Traditional method with curative allocations

Traditional method with curative allocations -
(1) In general. To correct distortions created by the ceiling rule, a partnership using the traditional method under paragraph (b) of this section may make reasonable curative allocations to reduce or eliminate disparities between book and tax items of noncontributing partners. A curative allocation is an allocation of income, gain, loss, or deduction for tax purposes that differs from the partnership's allocation of the corresponding book item. For example, if a noncontributing partner is allocated less tax depreciation than book depreciation with respect to an item of section 704(c) property, the partnership may make a curative allocation to that partner of tax depreciation from another item of partnership property to make up the difference, notwithstanding that the corresponding book depreciation is allocated to the contributing partner. A partnership may limit its curative allocations to allocations of one or more particular tax items (e.g., only depreciation from a specific property or properties) even if the allocation of those available items does not offset fully the effect of the ceiling rule.
(2) Consistency. A partnership must be consistent in its application of curative allocations with respect to each item of section 704(c) property from year to year.
(3) Reasonable curative allocations -
(i) Amount. A curative allocation is not reasonable to the extent it exceeds the amount necessary to offset the effect of the ceiling rule for the current taxable year or, in the case of a curative allocation upon disposition of the property, for prior taxable years.
(ii) Timing. The period of time over which the curative allocations are made is a factor in determining whether the allocations are reasonable. Notwithstanding paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section, a partnership may make curative allocations in a taxable year to offset the effect of the ceiling rule for a prior taxable year if those allocations are made over a reasonable period of time, such as over the property's economic life, and are provided for under the partnership agreement in effect for the year of contribution. See paragraph (c)(4) Example 3 (ii)(C) of this section.
(iii) Type -
(A) In general. To be reasonable, a curative allocation of income, gain, loss, or deduction must be expected to have substantially the same effect on each partner's tax liability as the tax item limited by the ceiling rule. The expectation must exist at the time the section 704(c) property is obligated to be (or is) contributed to the partnership and the allocation with respect to that property becomes part of the partnership agreement. However, the expectation is tested at the time the allocation with respect to that property is actually made if the partnership agreement is not sufficiently specific as to the precise manner in which allocations are to be made with respect to that property. Under this paragraph (c), if the item limited by the ceiling rule is loss from the sale of property, a curative allocation of gain must be expected to have substantially the same effect as would an allocation to that partner of gain with respect to the sale of the property. If the item limited by the ceiling rule is depreciation or other cost recovery, a curative allocation of income to the contributing partner must be expected to have substantially the same effect as would an allocation to that partner of partnership income with respect to the contributed property. For example, if depreciation deductions with respect to leased equipment contributed by a tax-exempt partner are limited by the ceiling rule, a curative allocation of dividend or interest income to that partner generally is not reasonable, although a curative allocation of depreciation deductions from other leased equipment to the noncontributing partner is reasonable. Similarly, under this rule, if depreciation deductions apportioned to foreign source income in a particular statutory grouping under section 904(d) are limited by the ceiling rule, a curative allocation of income from another statutory grouping to the contributing partner generally is not reasonable, although a curative allocation of income from the same statutory grouping and of the same character is reasonable.
(B) Exception for allocation from disposition of contributed property. If cost recovery has been limited by the ceiling rule, the general limitation on character does not apply to income from the disposition of contributed property subject to the ceiling rule, but only if properly provided for in the partnership agreement in effect for the year of contribution or revaluation. For example, if allocations of depreciation deductions to a noncontributing partner have been limited by the ceiling rule, a curative allocation to the contributing partner of gain from the sale of that property, if properly provided for in the partnership agreement, is reasonable for purposes of paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(A) of this section even if not of the same character.
(4) Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (c).
(C) The property has only one year remaining on its cost recovery schedule even though its economic life is considerably longer. Under these facts, if the partnership agreement had provided for curative allocations over a reasonable period of time, such as over the property's economic life, rather than over its remaining cost recovery period, the allocations would have been reasonable. See paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section. Thus, in this example, JK would make a curative allocation of $400 of sales income to J in the partnership's first year (10 percent of $4,000). J and K's book and tax capital accounts at the end of the first year would be as follows:
(1) In general. To correct distortions created by the ceiling rule, a partnership using the traditional method under paragraph (b) of this section may make reasonable curative allocations to reduce or eliminate disparities between book and tax items of noncontributing partners. A curative allocation is an allocation of income, gain, loss, or deduction for tax purposes that differs from the partnership's allocation of the corresponding book item. For example, if a noncontributing partner is allocated less tax depreciation than book depreciation with respect to an item of section 704(c) property, the partnership may make a curative allocation to that partner of tax depreciation from another item of partnership property to make up the difference, notwithstanding that the corresponding book depreciation is allocated to the contributing partner. A partnership may limit its curative allocations to allocations of one or more particular tax items (e.g., only depreciation from a specific property or properties) even if the allocation of those available items does not offset fully the effect of the ceiling rule.
(2) Consistency. A partnership must be consistent in its application of curative allocations with respect to each item of section 704(c) property from year to year.
(3) Reasonable curative allocations -
(i) Amount. A curative allocation is not reasonable to the extent it exceeds the amount necessary to offset the effect of the ceiling rule for the current taxable year or, in the case of a curative allocation upon disposition of the property, for prior taxable years.
(ii) Timing. The period of time over which the curative allocations are made is a factor in determining whether the allocations are reasonable. Notwithstanding paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section, a partnership may make curative allocations in a taxable year to offset the effect of the ceiling rule for a prior taxable year if those allocations are made over a reasonable period of time, such as over the property's economic life, and are provided for under the partnership agreement in effect for the year of contribution. See paragraph (c)(4) Example 3 (ii)(C) of this section.
(iii) Type -
(A) In general. To be reasonable, a curative allocation of income, gain, loss, or deduction must be expected to have substantially the same effect on each partner's tax liability as the tax item limited by the ceiling rule. The expectation must exist at the time the section 704(c) property is obligated to be (or is) contributed to the partnership and the allocation with respect to that property becomes part of the partnership agreement. However, the expectation is tested at the time the allocation with respect to that property is actually made if the partnership agreement is not sufficiently specific as to the precise manner in which allocations are to be made with respect to that property. Under this paragraph (c), if the item limited by the ceiling rule is loss from the sale of property, a curative allocation of gain must be expected to have substantially the same effect as would an allocation to that partner of gain with respect to the sale of the property. If the item limited by the ceiling rule is depreciation or other cost recovery, a curative allocation of income to the contributing partner must be expected to have substantially the same effect as would an allocation to that partner of partnership income with respect to the contributed property. For example, if depreciation deductions with respect to leased equipment contributed by a tax-exempt partner are limited by the ceiling rule, a curative allocation of dividend or interest income to that partner generally is not reasonable, although a curative allocation of depreciation deductions from other leased equipment to the noncontributing partner is reasonable. Similarly, under this rule, if depreciation deductions apportioned to foreign source income in a particular statutory grouping under section 904(d) are limited by the ceiling rule, a curative allocation of income from another statutory grouping to the contributing partner generally is not reasonable, although a curative allocation of income from the same statutory grouping and of the same character is reasonable.
(B) Exception for allocation from disposition of contributed property. If cost recovery has been limited by the ceiling rule, the general limitation on character does not apply to income from the disposition of contributed property subject to the ceiling rule, but only if properly provided for in the partnership agreement in effect for the year of contribution or revaluation. For example, if allocations of depreciation deductions to a noncontributing partner have been limited by the ceiling rule, a curative allocation to the contributing partner of gain from the sale of that property, if properly provided for in the partnership agreement, is reasonable for purposes of paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(A) of this section even if not of the same character.
(4) Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (c).
(C) The property has only one year remaining on its cost recovery schedule even though its economic life is considerably longer. Under these facts, if the partnership agreement had provided for curative allocations over a reasonable period of time, such as over the property's economic life, rather than over its remaining cost recovery period, the allocations would have been reasonable. See paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section. Thus, in this example, JK would make a curative allocation of $400 of sales income to J in the partnership's first year (10 percent of $4,000). J and K's book and tax capital accounts at the end of the first year would be as follows:
(d) Remedial allocation method -
(1) In general. A partnership may adopt the remedial allocation method described in this paragraph to eliminate distortions caused by the ceiling rule. A partnership adopting the remedial allocation method eliminates those distortions by creating remedial items and allocating those items to its partners. Under the remedial allocation method, the partnership first determines the amount of book items under paragraph (d)(2) of this section and the partners' distributive shares of these items under section 704(b). The partnership then allocates the corresponding tax items recognized by the partnership, if any, using the traditional method described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. If the ceiling rule (as defined in paragraph (b)(1) of this section) causes the book allocation of an item to a noncontributing partner to differ from the tax allocation of the same item to the noncontributing partner, the partnership creates a remedial item of income, gain, loss, or deduction equal to the full amount of the difference and allocates it to the noncontributing partner. The partnership simultaneously creates an offsetting remedial item in an identical amount and allocates it to the contributing partner.
(2) Determining the amount of book items. Under the remedial allocation method, a partnership determines the amount of book items attributable to contributed property in the following manner rather than under the rules of § 1.704-1(b)(2)(iv)(g)(3). The portion of the partnership's book basis in the property equal to the adjusted tax basis in the property at the time of contribution is recovered in the same manner as the adjusted tax basis in the property is recovered (generally, over the property's remaining recovery period under section 168(i)(7) or other applicable Internal Revenue Code section). The remainder of the partnership's book basis in the property (the amount by which book basis exceeds adjusted tax basis) is recovered using any recovery period and depreciation (or other cost recovery) method (including first-year conventions) available to the partnership for newly purchased property (of the same type as the contributed property) that is placed in service at the time of contribution. However, the additional first year depreciation deduction under section 168(k) is not a permissible method for purposes of the preceding sentence and, if a partnership has acquired property in a taxable year for which the additional first year depreciation deduction under section 168(k) has been used of the same type as the contributed property, the portion of the contributed property's book basis that exceeds its adjusted tax basis must be recovered under a reasonable method. See § 1.168(k)-2(b)(3)(iv)(B).
(3) Type. Remedial allocations of income, gain, loss, or deduction to the noncontributing partner have the same tax attributes as the tax item limited by the ceiling rule. The tax attributes of offsetting remedial allocations of income, gain, loss, or deduction to the contributing partner are determined by reference to the item limited by the ceiling rule. Thus, for example, if the ceiling rule limited item is loss from the sale of contributed property, the offsetting remedial allocation to the contributing partner must be gain from the sale of that property. Conversely, if the ceiling rule limited item is gain from the sale of contributed property, the offsetting remedial allocation to the contributing partner must be loss from the sale of that property. If the ceiling rule limited item is depreciation or other cost recovery from the contributed property, the offsetting remedial allocation to the contributing partner must be income of the type produced (directly or indirectly) by that property. Any partner level tax attributes are determined at the partner level. For example, if the ceiling rule limited item is depreciation from property used in a rental activity, the remedial allocation to the noncontributing partner is depreciation from property used in a rental activity and the offsetting remedial allocation to the contributing partner is ordinary income from that rental activity. Each partner then applies section 469 to the allocations as appropriate.
(4) Effect of remedial items -
(i) Effect on partnership. Remedial items do not affect the partnership's computation of its taxable income under section 703 and do not affect the partnership's adjusted tax basis in partnership property.
(ii) Effect on partners. Remedial items are notional tax items created by the partnership solely for tax purposes and do not affect the partners' book capital accounts. Remedial items have the same effect as actual tax items on a partner's tax liability and on the partner's adjusted tax basis in the partnership interest.
(5) Limitations on use of methods involving remedial allocations -
(i) Limitation on taxpayers. In the absence of published guidance, the remedial allocation method described in this paragraph (d) is the only reasonable section 704(c) method permitting the creation of notional tax items.
(ii) Limitation on Internal Revenue Service. In exercising its authority under paragraph (a)(10) of this section to make adjustments if a partnership's allocation method is not reasonable, the Internal Revenue Service will not require a partnership to use the remedial allocation method described in this paragraph (d) or any other method involving the creation of notional tax items.
(iii) Special rules for a section 721(c) partnership and anti-churning property -
(A) In general. Solely in the case of a gain deferral contribution of section 721(c) property that is a section 197(f)(9) intangible that was not an amortizable section 197 intangible in the hands of the contributor, the remedial allocation method is modified with respect to allocations to a related person to the U.S. transferor pursuant to paragraphs (d)(5)(iii)(B) through (F) of this section. For purposes of this paragraph (d)(5)(iii), gain deferral contribution is defined in § 1.721(c)-1(b)(7), related person is defined in § 1.721(c)-1(b)(12), section 721(c) partnership is defined in § 1.721(c)-1(b)(14), section 721(c) property is defined in § 1.721(c)-1(b)(15), and U.S. transferor is defined in § 1.721(c)-1(b)(18). For an example applying the rules of this paragraph (d)(5)(iii), see § 1.721(c)-7(b)(6) (Example 6).
(B) Book basis recovery. The section 721(c) partnership must amortize the portion of the partnership's book value in the section 197(f)(9) intangible that exceeds the adjusted basis in the property upon contribution using any recovery period and amortization method available to the partnership as if the property had been newly purchased by the partnership from an unrelated party.
(C) Effect of ceiling rule limitations. If the ceiling rule causes the book allocation of the item of amortization of a section 197(f)(9) intangible under paragraph (d)(5)(iii)(B) of this section by a section 721(c) partnership to a related person with respect to the U.S. transferor to differ from the tax allocation of the same item to the related person (a ceiling rule limited related person), the partnership must not create a remedial item of deduction to allocate to the related person but instead must increase the adjusted basis of the section 197(f)(9) intangible by an amount equal to the difference solely with respect to that related person. The partnership simultaneously must create an offsetting remedial item in an amount identical to the increase in adjusted tax basis of the section 197(f)(9) intangible and allocate it to the contributing partner.
(D) Effect of basis adjustment -
(1) In general. The basis adjustment described in paragraph (d)(5)(iii)(C) of this section constitutes an adjustment to the adjusted basis of a section 197(f)(9) intangible with respect to the ceiling rule limited related person only. No adjustment is made to the common basis of partnership property. Thus, for purposes of calculating gain and loss, the ceiling rule limited related person will have a special basis for that section 197(f)(9) intangible. The adjustment to the basis of partnership property under this section has no effect on the partnership's computation of any item under section 703.
(2) Computation of a partner's distributive share of partnership items. The partnership first computes its items of gain or loss at the partnership level under section 703. The partnership then allocates the partnership items among the partners, including the ceiling rule limited related person, in accordance with section 704, and adjusts the partners' capital accounts accordingly. The partnership then adjusts the ceiling rule limited related person's distributive share of the items of partnership gain or loss, in accordance with paragraph (d)(5)(iii)(D)(3) of this section, to reflect the effects of that person's basis adjustment under this section. These adjustments to that person's distributive shares must be reflected on Schedules K and K-1 of the partnership's return (Form 1065) (when otherwise required to be completed) and do not affect that person's capital account.
(3) Effect of basis adjustment in determining items of income, gain, or loss. The amount of a ceiling rule limited related person's gain or loss from the sale or exchange of a section 197(f)(9) intangible in which that person has a tax basis adjustment is equal to that person's share of the partnership's gain or loss from the sale of the asset (including any remedial allocations under this paragraph (d)), minus the amount of that person's tax basis adjustment for the section 197(f)(9) intangible.
(E) Subsequent transfers -
(1) In general. Except as provided in paragraph (d)(5)(iii)(E)(2) of this section, if a ceiling rule limited related person transfers all or part of its partnership interest, the portion of the basis adjustment for a section 197(f)(9) intangible attributable to the interest transferred is eliminated. The transferor of the partnership interest remains the ceiling rule limited related person with respect to any remaining basis adjustment for the section 197(f)(9) intangible.
(2) Special rules for substituted basis transactions. Paragraph (d)(5)(iii)(E)(1) of this section does not apply to the extent a ceiling rule limited related person transfers its partnership interest in a transaction in which the transferee's basis in the partnership interest is determined in whole or in part by reference to the ceiling rule limited related person's basis in that interest. Instead, in such a case, the transferee succeeds to that portion of the transferor's basis adjustment for a section 197(f)(9) intangible attributable to the interest transferred. In such a case, the basis adjustment in a section 197(f)(9) intangible to which the transferee succeeds is taken into account for purposes of determining the transferee's share of the adjusted basis to the partnership of the partnership's property for purposes of §§ 1.743-1(b) and 1.755-1(b)(5). To the extent a transferee would be required to decrease the adjusted basis of a section 197(f)(9) intangible pursuant to §§ 1.743-1(b)(2) and 1.755-1(b)(5), the decrease first reduces the special basis adjustment described in paragraph (d)(5)(iii)(C) of this section, if any, to which the transferee succeeds.
(F) Non-amortization of basis adjustment. Neither the increase to the adjusted basis of a section 197(f)(9) intangible with respect to a ceiling rule limited related person nor the portion of the basis of any property that was determined by reference to such increase is subject to amortization, depreciation, or other cost recovery.
(6) Adjustments to application of method. The Commissioner may, by published guidance, prescribe adjustments to the remedial allocation method under this paragraph (d) as necessary or appropriate. This guidance may, for example, prescribe adjustments to the remedial allocation method to prevent the duplication or omission of items of income or deduction or to reflect more clearly the partners' income or the income of a transferee of a partner.
(7) Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (d).
(ii) Years 1 through 4. Under the remedial allocation method of this paragraph (d), LM has book depreciation for each of its first 4 years of $1,600 [$1,000 ($4,000 adjusted tax basis divided by the 4-year remaining recovery period) plus $600 ($6,000 excess of book value over tax basis, divided by the new 10-year recovery period)]. (For the purpose of simplifying the example, the partnership's book depreciation is determined without regard to any first-year depreciation conventions.) Under the partnership agreement, L and M are each allocated 50 percent ($800) of the book depreciation. M is allocated $800 of tax depreciation and L is allocated the remaining $200 of tax depreciation ($1,000-$800). See paragraph (d)(1) of this section. No remedial allocations are made because the ceiling rule does not result in a book allocation of depreciation to M different from the tax allocation. The allocations result in capital accounts at the end of LM's first 4 years as follows:
(e) Exceptions and special rules -
(1) Small disparities -
(i) General rule. If a partner contributes one or more items of property to a partnership within a single taxable year of the partnership, and the disparity between the book value of the property and the contributing partner's adjusted tax basis in the property is a small disparity, the partnership may -
(A) Use a reasonable section 704(c) method;
(B) Disregard the application of section 704(c) to the property; or
(C) Defer the application of section 704(c) to the property until the disposition of the property.
(ii) Definition of small disparity. A disparity between book value and adjusted tax basis is a small disparity if the book value of all properties contributed by one partner during the partnership taxable year does not differ from the adjusted tax basis by more than 15 percent of the adjusted tax basis, and the total gross disparity does not exceed $20,000.
(2) Aggregation. Each of the following types of property may be aggregated for purposes of making allocations under section 704(c) and this section if contributed by one partner during the partnership taxable year.
(i) Depreciable property. All property, other than real property, that is included in the same general asset account of the contributing partner and the partnership under section 168.
(ii) Zero-basis property. All property with a basis equal to zero, other than real property.
(iii) Inventory. For partnerships that do not use a specific identification method of accounting, each item of inventory, other than qualified financial assets (as defined in paragraph (e)(3)(ii) of this section).
(3) Special aggregation rule for securities partnerships -
(i) General rule. For purposes of making reverse section 704(c) allocations, a securities partnership may aggregate gains and losses from qualified financial assets using any reasonable approach that is consistent with the purpose of section 704(c). Notwithstanding paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(6)(i) of this section, once a partnership adopts an aggregate approach, that partnership must apply the same aggregate approach to all of its qualified financial assets for all taxable years in which the partnership qualifies as a securities partnership. Paragraphs (e)(3)(iv) and (e)(3)(v) of this section describe approaches for aggregating reverse section 704(c) gains and losses that are generally reasonable. Other approaches may be reasonable in appropriate circumstances. See, however, paragraph (a)(10) of this section, which describes the circumstances under which section 704(c) methods, including the aggregate approaches described in this paragraph (e)(3), are not reasonable. A partnership using an aggregate approach must separately account for any built-in gain or loss from contributed property.
(ii) Qualified financial assets -
(A) In general. A qualified financial asset is any personal property (including stock) that is actively traded. Actively traded means actively traded as defined in § 1.1092(d)-1 (defining actively traded property for purposes of the straddle rules).
(B) Management companies. For a management company, qualified financial assets also include the following, even if not actively traded: shares of stock in a corporation; notes, bonds, debentures, or other evidences of indebtedness; interest rate, currency, or equity notional principal contracts; evidences of an interest in, or derivative financial instruments in, any security, currency, or commodity, including any option, forward or futures contract, or short position; or any similar financial instrument.
(C) Partnership interests. An interest in a partnership is not a qualified financial asset for purposes of this paragraph (e)(3)(ii). However, for purposes of this paragraph (e)(3), a partnership (upper-tier partnership) that holds an interest in a securities partnership (lower-tier partnership) must take into account the lower-tier partnership's assets and qualified financial assets as follows:
(1) In determining whether the upper-tier partnership qualifies as an investment partnership, the upper-tier partnership must treat its proportionate share of the lower-tier securities partnership's assets as assets of the upper-tier partnership; and
(2) If the upper-tier partnership adopts an aggregate approach under this paragraph (e)(3), the upper-tier partnership must aggregate the gains and losses from its directly held qualified financial assets with its distributive share of the gains and losses from the qualified financial assets of the lower-tier securities partnership.
(iii) Securities partnership -
(A) In general. A partnership is a securities partnership if the partnership is either a management company or an investment partnership, and the partnership makes all of its book allocations in proportion to the partners' relative book capital accounts (except for reasonable special allocations to a partner that provides management services or investment advisory services to the partnership).
(B) Definitions -
(1) Management company. A partnership is a management company if it is registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission as a management company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (15 U.S.C. 80a).
(2) Investment partnership. A partnership is an investment partnership if:
(i) On the date of each capital account restatement, the partnership holds qualified financial assets that constitute at least 90 percent of the fair market value of the partnership's non-cash assets; and
(ii) The partnership reasonably expects, as of the end of the first taxable year in which the partnership adopts an aggregate approach under this paragraph (e)(3), to make revaluations at least annually.
(iv) Partial netting approach. This paragraph (e)(3)(iv) describes the partial netting approach of making reverse section 704(c) allocations. See Example 1 of paragraph (e)(3)(ix) of this section for an illustration of the partial netting approach. To use the partial netting approach, the partnership must establish appropriate accounts for each partner for the purpose of taking into account each partner's share of the book gains and losses and determining each partner's share of the tax gains and losses. Under the partial netting approach, on the date of each capital account restatement, the partnership:
(A) Nets its book gains and book losses from qualified financial assets since the last capital account restatement and allocates the net amount to its partners;
(B) Separately aggregates all tax gains and all tax losses from qualified financial assets since the last capital account restatement; and
(C) Separately allocates the aggregate tax gain and aggregate tax loss to the partners in a manner that reduces the disparity between the book capital account balances and the tax capital account balances (book-tax disparities) of the individual partners.
(v) Full netting approach. This paragraph (e)(3)(v) describes the full netting approach of making reverse section 704(c) allocations on an aggregate basis. See Example 2 of paragraph (e)(3)(ix) of this section for an illustration of the full netting approach. To use the full netting approach, the partnership must establish appropriate accounts for each partner for the purpose of taking into account each partner's share of the book gains and losses and determining each partner's share of the tax gains and losses. Under the full netting approach, on the date of each capital account restatement, the partnership:
(A) Nets its book gains and book losses from qualified financial assets since the last capital account restatement and allocates the net amount to its partners;
(B) Nets tax gains and tax losses from qualified financial assets since the last capital account restatement; and
(C) Allocates the net tax gain (or net tax loss) to the partners in a manner that reduces the book-tax disparities of the individual partners.
(vi) Type of tax gain or loss. The character and other tax attributes of gain or loss allocated to the partners under this paragraph (e)(3) must:
(A) Preserve the tax attributes of each item of gain or loss realized by the partnership;
(B) Be determined under an approach that is consistently applied; and
(C) Not be determined with a view to reducing substantially the present value of the partners' aggregate tax liability.
(vii) Disqualified securities partnerships. A securities partnership that adopts an aggregate approach under this paragraph (e)(3) and subsequently fails to qualify as a securities partnership must make reverse section 704(c) allocations on an asset-by-asset basis after the date of disqualification. The partnership, however, is not required to disaggregate the book gain or book loss from qualified asset revaluations before the date of disqualification when making reverse section 704(c) allocations on or after the date of disqualification.
(viii) Transitional rule for qualified financial assets revalued after effective date. A securities partnership revaluing its qualified financial assets pursuant to § 1.704-1(b)(2)(iv)(f) on or after the effective date of this section may use any reasonable approach to coordinate with revaluations that occurred prior to the effective date of this section.
(ix) Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (e)(3).
(ii) Book allocations - Day 2. At the end of Day 2, PRS revalues the partnership's qualified financial assets and increases X's and Y's book capital accounts by each partner's 50 percent share of the $5,000 ($2,000 + $5,000 − $2,000) net increase in the value of the partnership's assets during Day 2. PRS increases X's and Y's respective revaluation account balances by $2,500 each to reflect the amount by which each partner's book capital account increased on Day 2. Z's capital account is not affected because Z did not join PRS until the end of Day 2. At the beginning of Day 3, the partnership's accounts are as follows:
(ii) Book allocations - Days 2 and 3. PRS allocates its book gains and losses in the manner described in paragraphs (ii) and (iii) of Example 1 (the partial netting approach). Thus, at the end of Day 2, PRS increases the book capital accounts of X and Y by $2,500 to reflect the appreciation in the parntership's assets from the close of Day 1 to the close of Day 2 and records that increase in the revaluation account created for each partner. At the end of Day 3, PRS decreases the book capital accounts of X, Y, and Z by $1,000 to reflect each partner's share of the decline in value of the partnership's assets from Day 2 to Day 3 and reduces each partner's revaluation account by a corresponding amount.
(iii) Tax allocations - Day 3. After making the book adjustments described in the previous paragraph, PRS allocates its net tax gain (or net tax loss) from its sales of qualified financial assets during Day 3. To do so, PRS first determines its net tax gain (or net tax loss) recognized from its sales of qualified financial assets for the day. There is a $2,000 net tax loss ($2,000 gain from the sale of Stock 2 less $4,000 loss from the sale of Stock 3) on the sale of PRS's qualified financial assets. Because Z is the only partner with a negative revaluation account balance, the partnership's net tax loss is allocated first to Z to the extent of Z's ($1,000) revaluation account balance. The remaining net tax loss is allocated among the partners in accoradnce with their distributive shares of loss. Thus, PRS allocates $333.33 of the $2,000 net tax loss to each of X and Y. PRS also allocates an additional $333.33 of the net tax loss to Z, so that the total net tax loss allocation to Z is $1,333.33. PRS then increases each partner's revaluation account balance by the amount of net tax loss allocated to that partner. At the beginning of Day 4, the partnership's accounts are as follows:
(4) Aggregation as permitted by the Commissioner. The Commissioner may, by published guidance or by letter ruling, permit:
(i) Aggregation of properties other than those described in paragraphs (e)(2) and (e)(3) of this section;
(ii) Partnerships and partners not described in paragraph (e)(3) of this section to aggregate gain and loss from qualified financial assets; and
(iii) Aggregation of qualified financial assets for purposes of making section 704(c) allocations in the same manner as that described in paragraph (e)(3) of this section.
(f) Effective/Applicability Dates. With the exception of paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(8)(ii) and (iii), and (a)(10) and (11) of this section, and of the last sentence in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, this section applies to property contributed to a partnership and to restatements pursuant to § 1.704-1(b)(2)(iv)(f) on or after December 21, 1993. Paragraph (a)(11) of this section applies to properties contributed by a partner to a partnership on or after August 20, 1997. However, partnerships may rely on paragraph (a)(11) of this section for properties contributed before August 20, 1997 and disposed of on or after August 20, 1997. Paragraph (a)(8)(ii) applies to installment obligations received by a partnership in exchange for section 704(c) property on or after November 24, 2003. Paragraph (a)(8)(iii) applies to property acquired on or after November 24, 2003, by a partnership pursuant to a contract that is section 704(c) property. Except as otherwise provided in § 1.752-7(k), paragraphs (a)(8)(iv) and (a)(12) apply to § 1.752-7 liability transfers, as defined in § 1.752-7(b)(4), occurring on or after June 24, 2003. See § 1.752-7(k). Paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(10) of this section are applicable for taxable years beginning after June 9, 2010. The last sentence of paragraph (d)(2) of this section applies to property contributed to a partnership on or after September 24, 2019. However, a taxpayer may choose to apply the last sentence in paragraph (d)(2) of this section for property contributed to a partnership on or after September 28, 2017. A taxpayer may rely on the last sentence in paragraph (d)(2) of this section in regulation project REG-104397-18 (2018-41 I.R.B. 558) (see § 601.601(d)(2)(ii)(b) of this chapter) for property contributed to a partnership on or after September 28, 2017, and ending before September 24, 2019.
(g) Applicability dates for rules for section 721(c) partnerships -
(1) In general. Notwithstanding paragraph (f) of this section, except as provided in paragraph (g)(2) of this section, paragraphs (a)(13) and (d)(5)(iii) of this section apply with respect to contributions occurring on or after January 18, 2017, and with respect to contributions that occurred before January 18, 2017 resulting from an entity classification election made under § 301.7701-3 of this chapter that was effective on or before January 18, 2017 but was filed on or after January 18, 2017.
(2) Election to apply the provisions described in paragraph (g)(1) of this section retroactively. Paragraphs (a)(13) and (d)(5)(iii) of this section may, by election, be applied with respect to a contribution that occurred on or after August 6, 2015 but before January 18, 2017, and with respect to a contribution that occurred before August 6, 2015 resulting from an entity classification election made under § 301.7701-3 of this chapter that was effective on or before August 6, 2015 but was filed on or after August 6, 2015. The election must have been made by applying paragraph (a)(13) or (d)(5)(iii) of this section, as applicable, on a timely filed original return (including extensions) or an amended return filed no later than July 18, 2017.

Source

26 CFR § 1.704-3


Scoping language

None
Is this correct? or