[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 19, 1995)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 36995-36998] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 95-17494] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 26 CFR Parts 1 and 602 [TD 8599] RIN 1545-AN55 Deductions for Transfers of Property AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Final regulations. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: This document contains final regulations concerning deductions for transfers of property. The regulations amend the special rule that required an employer to deduct and withhold income tax as a prerequisite for claiming a deduction for property transferred to an employee in connection with the performance of services. Under the former regulation, employers that failed to deduct and withhold income tax were denied a deduction even where the employee reported the income and paid the tax. The new rules permit service recipients to claim a deduction for the amount included in the service provider's gross income. The service provider will be deemed to have included an amount in gross income if the service recipient provides a timely Form W-2 or 1099, as appropriate. These regulations apply to all service recipients who transfer property in connection with the performance of services. DATES: These regulations are effective July 19, 1995. For dates of applicability, see Sec. 1.83-6(a)(5). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles T. Deliee, telephone 202-622- 6060 (not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Paperwork Reduction Act The collection of information contained in these final regulations has been reviewed and approved by the Office of Management and Budget in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3504(h)) under control number 1545-1448. The estimated annual burden of reporting will be reflected in the reporting requirements for Form 1099-MISC. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden estimate and suggestions for reducing this burden should be sent to the Internal Revenue Service, Attn: IRS Reports Clearance Officer, PC:FP, Washington, DC 20224, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Attn: Desk officer for the Department of the Treasury, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20503. Background On December 5, 1994, the IRS published in the Federal Register (59 FR 62370) proposed amendments to the income tax regulations (26 CFR part 1) under section 83(h) of the Internal Revenue Code (Code), which permits a deduction for property transferred in connection with the performance of services. Three written comments were received from the public on the proposed regulations. No public hearing was held. After consideration of the written comments received, the proposed regulations are adopted by this Treasury decision with one technical clarification. Explanation of Provisions Under section 83(h) of the Code, in the case of a transfer of property to which section 83(a) applies, the person for whom services were provided may deduct an amount equal to the amount included in the service provider's gross income. In light of the difficulty that a service recipient may have in demonstrating that an amount has [[Page 36996]] actually been included in the service provider's gross income, the general rule in former Sec. 1.83-6(a)(1) permitted the deduction for the amount ``includible'' in the service provider's gross income. Thus, the deduction was allowed to the service recipient even if the service provider did not properly report the includible amount. Where the service provider was an employee of the service recipient, however, the special rule in Sec. 1.83-6(a)(2) provided that a deduction could be claimed only if the service recipient (employer) deducted and withheld income tax in accordance with section 3402. The special rule was designed to ensure that the service recipient's deduction was in fact offset by a corresponding inclusion in the service provider's gross income. The special rule was limited to employer-employee situations because in other situations there was no underlying withholding requirement upon which the deduction could be conditioned. Taxpayers expressed concern that it was often difficult to satisfy the prerequisite that employers must deduct and withhold income tax from payments in kind as a condition for claiming a deduction. These regulations address this concern by eliminating this prerequisite, while still ensuring consistent treatment between service recipients and service providers as required by the statute. In addition, because the deduction no longer is conditioned on withholding, there no longer is a need to have different rules for those who receive services from employees and those who receive services from others. Under these regulations, the former general rule and special rule are replaced by a revised general rule that more closely follows the statutory language of section 83(h). The service recipient is allowed a deduction for the amount ``included'' in the service provider's gross income. For this purpose, the amount included means the amount reported on an original or amended return or included in gross income as a result of an IRS audit of the service provider. Because of the potential difficulty of demonstrating actual inclusion by the service provider, a special rule provides that, if the service recipient timely complies with applicable Form W-2 or 1099 reporting requirements under section 6041 (or 6041A), as appropriate, with respect to the amount includible in income by the service provider, the service provider is deemed to have included the amount in gross income for this purpose. Thus, the regulations allow the deduction without requiring the service recipient to demonstrate actual inclusion by the service provider. If a transfer meets the requirements for exemption from reporting for payments aggregating less than $600 in any taxable year, or is eligible for any other reporting exemption, no reporting is required in order for the service recipient to rely on the deemed inclusion rule. In order to allow service recipients to take advantage of the deemed inclusion rule with respect to property transfers to all service providers, these regulations also permit service recipients to use the special rule in the case of transfers to corporate service providers. To that end, service recipients are permitted, solely for purposes of this rule, to treat the Form 1099 reporting requirements as applicable to transfers to corporate service providers in the same manner as those requirements apply to transfers to noncorporate service providers. Thus, if a service recipient who transferred property to a corporate service provider timely reports that income on Form 1099 (to both the service provider and the federal government), the service recipient is entitled to rely on the deemed inclusion rule in claiming a deduction for the amount of that income. If the transfer meets the requirements for exemption from reporting for payments aggregating less than $600 in any taxable year, or is eligible for any other reporting exemption applicable to a service provider that is not a corporation, no reporting is required in order for the service recipient to rely on the deemed inclusion rule. The deemed inclusion rule may be used only by a service recipient whose compliance with applicable Form W-2 or 1099 reporting requirements is timely. Thus, for example, under the current reporting requirements, if amounts attributable to one or more section 83 transfers of property are includible in an employee's income in year 1 (and are not eligible for any reporting exemption), the employer generally is required to furnish the employee a Form W-2 reflecting that amount by January 31 of year 2 and generally is required to file a copy of the Form W-2 with the federal government by the last day of February of year 2. If the employer reports to the employee and the government in a timely manner, the employer can rely on the deemed inclusion rule to claim a deduction for the amount in year 1. If the employee's Form W-2 is not furnished until after January 31 of year 2 or the government's copy of Form W-2 is not filed until after the last day of February of year 2, the employer generally is required to demonstrate that the employee actually included the amount in income in order to support its deduction of the amount. Under these regulations, a special rule applies with respect to an amount includible in an employee's or former employee's income by reason of a disqualifying disposition of stock that had been acquired pursuant to a statutory stock option. In the case of such a disposition, and solely for the purpose of determining whether an employer may use the deemed inclusion rule under these regulations, a Form W-2 or W-2c (as appropriate) will be considered timely if it is furnished to the employee or former employee, and filed with the federal government, by the date on which the employer files its tax return (including an amended return) claiming a deduction for that amount. With respect to disqualifying dispositions, these regulations modify the conditions for an employer's deduction under section 83(h) in a manner that is not inconsistent with the guidance provided by Notice 87-49 (Changes to Incentive Stock Option Requirements by Section 321 of the Tax Reform Act of 1986), 1987-2 C.B. 355. These regulations are not intended to have any effect on the application of Notice 87-49 or the analysis contained therein, and therefore should not be viewed as constituting a reconsideration of Revenue Ruling 71-52, 1971-1 C.B. 278, within the meaning of Notice 87-49. Three written comments were received from the public on the proposed regulations. One dealt specifically with the withholding requirements as they apply to disqualifying dispositions of stock received under an employee stock purchase plan and, therefore, is beyond the scope of this regulation. The remaining two comments generally applauded the proposed amendments, but they both expressed a concern that, even after elimination of the withholding requirement as a prerequisite for claiming a deduction under section 83(h), there remains a statutory requirement, under subtitle C, to withhold income tax from compensatory transfers of property. Both commentators suggested that regulations be published to exclude transfers of property in payment for services from the withholding requirements. Treasury and the IRS have carefully considered the comments. However, section 3402 of the Code requires every employer making payment of wages to deduct and withhold income tax from the wages. Section 3401(a) (relating to the definition of wages for income tax [[Page 36997]] withholding purposes), section 3121(a) (relating to the definition of wages for FICA tax purposes), and section 3306(b) (relating to the definition of wages for FUTA tax purposes) of subtitle C all provide that ``wages'' means all remuneration ``including the cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash,'' except as specified otherwise in those sections. A transfer of property in connection with the performance of services is not one of the specified exceptions. Therefore, although the withholding requirement is eliminated as a prerequisite for claiming a deduction, these regulations do not relieve the service recipient from any applicable withholding requirements of subtitle C or from the statutorily prescribed penalties or additions to tax for noncompliance with those requirements. Thus, for example, if an employer transferred to an employee property to which section 83 applies and failed to withhold income tax on the payment, the employer would be liable for the tax under section 3403. However, under section 3402(d), any tax liability assessed against the employer would be offset by any tax paid by the employee. In addition, nothing in these regulations relieves the service recipient from penalties or additions to tax for noncompliance with the requirements of section 6041 or 6041A (relating to information reporting) to the extent they otherwise apply. These regulations are effective for deductions allowable for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 1995. However, taxpayers may apply these regulations when claiming a deduction for any year not closed by the statute of limitations. For example, if substantially vested (within the meaning of Sec. 1.83-3(b)) stock was transferred to an employee in 1992 upon the exercise of a nonstatutory stock option, and if the calendar year employer furnished a Form W-2 to the employee by January 31, 1993, reflecting the income generated by the transfer and filed the appropriate Form W-2 with the federal government by February 28, 1993, then the employer could apply these regulations to claim a deduction for 1992 for the amount of the income, even if the employer failed to withhold in accordance with section 3402 and could not demonstrate actual inclusion in income by the employee. If that employer did not claim a deduction for the amount of the income on its 1992 tax return, it could file an amended return for 1992 claiming such a deduction pursuant to these regulations, provided that 1992 is still an open year. The proposed regulation that was published in the Federal Register on November 16, 1983 (48 FR 52079), proposing to amend the special rule in Sec. 1.83-6(a)(2), was withdrawn by the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published on December 5, 1994 (59 FR 62371). Special Analyses It has been determined that this Treasury decision is not a significant regulatory action as defined in EO 12866. Therefore, a regulatory assessment is not required. It has also been determined that section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) do not apply to these regulations and, therefore, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Code, the notice of proposed rulemaking preceding these regulations was submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on its impact on small business. Drafting Information: The principal author of these regulations is Charles T. Deliee, Office of the Associate Chief Counsel (Employee Benefits and Exempt Organizations), IRS. However, personnel from other offices of the IRS and Treasury Department participated in their development. List of Subjects 26 CFR Part 1 Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 26 CFR Part 602 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Adoption of Amendments to the Regulations Accordingly, 26 CFR parts 1 and 602 are amended as follows: Paragraph 1. The authority for part 1 continues to read in part as follows: Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * * Par. 2. Section 1.83-6 is amended as follows: 1. Paragraphs (a) (1) and (2) are revised. 2. Paragraph (a)(5) is added. 3. The revisions and addition read as follows: Sec. 1.83-6 Deduction by employer. (a) Allowance of deduction--(1) General Rule. In the case of a transfer of property in connection with the performance of services, or a compensatory cancellation of a nonlapse restriction described in section 83(d) and Sec. 1.83-5, a deduction is allowable under section 162 or 212 to the person for whom the services were performed. The amount of the deduction is equal to the amount included as compensation in the gross income of the service provider under section 83 (a), (b), or (d)(2), but only to the extent the amount meets the requirements of section 162 or 212 and the regulations thereunder. The deduction is allowed only for the taxable year of that person in which or with which ends the taxable year of the service provider in which the amount is included as compensation. For purposes of this paragraph, any amount excluded from gross income under section 79 or section 101(b) or subchapter N is considered to have been included in gross income. (2) Special Rule. For purposes of paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the service provider is deemed to have included the amount as compensation in gross income if the person for whom the services were performed satisfies in a timely manner all requirements of section 6041 or section 6041A, and the regulations thereunder, with respect to that amount of compensation. For purposes of the preceding sentence, whether a person for whom services were performed satisfies all requirements of section 6041 or section 6041A, and the regulations thereunder, is determined without regard to Sec. 1.6041-3(c) (exception for payments to corporations). In the case of a disqualifying disposition of stock described in section 421(b), an employer that otherwise satisfies all requirements of section 6041 and the regulations thereunder will be considered to have done so timely for purposes of this paragraph (a)(2) if Form W-2 or Form W-2c, as appropriate, is furnished to the employee or former employee, and is filed with the federal government, on or before the date on which the employer files the tax return claiming the deduction relating to the disqualifying disposition. * * * * * (5) Effective date. Paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section apply to deductions for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 1995. However, taxpayers may also apply paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section when claiming deductions for taxable years beginning before that date if the claims are not barred by the statute of limitations. Paragraphs (a) (3) and (4) of this section are effective as set forth in Sec. 1.83-8(b). * * * * * [[Page 36998]] PART 602--OMB CONTROL NUMBERS UNDER THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT Par. 3. The authority citation for part 602 continues to read as follows: Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805. Sec. 602.101 [Amended] Par. 4. In Sec. 602.101, paragraph (c) is amended by adding the entry ``1.83-6 * * * 1545-1448'' in numerical order to the table. Approved: June 19, 1995. Margaret Milner Richardson, Commissioner of Internal Revenue. Leslie Samuels, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury. [FR Doc. 95-17494 Filed 7-18-95; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-U