MGO CPA | Tax, Audit, and Consulting Services

Topic: Tax Guidance

Businesses must navigate year-end tax planning with new tax laws potentially on the horizon

The end of the tax year is fast approaching for many businesses, but their ability to engage in traditional year-end planning may be hampered by the specter of looming tax legislation. The budget reconciliation bill, dubbed the Build Back Better Act (BBBA), is likely to include provisions affecting the taxation of businesses — although its passage is uncertain at this time.

While it appears that several of the more disadvantageous provisions targeting businesses won’t make it into the final bill, others may. In addition, some temporary provisions are coming to an end, requiring businesses to take action before year end to capitalize on them. As Congress continues to negotiate the final bill, here are some areas where you could act now to reduce your business’s 2021 tax bill.

Research and experimentation

Section 174 research and experimental (R&E) expenditures generally refer to research and development costs in the experimental or laboratory sense. They include costs related to activities intended to uncover information that would eliminate uncertainty about the development or improvement of a product.
Currently, businesses can deduct R&E expenditures in the year they’re incurred or paid. Alternatively, they can capitalize and amortize the costs over at least five years. Software development costs also can be immediately expensed, amortized over five years from the date of completion or amortized over three years from the date the software is placed in service.

However, under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), that tax treatment is scheduled to expire after 2021. Beginning next year, you can’t deduct R&E costs in the year incurred. Instead, you must amortize such expenses incurred in the United States over five years and expenses incurred outside the country over 15 years. In addition, the TCJA requires that software development costs be treated as Sec. 174 expenses.

The BBBA may include a provision that delays the capitalization and amortization requirements to 2026, but it’s far from a sure thing. You might consider accelerating research expenses into 2021 to maximize your deductions and reduce the amount you may need to begin to capitalize starting next year.

Income and expense timing

Accelerating expenses into the current tax year and deferring income until the next year is a tried-and-true tax reduction strategy for businesses that use cash-basis accounting. These businesses might, for example, delay billing until later in December than they usually do, stock up on supplies and expedite bonus payments.

But the strategy is advised only for businesses that expect to be in the same or a lower tax bracket the following year — and you may expect greater profits in 2022, as the pandemic hopefully winds down. If that’s the case, your deductions could be worth more next year, so you’d want to delay expenses, while accelerating your collection of income. Moreover, under some proposed provisions in the BBBA, certain businesses may find themselves facing higher tax rates in 2022.

For example, the BBBA may expand the net investment income tax (NIIT) to include active business income from pass-through businesses. The owners of pass-through businesses — who report their business income on their individual income tax returns — also could be subject to a new 5% “surtax” on modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) that exceeds $10 million, with an additional 3% on income of more than $25 million.

Capital assets

The traditional approach of making capital purchases before year-end remains effective for reducing taxes in 2021, bearing in mind the timing issues discussed above. Businesses can deduct 100% of the cost of new and used (subject to certain conditions) qualified property in the year the property is placed in service.
You can take advantage of this bonus depreciation by purchasing computer systems, software, vehicles, machinery, equipment and office furniture, among other items. Bonus depreciation also is available for qualified improvement property (generally, interior improvements to nonresidential real property) placed in service this year. Special rules apply to property with a longer production period.

Of course, if you face higher tax rates going forward, depreciation deductions would be worth more in the future. The good news is that you can purchase qualifying property before year-end but wait until your tax filing deadline, including extensions, to determine the optimal approach.

You can also cut your taxes in 2021 with Sec. 179 expensing (deducting the entire cost). It’s available for several types of improvements to nonresidential real property, including roofs, HVAC, fire protection systems, alarm systems and security systems.

The maximum deduction for 2021 is $1.05 million (the maximum deduction also is limited to the amount of income from business activity). The deduction begins phasing out on a dollar-for-dollar basis when qualifying property placed in service this year exceeds $2.62 million. Again, you needn’t decide whether to take the immediate deduction until filing time.

Business meals

Not every tax-cutting tactic has to be dry and dull. One temporary tax provision gives you an incentive to enjoy a little fun.

For 2021 and 2022, businesses can generally deduct 100% (compared with the normal 50%) of qualifying business meals. In addition to meals incurred at and provided by restaurants, qualifying expenses include those for company events, such as holiday parties. As many employees and customers return to the workplace for the first time after extended pandemic-related absences, a company celebration could reap you both a tax break and a valuable chance to reconnect and re-engage.

Stay tuned

The TCJA was signed into law with little more than a week left in 2017. It’s possible the BBBA similarly could come down to the wire, so be prepared to take quick action in the waning days of 2021. Turn to us for the latest information.

Raising Capital: Navigating Tax Challenges When Classifying Debt Versus Equity

The corporate fundraising environment has changed dramatically this year due to several factors, including a wide sell off in the equity markets, high interest rates, inflation, and a general tightening of the credit markets. Prior to the recent downturn, companies had the luxury of spending to develop their products and marketing ideas first, and then focusing on turning a profit later.

Because of these newly tightened conditions, companies may face challenges when raising capital, forcing them to adopt a more thoughtful approach to seek funding. Likewise, investors will want to ensure their priorities are protected and their returns met. The combination of a given borrower’s need for capital and a financer’s desire to seek favorable returns may lead to the creation of agreements that have characteristics of both debt and equity. As such, it is crucial for all parties involved to understand the resulting tax classification and the treatment of these arrangements, so all expectations are met.

The taxation of debt and equity

For borrowers, the difference between debt and equity can be critical because interest payments are generally tax deductible and subject to certain limitations. Dividends or other payments related to equity would not be deductible for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

Enacted as part of the Tax Cuts and Job Act (TCJA) of 2017, one main limit on interest deductibility is the IRC 163(j) limit on the amount of business interest that can be deducted each year. This limit is calculated as 30 percent of adjusted taxable income, which prior to the 2022 tax year closely resembled earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA). However, starting with the 2022 tax year adjusted taxable income excludes depreciation and amortization, becoming EBIT. This should result in a lower limit on the amount of interest expense that can be deducted each year. Any interest expense exceeding this annual limit can be carried forward to future years.

Determining if an arrangement is debt or equity for federal income tax purposes

Classifying an arrangement as debt or equity is made on a case-by-case basis depending on the facts and circumstances of a given agreement. While there is currently little guidance in this area beyond case law, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has issued a list of factors to consider when questioning whether something is debt or equity. (Keep in mind, however, that the IRS states not one factor is conclusive.) The factors include whether:

  • An agreement contains an unconditional promise to pay a sum certain on demand or at maturity,
  • A lender can enforce the payment of principal and interest by the borrower, and
  • A borrower is thinly capitalized.

The courts have also established a broader — but similar — list of factors to consider when determining whether an instrument should be treated as debt or equity. Both the IRS and the courts have generally placed more weight on whether an instrument provides for the rights and remedies of a creditor, whether the parties intend to establish a debtor-creditor relationship, and if the intent is economically feasible. Some factors include:

  • Participation in management (as a result of advances),
  • Identity of interest between creditor and stockholder,
  • Thinness of capital structure in relation to debt, and
  • Ability of a corporation to obtain credit from outside sources.

For international companies, the characterization of debt or equity when considered in a cross-border funding arrangement is important, as withholding tax rates may apply to interest payments and may differ from tax rates applied to dividends. Further, withholding tax obligations occurs when a cash payment is made. If you have a cross-border arrangement, it is crucial to know if you have debt or equity on your hands.

Special rules related to payment-in-kind

Once it is determined that an agreement should be classified as debt for U.S. federal income tax purposes, some borrowers may prefer to set aside interest payments or pay interest with securities, which is often referred to as payment-in-kind (PIK). This is generally done to preserve cash flow for operations and growth of the business. When a borrower chooses this route, U.S. federal income tax rules will impute an interest payment to the lender.

While using a PIK mechanism will not automatically result in the debt being recharacterized as equity for federal income tax purposes, it can support viewing the instrument as equity.

Limits to deductible debt interest

There are limitations that can apply to interest deductibility. As noted above, IRC 163(j) limits deductibility of business interest; for a corporation, this is deemed to be all interest regardless of use. Another provision that can result in interest deductibility limitation is IRC 163(l), which applies to certain convertible notes and similar instruments held by corporations.

For cannabis operators, it is important to consider that IRC 280E disallows interest deductions. Hence, it is highly detrimental for cannabis operators to issue debt from entities that are cannabis plant-touching.

How we can help

Due to the nature of the debt versus equity analysis, companies thinking about fundraising should plan on how they intend to perform the raise and whether to have the raise treated as equity or debt. If debt classification is desired, a borrower should take the steps needed to strengthen the facts of the transaction to support the arrangement as a debt instrument.

MGO’s dedicated tax team has extensive experience advising companies across industries on capital-raising, debt refinancing and restructuring, recapitalizations, and other tax transactions. If you are planning to fundraise, or you are currently in the process of conducting a debt versus equity analysis, contact us today.

Getting Ahead of Tax Credit and Incentive IRS Issues

Recent events in the media have shone a spotlight on issues surrounding bad practices when it comes to tax credits and incentives. This increased attention is likely to result in an influx of audits by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) as they crack down on the Research and Development (R&D) tax and the Employee Retention Tax Credit (ERTC) in the coming years.

We recently released an article detailing the red flags to look out when dealing with tax credits and incentives providers. If you think you could be at risk for future IRS issues, there is much you can do now to take a proactive approach and mitigate future negative impact. In the following, we break down steps you can take now to better understand and manage your exposure.

An overview of tax credits and incentives

Designed to encourage investment and development, job creation, growth, and certain business activities, tax credits and incentives provide an opportunity to reduce the amount of tax owed for performing certain activities. Credits and incentives are categorically different than tax deductions, which reduce the amount of taxable income.

These incentives often target desirable industries or activities like research and development, job creation for at-risk populations, and expanded growth in underdeveloped areas. When leveraged correctly, credits and incentives can be a powerful tool to funnel back resources into your organization to fuel activities you are already doing. Even more enticing, these credits can often apply retroactively if you determine you qualify for certain credits or incentives after the fact.

There are three basic types of tax credits: nonrefundable, refundable, and partially refundable. A few of the different types of tax credits pertaining to businesses in different classifications, industries, or activities performed include R&D tax credits, the employee retention tax credits, IRC Section 179D, and the work opportunity tax credit. To learn more about their eligibility rules, visit our previous article.

Understanding the risk of IRS tax audits

There is a three-year statute of limitations from the due date of the tax return or the filing date (whatever is later) for the IRS to assess your filings. That means if you think you may be exposed but escaped the IRS’ notice, you could still receive an audit notice for previous years’ returns. And if you do get audited, and the IRS determines you owe back taxes, you will get charged penalties and interest dating back to the infraction itself.

This is even more risky when considering the IRS’s extreme backlog. These IRS tax audits can sometimes take years to complete and if your credit and incentive calculations are the topic of interest, you’ll need to halt any future credit analysis until the situation is resolved. Meanwhile, you’ll be devoting crucial resources, time, and effort working with the IRS for something that yields no financial value and distracts from more conducive business activities.

Reasons to get a head-start and address issues now

Even though there is no guarantee you will get audited, you are still taking a risk if you do not address potential tax credit and incentive exposures in your organization. It may seem easy to “roll the dice” and hope the issue will remain uncovered, but it could come at a cost — especially if you are planning to make some big moves, like engaging in transaction of your business (M&A), going public, or embarking on another major transaction.

During the due diligence period of these transactions, it is almost certain any uncovered tax issues will emerge. You will likely not recover the value of these credits or remain on the hook for potential liability. Even worse, the exposure of these issues reflects negatively on your accounting and control system, potentially lowering the purchase value of your organization or undermining whatever deal you had in place prior to the due diligence. Often your transaction partners will start to question your organization’s trustworthiness, and reputation … due to something that may be no fault of your own.

So, you’ve been exposed … but haven’t received an IRS audit notice

Here is the deal: you know for certain you have been exposed, but you have not been notified by the IRS yet. You probably have a lot of questions — will you get an audit notice? Have you escaped unscathed? Do you need to address the issues preemptively, just in case? It may be overwhelming to decide how to proceed once you realize the exposure.

We suggest working with a qualified CPA firm to review your tax filings. A full-service accounting firm will review your organization holistically at a minimum rate, uncover any exposures, and deliver valuable peace of mind. If the firm does find issues, you have two options:

  • Update your credit and incentive filings moving forward.
    • While this will likely decrease the amount you can deduct, it exemplifies transparency.
  • Issue a Voluntary Disclosure (VA) if the exposure is significant and you do not have a lot of time to fix the issue.
    • Essentially, you are volunteering to correct your mistakes by recalculating the credits claimed and paying back the difference.
    • While this may sting a little, the IRS looks favorably upon organizations who are proactive to fix the issue by filing a VA and they are likely to waive any penalties or interest you would have had to pay.

You’ve received an IRS audit notice. Now what?

Well, it happened. You received an audit note from the IRS. Before you panic, here is what you need to do:

  • Start preparing your documentation right away. The sooner you have your ducks in a row, the sooner you are prepared to handle the audit.
  • Check the contract you signed with your original provider and verify if they provide controversy support services for situations like these.
    • If they do, reexamine the quality of their work. Do they have any of the red flags mentioned in this article? Could something they have done have caused the audit?
    • Consider engaging a qualified CPA firm as your new provider to handle the subsequent controversy support. Someone you trust can get you ready for any available credits and incentives moving forward, too.
  • If you used a provider that displays any red flags, you could have some leverage for a reasonable cause defense. Because the “professional” firm handled it for you and made a mistake, you could utilize a first-time penalty abatement, which means you can get relief from a penalty if you:
    • Did not previously have to file a return or if you do not have any penalties for the three years before the tax year you received a penalty;
    • Filed all currently required returns or an extension of time to file;
      and
    • Paid or have arranged to pay any tax due.
  • Verify your contract with the original provider to determine if you have any recourse to seek compensation from them. If the IRS does issue any penalties, you will want to ensure you do not have to pay.

Standalone firms vs. full-service accounting firms

Let’s say you haven’t received an IRS notice, and you do not think you are in danger of receiving one. How can you ensure you will not in the future? It comes down to choosing a firm to help you maximize the potential of these tax credits and incentives.

The bottom line: it is imperative you work with a certified public accounting (CPA) firm instead of a standalone firm. Because standalone firms often use lower-cost, less-experienced recent graduates who are not certified public accountants, there is a distinct lack of knowledge and background in the accounting fundamentals, causing you to be misled by those unequipped to help with complex tax matters. You also run the risk of being oversold benefits by aggressive firms that not only exaggerate the amount you are receiving from the tax credits and incentives, but also behave in a way that attracts IRS attention and jeopardizes your firm.

A full-service accounting firm, on the other hand, knows how to look at an organization holistically — and it has many more capabilities and professionals with experience. It looks at things through various lenses and can advise how certain positions will impact current and future tax positions. Full-service firms also likely have an in-house controversy team that has handled hundreds of audits successfully—so you will be in good hands.

Our perspective

Tax credits and incentives provide plenty of benefits you do not want to miss out on, and their often-complex application and qualification processes are reason enough to hire a professional accountant to help you maximize your returns. Unfortunately, we often see organizations placing their trust in the wrong providers and they end up suffering the consequences of an IRS audit. For many, it is simply easier and safer to cut off the relationship with the initial provider and start fresh with a professional firm you know you can trust.

At MGO, our dedicated Tax Credits and Incentives team brings more than 30 years of experience fixing these types of issues and working with the IRS to limit the damage. We provide cleanup in the event you are being audited by the IRS (or could be audited in the future), and help you identify areas where you can claim tax credits and incentives for next time. If you are concerned, our best advice is to get ahead of it with an opinion you can trust — before the IRS decides to investigate themselves.

About the author

Michael Silvio is a partner at MGO. He has more than 25 years of experience in public accounting and tax and has served a variety of public and private businesses in the manufacturing, distribution, pharmaceutical, and biotechnology sectors.

California’s Workaround to the Federal Cap on State Tax Deductions

On July 16, 2021, California joined a growing number of states that have enacted workarounds to the $10,000 limitation on the federal deduction for state and local taxes (SALT). California’s approach is to permit eligible pass-through entities to annually elect to pay a special tax (at a 9.3% flat rate) on the income allocable to certain participating owners of those entities (the “PTE Tax”) and then to claim the related tax payments as a business deduction. The result is that participating owners receive a potentially larger deduction for state taxes on their federal tax returns and a tax credit equal to their share of PTE Tax paid on their California state tax returns.

California’s workaround is in effect for the 2021 tax year and will continue to be available through the 2025 tax year (although it could expire earlier if the federal $10,000 limitation is repealed by Congress prior to its current sunset date of January 1, 2026).

The state tax credit, which is nonrefundable, can be carried over for five years. Nonresidents and part-year residents do not have to prorate the credit to account for their non-California income.

How to elect

California’s workaround is available for partnerships (including those structured as LLCs) and S corporations that only have individuals, trusts, estates, and/or corporations as owners. Publicly traded partnerships, partnerships owned by other partnerships, members of a combined reporting group, and disregarded entities do not qualify. (Disregarded Single-Member LLCs are not eligible to make the election, but will not make the entity ineligible if they are an owner of an otherwise eligible PTE).

Not all the owners of the pass-through entity need to consent to the election. Those that do not consent are not included in the calculation of the PTE Tax. To take advantage of the workaround, the pass-through entity needs to make the election annually on its state tax return. In addition, payments towards the PTE Tax need to be made by specified due dates.

• For the 2021 tax year, 100% of the PTE Tax needs to be paid by the due date for the pass-through entity’s state tax return without extensions – March 15, 2022.

• In later years, the PTE tax needs to be paid in two installments: the first installment is due by June 15 of the tax year for which the election is being made, and the second installment is due by the due date for the pass-through entity’s state tax return for that tax year without extensions (i.e., the following March 15). The minimum amount for the first installment is $1,000.

What to consider

The biggest benefit to the owners of a pass-through entity is the ability to claim a federal tax deduction for their share of the pass-through entity’s state income tax paid to California, but there is another potential benefit. In future years (starting with the 2022 tax year) PTE Tax payments may create some “float” for the owners in terms of the timing and amount of their individual estimated tax payments:

  • Individuals in California need to pay 70% of their estimated tax liability through quarterly payments on April 15 and June 15, while the PTE Tax only requires that one installment of 50% of the total tax be paid in by June 15.
  • Individuals in California need to pay the remaining 30% of their estimated tax liability by January 15 of the following year (i.e., the 4th quarter payment), while the PTE Tax only requires the remaining 50% be paid in by March 15.

However, despite these benefits, other factors should be considered before making the election:

  • If the pass-through entity provides most of the income for an owner and that owner’s top California tax rate is less than or equal to 9.3%, the state tax credit cannot be used in full before it expires. On the other hand, since the election is made annually, you could avoid accruing too much carryover by opting not to elect in a following year.
  • It’s unclear how California’s workaround will interact with pass-through entity tax regimes enacted by other states, especially their associated state tax credits. California provides credits against most other states’ taxes, but guidance has not been provided to indicate that it will afford the same treatment to other state PTE Taxes paid. Multi-state operators may not be able to reduce California taxable income by the amounts of other states’ similar taxes.
  • The 9.3% flat rate may not be sufficient to cover the full tax liability for higher income owners.
  • The PTE tax credit does not reduce the amount of tax due below California’s Tentative Minimum Tax (TMT), and thus may not be as beneficial for taxpayers subject to the TMT.
  • There are considerations pertaining to cash management, since the pass-through entity would be paying the PTE Tax, not the owners.
  • Non-resident withholding (7% for individuals) is not offset by the withholding requirements for the PTE Election. Non-resident taxpayers making the election would therefore be required to pay in tax at 16.3% among the quarterly and bi-annual installments, then claim a refund up to the amount of the 7% withholding. But because the 9.3% PTE Tax is non-refundable, to the extent that withholding exceeds tax due, it would need to be claimed in a later year.

How we can help

This PTE Election is a little complicated, but it is worth the effort to explore. MGO’s state and local tax professionals can advise you on the numerous pass-through entity tax regimes being passed by states to counter the federal limitation on deducting state taxes. Our cumulative experience as SALT specialists can help you determine if you are able to benefit from pass-through entity taxes and how to appropriately use them. Reach out to our team of experienced practitioners for your state and local tax needs.

Businesses Can File Retroactive Claims for the Employee Retention Tax Credit

Many people are excited about the pace of economic recovery, and it’s fair to say we are moving in the right direction. But as the excitement continues and life feels more like it is returning to normal after the pandemic, make sure you don’t forget to take advantage of some of the programs that were put in place to help us through the COVID-19 crisis.

Employee Retention Tax Credit

The Employee Retention Tax Credit (ERTC) is a refundable tax credit created by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act, to encourage businesses to keep employees on their payroll. For 2020, the credit is 70% of up to $10,000 in wages paid by an employer whose business was fully or partially suspended because of COVID-19 or whose gross receipts declined by more than 50%

For 2021, an employer can receive 70 percent of the first $10,000 of qualified wages paid per employee in each qualifying quarter. The credit applies to wages paid from March 13, 2020, through December 31, 2021. And the cost of employer-paid health benefits can be considered part of employees’ qualified wages.

It’s an attractive credit if you qualify.

Eligible businesses

The credit applies to all employers regardless of size, including tax exempt organizations that had a full or partial shutdown because of a government order limiting commerce due to COVID-19 during 2020 or 2021. With the exceptions of state and local governments or small businesses that take Small Business Administration loans, this credit is available to almost everyone.

Of course, there is some fine print:
• To qualify, gross receipts must have declined more than 50 percent during a 2020 or 2021 calendar quarter, when compared to the same quarter in the prior year.
• For employers with 100 or fewer full-time employees, all employee wages qualify for the credit, whether the employer is open for business or shutdown.
• For employers with more than 100 full-time employees, qualified wages are wages paid to employees when they are not providing services due to COVID-19-related circumstances.

One bright point about the ERTC is that employers can be immediately reimbursed for the credit by reducing the amount of payroll taxes they would usually have withheld from employees’ wages. That was a nice touch by the IRS.

Retroactive claims for the ERTC

Although it appears the IRS tried to make this as easy as possible, you may still need a tax professional to sort it out. For instance, if your business had a substantial decline in gross receipts but has now recovered, you can still claim the credit for the difficult period

Retroactive claims for refunds will probably be delayed because currently everything is delayed at the IRS. The credit can be claimed on amended payroll tax returns as long as the statute of limitations remains open, which is three years from the date of filing. So you have some time to claim the credit, but why wait?

Keep December 2021 in mind

The economy is in a state of change, and it is fair to say that we are once again in uncharted territory. On the positive side, there seems to be significant resources and support for businesses from both government and consumers. You and your tax professional should keep your eyes open for credits and benefits to make sure you don’t miss any opportunitie

The ERTC expires in December 2021. Though it may be difficult to think about year-end in the middle of the summer, you’ll want to figure out your position on this credit before December. A tax professional can help you understand the ERTC and help you decide on your next step.

About the author

Michael Silvio is a partner at MGO. He has more than 25 years of experience in public accounting and tax and has served a variety of public and private businesses in the manufacturing, distribution, pharmaceutical, and biotechnology sectors.

Structuring Transactions to Maximize Value

Welcome to the Cannabis M&A Field Guide from MGO. In this series, our practice leaders and service providers provide guidance for navigating M&A deals in this new phase of the quickly expanding industries of cannabis, hemp, and related products and services. Reporting from the front-lines, our team members are structuring deals, implementing best practices, and magnifying synergies to protect investments and accrete value during post-deal integration. Our guidance on market realities takes into consideration sound accounting principles and financial responsibility to help operators and investors navigate the M&A process, facilitate successful transactions, and maximize value.

Deal structure can be viewed as the “Terms and Conditions” of an M&A deal. It lays out the rights and obligations of both parties, and provides a roadmap for completing the deal successfully. While deal structures are necessarily complex, they typically fall within three overall strategies, each with distinct advantages and disadvantages: Merger, Asset Acquisition and Stock Purchase.
In the following we will address these options, and common alternatives within each category, and provide guidance on their effectiveness in the cannabis and hemp markets.

Key considerations of an M&A structure

Before we get to the actual M&A structure options, it is worth addressing a couple essential factors that play a role in the value of an M&A deal for both sides. Each transaction structure has a unique relationship to these factors and may be advantageous or disadvantageous to both parties.

Transfer of Liabilities: Any company in the legally complex and highly-regulated cannabis and hemp industries bears a certain number of liabilities. When a company is acquired in a stock deal or is merged with, in most cases, the resulting entity takes on those liabilities. The one exception being asset deals, where a buyer purchases all or select assets instead of the equity of the target. In asset deals, liabilities are not required to be transferred.

Shareholder/Third-Party Consent: A layer of complexity for all transaction structures is presented by the need to get consent from related parties. Some degree of shareholder consent is a requirement for mergers and stock/share purchase agreements, and depending on the Target company, getting consent may be smooth, or so difficult it derails negotiations.

Beyond that initial line of consent, deals are likely to require “third party” consent from the Target company’s existing contract holders – which can include suppliers, landlords, employee unions, etc. This is a particularly important consideration in deals where a “change of control” occurs. When the Target company is dissolved as part of the transaction process, the Acquirer is typically required to re-negotiate or enter into new contracts with third parties. Non-tangible assets, including intellectual property, trademarks and patents, and operating licenses, present a further layer of complexity where the Acquirer is often required to have the ownership of those assets formally transferred to the new entity.

Tax Impact: The structure of a deal will ultimately determine which aspects are taxed and which are tax-free. For example, asset acquisitions and stock/share purchases have tax consequences for both the Acquirer and Target companies. However, some merger types can be structured so that at least a part of the sale proceeds can be tax-deferred.

As this can have a significant impact on the ROI of any deal, a deep dive into tax implications (and liabilities) is a must. In the following, we will address the tax implications of each structure in broad strokes, but for more detail please see our article on M&A Tax Implications (COMING SOON).

Asset acquisitions

In this structure, the Acquirer identifies specific or all assets held by the Target company, which can include equipment, real estate, leases, inventory, equipment and patents, and pays an agreed-upon value, in cash and/or stock, for those assets. The Target company may continue operation after the deal.
This is one of the most common transaction structures, as the Acquirer can identify the specific assets that match their business plan and avoid burdensome or undesirable aspects of the Target company. From the Target company’s perspective, they can offload under-performing/non-core assets or streamline operations, and either continue operating, pivot, or unwind their company.
For the cannabis industry, asset sales are often preferred as many companies are still working out their operational specifics and the exchange of assets can be mutually beneficial.

Advantages/Disadvantages

Transfer of Liabilities: One of the strongest advantages of an asset deal structure is that the process of negotiating the assets for sale will include discussion of related liabilities. In many cases, the Acquirer can avoid taking on certain liabilities, depending on the types of assets discussed. This gives the Acquirer an added line of defense for protecting itself against inherited liabilities.

Shareholder/Third-Party Consent: Asset acquisitions are unique among the M&A transaction structures in that they do not necessarily require a stockholder majority agreement to conduct the deal.

However, because the entire Target company entity is not transferred in the deal, consent of third-parties can be a major roadblock. Unfortunately, as stated in our M&A Strategy article, many cannabis markets licenses are inextricably linked to the organization/ownership group that applied for and received the license. This means that acquiring an asset, for example a cultivation facility, does not necessarily mean the license to operate the facility can be included in the deal, and would likely require re-application or negotiation with regulatory authorities.

Tax Impact: A major consideration is the potential tax implications of an asset deal. Both the Acquirer and Target company will face immediate tax consequences following the deal. The Acquirer has a slight advantage in that a “step-up” in basis typically occurs, allowing the acquirer to depreciate the assets following the deal. Whereas the Target company is liable for the corporate tax of the sale and will also pay taxes on dividends from the sale.

Stock/share purchase

In some ways, a stock/share purchase is a more efficient version of a merger. In this structure, the acquiring company simply purchases the ownership shares of the Target business. The companies do not necessarily merge and the Target company retains its name, structure, operations and business contracts. The Target business simply has a new ownership group.

Advantages/Disadvantages

Transfer of Liabilities: Since the entirety of the company comes under new ownership, all related liabilities are also transferred.

Shareholder/Third Party Consent: To complete a stock deal, the Acquirer needs shareholder approval, which is not problematic in many circumstances. But if the deal is for 100% of a company and/or the Target company has a plenitude of minority shareholders, getting shareholder approval can be difficult, and in some cases, make a deal impossible.

Because assets and contracts remain in the name of the Target company, third party consent is typically not required unless the relevant contracts contain specific prohibitions against assignment when there is a change of control.

Tax Impact: The primary concern for this deal is the unequal tax burdens for the Acquirer vs the Shareholders of the Target company. This structure is ideal for Target company shareholders because it avoids the double taxation that typically occurs with asset sales. Whereas Acquirers face several potentially unfavorable tax outcomes. Firstly, the Target company’s assets do not get adjusted to fair market value, and instead, continue with their historical tax basis. This denies the Acquirer any benefits from depreciation or amortization of the assets (although admittedly not as important in the cannabis industry due to 280E). Additionally, the Acquirer inherits any tax liabilities and uncertain tax positions from the Target company, raising the risk profile of the transaction.

Three types of mergers

1: Direct merger

In the most straight-forward option, the Acquiring company simply acquires the entirety of the target company, including all assets and liabilities. Target company shareholders are either bought out of their shares with cash, promissory notes, or given compensatory shares of the Acquiring company. The Target company is then considered dissolved upon completion of the deal.

2: Forward indirect merger

Also known as a forward triangular merger, the Acquiring company merges the Target company into a subsidiary of the Acquirer. The Target company is dissolved upon completion of the deal.

3: Reverse indirect merger

The third merger option is called the reverse triangular merger. In this deal the Acquirer uses a wholly-owned subsidiary to merge with the Target company. In this instance, the Target company is the surviving entity.

This is one of the most common merger types because not only is the Acquirer protected from certain liabilities due to the use of the subsidiary, but the Target company’s assets and contracts are preserved. In the cannabis industry, this is particularly advantageous because Acquirers can avoid a lot of red tape when entering a new market by simply taking up the licenses and business deals of the Target company.

Advantages/Disadvantages

Transfer of Liabilities: In option #1, the acquirer assumes all liabilities from the Target company. Options #2 and #3, provide some protection as the use of the subsidiary helps shield the Acquirer from certain liabilities.

Shareholder/Third Party Consent: Mergers can be performed without 100% shareholder approval. Typically, the Acquirer and Target company leadership will determine a mutually acceptable stockholder approval threshold.

Options #1 and #2, where the Target company is ultimately dissolved, will require re-negotiation of certain contracts and licenses. Whereas in option #3, as long as the Target company remains in operation, the contracts and licenses will likely remain intact, barring any “change of control” conditions.

Tax Impact: Ultimately, the tax implications of the merger options are complex and depend on whether cash or shares are used. Some mergers and reorganizations can be structured so that at least a part of the sale proceeds, in the form of acquirer’s stock, can receive tax-deferred treatment.

In conclusion

Each deal structure comes with its own tax advantages (or disadvantages), business continuity implications, and legal requirements. All of these factors must be considered and balanced during the negotiating process.

Catch up on previous articles in this series and see what’s coming next…

Fast Answers on Opportunity Zone Incentives

Tax Alert: Qualified Opportunity Zones

Last year’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, H.R. 1 (“the Act”) created a federal capital gains tax deferral program through the opportunity zone statute, which is designed to attract private, long-term investments in low-income and economically distressed communities. Over 8,700 communities designated as Qualified Opportunity Zones (QOZ), located across all 50 states, territories and Washington D.C, were nominated by local governments and confirmed by the Department of Treasury (DoT) in Notice 2018-48 issued in June 2018.

The statutory language of the Act introduced the tax incentive deferring taxable gains but it did not provide important details, including the types of gains eligible for deferral, the timing and specific requirements  of qualified investments, and how investors report deferred gains. On October 19, 2018, the Treasury Department released proposed regulations, a revenue ruling, and tax forms to provide additional guidance on the opportunity zone tax incentive.

How QOZ tax incentives work

Simply stated, the opportunity zone statute allows for the deferral of capital gains if some or all of the amount of the capital gain recognized is invested in a Qualified Opportunity Fund (QOF) by an eligible taxpayer. A QOF is any entity that invests in qualified opportunity zone property and is taxed as a partnership or corporation organized in any of the 50 states, US territories, or D.C. The QOF is required to hold at least 90 percent of its assets in qualified opportunity zone property.

To defer a capital gain, a taxpayer has 180 days from the date of sale or exchange of the appreciated property to invest the recognized gain in a QOF. The potential tax benefits of opportunity zone statute include:

  • Deferral of tax on capital gains invested in a QOF through 2019: Any recognized capital gain invested in a QOF through December 31, 2019 may be deferred until December 31, 2026 or eliminated when an investment in a QOF is disposed. There is an opportunity for taxpayers to make multiple investments in QOFs through the statute expiration date.
  • Potential to eliminate 15% to 100% of taxes for capital gains invested: Capital gains invested in a QOF are deemed to have an initial tax basis of zero. The taxpayer receives a 10% increase in tax basis if the investment is held five years and an additional 5% increase in tax basis after seven years. If an investment in a QOF is held for ten years, the taxpayer can elect to increase their tax basis in the QOF to fair market value upon disposition, which provides for a tax-free investment in the QOF. Tax is realized on the excess of the deferred gain over the basis in the QOF at the time of disposal.
  • Ability to rollover gains on disposal of investments in QOF: In general, the original deferred gain must be recognized by the taxpayer upon disposition of the investment in the QOF. If a taxpayer disposes of all of an investment in a QOF, triggering tax on the deferred gain and the qualified opportunity zone property, a taxpayer can make an investment in a new QOF and rollover the deferred gain. The rollover investment must be made before December 31, 2026.

Qualified Opportunity Zone Property

The purpose of the opportunity zone statute is to incentivize investment in low-income areas of the country in need of community development and improvement. IRC Sec. 1400Z-2(d)(2) provides guidance regarding the types of assets that will be considered qualified opportunity zone property if held by a QOF. In general, qualified opportunity zone property includes the following:

  • Newly issued stock held in a domestic corporation if such corporation is a qualified opportunity zone business,
  • Newly issued partnership interests in a domestic partnership if such partnership is a qualified opportunity zone business, or
  • Qualified opportunity zone business property.

Qualified opportunity zone business property is further defined in IRC Sec. 1400Z-2(d)(2)(D) as tangible property used in a business in a qualified opportunity zone that is either:

  • Land in a qualified opportunity zone,
  • A building in a qualified opportunity zone that is first used by the QOF or the qualified opportunity business,
  • A building in a qualified opportunity zone that was previously used but is “substantially improved” by the QOF or qualified opportunity business,
  • Equipment that was never previously used in a qualified opportunity zone, or
  • Equipment that was previously used in a qualified opportunity zone but it “substantially improved” by the QOF or the qualified opportunity business.

The opportunity zone statute defines “substantial improvement,” as an amount of investment in existing tangible property by a QOF, during any 30-month period, that exceeds the adjusted basis in the property at the beginning of the 30-month period. The Revenue Ruling issued clarifies that improvements made to land are not included in the total improvements for purposes of the “substantial improvement test” and the value of land is excluded from the adjusted basis calculations.

More details on qualifying as a QOF

The new guidance also provides details on what qualifies an investment vehicle as a QOF. And a draft of Form 8996, Qualified Opportunity Fund was released alongside the guidance to demonstrate how corporations and partnerships can self-identify as a QOF by including the form with the filing of their tax return. Additional information provided includes guidelines for determining when a QOF begins, how a QOF can meet the requirements to be recognized as a qualified opportunity zone business, and what pre-existing entities may qualify as a QOF. And finally, guidance details the test required of QOFs to determine whether the entity holds the minimum threshold of assets in qualified opportunity zone property.

Considering a QOZ investment?

While the new guidance helps fill in many details, many questions are left unanswered and the Department of Treasury plans to release further guidance before the end of the year. If you’re planning on creating or investing in a QOF, we recommend consulting with an experienced tax advisor first.

The tax team at MGO is ready to assist you in navigating QOZs, QOFs, and other income tax concerns. For further guidance or to schedule a consultation, please contact us.