. Thus, an executor can elect to treat 
distributions paid by the estate within 65 days after the close 
of the estate's taxable year as having been paid on the last 
day of such taxable year.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to taxable years beginning after the 
date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

7. Separate share rules available to estates (sec. 1307 of the Act and 
        sec. 663(c) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Trusts with more than one beneficiary must use the 
``separate share'' rule in order to provide different tax 
treatment of distributions to different beneficiaries to 
reflect the income earned by different shares of the trust's 
corpus.\306\ Treasury regulations provide that ``[t]he 
application of the separate share rule . . . will generally 
depend upon whether distributions of the trust are to be made 
in substantially the same manner as if separate trusts had been 
created. . . . Separate share treatment will not be applied to 
a trust or portion of a trust subject to a power to distribute, 
apportion, or accumulate income or distribute corpus to or for 
the use of one or more beneficiaries within a group or class of 
beneficiaries, unless the payment of income, accumulated 
income, or corpus of a share of one beneficiary cannot affect 
the proportionate share of income, accumulated income, or 
corpus of any shares of the other beneficiaries, or unless 
substantially proper adjustment must thereafter be made under 
the governing instrument so that substantially separate and 
independent shares exist.'' Treas. Reg. sec. 1.663(c)-3. Under 
prior law, the separate share rule did not apply to estates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \306\ Application of the separate share rule is not elective; it is 
mandatory if there are separate shares in the trust.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress understood that estates typically do not have 
separate shares. Nonetheless, where separate shares do exist in 
an estate, the inapplicability of the separate share rule to 
estates may result in one beneficiary or class of beneficiaries 
being taxed on income payable to, or accruing to, a separate 
beneficiary or class of beneficiaries. Accordingly, the 
Congress believed that a more equitable taxation of an estate 
and its beneficiaries would be achieved with the application of 
the separate share rule to an estate where, under the 
provisions of the decedent's will or applicable local law, 
there are separate shares in the estate.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act extends the application of the separate share rule 
to estates. There are separate shares in an estate when the 
governing instrument of the estate (e.g., the will and 
applicable local law) creates separate economic interests in 
one beneficiary or class of beneficiaries such that the 
economic interests of those beneficiaries (e.g., rights to 
income or gains from specified items of property) are not 
affected by economic interests accruing to another separate 
beneficiary or class of beneficiaries. For example, a separate 
share in an estate would exist where the decedent's will 
provides that all of the shares of a closely-held corporation 
are devised to one beneficiary and that any dividends paid to 
the estate by that corporation should be paid only to that 
beneficiary and any such dividends would not affect any other 
amounts which that beneficiary would receive under the will. As 
in the case of trusts, the application of the separate share 
rule is mandatory where separate shares exist.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to decedents dying after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

8. Executor of estate and beneficiaries treated as related persons for 
        disallowance of losses (sec. 1308 of the Act and secs. 267(b) 
        and 1239(b) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Section 267 disallows a deduction for any loss on the sale 
of an asset to a person related to the taxpayer. For the 
purposes of section 267, the following parties are related 
persons: (1) a trust and the trust's grantor, (2) two trusts 
with the same grantor, (3) a trust and a beneficiary of the 
trust, (4) a trust and a beneficiary of another trust, if both 
trusts have the same grantor, and (5) a trust and a corporation 
the stock of which is more than 50 percent owned by the trust 
or the trust's grantor.
    Section 1239 disallows capital gain treatment on the sale 
of depreciable property to a related person. For purposes of 
section 1239, a trust and any beneficiary of the trust are 
treated as related persons, unless the beneficiary's interest 
is a remote contingent interest.
    Under prior law, neither section 267 nor section 1239 
treated an estate and a beneficiary of the estate as related 
persons.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the disallowance rules under 
sections 267 and 1239 with respect to transactions between 
related parties should apply to an estate and a beneficiary of 
that estate for the same reasons that such rules apply to a 
trust and a beneficiary of that trust.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, an estate and a beneficiary of that estate 
are treated as related persons for purposes of sections 267 and 
1239, except in the case of a sale or exchange in satisfaction 
of a pecuniary bequest.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to taxable years beginning after the 
date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

9. Simplified taxation of earnings of pre-need funeral trusts (sec. 
        1309 of the Act and sec. 684 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A pre-need funeral trust is an arrangement where an 
individual purchases funeral services or merchandise from a 
funeral home for the benefit of a specified person in advance 
of that person's death. (The beneficiary may be either the 
purchaser or another person.) The purchaser enters into a 
contract with the provider of such services or merchandise 
whereby the purchaser selects the services or merchandise to be 
provided upon the death of the beneficiary, and agrees to pay 
for them in advance of the beneficiary's death. Such amounts 
(or a portion thereof) are held in trust during the 
beneficiary's lifetime and are paid to the seller upon the 
beneficiary's death.
    Under prior law, pre-need funeral trusts generally were 
treated as grantor trusts, and the annual income earned by such 
trusts was taxed to the purchaser/grantor of the trust. Rev. 
Rul. 87-127. Any amount received from the trust by the seller 
(as payment for services or merchandise) is includible in the 
gross income of the seller.

                           Reasons for Change

    To the extent that pre-need funeral trusts were treated as 
grantor trusts under prior law, numerous individual taxpayers 
were required to account for the earnings of such trusts on 
their tax returns, even though the earnings with respect to any 
one taxpayer may have been small. The Congress believed that 
this recordkeeping burden on individuals could be eased, and 
that compliance with the tax laws would be improved, if such 
trusts instead were taxed at the entity level, with one 
simplified annual return filed by the trustee reporting the 
aggregate income from all such trusts administered by the 
trustee.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act allows the trustee of a pre-need funeral trust to 
elect special tax treatment for such a trust, to the extent the 
trust would otherwise be treated as a grantor trust. A 
qualified funeral trust is defined as one which meets the 
following requirements: (1) the trust arises as the result of a 
contract with a person engaged in the trade or business of 
providing funeral or burial services or merchandise; (2) the 
only beneficiaries of the trust are individuals with respect to 
whom such services or merchandise are to be provided at their 
death; (3) the only contributions to the trust are 
contributions by or for the benefit of the trust beneficiaries; 
(4) the trust's only purpose is to hold and invest funds that 
will be used to make payments for funeral or burial services or 
merchandise for the trust beneficiaries; and (5) the trust has 
not accepted contributions totaling more than $7,000 by or for 
the benefit of any individual. For this purpose, 
``contributions'' include all amounts transferred to the trust, 
regardless of how denominated in the contract. Contributions do 
not, however, include income or gain earned with respect to 
property in the trust. For purposes of applying the $7,000 
limit, if a purchaser has more than one contract with a single 
trustee (or related trustees), all such trusts are treated as 
one trust. Similarly, if the Secretary of the Treasury 
determines that a purchaser has entered into separate contracts 
with unrelated trustees to avoid the $7,000 limit described 
above, the Secretary may require that such trusts be treated as 
one trust. For contracts entered into after 1998, the $7,000 
limit is indexed annually for inflation.
    The trustee's election to have this provision apply to a 
qualified funeral trust is to be made separately with respect 
to each purchaser's trust. It is anticipated that the 
Department of the Treasury will issue prompt guidance with 
respect to the simplified reporting requirements so that if the 
election is made, a single annual trust return may be filed by 
the trustee, separately listing the amount of income earned 
with respect to each purchaser. If the election is made, the 
trust is not treated as a grantor trust and the amount of tax 
paid with respect to each purchaser's trust is determined in 
accordance with the income tax rate schedule generally 
applicable to estates and trusts (Code sec. 1(e)), but no 
deduction is allowed under section 642(b). The tax on the 
annual earnings of the trust is payable by the trustee.
    As under prior law, amounts received from the trust by the 
seller are treated as payments for services and merchandise and 
are includible in the gross income of the seller. No gain or 
loss is recognized to the purchaser of the trust for payments 
from the trust to the purchaser upon cancellation of the 
contract, and the purchaser takes a carryover basis in any 
assets received from the trust upon cancellation.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years ending after 
the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $2 million per year for the years 1998 
through 2007.

10. Adjustments for gifts within 3 years of decedent's death (sec. 1310 
        of the Act and secs. 2035 and 2038 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The first $10,000 of gifts of present interests to each 
donee during any one calendar year are excluded from Federal 
gift tax.
    The value of the gross estate includes the value of any 
previously transferred property if the decedent retained the 
power to revoke the transfer (sec. 2038). The gross estate also 
includes the value of any property with respect to which such 
power is relinquished during the three years before death (sec. 
2035). There has been significant litigation as to whether 
these rules require that certain transfers made from a 
revocable trust within three years of death be includible in 
the gross estate. See, e.g., Jalkut Estate v. Commissioner, 96 
T.C. 675 (1991) (transfers from revocable trust includible in 
gross estate); McNeely v. Commissioner, 16 F.3d 303 (8th Cir. 
1994) (transfers from revocable trust not includible in gross 
estate); Kisling v. Commissioner, 32 F.3d 1222 (8th Cir. 1994) 
(acq.) (transfers from revocable trust not includible in gross 
estate).

                           Reasons for Change

    The inclusion of certain property transferred during the 
three years before death is directed at transfers that would 
otherwise reduce the amount subject to estate tax by more than 
the amount subject to gift tax, disregarding appreciation 
between the times of gift and death. Because all amounts 
transferred from a revocable trust are subject to the gift tax, 
the Congress believed that inclusion of such amounts was 
unnecessary where the transferor has retained no power over the 
property transferred out of the trust. The Congress believed 
that clarifying these rules statutorily would lend certainty to 
these rules.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act codifies the rule set forth in the McNeely and 
Kisling cases to provide that a transfer from a revocable trust 
(i.e., a trust described under section 676) is treated as if 
made directly by the grantor. Thus, an annual exclusion gift 
from such a trust is not included in the gross estate. The 
provision is not intended to modify the result reached in the 
Kisling case.
    The provision also revises section 2035 to improve its 
clarity.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to decedents dying after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.

11. Clarify relationship between community property rights and 
        retirement benefits (sec. 1311 of the Act and sec. 
        2056(b)(7)(C) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

Community property

    Under State community property laws, each spouse owns an 
undivided one-half interest in each community property asset. 
In community property jurisdictions, a nonparticipant spouse 
may be treated as having a vested community property interest 
in either his or her spouse's qualified plan, individual 
retirement arrangement (``IRA''), or simplified employee 
pension (``SEP'') plan.

Transfer tax treatment of qualified plans

    In the Retirement Equity Act of 1984 (``REA''), qualified 
retirement plans were required to provide automatic survivor 
benefits (1) in the case of a participant who retires under the 
plan, in the form of a qualified joint and survivor annuity, 
and (2) in the case of a vested participant who dies before the 
annuity starting date and who has a surviving spouse, in the 
form of a preretirement survivor annuity. A participant 
generally is permitted to waive such annuities, provided he or 
she obtains the written consent of his or her spouse.
    The Tax Reform Act of 1986 (``1986 Act'') repealed the 
estate tax exclusion, formerly contained in sections 2039(c) 
and 2039(d), for certain interests in qualified plans owned by 
a nonparticipant spouse attributable to community property laws 
and made certain other changes to conform the transfer tax 
treatment of qualified and nonqualified plans.
    As a result of these changes made by REA and the 1986 Act, 
the transfer tax treatment of married couples residing in a 
community property State was unclear where either spouse was 
covered by a qualified plan.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that survivorship interests in 
annuities in community property States should be accorded 
similar treatment to the tax treatment of interests in such 
annuities in non-community property States. Accordingly, the 
Act clarifies that the transfer at death of a survivorship 
interest in an annuity to a surviving spouse will be a 
deductible marital transfer under the QTIP rules regardless of 
whether the decedent's annuity interest arose out of his or her 
employment or arose under community property laws by reason of 
the employment of his or her spouse.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act clarifies that the marital deduction is available 
with respect to a nonparticipant spouse's interest in an 
annuity attributable to community property laws where he or she 
predeceases the participant spouse. Under the provision, the 
nonparticipant spouse's interest in an annuity arising under 
the community property laws of a State that passes to the 
surviving participant spouse may qualify for treatment as QTIP 
under section 2056(b)(7).
    The provision is not intended to create an inference 
regarding the treatment under prior law of a transfer to a 
surviving spouse of the decedent spouse's interest in an 
annuity arising under community property laws. The provision is 
not intended to modify the result of the Supreme Court's 
decision in Boggs v. Boggs, 117 S.Ct. 1754 (1997).

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to decedents dying, or waivers, 
transfers and disclaimers made, after the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

12. Treatment under qualified domestic trust rules of forms of 
        ownership which are not trusts (sec. 1312 of the Act and sec. 
        2056A(c) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A marital deduction generally is allowed for estate and 
gift tax purposes for the value of property passing to a 
spouse. The marital deduction is not available for property 
passing to an alien spouse outside a qualified domestic trust 
(``QDT''). An estate tax generally is imposed on corpus 
distributions from a QDT.
    Trusts are not permitted in some countries (e.g., many 
civil law countries).\307\ As a result, it was not possible 
under prior law to create a QDT in those countries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \307\ Note that in some civil law States (e.g., Louisiana), an 
entity similar to a trust, called a usufruct, exists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The estate of a decedent with a nonresident spouse should 
not be precluded from qualifying for the marital deduction in 
situations where the use of a trust is prohibited by another 
country. Accordingly, the Congress believed it was appropriate 
to grant regulatory authority to allow qualification for the 
marital deduction in such situations where the Treasury 
Department determines that another similar arrangement allows 
the U.S. to retain jurisdiction and provides adequate security 
for the payment of U.S. transfer taxes on subsequent transfers 
by the surviving spouse of the property transferred by the 
decedent.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides the Treasury Department with regulatory 
authority to treat as trusts legal arrangements that have 
substantially the same effect as a trust. It is anticipated 
that such regulations, if any, would only permit a marital 
deduction with respect to non-trust arrangements under which 
the U.S. would retain jurisdiction and adequate security to 
impose U.S. transfer tax on transfers by the surviving spouse 
of the property transferred by the decedent. Possible 
arrangements could include the adoption of a bilateral treaty 
that provides for the collection of U.S. transfer tax from the 
noncitizen surviving spouse or a closing agreement process 
under which the surviving spouse waives treaty benefits, allows 
the U.S. to retain taxing jurisdiction and provides adequate 
security with respect to such transfer taxes.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to decedents dying after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

13. Opportunity to correct certain failures under section 2032A (sec. 
        1313 of the Act and sec. 2032A of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    For estate tax purposes, an executor may elect to value 
certain real property used in farming or other closely held 
business operations at its current use value rather than its 
highest and best use (sec. 2032A). A written agreement signed 
by each person with an interest in the property must be filed 
with the election.
    In 1984, section 2032A was amended to provide that if an 
executor makes a timely election that substantially complies 
with Treasury regulations, but fails to provide all required 
information or the signatures of all persons required to enter 
into the agreement, the executor may supply the missing 
information within a reasonable period of time (not exceeding 
90 days) after notification by the Treasury Department.
    Treasury regulations require that a notice of election and 
certain information be filed with the Federal estate tax return 
(Treas. Reg. sec. 20.2032A-8). The administrative policy of the 
Treasury Department was to disallow current use valuation 
elections unless the required information was supplied.

                           Reasons for Change

    It was understood that executors commonly fail to include 
with the filed estate tax return a recapture agreement signed 
by all persons with an interest in the property or all 
information required by Treasury regulations. The Congress 
believed that allowing such signatures or information to be 
supplied later would be consistent with the legislative intent 
of section 2032A and would ease return filing.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act extends the procedures allowing subsequent 
submission of information to any executor who makes the 
election and submits the recapture agreement, without regard to 
compliance with the Treasury regulations. Thus, the Act allows 
the current use valuation election if the executor supplies the 
required information within a reasonable period of time (not 
exceeding 90 days) after notification by the IRS. During that 
time period, the provision also allows the addition of 
signatures to a previously filed agreement.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to decedents dying after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

   14. Authority to waive requirement of U.S. trustee for qualified 
 domestic trusts (sec. 1314 of the Act and sec. 2056A(a)(1)(A) of the 
                                 Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In general, in order for a trust to be a QDT, a U.S. 
trustee must have the power to approve all corpus distributions 
from the trust. In some countries, trusts cannot have any U.S. 
trustees. As a result, trusts established in those countries 
could not qualify as a QDT under prior law.

                           Reasons for Change

    The estate of a decedent with a nonresident spouse should 
not be precluded from qualifying for the marital deduction in 
situations where the use of a U.S. trustee is prohibited by 
another country. Accordingly, the Congress believed it was 
appropriate to grant regulatory authority to allow 
qualification for the marital deduction in such situations 
where the Treasury Department determines that the U.S. can 
retain jurisdiction and other adequate security has been 
provided for the payment of U.S. transfer taxes on subsequent 
transfers by the surviving spouse of the property transferred 
by the decedent.

                        Explanation of Provision

    In order to permit the establishment of a QDT in those 
situations where a country prohibits a trust from having a U.S. 
trustee, the Act provides the Treasury Department with 
regulatory authority to waive the requirement that a QDT have a 
U.S. trustee. It is anticipated that such regulations, if any, 
provide an alternative mechanism under which the U.S. would 
retain jurisdiction and adequate security to impose U.S. 
transfer tax on transfers by the surviving spouse of the 
property transferred by the decedent.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to decedents dying after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.
       TITLE XIV. EXCISE TAX AND OTHER SIMPLIFICATION PROVISIONS

                A. Excise Tax Simplification Provisions

1. Increase de minimis limit for after-market alterations subject to 
        heavy truck and luxury automobile excise taxes (sec. 1401 of 
        the Act and secs. 4001 and 4051 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    An excise tax is imposed on retail sales of truck chassis 
and truck bodies suitable for use in a vehicle with a gross 
vehicle weight of over 33,000 pounds. The tax is equal to 12 
percent of the retail sales price. An excise tax also is 
imposed on retail sales of luxury automobiles. The tax 
currently is equal to 8 percent of the amount by which the 
retail sales price exceeds an inflation-adjusted $30,000 base. 
(The rate is reduced by 1 percentage point per year through 
2002, and the tax is not imposed after 2002.) Anti-abuse rules 
prevent the avoidance of these taxes through separate purchases 
of major component parts. With certain exceptions, tax at the 
rate applicable to the vehicle is imposed on the subsequent 
installation of parts and accessories within six months after 
purchase of a taxable vehicle. The exceptions include a de 
minimis exception for parts and accessories with an aggregate 
price that does not exceed $200 (or such other amount as 
Treasury may by regulation prescribe).

                           Reasons for Change

    Retailers generally are responsible for taxes on truck 
chassis and bodies and luxury automobiles. In the case of a 
subsequent installation, however, the owner or operator of the 
vehicle is responsible for paying the tax attributable to the 
installation and the installer is secondarily liable. 
Increasing the de minimis amount should significantly reduce 
the number of return filers and relieve many persons from the 
administrative burden of filing an excise tax return reporting 
a very small amount of tax.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The tax on subsequent installation of parts and accessories 
does not apply to parts and accessories with an aggregate price 
that does not exceed $1,000.

                             Effective Date

    The increase in the threshold for taxing after-market 
additions under the heavy truck and luxury car excise taxes is 
effective for installations on vehicles sold after the date of 
the Act's enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

2. Modify treatment of tires under the heavy highway vehicle retail 
        excise tax (sec. 1402 of the Act and sec. 4052 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A 12-percent retail excise tax is imposed on certain heavy 
highway trucks and trailers, and on highway tractors. A 
separate manufacturers' excise tax is imposed on tires weighing 
more than 40 pounds. This tire tax is imposed as a fixed dollar 
amount which varies based on the weight of the tire. Because 
tires are taxed separately, the value of tires installed on a 
highway vehicle was excluded from the 12-percent excise tax on 
heavy highway vehicles under prior law. The determination of 
value was factual and gave rise to numerous tax audit 
challenges.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that allowing a credit for the tire 
tax actually paid on truck tires would simplify the application 
of the retail truck tax.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The prior-law exclusion of the value of tires installed on 
a taxable highway vehicle is repealed. Instead, a credit for 
the amount of manufacturers' excise tax actually paid on the 
tires is allowed.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for sales after December 31, 
1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $66 million in 1998, $94 million in 1999, 
$96 million in 2000, $97 million in 2001, $99 million in 2002, 
$101 million in 2003, $102 million in 2004, $105 million in 
2005, $108 million in 2006, and $110 million in 2007.

3. Simplification of excise taxes on distilled spirits, wine, and beer 
        (secs. 1411-1422 of the Act and secs. 5008, 5053, 5055, 5115, 
        5175, and 5207, and new secs. 5222 and 5418 of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Imported distilled spirits returned to plant.--Excise tax 
that has been paid on domestic distilled spirits is credited or 
refunded if the spirits are later returned to bonded premises. 
Under prior law, tax was imposed on imported bottled spirits 
when they are withdrawn from customs custody, but the tax is 
not refunded or credited if the spirits are later returned to 
bonded premises.
    Cancellation of export bonds.--An exporter that withdraws 
distilled spirits from bonded warehouses for export or 
transportation to a customs bonded warehouse without the 
payment of tax must furnish a bond to cover the withdrawal. 
Under prior law, the required bonds were canceled ``on the 
submission of such evidence, records, and certification 
indicating exportation as the Secretary may by regulations 
prescribe.''
    Location of records of distilled spirits plant.--
Proprietors of distilled spirits plants were required to 
maintain records and reports relating to their production, 
storage, denaturation, and processing activities on the 
premises where the operations covered by the record are carried 
on.
    Transfers from brewery to distilled spirits plant.--A 
distilled spirits plant could receive on its bonded premises 
beer to be used in the production of distilled spirits only if 
the beer was produced on contiguous brewery premises.
    Sign not required for wholesale dealers.--Wholesale liquor 
dealers were required to post a sign identifying the firm as 
such. Failure to do so was subject to a penalty.
    Refund on returns of merchantable wine.--Excise tax paid on 
domestic wine that was returned to bond as unmerchantable was 
refunded or credited, and the wine was once again treated as 
wine in bond on the premises of a bonded wine cellar.
    Increased sugar limits for certain wine.--Natural wines 
could be sweetened to correct high acid content. For most 
wines, however, sugar could not constitute more than 35 percent 
(by volume) of the combined sugar and juice used to produce the 
wine. Up to 60 percent sugar could be used in wine made from 
loganberries, currants, and gooseberries. If the amount of 
sugar used exceeded the applicable limitation, the wine was 
required to be labeled ``substandard.''
    Beer withdrawn for embassy use.--Imported beer to be used 
for the family and official use of representatives of foreign 
governments or public international organizations may be 
withdrawn from customs bonded warehouses without payment of 
excise tax. Under prior law, no similar exemption applied to 
domestic beer withdrawn from a brewery or entered into a bonded 
customs warehouse for the same authorized use.
    Beer withdrawn for destruction.--Removals of beer from a 
brewery are exempt from tax if the removal is for export, 
because the beer is unfit for beverage use, for laboratory 
analysis, research, development and testing, for the brewer's 
personal or family use, or as supplies for certain vessels and 
aircraft.
    Drawback on exported beer.--Under prior law, a domestic 
producer that exports beer could recover the tax (receive a 
``drawback'') found to have been paid on the exported beer upon 
the ``submission of such evidence, records and certificates 
indicating exportation'' required by regulations.
    Imported beer transferred in bulk to brewery and imported 
wine transferred in bulk to wineries.--Imported beer and wine 
were subject to tax when removed from customs custody.

                           Reasons for Change

    Until 1980, the method of collecting alcohol excise taxes 
required the regular presence of Treasury Department inspectors 
at alcohol production facilities. In 1980, the method of 
collecting tax was changed to a bonded premises system under 
which examinations and collection procedures are similar to 
those used in connection with other Federal excise taxes.
    A number of reporting and recordkeeping requirements need 
to be modified to conform to the current collection system. The 
Congress determined that appropriate modification will allow 
the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms to administer 
alcohol excise taxes more efficiently and relieve taxpayers of 
unnecessary paperwork burdens.
    The prior-law rules under which the Code permitted tax-free 
removals of alcoholic beverages (or allowed a credit or refund 
of tax on a return to bonded premises) resulted in 
inappropriate disparities in the treatment of different types 
of alcoholic beverages. In addition, these rules unduly limited 
available options for complying with environmental and other 
laws that regulate the destruction and disposition of alcoholic 
beverages. Under the bonded premises system, these rules can be 
liberalized without jeopardizing the collection of tax 
revenues.
    Other provisions of prior law (i.e., the sign requirement 
and the sugar limits for certain wine) were determined to be 
outdated and thus appropriately repealed or revised.

                       Explanation of Provisions

    Imported distilled spirits returned to plant.--Refunds or 
credits of the tax are available for imported bottled spirits 
that are returned to distilled spirits plants.
    Cancellation of export bonds.--The certification 
requirements are relaxed to allow the bonds to be canceled if 
there is such proof of exportation as the Secretary may 
require.
    Location of records of distilled spirits plant.--Records 
and reports are permitted to be maintained elsewhere other than 
on the plant premises.
    Transfers from brewery to distilled spirits plant.--Beer 
may be brought from any brewery for use in the production of 
spirits. Such beer is exempt from excise tax, subject to 
Treasury Department regulations.
    Sign not required for wholesale dealers.--The requirement 
that a sign be posted is repealed.
    Refund on returns of merchantable wine.--A refund or credit 
is available in the case of all domestic wine returned to bond, 
whether or not unmerchantable.
    Increased sugar limits for certain wine.--Up to 60 percent 
sugar is permitted in any wine made from juice, such as 
cranberry or plum juice, with an acid content of 20 or more 
parts per thousand.
    Beer withdrawn for embassy use.--Subject to the Treasury 
Department's regulatory authority, an exemption similar to that 
currently available for imported beer is provided for domestic 
beer.
    Beer withdrawn for destruction.--An exemption from tax is 
added for removals for destruction, subject to Treasury 
regulations.
    Drawback on exported beer.--The certification requirement 
is relaxed to allow a drawback of tax paid if there is such 
proof of exportation as the Secretary may by regulations 
require.
    Imported beer transferred in bulk to brewery and imported 
wine transferred in bulk to wineries.--Subject to Treasury 
Department regulations, beer and wine imported in bulk may be 
withdrawn from customs custody and transferred in bulk to a 
brewery (beer) or a winery (wine) without payment of tax. The 
proprietor of the brewery to which the beer is transferred or 
of the winery to which the wine is transferred is liable for 
the tax imposed on beer or wine withdrawn from customs custody 
and the importer is relieved of liability.

                             Effective Date

    The provision to repeal the requirement that wholesale 
liquor dealers post a sign outside their place of business 
takes effect on the date of enactment. The other provisions 
take effect on the first day of the calendar quarter that 
begins at least 180 days after the date of enactment.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provisions are estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

4. Authority for Internal Revenue Service to grant exemptions from 
        excise tax registration requirements (sec. 1431 of the Act and 
        sec. 4222 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Code exempts certain types of sales (e.g., sales for 
use in further manufacture, sales for export, and sales for use 
by a State or local government or a nonprofit educational 
organization) from certain excise taxes imposed on 
manufacturers and retailers. These exemptions generally apply 
only if the seller, the purchaser, and any person to whom the 
article is resold by the purchaser (the second purchaser) are 
registered with the Internal Revenue Service. The IRS can waive 
the registration requirement for the purchaser and second 
purchaser in some but not all cases.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that allowing the Internal Revenue 
Service to waive the registration requirement for purchasers 
and second purchasers in all cases would permit more efficient 
administration of the exemptions and reduce paperwork burdens 
on taxpayers.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The IRS is authorized to waive the registration requirement 
for purchasers and second purchasers in all cases.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to sales made pursuant to waivers 
issued after the date of enactment.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.

5. Repeal of expired excise tax provisions (sec. 1432 of the Act and 
        secs. 4051, 4495-4498, and 4681-4682 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Code included a provision relating to a temporary 
reduction in the tax on piggyback trailers sold before July 18, 
1985, and provisions relating to the tax on the removal of hard 
minerals from the deep seabed before June 28, 1990.
    An excise tax is imposed on the sale or use by the 
manufacturer or importer of certain ozone-depleting chemicals 
(sec. 4681). The amount of the tax generally is determined by 
multiplying the base tax amount applicable for the calendar 
year by an ozone-depleting factor assigned to each taxable 
chemical. The base tax amount was $5.80 per pound in 1996 and 
will increase by 45 cents per pound per year thereafter. The 
Code contains provisions for special rates of tax applicable to 
years before 1996 (e.g., sec. 4282(g)(1), (2), (3), and (5)).

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the elimination of out-of-date, 
``deadwood'' provisions will simplify the Code by removing 
unneeded Code sections.

                        Explanation of Provision

    These provisions are repealed, as deadwood.

                             Effective Date

    The provisions were effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    These provisions are estimated to have no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.

6. Modifications to excise tax on certain arrows (sec. 1433 of the Act 
        and sec. 4161 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    An 11-percent manufacturer's excise tax is imposed on bows 
having a draw weight of 10 pounds or more, and under prior law 
on arrows that either were 18 inches or more in length or were 
suitable for use with a taxable bow. The prior-law tax was 
imposed on the manufacturer's sales price of the completed 
arrow.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress determined that imposing the excise tax on the 
component parts of the arrow before they are shipped to the 
assembler of the arrow will improve compliance with, and 
collection of, the tax by reducing the potential number of tax 
collection points.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, the prior-law excise tax on arrows is 
replaced with a manufacturers' excise tax on the four component 
parts of the arrow: shafts, points, nocks, and vanes. The tax 
rate is increased to 12.4 percent of the sale price of each of 
these four components to offset the reduction in aggregate 
value subjected to tax compared to present-law valuation of the 
completed arrow.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for arrow components sold after 
September 30, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

7. Modifications to heavy highway vehicle retail excise tax (sec. 1434 
        of the Act and sec. 4051 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A 12-percent retail excise tax is imposed on certain heavy 
highway trucks and trailers, and on highway tractors. Small 
trucks (those with a gross vehicle weight not over 33,000 
pounds) and lighter trailers (those with a gross vehicle weight 
not over 26,000 pounds) are exempt from the tax. The tax 
applies to the first retail sale of a new or remanufactured 
vehicle. The determination under present law of whether a 
particular modification to an existing vehicle constitutes 
remanufacture (taxable) or a repair (nontaxable) is factual and 
generally is based on whether the transportation function of 
the vehicle is changed, the vehicle was wrecked or, in the case 
of worn vehicles, whether the cost of the modification exceeds 
75 percent of the value of the modified vehicle.
    No tax is imposed on trucks, tractors, and trailers when 
they are sold for resale or long-term lease, if the purchaser 
is registered with the Treasury Department. In such cases, 
purchasers are liable for the tax when the vehicle is sold or 
leased. The tax is based on the sales price in the transaction 
to which it applies.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the 75-percent-of value 
threshold should apply in determining whether repairs to a 
wrecked vehicle constitute remanufacture, and that a 
certification requirement for resales of trucks, tractors, and 
trailers will simplify administration of the tax.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act makes two changes to the heavy vehicle excise tax:
    (1) The 75-percent-of-value threshold applies in 
determining whether repairs to a wrecked vehicle constitute 
remanufacture; and
    (2) The registration requirement currently applicable to 
certain sales of trucks, tractors, and trailers for resale is 
replaced with a certification requirement.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $5 million in 1998, $8 million per year in 
1999, 2000, and 2001, $9 million per year in 2002 and 2003, $10 
million per year in 2004 and 2005, and $11 million per year in 
2006 and 2007.

8. Treatment of skydiving flights as noncommercial aviation (sec. 1435 
        of the Act and sec. 4081 and 4261 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under prior law, commercial passenger aviation, or air 
transportation for which a fare was charged, was subject to a 
10-percent ad valorem excise tax for the Airport and Airway 
Trust Fund.\308\ Noncommercial aviation, or air transportation 
which is not ``for hire'' is subject to a fuels tax for the 
Trust Fund. In the case of skydiving flights, questions arose 
under prior law as to when the flight was commercial aviation 
subject to the ticket tax and when it was noncommercial 
aviation subject to the fuels tax. In general, if instruction 
was offered, the flight was noncommercial aviation. Otherwise, 
the flight was treated as commercial aviation. Many skydiving 
flights carry both persons receiving instruction and others not 
receiving instruction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \308\ The Act, in a separate provision (sec. 1031), modified the 
tax on commercial aviation and extended all aviation excise taxes for 
10 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the tax treatment of skydiving 
flights as commercial or noncommercial needed to be clarified.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act specifies that flights which are exclusively 
dedicated to skydiving are taxed as noncommercial aviation 
flights, regardless of whether instruction is offered to any of 
the passengers.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for flights beginning after 
September 30, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

9. Eliminate double taxation of certain aviation fuels sold to 
        producers by ``fixed base operators'' (sec. 1436 of the Act and 
        sec. 4091 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Code section 4091 imposes a tax on the sale of aviation 
fuel by any producer (defined to include a wholesale 
distributor). Fuel sold at many rural airports is sold by 
retail dealers who do not qualify as wholesale distributors. 
This fuel is purchased by the retailers tax-paid. In certain 
instances, fuel which has been purchased tax-paid by a retailer 
will be re-sold to a producer, e.g., to enable the producer to 
serve one of its customers at the airport. When this fuel is 
resold at retail by the producer, a second tax may be imposed. 
Under prior law, the Code contained no provision allowing a 
refund of the first tax in such cases.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that permitting a producer to obtain 
refund of tax previously paid on aviation fuel that it buys 
will improve the fairness of the tax collection for such fuel.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act permits a producer to obtain a refund of tax 
previously paid on aviation fuel that the producer buys.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective for fuel acquired by a producer 
after September 30, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

                     B. Tax-Exempt Bond Provisions

Overview

    Interest on State and local government bonds generally is 
excluded from gross income for purposes of the regular 
individual and corporate income taxes if the proceeds of the 
bonds are used to finance direct activities of these 
governmental units (Code sec. 103).
    Unlike the interest on governmental bonds, described above, 
interest on private activity bonds generally is taxable. A 
private activity bond is a bond issued by a State or local 
governmental unit acting as a conduit to provide financing for 
private parties in a manner violating either (1) a private 
business use and payment test or (2) a private loan 
restriction. However, interest on private activity bonds is not 
taxable if (1) the financed activity is specified in the Code 
and (2) at least 95 percent of the net proceeds of the bond 
issue is used to finance the specified activity.
    Issuers of State and local government bonds must satisfy 
numerous other requirements, including arbitrage restrictions 
(for all such bonds) and annual State volume limitations (for 
most private activity bonds) for the interest on these bonds to 
be excluded from gross income.

1. Repeal of $100,000 limitation on unspent proceeds under 1-year 
        exception from rebate (sec. 1441 of the Act and sec. 148 of 
        Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Subject to limited exceptions, arbitrage profits from 
investing bond proceeds in investments unrelated to the 
governmental purpose of the borrowing must be rebated to the 
Federal Government. No rebate is required if the gross proceeds 
of an issue are spent for the governmental purpose of the 
borrowing within six months after issuance.
    Under prior law, this six-month exception is deemed to be 
satisfied by issuers of governmental bonds (other than tax and 
revenue anticipation notes) and qualified 501(c)(3) bonds if 
(1) all proceeds other than an amount not exceeding the lesser 
of five percent or $100,000 are so spent within six months and 
(2) the remaining proceeds are spent within one year after the 
bonds are issued.

                           Reasons for Change

    Exemption of interest paid on State and local bonds from 
Federal income tax provides an implicit subsidy to State and 
local governments for their borrowing costs. The principal 
Federal policy concern underlying the arbitrage rebate 
requirement is to discourage the earlier and larger than 
necessary issuance of tax-exempt bonds to take advantage of the 
opportunity to profit by investing funds borrowed at low-cost 
tax-exempt rates in higher yielding taxable investments. If at 
least 95 percent of the proceeds of an issue of governmental 
and 501(c)(3) bonds is spent within six months, and the 
remainder is spent within one year, opportunities for such 
arbitrage profit are significantly limited.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The $100,000 limit on proceeds that may remain unspent 
after six months for certain governmental and qualified 
501(c)(3) bonds otherwise exempt from the rebate requirement is 
deleted. Thus, if at least 95 percent of the proceeds of these 
bonds is spent within six months after their issuance, and the 
remainder is spent within one year, the six-month exception is 
deemed to be satisfied.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to bonds issued after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 in 1998, $2 million in 
1999, $3 million in 2000, $5 million in 2001, $6 million in 
2002, $8 million in 2003, $9 million in 2004, $10 million in 
2005, $11 million in 2006, and $12 million in 2007.

2. Exception from rebate for earnings on bona fide debt service fund 
        under construction bond rules (sec. 1442 of the Act and sec. 
        148 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    In general, arbitrage profits from investing bond proceeds 
in investments unrelated to the governmental purpose of the 
borrowing must be rebated to the Federal Government. An 
exception is provided for certain construction bond issues if 
the bonds are governmental bonds, qualified 501(c)(3) bonds, or 
exempt-facility private activity bonds for governmentally-owned 
property.
    This exception is satisfied only if the available 
construction proceeds of the issue are spent at minimum 
specified rates during the 24-month period after the bonds are 
issued. The exception does not apply to bond proceeds invested 
after the 24-month expenditure period as part of a reasonably 
required reserve or replacement fund, a bona fide debt service 
fund under prior law, or to certain other investments (e.g., 
sinking funds). Issuers of these construction bonds also may 
elect to comply with a penalty regime in lieu of rebating 
arbitrage profits if they fail to satisfy the exception's 
spending requirements.

                           Reasons for Change

    Bond proceeds invested in a bona fide debt service fund 
generally must be spent at least annually for current debt 
service. The short-term nature of investments in such funds 
results in only limited potential for generating arbitrage 
profits. If the spending requirements of the 24-month rebate 
exception are satisfied, the administrative complexity of 
calculating rebate on these proceeds outweighs the other 
Federal policy concerns addressed by the rebate requirement.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act exempts earnings on bond proceeds invested in bona 
fide debt service funds from the arbitrage rebate requirement 
and the penalty requirement of the 24-month exception if the 
spending requirements of that exception are otherwise 
satisfied.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to bonds issued after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 in 1998, $1 million in 
1999, $2 million in 2000, $3 million in 2001, $3 million in 
2002, $4 million in 2003, $5 million in 2004, $6 million in 
2005, $6 million in 2006, and $7 million in 2007.

3. Repeal of debt service-based limitation on investment in certain 
        nonpurpose investments (sec. 1443 of the Act and sec. 148 of 
        the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Issuers of all tax-exempt bonds generally are subject to 
two sets of restrictions on investment of their bond proceeds 
to limit arbitrage profits. The first set requires that tax-
exempt bond proceeds be invested at a yield that is not 
materially higher (generally defined as 0.125 percentage 
points) than the bond yield (``yield restrictions''). 
Exceptions are provided to this restriction for investments 
during any of several ``temporary periods'' pending use of the 
proceeds and, throughout the term of the issue, for proceeds 
invested as part of a reasonably required reserve or 
replacement fund or a ``minor'' portion of the issue proceeds.
    Except for temporary periods and amounts held pending use 
to pay current debt service, prior law also limited the amount 
of the proceeds of private activity bonds (other than qualified 
501(c)(3) bonds) that may be invested at materially higher 
yields at any time during a bond year to 150 percent of the 
debt service for that bond year. This restriction affected 
primarily investments in reasonably required reserve or 
replacement funds. Present law and prior law further restricts 
the amount of proceeds from the sale of bonds that may be 
invested in these reserve funds to ten percent of such 
proceeds.
    The second set of restrictions requires generally that all 
arbitrage profits earned on investments unrelated to the 
governmental purpose of the borrowing be rebated to the Federal 
Government (``arbitrage rebate''). Arbitrage profits include 
all earnings (in excess of bond yield) derived from the 
investment of bond proceeds (and subsequent earnings on any 
such earnings).

                           Reasons for Change

    The 150-percent of debt service limit was enacted before 
enactment of the arbitrage rebate requirement and the ten-
percent limit on the size of reasonably required reserve or 
replacement funds. It was intended to eliminate arbitrage-
motivated activities available from investment of such reserve 
funds. Provided that comprehensive yield restriction and 
arbitrage rebate requirements and the present-law overall size 
limit on reserve funds are maintained, the 150-percent of debt 
service yield restriction limit is duplicative.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act repeals the 150-percent of debt service yield 
restriction.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to bonds issued after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible revenue 
effect on Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

4. Repeal of expired provisions relating to student loan bonds (sec. 
        1444 of the Act and sec. 148 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Prior law included two special exceptions to the arbitrage 
rebate and pooled financing temporary period rules for certain 
qualified student loan bonds. These exceptions applied only to 
bonds issued before January 1, 1989.

                        Explanation of Provision

    These special exceptions are deleted as ``deadwood.''

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to bonds issued after the date of 
enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.

                        C. Tax Court Procedures

1. Overpayment determinations of Tax Court (sec. 1451 of the Act and 
        sec. 6512 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Tax Court may order the refund of an overpayment 
determined by the Court, plus interest, if the IRS fails to 
refund such overpayment and interest within 120 days after the 
Court's decision becomes final. Whether such an order is 
appealable is uncertain.
    In addition, it is unclear whether the Tax Court has 
jurisdiction over the validity or merits of certain credits or 
offsets (e.g., providing for collection of student loans, child 
support, etc.) made by the IRS that reduce or eliminate the 
refund to which the taxpayer was otherwise entitled.

                           Reasons for Change

    Clarification of the jurisdiction of the Tax Court and the 
ability to appeal orders of the Tax Court would provide for 
greater certainty for taxpayers and the government in 
conducting cases before the Tax Court. Clarification will also 
reduce litigation.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act clarifies that an order to refund an overpayment is 
appealable in the same manner as a decision of the Tax Court. 
The Act also clarifies that the Tax Court does not have 
jurisdiction over the validity or merits of the credits or 
offsets that reduce or eliminate the refund to which the 
taxpayer was otherwise entitled.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $3 million in each of 1998 through 2007.

2. Redetermination of interest pursuant to motion (sec. 1452 of the Act 
        and sec. 7481 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    A taxpayer may seek a redetermination of interest after 
certain decisions of the Tax Court have become final by filing 
a petition with the Tax Court.

                           Reasons for Change

    Congress concluded that it would be beneficial to taxpayers 
if a proceeding for a redetermination of interest supplemented 
the original deficiency action brought by the taxpayer to 
redetermine the deficiency determination of the IRS. A motion, 
rather than a petition, is a more appropriate pleading for 
relief in these cases.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that a taxpayer must file a ``motion'' 
(rather than a `petition'') to seek a redetermination of 
interest in the Tax Court. The Act also clarifies that the Tax 
Court's jurisdiction to redetermine the amount of interest 
under section 7481(c) does not depend on whether the interest 
is underpayment or overpayment interest. In clarifying the Tax 
Court's jurisdiction over interest determinations, the Congress 
did not intend to limit any other remedies that taxpayers may 
currently have with respect to such determinations, including 
in particular refund proceedings relating solely to the amount 
of interest due.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no revenue effect.

3. Application of net worth requirement for awards of litigation costs 
        (sec. 1453 of the Act and sec. 7430 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Any person who substantially prevails in any action brought 
by or against the United States in connection with the 
determination, collection, or refund of any tax, interest, or 
penalty may be awarded reasonable administrative costs incurred 
before the IRS and reasonable litigation costs incurred in 
connection with any court proceeding. A person who 
substantially prevails must meet certain net worth requirements 
to be eligible for an award of administrative or litigation 
costs. In general, only an individual whose net worth does not 
exceed $2,000,000 is eligible for an award, and only a 
corporation or partnership whose net worth does not exceed 
$7,000,000 is eligible for an award. (The net worth 
determination with respect to a partnership or S corporation 
applies to all actions that are in substance partnership 
actions or S corporation actions, including unified entity-
level proceedings under sections 6226 or 6228, that are 
nominally brought in the name of a partner or a shareholder.)

                           Reasons for Change

    Although the net worth requirements are explicit for 
individuals, corporations, and partnerships, it is not clear 
which net worth requirement is to apply to other potential 
litigants. It is also unclear how the individual net worth 
rules are to apply to individuals filing a joint tax return. 
Clarifying these rules will provide certainty for potential 
claimants and will decrease needless litigation over procedural 
issues.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that the net worth limitations currently 
applicable to individuals also apply to estates and trusts. The 
Act also provides that individuals who file a joint tax return 
shall be treated as separate individuals for purposes of 
computing the net worth limitations (resulting in a net worth 
limitation of $4,000,000 for individuals who file a joint 
return).

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to proceedings commenced after the 
date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
receipts by $1 million in 1998, $2 million in 1999, $2 million 
in 2000, $2 million in 2001, $2 million in 2002, $2 million in 
2003, $2 million in 2004, $2 million in 2005, $2 million in 
2006, and $2 million in 2007.

4. Tax Court jurisdiction for determination of employment status (sec. 
        1454 of the Act and new sec. 7436 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction, 
established under Article I of the Constitution. The Tax Court 
only has the jurisdiction that is expressly conferred on it by 
statute (sec. 7442).

                           Reasons for Change

    Congress concluded that it will be advantageous to 
taxpayers to have the option of going to the Tax Court to 
resolve certain disputes regarding employment status.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that, in connection with the audit of any 
person, if there is an actual controversy involving a 
determination by the IRS as part of an examination that (1) one 
or more individuals performing services for that person are 
employees of that person or (2) that person is not entitled to 
relief under section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978, the Tax 
Court has jurisdiction to determine whether the IRS is correct. 
For example, one way the IRS could make the required 
determination is through a mechanism similar to the employment 
tax early referral procedures.\309\ A failure to agree would 
also be considered a determination for this purpose, to the 
extent permitted under Tax Court rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \309\ See Announcement 96-13 and Announcement 97-52.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Act provides for de novo review (rather than review of 
the administrative record). Assessment and collection of the 
tax attributable to those issues would be suspended while the 
matter is pending in the Tax Court. Any determination by the 
Tax Court would have the force and effect of a decision of the 
Tax Court and would be reviewable as such; accordingly, it 
would be binding on the parties. Awards of costs and certain 
fees (pursuant to section 7430) would be available to eligible 
taxpayers with respect to Tax Court determinations pursuant to 
this proposal. The Act also provides a number of procedural 
rules to incorporate this new jurisdiction within the existing 
procedures applicable in the Tax Court.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

                          D. Other Provisions

1. Due date for first quarter estimated tax payments by private 
        foundations (sec. 1461 of the Act and sec. 6655(c) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under section 4940, tax-exempt private foundations 
generally are required to pay an excise tax equal to two 
percent of their net investment income for the taxable year. 
Under section 6655(g)(3), private foundations are required to 
pay estimated tax with respect to their excise tax liability 
under section 4940 (as well as any unrelated business income 
tax liability under section 511).\310\ Section 6655(c) provides 
that this estimated tax is payable in quarterly installments 
and that, for calendar-year foundations, the first quarterly 
installment is due on April 15th. Under section 6655(i), 
foundations with taxable years other than the calendar year 
must make their quarterly estimated tax payments no later than 
the dates in their fiscal years that correspond to the dates 
applicable to calendar-year foundations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \310\ Generally, the amount of the first quarter payment must be at 
least 25 percent of the lesser of (1) the preceding year's tax 
liability, as shown on the foundation's Form 990-PF, or (2) 95 percent 
of the foundation's current-year tax liability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    Because a private foundation's estimated tax payments are 
determined, in part, by reference to the foundation's tax 
liability for the preceding year, Congress concluded that the 
due date of a foundation's first-quarter estimated tax payment 
should be the same as the date for filing the foundation's 
annual return (Form 990-PF) for the preceding year.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act amends section 6655(g)(3) to provide that a 
calendar-year foundation's first-quarter estimated tax payment 
is due on May 15th (which is the same day that its annual 
return, Form 990-PF, for the preceding year is due). As a 
result of the operation of present-law section 6655(i), fiscal-
year foundations will be required to make their first-quarter 
estimated tax payment no later than the 15th day of the fifth 
month of their taxable year.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to taxable years beginning after 
August 5, 1997, the date of enactment.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $2 million in 1998, and by less than 
$500,000 per year in each of 1999 through 2007.

2. Withholding of Commonwealth income taxes from wages of Federal 
        employees (sec. 1462 of the Act and sec. 5517 of Title 5, 
        United States Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    If State law provides generally for the withholding of 
State income taxes from the wages of employees in a State, the 
Secretary of the Treasury shall (upon the request of the State) 
enter into an agreement with the State providing for the 
withholding of State income taxes from the wages of Federal 
employees in the State. For this purpose, a State is a State, 
territory, or possession of the United States. The Court of 
Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently held in Romero v. 
United States (38 F.3d 1204 (1994)) that Puerto Rico was not 
encompassed within this definition; consequently, the court 
invalidated an agreement between the Secretary of the Treasury 
and Puerto Rico that provided for the withholding of Puerto 
Rico income taxes from the wages of Federal employees.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that employees of the United States 
should be in no better or worse position than other employees 
with respect to Commonwealth income tax withholding.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act makes any Commonwealth eligible to enter into an 
agreement with the Secretary of the Treasury that would provide 
for income tax withholding from the wages of Federal employees.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective on January 1, 1998.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $2 million in 1998, $3 million in 1999, $1 
million in 2000, $1 million in 2001, $1 million in 2002, $1 
million in 2003, $1 million in 2004, $1 million in 2005, $1 
million in 2006, and $1 million in 2007.

3. Certain notices disregarded under provision increasing interest rate 
        on large corporate underpayments (sec. 1463 of the Act and sec. 
        6621 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The interest rate on a large corporate underpayment of tax 
is the Federal short-term rate plus five percentage points. A 
large corporate underpayment is any underpayment by a 
subchapter C corporation of any tax imposed for any taxable 
period, if the amount of such underpayment for such period 
exceeds $100,000. The large corporate underpayment rate 
generally applies to periods beginning 30 days after the 
earlier of the date on which the first letter of proposed 
deficiency, a statutory notice of deficiency, or a 
nondeficiency letter or notice of assessment or proposed 
assessment is sent. For this purpose, a letter or notice is 
disregarded if the taxpayer makes a payment equal to the amount 
shown on the letter or notice within that 30 day period.

                           Reasons for Change

    The large corporate underpayment rate generally applies if 
the underpayment of tax for a taxable period exceeded $100,000, 
even if the initial letter or notice of deficiency, proposed 
deficiency, assessment, or proposed assessment was for an 
amount less than $100,000. Thus, for example, under prior law, 
a notice relating to a relatively minor mathematical error by 
the taxpayer may have resulted in the application of the large 
corporate underpayment rate to a subsequently identified tax 
deficiency.

                        Explanation of Provision

    For purposes of determining the period to which the large 
corporate underpayment rate applies, any letter or notice is 
disregarded if the amount of the deficiency, proposed 
deficiency, assessment, or proposed assessment set forth in the 
letter or notice is not greater than $100,000 (determined by 
not taking into account any interest, penalties, or additions 
to tax).

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for purposes of determining 
interest for periods after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million in 1998, $1 million in 1999, $1 
million in 2000, $1 million in 2001, $1 million in 2002, $1 
million in 2003, $1 million in 2004, $1 million in 2005, $1 
million in 2006, and $1 million in 2007.
           TITLE XV. PENSION AND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PROVISIONS

                  A. Pension Simplification Provisions

 1. Matching contributions of self-employed individuals not treated as 
 elective deferrals (sec. 1501 of the Act and sec. 402(g) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, a qualified cash or deferred 
arrangement (a ``section 401(k) plan'') is a type of tax-
qualified pension plan under which employees can elect to make 
pre-tax deferrals. An employee's annual elective deferrals are 
subject to a dollar limit ($9,500 for 1997). Employers may make 
matching contributions based on employees' elective deferrals. 
In the case of employees, such matching contributions are not 
subject to the $9,500 limit on elective deferrals. Elective 
deferrals are subject to a special nondiscrimination test, 
called the average deferral percentage (``ADP'') test. Under 
the ADP test, the maximum amount of elective deferrals that can 
be made by highly compensated employees is based on the amount 
of elective deferrals made by nonhighly compensated employees. 
Matching contributions are subject to a similar 
nondiscrimination test, called the average contribution 
percentage (``ACP'') test. An employer may treat certain 
qualified matching contributions as elective deferrals for 
purposes of satisfying the ADP test.
    Under present and prior law, a SIMPLE retirement plan is 
either an individual retirement arrangement (``IRA'') or part 
of a 401(k) plan that meets certain requirements. Under a 
SIMPLE retirement plan, employees can elect to make pre-tax 
deferrals of up to $6,000 per year. Employers are required to 
make either a matching contribution of up to 3-percent of the 
employee's compensation or, alternatively, the employer can 
elect to make a lower percentage contribution on behalf of all 
eligible employees. Contributions to a SIMPLE retirement plan 
are not subject to the ADP or ACP tests.
    Under prior law, matching contributions made for a self-
employed individual were generally treated as additional 
elective deferrals by the self-employed individual who received 
the matching contribution. Accordingly, elective deferrals and 
matching contributions for self-employed individuals were 
subject to the dollar limits on elective deferrals and, in the 
case of a 401(k) plan, treated as elective deferrals for 
purposes of the ADP test.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed it was appropriate to treat self-
employed individuals in the same manner as other employees with 
regard to the limitations on matching contributions.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that matching contributions for self-
employed individuals are treated the same as matching 
contributions for employees, i.e., they are not subject to the 
elective deferral limits and are not treated as elective 
deferrals for purposes of the ADP test (unless the employer 
elects to treat qualified matching contributions as elective 
deferrals under the ADP test). The provision does not apply to 
qualified matching contributions that are treated as elective 
deferrals for purposes of satisfying the ADP test.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for years beginning after 
December 31, 1997. In the case of SIMPLE retirement plans 
(including SIMPLE IRAs and SIMPLE 401(k)s), the provision is 
effective for years beginning after December 31, 1996.\311\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \311\ A technical correction may be necessary so that the statute 
reflects this intent with respect to SIMPLE 401(k) plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $1 million per year for each of 
years 1998 through 2007.

 2. Modification of prohibition on assignment or alienation (sec. 1502 
   of the Act, sec. 401(a)(13) of the Code, and sec. 206(d) of ERISA)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, amounts held in a qualified 
retirement plan for the benefit of a participant are not, 
except in very limited circumstances, assignable or available 
to personal creditors of the participant. A plan may permit a 
participant, at such time as benefits under the plan are in pay 
status, to make a voluntary revocable assignment of an amount 
not in excess of 10-percent of any benefit payment, provided 
the purpose is not to defray plan administration costs. In 
addition, a plan may comply with a qualified domestic relations 
order issued by a state court requiring benefit payments to 
former spouses or other ``alternate payees'' even if the 
participant is not in pay status.
    Under prior law, there was no specific exception under the 
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended 
(``ERISA'') or the Internal Revenue Code which would permit the 
offset of a participant's benefit against the amount owed to a 
plan by the participant as a result of a breach of fiduciary 
duty to the plan or criminality involving the plan. Courts were 
divided in their interpretation of the prohibition on 
assignment or alienation in these cases. Some courts ruled that 
there is no exception in ERISA for the offset of a 
participant's benefit to make a plan whole in the case of a 
fiduciary breach. Other courts reached a different result and 
permitted an offset of a participant's benefit for breach of 
fiduciary duties.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the assignment and alienation 
rules should be clarified by creating a limited exception that 
permits participants' benefits under a qualified plan to be 
reduced under certain circumstances including the participant's 
breach of fiduciary duty to the plan.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act permits a participant's benefit in a qualified plan 
to be reduced to satisfy liabilities of the participant to the 
plan due to (1) the participant being convicted of committing a 
crime involving the plan, (2) a civil judgment (or consent 
order or decree) entered by a court in an action brought in 
connection with a violation of the fiduciary provisions of 
ERISA, or (3) a settlement agreement between the Secretary of 
Labor or the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation and the 
participant in connection with a violation of the fiduciary 
provisions of ERISA. The court order establishing such 
liability must require that the participant's benefit in the 
plan be applied to satisfy the liability. If the participant is 
married at the time his or her benefit under the plan is offset 
to satisfy the liability, spousal consent to such offset is 
required unless the spouse is also required to pay an amount to 
the plan in the judgment, order, decree or settlement or the 
judgment, order, decree or settlement provides a 50-percent 
survivor annuity for the spouse. An offset is includible in 
income on the date of the offset (except to the extent 
attributable to the employee's basis).

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for judgments, orders, and 
degrees issued, and settlement agreements entered into, on or 
after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

3. Elimination of paperwork burdens on plans (sec. 1503 of the Act and 
        sec. 101 of ERISA)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, employers are required to 
prepare summary plan descriptions of employee benefit plans 
(``SPDs''), and summaries of material modifications to such 
plans (``SMMs''). The SPDs and SMMs generally provide 
information concerning the benefits provided by the plan and 
the participants' rights and obligations under the plan. The 
SPDs and SMMs must be furnished to plan participants and 
beneficiaries. Under prior law, SPDs and SMMs had to be filed 
with the Secretary of Labor.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed it was appropriate to alleviate the 
cost and burden of paperwork associated with employee benefit 
plans.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act eliminates the requirement that SPDs and SMMs 
automatically be filed with the Secretary of Labor. Employers 
are required to furnish these documents to the Secretary of 
Labor upon request. A civil penalty may be imposed by the 
Secretary of Labor on the plan administrator for failure to 
comply with such requests. The penalty is up to $100 per day of 
failure, up to a maximum of $1,000 per request. No penalty is 
imposed if the failure was due to matters reasonably outside 
the control of the plan administrator.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.

  4. Modification of section 403(b) exclusion allowance to conform to 
section 415 modifications (sec. 1504 of the Act and sec. 403(b) of the 
                                 Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, annual contributions to a 
section 403(b) annuity cannot exceed the exclusion allowance. 
In general, the exclusion allowance for a taxable year is the 
excess, if any, of (1) 20 percent of the employee's includible 
compensation multiplied by his or her years of service, over 
(2) the aggregate employer contributions for an annuity 
excludable for any prior taxable years.
    Alternatively, an employee may elect to have the exclusion 
allowance determined under the rules relating to tax-qualified 
defined contribution plans (sec. 415). Tax-qualified defined 
contribution plans are subject to limitations on annual 
additions. In addition, for years beginning before January 1, 
2000, an overall limit applies if an employee is a participant 
in both a defined contribution plan and defined benefit plan of 
the same employer (sec. 415(e)).

                           Reasons for Change

    The exclusion allowance for tax-sheltered annuities should 
be modified to reflect recent changes to the corresponding 
limits on benefits under tax-qualified plans.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act conforms the section 403(b) exclusion allowance to 
the section 415 limits by providing that includible 
compensation includes elective deferrals (and similar pre-tax 
contributions) of the employee.
    The Secretary of the Treasury is directed to revise the 
regulations regarding the election to have the exclusion 
allowance determined under section 415 to reflect the fact that 
the overall limit on benefits and contributions is repealed 
(sec. 415(e)). The revised regulations are to be effective for 
years beginning after December 31, 1999.

                             Effective Date

    The modification to the definition of includible 
compensation is effective for years beginning after December 
31, 1997. The direction to the Secretary of the Treasury is 
effective on the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $1 million per year for each of 
years 1998 through 2007.

5. Permanent moratorium on application of nondiscrimination rules to 
        State and local governmental plans (sec. 1505 of the Act and 
        secs. 401 and 403(b) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, the rules applicable to 
governmental plans require that such plans satisfy certain 
nondiscrimination and minimum participation rules. In general, 
the rules require that a plan not discriminate in favor of 
highly compensated employees with regard to the contribution 
and benefits provided under the plan, participation in the 
plan, coverage under the plan, and compensation taken into 
account under the plan. The nondiscrimination rules apply to 
all governmental plans, qualified retirement plans (including 
cash or deferred arrangements (sec. 401(k) plans) in effect 
before May 6, 1986) and annuity plans (sec. 403(b) plans). 
Elective deferrals under section 401(k) plans are required to 
satisfy a special nondiscrimination test called the average 
deferral percentage (``ADP'') test. Employer matching and 
after-tax employee contributions are subject to a similar test 
called the average contribution percentage (``ACP'') test.
    For purposes of satisfying the nondiscrimination rules, the 
Internal Revenue Service has issued several Notices which 
extended the effective date for compliance for governmental 
plans. Under the Notices, governmental plans will be required 
to comply with the nondiscrimination rules beginning with plan 
years beginning on or after the later of January 1, 1999, or 90 
days after the opening of the first legislative session 
beginning on or after January 1, 1999, of the governing body 
with authority to amend the plan, if that body does not meet 
continuously. For plan years beginning before the extended 
effective date, governmental plans are deemed to satisfy the 
nondiscrimination requirements.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that, because of the unique 
circumstances applicable to governmental plans and the 
complexity of compliance, the moratorium on compliance with the 
nondiscrimination rules should be made permanent.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that State and local governmental plans 
are exempt from the nondiscrimination and minimum participation 
rules. The exemption from the nondiscrimination and 
participation rules includes exemption from the ADP and ACP 
tests. A cash or deferred arrangement under a governmental plan 
is treated as a qualified cash or deferred arrangement even 
though the ADP test is not in fact satisfied. Thus, for 
example, elective contributions made by a governmental employer 
on behalf of an employee are not treated as distributed or made 
available to the employee (in accordance with section 402(e)(3) 
of the Code).

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning on 
and after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997). A 
governmental plan is treated as satisfying the coverage and 
nondiscrimination tests for taxable years beginning before the 
date of enactment.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

6. Clarification of certain rules relating to ESOPs of S corporations 
        (sec. 1506 of the Act and sec. 409 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, an S corporation can have no 
more than 75 shareholders. For taxable years beginning after 
December 31, 1997, certain tax-exempt organizations, including 
employee stock ownership plans (``ESOPs'') can be a shareholder 
of an S corporation.
    ESOPs are generally required to make distributions in the 
form of employer securities. If the employer securities are not 
readily tradable, the employee has a right to require the 
employer to buy the securities. In the case of an employer 
whose bylaws or charter restricts ownership of substantially 
all employer securities to employees or a pension plan, the 
plan may provide that benefits are distributed in the form of 
cash. Such a plan may distribute employer securities, if the 
employee has a right to require the employer to purchase the 
securities. Under prior law, similar rules did not apply in the 
case of an ESOP maintained by an S corporation.
    ESOPs are subject to certain prohibited transaction rules 
under the Internal Revenue Code and title I of the Employee 
Retirement Income Security Act (``ERISA'') which are designed 
to prohibit certain transactions between the plan and certain 
persons close to the plan. A number of statutory exceptions are 
provided to the prohibited transaction rules. Under prior law, 
these statutory exceptions did not apply to any transaction in 
which a plan (directly or indirectly) (1) lends any part of the 
assets of the plan to, (2) pays any compensation for personal 
services rendered to the plan to, or (3) acquires for the plan 
any property from or sells any property to a shareholder 
employee of an S corporation, a member of the family of such a 
shareholder employee, or a corporation controlled by the 
shareholder employee. An administrative exception from the 
prohibited transactions rules may be obtained from the 
Secretary of Labor, even if a statutory exception does not 
apply.

                           Reasons for Change

    It is possible that an S corporation may lose its status as 
such if the ESOP is required to give stock to plan 
participants, rather than cash equal to the value of the stock. 
Changes to the prohibited transactions rules are appropriate to 
facilitate the maintenance of an ESOP by an S corporation.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that ESOPs of S corporations may 
distribute cash to plan participants. Such a plan may 
distribute employer securities, as long as the employee has a 
right to require the employer to purchase the securities (as 
under the rules applicable to ESOPs generally). In addition, 
the Act provides that the statutory exceptions to the 
prohibited transaction rules do not fail to apply merely 
because a transaction involves the sale of employer securities 
to an ESOP maintained by an S corporation by a shareholder 
employee, a family member of the shareholder employee, or a 
corporation controlled by the shareholder employee. Thus, the 
statutory exemptions for such a transaction (including the 
exemption for a loan to the ESOP to acquire employer securities 
in connection with such a sale or a guarantee of such a loan) 
apply.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

7. Modification of 10-percent tax on nondeductible contributions (sec. 
        1507 of the Act and sec. 4972 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, contributions to qualified 
pension plans are deductible within certain limits. In the case 
of a single-employer defined benefit plan which has more than 
100 participants during the year, the maximum amount deductible 
is not less than the plan's unfunded current liability as 
determined under the minimum funding rules. Limits are also 
imposed on the amount of annual deductible contributions if an 
employer sponsors both a defined benefit plan and a defined 
contribution plan that covers some of the same employees. Under 
the combined plan limitation, the total deduction for all plans 
for a plan year is generally limited to the greater of (1) 25 
percent of compensation or (2) the contribution necessary to 
meet the minimum funding requirements of the defined benefit 
plan for the year.
    A 10-percent nondeductible excise tax is imposed on 
contributions that are not deductible. This excise tax does not 
apply to contributions to one or more defined contribution 
plans that are nondeductible because they exceed the combined 
plan deduction limit to the extent such contributions do not 
exceed 6 percent of compensation in the year for which the 
contribution is made.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that present law unfairly penalizes 
employers by imposing an excise tax on employer plan 
contributions that are required to be made and that are not 
deductible because the employer is fully funding its pension 
plan. In particular, the Congress did not believe that the 
excise tax on nondeductible contributions should be imposed 
when an employer is required to make contributions attributable 
to elective deferrals under a section 401(k) plan and employer 
matching contributions.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act adds an additional exception to the 10-percent 
excise tax on nondeductible contributions. Under the provision, 
the excise tax does not apply to contributions to one or more 
defined contribution plans that are not deductible because they 
exceed the combined plan deduction limit to the extent such 
contributions do not exceed the amount of the employer's 
matching contributions plus the elective deferral contributions 
to a section 401(k) plan for the taxable year for which the 
contributions are made.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to taxable years 
beginning after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $2 million in 1998, and by $3 million per 
year in each of 1999 through 2007.

8. Modify funding requirements for certain plans (sec. 1508 of the Act 
        and sec. 412 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, defined benefit pension plans 
are required to meet certain minimum funding rules. Underfunded 
plans are required to satisfy certain faster funding 
requirements. In general, these additional requirements do not 
apply in the case of plans with a funded current liability 
percentage of at least 90 percent.
    The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (``PBGC'') insures 
benefits under most defined benefit pension plans in the event 
the plan is terminated with insufficient assets to pay for plan 
benefits. The PBGC is funded in part by a flat-rate premium per 
plan participant, and a variable rate premium based on plan 
underfunding.

                           Reasons for Change

    Certain interstate bus companies have pension plans that 
are closed to new participants and the participants in these 
plans have demonstrated mortality significantly greater than 
that predicted by the mortality tables that the plans are 
required to use for minimum funding purposes. As a result, the 
sponsors of such plans are required to make contributions that 
cause the plan to be substantially overfunded. The Congress 
believed it was appropriate to modify the minimum funding 
requirements for such plans, while at the same time ensuring 
that pension benefits are adequately funded.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act modifies the minimum funding requirements in the 
case of certain plans. The Act applies in the case of plans 
that (1) were not required to pay a variable rate PBGC premium 
for the plan year beginning in 1996, (2) do not, in plan years 
beginning after 1995 and before 2009, merge with another plan 
(other than a plan sponsored by an employer that was a member 
of the controlled group of the employer in 1996), and (3) are 
sponsored by a company that is engaged primarily in the 
interurban or interstate passenger bus service.
    The provision treats a plan to which it applies as having a 
funded current liability percentage of at least 90 percent for 
plan years beginning after 1996 and before 2005. For plan years 
beginning after 2004, the funded current liability percentage 
will be deemed to be at least 90 percent if the actual funded 
current liability percentage is at least at certain specified 
levels.
    The relief from the minimum funding requirements applies 
for the plan year beginning in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 only 
if contributions to the plan equal at least the expected 
increase in current liability due to benefits accruing during 
the plan year.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to plan years 
beginning after December 31, 1996.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

9. Plans not disqualified merely by accepting rollover contributions 
        (sec. 1509 of the Act and sec. 401(a) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, Treasury regulations provide 
that a qualified retirement plan that accepts rollover 
contributions from other plans will not be disqualified because 
the plan making the distribution is, in fact, not qualified at 
the time of the distribution, if, prior to accepting the 
rollover, the receiving plan reasonably concluded that the 
distributing plan was qualified. The receiving plan can 
reasonably conclude that the distributing plan was qualified 
if, for example, prior to accepting the rollover, the 
distributing plan provided a statement that the distributing 
plan had a favorable determination letter issued by the 
Internal Revenue Service (``IRS''). The receiving plan is not 
required to verify this information.

                           Reasons for Change

    In order to encourage employers to accept rollovers from 
other qualified retirement plans, the Congress believed that 
the receiving plans should be insulated from disqualification 
based on the subsequent qualified status of the distributing 
plan.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act directs the Secretary of the Treasury to clarify 
that, under its regulations protecting plans from 
disqualification because they receive invalid rollover 
contributions, it is not necessary for a distributing plan to 
have a determination letter in order for the administrator of 
the receiving plan to reasonably conclude that a contribution 
is a valid rollover.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

10. New technologies in retirement plans (sec. 1510 of the Act)

                               Prior Law

    Under prior law, it was not clear if sponsors of employee 
benefit plans could use new technologies (telephonic response 
systems, computers, email) to satisfy the various ERISA 
requirements for notice, election, consent, record keeping, and 
participant disclosure.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed it was appropriate to review existing 
guidance for purposes of permitting the use of new technologies 
for notice and record keeping requirements for retirement 
plans.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act directs the Secretaries of the Treasury and Labor 
to issue guidance facilitating the use of new technology for 
plan purposes. The guidance must be designed to (1) interpret 
the notice, election, consent, disclosure, and time 
requirements (and related recordkeeping requirements) under the 
Internal Revenue Code (the ``Code'') and the Employee 
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (``ERISA'') 
relating to retirement plans as applied to the use of new 
technologies by plan sponsors and administrators while 
maintaining the protection of the rights of participants and 
beneficiaries, and (2) clarify the extent to which writing 
requirements under the Code will be interpreted to permit 
paperless transactions.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997), and requires that the guidance be issued not 
later than December 31, 1998.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.

  B. Miscellaneous Provisions Relating to Pensions and Other Benefits

1. Increase in full funding limit (sec. 1521 of the Act and sec. 412 of 
        the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, defined benefit pension plans 
are subject to minimum funding requirements. In addition, there 
is a maximum limit on contributions that can be made to a plan, 
called the full funding limit. Under prior law, the full 
funding limit was generally the lesser of a plan's accrued 
liability and 150 percent of current liability. In general, 
current liability is all liabilities to plan participants and 
beneficiaries. Current liability represents benefits accrued to 
date, whereas the accrued liability full funding limit is based 
on projected benefits. Under IRS rules, amounts that cannot be 
contributed because of the current liability full funding limit 
are amortized over 10 years.

                           Reasons for Change

    The 150-percent of full funding limit was enacted to limit 
and allocate efficiently the Federal tax revenue associated 
with the special tax treatment provided to tax-qualified plans. 
However, the Congress believed that the 150-percent of current 
liability full funding limit unduly restricts funding and that 
the amortization period should be extended.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act increases the 150-percent of current liability full 
funding limit as follows: 155 percent for plan years beginning 
in 1999 or 2000, 160 percent for plan years beginning in 2001 
or 2002, 165 percent for plan years beginning in 2003 and 2004, 
and 170 percent for plan years beginning in 2005 and 
thereafter. In addition, amounts that cannot be contributed due 
to the current liability full funding limit are amortized over 
20 years. Amounts that could not be contributed because of the 
prior-law current liability full funding limit and that have 
not been amortized as of the last day of the last plan year 
beginning in 1998 are amortized over this 20-year period. With 
respect to amortization bases remaining at the end of the 1998 
plan year, the 20-year amortization period is reduced by the 
number of years since the amortization base had been 
established. No amortization is required with respect to 
funding methods that do not provide for amortization bases.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for plan years beginning after 
December 31, 1998.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated is estimated to reduce Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts by $4 million in 1999, $12 million 
in 2000, $14 million in 2001, $18 million in 2002, $19 million 
in 2003, $23 million per year for 2004 and 2005, and $25 
million per year for 2006 and 2007.

2. Contributions on behalf of a minister to a church plan (sec. 
        1522(a)(2) of the Act and sec. 414(e) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, contributions made to 
retirement plans by ministers who are self-employed are 
deductible to the extent such contributions do not exceed 
certain limitations applicable to retirement plans. These 
limitations include the limit on elective deferrals, the 
exclusion allowance, and the limit on annual additions to a 
retirement plan.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that the unique characteristics of 
church plans and the procedures associated with contributions 
made by ministers who are self-employed create particular 
problems with respect to plan administration.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that in the case of a contribution made to 
a church plan on behalf of a minister who is self-employed, the 
contribution is excludable from the income of the minister to 
the extent that the contribution would be excludable if the 
minister was an employee of a church and the contribution was 
made to the plan. The provision does not alter present law 
under which amounts contributed for a minister in connection 
with section 403(b), either by the minister's actual employer 
or by any church or convention or association of churches that 
is treated as the minister's employer under section 414(e), are 
excluded from the minister's income, and amounts contributed in 
accordance with section 403(b) by the minister (whether the 
minister is an employee or is self-employed) are deductible by 
the minister as provided in section 404 taking into account the 
other special rules of section 414(e). A minister will not be 
entitled to both an exclusion and deduction for the same 
contribution.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for years beginning after 
December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

3. Exclusion of ministers from discrimination testing of certain non-
        church retirement plans (sec. 1522(a)(1) of the Act and sec. 
        414(e) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law ministers who are employed by 
an organization other than a church are treated as if employed 
by the church and may participate in the retirement plan 
sponsored by the church. Under prior law, if the organization 
also sponsored a retirement plan, such plan did not have to 
include the ministers as employees for purposes of satisfying 
the nondiscrimination rules applicable to qualified plans 
provided the organization was not eligible to participate in 
the church plan.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed it was appropriate to extend the same 
relief to other non-church organizations that may be eligible 
to participate in a church plan but elect not to do so. Such 
organizations will not be required to treat ministers as 
employees for purposes of satisfying the nondiscrimination 
rules applicable to their retirement plan.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that if a minister is employed by an 
organization other than a church and the organization is not 
otherwise participating in the church plan, then the minister 
does not have to be included as an employee under the 
retirement plan of the organization for purposes of the 
nondiscrimination rules.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for years beginning after 
December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

4. Repeal application of UBIT to ESOPs of S corporations (sec. 1523 of 
        the Act and sec. 512 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997, certain tax-exempt organizations, 
including employee stock ownership plans (``ESOPs'') can be a 
shareholder of an S corporation. Under prior law, items of 
income or loss of the S corporation flowed through to all 
qualified tax-exempt shareholders as unrelated business taxable 
income (``UBTI''), regardless of the source of the income.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that treating S corporation income as 
UBTI is not appropriate because such amounts would be subject 
to tax at the ESOP level, and also again when benefits are 
distributed to ESOP participants.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act repeals the provision treating items of income or 
loss of an S corporation as unrelated business taxable income 
in the case of an employee stock ownership plan that is an S 
corporation shareholder. The repeal of such provision applies 
only with respect to employer securities held by an employee 
stock ownership plan (as defined in section 4975(e)(7) of the 
Code) maintained by an S corporation.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $8 million in 1998, $23 million in 1999, $34 
million in 2000, $41 million in 2001, $44 million in 2002, $46 
million in 2003, $48 million in 2004, $50 million in 2005, $52 
million in 2006, and $54 million in 2007.

5. Diversification in section 401(k) plan investments (sec. 1524 of the 
        Act and sec. 407(b) of ERISA)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as 
amended (``ERISA'') prohibits certain employee benefit plans 
from acquiring securities or real property of the employer who 
sponsors the plan if, after the acquisition, the fair market 
value of such securities and property exceeds 10 percent of the 
fair market value of plan assets. Under prior law, the 10-
percent limitation did not apply to any ``eligible individual 
account plans'' that specifically authorized such investments. 
Generally, eligible individual account plans were defined 
contribution plans, including plans containing a cash or 
deferred arrangement (``401(k) plans''). Under prior law, the 
assets of such plans could be invested in employer securities 
and real property without regard to the 10-percent limitation.

                           Reasons for Change

    Because of the growth of 401(k) plans in recent years and 
the fact that these plans serve as a significant source of 
pension benefits for many individuals, the Congress was 
concerned with protecting and preserving these benefits. 
Requiring participant contributions to be invested in employer 
securities or real property could have an adverse impact on the 
retirement security of the plan participants. In circumstances 
where an employer experiences financial distress, including 
bankruptcy, participants would be affected by a decrease in the 
value of employer securities and real property.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that the term ``eligible individual 
account plan'' does not include the portion of a plan that 
consists of elective deferrals (and earnings on the elective 
deferrals) made under section 401(k) if elective deferrals 
equal to more than 1 percent of any employee's eligible 
compensation are required to be invested in employer securities 
and employer real property. Eligible compensation is 
compensation that is eligible to be deferred under the plan. 
The portion of the plan that consists of elective deferrals 
(and earnings thereon) is still treated as an individual 
account plan, and the 10-percent limitation does not apply, as 
long as elective deferrals (and earnings thereon) are not 
required to be invested in employer securities or employer real 
property.
    The provision does not apply if individual account plans 
are a small part of the employer's retirement plans. In 
particular, the provision does not apply to an individual 
account plan for a plan year if the value of the assets of all 
individual account plans maintained by the employer do not 
exceed 10 percent of the value of the assets of all pension 
plans maintained by the employer (determined as of the last day 
of the preceding plan year). Multiemployer plans are not taken 
into account in determining whether the value of the assets of 
all individual account plans maintained by the employer exceed 
10 percent of the value of the assets of all pension plans 
maintained by the employer. The provision does not apply to an 
employee stock ownership plan as defined in section 4975(e)(7) 
of the Internal Revenue Code.
    In determining whether individual account plans are a small 
part of the employer's total pension plan assets, all assets of 
such plans (regardless of when acquired) are taken into 
account. Similarly, if the provision applies to the portion of 
a plan consisting of elective deferrals and earnings thereon 
(so that such portion of a plan is subject to the 10-percent 
limitation on employer securities and real property), all 
assets of such portion of the plan (regardless of when 
acquired) are taken into account in determining whether the 10-
percent limitation is violated.
    The effect of the provision is illustrated as follows. 
Assume the provision applies to the portion of a plan 
consisting of elective deferrals (and earnings thereon), so 
that such portion of a plan is treated as a separate plan 
subject to the 10-percent limitation on employer securities and 
real property, and that more than 10-percent of such separate 
plan's assets are invested in employer securities. The separate 
plan cannot acquire more employer securities or real property, 
unless the participants elect such investment.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to elective 
deferrals for plan years beginning after December 31, 1998 (and 
earnings thereon). The provision does not apply with respect to 
earnings on elective deferrals for plan years beginning before 
January 1, 1999.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

6. Cash or deferred arrangements for irrigation and drainage entities 
        (sec. 1525 of the Act and sec. 401(k) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, taxable and tax-exempt 
employers may maintain qualified cash or deferred arrangements. 
Under prior law, all State and local government organizations 
generally were prohibited from maintaining qualified cash or 
deferred arrangements (``section 401(k) plans''), other than 
qualified cash or deferred arrangements adopted by a State or 
local government before May 6, 1986.
    Mutual irrigation or ditch companies are exempt from tax if 
at least 85 percent of the income of the company consists of 
amounts collected from members for the sole purpose of meeting 
losses and expenses.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that all mutual irrigation and ditch 
companies and water districts should be permitted to maintain a 
qualified cash or deferred arrangement, regardless of whether 
the company or district is a tax-exempt or taxable entity or 
part of a State or local government.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, mutual irrigation or ditch companies and 
districts organized under the laws of a State as a municipal 
corporation for the purpose of irrigation, water conservation 
or drainage (or a national association of such organizations) 
are permitted to maintain qualified cash or deferred 
arrangements, even if the company or district is a State or 
local government organization.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $1 million in 1998, $1 million per 
year in each of 1999 through 2001, $2 million per year in each 
of 2002 through 2006, and $3 million in 2007.

7. Portability of permissive service credit under governmental pension 
        plans (sec. 1526 of the Act and sec. 415 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, limits are imposed on the 
contributions and benefits under qualified pension plans (Code 
sec. 415).
    In the case of a defined contribution plan, the limit on 
annual additions is the lesser of $30,000 or 25 percent of 
compensation. Annual additions include employer contributions, 
as well as after-tax employee contributions. In the case of a 
defined benefit pension plan, the limit on the annual 
retirement benefit is the lesser of (1) 100 percent of 
compensation or (2) $120,000 (indexed for inflation). The 100 
percent of compensation limitation does not apply in the case 
of State and local governmental pension plans. Certain other 
special rules apply in the case of State and local governmental 
plans.
    Amounts contributed by employees to a State or local 
governmental plan are treated as made by the employer if the 
employer ``picks up'' the contribution.
    Under prior law, there were no special rules applicable to 
make-up contributions by State and local government employees.

                           Reasons for Change

    Many State and local government plans facilitate 
portability of pension benefits by permitting employees to 
purchase credit for service with another governmental employer 
and for certain other service as provided in the plan. The 
Congress believed it was appropriate to modify the limits on 
contributions and benefits to encourage portability of benefits 
between governmental plans.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, contributions by a participant in a State or 
local governmental plan to purchase permissive service credits 
are subject to one of two limits. Either (1) the accrued 
benefit derived from all contributions to purchase permissive 
service credit must be taken into account in determining 
whether the defined benefit pension plan limit is satisfied, or 
(2) all such contributions must be taken into account in 
determining whether the $30,000 limit on annual additions is 
met for the year (taking into account any other annual 
additions of the participant). Under the first alternative, a 
plan will not fail to satisfy the reduced defined benefit 
pension plan limit that applies in the case of early retirement 
due to the accrued benefit derived from the purchase of 
permissive service credits. These limits may be applied on a 
participant-by-participant basis. That is, contributions to 
purchase permissive service credits by all participants in the 
same plan do not have to satisfy the same limit.
    Under the Act, permissive service credit means credit for a 
period of service recognized by the governmental plan only if 
the employee voluntarily contributes to the plan an amount (as 
determined by the plan) which does not exceed the amount 
necessary to fund the benefit attributable to the period of 
service and which is in addition to the regular employee 
contributions, if any, under the plan. Section 415 is violated 
if more than 5 years of permissive service credit is purchased 
for ``nonqualified service''. In addition, section 415 is 
violated if nonqualified service is taken into account for an 
employee who has less than 5 years of participation under the 
plan. Nonqualified service is service other than service (1) as 
a Federal, State, or local government employee, (2) as an 
employee of an association representing Federal, State or local 
government employees, (3) as an employee of an educational 
institution which provides elementary or secondary education, 
or (4) for military service. Service under (1), (2) or (3) is 
not qualified if it enables a participant to receive a 
retirement benefit for the same service under more than one 
plan.
    The Act provides that in the case of any repayment of 
contributions and earnings to a governmental plan with respect 
to an amount previously refunded upon a forfeiture of service 
credit under the plan (or another plan maintained by a State or 
local government employer within the same State) any such 
repayment shall not be taken into account for purposes of 
section 415 and service credit obtained as a result of the 
repayment shall not be considered permissive service credit.
    The provision is not intended to affect the application of 
``pick up'' contributions to purchase permissive service credit 
or the treatment of pick up contributions under section 415. 
The provision does not apply to purchases of service credit for 
qualified military service under the rules relating to 
veterans' reemployment rights (sec. 414(u)).

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to contributions to 
purchase permissive service credits made in years beginning 
after December 31, 1997.
    The Act provides a transition rule for plans that provided 
for the purchase of permissive service credit prior to 
enactment of the Act. Under this rule, the defined contribution 
limits will not reduce the amount of permissive service credit 
of an eligible participant allowed under the terms of the plan 
as in effect on the date of enactment. For this purpose an 
eligible participant is an individual who first became a 
participant in the plan before the first plan year beginning 
after the last day of the calendar year in which the next 
regular session (following the date of the enactment of this 
Act) of the governing body with authority to amend the plan 
ends.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $9 million in 1998, $25 million per year in 
each of years 1999 and 2000, $26 million per year in each of 
years 2001 through 2003, $27 million per year in each of years 
2004 through 2006, and $28 million in 2007.

8. Removal of dollar limitation on benefit payments from a defined 
        benefit plan for police and fire employees (sec. 1527 of the 
        Act and sec. 415(b)(2) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, limits are imposed on the 
contributions and benefits under qualified pension plans. 
Certain special rules apply in the case of State and local 
governmental plans.
    In the case of a defined benefit pension plan, the limit on 
the annual retirement benefit is the lesser of (1) 100 percent 
of compensation or (2) $125,000 (for 1997, indexed for 
inflation). The 100 percent of compensation limitation does not 
apply in the case of State and local governmental pension 
plans. In general, the dollar limit is reduced if benefits 
begin before social security retirement age and increased if 
benefits begin after social security retirement age. In the 
case of State and local government plans, the dollar limit is 
not reduced unless benefits begin before age 62 and in any case 
is not less than $75,000, and the dollar limit is increased if 
benefits begin after age 65. Under prior law, this rule applied 
to police and fire department employees, except that the dollar 
limit could not be reduced below $50,000 (indexed), regardless 
of the age at which benefits commenced.\312\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \312\ This special rule applied to participants (1) in a defined 
benefit plan of a State or local government plan, and (2) with respect 
to whom the period of service taken into account in determining the 
amount of the benefit under such plan includes at least 15 years of 
service of the participant as (a) a full-time employee of a police or 
fire department organized by a State or political subdivision to 
provide police protection, firefighting services, or emergency medical 
services or (b) as a member of the Armed Services of the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that police and fire department 
employees who are covered by the special rule should be 
excepted from the dollar limit as it applies to the reduction 
for early retirement benefits.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The dollar limit on defined benefit plans does not apply to 
the reduction for early retirement benefits for individuals who 
received the special rule for certain police and fire 
department employees under prior law. Thus, the defined benefit 
plan dollar limit continues to apply, but is not reduced in the 
case of early retirement. As under present law, the dollar 
limit is increased for such employees if benefits begin after 
age 65.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for years beginning after 
December 31, 1996.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

9. Survivor benefits of public safety officers killed in the line of 
        duty (sec. 1528 of the Act and sec. 101 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, survivors of military service 
personnel (such as those killed in combat) are generally 
entitled to survivor benefits (38 U.S.C. sec. 1310). These 
survivor benefits are generally exempt from taxation (38 U.S.C. 
sec. 5301). ``Survivor'' means the surviving spouse or 
surviving dependent child of the military service personnel.
    Under prior law, survivor annuity benefits paid under a 
governmental retirement plan to a survivor of a law enforcement 
officer killed in the line of duty were generally includible in 
income except to the extent the benefits are a return of after-
tax employee contributions. Under present and prior law, 
survivor benefits paid under a government plan only to 
survivors of officers who died as a result of injuries 
sustained in the line of duty are in the nature of workers' 
compensation and are generally excludable from income.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that it was appropriate to apply to 
the survivors of public safety officers who are killed in the 
line of duty the rules regarding the taxation of certain 
survivor benefits provided to survivors of military personnel.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act generally provides that an amount paid as a 
survivor annuity on account of the death of a public safety 
officer who is killed in the line of duty is excludable from 
income to the extent the survivor annuity is attributable to 
the officer's service as a law enforcement officer. The 
survivor annuity must be provided under a governmental plan to 
the surviving spouse (or former spouse) of the public safety 
officer or to a child of the officer. Public safety officers 
include law enforcement officers, firefighters, rescue squad or 
ambulance crew. The provision does not apply with respect to 
the death of a public safety officer if it is determined by the 
appropriate supervising authority that (1) the death was caused 
by the intentional misconduct of the officer or by the 
officer's intention to bring about the death, (2) the officer 
was voluntarily intoxicated at the time of death, (3) the 
officer was performing his or her duties in a grossly negligent 
manner at the time of death, or (4) the actions of the 
individual to whom payment is to be made were a substantial 
contributing factor to the death of the officer.

                             Effective Date

    The provision applies to amounts received in taxable years 
beginning after December 31, 1996, with respect to individuals 
dying after that date.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 in 1998, $1 million per 
year in each of 1999 through 2005, and by $2 million per year 
in each of 2006 and 2007.

10. Treatment of certain disability payments to public safety employees 
        (sec. 1529 of the Act and sec. 104 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, amounts received under a 
workmen's compensation act as compensation for personal 
injuries or sickness incurred in the course of employment are 
excluded from gross income. Compensation received under a 
workmen's compensation act by the survivors of a deceased 
employee also are excluded from gross income. Under prior law, 
no nonoccupational death and disability benefits were 
excludable from income as workmen's compensation benefits.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress was aware that some State plans were 
structured so that the exclusion for workers' compensation 
benefits was not applicable, and that some benefit recipients 
mistakenly thought the exclusion applied. The Congress believed 
it was appropriate to provide relief in such cases.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, certain payments made on behalf of full-time 
employees of any police or fire department organized and 
operated by a State (or any political subdivision, agency, or 
instrumentality thereof) are excludable from income. The 
provision applies to payments made on account of heart disease 
or hypertension of the employee and that were received in 1989, 
1990, 1991 pursuant to a State law as amended on May 19, 1992, 
which irrebuttably presumed that heart disease and hypertension 
are work-related illnesses, but only for employees separating 
from service before July 1, 1992.
    The Act provides that claims for refund or credit for 
overpayment of tax resulting from the provision could be filed 
up to 1 year after the date of enactment, without regard to the 
otherwise applicable statute of limitations.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $10 million in 1998, and by $1 million in 
1999.

11. Gratuitous transfers for the benefit of employees (sec. 1530 of the 
        Act and sec. 664 of the Code )

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, an employee stock ownership 
plan (``ESOP'') is a qualified stock bonus plan or a 
combination stock bonus and money purchase pension plan under 
which employer securities are held for the benefit of 
employees.
    Under present and prior law, a deduction is allowed for 
Federal estate tax purposes for transfers by a decedent to 
charitable, religious, scientific, etc. organizations. In the 
case of a transfer of a remainder interest to a charity, the 
remainder interest must be in a charitable remainder trust. A 
charitable remainder trust generally is a trust that is 
required to pay, no less often than annually, a fixed dollar 
amount (charitable remainder annuity trust) or a fixed 
percentage of the fair market value of the trust's assets 
determined at least annually (charitable remainder unitrust) to 
noncharitable beneficiaries, and, under prior law, the 
remainder of the trust (i.e., after termination of the annuity 
or unitrust amounts) to a charitable, religious, scientific, 
etc. organization.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed it was appropriate to encourage 
certain transfers of stock to an ESOP.

                        Explanation of Provision

In general

    The Act permits certain limited transfers of qualified 
employer securities by charitable remainder trusts to ESOPs 
without adversely affecting the status of the charitable 
remainder trusts under Code section 664. As a result, the Act 
provides that a qualified gratuitous transfer of employer 
securities to an ESOP is deductible from the gross estate of a 
decedent under Code section 2055 to the extent of the present 
value of the remainder interest. In addition, an ESOP will not 
fail to be a qualified plan because it complies with the 
requirements with respect to a qualified gratuitous transfer.

Qualified gratuitous transfer

    In order for a transfer of securities to be a ``qualified 
gratuitous transfer,'' the following requirements must be 
satisfied, including the following: (1) the securities 
transferred to the ESOP must previously have passed from the 
decedent to a charitable remainder trust; (2) at the time of 
the transfer to the ESOP, family members of the decedent own 
(directly or indirectly) no more than 10 percent of the value 
of the outstanding stock of the company; (3) immediately after 
the transfer to the ESOP, the ESOP owns at least 60 percent 
\313\ of the value of outstanding stock of the company; and (4) 
the plan meets certain requirements. In order to prevent 
erosion of the 60-percent ownership requirements, an excise tax 
is imposed on the employer maintaining the ESOP with respect to 
certain dispositions of the transferred stock within 3 years of 
the transfer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \313\ The 60-percent requirement is determined assuming that 
outstanding options have been exercised.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The provision applies in cases in which the ESOP was in 
existence on August 1, 1996, and the decedent dies on or before 
December 31, 1998. The provision does not fail to apply merely 
because the ESOP is amended after August 1, 1996, for example, 
in order to conform to the requirements of the provision.

Plan requirements

    In order for a transfer to qualify as a gratuitous 
transfer, the ESOP must contain certain provisions. First, the 
plan must provide that plan participants are entitled to direct 
the manner in which stock transferred are to be voted (with 
respect to all matters). Transferred securities that have not 
yet been allocated to participants must be voted by a trustee 
that is not a 5-percent owner of the company or a family member 
of the decedent.
    Second, the plan must provide that participants have the 
right to receive distributions in the form of stock and that 
the participant can require the employer to repurchase any 
shares distributed under a fair valuation formula. For this 
purpose, a valuation formula is not considered fair if it takes 
into account a discount for minority interests.
    Finally, the plan must provide that, if the plan is 
terminated before all the transferred stock has been allocated, 
the remaining stock is to be transferred to one or more 
charitable organizations. The employer is subject to an excise 
tax designed to recapture the estate taxes that would have been 
due had the transfer to the ESOP not occurred if the plan is 
terminated and any unallocated shares are not transferred to 
charitable organizations.

Treatment of transferred stock and allocation rules

    No deduction is permitted under section 404 of the Code 
with respect to securities transferred from the charitable 
remainder trust. The nondiscrimination requirements (sec. 
401(a)(4)) normally applicable to qualified plans must be 
satisfied with respect to the securities transferred. The ESOP 
is required to treat the securities transferred as employer 
securities, except for purposes of determining the amount of 
deductible contributions to the plan otherwise permitted by the 
employer. The ESOP is required to allocate the transferred 
securities up to the limit on contributions and benefits (sec. 
415) after allocating any other employer contributions for the 
year; any transferred securities that cannot be allocated 
because of the section 415 limits would be held in a suspense 
account and allocated in the same manner in subsequent years. 
Transferred securities are not taken into account in 
determining whether any other contributions satisfy the section 
415 limit. Further, securities transferred to an ESOP by a 
charitable remainder trust cannot be allocated to the account 
of (1) any family member of the decedent, or (2) any employee 
owning more than 5 percent of any class of outstanding stock of 
the corporation issuing the securities (or a member of a 
controlled group of corporations) or the total value of any 
class of outstanding stock of any such corporation. The 
employer is subject to an excise tax if impermissible 
allocations are made.

Definition of qualified employer securities

    Qualified employer securities include only employer 
securities (within the meaning of sec. 409(l) of the Code), 
which are issued by a domestic corporation that has no 
outstanding stock that is readily tradable on an established 
securities market and that has only one class of stock.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective with respect to transfers to an 
ESOP after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $8 million in 1998 and by $15 million in 
1999.

                    C. Certain Health Act Provisions

1. Newborns' and mothers' health protection; mental health parity (sec. 
        1531 of the Act)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Newborns' and Mothers' Health Protection Act of 1996 
amended the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (``ERISA'') 
and the Public Health Service Act to impose certain 
requirements on group health plans with respect to coverage of 
newborns and mothers, including a requirement that a group 
health plan cannot restrict benefits for a hospital stay in 
connection with childbirth for the mother or newborn to less 
than 48 hours following a normal vaginal delivery or less than 
96 hours following a cesarean section. These provisions are 
effective with respect to plan years beginning on or after 
January 1, 1998.
    The Mental Health Parity Act of 1996 amended ERISA and the 
Public Health Service Act to provide that group health plans 
that provide both medical and surgical benefits and mental 
health benefits cannot impose aggregate lifetime or annual 
dollar limits on mental health benefits that are not imposed on 
substantially all medical and surgical benefits. The provisions 
of the Mental Health Parity Act are effective with respect to 
plan years beginning on or after January 1, 1998, but do not 
apply to benefits for services furnished on or after September 
30, 2001.
    The Internal Revenue Code requires that group health plans 
meet certain requirements with respect to limitations on 
exclusions of preexisting conditions and that group health 
plans not discriminate against individuals based on health 
status. An excise tax of $100 per day during the period of 
noncompliance is imposed on the employer sponsoring the plan if 
the plan fails to meet these requirements. The maximum tax that 
can be imposed during a taxable year cannot exceed the lesser 
of 10 percent of the employer's group health plan expenses for 
the prior year or $500,000. No tax is imposed if the Secretary 
determines that the employer did not know, and exercising 
reasonable diligence would not have known, that the failure 
existed.
    Under prior law, the provisions of the Newborns' and 
Mothers' Health Protection Act and the Mental Health Parity Act 
were not in the Code.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act incorporates into the Internal Revenue Code the 
provisions of the Newborns' and Mothers' Health Protection Act 
of 1996 and the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996 relating to 
group health plans. Failures to comply with such provisions are 
subject to the excise tax applicable to failures to comply with 
present-law group health plan requirements.

                             Effective Date

    The provisions are effective with respect to plan years 
beginning on or after January 1, 1998. However, the provisions 
relating to the Mental Health Parity Act do not apply to 
benefits for services furnished on or after September 30, 2001.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provisions are estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

   2. Church plan exception to prohibition on discrimination against 
       individuals based on health status (sec. 1532 of the Act)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability 
Act (``HIPAA''), group health plans generally may not establish 
rules for eligibility based on any of the following factors 
relating to an individual or a dependent of the individual: (1) 
health status, (2) medical condition, (3) claims experience, 
(4) receipt of health care, (5) medical history, (6) genetic 
information, (7) evidence of insurability, or (8) disability. 
In addition, a group health plan may not charge an individual a 
greater premium based on any of such factors.
    An excise tax is imposed on the failure of a group plan to 
satisfy the nondiscrimination rule. In general, the excise tax 
is imposed on the employer sponsoring the plan and is equal to 
$100 per day per individual as long as the plan is not in 
compliance.
    Under prior law, there were no exceptions to these rules 
for church plans.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that certain church plans are not treated 
as violating HIPAA's health plan eligibility requirements 
merely because the plan requires evidence of good health in 
order for an individual to enroll in the plan for (1) both any 
individual who is an employee of an employer with 10 or fewer 
employees and any self-employed individual or (2) any 
individual who enrolls after the first 90 days of eligibility 
under the plan. The provision applies to a church plan for a 
year if the plan included either of such provisions requiring 
evidence of good health on July 15, 1997, and at all times 
thereafter before the beginning of the year.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective as if included in HIPAA.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
Federal fiscal year budget receipts.

     D. Date for Adoption of Plan Amendments (sec. 1541 of the Act)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Plan amendments to reflect amendments to the law generally 
must be made by the time prescribed by law for filing the 
income tax return of the employer for the employer's taxable 
year in which the change in law occurs.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that any amendments to a plan or annuity 
contract required to be made by the Act are not required to be 
made before the first day of the first plan year beginning on 
or after January 1, 1999. In the case of a governmental plan, 
the date for amendments is extended to the first plan year 
beginning on or after January 1, 2001. The Act also provides 
that if an amendment is made pursuant to the Act (whether or 
not the amendment is required) before the date for required 
plan amendments, the plan or contract is operated in a manner 
consistent with the amendment during a period and the amendment 
is effective retroactively to such period (1) the plan or 
contract will not fail to be treated as operated in accordance 
with its terms for such period merely because it is operated in 
a manner consistent with the amendment, and (2) the plan will 
not fail to meet the anti-cutback provisions applicable to 
qualified retirement plans by reason of such a plan amendment.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.
              TITLE XVI. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS PROVISIONS

    Except as otherwise provided, the technical corrections 
contained in the Act generally are effective as if included in 
the originally enacted related legislation.

 TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO THE SMALL BUSINESS JOB PROTECTION ACT OF 1996

                  A. Small Business-Related Provisions

1. Returns relating to purchases of fish (sec. 1601(a)(1) of the Act 
        and sec. 6050R(c)(1) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Every person engaged in the trade or business of purchasing 
fish for resale must file an informational return reporting its 
purchases from any person that is engaged in the trade or 
business of catching fish which are in excess of $600 for any 
calendar year. Persons filing such an informational return 
relating to the purchase of fish must furnish a statement 
showing the name and address of the person filing the return, 
as well as the amount shown on the return, to each person whose 
name is required to be disclosed on the return.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Every person filing an informational return relating to the 
purchase of fish must furnish a statement showing the phone 
number of the person filing the return, as well as such 
person's name, address and the amount shown on the return, to 
each person whose name is required to be disclosed on the 
return.

   2. Charitable remainder trusts not eligible to be electing small 
 business trusts (sec. 1601(c)(1) of the Act and sec. 1361(c)(1)(B) of 
                               the Code)

                               Prior Law

    An electing small business trust may be a shareholder in an 
S corporation. In order to qualify for this treatment, all 
beneficiaries of the electing small business trust generally 
must be individuals or estates eligible to be S corporation 
shareholders. An exempt trust may not qualify as an electing 
small business trust.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The provision clarifies that charitable remainder annuity 
trusts and charitable remainder unitrusts may not be electing 
small business trusts.

3. Clarify the effective date for post-termination transition period 
        provision (sec. 1601(c)(2) of the Act)

                               Prior Law

    Distributions made by a former S corporation during its 
post-termination period are treated in the same manner as if 
the distributions were made by an S corporation (e.g., treated 
by shareholders as nontaxable distributions to the extent of 
the accumulated adjustment account). Distributions made after 
the post-termination period are generally treated as made by a 
C corporation (i.e., treated by shareholders as taxable 
dividends to the extent of earnings and profits).
    The ``post-termination period'' is the period beginning on 
the day after the last day of the last taxable year of the S 
corporation and ending on the later of: (1) a date that is one 
year later, or (2) the due date for filing the return for the 
last taxable year and the 120-day period beginning on the date 
of a determination that the corporation's S corporation 
election had terminated for a previous taxable year.
    The Small Business Act expanded the post-termination period 
to include the 120-day period beginning on the date of any 
determination pursuant to an audit of the taxpayer that follows 
the termination of the S corporation's election and that 
adjusts a subchapter S item of income, loss or deduction of the 
S corporation during the S period. In addition, the definition 
of ``determination'' was expanded to include a final 
disposition of the Secretary of the Treasury of a claim for 
refund and, under regulations, certain agreements between the 
Secretary and any person, relating to the tax liability of the 
person. The Small Business Act provision was effective for 
taxable years beginning after December 31, 1996.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction clarifies that the effective date 
for the Small Business Act provision affecting the post-
termination transition period is for determinations after 
December 31, 1996, not for determinations with respect to 
taxable years beginning after December 31, 1996. However, in no 
event will the post-termination transition period expanded by 
the Small Business Act end before the end of the 120-day period 
beginning after the date of enactment of this Act.

4. Treatment of qualified subchapter S subsidiaries (sec. 1601(c)(3) of 
        the Act and sec. 1361(b)(3) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Pursuant to a provision of the Small Business Act, an S 
corporation is allowed to own a qualified subchapter S 
subsidiary. The term ``qualified subchapter S subsidiary'' 
means a domestic corporation that (1) is not an ineligible 
corporation (i.e., a corporation that would be eligible to be 
an S corporation if the stock of the corporation were held 
directly by the shareholders of its parent S corporation) if 
100 percent of the stock of the subsidiary were held by its S 
corporation parent and (2) which the parent elects to treat as 
a qualified subchapter S subsidiary. Under the election, for 
all purposes of the Code, the qualified subchapter S subsidiary 
is not treated as a separate corporation and all the assets, 
liabilities, and items of income, deduction, and credit of the 
subsidiary are treated as the assets, liabilities, and items of 
income, deduction, and credit of the parent S corporation.
    The legislative history of the provision provides that if 
an election is made to treat an existing corporation as a 
qualified subchapter S subsidiary, the subsidiary will be 
deemed to have liquidated under sections 332 and 337 
immediately before the election is effective.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction provides that the Secretary of the 
Treasury may provide, by regulations, instances where the 
separate corporate existence of a qualified subchapter S 
subsidiary may be taken into account for purposes of the Code. 
Thus, if an S corporation owns 100 percent of the stock of a 
bank (as defined in sec. 581) and elects to treat the bank as a 
qualified subchapter S subsidiary, it is expected that Treasury 
regulations would treat the bank as a separate legal entity for 
purposes of those Code provisions that apply specifically to 
banks (e.g., sec. 582).
    Treasury regulations also may provide exceptions to the 
general rule that the qualified subchapter S subsidiary 
election is treated as a deemed section 332 liquidation of the 
subsidiary in appropriate cases. In addition, if the effect of 
a qualified subchapter S subsidiary election is to invalidate 
an election to join in the filing of a consolidated return for 
a group of subsidiaries that formerly joined in such filing, 
Treasury regulations may provide guidance as to the 
consolidated return effects of the S election.

                         B. Pension Provisions

1. Salary reduction simplified employee pensions (``SARSEPS'') (sec. 
        1601(d)(1)(B) of the Act and sec. 408(k)(6) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    SARSEPs were repealed for years beginning after December 
31, 1996, unless the SARSEP was established before January 1, 
1997. Consequently, an employer was not permitted to establish 
a SARSEP after December 31, 1996. SARSEPs established before 
January 1, 1997, may continue to receive contributions under 
the rules in effect prior to January 1, 1997.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act amends Code section 408(k)(6) to clarify that new 
employees of an employer hired after December 31, 1996, may 
participate in a SARSEP of an employer established before 
January 1, 1997.

2. SIMPLE retirement plans (secs. 1601(d)(1)(A) and (d)(1)(C)-(F) and 
        1601(d)(2) of the Act)

            a. Reporting requirements for SIMPLE IRAs (sec. 
                    1601(d)(1)(A) of the Act and sec. 408(i) of the 
                    Code)

                               Prior Law

    A trustee of an individual retirement account and the 
issuer of an individual retirement annuity must furnish reports 
regarding the account or annuity to the individual for whom the 
account or annuity is maintained not later than January 31 of 
the calendar year following the year to which the reports 
relate. In the case of a SIMPLE IRA, such reports are to be 
furnished within 30 days after each calendar year.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act conforms the time for providing reports for SIMPLE 
IRAs to that for IRA reports generally. Thus, the Act would 
provide that the report required to be furnished to the 
individual under a SIMPLE IRA would be provided within 31 days 
after each calendar year.
            b. Notification requirement for SIMPLE IRAs (sec. 
                    1601(d)(1)(C) of the Act and secs. 408(l)(2) and 
                    6693(c) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    The trustee of any SIMPLE IRA is required to provide the 
employer maintaining the arrangement a summary plan description 
containing basic information about the plan. At least once a 
year, the trustee is also required to furnish an account 
statement to each individual maintaining a SIMPLE account. In 
addition, the trustee is required to file an annual report with 
the Secretary. A trustee who fails to provide any of such 
reports or descriptions will be subject to a penalty of $50 per 
day until such failure is corrected, unless the failure is due 
to reasonable cause.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that issuers of annuities for SIMPLE IRAs 
have the same reporting requirements as SIMPLE IRA trustees.
            c. Maximum dollar limitation for SIMPLE IRAs (sec. 
                    1601(d)(1)(D) of the Act and sec. 408(p) of the 
                    Code)

                               Prior Law

    The Small Business Act created a simplified retirement plan 
for small business called the savings incentive match plan for 
employees (``SIMPLE'') retirement plan. A SIMPLE plan can be 
either an individual retirement arrangement (``IRA'') for each 
employee or part of a qualified cash or deferred arrangement 
(``a 401(k) plan''). A SIMPLE IRA permits employees to make 
elective contributions up to $6,000 per year to their IRA. The 
employer is required to satisfy one of two contribution 
formulas. Under the matching contribution formula, the employer 
generally is required to match employee elective contributions 
on a dollar-for-dollar basis up to 3 percent of the employee's 
compensation, unless the employer elects a lower percentage 
matching contribution (but not less than 1 percent of each 
employee's compensation). Alternatively, an employer is 
permitted to elect, in lieu of making matching contributions, 
to make a 2 percent of compensation nonelective contribution on 
behalf of each eligible employee. The employer contribution 
amounts are contributed to the employee's IRA. The maximum 
contribution limitation to an IRA is $2,000.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that in the case of a SIMPLE IRA, the 
$2,000 maximum limitation applicable to IRAs is increased to 
the limitations in effect for contributions made under a 
qualified salary reduction arrangement. This includes employee 
elective contributions and required employer contributions.
            d. Application of exclusive plan requirement for SIMPLE 
                    IRAs to noncollectively bargained employees (sec. 
                    1601(d)(1)(E) of the Act and sec. 408(p)(2)(D) of 
                    the Code)

                               Prior Law

    A SIMPLE IRA will be treated as a qualified salary 
reduction arrangement provided the employer does not maintain a 
qualified plan during the same time period the SIMPLE IRA is 
maintained. Collectively bargained employees can be excluded 
from participation in the SIMPLE IRA and may be covered under a 
plan established by the employer as a result of a good faith 
bargaining agreement.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that an employer who maintains a plan for 
collectively bargained employees is permitted to maintain a 
SIMPLE IRA for noncollectively bargained employees.
            e. Application of exclusive plan requirement for SIMPLE 
                    IRAs in the case of mergers and acquisitions (sec. 
                    1601(d)(1)(F) of the Act and sec. 408(p)(2) of the 
                    Code)

                               Prior Law

    Only employers who employ 100 or fewer employees who 
received compensation for the preceding year of at least $5,000 
are eligible to establish a SIMPLE IRA. An eligible employer 
maintaining a SIMPLE IRA who fails to be an eligible employer 
due to an acquisition, disposition or similar transaction is 
treated as an eligible employer for the 2 years following the 
last year the employer was eligible provided rules similar to 
the special coverage rules of section 410(b)(6)(C)(i) apply. 
There is no parallel provision with respect to an employer who, 
because of an acquisition, disposition or similar transaction, 
maintains a qualified plan and a SIMPLE IRA at the same time.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that if an employer maintains a qualified 
plan and a SIMPLE IRA in the same year due to an acquisition, 
disposition or similar transaction the SIMPLE IRA is treated as 
a qualified salary reduction arrangement for the year of the 
transaction and the following calendar year.
            f. Top-heavy exemption for SIMPLE 401(k) arrangements (sec. 
                    1601(d)(2)(A) of the Act and sec. 401(k)(11)(D) of 
                    the Code)

                               Prior Law

    A plan meeting the SIMPLE 401(k) requirements for any year 
is not treated as a top-heavy plan under section 416 for the 
year. This rule was intended to apply only to SIMPLE 401(k)s, 
and not other plans maintained by the employer.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that the top-heavy exemption applies to a 
plan which permits only contributions required to satisfy the 
SIMPLE 401(k) requirements.
            g. Cost of living adjustments for SIMPLE 401(k) 
                    arrangements (sec. 1601(d)(2)(B) of the Act and 
                    sec. 401(k)(11) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    The $6,000 limit on deferrals to a SIMPLE IRA is subject to 
a cost-of-living adjustment. There is no parallel provision 
applicable to a SIMPLE 401(k) arrangement.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that the $6,000 limit on elective 
deferrals under a SIMPLE 401(k) arrangement will be adjusted at 
the same time and in the same manner as for SIMPLE IRAs.
            h. Employer deduction for SIMPLE 401(k) arrangements (sec. 
                    1601(d)(2)(C) of the Act and sec. 404(a)(3) of the 
                    Code)

                               Prior Law

    Contributions paid by an employer to a profit sharing or 
stock bonus plan are deductible by the employer for a taxable 
year to the extent the contributions do not exceed 15-percent 
of the compensation otherwise paid or accrued during the 
taxable year to the participants under the plan. Contributions 
paid by an employer to a profit sharing or stock bonus plan 
that are not deductible because they are in excess of the 15-
percent limitation are subject to a 10-percent excise tax 
payable by the employer making the contribution.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that to the extent that contributions paid 
by an employer to a SIMPLE 401(k) arrangement satisfy the 
contribution requirements of section 401(k)(11)(B), such 
contributions are deductible by the employer for the taxable 
year.
            i. Notification and election periods for SIMPLE 401(k) 
                    arrangements (sec. 1601(d)(2)(D) of the Act and 
                    sec. 401(k)(11) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    An employer maintaining a SIMPLE 401(k) arrangement is 
required to make a matching contribution for employees making 
elective deferrals of up to 3-percent of compensation (or, 
alternatively, elect to make a 2-percent of compensation 
nonelective contribution on behalf of all eligible employees). 
An employer electing to make a 2-percent nonelective 
contribution is required to notify all employees of such 
election within a reasonable period of time before the 60th day 
before the beginning of the year.
    An employer maintaining a SIMPLE IRA is required to notify 
each employee of the employee's opportunity to make or modify 
salary reduction contributions as well as the contribution 
alternative chosen by the employer within a reasonable period 
of time before the employee's election period. The employee's 
election period is the 60-day period before the beginning of 
any year (and the 60-day period before the first day such 
employee is eligible to participate).

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act extends the employer notice and employee election 
requirements of SIMPLE IRAs to SIMPLE 401(k) arrangements.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to calendar years 
beginning after the date of enactment.
            j. Treatment of Indian tribal governments under section 
                    403(b) (sec. 1601(d)(4) of the Act and sec. 403(b) 
                    of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Any 403(b) annuity contract purchased in a plan year 
beginning before January 1, 1995, by an Indian tribal 
government is treated as purchased by an entity permitted to 
maintain a tax-sheltered annuity plan. Such contracts may be 
rolled over into a section 401(k) plan maintained by the Indian 
tribal government in accordance with the rollover rules of 
section 403(b)(8).

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act clarifies that an employee participating in a 
403(b) annuity contract of the Indian tribal government would 
be permitted to roll over amounts from such contract to a 
section 401(k) plan maintained by the Indian tribal government 
whether or not the annuity contract is terminated.
            k. Special rules for chaplains and self-employed ministers 
                    (sec. 1601(d)(6) of the Act and sec. 414(e)(5)(A) 
                    of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Ministers employed by an employer other than a church may 
participate in their denominational plan.
    Certain service of a self-employed minister is treated as 
years of service for purposes of calculating the exclusion 
allowance applicable to section 403(b) annuities.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The provision clarifies that a minister may participate in 
the denominational plan, whether or not the minister is 
employed by a tax-exempt employer or a taxable employer.
    The provision clarifies that the exclusion amount is 
determined by taking into account the minister's self-employed 
earnings with respect to years of service taken into account in 
calculating the exclusion amount.

                         C. Foreign Provisions

1. Measurement of earnings of controlled foreign corporations (sec. 
        1601(e) of the Act and section 956 of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    U.S. 10-percent shareholders of a controlled foreign 
corporation (CFC) are subject to current U.S. tax on their pro 
rata shares of the CFC's earnings invested in United States 
property. For this purpose, earnings include both current 
earnings and profits (not including a deficit) referred to in 
section 316(a)(2) and accumulated earnings and profits referred 
to in section 316(a)(1). It could be argued that this 
definition of earnings takes current year earnings into account 
twice.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction clarifies that accumulated 
earnings and profits of a CFC taken into account under section 
956(b)(1)(A) for purposes of determining the CFC's earnings 
invested in United States property do not include current 
earnings (which are taken into account separately under sec. 
956(b)(1)(B)). A similar technical correction to the definition 
of earnings for purposes of prior-law section 956A (relating to 
a CFC's earnings invested in excess passive assets) was enacted 
with the Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 (section 
1703(i)(2)).

2. Transfers to foreign trusts at fair market value (sec. 1601(i)(2) of 
        the Act and sec. 679 of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    A U.S. person who transfers property to a foreign trust 
which has U.S. beneficiaries generally is treated as the owner 
of such trust. However, this rule does not apply where the U.S. 
person transfers property to a trust in exchange for fair 
market value consideration. In determining whether the U.S. 
person receives fair market value consideration, obligations of 
certain related persons are not taken into account. For this 
purpose, related persons include the trust, any grantor or 
beneficiary of the trust, and certain persons who are related 
to any such grantor or beneficiary.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction clarifies that, for purposes of 
determining whether a U.S. person's transfer to a trust is for 
fair market value consideration, the related persons whose 
obligations are disregarded include any owner of the trust and 
certain persons who are related to any such owner.

3. Treatment of trust as U.S. person (sec. 1601(i)(3) of the Act and 
        secs. 641 and 7701(a)(30) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    A trust is considered to be a U.S. person if two criteria 
are met. First, a court within the United States must be able 
to exercise primary supervision over the administration of the 
trust. Second, one or more U.S. fiduciaries must have the 
authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust.
    These criteria regarding the treatment of a trust as a U.S. 
person are effective for taxable years beginning after December 
31, 1996. The Internal Revenue Service announced procedures 
under which a U.S. trust in existence on August 20, 1996 may 
continue to file returns as a U.S. trust for taxable years 
beginning after December 31, 1996. To qualify for such 
treatment, the trustee (1) must initiate modification of the 
trust to conform to the new criteria by the due date for filing 
the trust's return for its first taxable year beginning after 
1996, (2) must complete the modification within two years of 
such date, and (3) must attach the required statement to the 
trust returns for the taxable years beginning after 1996.\314\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \314\ Notice 96-65, 1996-2 C.B. 232. See Joint Committee on 
Taxation, General Explanation of Tax Legislation Enacted in the 104th 
Congress (JCS-12-96), December 12, 1996, pp. 277-278.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction clarifies that a trust is treated 
as a U.S. person as long as one or more U.S. persons have the 
authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust 
(and a U.S. court can exercise primary supervision). 
Accordingly, the fact that a substantial decision of the trust 
is controlled by a U.S. person who is not a fiduciary would not 
cause the trust not to be treated as a U.S. person. In 
addition, the technical correction clarifies that a trust that 
is a foreign trust under these criteria is not considered to be 
present or resident in the United States at any time. Finally, 
the technical correction provides the Secretary of Treasury 
with authority to allow reasonable time for U.S. trusts in 
existence on August 20, 1996 to make modifications in order to 
comply with the new criteria for treatment of a trust as a U.S. 
person.

                          D. Other Provisions

1. Phaseout and expiration of excise tax on luxury automobiles (sec. 
        1601(f)(3) of the Act and secs. 4001 and 4003 of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    An excise tax is imposed on the sale of automobiles whose 
price exceeds a designated threshold ($36,000 for 1997). The 
excise tax is imposed at a rate of 8-percent on the excess of 
the sales price above the designated threshold. The 8-percent 
rate declines by one percentage point per year until reaching 3 
percent in 2002. The $36,000 threshold is indexed for 
inflation.
    The tax generally applies only to the first retail sale 
after manufacture, production, or importation of an automobile. 
It does not apply to subsequent sales of taxable automobiles. 
However, under section 4003 of the Code, a 10-percent tax was 
imposed on the ``separate purchase of vehicle and parts and 
accessories therefor'' when the sum of the separate purchases 
exceeds the luxury tax threshold. The rate of tax under section 
4003 is not determined by reference to section 4001.
    The tax under section 4001 applies to sales before January 
1, 2003. The tax under section 4003 has no termination date.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act clarifies that the phased reduction in luxury 
excise tax rates and the expiration date of December 31, 2002, 
enacted as part of the Small Business Act, apply both for the 
tax imposed on the purchase of new automobiles under section 
4001 and for the tax imposed for the separate purchase of 
vehicles and parts and accessories therefor under section 4003.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective for sales after the date of 
enactment of the 1997 Act.

2. Treatment of certain reserves of thrift institutions (sec. 
        1601(f)(5) of the Act and secs. 593(e) and 1374 of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    A provision of the Small Business Act repealed the 
percentage-of-taxable income method for deducting bad debts 
applicable to thrift institutions. The portion of the section 
481(a) adjustment applicable to pre-1988 reserves of an 
institution required to change its method of accounting 
generally is not restored to income unless the institution 
makes a distribution to which section 593(e) applies. Section 
593(e) provides that if a institution makes a nonliquidating 
distribution in an amount in excess of its post-1951 
accumulated earnings and profits, such excess will be treated 
as a distribution of the post-1987 reserve for bad debts, 
requiring recapture of such amount.
    Another provision of the Small Business Act allows a bank 
or a thrift institution to elect to be treated as an S 
corporation so long as the entity does not use a reserve method 
of accounting for bad debts. The earnings of an S corporation 
increase the corporation's accumulated adjustments account, but 
do not increase its accumulated earnings and profits (sec. 
1368). In addition, any net unrealized built-in gains of a C 
corporation that converts to S corporation status that are 
recognized during the 10-year period beginning with the date of 
such conversion generally are subject to corporate-level tax 
(sec. 1374). Section 481(a) adjustments taken into account 
during the 10-year period generally are subject to section 
1374.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides rules to clarify the section 593(e) 
treatment of pre-1988 bad debt reserves of thrift and former 
thrift institutions that become S corporations. The technical 
corrections provide that (1) the accumulated adjustments 
account of an S corporation would be treated the same as post-
1951 earnings and profits for purposes of section 593(e) and 
(2) section 593(e) would apply irrespective of section 1374 
(e.g., distributions that trigger section 593(e) would be 
subject to corporate-level recapture even if such distributions 
occur after the 10-year period of section 1374).

3. ``FASIT'' technical corrections (sec. 1601(f)(6) of the Act and sec. 
        860L of the Code)

                               Prior Law

In general

    A ``financial asset securitization investment trust'' 
(``FASIT'') is designed to facilitate the securitization of 
debt obligations such as credit card receivables, home equity 
loans, and auto loans. A FASIT generally is not taxable; the 
FASIT's taxable income or net loss flows through to the owner 
of the FASIT.
    The ownership interest of a FASIT generally is required to 
be entirely held by a single domestic C corporation. In 
addition, a FASIT generally must hold only qualified debt 
obligations, and certain other specified assets, and is subject 
to certain restrictions on its activities. An entity that 
qualifies as a FASIT can issue instruments (called ``regular 
interests'') that meet certain specified requirements and treat 
those instruments as debt for Federal income tax purposes. In 
general, those requirements must be met ``after the startup 
date.'' Instruments bearing yields to maturity over 5 
percentage points above the yield to maturity on specified 
United States government obligations (i.e., ``high-yield 
interests'') may be held only by domestic C corporations that 
are not exempt from income tax.

Income from prohibited transactions

    The owner of a FASIT is required to pay a penalty excise 
tax equal to 100 percent of net income derived from (1) an 
asset that is not a permitted asset, (2) any disposition of an 
asset other than a permitted disposition, (3) any income 
attributable to loans originated by the FASIT, and (4) 
compensation for services (other than fees for a waiver, 
amendment, or consent under permitted assets not acquired 
through foreclosure). A permitted disposition is any 
disposition of any permitted asset (1) arising from complete 
liquidation of a class of regular interests (i.e., a qualified 
liquidation); \315\ (2) incident to the foreclosure, default, 
or imminent default of the asset; (3) incident to the 
bankruptcy or insolvency of the FASIT; (4) necessary to avoid a 
default on any indebtedness of the FASIT attributable to a 
default (or imminent default) on an asset of the FASIT; (5) to 
facilitate a clean-up call; (6) to substitute a permitted debt 
instrument for another such instrument; or (7) in order to 
reduce over-collateralization where a principal purpose of the 
disposition was not to avoid recognition of gain arising from 
an increase in its market value after its acquisition by the 
FASIT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \315\ For this purpose, a ``qualified liquidation'' has the same 
meaning as it does purposes of the exemption from the tax on prohibited 
transactions of a real estate mortgage investment conduit (``REMIC'') 
in section 860F(a)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Definition of ``FASIT''

    For an entity or arrangement to qualify as a FASIT, 
substantially all of its assets must consist of the following 
``permitted assets'': (1) cash and cash equivalents; (2) 
certain permitted debt instruments; (3) certain foreclosure 
property; (4) certain instruments or contracts that represent a 
hedge or guarantee of debt held or issued by the FASIT; (5) 
contract rights to acquire permitted debt instruments or 
hedges; (6) a regular interest in another FASIT; and (7) a 
regular interest in a REMIC. A FASIT must meet the asset test 
at the 90th day after its formation and at all times 
thereafter. Permitted assets may be acquired at any time by a 
FASIT, including any time after its formation.

                        Explanation of Provision

Definition of regular interest

    The Act provides that the requirement of a ``regular 
interest'' must be met ``on or after the startup date,'' 
instead of just ``after the startup date.''

Correction of cross reference

    The Act corrects an incorrect cross reference in section 
860L(d) from section 860I(c)(2) to section 860I(b)(2).

Tax on prohibited transactions

    The Act provides that the tax on prohibited transactions 
would not apply to dispositions of foreclosure property or 
hedges using the similar exception applicable to REMICs.

4. Qualified State tuition programs (sec. 1601(h)(1) of the Act and 
        sec. 529 of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Section 529 provides tax-exempt status to certain qualified 
State tuition programs and provides rules governing the tax 
treatment of distributions from such programs. Section 529 was 
effective on the date of enactment of the Small Business Job 
Protection Act of 1996, but a special transition rule provides 
that if (1) a State maintains (on the date of enactment) a 
program under which persons may purchase tuition credits on 
behalf of, or make contributions for educational expenses of, a 
designated beneficiary, and (2) such program meets the 
requirements of a qualified State tuition program before the 
later of (a) one year after the date of enactment, or (b) the 
first day of the first calendar quarter after the close of the 
first regular session of the State legislature that begins 
after the date of enactment, then the provisions of the Small 
Business Act will apply to contributions (and earnings 
allocable thereto) made before the date the program meets the 
requirements of a qualified State tuition program, without 
regard to whether the requirements of a qualified State tuition 
program are satisfied with respect to such contributions and 
earnings.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The provision clarifies that, if a State program under 
which persons may purchase tuition credits comes into 
compliance with the requirements of a ``qualified State tuition 
program'' as defined in section 529 within a specified time 
period, then such program will be treated as a qualified State 
tuition program with respect to any contributions (and earnings 
allocable thereto) made pursuant to a contract entered into 
under the program before the date on which the program comes 
into compliance with the present-law requirements of a 
qualified State tuition program under section 529.

5. Adoption credit (sec. 1601(h)(2) of the Act, sec. 1807 of the Small 
        Business Act, and sec. 23 of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Taxpayers are allowed a maximum nonrefundable tax credit 
against income tax liability of $5,000 per child for qualified 
adoption expenses ($6,000 in the case of certain domestic 
adoptions) paid or incurred by the taxpayer. Qualified adoption 
expenses are reasonable and necessary adoption fees, court 
costs, attorneys' fees, and other expenses that are directly 
related to the legal adoption of an eligible child.
    Otherwise qualified adoption expenses paid or incurred in 
one taxable year are not taken into account for purposes of the 
credit until the next taxable year unless the expenses are paid 
or incurred in the year the adoption becomes final.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction conforms the treatment of 
otherwise qualified adoption expenses paid or incurred in years 
after the year the adoption becomes final to the treatment of 
expenses paid or incurred in the year the adoption becomes 
final. Another technical correction repeals as ``deadwood'' an 
ordering rule inadvertently included in the credit.

6. Phaseout of adoption assistance exclusion (sec. 1601(h)(2) of the 
        Act, sec. 1807 of the Small Business Act, and sec. 137 of the 
        Code)

                               Prior Law

    The adoption tax credit and the exclusion for employer 
provided adoption assistance are generally phased out ratably 
for taxpayers with modified adjusted gross income (AGI) above 
$75,000, and are fully phased out at $115,000 of modified AGI. 
For these purposes modified AGI is computed by increasing the 
taxpayer's AGI by the amount otherwise excluded from gross 
income under Code sections 911, 931, or 933 (relating to the 
exclusion of income of U.S. citizens or residents living 
abroad; residents of Guam, American Samoa, and the Northern 
Mariana Islands, and residents of Puerto Rico, respectively).

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction conforms the phaseout range of the 
adoption assistance exclusion to the phaseout range of the 
credit for qualified adoption expenses.
     TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO THE HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND 
                       ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 1996

 A. Medical Savings Accounts (sec. 1602(a) of the Act and sec. 220 of 
                               the Code)

1. Additional tax on distributions not used for medical purposes

                               Prior Law

    Distributions from a medical savings account (``MSA'') that 
are not used for medical expenses are includible in gross 
income and subject to a 15-percent additional tax unless the 
distribution is after age 65 or death or on account of 
disability. A similar additional 10-percent tax is imposed on 
early withdrawals from individual retirement arrangements and 
qualified pension plans. The 10-percent additional tax on early 
withdrawals is not treated as tax liability for purposes of the 
minimum tax. No such rule applies to the 15-percent additional 
tax applicable to MSAs.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that the 15-percent tax on nonmedical 
withdrawals from an MSA is not treated as tax liability for 
purposes of the minimum tax.

2. Definition of permitted coverage

                               Prior Law

    In order to be eligible to have an MSA an individual must 
be covered under a high deductible health plan and no other 
health plan, except for plans that provide certain permitted 
coverage. Medicare supplemental plans are one of the types of 
permitted coverage, even though an individual covered by 
Medicare is not eligible to have an MSA.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Under the Act, Medicare supplemental plans would be deleted 
from the types of permitted coverage an individual may have and 
still qualify for an MSA.

3. Taxation of distributions

                               Prior Law

    In order to be eligible to have a medical savings account 
(``MSA'') an individual must be covered under a high deductible 
health plan and no other health plan, except for plans that 
provide certain permitted coverage and must be either (1) a 
self-employed individual, or (2) employed by a small employer. 
Distributions from an MSA for the medical expenses of the MSA 
account holder and his or her spouse or dependents are 
generally excludable from income. However, in any year for 
which a contribution is made to an MSA, withdrawals from the 
MSA are excludable from income only if the individual for whom 
the expenses were incurred was an eligible individual for the 
month in which the expenses were incurred. This rule is 
designed to ensure that MSAs are used in conjunction with a 
high deductible plan and that they are not primarily used by 
other individuals who have health plans that are not high 
deductible plans.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act would clarify that, in any year for which a 
contribution is made to an MSA, withdrawals from the MSA are 
excludable from income only if the individual for whom the 
expenses were incurred was covered under a high deductible 
health plan (and no other health plan except for plans that 
provide certain permitted coverage) in the month in which the 
expenses were incurred. That is, the individual for whom the 
expenses were incurred does not have to be self employed or 
employed by a small employer in order for a withdrawal for 
medical expenses to be excludible.

4. Penalty for failure to provide required reports

                               Prior Law

    Trustees of an MSA are required to provide such reports to 
the Secretary and the account holder as the Secretary may 
require. A penalty of $50 applies with respect to each failure 
to provide a required report. Separate penalties apply to 
information returns required by the Code.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act provides that the $50 penalty does not apply to 
information returns.

     B. Definition of Chronically Ill Individual Under a Qualified

         Long-Term Care Insurance Contract (sec. 1602(b) of the

                 Act and sec. 7702B(c)(2) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Under the long-term care insurance rules, a chronically ill 
individual is one who has been certified within the previous 12 
months by a licensed health care practitioner as (1) being 
unable to perform (without substantial assistance) at least 2 
activities of daily living for at least 90 days due to a loss 
of functional capacity, (2) having a level of disability 
similar (as determined under regulations prescribed by the 
Secretary in consultation with the Secretary of Health and 
Human Services) to the level of disability described above, or 
(3) requiring substantial supervision to protect the individual 
from threats to health and safety due to severe cognitive 
impairment. A contract is not treated as a qualified long-term 
care insurance contract unless the determination of whether an 
individual is a chronically ill individual takes into account 
at least 5 of such activities.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction clarifies that the five-activity 
requirement--i.e., that the number of activities of daily 
living that are taken into account not be less than five--
applies only for purposes of the first of three alternative 
definitions of a chronically ill individual (Code sec. 
7702B(c)(2)(A)(i)), that is, by reason of the individual being 
unable to perform (without substantial assistance) at least 2 
activities of daily living for at least 90 days due to a loss 
of functional capacity. Thus, the requirement does not apply to 
the determination of whether an individual is a chronically ill 
individual either (1) by virtue of severe cognitive impairment, 
or (2) if the insured satisfies a standard (if any) that is not 
based upon activities of daily living, as determined under 
regulations.

           C. Deduction for Long-Term Care Insurance of Self-

           Employed Individuals (sec. 1602(c) of the Act and

                      sec. 162(l)(2) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    The deduction for health insurance expenses of a self-
employed individual is not available for a month for which the 
individual is eligible to participate in any subsidized health 
plan maintained by any employer of the individual or the 
individual's spouse. In the case of a qualified long-term care 
insurance contract, only eligible long-term care premiums (as 
defined for purposes of the medical expense deduction) are 
taken into account in determining the deduction for health 
insurance expenses of a self-employed individual.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction applies the rules for the 
deduction for health insurance expenses of a self-employed 
individual separately with respect to (1) plans that include 
coverage for qualified long-term care services or that are 
qualified long-term care insurance contracts, and (2) plans 
that do not include such coverage and are not such contracts. 
Thus, the provision clarifies that the fact that an individual 
is eligible for employer-subsidized health insurance does not 
affect the ability of such an individual to deduct long-term 
care insurance premiums, so long as the individual is not 
eligible for employer-subsidized long-term care insurance.

        D. Applicability of Reporting Requirements of Long-Term

             Care Contracts and Accelerated Death Benefits

          (sec. 1602(d) of the Act and sec. 6050Q of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Amounts (other than policyholder dividends or premium 
refunds) received under a long-term care insurance contract 
generally are excludable as amounts received for personal 
injuries and sickness, subject to a dollar cap on per diem 
contracts only. If the aggregate amount of periodic payments 
under all qualified long-term care contracts exceeds the dollar 
cap for the period, then the amount of such excess payments is 
excludable only to the extent of the individual's costs (that 
are not otherwise compensated for by insurance or otherwise) 
for long-term care services during the period.
    An exclusion from gross income is provided for an amount 
paid by reason of the death of an insured for (1) amounts 
received under a life insurance contract and (2) amounts 
received for the sale or assignment of any portion of the death 
benefit under a life insurance contract to a qualified viatical 
settlement provider, provided that the insured under the life 
insurance contract is either terminally ill or chronically ill 
(the accelerated death benefit rules).
    A payor of long-term care benefits (defined for this 
purpose to include any amount paid under a product advertised, 
marketed or offered as long-term care insurance), and a payor 
of amounts treated as subject to reporting under the 
accelerated death benefit rules, is required to report to the 
IRS the aggregate amount of such benefits paid to any 
individual during any calendar year, and the name, address and 
taxpayer identification number of such individual. A payor is 
also required to report the name, address, and taxpayer 
identification number of the chronically ill individual on 
account of whose condition the amounts are paid, and whether 
the contract under which the amount is paid is a per diem-type 
contract. A copy of the report must be provided to the payee by 
January 31 following the year of payment, showing the name of 
the payor and the aggregate amount of benefits paid to the 
individual during the calendar year. Failure to file the report 
or provide the copy to the payee is subject to the generally 
applicable penalties for failure to file similar information 
reports.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction clarifies that the reporting 
requirements include the need to report the address and phone 
number of the information contact. This conforms these 
reporting requirements to the requirements of the Taxpayer Bill 
of Rights 2.

          E. Consumer Protection Provisions for Long-Term Care

            Insurance Contracts (sec. 1602(e) of the Act and

                    sec. 7702B(g)(4)(b) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    The long-term care insurance rules include consumer 
protection provisions (sec. 7702B(g)). Among these provisions 
is a requirement that the issuer of a contract offer to the 
policyholder a nonforfeiture provision that meets certain 
requirements. The requirements include a rule that the 
nonforfeiture provision shall provide for a benefit available 
in the event of a default in the payment of any premiums and 
the amount of the benefit may be adjusted subsequent to being 
initially granted only as necessary to reflect changes in 
claims, persistency, and interest as reflected in changes in 
rates for premium paying policies approved by the Secretary for 
the same contract form.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction clarifies that the nonforfeiture 
provision shall provide for a benefit available in the event of 
a default in the payment of any premiums and the amount of the 
benefit may be adjusted subsequent to being initially granted 
only as necessary to reflect changes in claims, persistency, 
and interest as reflected in changes in rates for premium 
paying policies approved by the appropriate State regulatory 
authority (not by the Secretary) for the same contract form.

F. Insurable Interests Under the COLI Provision (sec. 1602(f)(1) of the 
                  Act and sec. 264(a)(4) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    No deduction is allowed for interest paid or accrued on any 
indebtedness with respect to one or more life insurance 
policies or annuity or endowment contracts owned by the 
taxpayer covering any individual who is (1) an officer or 
employee of, or (2) is financially interested in, any trade or 
business carried on by the taxpayer (the COLI rule). An 
exception is provided for interest on indebtedness with respect 
to life insurance policies covering up to 20 key persons, 
subject to an interest rate cap.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction is intended to prevent unintended 
avoidance of the COLI rule by clarifying that the rule relates 
to life insurance policies or annuity or endowment contracts 
covering any individual who (1) is or was an officer or 
employee of, or (2) is or was financially interested in, any 
trade or business carried on currently or formerly by the 
taxpayer. Thus, for example, the provision would clarify the 
treatment of interest on debt with respect to contracts 
covering former employees of the taxpayer. As another example, 
the provision would clarify the treatment of interest on debt 
with respect to a business formerly conducted by the taxpayer 
and transferred to an affiliate of the taxpayer. No inference 
is intended as the interpretation of this provision under prior 
law.

       G. Applicable Period for Purposes of Applying the Interest

         Rate for a Variable Rate Contract Under the COLI Rules

   (sec. 1602(f)(2) of the Act and sec. 264(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    No deduction is allowed for interest paid or accrued on any 
indebtedness with respect to one or more life insurance 
policies or annuity or endowment contracts owned by the 
taxpayer covering any individual who is (1) an officer or 
employee of, or (2) is financially interested in, any trade or 
business carried on by the taxpayer. An exception is provided 
for interest on indebtedness with respect to life insurance 
policies covering up to 20 key persons, subject to an interest 
rate cap.
    This provision generally does not apply to interest on debt 
with respect to contracts purchased on or before June 20, 1986. 
If the policy loan interest rate under such a contract does not 
provide for a fixed rate of interest, then interest on such a 
contract paid or accrued after December 31, 1995, is allowable 
only to the extent the rate of interest for each fixed period 
selected by the taxpayer does not exceed Moody's Corporate Bond 
Yield Average--Monthly Average Corporates, for the third month 
preceding the first month of the fixed period. The fixed period 
must be 12 months or less.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction provides that an election of an 
applicable period for purposes of applying the interest rate 
for a variable rate contract can be made no later than the 90th 
date after the date of enactment of the proposal, and applies 
to the taxpayer's first taxable year ending on or after October 
13, 1995. If no election is made, the applicable period is the 
policy year. The policy year is the 12-month period beginning 
on the anniversary date of the policy.

         H. Definition of 20-Percent Owner for Purposes of Key

        Person Exception Under COLI Rule (sec. 1602(f)(3) of the

                  Act and sec. 264(d)(4) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    No deduction is allowed for interest paid or accrued on any 
indebtedness with respect to one or more life insurance 
policies or annuity or endowment contracts owned by the 
taxpayer covering any individual who is (1) an officer or 
employee of, or (2) is financially interested in, any trade or 
business carried on by the taxpayer. An exception is provided 
for interest on indebtedness with respect to life insurance 
policies covering up to 20 key persons, subject to an interest 
rate cap.
    A key person is an individual who is either an officer or a 
20-percent owner of the taxpayer. The number of individuals 
that can be treated as key persons may not exceed the greater 
of (1) 5 individuals, or (2) the lesser of 5 percent of the 
total number of officers and employees of the taxpayer, or 20 
individuals. Employees are to be full-time employees, for this 
purpose. A 20-percent owner is an individual who directly owns 
20 percent or more of the total combined voting power of the 
corporation. If the taxpayer is not a corporation, the statute 
states that a 20-percent owner is an individual who directly 
owns 20 percent or more of the capital or profits interest of 
the employer.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction clarifies that, in determining a 
key person, if the taxpayer is not a corporation, a 20-percent 
owner is an individual who directly owns 20 percent or more of 
the capital or profits interest of the taxpayer.

       I. Effective Date of Interest Rate Cap on Key Persons and

        Pre-1986 Contracts Under the COLI Rule (sec. 1602(f)(4)

                  of the Act and sec. 501(c) of HIPA)

                               Prior Law

    No deduction is allowed for interest paid or accrued on any 
indebtedness with respect to one or more life insurance 
policies or annuity or endowment contracts owned by the 
taxpayer covering any individual who is (1) an officer or 
employee of, or (2) is financially interested in, any trade or 
business carried on by the taxpayer. An exception is provided 
for interest on indebtedness with respect to life insurance 
policies covering up to 20 key persons, subject to an interest 
rate cap.
    This provision generally does not apply to interest on debt 
with respect to contracts purchased on or before June 20, 1986. 
If the policy loan interest rate under such a contract does not 
provide for a fixed rate of interest, then interest on such a 
contract paid or accrued after December 31, 1995, is allowable 
only to the extent the rate of interest for each fixed period 
selected by the taxpayer does not exceed Moody's Corporate Bond 
Yield Average--Monthly Average Corporates, for the third month 
preceding the first month of the fixed period. The fixed period 
must be 12 months or less.
    The interest rate cap on key persons and pre-1986 contracts 
is effective with respect to interest paid or accrued for any 
month beginning after December 31, 1995. Another part of the 
provision provides that the interest rate cap on key employees 
and pre-1986 contracts applies to interest paid or accrued 
after October 13, 1995.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction clarifies that, under the COLI 
rule, the interest rate cap on key persons and pre-1986 
contracts applies to interest paid or accrued for any month 
beginning after December 31, 1995. This technical correction 
eliminates the discrepancy between the October and the December 
dates in the grandfather rule for pre-1986 contracts.

        J. Clarification of Contract Lapses Under Effective Date

        Provisions of the COLI Rule (sec. 1602(f)(5) of the Act

                      and sec. 501(d)(2) of HIPA)

                               Prior Law

    No deduction is allowed for interest paid or accrued on any 
indebtedness with respect to one or more life insurance 
policies or annuity or endowment contracts owned by the 
taxpayer covering any individual who is (1) an officer or 
employee of, or (2) is financially interested in, any trade or 
business carried on by the taxpayer. An exception is provided 
for interest on indebtedness with respect to life insurance 
policies covering up to 20 key persons, subject to an interest 
rate cap.
    Additional limitations are imposed on the deductibility of 
interest with respect to single premium contracts, and interest 
on debt incurred or continued to purchase or carry a life 
insurance, endowment, or annuity contract pursuant to a plan of 
purchase that contemplates the systematic direct or indirect 
borrowing of part or all of the increases in the cash value of 
the contract. An exception to the latter rule is provided, 
permitting deductibility of interest on bona fide debt that is 
part of such a plan, if no part of 4 of the annual premiums due 
during the first 7 years is paid by means of debt (the ``4-out-
of-7'' rule).
    This COLI rule is phased in. In connection with the phase-
in rule, a transition rule provides that any amount included in 
income during 1996, 1997, or 1998, that is received under a 
contract described in the provision on the complete surrender, 
redemption or maturity of the contract or in full discharge of 
the obligation under the contract that is in the nature of a 
refund of the consideration paid for the contract, is 
includable ratably over the first 4 taxable years beginning 
with the taxable year the amount would otherwise have been 
includable. The lapse of a contract after October 13, 1995, due 
to nonpayment of premiums does not cause interest paid or 
accrued prior to January 1, 1999, to be nondeductible solely by 
reason of (1) failure to meet the 4-out-of-7 rule, or (2) 
causing the contract to be treated as a single premium contract 
within the meaning of section 264(b)(1). This lapse provision 
states that the relief is provided in the following case: 
solely by reason of no additional premiums being received by 
reason of a lapse.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction clarifies that, under the 
transition relief provided under the COLI rule, the 4-out-of-7 
rule and the single premium rule are not to apply solely by 
reason of a lapse occurring after October 13, 1995, by reason 
of no additional premiums being received under the contract.

        K. Requirement of Gain Recognition on Certain Exchanges

     (sec. 1602(g) (1) and (2) of the Act, sec. 511 of the Act, and

                      sec. 877(d)(2) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Under the expatriation tax provisions in section 877, 
special tax treatment applies to certain former U.S. citizens 
and former long-term U.S. residents for 10 years following the 
date of loss of U.S. citizenship or U.S. residency status. Gain 
recognition is required on certain exchanges of property 
following loss of U.S. citizenship or U.S. residency status, 
unless a gain recognition agreement is entered into. In 
addition, regulatory authority is granted to apply this rule to 
the 15-year period beginning 5 years before the loss of U.S. 
citizenship or U.S. residency status.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction clarifies that the period to which 
the general rule requiring gain recognition on certain 
exchanges applies is the 10-year period that begins on the date 
of loss of U.S. citizenship or U.S. residency status. In 
addition, the technical correction clarifies that in the case 
of an exchange occurring during the 5-year period before the 
loss of U.S. citizenship or U.S. residency status, any gain 
required to be recognized under regulations is to be recognized 
immediately after the date of such loss of U.S. citizenship or 
U.S. residency status.

         L. Suspension of 10-Year Period in Case of Substantial

        Diminution of Risk of Loss (sec. 1602(g)(3) of the Act,

          sec. 511 of the Act, and sec. 877(d)(3) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Under the expatriation tax provisions in section 877, 
special tax treatment applies to certain former U.S. citizens 
and former long-term U.S. residents for 10 years following the 
date of loss of U.S. citizenship or U.S. residency status. The 
running of this period with respect to gain on the sale or 
exchange of any property is suspended for any period during 
which the individual's risk of loss with respect to the 
property is substantially diminished.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction clarifies that the period to which 
the rule suspending such period in the case of a substantial 
diminution of risk of loss applies is the 10-year period that 
begins on the date of loss of U.S. citizenship or U.S. 
residency status.

        M. Treatment of Property Contributed to Certain Foreign

     Corporations (sec. 1602(g)(4) of the Act, sec. 511 of the Act,

                    and sec. 877(d)(4) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Under the expatriation tax provisions in section 877, 
special tax treatment applies to certain former U.S. citizens 
and former long-term U.S. residents for 10 years following the 
date of loss of U.S. citizenship or U.S. residency status. 
Special rules apply in the case of certain contributions of 
U.S. property by such an individual to a foreign corporation 
during such period.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction clarifies that the period to which 
the rule regarding certain contributions to foreign 
corporations applies is the 10-year period that begins on the 
date of loss of U.S. citizenship or U.S. residency status. The 
technical correction also clarifies that the rule applies in 
the case of property the income from which, immediately before 
the contribution, was from U.S. sources.

N. Credit for Foreign Estate Tax (sec. 1602(g)(6) of the Act, sec. 511 
               of the Act, and sec. 2107(c) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Under the expatriation tax provisions in section 2107, 
special estate tax treatment applies to certain former U.S. 
citizens and former long-term U.S. residents who die within 10 
years following the date of loss of U.S. citizenship or U.S. 
residency status. Special rules provide a credit against the 
U.S. estate tax for foreign estate taxes paid with respect to 
property that is includible in the decedent's U.S. estate 
solely by reason of the expatriation estate tax provisions.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The technical correction clarifies the formula for 
determining the amount of the foreign tax credit allowable 
against U.S. estate taxes on property includible in the 
decedent's U.S. estate solely by reason of the expatriation 
estate tax provisions. The credit for the estate taxes paid to 
any foreign country generally is limited to the lesser of (1) 
the foreign estate taxes attributable to the property 
includible in the decedent's U.S. estate solely by reason of 
the expatriation estate tax provisions or (2) the U.S. estate 
tax attributable to property that is subject to estate tax in 
such foreign country and is includible in the decedent's U.S. 
estate solely by reason of the expatriation tax provisions. The 
amount of taxes attributable to such property is determined on 
a pro rata basis.
         TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO THE TAXPAYER BILL OF RIGHTS 2

       A. Reasonable Cause Abatement for First-Tier Intermediate

      Sanctions Excise Tax (sec. 1603(a) of the Act and sec. 4962

                              of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Section 4958 imposes penalty excise taxes as an 
intermediate sanction in cases where organizations exempt from 
tax under sections 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4) (other than private 
foundations) engage in an ``excess benefit transaction.'' The 
excise tax may be imposed on certain disqualified persons 
(i.e., insiders) who improperly benefit from an excess benefit 
transaction and on organization managers who participate in 
such a transaction knowing that it is improper.
    A disqualified person who benefits from an excess benefit 
transaction is subject to a first-tier penalty tax equal to 25 
percent of the amount of the excess benefit. Organization 
managers who participate in an excess benefit transaction 
knowing that it is improper are subject to a first-tier penalty 
tax of 10 percent of the amount of the excess benefit. 
Additional second-tier taxes equal to 200 percent of the amount 
of the excess benefit may be imposed on a disqualified person 
if there is no correction of the transaction within a specified 
time period.
    Under section 4962, the IRS has the authority to abate 
certain first-tier taxes if the taxable event was due to 
reasonable cause and not to willful neglect and the event was 
corrected within the applicable correction period. First-tier 
taxes which may be abated include, among others, the taxes 
imposed under sections 4941 (on acts of self-dealing between 
private foundations and disqualified persons), 4942 (for 
failure by private foundations to distribute a minimum amount 
of income), and 4943 (on private foundations with excess 
business holdings).
    In enacting the new excise taxes on excess benefit 
transactions, Congress explicitly intended to provide the IRS 
with abatement authority under section 4962.\316\ However, the 
abatement rules of section 4962 applied only to qualified 
first-tier taxes imposed by subchapter A or C of Chapter 42. 
The section 4958 excise tax is located in subchapter D of 
Chapter 42. The failure to cross reference subchapter D in 
section 4962 meant that IRS did not have such abatement 
authority with respect to the section 4958 excise taxes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \316\ See report of the House Committee on Ways and Means (H. Rept. 
104-506) accompanying H.R. 2377, p. 59.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act amends section 4962(b) to include a cross-reference 
to first-tier taxes imposed by subchapter D (i.e., the section 
4958 excise taxes on excess benefit transactions). Thus, the 
IRS has authority to abate the first-tier excise taxes on 
excess benefit transactions in cases where it is established 
that the violation was due to reasonable cause and not due to 
willful neglect and the transaction at issue was corrected 
within the specified period.

B. Reporting by Public Charities With Respect to Intermediate Sanctions 
  and Certain Other Excise Tax Penalties (sec. 1603(b) of the Act and 
                         sec. 6033 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Section 4958 imposes penalty excise taxes as an 
intermediate sanction in cases where organizations exempt from 
tax under sections 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4) (other than private 
foundations) engage in an ``excess benefit transaction.'' The 
excise tax may be imposed on certain disqualified persons 
(i.e., insiders) who improperly benefit from an excess benefit 
transaction and on organization managers who participate in 
such a transaction knowing that it is improper. No tax is 
imposed on the organization itself with respect under section 
4958.
    Section 4911 imposes an excise tax penalty on excess 
lobbying expenditures made by public charities. The tax is 
imposed on the organization itself. Section 4912 imposes a 
penalty excise tax on certain public charities that make 
disqualifying lobbying expenditures and section 4955 imposes a 
penalty excise tax on political expenditures of section 
501(c)(3) organizations. Both of these penalty taxes are 
imposed not only on the affected organization, but also on 
organization managers who agree to an expenditure knowing that 
it is improper.
    Under section 4962, the IRS has the authority to abate 
certain first-tier taxes if the taxable event was due to 
reasonable cause and not to willful neglect and the event was 
corrected within the applicable correction period. First-tier 
taxes which may be abated include, among others, the taxes 
imposed under section 4955.\317\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \317\ A separate provision in the Act makes a technical correction 
to section 4962(b) to permit the abatement of first-tier penalty excise 
taxes imposed under section 4958.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under section 6033(b)(10), 501(c)(3) organizations are 
required to report annually on Form 990 any amounts paid by the 
organization under section 4911, 4912, and 4955. Thus, although 
sections 4912 and 4955 impose excise taxes on organization 
managers, organizations technically were not required to report 
any such excise taxes paid by such managers.
    In addition, under section 6033(b)(11), an organization 
exempt from tax under section 501(c)(3) must report on Form 990 
any amount of excise tax on excess benefit transactions paid by 
the organization, or any disqualified person with respect to 
such organization, during the taxable year. The Code did not 
explicitly require the reporting of any excess benefit excise 
taxes paid by an organization manager solely in his or her 
capacity as such (i.e., an organization manager might also be a 
disqualified person with respect to an excess benefit 
transaction, in which case any tax paid would be reported).

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act makes the reporting requirements of section 
6033(b)(10) and (11) consistent with the excise tax penalty 
provisions to which they relate. Thus, section 6033(b)(10) is 
amended to require 501(c)(3) organizations to report any 
amounts of tax imposed under sections 4911, 4912, and 4955 on 
the organization or any organization manager of the 
organization. In addition, the Act requires reporting with 
respect to any reimbursements paid by an organization with 
respect to taxes imposed under sections 4912 or 4955 on any 
organization manager of the organization. Section 6033(b)(11) 
is amended to require 501(c)(3) organizations to report any 
amounts of tax imposed under section 4958 on any organization 
manager or any disqualified person, as well as any 
reimbursements of section 4958 excise tax liability paid by the 
organization to such organization managers or disqualified 
persons.
    In addition, the Act clarifies that no reporting is 
required under sections 6033(b)(10) or (11) in the event a 
first-tier penalty excise tax imposed under section 4955 or 
section 4958 is abated by the IRS pursuant to its authority 
under section 4962.
                  TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO OTHER ACTS

  A. Correction of GATT Interest and Mortality Rate Provisions in the 
               Retirement Protection Act (sec. 1604(b)(3)

         of the Act and sec. 1449(a) of the Small Business Act)

                               Prior Law

    The Retirement Protection Act of 1994, enacted as part of 
the implementing legislation for the General Agreements on 
Tariffs and Trade (``GATT''), modified the actuarial 
assumptions that must be used in adjusting benefits and 
limitations under section 415. In general, in adjusting a 
benefit that is payable in a form other than a straight life 
annuity and in adjusting the dollar limitation if benefits 
begin before age 62, the interest rate to be used cannot be 
less than the greater of 5 percent or the rate specified by the 
plan. Under GATT, the benefit is payable in a form subject to 
the requirements of section 417(e)(3), then the interest rate 
on 30-year Treasury securities is substituted for 5 percent. 
Also under GATT, for purposes of adjusting any limit or 
benefit, the mortality table prescribed by the Secretary must 
be used. This provision of GATT was generally effective as of 
the first day of the limitation year beginning in 1995.
    The Small Business Act conformed the effective date of 
these changes to the effective date of similar changes by 
providing generally that, in the case of a plan that was 
adopted and in effect before December, 8, 1994, the GATT change 
is not effective with respect to benefits accrued before the 
earlier of (1) the later of the date a plan amendment applying 
the amendments is adopted or made effective or (2) the first 
day of the first limitation year beginning after December 31, 
1999. The Small Business Act provides that ``Determinations 
under section 415(b)(2)(E) before such earlier date are to be 
made with respect to such benefits on the basis of such section 
as in effect on December 7, 1994 (except that the modification 
made by section 1449(b) of the Small Business Job Protection 
Act of 1996 shall be taken into account), and the provisions of 
the plan as in effect on December 7, 1994, but only if such 
provisions of the plan meet the requirements of such section 
(as so in effect).''

                        Explanation of Provision

    The provision in the Small Business Act was intended to 
permit plans to apply pre-GATT law under section 415(b)(2)(E) 
for a transition period. The Act conforms the statute to this 
intent by providing that determinations under section 
415(b)(2)(E) before such earlier date are to be made with 
respect to such benefits on the basis of such section as in 
effect on December 7, 1994 and the provisions of the plan as in 
effect on December 7, 1994, but only if such provisions of the 
plan meet the requirements of such section (as so in effect).

  B. Clarify Definition of Indian Reservation Under Section 168(j)(6) 
        (sec. 1604(c) of the Act and sec 168(j)(6) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Section 168(j)(6) provides for accelerated depreciation for 
certain property located on Indian reservations. For this 
purpose, the term ``Indian reservation'' means a reservation as 
defined in either (a) section 3(d) of the Indian Financing Act 
of 1974 (25 U.S.C. 1452(d)), or (b) section 4(10) of the Indian 
Child Welfare Act of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 1903(10)). In addition, 
section 45A (which provides for an incremental Indian 
employment credit) incorporates by reference the same 
definition of ``Indian reservation'' contained in section 
168(j)(6). Section 3(d) of the Indian Financing Act of 1974 
includes not only officially designated Indian reservations and 
public domain Indian allotments, but also all ``former Indian 
reservations in Oklahoma,'' which covers most of the State of 
Oklahoma even though parts of such ``former Indian 
reservations'' may no longer have a significant nexus to an 
Indian tribe.

                        Explanation of Provision

    For purposes of the section 168(j)(6) definition of 
``Indian reservation,'' the term ``former reservations in 
Oklahoma'' is defined as lands that are (1) within the 
jurisdictional area of an Oklahoma Indian tribe as determined 
by the Secretary of the Interior, and (2) recognized by such 
Secretary as an area eligible for trust land status under 25 
C.F.R. Part 151.

                             Effective Date

    The provision generally is effective as if included in the 
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (i.e., the technical 
correction applies to property placed in service and wages paid 
on or after January 1, 1994). However, the provision does not 
apply to wages claimed on any original return filed prior to 
March 18, 1997, nor does it apply to property placed in service 
with a 10-year life or less (without regard to section 168(j)) 
if accelerated depreciation under section 168(j) was claimed 
with respect to such property on an original return filed prior 
to March 18, 1997.

C. Treatment of ``Cost-Plus'' Contracts Under Section 833 (sec. 1604(d) 
                  of the Act and sec. 833 of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Section 833 provides a special deduction for eligible 
health insurance organizations equal to (1) 25 percent of the 
sum of: the claims incurred during the taxable year; and 
expenses incurred during the year in connection with the 
administration, adjustment, or settlement of claims, less (2) 
the adjusted surplus as of the beginning of the year.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The provision clarifies that, for purposes of the section 
833 deduction, liabilities incurred during the taxable year 
under cost-plus contracts are added to claims incurred under 
section 833(b)(1)(A)(i). Similarly, for purposes of the section 
833 deduction, expenses incurred during the taxable year in 
connection with the administration of cost-plus contracts are 
added to expenses incurred under section 833(b)(1)(A)(ii).

D. Related Parties Determined by Reference to Section 267 (sec. 1604(d) 
                of the Act and sec. 267(f) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Section 267 disallows loses arising in transactions between 
certain defined related parties. In the case of related 
corporations, such losses may be deferred. Several Code 
provisions, in defining related parties, often incorporate the 
relationships described in section 267 by cross-reference to 
such section.

                        Explanation of Provision

    Any provision of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that 
refers to a relationship that would result in loss disallowance 
under section 267 also refers to relationships where loss is 
deferred, where such relationship is applicable to the 
provision.
   TITLE XVII. LIMITED TAX BENEFITS SUBJECT TO THE LINE ITEM VETO ACT

                         (sec. 1701 of the Act)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Line Item Veto Act amended the Congressional Budget and 
Impoundment Act of 1974 to grant the President the limited 
authority to cancel specific dollar amounts of discretionary 
budget authority, certain new direct spending, and limited tax 
benefits. The Line Item Veto Act provides that the Joint 
Committee on Taxation is required to examine any revenue or 
reconciliation bill or joint resolution that amends the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 prior to its filing by a 
conference committee in order to determine whether or not the 
bill or joint resolution contains any limited tax benefits and 
to provide a statement to the conference committee that either 
(1) identifies each limited tax benefit contained in the bill 
or resolution, or (2) states that the bill or resolution 
contains no limited tax benefits. The conferees determine 
whether or not to include the Joint Committee's statement in 
the conference report. If the conference report includes the 
information from the Joint Committee on Taxation identifying 
provisions that are limited tax benefits, then the President 
may cancel one or more of those, but only those, provisions 
that have been identified. If such a conference report contains 
a statement from the Joint Committee on Taxation that none of 
the provisions in the conference report are limited tax 
benefits, then the President has no authority to cancel any of 
the specific tax provisions, because there are no tax 
provisions that are eligible for cancellation under the Line 
Item Veto Act.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act contains a list of provisions that were identified 
by the Joint Committee on Taxation as limited tax benefits 
within the meaning of the Line Item Veto Act. These provisions 
are listed below.
    (1) Sec. 101(c) (relating to high risk pools permitted to 
cover dependents of high risk individuals)
    (2) Sec. 222 (relating to limitation on qualified 501(c)(3) 
bonds other than hospital bonds)
    (3) Sec. 224 (relating to contributions of computer 
technology and equipment for elementary or secondary school 
purposes)
    (4) Sec. 312(a) (relating to treatment of remainder 
interests for purposes of provision relating to gain from sale 
of principal residence)
    (5) Sec. 501(b) (relating to indexing of alternative 
valuation of certain farm, etc., real property)
    (6) Sec. 504 (relating to extension of treatment of certain 
rents under section 2032A to lineal descendants)
    (7) Sec. 505 (relating to clarification of judicial review 
of eligibility for extension of time for payment of estate tax)
    (8) Sec. 508 (relating to treatment of land subject to 
qualified conservation easement)
    (9) Sec. 511 (relating to expansion of exception from 
generation-skipping transfer tax for transfers to individuals 
with deceased parents)
    (10) Sec. 601 (relating to the research tax credit)
    (11) Sec. 602 (relating to contributions of stock to 
private foundations)
    (12) Sec. 603 (relating to the work opportunity tax credit)
    (13) Sec. 604 (relating to orphan drug tax credit)
    (14) Sec. 701 (relating to incentives for revitalization of 
the District of Columbia) to the extent it amends the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 to create sections 1400 and 1400A 
(relating to tax-exempt economic development bonds)
    (15) Sec. 701 (relating to incentives for revitalization of 
the District of Columbia) to the extent it amends the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 to create section 1400C (relating to 
first-time homebuyer credit for District of Columbia)
    (16) Sec. 801 (relating to incentives for employing long-
term family assistance recipients)
    (17) Sec. 904(b) (relating to uniform rate of tax on 
vaccines) as it relates to any vaccine containing pertussis 
bacteria, extracted or partial cell bacteria, or specific 
pertussis antigens
    (18) Sec. 904(b) (relating to uniform rate of tax on 
vaccines) as it relates to any vaccine against measles
    (19) Sec. 904(b) (relating to uniform rate of tax on 
vaccines) as it relates to any vaccine against mumps
    (20) Sec. 904(b) (relating to uniform rate of tax on 
vaccines) as it relates to any vaccine against rubella
    (21) Sec. 905 (relating to operators of multiple retail 
gasoline outlets treated as wholesale distributors for refund 
purposes)
    (22) Sec. 906 (relating to exemption of electric and other 
clean-fuel motor vehicles from luxury automobile 
classification)
    (23) Sec. 907(a) (relating to rate of tax on liquified 
natural gas determined on basis of BTU equivalency with 
gasoline)
    (24) Sec. 907(b) (relating to rate of tax on methanol from 
natural gas determined on basis of BTU equivalency with 
gasoline)
    (25) Sec. 908 (relating to modification of tax treatment of 
hard cider)
    (26) Sec. 914 (relating to mortgage financing for 
residences located in disaster areas)
    (27) Sec. 962 (relating to assignment of workmen's 
compensation liability eligible for exclusion relating to 
personal injury liability assignments)
    (28) Sec. 963 (relating to tax-exempt status for certain 
State worker's compensation act companies)
    (29) Sec. 967 (relating to additional advance refunding of 
certain Virgin Island bonds)
    (30) Sec. 968 (relating to nonrecognition of gain on sale 
of stock to certain farmers' cooperatives)
    (31) Sec. 971 (relating to exemption of the incremental 
cost of a clean fuel vehicle from the limits on depreciation 
for vehicles)
    (32) Sec. 974 (relating to clarification of treatment of 
certain receivables purchased by cooperative hospital service 
organizations)
    (33) Sec. 975 (relating to deduction in computing adjusted 
gross income for expenses in connection with service performed 
by certain officials) with respect to taxable years beginning 
before 1991
    (34) Sec. 977 (relating to elective carryback of existing 
carryovers of National Railroad Passenger Corporation)
    (35) Sec. 1005(b)(2)(B) (relating to transition rule for 
instruments described in a ruling request submitted to the 
Internal Revenue Service on or before June 8, 1997)
    (36) Sec. 1005(b)(2)(C) (relating to transition rule for 
instruments described on or before June 8, 1997, in a public 
announcement or in a filing with the Securities and Exchange 
Commission) as it relates to a public announcement
    (37) Sec. 1005(b)(2)(C) (relating to transition rule for 
instruments described on or before June 8, 1997, in a public 
announcement or in a filing with the Securities and Exchange 
Commission) as it relates to a filing with the Securities and 
Exchange Commission
    (38) Sec. 1011(d)(2)(B) (relating to transition rule for 
distributions made pursuant to the terms of a tender offer 
outstanding on May 3, 1995)
    (39) Sec. 1011(d)(3) (relating to transition rule for 
distributions made pursuant to the terms of a tender offer 
outstanding on September 13, 1995)
    (40) Sec. 1012(d)(3)(B) (relating to transition rule for 
distributions pursuant to an acquisition described in section 
355(e)(2)(A)(ii) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 described 
in a ruling request submitted to the Internal Revenue Service 
on or before April 16, 1997)
    (41) Sec. 1012(d)(3)(C) (relating to transition rule for 
distributions pursuant to an acquisition described in section 
355(e)(2)(A)(ii) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 described 
in a public announcement or filing with the Securities and 
Exchange Commission) as it relates to a public announcement
    (42) Sec. 1012(d)(3)(C) (relating to transition rule for 
distributions pursuant to an acquisition described in section 
355(e)(2)(A)(ii) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 described 
in a public announcement or filing with the Securities and 
Exchange Commission) as it relates to a filing with the 
Securities and Exchange Commission
    (43) Sec. 1013(d)(2)(B) (relating to transition rule for 
distributions or acquisitions after June 8, 1997, described in 
a ruling request submitted to the Internal Revenue Service 
submitted on or before June 8, 1997)
    (44) Sec. 1013(d)(2)(C) (relating to transition rule for 
distributions or acquisitions after June 8, 1997, described in 
a public announcement or filing with the Securities and 
Exchange Commission on or before June 8, 1997) as it relates to 
a public announcement
    (45) Sec. 1013(d)(2)(C) (relating to transition rule for 
distributions or acquisitions after June 8, 1997, described in 
a public announcement or filing with the Securities and 
Exchange Commission on or before June 8, 1997) as it relates to 
a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission
    (46) Sec. 1014(f)(2)(B) (relating to transition rule for 
any transaction after June 8, 1997, if such transaction is 
described in a ruling request submitted to the Internal Revenue 
Service on or before June 8, 1997)
    (47) Sec. 1014(f)(2)(C) (relating to transition rule for 
any transaction after June 8, 1997, if such transaction is 
described in a public announcement or filing with the 
Securities and Exchange Commission on or before June 8, 1997) 
as it relates to a public announcement
    (48) Sec. 1014(f)(2)(C) (relating to transition rule for 
any transaction after June 8, 1997, if such transaction is 
described in a public announcement or filing with the 
Securities and Exchange Commission on or before June 8, 1997) 
as it relates to a filing with the Securities and Exchange 
Commission
    (49) Sec. 1042(b) (relating to special rules for provision 
terminating certain exceptions from rules relating to exempt 
organizations which provide commercial-type insurance)
    (50) Sec. 1081(a) (relating to termination of suspense 
accounts for family corporations required to use accrual 
accounting) as it relates to the repeal of Internal Revenue 
Code section 447(i)(3)
    (51) Sec. 1089(b)(3) (relating to reformations)
    (52) Sec. 1089(b)(5)(B)(i) (relating to persons under a 
mental disability)
    (53) Sec.1171 (relating to treatment of computer software 
as FSC export property)
    (54) Sec. 1175 (relating to exemption for active financing 
income)
    (55) Sec. 1204 (relating to travel expenses of Federal 
employees doing criminal investigations)
    (56) Sec. 1236 (relating to extension of time for filing a 
request for administrative adjustment)
    (57) Sec. 1243 (relating to special rules for 
administrative adjustment request with respect to bad debts or 
worthless securities)
    (58) Sec. 1251 (relating to clarification on limitation on 
maximum number of shareholders)
    (59) Sec. 1253 (relating to attribution rules applicable to 
tenant ownership)
    (60) Sec. 1256 relating to modification of earnings and 
profits rules for determining whether REIT has earnings and 
profits from non-REIT years)
    (61) Sec. 1257 (relating to treatment of foreclosure 
property)
    (62) Sec. 1261 (relating to shared appreciation mortgages)
    (63) Sec. 1302 (relating to clarification of waiver of 
certain rights of recovery)
    (64) Sec. 1303 (relating to transitional rule under section 
2056A)
    (65) Sec. 1304 (relating to treatment for estate tax 
purposes of short-term obligations held by nonresident alien)
    (66) Sec. 1311 (relating to clarification of treatment of 
survivor annuities under qualified terminable interest rules)
    (67) Sec. 1312 (relating to treatment of qualified domestic 
trust rules of forms of ownership which are not trusts)
    (68) Sec. 1313 (relating to opportunity to correct failures 
under section 2032A)
    (69) Sec. 1414 (relating to fermented material from any 
brewery may be received at a distilled spirits plant)
    (70) Sec. 1417 (relating to use of additional ameliorating 
material in certain wines)
    (71) Sec. 1418 (relating to domestically produced beer may 
be withdrawn free of tax for use of foreign embassies, 
legations, etc.)
    (72) Sec. 1421 (relating to transfer to brewery of beer 
imported in bulk without payment of tax)
    (73) Sec. 1422 (relating to transfer to bonded wine cellars 
of wine imported in bulk without payment of tax)
    (74) Sec. 1506 (relating to clarification of certain rules 
relating to employee stock ownership plans of S corporations)
    (75) Sec. 1507 (relating to modification of 10 percent tax 
for nondeductible contributions)
    (76) Sec. 1523 (relating to repeal of application of 
unrelated business income tax to ESOPs)
    (77) Sec. 1530 (relating to gratuitous transfers for the 
benefit of employees)
    (78) Sec. 1532 (relating to special rules relating to 
church plans)
    (79) Sec. 1604(c)(2) (relating to amendment related to 
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993)

                         Line Item Veto Action

    Pursuant to the authority under the Line Item Veto Act, the 
President canceled the following from the above listed items: 
item (30) Sec. 968 (relating to nonrecognition of gain on sale 
of stock to certain farmers' cooperatives) and item (54) Sec. 
1175 (relating to exemption for active financing 
income).317a
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \317a\ See House Document 105-116, Cancellation of Limited Tax 
Benefit, Message from the President of the United States. A bill that 
would restore and modify these canceled provisions, H.R. 2513, was 
reported by the House Committee on Ways and Means (Rept. 105-318 Part 
1) on October 9, 1997, and passed by the House on November 8, 1997.

PART THREE: REVENUE PROVISIONS OF THE BALANCED BUDGET ACT OF 1997 (H.R. 
                              2015) \318\

 A. Taxation of Medicare+Choice Medical Savings Accounts (sec. 4006 of 
                 the Act and new sec. 138 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    Under present and prior law, the value of Medicare coverage 
and benefits is not includible in taxable income.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \318\ P.L. 105-33; August 5, 1997. H.R. 2015 was reported by the 
House Committee on the Budget on June 24, 1997 (H. Rept. 105-149). The 
Committee on Ways and Means approved its health and human resources 
reconciliation provisions on June 9 and 10, 1997, respectively, which 
were incorporated in H.R. 2015 as reported. The bill, as amended, was 
passed by the House on June 25, 1997.
    S. 947 was reported by the Senate Committee on the Budget on June 
20, 1997 (no written report). S. 947 included the health and human 
resources reconciliation provisions as approved by the Committee on 
Finance on June 18, 1997. S. 947 was considered by the Senate on June 
23 and 24, 1997, and was passed, as amended, on June 25, 1997.
    H.R. 2015, as amended by the Senate provisions of S. 947, was 
passed by the Senate on June 25, 1997. A conference report was filed in 
the House on July 30, 1997 (H. Rept. 105-217); the House agreed to the 
conference report on July 30, 1997; and the Senate agreed to the 
conference report on July 31, 1997. H.R. 2015 was signed by the 
President on August 5, 1997.
    H.R. 2015, as enacted, includes the revenue-related provisions 
described in this Part.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Individuals who itemize deductions may deduct amounts paid 
during the taxable year (if not reimbursed by insurance or 
otherwise) for medical expenses of the taxpayer and the 
taxpayer's spouse and dependents (including expenses for 
insurance providing medical care) to the extent that the total 
of such expenses exceeds 7.5 percent of the taxpayer's adjusted 
gross income (``AGI'').
    Within limits, contributions to a medical savings account 
(``MSA'') are deductible in determining AGI if made by an 
eligible individual and are excludable from gross income and 
wages for employment tax purposes if made by the employer of an 
eligible individual.\319\ Under prior law, individuals covered 
under Medicare were not eligible to have an MSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \319\ The number of MSAs which can be established is subject to a 
cap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Earnings on amounts in an MSA are not currently includible 
in income. Distributions from an MSA for medical expenses of 
the MSA account holder and his or her spouse or dependents are 
not includible in income. For this purpose, medical expenses 
are defined as under the itemized deduction for medical 
expenses, except that medical expenses do not include any 
insurance premiums other than premiums for long-term care 
insurance, continuation coverage (so-called ``COBRA 
coverage''), or premiums for coverage while an individual is 
receiving unemployment compensation. Distributions not used for 
medical expenses are subject to an additional 15-percent tax 
unless the distribution is made after age 65, death, or 
disability.
    Under prior law, there were no tax provisions for 
Medicare+Choice medical savings accounts (``Medicare+Choice 
MSAs'').

                        Explanation of Provision

In general
    Under the Act, individuals who are eligible for Medicare 
are permitted to choose either the traditional Medicare program 
or a Medicare+Choice MSA plan.\320\ To the extent an individual 
chooses such a plan, the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
makes a specified contribution directly into a Medicare+Choice 
MSA designated by such individual. Only contributions by the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services can be made to a 
Medicare+Choice MSA and such contributions are not included in 
the taxable income of the Medicare+Choice MSA holder. Income 
earned on amounts held in a Medicare+Choice MSA are not 
currently includible in taxable income. Withdrawals from a 
Medicare+Choice MSA are excludable from taxable income if used 
for the qualified medical expenses of the Medicare+Choice MSA 
holder. Medical expenses of the account holder's spouse or 
dependents are not treated as qualified medical expenses. 
Withdrawals from a Medicare+Choice MSA that are not used for 
the qualified medical expenses of the account holder are 
includible in income and may be subject to an additional tax 
(described below).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \320\ As under prior law, individuals who are eligible for Medicare 
are not eligible for an MSA that is not a Medicare+Choice MSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definition of Medicare+Choice MSAs
    In general, a Medicare+Choice MSA is an MSA that is 
designated as Medicare+Choice MSA and to which the only 
contributions that can be made are those by the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services.\321\ Thus, a Medicare+Choice MSA is 
a tax-exempt trust (or a custodial account) created exclusively 
for the purpose of paying the qualified medical expenses of the 
account holder that meets requirements similar to those 
applicable to individual retirement arrangements 
(``IRAs'').\322\ The trustee of a Medicare+Choice MSA can be a 
bank, insurance company, or other person that demonstrates to 
the satisfaction of the Secretary of the Treasury that the 
manner in which such person will administer the trust will be 
consistent with applicable requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \321\ Medicare+Choice MSAs are not taken into account for purposes 
of the cap on non-Medicare+Choice MSAs, nor are they subject to that 
cap.
    \322\ For example, no Medicare+Choice MSA assets could be invested 
in life insurance contracts, Medicare+Choice MSA assets can not be 
commingled with other property except in a common trust fund or common 
investment fund, and an account holder's interest in a Medicare+Choice 
MSA would be nonforfeitable. In addition, if an account holder engages 
in a prohibited transaction with respect to a Medicare+Choice MSA or 
pledges assets in a Medicare+Choice MSA, rules similar to those for 
IRAs would apply, and any amounts treated as distributed to the account 
holder under such rules would be treated as not used for qualified 
medical expenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A Medicare+Choice MSA trustee is required to make such 
reports as may be required by the Secretary of the Treasury. A 
$50 penalty is imposed for each failure to file without 
reasonable cause.
Taxation of distributions from a Medicare+Choice MSA
    Distributions from a Medicare+Choice MSA that are used to 
pay the qualified medical expenses of the account holder are 
excludable from taxable income regardless of whether the 
account holder is enrolled in the Medicare+Choice MSA plan at 
the time of the distribution.\323\ Qualified medical expenses 
are defined as under the rules relating to the itemized 
deduction for medical expenses. However, for this purpose, 
qualified medical expenses do not include any insurance 
premiums other than premiums for long-term care insurance, 
continuation insurance (so-called ``COBRA coverage''), or 
premium for coverage while an individual is receiving 
unemployment compensation. Distributions from a Medicare+Choice 
MSA that are excludable from gross income under the provision 
can not be taken into account for purposes of the itemized 
deduction for medical expenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \323\ Under the provision, medical expenses of the account holder's 
spouse or dependents are not treated as qualified medical expenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Distributions for purposes other than qualified medical 
expenses are includible in taxable income. An additional tax of 
50 percent applies to the extent the total distributions for 
purposes other than qualified medical expenses in a taxable 
year exceed the amount by which the value of the 
Medicare+Choice MSA as of December 31, of the preceding year 
exceeds 60 percent of the deductible of the plan under which 
the individual is covered on January 1 of the current year. The 
additional tax does not apply to distributions on account of 
the disability or death of the account holder.
    Following is an example of how the amount available to be 
withdrawn from a Medicare+Choice MSA without penalty is 
calculated.\324\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \324\ The numbers are provided for illustrative purposes only.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Year 1   Year 2   Year 3   Year 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Deductible.......................   $3,000   $3,000   $3,000   $3,000
2. 60% of deductible................    1,800    1,800    1,800    1,800
3. Contributions....................    1,300    1,300    1,300    1,300
4. Earnings.........................      130      200      300      400
5. Total withdrawals................      600      500      600      600
6. Closing balance (Dec. 31 of                                          
 current year)......................      830    1,830    2,830    3,930
7. Amount available for nonmedical                                      
 withdrawal without penalty (6. from                                    
 prior year--2., or 0 if less than                                      
 0).................................        0        0       30    1,030
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Direct trustee-to-trustee transfers can be made from one 
Medicare+Choice MSA to another Medicare+Choice MSA without 
income inclusion.
    The provision includes a correction mechanism so that if 
contributions for a year are erroneously made by the Secretary 
of Health and Human Services, such erroneous contributions can 
be returned to the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
(along with any attributable earnings) from the Medicare+Choice 
MSA without tax consequence to the account holder.
Treatment of Medicare+Choice MSA at death
    Upon the death of the account holder, if the beneficiary of 
the Medicare+Choice MSA is the account holder's surviving 
spouse, the surviving spouse may continue the Medicare+Choice 
MSA, but no new contributions could be made. Distributions from 
the Medicare+Choice MSA are subject to the rules applicable to 
MSAs that are not Medicare+Choice MSAs. Thus, earnings on the 
account balance are not currently includible in income. 
Distributions from the account for the qualified medical 
expenses of the spouse or the spouse's dependents (or 
subsequent spouse) are not includible in income. Distributions 
not for such medical expenses are includible in income, and 
subject to a 15-percent excise tax unless the distribution is 
made after the surviving spouse attains age 65, dies, or 
becomes disabled.
    If the beneficiary of a Medicare+Choice MSA is not the 
account holder's spouse, the Medicare+Choice MSA is no longer 
treated as a Medicare+Choice MSA and the value of the 
Medicare+Choice MSA on the account holder's date of death is 
included in the taxable income of the beneficiary for the 
taxable year in which the death occurred (under the rules 
applicable to MSAs generally). If the account holder fails to 
name a beneficiary, the value of the Medicare+Choice MSA on the 
account holder's date of death is to be included in the taxable 
income of the account holder's final income tax return (under 
the rules applicable to MSAs generally).
    In all cases, the value of the Medicare+Choice MSA is 
included in the account holder's gross estate for estate tax 
purposes.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective with respect to taxable years 
beginning after December 31, 1998.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
fiscal year budget receipts.

           B. Tax Treatment of Hospitals Which Participate in

         Provider-Sponsored Organizations (sec. 4041 of the Act

                    and new sec. 501(o) of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    To qualify as a charitable tax-exempt organization 
described in section 501(c)(3), an organization must be 
organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, 
scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational 
purposes, or to foster international sports competition, or for 
the prevention of cruelty to children or animals. Although 
section 501(c)(3) does not specifically mention furnishing 
medical care and operating a nonprofit hospital, such 
activities have long been considered to further charitable 
purposes, provided that the organization benefits the community 
as a whole.
    No part of the net earnings of a 501(c)(3) organization may 
inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual. 
No substantial part of the activities of a 501(c)(3) 
organization may consist of carrying on propaganda, or 
otherwise attempting to influence legislation, and such 
organization may not participate in, or intervene in, any 
political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any 
candidate for public office. In addition, under section 501(m), 
an organization described in section 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4) is 
exempt from tax only if no substantial part of its activities 
consists of providing commercial-type insurance.
    A tax-exempt organization may, subject to certain 
limitations, enter into a joint venture or partnership with a 
for-profit organization without affecting its tax-exempt 
status. Under current ruling practice, the IRS examines the 
facts and circumstances of each arrangement to determine (1) 
whether the venture itself and the participation of the tax-
exempt organization therein furthers a charitable purpose, and 
(2) whether the sharing of profits and losses or other aspects 
of the arrangement entail improper private inurement or more 
than incidental private benefit.\325\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \325\ See IRS General Counsel Memorandum 39862; Announcement 92-83, 
1992-22 I.R.B. 59 (IRS Audit Guidelines for Hospitals). Even where no 
prohibited private inurement exists, however, more than incidental 
private benefit conferred on individuals may result in the organization 
not being operated ``exclusively'' for an exempt purpose. See, e.g., 
American Campaign Academy v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 1053 (1989).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Explanation of Provision

    The provision provides that an organization does not fail 
to be treated as organized and operated exclusively for a 
charitable purpose for purposes of Code section 501(c)(3) 
solely because a hospital which is owned and operated by such 
organization participates in a provider-sponsored organization 
(``PSO'') (as defined in section 1845(a)(1) of the Social 
Security Act), whether or not such PSO is exempt from tax. 
Thus, participation by a hospital in a PSO (whether taxable or 
tax-exempt) is deemed to satisfy the first part of the inquiry 
under current IRS ruling practice.\326\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \326\ The qualification of a hospital as a tax-exempt charitable 
organization under section 501(c)(3) is determined as under present 
law. See Rev. Rul. 69-545, 1969-2 C.B. 117.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The provision does not change present-law restrictions on 
private inurement and private benefit. However, the provision 
provides that any person with a material financial interest in 
such a PSO shall be treated as a private shareholder or 
individual with respect to the hospital for purposes of 
applying the private inurement prohibition in Code section 
501(c)(3). Accordingly, the facts and circumstances of each PSO 
arrangement are evaluated to determine whether the arrangement 
entails impermissible private inurement or more than incidental 
private benefit (e.g., where there is a disproportionate 
allocation of profits and losses to the non-exempt partners, 
the tax-exempt partner makes loans to the joint venture that 
are commercially unreasonable, the tax-exempt partner provides 
property or services to the joint venture at less than fair 
market value, or a non-exempt partner receives more than 
reasonable compensation for the sale of property or services to 
the joint venture).
    The provision does not change present-law restrictions on 
lobbying and political activities. In addition, the 
restrictions of Code section 501(m) on the provision of 
commercial-type insurance continue to apply.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible revenue 
effect on Federal fiscal year budget receipts in each of 1997 
through 2007.

 C. Provision of Employer Identification Numbers by Medicare Providers 
                         (sec. 4313 of the Act)

                              Present Law

    Entities participating in Medicare, Medicaid and the 
Maternal and Child Health Block Grant programs are required to 
provide certain information regarding the identity of each 
person with an ownership or control interest in the entity or 
in any subcontractor in which the entity has a direct or 
indirect 5 percent or more ownership interest. Providers under 
part B of Medicare also are required to provide information 
regarding persons with an ownership or control interest in a 
provider or any subcontractor in which the provider has a 
direct or indirect 5 percent or more ownership interest.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act requires that all Medicare providers supply the 
Secretary of HHS with the employer identification number 
(``EIN'') of each disclosing entity, each person with an 
ownership or control interest, and any subcontractor in which 
the entity has a direct or indirect 5 percent or more ownership 
interest. The Secretary of HHS is required to transmit to the 
Secretary of the Treasury the EIN's received, and the Secretary 
of the Treasury is directed to verify or correct the EINs. The 
Secretary of HHS is to reimburse the Secretary of the Treasury 
for the costs incurred in performing the verification and 
correction.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective 90 days after the Secretary of 
HHS submits to the Congress a report on the steps taken to 
ensure the confidentiality of social security account numbers 
required to be provided to the Secretary of HHS.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have a negligible effect on 
fiscal year budget receipts in each of 1997 through 2007.

        D. Disclosure of Tax Return Information for Verification

           of Employment Status of Medicare Beneficiaries and

       the Spouse of a Medicare Beneficiary (sec. 4631(c) of the

                 Act and sec. 6103(l)(12) of the Code)

                              Present Law

    The Internal Revenue Code prohibits disclosure of tax 
returns and return information, except to the extent 
specifically authorized by the Internal Revenue Code (sec. 
6103). Unauthorized disclosure is a felony punishable by a fine 
not exceeding $5,000 or imprisonment of not more than five 
years, or both (sec. 7213). An action for civil damages also 
may be brought for unauthorized disclosure (sec. 7431). No tax 
information may be furnished by the Internal Revenue Service 
(``IRS'') to another agency unless the other agency establishes 
procedures satisfactory to the IRS for safeguarding the tax 
information it receives (sec. 6103(p)).
    Among the disclosures permitted under the Code is 
disclosure of taxpayer filing status and identity information 
for the purpose of verifying the employment status of Medicare 
beneficiaries and the spouse of a Medicare beneficiary.
    The Medicare disclosure provision was generally scheduled 
to expire after September 30, 1998.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act permanently extends the Medicare disclosure 
provision.

                             Effective Date

    The provision is effective on the date of enactment (August 
5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.

                     E. Unemployment Tax Provisions

1. Exemption from service performed by election workers from the 
        Federal Unemployment Tax (sec. 5405 of the Act and sec. 3309(b) 
        of the Code)

                              Present Law

    The Federal Unemployment Tax Act (``FUTA'') generally 
requires States to cover under their unemployment compensation 
laws service performed in the employ of a State or local 
government. Only certain enumerated exceptions are allowed.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believes that short-term employment as an 
election official or election worker should not form the basis 
for participation in the unemployment compensation system.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act exempts from FUTA service performed as an election 
official or election worker. This exemption applies only if the 
annual wages received by the individual for such service are 
less than $1,000. These persons are also ineligible to claim 
unemployment benefits with respect to such wages.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective with respect to service 
performed after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $1 million in 1998 and have a negligible 
effect on Federal fiscal year budget receipts thereafter.

2. Treatment of certain services performed by inmates (sec. 5406 of the 
        Act and sec. 3306 of the Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Federal Unemployment Tax Act (``FUTA'') imposes a 6.2-
percent gross tax rate on the first $7,000 of wages paid 
annually by covered employers to each employee. Generally, 
wages are defined to include all remuneration for employment 
unless specifically exempted. Under prior law, there was no 
exemption for wages paid to persons committed to penal 
institutions who earn wages through private-sector jobs.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that employment while committed to 
penal institutions should not form the basis for participation 
in the unemployment compensation system.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act exempts wages paid to persons committed to penal 
institutions from the definition of wages for FUTA tax 
purposes. These persons are also ineligible to claim 
unemployment benefits with respect to such wages.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective with respect to service 
performed after January 1, 1994.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to reduce Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $500,000 a year.

3. Exemption of service performed for an elementary or secondary school 
        operated primarily for religious purposes from the Federal 
        unemployment tax (sec. 5407 of the Act and sec. 3309(b) of the 
        Code)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Federal Unemployment Tax Act (``FUTA'') requires States 
to cover under their unemployment compensation laws certain 
nonprofit organizations designated under FUTA that are not 
subject to the FUTA tax. These nonprofit organizations 
generally must elect whether to pay State unemployment taxes or 
reimburse the State unemployment insurance agency for the 
benefits provided to its former employees. However, FUTA 
exempts from coverage under State unemployment compensation 
laws service performed in the employ of: (1) a church or 
convention or association of churches, or (2) an organization 
which is operated primarily for religious purposes and which is 
operated, supervised, controlled, or principally supported by a 
church or convention or association of churches. Under prior 
law, services provided by individuals who are in the employ of 
entities with a religious orientation which are not affiliated 
with a particular church, or convention or association of 
churches were not exempt from State unemployment compensation 
laws.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that employees of certain schools 
with a religious orientation should be treated similarly for 
FUTA tax purposes regardless of the school's affiliation, or 
lack thereof, with a particular church, or convention, or 
association of churches.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act exempts from FUTA requirements of coverage under 
State unemployment compensation laws service performed in an 
elementary or secondary school which is operated primarily for 
religious purposes. This exemption is available to such schools 
even though they are not operated, supervised, controlled, or 
principally supported by a church or convention or association 
of churches. Persons performing such service are also 
ineligible to claim unemployment benefits with respect to such 
wages

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective with respect to service 
performed after the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by $2 million in fiscal year 1998 and have a 
negligible revenue effect thereafter.

                   F. Earned Income Credit Provision

1. Authorization of appropriations for enforcement initiatives related 
        to the earned income credit (sec. 5702)

                              Present Law

    Certain eligible low-income workers are entitled to claim a 
refundable earned income credit on their income tax return. A 
refundable credit is a credit that not only reduces an 
individual's tax liability but allows refunds to the individual 
in excess of income tax liability. The amount of the credit an 
eligible individual may claim depends upon whether the 
individual has one, more than one, or no qualifying children, 
and is determined by multiplying the credit rate by the 
individual's earned income up to an earned income amount. The 
maximum amount of the credit is the product of the credit rate 
and the earned income amount. The credit is reduced by the 
amount of the alternative minimum tax (``AMT'') the taxpayer 
owes for the year. The credit is phased out above certain 
income levels.
    The Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 modified the Code to 
include several earned income credit compliance initiatives. 
Prior to fiscal year 1998 however, there was no explicit 
authorization of appropriations for the enforcement of the 
earned income credit.

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believes that this provision will lead to 
better enforcement of the earned income credit.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act authorizes to be appropriated to the Secretary of 
the Treasury for improved application of the earned income 
credit, the following amounts: $138 million in FY 1998, $143 
million in FY 1999, $144 million in FY 2000, $145 million in FY 
2001, and $146 million in FY 2002.

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on the date of enactment 
(August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to have no effect on Federal 
fiscal year budget receipts.

 G. Increase in Excise Tax on Tobacco Products (sec. 9302 of the Act, 
 sec. 1604(f)(3) of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, and sec. 5701 of 
                               the Code)

                              Present Law

    The following is a listing of the Federal excise tax rates 
imposed on tobacco products under present law (through December 
31, 1999):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Article                              Tax rate              
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cigars:                                                                 
    Small cigars.................  $1.125 per thousand.                 
    Large cigars.................  12.75% of manufacturer's price, up to
                                    $30 per thousand.                   
Cigarettes:                                                             
    Small cigarettes.............  $12.00 per thousand (24 cents per    
                                    pack of 20 cigarettes).             
    Large cigarettes.............  $25.20 per thousand.                 
Cigarette papers.................  $0.0075 per 50 papers.               
Cigarette tubes..................  $0.15 per 50 tubes.                  
Chewing tobacco..................  $0.12 per pound.                     
Snuff............................  $0.36 per pound.                     
Pipe tobacco.....................  $0.675 per pound.                    
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress determined that it is appropriate to increase 
excise taxes on tobacco products, and to extend the tax to 
``roll-your-own'' tobacco. Raising such taxes will have the 
positive effect of discouraging smoking, particularly by 
children and teenagers.

                        Explanation of Provision

In general

    The Act increases the current excise tax rates on all 
tobacco products, including cigarettes, cigars, chewing 
tobacco, snuff, and pipe tobacco, effective in two stages: 
January 1, 2000 and January 1, 2002. Excise tax is also imposed 
on ``roll-your-own'' tobacco, beginning in 2000. Floor stocks 
taxes are imposed on tobacco products at the time of the rate 
increases (including tobacco products in foreign trade zones). 
The Act also includes expanded compliance measures designed to 
prevent diversion of non-tax-paid tobacco products nominally 
destined for export to use within the United States.

Specific tax rate increases

            Tax rates for 2000 and 2001
    The following table shows the specific tobacco excise tax 
rates under the Act in effect for the period, January 1, 2000-
December 31, 2001:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Tax rate (January 1, 2000-December 
             Article                             31, 2001)              
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cigars:                                                                 
    Small cigars.................  $1.594 per thousand.                 
    Large cigars.................  18.063% of manufacturer's price, up  
                                    to $42.50 per thousand.             
Cigarettes:                                                             
    Small cigarettes.............  $17.00 per thousand (34 cents per    
                                    pack of 20 cigarettes).             
    Large cigarettes.............  $35.70 per thousand.                 
Cigarette papers.................  $0.0106 per 50 papers.               
Cigarette tubes..................  $0.0213 per 50 tubes.                
Chewing tobacco..................  $0.17 per pound.                     
Snuff............................  $0.51 per pound.                     
Pipe tobacco.....................  $0.9567 per pound.                   
Roll-your-own tobacco............  $0.9567 per pound.                   
------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Tax rates for 2002 and thereafter
    The following table shows the specific tobacco excise tax 
rates in effect for 2002 and thereafter:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Article                   Tax rate (2002 and thereafter)   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cigars:                                                                 
    Small cigars.................  $1.828 per thousand.                 
    Large cigars.................  20.719% of manufacturers price, up to
                                    $48.75 per thousand.                
Cigarettes:                                                             
    Small cigarettes.............  $19.50 per thousand (39 cents per    
                                    pack of 20 cigarettes).             
    Large cigarettes.............  $40.95 per thousand.                 
Cigarette papers.................  $0.0122 per 50 papers.               
Cigarette tobacco................  $0.0244 per 50 tubes.                
Chewing tobacco..................  $0.19 cents per pound.               
Snuff............................  $0.585 cents per pound.              
Pipe tobacco.....................  $1.0969 per pound.                   
Roll-your-own tobacco............  $1.0969 per pound.                   
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coordination with tobacco industry settlement agreement

    Section 1604(f)(3) of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 
provided that the increase in tobacco excise taxes collected as 
a result of the above increases are to be ``credited against 
the total payments made by parties pursuant to Federal 
legislation implementing the tobacco industry settlement 
agreement of June 20, 1997.'' \327\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \327\ This provision was repealed under section 519 of the Fiscal 
Year 1998 Appropriations for Labor, Health and Human Resources (H.R. 
2264) as passed by the Congress and signed by the President (P.L. 105-
78, November 13, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provision generally is effective on January 1, 2000.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase fiscal year budget 
receipts by $1,175 million in 2000, $1,720 million in 2001, 
$2,272 million in 2002, $2,280 million in 2003, $2,290 million 
in 2004, $2,300 million in 2005, $2,310 million in 2006, and 
$2,320 million in 2007.

  H. Identification of Limited Tax Benefits Subject to Line Item Veto 
                         (sec. 9304 of the Act)

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Line Item Veto Act amended the Congressional Budget and 
Impoundment Act of 1974 to grant the President the limited 
authority to cancel specific dollar amounts of discretionary 
budget authority, certain new direct spending, and limited tax 
benefits. The Line Item Veto Act provides that the Joint 
Committee on Taxation is required to examine any revenue or 
reconciliation bill or joint resolution that amends the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 prior to its filing by a 
conference committee in order to determine whether or not the 
bill or joint resolution contains any limited tax benefits and 
to provide a statement to the conference committee that either 
(1) identifies each limited tax benefit contained in the bill 
or resolution, or (2) states that the bill or resolution 
contains no limited tax benefits. The conferees determine 
whether or not to include the Joint Committee's statement in 
the conference report. If the conference report includes the 
information from the Joint Committee on Taxation identifying 
provisions that are limited tax benefits, then the President 
may cancel one or more of those, but only those, provisions 
that have been identified. If such a conference report contains 
a statement from the Joint Committee on Taxation that none of 
the provisions in the conference report are limited tax 
benefits, then the President has no authority to cancel any of 
the specific tax provisions, because there are no tax 
provisions that are eligible for cancellation under the Line 
Item Veto Act.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 contains a provision that 
has been identified by the Joint Committee on Taxation as a 
limited tax benefit within the meaning of the Line Item Veto 
Act. The provision is section 5406 of the Balanced Budget Act, 
relating to treatment of certain services performed by inmates.

     PART FOUR: TAXPAYER BROWSING PROTECTION ACT (H.R. 1226) \328\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \328\ P.L. 105-35; August 5, 1997. H.R. 1226 was reported by the 
House Committee on Ways and Means on April 14, 1997 (H. Rept. 105-51). 
The bill, as amended, passed the House on April 15, 1997, and was 
passed by the Senate on July 23, 1997. H.R. 1226 was signed by the 
President on August 5, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         Present and Prior Law

    The Internal Revenue Code prohibits disclosure of tax 
returns and return information, except to the extent 
specifically authorized by the Internal Revenue Code (sec. 
6103). Unauthorized willful disclosure is a felony punishable 
by a fine not exceeding $5,000 or imprisonment of not more than 
five years, or both (sec. 7213). An action for civil damages 
also may be brought for unauthorized disclosure (sec. 7431).
    There is no explicit criminal penalty in the Internal 
Revenue Code for unauthorized inspection (absent subsequent 
disclosure) of tax returns and return information. Such 
inspection is, however, explicitly prohibited by the Internal 
Revenue Service (``IRS'').\329\ In a recent case, an individual 
was convicted of violating the Federal wire fraud statute (18 
U.S.C. 1343 and 1346) and a Federal computer fraud statute (18 
U.S.C. 1030) for unauthorized inspection. However, the U.S. 
First Circuit Court of Appeals overturned this conviction.\330\ 
Unauthorized inspection of information of any department or 
agency of the United States (including the IRS) via computer 
was made a crime under 18 U.S.C. 1030 by the Economic Espionage 
Act of 1996.\331\ This provision does not apply to unauthorized 
inspection of paper documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \329\ IRS Declaration of Privacy Principles, May 9, 1994.
    \330\ U.S. v. Czubinski, DTR 2/25/97, p. K-2.
    \331\ P.L. 104-294, sec. 201 (October 11, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress believed that it is important to have a 
criminal penalty in the Internal Revenue Code to punish this 
type of behavior. The Congress also believed that it is 
appropriate to provide for civil damages for unauthorized 
inspection parallel to civil damages for unauthorized 
disclosure.

                       Explanation of Provisions

Criminal penalties (sec. 2 of the Act and new sec. 7213A of the Code)
    The Act creates a new criminal penalty in the Internal 
Revenue Code. The penalty is imposed for willful inspection 
(except as authorized by the Code) of any tax return or return 
information by any Federal employee or IRS contractor. The 
penalty also applies to willful inspection (except as 
authorized) by any State employee or other person who acquired 
the tax return or return information under specific provisions 
of section 6103. Upon conviction, the penalty is a fine in any 
amount not exceeding $1,000,\332\ or imprisonment of not more 
than 1 year, or both, together with the costs of prosecution. 
In addition, upon conviction, an officer or employee of the 
United States would be dismissed from office or discharged from 
employment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \332\ Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. sec. 3571 (added by the Sentencing 
Reform Act of 1984), the amount of the fine is not more than the 
greater of the amount specified in this new Code section or $100,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Congress viewed any unauthorized inspection of tax 
returns or return information as a very serious offense; this 
new criminal penalty reflects that view. The Congress also 
believed that unauthorized inspection warrants very serious 
personnel sanctions against IRS employees who engage in 
unauthorized inspection, and that it is appropriate to fire 
employees who do this.
Civil damages (sec. 3 of the Act and sec. 7431 of the Code)
    The Act amends the provision providing for civil damages 
for unauthorized disclosure by also providing for civil damages 
for unauthorized inspection. Damages are available for 
unauthorized inspection that occurs either knowingly or by 
reason of negligence. Accidental or inadvertent inspection that 
may occur (such as, for example, by making an error in typing 
in a TIN) would not be subject to damages because it would not 
meet this standard. The Act also provides that no damages are 
available to a taxpayer if that taxpayer requested the 
inspection or disclosure.
    The Act also requires that, if any person is criminally 
charged by indictment or information with inspection or 
disclosure of a taxpayer's return or return information in 
violation of section 7213 (a) or (b), new section 7213A (as 
added by the Act), or 18 USC section 1030(a)(2)(B), the 
Secretary notify that taxpayer as soon as practicable of the 
inspection or disclosure.

                             Effective Date

    The Act is effective for violations occurring on or after 
the date of enactment (August 5, 1997).

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision is estimated to increase Federal fiscal year 
budget receipts by less than $1 million per year in 1997 
through 2007.

               PART FIVE: EXTENSION OF HIGHWAY TRUST FUND

                            (S. 1519) \333\

  (Sec. 9 of S. 1519 and secs. 9503, 9504(c) and 9511(c) of the Code)

                               Prior Law

    Under prior law, the Internal Revenue Code (sec. 9503) 
authorized expenditures (subject to appropriations) to be made 
from the Highway Trust Fund through September 30, 1997, for 
purposes provided in specified authorizing legislation as in 
effect on the date of enactment of the most recent authorizing 
Act (the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 
1991).\334\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \333\ P.L. 105-130; December 1, 1997 (Section 9 of the Surface 
Transportation Extension Act of 1997). S. 1519 was passed by the Senate 
on November 10, 1997, and by the House on November 12, 1997. The Act 
was signed by the President on December 1, 1997.
    \334\ The other authorizing Acts referenced in the Highway Trust 
Fund are the Highway Revenue Act of 1956, Titles I and II of the 
Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982, and the Surface 
Transportation and Uniform Relocation Act of 1987.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Highway Trust Fund provisions also provided for transfer of 
11.5 cents per gallon of the revenues from the excise tax 
imposed on motor fuels used in motorboats and off-highway 
recreational vehicles. Those revenues were transferred from the 
Highway Trust Fund to the Boat Safety Account of the Aquatic 
Resources Trust Fund (up to $70 million per year), the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund ($1 million per year), and the National 
Recreational Trails Trust Fund, respectively, through September 
30, 1997.\335\ Revenues from the gasoline tax used in small 
engines were transferred to the Sport Fish Restoration Account 
of the Aquatic Resources Trust Fund through September 30, 1997. 
Expenditures were and are authorized from the Boat Safety 
Account of the Aquatic Resources Trust Fund through March 31, 
1998. Expenditures were authorized from the National 
Recreational Trails Trust Fund through September 30, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \335\ No amounts have actually been transferred yet to the National 
Recreational Trails Trust Fund because no obligations have been made 
for that Trust Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Reasons for Change

    The Congress extended Highway Trust Fund program 
authorizations for 6 months in this Act (``Surface 
Transportation Extension Act of 1997''), and determined that 
the Highway Trust Fund expenditure authority needed to be 
extended and updated to reflect the expenditure purposes 
authorized under this Act during fiscal year 1998.

                        Explanation of Provision

    The Act extends the authority to make expenditures (subject 
to appropriations) from the Highway Trust Fund through 
September 30, 1998. The Act also updates the Highway Trust Fund 
cross reference to authorizing legislation to include 
expenditure purposes in this Act as in effect on the date of 
enactment.
    In addition, the Act extends the deadline for the transfer 
from the Highway Trust Fund of revenues from the tax on 
gasoline and special motor fuels used in motorboats, gasoline 
used in small engines, and motor fuels used in off-highway 
recreational vehicles through September 30, 1998. Further, the 
Act extends the expenditure authority from the Boat Safety 
Account of the Aquatic Resources Trust Fund for 6 months, 
through September 30, 1998, and extends the expenditure 
authority from the National Recreational Trails Trust Fund 
through September 30, 1998.\336\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \336\ This Act includes an authorization from the Highway Trust 
Fund for the National Recreational Trails Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Effective Date

    The provision was effective on October 1, 1997.

                             Revenue Effect

    The provision has no effect on Federal fiscal year budget 
receipts.
      

=======================================================================


                            A P P E N D I X

=======================================================================

      

                                                                                            APPENDIX:                                                                                           
                                                                   ESTIMATED BUDGET EFFECTS OF TAX LEGISLATION ENACTED IN 1997                                                                  
                                                                                     Fiscal Years 1997-2007                                                                                     
                                                                                      [Millions of dollars]                                                                                     
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Provision                     Effective      1997       1998       1999       2000       2001       2002       2003       2004       2005       2006       2007      1997-07 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                                                                                
PART ONE: AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND                                                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                                                                                
1. Extension of Airport and Airway Trust Fund                                                                                                                                                   
 excise taxes through  9/30/97................   tp 7 data                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE       2,730        -54  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........       2,676
                                                            ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal: H.R. 668......................                   2,730        -54  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........       2,676
                                                            ====================================================================================================================================
PART TWO: TAXPAYER RELIEF ACT OF 1997 (H.R.                                                                                                                                                     
 2014)                                                                                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title I. Child Tax Credit                                                                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                                                                                
A. Tax Credit for Children Under Age 17 ($400                                                                                                                                                   
 in 1998, and $500 thereafter: $75,000/                                                                                                                                                         
 $110,000 AGI phaseout for credit;                                                                                                                                                              
 nonrefundable for small families, refundable                                                                                                                                                   
 and limited to tax plus employee FICA minus                                                                                                                                                    
 EIC for large families) (\1\)(\2\)...........        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........     -2,710    -18,119    -21,549    -21,401    -21,258    -20,901    -20,430    -19,702    -18,997    -18,317    -183,384
B. Expand Definition of High-Risk Individuals                                                                                                                                                   
 with Respect to Tax-Exempt State-Sponsored                                                                                                                                                     
 Organizations Providing Health Coverage......        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         -1         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -17
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title II. Education Tax Incentives                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                                                                
A. Tax Benefits Relating to Education Expenses                                                                                                                                                  
  1. HOPE credit, 100% credit for first $1,000                                                                                                                                                  
   of eligible expenses, 50% credit for next                                                                                                                                                    
   $1,000, 20% credit for third and fourth                                                                                                                                                      
   year students for up to $5,000 of expenses;                                                                                                                                                  
   for years after 2002, expenses are                                                                                                                                                           
   increased to $10,000 (effective date of the                                                                                                                                                  
   20% credit is 7/1/98); eligible expenses                                                                                                                                                     
   for HOPE credit are indexed in 2001; income                                                                                                                                                  
   limits for both credits indexed in 2001....       pma &                                                                                                                                      
                                                      tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........     -2,083     -6,469     -7,393     -7,907     -7,707     -8,620     -8,754     -8,893     -9,035     -9,180     -76,041
  2. Deduction for student loan interest:                                                                                                                                                       
   $1,000 above-the-line deduction in 1998,                                                                                                                                                     
   $1,500 in 1999, $2,000 in 2000, $2,500 in                                                                                                                                                    
   2001 and thereafter; phaseout $40,000--                                                                                                                                                      
   $55,000 single filers ($60,000--$75,000                                                                                                                                                      
   joint filers); income limits indexed                                                                                                                                                         
   beginning in 2003..........................       poida                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........        -18        -69       -122       -204       -277       -308       -326       -346       -368       -391      -2,429
  3. Penalty-free withdrawals from IRAs for                                                                                                                                                     
   undergraduate, post-secondary vocational,                                                                                                                                                    
   and graduate education expenses............          da                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........        -78       -201       -181       -175       -177       -179       -182       -184       -186       -189      -1,732
  4. Expand State-sponsored prepaid tuition                                                                                                                                                     
   and State savings programs to include room                                                                                                                                                   
   and board (\3\)............................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........        -36       -107       -118       -130       -143       -157       -173       -190       -209       -230      -1,491
  5. Education IRA--permit contributions to                                                                                                                                                     
   Education IRA for a child under age 18;                                                                                                                                                      
   annual contributions limited to $500 per                                                                                                                                                     
   child; impose phaseout range of $95,000-                                                                                                                                                     
   $110,000 for single filers and $150,000-                                                                                                                                                     
   $160,000 for joint filers (\4\)............        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........       -156       -644       -912     -1,060     -1,126     -1,448     -1,752     -2,054     -2,360     -2,680     -14,193
B. Other Education-Related Tax Provisions                                                                                                                                                       
  1. Extend employer-provided education                                                                                                                                                         
   assistance for undergraduates through 5/31/                                                                                                                                                  
   00 (\1\)...................................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/96   .........       -534       -369       -250  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........      -1,153
  2. Repeal $150 million limit on tax-exempt                                                                                                                                                    
   section 501(c)(3) bonds for new capital                                                                                                                                                      
   expenditures...............................         bia                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         -6        -45        -75        -89        -99       -106       -115       -125       -138       -162        -962
  3. Raise small issuer arbitrage rebate                                                                                                                                                        
   exception for governmental bonds used to                                                                                                                                                     
   finance education facilities from $5                                                                                                                                                         
   million to $10 million.....................         bia                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         -1         -4         -7        -11        -14        -27        -30        -33        -36        -38        -199
  4. Enhanced deduction for corporate                                                                                                                                                           
   contributions of computer technology and                                                                                                                                                     
   equipment for grades K-12; sunset after 3                                                                                                                                                    
   years......................................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........        -46        -48        -77        -49         -5         -1  .........  .........  .........  .........        -227
  5. Treatment of cancellation of certain                                                                                                                                                       
   student loans..............................        Doia                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  6. Tax credit for holders of qualified                                                                                                                                                        
   education bonds (limited to $400 million                                                                                                                                                     
   per year in loans); 2-year sunset..........     qza bia                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         -8        -27        -43        -47        -47        -47        -47        -47        -47        -47        -408
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title III. Savings and Investment Tax                                                                                                                                                           
 Incentives                                                                                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                                                                                
A. Individual Retirement Arrangements--                                                                                                                                                         
 Increase deductible IRA income limits by                                                                                                                                                       
 $10,000 for joint filers in 1998 ($5,000 for                                                                                                                                                   
 single filers in 1998) and by $1,000 per year                                                                                                                                                  
 through 2002; in 2003 increase to $40,000 for                                                                                                                                                  
 single filers and $60,000 for joint filers                                                                                                                                                     
 and by $5,000 per year thereafter until                                                                                                                                                        
 limits are $50,000-$60,000 for single filers                                                                                                                                                   
 and $80,000-$100,000 for joint filers (phase                                                                                                                                                   
 out range increases to $20,000 when lower                                                                                                                                                      
 limit reaches $100,000); penalty-free                                                                                                                                                          
 withdrawals for educational purposes and                                                                                                                                                       
 first-time home purchase only; create Roth                                                                                                                                                     
 IRA; impose phase-out range of $95,000-                                                                                                                                                        
 $110,000 for single filers and $150,000-                                                                                                                                                       
 $160,000 for joint filers; impose $150,000-                                                                                                                                                    
 $160,000 income phase-out for spousal IRAs;                                                                                                                                                    
 provide that aggregate contributions to                                                                                                                                                        
 deductible and nondeductible retirement IRAs                                                                                                                                                   
 may not exceed $2,000........................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........       -367       -345         86       -346       -860     -1,830     -3,292     -3,482     -4,424     -5,004     -20,225
B. Capital Gains Provisions: (a) 20%/10% rate                                                                                                                                                   
 structure; (b) retain 28%/15% for                                                                                                                                                              
 collectibles, includible gain from small                                                                                                                                                       
 business stock, and assets held more than 1                                                                                                                                                    
 year but not more than 18 months; (c) 25%                                                                                                                                                      
 maximum rate for unrecaptured section 1250                                                                                                                                                     
 gain; (d) 18%/8% for assets held more than 5                                                                                                                                                   
 years after 2000, with mark-to-market in                                                                                                                                                       
 2001; assets qualify for 18% only if                                                                                                                                                           
 purchased after 2000; (e) symmetric AMT                                                                                                                                                        
 rates; (f) exclusion of gain on personal                                                                                                                                                       
 residences (including remainder interests);                                                                                                                                                    
 (g) no information reporting on sales of                                                                                                                                                       
 principal residences less than $250,000 or                                                                                                                                                     
 $500,000 (married filing joint return); (h)                                                                                                                                                    
 tax-free rollover of qualified small business                                                                                                                                                  
 stock held more than 6 months by individuals;                                                                                                                                                  
 and (i) corporate alternative rate limited to                                                                                                                                                  
 taxable income...............................     various                                                                                                                                      
                                                     (\5\)       1,254      6,371        171     -2,954     -2,934     -1,785     -3,742     -3,981     -4,179     -4,424     -4,958     -21,161
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title IV. Alternative Minimum Tax Provisions                                                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                                                                
A. Repeal Alternative Minimum Tax for Small                                                                                                                                                     
 Businesses and Modify the Depreciation                                                                                                                                                         
 Adjustment                                                                                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                                                                                
  1. Repeal of the alternative minimum tax for                                                                                                                                                  
   small corporations.........................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........        -97       -171       -131       -100        -77        -59        -45        -34        -26        -20        -762
  2. Conform AMT depreciation lives to the                                                                                                                                                      
   regular tax................................       ppisa                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/98   .........  .........       -580     -1,653     -2,230     -2,358     -2,561     -2,622     -2,350     -2,044     -1,920     -18,317
B. Repeal AMT Installment Method Adjustment                                                                                                                                                     
 for Farmers..................................     di tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/87          -8       -157       -158       -167       -164       -157       -148         22         22         21         21        -872
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title V. Estate, Gift, and Generation-Skipping                                                                                                                                                  
 Tax Provisions                                                                                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                                                                
A. Estate and Gift Tax Provisions                                                                                                                                                               
  1. Increase unified estate and gift tax                                                                                                                                                       
   credit to $625,000 in 1998; $650,000 in                                                                                                                                                      
   1999; $675,000 in 2000 and 2001; $700,000                                                                                                                                                    
   in 2002 and 2003, $850,000 in 2004,                                                                                                                                                          
   $950,000 in 2005; $1 million in 2006 and                                                                                                                                                     
   thereafter; and index other provisions                                                                                                                                                       
   beginning in 1999; cap family owned                                                                                                                                                          
   business exclusion with unified credit at                                                                                                                                                    
   $1.3 million annually (exclude $675,000 in                                                                                                                                                   
   1998, $650,000 in 1999, $625,000 in 2000,                                                                                                                                                    
   $625,000 in 2001, $600,000 in 2002 and                                                                                                                                                       
   2003, $450,000 in 2004, $350,000 in 2005;                                                                                                                                                    
   $300,000 in 2006 and thereafter)...........         dda                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........       -843     -1,259     -1,816     -2,013     -2,596     -2,997     -5,656     -7,279     -8,638     -33,097
  2. Reduce section 6601(j) interest rate to                                                                                                                                                    
   2% for first $1 million of taxable closely-                                                                                                                                                  
   held business interests, remainder subject                                                                                                                                                   
   to tax at 45% of present-law interest                                                                                                                                                        
   rates, and all interest under section 6166                                                                                                                                                   
   made nondeductible.........................         dda                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........         -9        -17        -25        -33        -41        -47        -53        -58        -65        -349
  3. Extension of treatment of certain rents                                                                                                                                                    
   under section 2032A to lineal descendants..         roa                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/76   .........        -25         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -43
  4. Clarification of judicial review of                                                                                                                                                        
   eligibility for extension of time for                                                                                                                                                        
   payment of estate tax......................         dda                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........        -15        -15        -15        -15        -15        -15        -14        -12        -11        -127
  5. Gifts may not be revalued for estate tax                                                                                                                                                   
   purposes after expiration of statute of                                                                                                                                                      
   limitations................................         gma                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........        -16        -18        -21        -26        -32        -38        -45        -53        -61        -310
  6. Repeal certain throwback rules applicable                                                                                                                                                  
   to domestic trusts; exclude pre-1984                                                                                                                                                         
   multiple trusts from repeal................    Dmi tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........        -11        -11        -11        -11        -11        -11        -11        -11        -11         -99
  7. Provide up to $500,000 estate tax                                                                                                                                                          
   exclusion (phasein by $100,000 annually                                                                                                                                                      
   beginning in 1998) for treatment of land                                                                                                                                                     
   subject to a qualified conservation                                                                                                                                                          
   easement coordinated with exclusion of                                                                                                                                                       
   family farms and business relief (with                                                                                                                                                       
   expanded treatment of land with severed                                                                                                                                                      
   mineral rights)............................         dda                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........         -7        -15        -25        -35        -48        -51        -56        -60        -64        -361
B. Generation-Skipping Tax Provision                                                                                                                                                            
  1. Expand exception from generation-skipping                                                                                                                                                  
   transfer tax for transfers to individuals                                                                                                                                                    
   with deceased parents......................        gsta                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........         -4         -4         -4         -4         -4         -5         -5         -5         -6         -41
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title VI. Extension of Certain Expiring Tax                                                                                                                                                     
 Provisions                                                                                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                                                                                
A. Research Tax Credit (through  6/30/98).....      6/1/97        -161       -820       -639       -294       -204       -123        -33  .........  .........  .........  .........      -2,274
B. Contributions of Appreciated Stock to                                                                                                                                                        
 Private Foundations (through 6/30/98)........      6/1/97   .........        -99         -9         -4  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........        -112
C. Work Opportunity Tax Credit (through 6/30/                                                                                                                                                   
 98 (\6\))....................................    wpoifhma                                                                                                                                      
                                                   9/30/97   .........       -140       -131        -73        -28        -11         -2  .........  .........  .........  .........        -385
D. Orphan Drug Tax Credit (permanent).........       epoia                                                                                                                                      
                                                   5/31/97   .........        -29        -28        -30        -32        -34        -35        -37        -39        -40        -42        -346
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title VII. District of Columbia Tax Incentives                                                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                                                                                
1. Designate existing D.C. enterprise                                                                                                                                                           
 community and census tracts with greater than                                                                                                                                                  
 20% poverty (with revised residency                                                                                                                                                            
 requirement) as the D.C. Enterprise Zone,                                                                                                                                                      
 eligible for modified present-law empowerment                                                                                                                                                  
 zone incentives (20% wage credit, increased                                                                                                                                                    
 179 expensing, and expanded tax-exempt                                                                                                                                                         
 financing); sunset 12/31/02..................      1/1/98   .........        -71       -110       -113       -118       -127        -45          3          2      (\7\)         -2        -582
2. Provide 0% capital gains rate on enterprise                                                                                                                                                  
 zone business property in D.C. census tracts                                                                                                                                                   
 with greater than 10% poverty held for at                                                                                                                                                      
 least 5 years; sunset 12/31/02...............      1/1/98   .........         -1         -5        -12        -21        -33        -48        -85        -90        -99       -107        -502
3. $5,000 tax credit for first-time homebuyer                                                                                                                                                   
 in D.C., with phaseout of $110,000-$130,000                                                                                                                                                    
 for joint filers ($70,000-$90,000 for single                                                                                                                                                   
 filers), and sunset 12/31/00.................        po/a                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........        -10        -21        -27        -16      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)         -74
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title VIII. Welfare-To-Work Tax Credit                                                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                                                                                
1. Administration's welfare-to-work tax                                                                                                                                                         
 credit, as modified:                                                                                                                                                                           
  (a) wage credit is 35% on first $10,000 of                                                                                                                                                    
 wages in the first year of employment, and                                                                                                                                                     
 50% on $10,000 of wages in the second year of                                                                                                                                                  
 employment; (b) effective for hires made                                                                                                                                                       
 through 4/30/99..............................    wpoifhma                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........        -13        -31        -29        -15        -10         -4         -2         -1  .........  .........        -106
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title IX. Miscellaneous Provisions                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                                                                
A. Excise Tax Provisions                                                                                                                                                                        
  1. Transfer of General Fund highway fuels                                                                                                                                                     
   tax revenues to the Highway Trust Fund:                                                                                                                                                      
    a. Transfer the 4.3 cents/gallon                                                                                                                                                            
     transportation motor fuels tax on highway                                                                                                                                                  
     motor fuels to the Highway Trust Fund....     10/1/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
    b. Modify excise tax deposit rules for                                                                                                                                                      
     gasoline and special motor fuels, diesel                                                                                                                                                   
     fuel and kerosene, aviation fuels, and                                                                                                                                                     
     air cargo taxes to suspend deposits due 8/                                                                                                                                                 
     1/98 to 9/30/98 until 10/5/98............         DOE   .........     -6,359      6,359  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  ..........
  2. Repeal excise tax on recreational                                                                                                                                                          
   motorboat diesel fuel......................         fsa                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         -4         -5         -5         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -22
  3. Modify excise tax on imported halons.....         DOE       (\8\)      (\8\)      (\8\)      (\8\)      (\8\)      (\8\)      (\8\)      (\8\)      (\8\)      (\8\)      (\8\)           1
  4. Uniform excise tax on vaccines; add 3 new                                                                                                                                                  
   vaccines ($0.75 per dose)..................       SaDOE   .........        -16        -15        -15        -15        -14        -14        -14        -14        -14        -14        -146
  5. Treat certain gasoline retailers as                                                                                                                                                        
   wholesale distributors under gasoline tax                                                                                                                                                    
   refund rules...............................         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  6. Exemption for electric and clean-fuel                                                                                                                                                      
   vehicles from luxury excise tax............        saia                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE       (\7\)         -1         -1      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)  .........  .........  .........  .........          -2
  7. Equalize the excise tax rates among                                                                                                                                                        
   alternative motor fuels except CNG.........       fsoua                                                                                                                                      
                                                   9/30/97          -2        -15        -16        -16        -17        -18        -19        -20        -21        -22        -23        -186
  8. Reduce excise tax rate on draft cider to                                                                                                                                                   
   the small producer beer rate...............     10/1/97   .........         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1          -7
  9. Study feasibility of moving collection                                                                                                                                                     
   point for distilled spirits excise tax.....         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  10. Codify Treasury Department regulations                                                                                                                                                    
   regulating wine labels.....................         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
B. Disaster Relief Provisions                                                                                                                                                                   
  1. Disaster losses--postponement of IRS                                                                                                                                                       
   deadlines; permit extension of statute of                                                                                                                                                    
   limitations................................        aoty   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  2. Use of certain appraisals to establish                                                                                                                                                     
   amount of disaster loss....................         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  3. Modify tax treatment of livestock sold on                                                                                                                                                  
   account of certain weather-related                                                                                                                                                           
   conditions.................................         sea                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/96   .........        -12         -2         -2         -2         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -23
  4. Loosen mortgage revenue bond requirements                                                                                                                                                  
   in Presidentially declared disaster areas                                                                                                                                                    
   for 2 years; permit 2-year period to place                                                                                                                                                   
   mortgages..................................       (\9\)   .........         -3         -7         -8         -8         -7         -6         -6         -5         -4         -4         -58
  5. Abatement of interest on underpayments by                                                                                                                                                  
   taxpayers in Presidentially declared                                                                                                                                                         
   disaster areas (1997 disaster areas only)..      1/1/97          -5  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........          -5
C. Provisions Relating to Employment Taxes                                                                                                                                                      
  1. Worker classification of securities                                                                                                                                                        
   brokers for income and employment tax                                                                                                                                                        
   purposes...................................         spa                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  2. Clarification of SECA tax treatment of                                                                                                                                                     
   termination payments received by former                                                                                                                                                      
   insurance agents...........................          pa                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
D. Provisions Relating to Small Businesses                                                                                                                                                      
  1. Delay penalties for failure to make                                                                                                                                                        
   payments through EFTPS until after 6/30/98.         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  2. Home office deduction: definition of                                                                                                                                                       
   principal place of business................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/98   .........  .........       -119       -244       -253       -263       -274       -285       -295       -306       -318      -2,358
  3. 3-year income averaging for farmers......      (\10\)          -1        -10        -53        -54        -50  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........        -168
  4. Increase deduction for health insurance                                                                                                                                                    
   expenses of self-employed individuals: 50%                                                                                                                                                   
   in 2000 and 2001, 60% in 2002, 80% in 2003                                                                                                                                                   
   through 2005; 90% in 2006, and 100% in 2007                                                                                                                                                  
   and thereafter.............................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/96   .........  .........  .........        -39       -120       -224       -605       -882       -601       -404       -604      -3,479
  5. Impose moratorium on issuance of Treasury                                                                                                                                                  
   regulations relating to self-employment tax                                                                                                                                                  
   (SECA) treatment of limited partners                                                                                                                                                         
   through 6/30/98............................         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
E. Expense ``Brownfields'' redevelopment costs                                                                                                                                                  
 in empowerment zones, enterprise communities                                                                                                                                                   
 and EPA demonstration sites; add census                                                                                                                                                        
 tracts with greater than 20% poverty; 3-year                                                                                                                                                   
 sunset.......................................      (\11\)   .........        -57       -132       -165        -63      (\8\)          2          9         17         19         18        -352
F. Empowerment Zones and Enterprise                                                                                                                                                             
 Communities                                                                                                                                                                                    
  1. Designate 20 new urban empowerment zones                                                                                                                                                   
   with modified incentives (\12\)............         DOE   .........        -82       -121       -121        -99        -79        -56        -44        -41        -38        -25        -706
  2. Designate 2 supplemental empowerment                                                                                                                                                       
   zones as regular empowerment zones, with                                                                                                                                                     
   present-law incentives (phaseout of wage                                                                                                                                                     
   credit beginning in 2004)..................      1/1/00   .........  .........  .........        -38        -86        -92        -98        -78        -53        -26        -13        -483
  3. Modification of empowerment zone and                                                                                                                                                       
   enterprise community criteria in the event                                                                                                                                                   
   of future designations of additional zones                                                                                                                                                   
   and communities............................         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
G. Other Provisions                                                                                                                                                                             
  1. Shrinkage allowance for inventory                                                                                                                                                          
   accounting.................................        tyea                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         -7        -21        -23        -25        -27        -29        -31        -33        -35        -37        -268
  2. Include liability to pay compension under                                                                                                                                                  
   workmen's compensation acts within rules                                                                                                                                                     
   relating to certain personal liability                                                                                                                                                       
   assignments................................         cfa                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         -1         -2         -5         -8        -12        -17        -23        -29        -32        -36        -164
  3. Clarify tax-exempt status of certain                                                                                                                                                       
   State workmen's compensation funds.........        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........      (\7\)      (\7\)         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1          -6
  4. Election for 1987 partnerships to                                                                                                                                                          
   continue exception from treatment of                                                                                                                                                         
   publicly traded partnerhsips as                                                                                                                                                              
   corporations...............................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Revenue Neutral                              ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  5. Exclusion from UBIT for certain corporate                                                                                                                                                  
   sponsorship payments.......................       psora                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  6. Allow timeshare associations to elect to                                                                                                                                                   
   be taxed as homeowner associations at 32%                                                                                                                                                    
   rate and modify definition of property for                                                                                                                                                   
   timeshares.................................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/96   .........         -1         -1         -1         -1         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -17
  7. Modification of advance refunding rules                                                                                                                                                    
   for certain tax-exempt bonds issued by the                                                                                                                                                   
   Virgin Islands (\13\)......................         DOE   .........         -2         -4         -5         -5         -5         -3         -1         -3         -4         -4         -37
  8. Deferral of gain on sales of stock in                                                                                                                                                      
   farm product refining firms to farm coops                                                                                                                                                    
   which supply the firm with raw farm                                                                                                                                                          
   products for refining (\14\)...............          Sa                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         -2        -68         -5         -5         -4         -4         -4         -4         -4         -4        -104
  9. Increase the business meals deduction to                                                                                                                                                   
   80% in 5% increments every other year for                                                                                                                                                    
   persons subject to Federal hours of service                                                                                                                                                  
   limitation, with clarification of section                                                                                                                                                    
   119 meals..................................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         -8        -17        -27        -37        -49        -62        -76        -91       -108       -125        -600
  10. Modify limits on depreciation of luxury                                                                                                                                                   
   automobiles for certain clean-burning fuel                                                                                                                                                   
   and electric vehicles......................       ppisa                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  11. Suspend 100% net income limitation with                                                                                                                                                   
   respect to percentage depletion on oil and                                                                                                                                                   
   gas property for marginal producers for 2                                                                                                                                                    
   years......................................         DOE   .........        -21        -35        -14  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........         -70
  12. Raise the charitable mileage rate from                                                                                                                                                    
   12 cents/mile to 14 cents/mile; no indexing        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         -8        -56        -58        -61        -64        -68        -71        -75        -78        -82        -621
  13. Purchasing of receivables by tax-exempt                                                                                                                                                   
   hospital cooperative service organizations.        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/96   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  14. Provide an above-the-line deduction for                                                                                                                                                   
   certain State and local official's expenses        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/86   .........        -10         -4         -4         -4         -5         -5         -6         -6         -7         -7         -58
  15. Combined employment tax reporting                                                                                                                                                         
   demonstration project (5-year                                                                                                                                                                
   demonstration).............................         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  16. Elective carryback of existing net                                                                                                                                                        
   operating losses of the National Railroad                                                                                                                                                    
   Passenger Corporation (Amtrak).............      (\15\)   .........     -1,162     -1,162  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........      -2,323
H. Extension of Duty-Free Treatment Under the                                                                                                                                                   
 Generalized System of Preferences (through  6/                                                                                                                                                 
 30/98) (\16\)................................         DOE        -378  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........        -378
                                                                                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title X. Revenue-Increase Provisions                                                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                                                                                
A. Financial Products                                                                                                                                                                           
  1. Require recognition of gain on certain                                                                                                                                                     
   appreciated positions in personal property;                                                                                                                                                  
   election of mark-to-market for securities                                                                                                                                                    
   traders and for traders and dealers in                                                                                                                                                       
   commodities; limitation on exception for                                                                                                                                                     
   investment companies under section 351.....         csa                                                                                                                                      
                                                    6/8/97   .........        367        121         68         73         79         85         94        111        118        127       1,243
  2. Gains or losses from certain terminations                                                                                                                                                  
   with respect to property...................        30da                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         15         27         25         25         25         25         25         25         25         25         242
  3. Determination of original issue discount                                                                                                                                                   
   where pooled debt obligations subject to                                                                                                                                                     
   acceleration...............................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         76        275        358        319        283        100        105        109        114        118       1,857
  4. Deny interest deduction on certain debt                                                                                                                                                    
   instruments................................         iia                                                                                                                                      
                                                    6/8/97   .........          5         16         29         43         55         62         63         64         65         67         469
B. Corporate Organizations and Reorganizations                                                                                                                                                  
  1. Require gain recognition for certain                                                                                                                                                       
   extraordinary dividends....................          da                                                                                                                                      
                                                   5/3/95+                                                                                                                                      
                                                   9/13/95   .........         44        -93        -54        -10         45         77         81         89         95        101         375
  2. Require gain recognition on certain                                                                                                                                                        
   distributions of controlled corporation                                                                                                                                                      
   stock......................................          da                                                                                                                                      
                                                   4/16/97   .........        301        243        216        187        158        130        101         73         46         10       1,465
  3. Reform tax treatment of certain corporate                                                                                                                                                  
   stock transfers............................        doaa                                                                                                                                      
                                                    6/8/97   .........         10         10          5          5          5          5          5          5          5          5          60
  4. Treat certain preferred stock treated as                                                                                                                                                   
   ``boot''...................................          ta                                                                                                                                      
                                                    6/8/97   .........         35         37         39         41         43         10         10         11         11         12         248
  5. Modify holding period for dividends-                                                                                                                                                       
   received deduction with 2-year transition                                                                                                                                                    
   period.....................................       droaa                                                                                                                                      
                                                      30da                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         11         13         15         16         16         16         17         17         17         18         156
C. Administrative Provisions                                                                                                                                                                    
  1. Reporting of certain payments made to                                                                                                                                                      
   attorneys..................................         pma                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........          3          3          3          3          3          4          4          4          4          31
  2. Information reporting on persons                                                                                                                                                           
   receiving contract payments from certain                                                                                                                                                     
   Federal agencies...........................     rd 90da                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........          7          8          9         10         11         11         12         12         13          93
  3. Disclosure of tax return information for                                                                                                                                                   
   administration of certain Veterans'                                                                                                                                                          
   programs (\16\)............................         DOE   .........  .........         22         27         31         36         36  .........  .........  .........  .........         152
  4. Establish IRS continuous levy and improve                                                                                                                                                  
   debt collections...........................         lia                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........        332        327        256        213        157        117        102         86         82         78       1,750
  5. Consistency rule for beneficiaries of                                                                                                                                                      
   trusts and estates.........................         rfa                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........          3          3          3          3          3          3          4          4          4          4          34
  6. Registration of confidential corporate                                                                                                                                                     
   tax shelters and substantial understatement                                                                                                                                                  
   penalty....................................     tsoaiTg   .........         15         37         38         39         41         42         43         44         46         47         392
D. Excise and Employment Tax Provisions                                                                                                                                                         
  1. Extension and modification of Airport and                                                                                                                                                  
   Airway Trust Fund excise taxes:                                                                                                                                                              
    a. Extend domestic air passenger ticket                                                                                                                                                     
     tax: reduce tax rate from 10% to 9% of                                                                                                                                                     
     ticket price and impose an additional tax                                                                                                                                                  
     of $1.00 per flight segment for 10/1/97                                                                                                                                                    
     through 9/30/98; 8% and $2.00/segment for                                                                                                                                                  
     10/1/98 through 9/30/99; and 7.5% after 9/                                                                                                                                                 
     30/99 with additional tax of $2.25/                                                                                                                                                        
     segment for 10/1/99 through 12/31/99,                                                                                                                                                      
     $2.50/segment in 2000, $2.75/segment in                                                                                                                                                    
     2001, and $3.00/segment in 2002, and in                                                                                                                                                    
     years thereafter index the $3.00/segment                                                                                                                                                   
     tax to changes in the CPI (first indexing                                                                                                                                                  
     adjustment on 1/1/03)....................     10/1/97   .........      4,633      4,859      5,031      5,433      5,870      6,275      6,684      7,117      7,580      8,059      61,542
    b. Modify airline ticket tax deposit rule                                                                                                                                                   
     to suspend deposits due 8/15/97 to 9/30/                                                                                                                                                   
     97 until 10/10/97, and suspend deposits                                                                                                                                                    
     due 8/15/98 to 9/30/98 until 10/5/98.....         DOE      -1,017       -199      1,216  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  ..........
    c. Reduce air passenger ticket tax to 7.5%                                                                                                                                                  
     of ticket price (and omit segment tax)                                                                                                                                                     
     for flight segment to/from certain rural                                                                                                                                                   
     airports (\17\)..........................     10/1/97   .........        -26        -27        -26        -27        -27        -28        -30        -31        -32        -33        -289
    d. Extend international departure tax:                                                                                                                                                      
     increase tax from $6.00 to $12/passenger,                                                                                                                                                  
     tax arrivals at the same rate, and index                                                                                                                                                   
     the $12 tax to changes in the CPI (first                                                                                                                                                   
     indexing adjustment on 1/1/99), but                                                                                                                                                        
     retain present-law $6.00/passenger                                                                                                                                                         
     departure tax for domestic flights to/                                                                                                                                                     
     from Alaska and Hawaii, and index the                                                                                                                                                      
     $6.00 departure tax to changes in the CPI                                                                                                                                                  
     (first indexing adjustment on 1/1/99)....     10/1/97   .........        788        879        948      1,026      1,114      1,209      1,307      1,411      1,526      1,653      11,859
    e. Impose 7.5% tax rate on cash payments                                                                                                                                                    
     to airlines for air travel under credit                                                                                                                                                    
     card and similar programs................     10/1/97   .........         65         73         77         82         87         92         98        104        110        116         904
    f. Extend current air cargo excise tax....     10/1/97   .........        304        347        377        409        443        481        522        567        615        667       4,732
    g. Extend current taxes on noncommercial                                                                                                                                                    
     aviation gasoline and noncommercial jet                                                                                                                                                    
     fuel.....................................     10/1/97   .........         84         87         89         91         93         95         97         99        102        104         943
    h. Dedicate 4.3 cents/gallon of tax on                                                                                                                                                      
     aviation fuel to the Airport and Airway                                                                                                                                                    
     Trust Fund...............................     10/1/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  2. Extend diesel fuel excise tax rules to                                                                                                                                                     
   kerosene...................................      7/1/98   .........         44         43         49         46         44         43         44         47         49         52         461
  3. Reinstate LUST excise tax and extend                                                                                                                                                       
   through 3/31/05............................     10/1/97   .........        129        129        128        129        131        134        136         67  .........  .........         983
  4. Apply 3% telephone excise tax to certain                                                                                                                                                   
   prepaid phone cards and cash payments to                                                                                                                                                     
   service providers under credit card                                                                                                                                                          
   arrangements...............................     11/1/97   .........         19         28         38         49         60         71         83        101        113        124         684
  5. Extend FUTA surtax and increase the                                                                                                                                                        
   statutory limit on the FUA Trust Fund from                                                                                                                                                   
   .25% of covered wages to .50% (\16\).......       lpo/a                                                                                                                                      
                                                    1/1/99   .........  .........      1,063      1,763      1,797      1,733        661        -73        -71        -74        -73       6,726
E. Provisions Relating to Tax-Exempt                                                                                                                                                            
 Organizations                                                                                                                                                                                  
  1. Modify control test and include                                                                                                                                                            
   attribution rules to determine UBIT                                                                                                                                                          
   consequences of certain payments from                                                                                                                                                        
   subsidiaries of tax-exempt organizations...        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/98                                                                                                                                      
                                                    & tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       2ya                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........      (\8\)      (\8\)      (\8\)          3          5          5          4          4          4          4          29
  2. Repeal grandfather rule with respect to                                                                                                                                                    
   pension business of certain insurers.......        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........      (\8\)         82        116        124        128        133        140        149        160        174       1,208
F. Foreign Provisions                                                                                                                                                                           
  1. Inclusion of income from notional                                                                                                                                                          
   principal contracts and stock lending                                                                                                                                                        
   transactions under Subpart F...............        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........          9         20         21         21         21         21         22         22         22         23         202
  2. Restrict like-kind exchanges involving                                                                                                                                                     
   foreign personal property..................          ea                                                                                                                                      
                                                    6/8/97   .........          4          8         11         13         15         17         19         21         23         25         156
  3. Impose holding period requirement for                                                                                                                                                      
   claiming foreign tax credits with respect                                                                                                                                                    
   to dividends...............................       dpoaa                                                                                                                                      
                                                      30da                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         23         48         50         53         56         58         61         64         68         71         552
  4. Limitation on treaty benefits for                                                                                                                                                          
   payments to hybrid entities................         DOE   .........          1          1          1          1          1          1          1          1          1          1          10
  5. Interest on underpayment reduced by                                                                                                                                                        
   foreign tax credit carrybacks..............       ftpoa                                                                                                                                      
                                                      tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........          8         10          2          1          1          1          1          1          1          1          27
  6. Determination of period of limitations                                                                                                                                                     
   relating to foreign tax credits............       ftpoa                                                                                                                                      
                                                      tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........          1          2          1          1          1          1          1          1          1          1          11
  7. Repeal special exception which permits                                                                                                                                                     
   certain companies to eliminate their AMT                                                                                                                                                     
   liability..................................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........          2          5          5          5          5          5          5          5          5          5          47
G. Partnership Provisions                                                                                                                                                                       
  1. Allocation of basis of properties                                                                                                                                                          
   distributed to a partner by a partnership..         pda                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         26         52         55         57         59         61         64         66         69         72         581
  2. Eliminate the substantial appreciation                                                                                                                                                     
   requirement for inventory on sale of                                                                                                                                                         
   partnership interest.......................       sepda                                                                                                                                      
                                                     DOE &                                                                                                                                      
                                                   efbcieo                                                                                                                                      
                                                    6/8/97   .........         30         66         69         73         77         80         84         89         93         98         760
  3. Extension of time for taxing                                                                                                                                                               
   precontribution gain.......................        pcpa                                                                                                                                      
                                                    6/8/97   .........  .........  .........  .........  .........          2         10         11         11         12         12          58
H. Pension and Employee Benefit Provisions                                                                                                                                                      
  1. Increase involuntary cash out amount from                                                                                                                                                  
   $3,500 to $5,000 (no indexing of dollar                                                                                                                                                      
   amount)....................................        pyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE       (\8\)          2          6          7          7          7          8          8          9          9         10          73
  2. Election to receive taxable cash                                                                                                                                                           
   compensation in lieu of nontaxable parking                                                                                                                                                   
   benefits (\18\)............................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........          3          8         11         12         12         13         14         14         15         16         118
  3. Repeal of 15% excess distribution and                                                                                                                                                      
   excess retirement accumulation taxes.......   dra & dda                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/96   .........        -18        -19         -7         18         18         16         16         14         13         11          62
  4. Increase in prohibited transactions                                                                                                                                                        
   excise tax.................................        ptoa                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........          2          4          4          4          4          4          4          4          4          4          34
  5. Modify basis recovery rules..............         aba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........          1          3          6          9         11         15         18         21         24         27         133
I. Other Revenue-Increase Provisions                                                                                                                                                            
  1. Termination of suspense accounts for                                                                                                                                                       
   family farm corporations required to use                                                                                                                                                     
   accrual method of accounting (\19\)........      (\20\)   .........         29         33         35         36         37         39         40         41         43         44         377
  2. 2-year carryback and 20-year carryforward                                                                                                                                                  
   for net operating losses with an exception                                                                                                                                                   
   related to Presidentially declared disaster                                                                                                                                                  
   areas......................................       NOLgi                                                                                                                                      
                                                      tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         42        303        361        256        179        136        112        100         93         90       1,672
  3. Limit carryback period for general                                                                                                                                                         
   business credits to 1 year; extend                                                                                                                                                           
   carryforward period to 20 years............    cai tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........        182        300         81        -60        -32         -9          5         15         21         25         527
  4. Modification of treatment of company-                                                                                                                                                      
   owned life insurance--disallowance of                                                                                                                                                        
   certain interests and premiums; pro rata                                                                                                                                                     
   disallowance of interest on debt to fund                                                                                                                                                     
   life insurance.............................         cia                                                                                                                                      
                                                    6/8/97   .........         20         53         93        140        193        247        299        349        399        447       2,240
  5. Earned income Credit (``EIC'') compliance                                                                                                                                                  
   provisions:                                                                                                                                                                                  
    a. Deny EIC eligibility for prior acts of                                                                                                                                                   
     recklessness or fraud; recertification                                                                                                                                                     
     required when EIC denied in past; and due                                                                                                                                                  
     diligence requirement for paid preparers.        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/96   .........      (\8\)         18         25         24         21         21         21         21         21         21         193
    b. For the purpose of EIC phaseout,                                                                                                                                                         
     include in AGI nontaxable distributions                                                                                                                                                    
     of IRA, pensions, and annuities, and tax-                                                                                                                                                  
     exempt interest; and addback 75% of                                                                                                                                                        
     business losses (\21\)...................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........      (\8\)         72         75         79         85         89         92         94         99        102         788
  6. Provide that workfare payments do not                                                                                                                                                      
   qualify as earned income for the purposes                                                                                                                                                    
   of the earned income credit................         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  7. Restrict income forecast method and allow                                                                                                                                                  
   3-year MACRS for rent-to-own property; with                                                                                                                                                  
   clarification for home computers and                                                                                                                                                         
   cellular phones............................       ppisa                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         29         41         62         78         38         27         25         17         17         18         352
  8. Expansion of requirement that                                                                                                                                                              
   involuntarily converted property be                                                                                                                                                          
   replaced with property acquired from an                                                                                                                                                      
   unrelated person...........................        icoa                                                                                                                                      
                                                    6/8/97   .........          1          4          6          8         11         13         15         17         19         21         115
  9. Repeal of exception for certain sales by                                                                                                                                                   
   manufacturers to dealers...................      tyb1ya                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........         44         97        106        106         64         21         22         23         24         507
  10. Limitation on charitable remainder trust                                                                                                                                                  
   annual payouts; require charitable                                                                                                                                                           
   remainders to have a minimum value of 10%                                                                                                                                                    
   of trust...................................          Ta                                                                                                                                      
                                                   6/18/97   .........          6          6          6          6          6          6          6          6          6          6          60
  11. Expanded SSA records for tax enforcement                                                                                                                                                  
   (\22\).....................................       180da                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........         10         10         10         10         10         10         10         10         10          90
  12. Using Federal case registry of child                                                                                                                                                      
   support orders for tax enforcement purposes                                                                                                                                                  
   (\22\).....................................     10/1/98   .........  .........  .........  .........         10         20         30         40         60         85        105         350
  13. Prior year estimated tax safe harbor                                                                                                                                                      
   (100% in 1998, 105% in 1999 through 2001,                                                                                                                                                    
   and 112% in 2002)..........................         DOE   .........     -7,400      4,000  .........  .........      4,400     -1,000  .........  .........  .........  .........  ..........
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title XI. Foreign Tax Provisions                                                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                                                                                
A. General Provisions                                                                                                                                                                           
  1. Simplify foreign tax credit limitation                                                                                                                                                     
   for individuals............................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........     (\23\)         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1          -9
  2. Simplify translation of foreign taxes....        ftpo                                                                                                                                      
                                                      tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)      (\23\)
  3. Election to use simplified foreign tax                                                                                                                                                     
   credit limitation for alternative minimum                                                                                                                                                    
   tax purposes...............................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)          -2
  4. Simplify treatment of personal                                                                                                                                                             
   transactions in foreign currency...........        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)          -2
  5. Simplify foreign tax credit limitation                                                                                                                                                     
   for dividends from 10/50 companies to                                                                                                                                                        
   provide look-through starting in 2003......        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/02   .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........        -57       -241       -215       -227       -242        -982
B. General Provisions Affecting Treatment of                                                                                                                                                    
 Controlled Foreign Corporations..............     various                                                                                                                                      
                                                     (\5\)   .........         -2         -5         -7         -9        -10        -10        -11        -12        -13        -14         -93
C. Modification of Passive Foreign Investment                                                                                                                                                   
 Company Provisions to Eliminate Overlap With                                                                                                                                                   
 Subpart F, to Allow Mark-to-Market Election,                                                                                                                                                   
 and to Require Measurement Based on Value for                                                                                                                                                  
 PFIC Asset Test..............................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........        -24        -23        -24        -26        -27        -28        -29        -31        -33        -35        -280
D. Simplify Formation and Operation of                                                                                                                                                          
 International Joint Ventures.................     various                                                                                                                                      
                                                     (\5\)   .........      (\7\)      (\7\)         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -2          -9
E. Modification of Reporting Threshold for                                                                                                                                                      
 Stock Ownership of a Foreign Corporation.....         toa                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........     (\23\)         -1         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -3         -3         -3         -20
F. Other Foreign Simplification Provisions                                                                                                                                                      
  1. Transition rule for certain trusts.......        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/96   .........         -1         -3         -5         -5         -5         -5         -5         -5         -5         -5         -44
  2. Simplify application of the stock and                                                                                                                                                      
   securities trading safe harbor.............        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)       (\7\)
  3. Clarification of determination of foreign                                                                                                                                                  
   taxes deemed paid..........................         DOE   .........      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)       (\7\)
  4. Clarification of foreign tax credit                                                                                                                                                        
   limitation for financial services income...         DOE   .........      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)       (\7\)
G. Other Foreign Provisions                                                                                                                                                                     
  1. Eligibility of licenses of computer                                                                                                                                                        
   software for foreign sales corporation                                                                                                                                                       
   benefits...................................         gra                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........        -27        -42       -146       -173       -180       -191       -202       -227       -252       -277      -1,717
  2. Increase dollar limitation on section 911                                                                                                                                                  
   exclusion and index after 2007.............        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........        -15        -30        -50        -67        -82        -97       -103       -111       -119       -127        -801
  3. Exception from U.S. property definition                                                                                                                                                    
   under subpart F for certain securities                                                                                                                                                       
   positions..................................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         -1         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -19
  4. Treat service income of nonresident alien                                                                                                                                                  
   individuals earned on foreign ships as                                                                                                                                                       
   foreign source income and disregard the                                                                                                                                                      
   U.S. presence of such individuals..........        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         -2         -4         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -30
  5. Exemption from subpart F for active                                                                                                                                                        
   financing income (\14\)....................        tybi                                                                                                                                      
                                                      1998   .........        -23        -68         -3  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........         -94
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title XII. Simplification Provisions Relating                                                                                                                                                   
 to Individuals and Businesses                                                                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                                                                                
A. Provisions Relating to Individuals                                                                                                                                                           
  1. Deduction attributable to unearned income                                                                                                                                                  
   of dependent filers: greater of (a) present                                                                                                                                                  
   law; or (b) earned income plus $250; delink                                                                                                                                                  
   dependent AMT from parent's AMT position...        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         -2        -38        -35        -35        -35        -35        -35        -38        -37        -36        -327
  2. Increase de minimis threshold for                                                                                                                                                          
   estimated tax to $1,000 for individuals....        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........       -134        -17        -18        -19        -20        -21        -22        -24        -25        -26        -326
  3. Treatment of certain reimbursed expenses                                                                                                                                                   
   for rural mail carriers' vehicles..........        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........      (\7\)         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -11
  4. Treatment of travel expenses of certain                                                                                                                                                    
   Federal employees participating in a                                                                                                                                                         
   Federal criminal investigation.............       apoii                                                                                                                                      
                                                      tyea                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)          -2
  5. Permit payment of taxes by any                                                                                                                                                             
   commercially acceptable means; and prohibit                                                                                                                                                  
   payment of fees by Treasury................         9ma                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
B. Provisions Relating to Businesses Generally                                                                                                                                                  
  1. Modifications to look-back method for                                                                                                                                                      
   long-term contracts........................    cci tyea                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         -1         -2         -3         -4         -4         -4         -4         -5         -5         -5         -37
  2. Minimum tax treatment of certain property                                                                                                                                                  
   and casualty insurance companies...........        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         -1         -2         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -27
  3. Treatment of construction allowances                                                                                                                                                       
   provided to lessees........................        leia                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
C. Partnership Simplification Provisions                                                                                                                                                        
  1. General provisions:                                                                                                                                                                        
    a. Simplified reporting to partners.......        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........          6          8          8          8          8          9          9          9          9          9          83
    b. Simplified audit procedure for large                                                                                                                                                     
     partnerships.............................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........      (\8\)      (\8\)      (\8\)          1          1          1          1          1          1          1           8
    c. Due date for furnishing information to                                                                                                                                                   
     partners of large partnerships...........        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
    d. Returns required on magnetic media for                                                                                                                                                   
     partnerships with 100 partners or more...        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
    e. Treatment for partnership items of                                                                                                                                                       
     individual retirement arrangements.......        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  2. Other partnership audit rules............     various                                                                                                                                      
                                                     (\5\)   .........         -2      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)          -5
  3. Closing partnership taxable year with                                                                                                                                                      
   respect to deceased partner................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)          -1
D. Modifications of Rules for Real Estate                                                                                                                                                       
 Investment Trusts                                                                                                                                                                              
  1. Alternative penalty for failure to                                                                                                                                                         
   request information from shareholders......        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  2. De minimis rule for tenant services                                                                                                                                                        
   income.....................................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  3. Attribution rules applicable to tenant                                                                                                                                                     
   ownership..................................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  4. Credit for tax paid by REIT on retained                                                                                                                                                    
   capital gains..............................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  5. Repeal 30% gross income requirment.......        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         -4         -5         -5         -6         -7         -7         -8         -9        -10        -11         -72
  6. Modification of earnings and profits                                                                                                                                                       
   rules for determining whether REIT has                                                                                                                                                       
   earnings and profits from non-REIT year....        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  7. Treatment of foreclosure property........        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  8. Payments under hedging instruments.......        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  9. Excess noncash income....................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  10. Prohibited transaction safe harbor......        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  11. Shared appreciation mortgages...........        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  12. Wholly owned subsidiaries...............        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
E. Repeal 30% Gross Income Limitation for                                                                                                                                                       
 Regulated Investment Companies...............        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........        -17        -23        -27        -33        -38        -45        -53        -61        -71        -82        -450
F. Taxpayer Protections                                                                                                                                                                         
  1. Provide reasonable cause exception for                                                                                                                                                     
   additional penalties.......................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  2. Clarification of period for filing claims                                                                                                                                                  
   for refunds................................        tyea                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  3. Repeal authority to disclose whether a                                                                                                                                                     
   prospective juror has been audited.........         pca                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  4. Clarify statute of limitations for items                                                                                                                                                   
   from pass-through entities.................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  5. Awarding of administrative costs and                                                                                                                                                       
   attorneys fees.............................         aca                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title XIII. Estate, Gift, and Trust                                                                                                                                                             
 Simplification Provisions                                                                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                                                                                
  1. Eliminate gift tax filing requirements                                                                                                                                                     
   for gifts to charities of over $10,000.....         gma                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  2. Clarification of waiver of certain rights                                                                                                                                                  
   of recovery of estate tax from QTIP trust..         dda                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  3. Transitional rule under section 2056A....        aiii                                                                                                                                      
                                                   OBRA'90   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  4. Estate and gift tax treatment of short-                                                                                                                                                    
   term OID instruments.......................         dda                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  5. Certain revocable trusts treated as part                                                                                                                                                   
   of estate..................................         dda                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -30
  6. Distributions during first 65 days of                                                                                                                                                      
   taxable year of estate.....................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  7. Separate share rules available to estates         dda                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  8. Executor of estate and beneficiaries                                                                                                                                                       
   treated as related persons for disallowance                                                                                                                                                  
   of losses..................................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  9. Simplified taxation of earnings of pre-                                                                                                                                                    
   need funeral trusts........................        tyea                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........          2          2          2          2          2          2          2          2          2          2          20
  10. Adjustments for certain gifts within 3                                                                                                                                                    
   years of decedent's death..................         dda                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  11. Clarification of treatment of survivor                                                                                                                                                    
   annuities under qualified terminable                                                                                                                                                         
   interest rules.............................         dda                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  12. Treatment under qualified domestic trust                                                                                                                                                  
   rules of forms of ownership which are not                                                                                                                                                    
   trusts.....................................         dda                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  13. Opportunity to correct certain failures                                                                                                                                                   
   under section 2032A........................         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  14. Authority to waive requirement of United                                                                                                                                                  
   States trustee for qualified domestic                                                                                                                                                        
   trusts.....................................         dda                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title XIV. Excise Tax and Other Simplification                                                                                                                                                  
 Provisions                                                                                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                                                                                
A. Excise Tax Simplification Provisions                                                                                                                                                         
  1. Increase de minimis limit for after-                                                                                                                                                       
   market alterations for heavy truck and                                                                                                                                                       
   luxury automobile excise taxes.............          ia                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  2. Replace truck excise tax deduction for                                                                                                                                                     
   tire value with tax credit for excise tax                                                                                                                                                    
   paid on tires..............................          Sa                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         66         94         96         97         99        101        102        105        108        110         979
  3. Simplification of excise taxes on                                                                                                                                                          
   distilled spirits, wine, and beer:                                                                                                                                                           
    a. Credit or refund for imported bottled                                                                                                                                                    
     distilled spirits returned to distilled                                                                                                                                                    
     spirits plant............................         fcq                                                                                                                                      
                                                     DOE +                                                                                                                                      
                                                  180 days   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
    b. Authority to cancel or credit export                                                                                                                                                     
     bonds without submission of records......         fcq                                                                                                                                      
                                                     DOE +                                                                                                                                      
                                                  180 days   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
    c. Repeal of required maintenance of                                                                                                                                                        
     records on premises of distilled spirits                                                                                                                                                   
     plant....................................         fcq                                                                                                                                      
                                                     DOE +                                                                                                                                      
                                                  180 days   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
    d. Fermented material from any brewery may                                                                                                                                                  
     be received at a distilled spirits plant.         fcq                                                                                                                                      
                                                     DOE +                                                                                                                                      
                                                  180 days   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
    e. Repeal of requirement for wholesale                                                                                                                                                      
     dealers in liquors to post sign..........         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
    f. Refund of tax to wine returned to bond                                                                                                                                                   
     not limited to unmerchantable wine.......         fcq                                                                                                                                      
                                                     DOE +                                                                                                                                      
                                                  180 days   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
    g. Use of additional ameliorating material                                                                                                                                                  
     in certain wines.........................         fcq                                                                                                                                      
                                                     DOE +                                                                                                                                      
                                                  180 days   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
    h. Domestically produced beer may be                                                                                                                                                        
     withdrawn free of tax for use of foreign                                                                                                                                                   
     embassies, legations, etc................         fcq                                                                                                                                      
                                                     DOE +                                                                                                                                      
                                                  180 days   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
    i. Beer may be withdrawn free of tax for                                                                                                                                                    
     destruction..............................         fcq                                                                                                                                      
                                                     DOE +                                                                                                                                      
                                                  180 days   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
    j. Authority to allow drawback on exported                                                                                                                                                  
     beer without submission of records.......         fcq                                                                                                                                      
                                                     DOE +                                                                                                                                      
                                                  180 days   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
    k. Imported beer or wine transferred in                                                                                                                                                     
     bulk to brewery or winery without payment                                                                                                                                                  
     of tax...................................         fcq                                                                                                                                      
                                                     DOE +                                                                                                                                      
                                                  180 days   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  4. Authority for IRS to grant exemption from                                                                                                                                                  
   excise tax registration requirements.......         wia                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  5. Repeal of excise tax ``deadwood''                                                                                                                                                          
   provisions.................................         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  6. Move taxation of arrows from tax on                                                                                                                                                        
   assembled arrows to tax on component parts                                                                                                                                                   
   of 12.4%...................................            Csa                                                                                                                                   
                                                   9/30/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  7. Modifications to heavy highway vehicle                                                                                                                                                     
   retail excise tax:                                                                                                                                                                           
    a. Exemption from truck excise tax for                                                                                                                                                      
     certain wrecked truck fixups and truck                                                                                                                                                     
     modifications............................      1/1/98   .........         -5         -8         -8         -8         -9         -9        -10        -10        -11        -11         -89
    b. Repeal registration requirement for tax-                                                                                                                                                 
     free sales of trucks for resale..........      1/1/98   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  8. Treatment of skydiving flights as                                                                                                                                                          
   noncommerical aviation.....................     10/1/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  9. Eliminate double taxation for certain                                                                                                                                                      
   purchases of aviation fuel from ``fixed-                                                                                                                                                     
   based operators''..........................     10/1/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
B. Tax-Exempt Bond Provisions                                                                                                                                                                   
  1. Repeal $100,000 limitation on unspent                                                                                                                                                      
   proceeds from tax-exempt bond issues under                                                                                                                                                   
   year exception from rebate.................         bia                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........      (\7\)         -2         -3         -5         -6         -8         -9        -10        -11        -12         -65
  2. Exclusion from arbitrage rebate for                                                                                                                                                        
   earnings on bona fide debt service fund                                                                                                                                                      
   under construction bond rules..............         bia                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........      (\7\)         -1         -2         -3         -3         -4         -5         -6         -6         -7         -37
  3. Repeal of debt service-based limitation                                                                                                                                                    
   on investment in certain nonpurpose                                                                                                                                                          
   investments................................         bia                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  4. Repeal of expired student loan bond                                                                                                                                                        
   arbitrage rebate provisions................         bia                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
C. Tax Court Procedures                                                                                                                                                                         
  1. Overpayment determinations of Tax Court..         DOE   .........         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -30
  2. Redetermination of interest pursuant to                                                                                                                                                    
   motion.....................................         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  3. Application of net worth requirements for                                                                                                                                                  
   awards of administrative or litigation                                                                                                                                                       
   costs; $4 million for joint returns........         pca                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         -1         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -19
  4. Tax Court jurisdiction for determination                                                                                                                                                   
   of employment status.......................         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
D. Other Provisions                                                                                                                                                                             
  1. Due date for first quarter estimated tax                                                                                                                                                   
   by private foundations.....................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         -2      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)          -3
  2. Withholding of Commonwealth income taxes                                                                                                                                                   
   from wages of Federal employees............      1/1/98   .........         -2         -3         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -13
  3. Certain notices disregarded under                                                                                                                                                          
   provision increasing interest rate on large                                                                                                                                                  
   corporate underpayments....................          Pa                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -10
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title XV. Pension and Employee Benefit                                                                                                                                                          
 Provisions                                                                                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                                                                                
A. Pension Simplification Provisions                                                                                                                                                            
  1. Matching contributions for self-employed                                                                                                                                                   
   individuals not treated as elective                                                                                                                                                          
   deferrals..................................         yba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)      (\24\)
  2. Modification of prohibition on assignment                                                                                                                                                  
   or alienation..............................         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  3. Eliminate paperwork burdens on plans.....         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  4. Modifications to section 403(b) exclusion                                                                                                                                                  
   allowance to conform to section 415                                                                                                                                                          
   modifications..............................         yba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)     (\23\)      (\24\)
  5. Permanent moratorium on nondiscrimination                                                                                                                                                  
   rules to State and local governmental plans      tybo/a                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  6. Clarification of certain rules relating                                                                                                                                                    
   to employee stock ownership plans of S                                                                                                                                                       
   corporation................................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  7. Modification of 10% tax on nondeductible                                                                                                                                                   
   contributions..............................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         -2         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -3         -29
  8. Modify funding requirements for certain                                                                                                                                                    
   plans......................................        pyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/96   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  9. Plans not disqualified merely by                                                                                                                                                           
   accepting rollover contributions...........         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  10. New technologies in retirement plans....         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
B. Miscellaneous Provisions Relating to                                                                                                                                                         
 Pensions and Other Benefits                                                                                                                                                                    
  1. Increase in full funding limit with 20-                                                                                                                                                    
   year amortization..........................        pyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/98   .........  .........         -4        -12        -14        -18        -19        -23        -23        -25        -25        -164
  2. Deduction for contributions made by                                                                                                                                                        
   ministers to retirement plans..............         yba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  3. Exclusion of ministers from                                                                                                                                                                
   discrimination testing of certain non-                                                                                                                                                       
   church retirement plans....................         yba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  4. Repeal UBIT on income from an S                                                                                                                                                            
   corporation to an ESOP.....................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         -8        -23        -34        -41        -44        -46        -48        -50        -52        -54        -400
  5. Diversification of section 401(k) plan                                                                                                                                                     
   investments................................      1/1/99   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  6. Water districts made eligible for 401(k)                                                                                                                                                   
   plans even if State or local entity........         yba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........     (\23\)         -1         -1         -1         -2         -2         -2         -2         -2         -3         -15
  7. Modify section 415 limits for permissive                                                                                                                                                   
   service credits under State and local plans         yba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/97   .........         -9        -25        -25        -26        -26        -26        -27        -27        -27        -28        -246
  8. Removal of dollar limitation on benefits                                                                                                                                                   
   payments from a defined benefit plan for                                                                                                                                                     
   police and fire employees..................         yba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/96   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  9. Exclude from gross income certain                                                                                                                                                          
   survivor benefits attributable to a public                                                                                                                                                   
   safety officer who is killed in the line of                                                                                                                                                  
   duty.......................................      (\25\)   .........      (\7\)         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -1         -2         -2         -12
  10. Treatment of certain disability benefits                                                                                                                                                  
   to public safety employees.................         DOE   .........        -10         -1  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........         -11
  11. Gratuitous transfers for the benefit of                                                                                                                                                   
   employees..................................          Ta                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........         -8        -15  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........         -23
C. Certain Health Act Provisions                                                                                                                                                                
  1. Excise tax penalties for failure of group                                                                                                                                                  
   health plan to provide certain maternity                                                                                                                                                     
   and mental health benefits.................      pybo/a                                                                                                                                      
                                                    1/1/98   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
  2. Church plan exception to prohibition on                                                                                                                                                    
   discrimination against individuals based on                                                                                                                                                  
   health status..............................        aiii                                                                                                                                      
                                                     HIPAA   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
D. Date for Adoption of Plan Amendments.......         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title XVI. Technical Corrections Provisions                                                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                                                                                
1. Oklahoma technical on Indian wage credits                                                                                                                                                    
 and development incentives for property with                                                                                                                                                   
 10-year lives or less........................    dwcorfpt                                                                                                                                      
                                                   3/18/97   .........        -10         -2          1          2          2          1          1          1          1          1          -2
2. Luxury tax clarification...................          Sa                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
                                                            ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal: H.R. 2014.....................                      60     -9,483     -9,887    -27,937    -29,329    -23,865    -34,966    -36,611    -38,652    -39,809    -41,551    -292,045
                                                            ====================================================================================================================================
PART THREE: REVENUE PROVISIONS OF THE BALANCED                                                                                                                                                  
 BUDGET ACT OF 1997 (H.R. 2015)                                                                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                                                                
A. Treatment of Medicare+Choice Medical                                                                                                                                                         
 Savings Accounts.............................        tyba                                                                                                                                      
                                                  12/31/98   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
B. Tax Treatment of Hospitals Which                                                                                                                                                             
 Participate in Provider-Sponsored                                                                                                                                                              
 Organizations................................         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
C. Provision of Employer Identification                                                                                                                                                         
 Numbers by Medicare Providers................      (\26\)   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)Negligible Revenue Effect                    ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
D. Disclosure of Tax Return Information for                                                                                                                                                     
 Verification of Employment Status of Medicare                                                                                                                                                  
 Beneficiaries and Spouses of Medicare                                                                                                                                                          
 Beneficiaries (\27\).........................         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
E. Unemployment Tax Provisions--Miscellaneous                                                                                                                                                   
 FUTA provisions (\16\).......................     various                                                                                                                                      
                                                     (\5\)   .........          3      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)      (\7\)  ..........
F. Earned Income Tax Credit Provision--                                                                                                                                                         
 Authorization of appropriations for                                                                                                                                                            
 enforcement initiatives related to the earned                                                                                                                                                  
 income credit (\22\).........................         DOE   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
G. Increase in Excise Tax on Tobacco Products--                                                                                                                                                 
 Increase small cigarettes tax by $0.10 per                                                                                                                                                     
 pack in 2000 and 2001, and $0.15 per pack in                                                                                                                                                   
 2002 and thereafter with proportionate                                                                                                                                                         
 increase in other tobacco products excise                                                                                                                                                      
 taxes; extend tax to ``roll-your-own''                                                                                                                                                         
 tobacco......................................      1/1/00   .........  .........  .........      1,175      1,720      2,272      2,280      2,290      2,300      2,310      2,320      16,667
                                                            ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal: H.R. 2015.....................               .........          3      (\7\)      1,175      1,720      2,272      2,280      2,290      2,300      2,310      2,320      16,667
                                                            ====================================================================================================================================
PART FOUR: TAXPAYER BROWSING PROTECTION ACT                                                                                                                                                     
 (H.R. 1226)                                                                                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                                                                
1. Civil damages for unauthorized inspection                                                                                                                                                    
 of tax returns or tax return information;                                                                                                                                                      
 notification of unlawful inspection or                                                                                                                                                         
 disclosure...................................       voo/a                                                                                                                                      
                                                       DOE      (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)      (\28\)
                                                            ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal: H.R. 1226.....................                  (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)     (\28\)      (\28\)
                                                            ====================================================================================================================================
PART FIVE: HIGHWAY TRUST FUND EXTENSION (S.                                                                                                                                                     
 1519)                                                                                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                                                                                
1. Extend Highway Trust Fund expenditure and                                                                                                                                                    
 revenue transfer authority through 9/30/98;                                                                                                                                                    
 extend Boat Safety Account and National                                                                                                                                                        
 Recreational Trails Trust Fund expenditure                                                                                                                                                     
 authority through 9/30/98....................     10/1/97   .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
                                                            ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal: S. 1519.......................               .........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                         
(3)No Revenue Effect                            ...........  .........  .........  .........                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                                                                
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joint Committee on Taxation.                                                                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                                                                
NOTE: Details may not add to totals due to rounding.                                                                                                                                            


Legend for ``Effective'' column:                                                                                
  aba=annuities beginning after             fcq DOE + 180 days=first day of the        rfa=returns filed after  
                                             calendar                                                           
  aca=actions commenced after                 quarter that begins at least 180 days    roa=rentals occurring    
                                                                                        after (for              
  aiii HIPAA=as if included in the Health     after date of enactment                    returns open on date of
                                                                                        first                   
    Insurance Portability and               fsa=fuels sold after                         committee action)      
   Accountability                                                                                               
    Act                                     fsoua=fuels sold or used after             Sa=sales after           
  aiii OBRA'90=as if included in the        ftpoa=foreign taxes paid or accrued in     saia=sales and           
   Omnibus                                                                              installations after     
    Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990       gma=gifts made after                       sea=sales or exchanges   
                                                                                        after                   
  aoty=all open taxable years               gra=gross receipts after                   sepda=sales and          
                                                                                        exchanges, and certain  
  apoii=amounts paid or incurred in         gsta=generation skipping transfers after     partnership            
                                                                                        distributions after     
  bia=bonds issued after                    ia=installations after                     spa=services performed   
                                                                                        after                   
  cai=credits arising in                    icoa=involuntary conversions occurring     ta=transactions after    
                                             after                                                              
  cci=contracts completed in                iia=instruments issued after               Ta=transfers after       
  cfa=claims filed after                    leia=leases entered into after             toa=transactions         
                                                                                        occurring after         
  cia=contracts issued after                lia=levies issued after                    tp7data=tickets purchased
                                                                                        7 days after date of    
  csa=constructive sales after              lpo/a=labor performed on or after            enactment for travel 7 
                                                                                        days after              
  Csa=components sold after                 NOLgi=net operating losses generated in    tsoaiTg=tax shelters     
                                                                                        offered after issuance  
                                                                                        of                      
  da=distributions after                    pa=payments after                            Treasury guidance      
  dda=decedents dying after                 Pa=periods after                           tyba=taxable years       
                                                                                        beginning after         
  di=dispositions in                        pca=proceedings commenced after            tyb1ya=taxable years     
                                                                                        beginning 1 year after  
  Dmi=distributions made in                 pcpa=property contributed to partnership   tybo/a=taxable years     
                                             after                                      beginning on or after   
  doaa=distributions or acquisitions after  pda=partnership distributions after        tybi=taxable years       
                                                                                        beginning in            
  DOE=date of enactment                     pma=payments made after                    tyea=taxable years ending
                                                                                        after                   
  Doia=discharges of indebtedness after     po/a=purchases on or after                 voo/a=violations         
                                                                                        occurring on or after   
  dpoaa=dividends paid or accrued after     poida=payments of interest due after       wia=waivers issued after 
  dra=distributions received after          ppisa=property placed in service after     wpoifhma=wages paid or   
                                                                                        incurred for hires      
  droaa=dividends received or accrued       psora=payments solicited or received         made after             
   after                                     after                                                              
  dwcorfpt=depreciation and wages claimed   ptoa=prohibited transactions occurring     yba=years beginning after
   on                                        after                                                              
    returns filed prior to                  pyba=plans years beginning after           30da=30 days after       
  ea=exchanges after                        pybo/a=plans years beginning on or after   90da=90 days after       
  efbcieo=exception for binding contracts   qza=qualified zone academy                 180da=180 days after     
   in effect on                                                                                                 
  epoia=expenses paid or incurred after     rd=returns due                             9ma=9 months after       
                                                                                       2ya=2 years after        
Footnotes for Appendix:                                                                                         
                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                
\1\ Estimate considers interaction with HOPE tax credit proposal.                                               
\2\ The estimate includes a refundable portion of the child credit equal to $4,281 million for fiscal years 1998-
  2002 and $10,022 million for fiscal years 1998-2007.                                                          
\3\ Estimate includes interaction with estate and gift taxes.                                                   
\4\ Considers interaction with IRA PLUS proposal.                                                               
\5\ For complete breakout of the effective date, refer to the body of the text.                                 
\6\ Estimate includes interaction with Welfare-to-Work tax credit.                                              
\7\ Loss of less than $500,000.                                                                                 
\8\ Gain of less than $500,000.                                                                                 
\9\ Effective for bonds issued after 12/31/96 and bonds issued before 1/1/99.                                   
\10\ Effective for taxable years beginning after 12/31/97 and before 1/1/01.                                    
\11\ Effective for expenses in taxable years ending after date of enactment and before 1/1/01.                  
\12\ Estimate includes interaction with Brownfields provision.                                                  
\13\ Assumes prior or concurrent passage of legislation to allow Virgin Island financing on parity basis.       
\14\ Provision was cancelled by the President pursuant to the Line Item Veto Act of 1996.                       
\15\ The provision became effective on 12/2/97, upon enactment of the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act of   
  1997.                                                                                                         
\16\ Estimate provided by the Congressional Budget Office.                                                      
\17\ Rural airports are defined as (1) airports receiving ``essential air service'' assistance on date of       
  enactment and having fewer than 100,000 enplanements in the previous calendar year, and (2) other airports    
  having fewer than 100,000 passenger enplanements in the previous calendar year, excluding those within 75     
  miles of airports having more than 100,000 passenger enplanements in the previous year.                       
\18\ Estimate does not include increase in receipts to Social Security trust fund ($21 million for fiscal years 
  1997-2002; $51 million for fiscal years 1997-2007).                                                           
\19\ The provision also eliminates the present-law requirement that a portion of the suspense account be        
  restored to income whenever the gross receipts of the corporation decline.                                    
\20\ Provision is effective for taxable years ending after 6/8/97 for new suspense accounts, and taxable years  
  beginning after that date for existing accounts. Balances in new accounts are included in income over a 10-   
  year period, and balances in existing accounts over a 20-year period. For existing accounts, the amounts      
  included in income in any year may not exceed 50% of the taxable income of the taxpayer before the inclusion. 
\21\ Estimate includes outlay reductions of $254 million for 1997-2002 and $650 million for 1997-2007.          
\22\ Estimate does not include effect on outlays. Outlays will be provided by the Congressional Budget Office.  
\23\ Loss of less than $1 million.                                                                              
\24\ Loss of less than $10 million.                                                                             
\25\ Effective for payments received in taxable years beginning after 12/31/96 with respect to individuals dying
  after such date.                                                                                              
\26\ Effective 90 days after the Secretary of HHS submits to the Congress a report on the steps taken to ensure 
  the confidentiality of social security account numbers required to be provided to the Secretary of HHS.       
\27\ Revenue estimate does not include outlay effects of the provision.                                         
\28\ Gain of less than $1 million.