26 C.F.R. §§ 1.482-1–1.482-9

10 sections in range

§1.482-1. Allocation of income and deductions among taxpayers.

26 C.F.R. § 1.482-1

(a)

In general—

(1)

Purpose and scope. The purpose of section 482 is to ensure that taxpayers clearly reflect income attributable to controlled transactions and to prevent the avoidance of taxes with respect to such transactions. Section 482 places a controlled taxpayer on a tax parity with an uncontrolled taxpayer by determining the true taxable income of the controlled taxpayer. This section sets forth general principles and guidelines to be followed under section 482. Section 1.482-2 provides rules for the determination of the true taxable income of controlled taxpayers in specific situations, including controlled transactions involving loans or advances or the use of tangible property. Sections 1.482-3 through 1.482-6 provide rules for the determination of the true taxable income of controlled taxpayers in cases involving the transfer of property. Section 1.482-7T sets forth the cost sharing provisions applicable to taxable years beginning on or after January 5, 2009. Section 1.482-8 provides examples illustrating the application of the best method rule. Finally, § 1.482-9 provides rules for the determination of the true taxable income of controlled taxpayers in cases involving the performance of services.

(2)

Authority to make allocations. The district director may make allocations between or among the members of a controlled group if a controlled taxpayer has not reported its true taxable income. In such case, the district director may allocate income, deductions, credits, allowances, basis, or any other item or element affecting taxable income (referred to as allocations). The appropriate allocation may take the form of an increase or decrease in any relevant amount.

(3)

Taxpayer's use of section 482. If necessary to reflect an arm's length result, a controlled taxpayer may report on a timely filed U.S. income tax return (including extensions) the results of its controlled transactions based upon prices different from those actually charged. Except as provided in this paragraph, section 482 grants no other right to a controlled taxpayer to apply the provisions of section 482 at will or to compel the district director to apply such provisions. Therefore, no untimely or amended returns will be permitted to decrease taxable income based on allocations or other adjustments with respect to controlled transactions. See § 1.6662-6T(a)(2) or successor regulations.

(b)

Arm's length standard—

(1)

In general. In determining the true taxable income of a controlled taxpayer, the standard to be applied in every case is that of a taxpayer dealing at arm's length with an uncontrolled taxpayer. A controlled transaction meets the arm's length standard if the results of the transaction are consistent with the results that would have been realized if uncontrolled taxpayers had engaged in the same transaction under the same circumstances (arm's length result). However, because identical transactions can rarely be located, whether a transaction produces an arm's length result generally will be determined by reference to the results of comparable transactions under comparable circumstances. See § 1.482-1(d)(2) (Standard of comparability). Evaluation of whether a controlled transaction produces an arm's length result is made pursuant to a method selected under the best method rule described in § 1.482-1(c).

(2)

Arm's length methods—

(i)

Methods. Sections 1.482-2 through 1.482-7 and 1.482-9 provide specific methods to be used to evaluate whether transactions between or among members of the controlled group satisfy the arm's length standard, and if they do not, to determine the arm's length result. This section provides general principles applicable in determining arm's length results of such controlled transactions, but do not provide methods, for which reference must be made to those other sections in accordance with paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) and (iii) of this section. Section 1.482-7 provides the specific methods to be used to evaluate whether a cost sharing arrangement as defined in § 1.482-7 produces results consistent with an arm's length result.

(ii)

Selection of category of method applicable to transaction. The methods listed in § 1.482-2 apply to different types of transactions, such as transfers of property, services, loans or advances, and rentals. Accordingly, the method or methods most appropriate to the calculation of arm's length results for controlled transactions must be selected, and different methods may be applied to interrelated transactions if such transactions are most reliably evaluated on a separate basis. For example, if services are provided in connection with the transfer of property, it may be appropriate to separately apply the methods applicable to services and property in order to determine an arm's length result. But see § 1.482-1(f)(2)(i) (Aggregation of transactions). In addition, other applicable provisions of the Code may affect the characterization of a transaction, and therefore affect the methods applicable under section 482. See for example section 467.

(iii)

Coordination of methods applicable to certain intangible development arrangements. Section 1.482-7 provides the specific methods to be used to determine arm's length results of controlled transactions in connection with a cost sharing arrangement as defined in § 1.482-7. Sections 1.482-4 and 1.482-9, as appropriate, provide the specific methods to be used to determine arm's length results of arrangements, including partnerships, for sharing the costs and risks of developing intangibles, other than a cost sharing arrangement covered by § 1.482-7. See also §§ 1.482-4(g) (Coordination with rules governing cost sharing arrangements) and 1.482-9(m)(3) (Coordination with rules governing cost sharing arrangements).

(c)

Best method rule—

(1)

In general. The arm's length result of a controlled transaction must be determined under the method that, under the facts and circumstances, provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result. Thus, there is no strict priority of methods, and no method will invariably be considered to be more reliable than others. An arm's length result may be determined under any method without establishing the inapplicability of another method, but if another method subsequently is shown to produce a more reliable measure of an arm's length result, such other method must be used. Similarly, if two or more applications of a single method provide inconsistent results, the arm's length result must be determined under the application that, under the facts and circumstances, provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result. See § 1.482-8 for examples of the application of the best method rule. See § 1.482-7 for the applicable methods in the case of a cost sharing arrangement.

(2)

Determining the best method. Data based on the results of transactions between unrelated parties provides the most objective basis for determining whether the results of a controlled transaction are arm's length. Thus, in determining which of two or more available methods (or applications of a single method) provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result, the two primary factors to take into account are the degree of comparability between the controlled transaction (or taxpayer) and any uncontrolled comparables, and the quality of the data and assumptions used in the analysis. In addition, in certain circumstances, it also may be relevant to consider whether the results of an analysis are consistent with the results of an analysis under another method. These factors are explained in paragraphs (c)(2)(i), (ii), and (iii) of this section.

(i)

Comparability. The relative reliability of a method based on the results of transactions between unrelated parties depends on the degree of comparability between the controlled transaction or taxpayers and the uncontrolled comparables, taking into account the factors described in § 1.482-1(d)(3) (Factors for determining comparability), and after making adjustments for differences, as described in § 1.482-1(d)(2) (Standard of comparability). As the degree of comparability increases, the number and extent of potential differences that could render the analysis inaccurate is reduced. In addition, if adjustments are made to increase the degree of comparability, the number, magnitude, and reliability of those adjustments will affect the reliability of the results of the analysis. Thus, an analysis under the comparable uncontrolled price method will generally be more reliable than analyses obtained under other methods if the analysis is based on closely comparable uncontrolled transactions, because such an analysis can be expected to achieve a higher degree of comparability and be susceptible to fewer differences than analyses under other methods. See § 1.482-3(b)(2)(ii)(A). An analysis will be relatively less reliable, however, as the uncontrolled transactions become less comparable to the controlled transaction.

(ii)

Data and assumptions. Whether a method provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result also depends upon the completeness and accuracy of the underlying data, the reliability of the assumptions, and the sensitivity of the results to possible deficiencies in the data and assumptions. Such factors are particularly relevant in evaluating the degree of comparability between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions. These factors are discussed in paragraphs (c)(2)(ii) (A), (B), and (C) of this section.

(A)

Completeness and accuracy of data. The completeness and accuracy of the data affects the ability to identify and quantify those factors that would affect the result under any particular method. For example, the completeness and accuracy of data will determine the extent to which it is possible to identify differences between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions, and the reliability of adjustments that are made to account for such differences. An analysis will be relatively more reliable as the completeness and accuracy of the data increases.

(B)

Reliability of assumptions. All methods rely on certain assumptions. The reliability of the results derived from a method depends on the soundness of such assumptions. Some assumptions are relatively reliable. For example, adjustments for differences in payment terms between controlled and uncontrolled transactions may be based on the assumption that at arm's length such differences would lead to price differences that reflect the time value of money. Although selection of the appropriate interest rate to use in making such adjustments involves some judgement, the economic analysis on which the assumption is based is relatively sound. Other assumptions may be less reliable. For example, the residual profit split method may be based on the assumption that capitalized intangible development expenses reflect the relative value of the intangible property contributed by each party. Because the costs of developing an intangible may not be related to its market value, the soundness of this assumption will affect the reliability of the results derived from this method.

(C)

Sensitivity of results to deficiencies in data and assumptions. Deficiencies in the data used or assumptions made may have a greater effect on some methods than others. In particular, the reliability of some methods is heavily dependent on the similarity of property or services involved in the controlled and uncontrolled transaction. For certain other methods, such as the resale price method, the analysis of the extent to which controlled and uncontrolled taxpayers undertake the same or similar functions, employ similar resources, and bear similar risks is particularly important. Finally, under other methods, such as the profit split method, defining the relevant business activity and appropriate allocation of costs, income, and assets may be of particular importance. Therefore, a difference between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions for which an accurate adjustment cannot be made may have a greater effect on the reliability of the results derived under one method than the results derived under another method. For example, differences in management efficiency may have a greater effect on a comparable profits method analysis than on a comparable uncontrolled price method analysis, while differences in product characteristics will ordinarily have a greater effect on a comparable uncontrolled price method analysis than on a comparable profits method analysis.

(iii)

Confirmation of results by another method. If two or more methods produce inconsistent results, the best method rule will be applied to select the method that provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result. If the best method rule does not clearly indicate which method should be selected, an additional factor that may be taken into account in selecting a method is whether any of the competing methods produce results that are consistent with the results obtained from the appropriate application of another method. Further, in evaluating different applications of the same method, the fact that a second method (or another application of the first method) produces results that are consistent with one of the competing applications may be taken into account.

(d)

Comparability—

(1)

In general. Whether a controlled transaction produces an arm's length result is generally evaluated by comparing the results of that transaction to results realized by uncontrolled taxpayers engaged in comparable transactions under comparable circumstances. For this purpose, the comparability of transactions and circumstances must be evaluated considering all factors that could affect prices or profits in arm's length dealings (comparability factors). While a specific comparability factor may be of particular importance in applying a method, each method requires analysis of all of the factors that affect comparability under that method. Such factors include the following—

(i)

Functions;

(ii)

Contractual terms;

(iii)

Risks;

(iv)

Economic conditions; and

(v)

Property or services.

(2)

Standard of comparability. In order to be considered comparable to a controlled transaction, an uncontrolled transaction need not be identical to the controlled transaction, but must be sufficiently similar that it provides a reliable measure of an arm's length result. If there are material differences between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions, adjustments must be made if the effect of such differences on prices or profits can be ascertained with sufficient accuracy to improve the reliability of the results. For purposes of this section, a material difference is one that would materially affect the measure of an arm's length result under the method being applied. If adjustments for material differences cannot be made, the uncontrolled transaction may be used as a measure of an arm's length result, but the reliability of the analysis will be reduced. Generally, such adjustments must be made to the results of the uncontrolled comparable and must be based on commercial practices, economic principles, or statistical analyses. The extent and reliability of any adjustments will affect the relative reliability of the analysis. See § 1.482-1(c)(1) (Best method rule). In any event, unadjusted industry average returns themselves cannot establish arm's length results.

(3)

Factors for determining comparability. The comparability factors listed in § 1.482-1(d)(1) are discussed in this section. Each of these factors must be considered in determining the degree of comparability between transactions or taxpayers and the extent to which comparability adjustments may be necessary. In addition, in certain cases involving special circumstances, the rules under paragraph (d)(4) of this section must be considered.

(i)

Functional analysis. Determining the degree of comparability between controlled and uncontrolled transactions requires a comparison of the functions performed, and associated resources employed, by the taxpayers in each transaction. This comparison is based on a functional analysis that identifies and compares the economically significant activities undertaken, or to be undertaken, by the taxpayers in both controlled and uncontrolled transactions. A functional analysis should also include consideration of the resources that are employed, or to be employed, in conjunction with the activities undertaken, including consideration of the type of assets used, such as plant and equipment, or the use of valuable intangibles. A functional analysis is not a pricing method and does not itself determine the arm's length result for the controlled transaction under review. Functions that may need to be accounted for in determining the comparability of two transactions include—

(A)

Research and development;

(B)

Product design and engineering;

(C)

Manufacturing, production and process engineering;

(D)

Product fabrication, extraction, and assembly;

(E)

Purchasing and materials management;

(F)

Marketing and distribution functions, including inventory management, warranty administration, and advertising activities;

(G)

Transportation and warehousing; and

(H)

Managerial, legal, accounting and finance, credit and collection, training, and personnel management services.

(ii)

Contractual terms—

(A)

In general. Determining the degree of comparability between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions requires a comparison of the significant contractual terms that could affect the results of the two transactions. These terms include—

(1) The form of consideration charged or paid;

(2) Sales or purchase volume;

(3) The scope and terms of warranties provided;

(4) Rights to updates, revisions or modifications;

(5) The duration of relevant license, contract or other agreements, and termination or renegotiation rights;

(6) Collateral transactions or ongoing business relationships between the buyer and the seller, including arrangements for the provision of ancillary or subsidiary services; and

(7) Extension of credit and payment terms. Thus, for example, if the time for payment of the amount charged in a controlled transaction differs from the time for payment of the amount charged in an uncontrolled transaction, an adjustment to reflect the difference in payment terms should be made if such difference would have a material effect on price. Such comparability adjustment is required even if no interest would be allocated or imputed under § 1.482-2(a) or other applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code or regulations.

(B)

Identifying contractual terms— (1) Written agreement. The contractual terms, including the consequent allocation of risks, that are agreed to in writing before the transactions are entered into will be respected if such terms are consistent with the economic substance of the underlying transactions. In evaluating economic substance, greatest weight will be given to the actual conduct of the parties, and the respective legal rights of the parties (see, for example, § 1.482-4(f)(3) (Ownership of intangible property)). If the contractual terms are inconsistent with the economic substance of the underlying transaction, the district director may disregard such terms and impute terms that are consistent with the economic substance of the transaction.

(2) No written agreement. In the absence of a written agreement, the district director may impute a contractual agreement between the controlled taxpayers consistent with the economic substance of the transaction. In determining the economic substance of the transaction, greatest weight will be given to the actual conduct of the parties and their respective legal rights (see, for example, § 1.482-4(f)(3) (Ownership of intangible property)). For example, if, without a written agreement, a controlled taxpayer operates at full capacity and regularly sells all of its output to another member of its controlled group, the district director may impute a purchasing contract from the course of conduct of the controlled taxpayers, and determine that the producer bears little risk that the buyer will fail to purchase its full output. Further, if an established industry convention or usage of trade assigns a risk or resolves an issue, that convention or usage will be followed if the conduct of the taxpayers is consistent with it. See UCC 1-205. For example, unless otherwise agreed, payment generally is due at the time and place at which the buyer is to receive goods. See UCC 2-310.

(C)

Examples. The following examples illustrate this paragraph (d)(3)(ii).

(iii)

Risk—

(A)

Comparability. Determining the degree of comparability between controlled and uncontrolled transactions requires a comparison of the significant risks that could affect the prices that would be charged or paid, or the profit that would be earned, in the two transactions. Relevant risks to consider include—

(1) Market risks, including fluctuations in cost, demand, pricing, and inventory levels;

(2) Risks associated with the success or failure of research and development activities;

(3) Financial risks, including fluctuations in foreign currency rates of exchange and interest rates;

(4) Credit and collection risks;

(5) Product liability risks; and

(6) General business risks related to the ownership of property, plant, and equipment.

(B)

Identification of taxpayer that bears risk. In general, the determination of which controlled taxpayer bears a particular risk will be made in accordance with the provisions of § 1.482-1(d)(3)(ii)(B) (Identifying contractual terms). Thus, the allocation of risks specified or implied by the taxpayer's contractual terms will generally be respected if it is consistent with the economic substance of the transaction. An allocation of risk between controlled taxpayers after the outcome of such risk is known or reasonably knowable lacks economic substance. In considering the economic substance of the transaction, the following facts are relevant—

(1) Whether the pattern of the controlled taxpayer's conduct over time is consistent with the purported allocation of risk between the controlled taxpayers; or where the pattern is changed, whether the relevant contractual arrangements have been modified accordingly;

(2) Whether a controlled taxpayer has the financial capacity to fund losses that might be expected to occur as the result of the assumption of a risk, or whether, at arm's length, another party to the controlled transaction would ultimately suffer the consequences of such losses; and

(3) The extent to which each controlled taxpayer exercises managerial or operational control over the business activities that directly influence the amount of income or loss realized. In arm's length dealings, parties ordinarily bear a greater share of those risks over which they have relatively more control.

(C)

Examples. The following examples illustrate this paragraph (d)(3)(iii).

(iv)

Economic conditions. Determining the degree of comparability between controlled and uncontrolled transactions requires a comparison of the significant economic conditions that could affect the prices that would be charged or paid, or the profit that would be earned in each of the transactions. These factors include—

(A)

The similarity of geographic markets;

(B)

The relative size of each market, and the extent of the overall economic development in each market;

(C)

The level of the market (e.g., wholesale, retail, etc.);

(D)

The relevant market shares for the products, properties, or services transferred or provided;

(E)

The location-specific costs of the factors of production and distribution;

(F)

The extent of competition in each market with regard to the property or services under review;

(G)

The economic condition of the particular industry, including whether the market is in contraction or expansion; and

(H)

The alternatives realistically available to the buyer and seller.

(v)

Property or services. Evaluating the degree of comparability between controlled and uncontrolled transactions requires a comparison of the property or services transferred in the transactions. This comparison may include any intangible property that is embedded in tangible property or services being transferred (embedded intangibles). The comparability of the embedded intangibles will be analyzed using the factors listed in § 1.482-4(c)(2)(iii)(B)(1) (comparable intangible property). The relevance of product comparability in evaluating the relative reliability of the results will depend on the method applied. For guidance concerning the specific comparability considerations applicable to transfers of tangible and intangible property and performance of services, see §§ 1.482-3 through 1.482-6 and § 1.482-9; see also §§ 1.482-3(f), 1.482-4(f)(4), and 1.482-9(m), dealing with the coordination of intangible and tangible property and performance of services rules.

(4)

Special circumstances—

(i)

Market share strategy. In certain circumstances, taxpayers may adopt strategies to enter new markets or to increase a product's share of an existing market (market share strategy). Such a strategy would be reflected by temporarily increased market development expenses or resale prices that are temporarily lower than the prices charged for comparable products in the same market. Whether or not the strategy is reflected in the transfer price depends on which party to the controlled transaction bears the costs of the pricing strategy. In any case, the effect of a market share strategy on a controlled transaction will be taken into account only if it can be shown that an uncontrolled taxpayer engaged in a comparable strategy under comparable circumstances for a comparable period of time, and the taxpayer provides documentation that substantiates the following—

(A)

The costs incurred to implement the market share strategy are borne by the controlled taxpayer that would obtain the future profits that result from the strategy, and there is a reasonable likelihood that the strategy will result in future profits that reflect an appropriate return in relation to the costs incurred to implement it;

(B)

The market share strategy is pursued only for a period of time that is reasonable, taking into consideration the industry and product in question; and

(C)

The market share strategy, the related costs and expected returns, and any agreement between the controlled taxpayers to share the related costs, were established before the strategy was implemented.

(ii)

Different geographic markets—

(A)

In general. Uncontrolled comparables ordinarily should be derived from the geographic market in which the controlled taxpayer operates, because there may be significant differences in economic conditions in different markets. If information from the same market is not available, an uncontrolled comparable derived from a different geographic market may be considered if adjustments are made to account for differences between the two markets. If information permitting adjustments for such differences is not available, then information derived from uncontrolled comparables in the most similar market for which reliable data is available may be used, but the extent of such differences may affect the reliability of the method for purposes of the best method rule. For this purpose, a geographic market is any geographic area in which the economic conditions for the relevant product or service are substantially the same, and may include multiple countries, depending on the economic conditions.

(B)

Example. The following example illustrates this paragraph (d)(4)(ii).

(C)

Location savings. If an uncontrolled taxpayer operates in a different geographic market than the controlled taxpayer, adjustments may be necessary to account for significant differences in costs attributable to the geographic markets. These adjustments must be based on the effect such differences would have on the consideration charged or paid in the controlled transaction given the relative competitive positions of buyers and sellers in each market. Thus, for example, the fact that the total costs of operating in a controlled manufacturer's geographic market are less than the total costs of operating in other markets ordinarily justifies higher profits to the manufacturer only if the cost differences would increase the profits of comparable uncontrolled manufacturers operating at arm's length, given the competitive positions of buyers and sellers in that market.

(D)

Example. The following example illustrates the principles of this paragraph (d)(4)(ii)(C).

(iii)

Transactions ordinarily not accepted as comparables—

(A)

In general. Transactions ordinarily will not constitute reliable measures of an arm's length result for purposes of this section if—

(1) They are not made in the ordinary course of business; or

(2) One of the principal purposes of the uncontrolled transaction was to establish an arm's length result with respect to the controlled transaction.

(B)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principle of this paragraph (d)(4)(iii).

(e)

Arm's length range—

(1)

In general. In some cases, application of a pricing method will produce a single result that is the most reliable measure of an arm's length result. In other cases, application of a method may produce a number of results from which a range of reliable results may be derived. A taxpayer will not be subject to adjustment if its results fall within such range (arm's length range).

(2)

Determination of arm's length range—

(i)

Single method. The arm's length range is ordinarily determined by applying a single pricing method selected under the best method rule to two or more uncontrolled transactions of similar comparability and reliability. Use of more than one method may be appropriate for the purposes described in paragraph (c)(2)(iii) of this section (Best method rule).

(ii)

Selection of comparables. Uncontrolled comparables must be selected based upon the comparability criteria relevant to the method applied and must be sufficiently similar to the controlled transaction that they provide a reliable measure of an arm's length result. If material differences exist between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions, adjustments must be made to the results of the uncontrolled transaction if the effect of such differences on price or profits can be ascertained with sufficient accuracy to improve the reliability of the results. See § 1.482-1(d)(2) (Standard of comparability). The arm's length range will be derived only from those uncontrolled comparables that have, or through adjustments can be brought to, a similar level of comparability and reliability, and uncontrolled comparables that have a significantly lower level of comparability and reliability will not be used in establishing the arm's length range.

(iii)

Comparables included in arm's length range—

(A)

In general. The arm's length range will consist of the results of all of the uncontrolled comparables that meet the following conditions: the information on the controlled transaction and the uncontrolled comparables is sufficiently complete that it is likely that all material differences have been identified, each such difference has a definite and reasonably ascertainable effect on price or profit, and an adjustment is made to eliminate the effect of each such difference.

(B)

Adjustment of range to increase reliability. If there are no uncontrolled comparables described in paragraph (e)(2)(iii)(A) of this section, the arm's length range is derived from the results of all the uncontrolled comparables, selected pursuant to paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section, that achieve a similar level of comparability and reliability. In such cases the reliability of the analysis must be increased, where it is possible to do so, by adjusting the range through application of a valid statistical method to the results of all of the uncontrolled comparables so selected. The reliability of the analysis is increased when statistical methods are used to establish a range of results in which the limits of the range will be determined such that there is a 75 percent probability of a result falling above the lower end of the range and a 75 percent probability of a result falling below the upper end of the range. The interquartile range ordinarily provides an acceptable measure of this range; however a different statistical method may be applied if it provides a more reliable measure.

(C)

Interquartile range. For purposes of this section, the interquartile range is the range from the 25th to the 75th percentile of the results derived from the uncontrolled comparables. For this purpose, the 25th percentile is the lowest result derived from an uncontrolled comparable such that at least 25 percent of the results are at or below the value of that result. However, if exactly 25 percent of the results are at or below a result, then the 25th percentile is equal to the average of that result and the next higher result derived from the uncontrolled comparables. The 75th percentile is determined analogously.

(3)

Adjustment if taxpayer's results are outside arm's length range. If the results of a controlled transaction fall outside the arm's length range, the district director may make allocations that adjust the controlled taxpayer's result to any point within the arm's length range. If the interquartile range is used to determine the arm's length range, such adjustment will ordinarily be to the median of all the results. The median is the 50th percentile of the results, which is determined in a manner analogous to that described in paragraph (e)(2)(iii)(C) of this section (Interquartile range). In other cases, an adjustment normally will be made to the arithmetic mean of all the results. See § 1.482-1(f)(2)(iii)(D) for determination of an adjustment when a controlled taxpayer's result for a multiple year period falls outside an arm's length range consisting of the average results of uncontrolled comparables over the same period.

(4)

Arm's length range not prerequisite to allocation. The rules of this paragraph (e) do not require that the district director establish an arm's length range prior to making an allocation under section 482. Thus, for example, the district director may properly propose an allocation on the basis of a single comparable uncontrolled price if the comparable uncontrolled price method, as described in § 1.482-3(b), has been properly applied. However, if the taxpayer subsequently demonstrates that the results claimed on its income tax return are within the range established by additional equally reliable comparable uncontrolled prices in a manner consistent with the requirements set forth in § 1.482-1(e)(2)(iii), then no allocation will be made.

(5)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (e).

(f)

Scope of review—

(1)

In general. The authority to determine true taxable income extends to any case in which either by inadvertence or design the taxable income, in whole or in part, of a controlled taxpayer is other than it would have been had the taxpayer, in the conduct of its affairs, been dealing at arm's length with an uncontrolled taxpayer.

(i)

Intent to evade or avoid tax not a prerequisite. In making allocations under section 482, the district director is not restricted to the case of improper accounting, to the case of a fraudulent, colorable, or sham transaction, or to the case of a device designed to reduce or avoid tax by shifting or distorting income, deductions, credits, or allowances.

(ii)

Realization of income not a prerequisite—

(A)

In general. The district director may make an allocation under section 482 even if the income ultimately anticipated from a series of transactions has not been or is never realized. For example, if a controlled taxpayer sells a product at less than an arm's length price to a related taxpayer in one taxable year and the second controlled taxpayer resells the product to an unrelated party in the next taxable year, the district director may make an appropriate allocation to reflect an arm's length price for the sale of the product in the first taxable year, even though the second controlled taxpayer had not realized any gross income from the resale of the product in the first year. Similarly, if a controlled taxpayer lends money to a related taxpayer in a taxable year, the district director may make an appropriate allocation to reflect an arm's length charge for interest during such taxable year even if the second controlled taxpayer does not realize income during such year. Finally, even if two controlled taxpayers realize an overall loss that is attributable to a particular controlled transaction, an allocation under section 482 is not precluded.

(B)

Example. The following example illustrates this paragraph (f)(1)(ii).

(iii)

Nonrecognition provisions may not bar allocation—

(A)

In general. If necessary to prevent the avoidance of taxes or to clearly reflect income, the district director may make an allocation under section 482 with respect to transactions that otherwise qualify for nonrecognition of gain or loss under applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code (such as section 351 or 1031).

(B)

Example. The following example illustrates this paragraph (f)(1)(iii).

(iv)

Consolidated returns. Section 482 and the regulations thereunder apply to all controlled taxpayers, whether the controlled taxpayer files a separate or consolidated U.S. income tax return. If a controlled taxpayer files a separate return, its true separate taxable income will be determined. If a controlled taxpayer is a party to a consolidated return, the true consolidated taxable income of the affiliated group and the true separate taxable income of the controlled taxpayer must be determined consistently with the principles of a consolidated return.

(2)

Rules relating to determination of true taxable income. The following rules must be taken into account in determining the true taxable income of a controlled taxpayer.

(i)

(A)

through (E) [Reserved]. For further guidance see § 1.482-1T(f)(2)(i)(A) through (E).

(ii)

Allocation based on taxpayer's actual transactions—

(A)

In general. The Commissioner will evaluate the results of a transaction as actually structured by the taxpayer unless its structure lacks economic substance. However, the Commissioner may consider the alternatives available to the taxpayer in determining whether the terms of the controlled transaction would be acceptable to an uncontrolled taxpayer faced with the same alternatives and operating under comparable circumstances. In such cases the Commissioner may adjust the consideration charged in the controlled transaction based on the cost or profit of an alternative as adjusted to account for material differences between the alternative and the controlled transaction, but will not restructure the transaction as if the alternative had been adopted by the taxpayer. See paragraph (d)(3) of this section (factors for determining comparability; contractual terms and risk); §§ 1.482-3(e), 1.482-4(d), and 1.482-9(h) (unspecified methods).

(B)

[Reserved]. For further guidance see § 1.482-1T(f)(2)(ii)(B).

(iii)

Multiple year data—

(A)

In general. The results of a controlled transaction ordinarily will be compared with the results of uncontrolled comparables occurring in the taxable year under review. It may be appropriate, however, to consider data relating to the uncontrolled comparables or the controlled taxpayer for one or more years before or after the year under review. If data relating to uncontrolled comparables from multiple years is used, data relating to the controlled taxpayer for the same years ordinarily must be considered. However, if such data is not available, reliable data from other years, as adjusted under paragraph (d)(2) (Standard of comparability) of this section may be used.

(B)

Circumstances warranting consideration of multiple year data. The extent to which it is appropriate to consider multiple year data depends on the method being applied and the issue being addressed. Circumstances that may warrant consideration of data from multiple years include the extent to which complete and accurate data are available for the taxable year under review, the effect of business cycles in the controlled taxpayer's industry, or the effects of life cycles of the product or intangible property being examined. Data from one or more years before or after the taxable year under review must ordinarily be considered for purposes of applying the provisions of paragraph (d)(3)(iii) of this section (risk), paragraph (d)(4)(i) of this section (market share strategy), § 1.482-4(f)(2) (periodic adjustments), § 1.482-5 (comparable profits method), § 1.482-9(f) (comparable profits method for services), and § 1.482-9(i) (contingent-payment contractual terms for services). On the other hand, multiple year data ordinarily will not be considered for purposes of applying the comparable uncontrolled price method of § 1.482-3(b) or the comparable uncontrolled services price method of § 1.482-9(c) (except to the extent that risk or market share strategy issues are present).

(C)

Comparable effect over comparable period. Data from multiple years may be considered to determine whether the same economic conditions that caused the controlled taxpayer's results had a comparable effect over a comparable period of time on the uncontrolled comparables that establish the arm's length range. For example, given that uncontrolled taxpayers enter into transactions with the ultimate expectation of earning a profit, persistent losses among controlled taxpayers may be an indication of non-arm's length dealings. Thus, if a controlled taxpayer that realizes a loss with respect to a controlled transaction seeks to demonstrate that the loss is within the arm's length range, the district director may take into account data from taxable years other than the taxable year of the transaction to determine whether the loss was attributable to arm's length dealings. The rule of this paragraph (f)(2)(iii)(C) is illustrated by Example 3 of paragraph (f)(2)(iii)(E) of this section.

(D)

Applications of methods using multiple year averages. If a comparison of a controlled taxpayer's average result over a multiple year period with the average results of uncontrolled comparables over the same period would reduce the effect of short-term variations that may be unrelated to transfer pricing, it may be appropriate to establish a range derived from the average results of uncontrolled comparables over a multiple year period to determine if an adjustment should be made. In such a case the district director may make an adjustment if the controlled taxpayer's average result for the multiple year period is not within such range. Such a range must be determined in accordance with § 1.482-1(e) (Arm's length range). An adjustment in such a case ordinarily will be equal to the difference, if any, between the controlled taxpayer's result for the taxable year and the mid-point of the uncontrolled comparables' results for that year. If the interquartile range is used to determine the range of average results for the multiple year period, such adjustment will ordinarily be made to the median of all the results of the uncontrolled comparables for the taxable year. See Example 2 of § 1.482-5(e). In other cases, the adjustment normally will be made to the arithmetic mean of all the results of the uncontrolled comparables for the taxable year. However, an adjustment will be made only to the extent that it would move the controlled taxpayer's multiple year average closer to the arm's length range for the multiple year period or to any point within such range. In determining a controlled taxpayer's average result for a multiple year period, adjustments made under this section for prior years will be taken into account only if such adjustments have been finally determined, as described in § 1.482-1(g)(2)(iii). See Example 3 of § 1.482-5(e).

(E)

Examples. The following examples, in which S and P are controlled taxpayers, illustrate this paragraph (f)(2)(iii). Examples 1 and 4 also illustrate the principle of the arm's length range of paragraph (e) of this section.

(iv)

Product lines and statistical techniques. The methods described in §§ 1.482-2 through 1.482-6 are generally stated in terms of individual transactions. However, because a taxpayer may have controlled transactions involving many different products, or many separate transactions involving the same product, it may be impractical to analyze every individual transaction to determine its arm's length price. In such cases, it is permissible to evaluate the arm's length results by applying the appropriate methods to the overall results for product lines or other groupings. In addition, the arm's length results of all related party transactions entered into by a controlled taxpayer may be evaluated by employing sampling and other valid statistical techniques.

(v)

Allocations apply to results, not methods—

(A)

In general. In evaluating whether the result of a controlled transaction is arm's length, it is not necessary for the district director to determine whether the method or procedure that a controlled taxpayer employs to set the terms for its controlled transactions corresponds to the method or procedure that might have been used by a taxpayer dealing at arm's length with an uncontrolled taxpayer. Rather, the district director will evaluate the result achieved rather than the method the taxpayer used to determine its prices.

(B)

Example. The following example illustrates this paragraph (f)(2)(v).

(g)

Collateral adjustments with respect to allocations under section 482—

(1)

In general. The district director will take into account appropriate collateral adjustments with respect to allocations under section 482. Appropriate collateral adjustments may include correlative allocations, conforming adjustments, and setoffs, as described in this paragraph (g).

(2)

Correlative allocations—

(i)

In general. When the district director makes an allocation under section 482 (referred to in this paragraph (g)(2) as the primary allocation), appropriate correlative allocations will also be made with respect to any other member of the group affected by the allocation. Thus, if the district director makes an allocation of income, the district director will not only increase the income of one member of the group, but correspondingly decrease the income of the other member. In addition, where appropriate, the district director may make such further correlative allocations as may be required by the initial correlative allocation.

(ii)

Manner of carrying out correlative allocation. The district director will furnish to the taxpayer with respect to which the primary allocation is made a written statement of the amount and nature of the correlative allocation. The correlative allocation must be reflected in the documentation of the other member of the group that is maintained for U.S. tax purposes, without regard to whether it affects the U.S. income tax liability of the other member for any open year. In some circumstances the allocation will have an immediate U.S. tax effect, by changing the taxable income computation of the other member (or the taxable income computation of a shareholder of the other member, for example, under the provisions of subpart F of the Internal Revenue Code). Alternatively, the correlative allocation may not be reflected on any U.S. tax return until a later year, for example when a dividend is paid.

(iii)

Events triggering correlative allocation. For purposes of this paragraph (g)(2), a primary allocation will not be considered to have been made (and therefore, correlative allocations are not required to be made) until the date of a final determination with respect to the allocation under section 482. For this purpose, a final determination includes—

(A)

Assessment of tax following execution by the taxpayer of a Form 870 (Waiver of Restrictions on Assessment and Collection of Deficiency in Tax and Acceptance of Overassessment) with respect to such allocation;

(B)

Acceptance of a Form 870-AD (Offer of Waiver of Restriction on Assessment and Collection of Deficiency in Tax and Acceptance of Overassessment);

(C)

Payment of the deficiency;

(D)

Stipulation in the Tax Court of the United States; or

(E)

Final determination of tax liability by offer-in-compromise, closing agreement, or final resolution (determined under the principles of section 7481) of a judicial proceeding.

(iv)

Examples. The following examples illustrate this paragraph (g)(2). In each example, X and Y are members of the same group of controlled taxpayers and each regularly computes its income on a calendar year basis.

(3)

Adjustments to conform accounts to reflect section 482 allocations—

(i)

In general. Appropriate adjustments must be made to conform a taxpayer's accounts to reflect allocations made under section 482. Such adjustments may include the treatment of an allocated amount as a dividend or a capital contribution (as appropriate), or, in appropriate cases, pursuant to such applicable revenue procedures as may be provided by the Commissioner (see § 601.601(d)(2) of this chapter), repayment of the allocated amount without further income tax consequences.

(ii)

Example. The following example illustrates the principles of this paragraph (g)(3).

(4)

Setoffs—

(i)

In general. If an allocation is made under section 482 with respect to a transaction between controlled taxpayers, the Commissioner will take into account the effect of any other non-arm's length transaction between the same controlled taxpayers in the same taxable year which will result in a setoff against the original section 482 allocation. Such setoff, however, will be taken into account only if the requirements of paragraph (g)(4)(ii) of this section are satisfied. If the effect of the setoff is to change the characterization or source of the income or deductions, or otherwise distort taxable income, in such a manner as to affect the U.S. tax liability of any member, adjustments will be made to reflect the correct amount of each category of income or deductions. For purposes of this setoff provision, the term arm's length refers to the amount defined in paragraph (b) of this section (arm's length standard), without regard to the rules in § 1.482-2(a) that treat certain interest rates as arm's length rates of interest.

(ii)

Requirements. The district director will take a setoff into account only if the taxpayer—

(A)

Establishes that the transaction that is the basis of the setoff was not at arm's length and the amount of the appropriate arm's length charge;

(B)

Documents, pursuant to paragraph (g)(2) of this section, all correlative adjustments resulting from the proposed setoff; and

(C)

Notifies the district director of the basis of any claimed setoff within 30 days after the earlier of the date of a letter by which the district director transmits an examination report notifying the taxpayer of proposed adjustments or the date of the issuance of the notice of deficiency.

(iii)

Examples. The following examples illustrate this paragraph (g)(4).

(h)

Special rules—

(1)

Small taxpayer safe harbor. [Reserved]

(2)

Effect of foreign legal restrictions—

(i)

In general. The district director will take into account the effect of a foreign legal restriction to the extent that such restriction affects the results of transactions at arm's length. Thus, a foreign legal restriction will be taken into account only to the extent that it is shown that the restriction affected an uncontrolled taxpayer under comparable circumstances for a comparable period of time. In the absence of evidence indicating the effect of the foreign legal restriction on uncontrolled taxpayers, the restriction will be taken into account only to the extent provided in paragraphs (h)(2) (iii) and (iv) of this section (Deferred income method of accounting).

(ii)

Applicable legal restrictions. Foreign legal restrictions (whether temporary or permanent) will be taken into account for purposes of this paragraph (h)(2) only if, and so long as, the conditions set forth in paragraphs (h)(2)(ii) (A) through (D) of this section are met.

(A)

The restrictions are publicly promulgated, generally applicable to all similarly situated persons (both controlled and uncontrolled), and not imposed as part of a commercial transaction between the taxpayer and the foreign sovereign;

(B)

The taxpayer (or other member of the controlled group with respect to which the restrictions apply) has exhausted all remedies prescribed by foreign law or practice for obtaining a waiver of such restrictions (other than remedies that would have a negligible prospect of success if pursued);

(C)

The restrictions expressly prevented the payment or receipt, in any form, of part or all of the arm's length amount that would otherwise be required under section 482 (for example, a restriction that applies only to the deductibility of an expense for tax purposes is not a restriction on payment or receipt for this purpose); and

(D)

The related parties subject to the restriction did not engage in any arrangement with controlled or uncontrolled parties that had the effect of circumventing the restriction, and have not otherwise violated the restriction in any material respect.

(iii)

Requirement for electing the deferred income method of accounting. If a foreign legal restriction prevents the payment or receipt of part or all of the arm's length amount that is due with respect to a controlled transaction, the restricted amount may be treated as deferrable if the following requirements are met—

(A)

The controlled taxpayer establishes to the satisfaction of the district director that the payment or receipt of the arm's length amount was prevented because of a foreign legal restriction and circumstances described in paragraph (h)(2)(ii) of this section; and

(B)

The controlled taxpayer whose U.S. tax liability may be affected by the foreign legal restriction elects the deferred income method of accounting, as described in paragraph (h)(2)(iv) of this section, on a written statement attached to a timely U.S. income tax return (or an amended return) filed before the IRS first contacts any member of the controlled group concerning an examination of the return for the taxable year to which the foreign legal restriction applies. A written statement furnished by a taxpayer subject to the Coordinated Examination Program will be considered an amended return for purposes of this paragraph (h)(2)(iii)(B) if it satisfies the requirements of a qualified amended return for purposes of § 1.6664-2(c)(3) as set forth in those regulations or as the Commissioner may prescribe by applicable revenue procedures. The election statement must identify the affected transactions, the parties to the transactions, and the applicable foreign legal restrictions.

(iv)

Deferred income method of accounting. If the requirements of paragraph (h)(2)(ii) of this section are satisfied, any portion of the arm's length amount, the payment or receipt of which is prevented because of applicable foreign legal restrictions, will be treated as deferrable until payment or receipt of the relevant item ceases to be prevented by the foreign legal restriction. For purposes of the deferred income method of accounting under this paragraph (h)(2)(iv), deductions (including the cost or other basis of inventory and other assets sold or exchanged) and credits properly chargeable against any amount so deferred, are subject to deferral under the provisions of § 1.461- 1(a)(4). In addition, income is deferrable under this deferred income method of accounting only to the extent that it exceeds the related deductions already claimed in open taxable years to which the foreign legal restriction applied.

(v)

Examples. The following examples, in which Sub is a Country FC subsidiary of U.S. corporation, Parent, illustrate this paragraph (h)(2).

(3)

Coordination with section 936—

(i)

Cost sharing under section 936. If a possessions corporation makes an election under section 936(h)(5)(C)(i)(I), the corporation must make a section 936 cost sharing payment that is at least equal to the payment that would be required under section 482 if the electing corporation were a foreign corporation. In determining the payment that would be required under section 482 for this purpose, the provisions of §§ 1.482-1 and 1.482-4 will be applied, and to the extent relevant to the valuation of intangibles, §§ 1.482-5 and 1.482-6 will be applied. The provisions of section 936(h)(5)(C)(i)(II) (Effect of Election—electing corporation treated as owner of intangible property) do not apply until the payment that would be required under section 482 has been determined.

(ii)

Use of terms. A cost sharing payment, for the purposes of section 936(h)(5)(C)(i)(I), is calculated using the provisions of section 936 and the regulations thereunder and the provisions of this paragraph (h)(3). The provisions relating to cost sharing under section 482 do not apply to payments made pursuant to an election under section 936(h)(5)(C)(i)(I). Similarly, a profit split payment, for the purposes of section 936(h)(5)(C)(ii)(I), is calculated using the provisions of section 936 and the regulations thereunder, not section 482 and the regulations thereunder.

(i)

Definitions. The definitions set forth in paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(10) of this section apply to this section and §§ 1.482-2 through 1.482-9.

(1)

Organization— includes an organization of any kind, whether a sole proprietorship, a partnership, a trust, an estate, an association, or a corporation (as each is defined or understood in the Internal Revenue Code or the regulations thereunder), irrespective of the place of organization, operation, or conduct of the trade or business, and regardless of whether it is a domestic or foreign organization, whether it is an exempt organization, or whether it is a member of an affiliated group that files a consolidated U.S. income tax return, or a member of an affiliated group that does not file a consolidated U.S. income tax return.

(2)

Trade— or business includes a trade or business activity of any kind, regardless of whether or where organized, whether owned individually or otherwise, and regardless of the place of operation. Employment for compensation will constitute a separate trade or business from the employing trade or business.

(3)

Taxpayer means any person, organization, trade or business, whether or not subject to any internal revenue tax.

(4)

Controlled— includes any kind of control, direct or indirect, whether legally enforceable or not, and however exercisable or exercised, including control resulting from the actions of two or more taxpayers acting in concert or with a common goal or purpose. It is the reality of the control that is decisive, not its form or the mode of its exercise. A presumption of control arises if income or deductions have been arbitrarily shifted.

(5)

Controlled taxpayer means any one of two or more taxpayers owned or controlled directly or indirectly by the same interests, and includes the taxpayer that owns or controls the other taxpayers. Uncontrolled taxpayer means any one of two or more taxpayers not owned or controlled directly or indirectly by the same interests.

(6)

Group, controlled group,— and group of controlled taxpayers mean the taxpayers owned or controlled directly or indirectly by the same interests.

(7)

Transaction means any sale, assignment, lease, license, loan, advance, contribution, or any other transfer of any interest in or a right to use any property (whether tangible or intangible, real or personal) or money, however such transaction is effected, and whether or not the terms of such transaction are formally documented. A transaction also includes the performance of any services for the benefit of, or on behalf of, another taxpayer.

(8)

Controlled transaction— or controlled transfer means any transaction or transfer between two or more members of the same group of controlled taxpayers. The term uncontrolled transaction means any transaction between two or more taxpayers that are not members of the same group of controlled taxpayers.

(9)

True taxable income— means, in the case of a controlled taxpayer, the taxable income that would have resulted had it dealt with the other member or members of the group at arm's length. It does not mean the taxable income resulting to the controlled taxpayer by reason of the particular contract, transaction, or arrangement the controlled taxpayer chose to make (even though such contract, transaction, or arrangement is legally binding upon the parties thereto).

(10)

Uncontrolled comparable means the uncontrolled transaction or uncontrolled taxpayer that is compared with a controlled transaction or taxpayer under any applicable pricing methodology. Thus, for example, under the comparable profits method, an uncontrolled comparable is any uncontrolled taxpayer from which data is used to establish a comparable operating profit.

(j)

Effective dates—

(1)

The regulations in this are generally effective for taxable years beginning after October 6, 1994.

(2)

Taxpayers may elect to apply retroactively all of the provisions of these regulations for any open taxable year. Such election will be effective for the year of the election and all subsequent taxable years.

(3)

Although these regulations are generally effective for taxable years as stated, the final sentence of section 482 (requiring that the income with respect to transfers or licenses of intangible property be commensurate with the income attributable to the intangible) is generally effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1986. For the period prior to the effective date of these regulations, the final sentence of section 482 must be applied using any reasonable method not inconsistent with the statute. The IRS considers a method that applies these regulations or their general principles to be a reasonable method.

(4)

These regulations will not apply with respect to transfers made or licenses granted to foreign persons before November 17, 1985, or before August 17, 1986, for transfers or licenses to others. Nevertheless, they will apply with respect to transfers or licenses before such dates if, with respect to property transferred pursuant to an earlier and continuing transfer agreement, such property was not in existence or owned by the taxpayer on such date.

(5)

The last sentences of paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (c)(1) of this section and of paragraph (c)(2)(iv) of § 1.482-5 apply for taxable years beginning on or after August 26, 2003.

(6)

(i)

The provisions of paragraphs (a)(1), (d)(3)(ii)(C) Example 3, Example 4, Example 5, and Example 6, (d)(3)(v), (f)(2)(ii)(A), (f)(2)(iii)(B), (g)(4)(i), (g)(4)(iii), and (i) of this section are generally applicable for taxable years beginning after July 31, 2009. The provision of paragraph (b)(2)(iii) of this section is generally applicable on January 5, 2009.

(ii)

A person may elect to apply the provisions of paragraphs (a)(1), (b)(2)(i), (d)(3)(ii)(C) Example 3, Example 4, Example 5, and Example 6, (d)(3)(v), (f)(2)(ii)(A), (f)(2)(iii)(B), (g)(4)(i), (g)(4)(iii), and (i) of this section to earlier taxable years in accordance with the rules set forth in § 1.482-9(n)(2).

(7)

[Reserved]. For further guidance see § 1.482-1T(j)(7).

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[T.D. 8552, 59 FR 34990, July 8, 1994, as amended by T.D. 9088, 68 FR 51177, Aug. 26, 2003; T.D. 9278, 71 FR 44481, Aug. 4, 2006; 71 FR 76903, Dec. 22, 2006; T.D. 9441, 74 FR 351, Jan. 5, 2009; T.D. 9456, 74 FR 38839, Aug. 4, 2009; 74 FR 46345, Sept. 9, 2009; T.D. 9568, 76 FR 80089, Dec. 22, 2011; 77 FR 3606, Jan. 25, 2012; T.D. 9738, 80 FR 55541, Sept. 16, 2015]

Authority

Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805, unless otherwise noted. Section 1.1(h)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1(h); Section 1.21-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 21(f); Section 1.21-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 21(f); Section 1.21-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 21(f); Section 1.21-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 21(f); Section 1.25-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 25; Section 1.25-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 25; Section 1.25-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 25; Section 1.25-3T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 25; Section 1.25-4T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 25; Section 1.25-5T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 25; Section 1.25-6T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 25; Section 1.25-7T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 25; Section 1.25-8T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 25; Section 1.25A-1 also issued under section 26 U.S.C. 25A(i); Section 1.25A-2 also issued under section 26 U.S.C. 25A(i); Section 1.25A-3 also issued under section 26 U.S.C. 25A(i); Section 1.25A-4 also issued under section 26 U.S.C. 25A(i); Section 1.25A-5 also issued under section 26 U.S.C. 25A(i); Section 1.25E-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 25E. Section 1.25E-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 25E. Section 1.25E-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 25E, 26 U.S.C. 30D(g)(1) and (g)(10), and 26 U.S.C. 6011. Section 1.28-0 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 28(d)(5); Section 1.28-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 28(d)(5); Section 1.30-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 30(d)(2); Section 1.30C-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 30; Section 1.30D-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 30D. Section 1.30D-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 30D. Section 1.30D-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 30D. Section 1.30D-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 30D and 26 U.S.C. 45W(d)(3). Section 1.30D-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 30D and 26 U.S.C. 6011. Section 1.30D-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 30D. Section 1.36B-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 36B(h). Section 1.36B-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 36B(h). Section 1.36B-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 36B(h). Section 1.36B-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 36B(h). Section 1.36B-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 36B(h). Section 1.36B-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 36B(h). Section 1.41-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 41(d)(4)(E). Section 1.41-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 41(f)(1) and 1502; Section 1.41-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 41(c)(4)(B); Section 1.41-8T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 41(c)(4)(B); Section 1.41-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 41(c)(5)(C); Section 1.41-9T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 41(c)(5)(C); Section 1.42-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 42(n); Section 1.42-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 42(n); Section 1.42-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 42(n); Section 1.42-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 42(n); Section 1.42-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 42(n); Sections 1.42-6, 1.42-8, 1.42-9, 1.42-10, 1.42-11, and 1.42-12, also issued under 26 U.S.C. 42(n); Section 1.42-13 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 42(n); Section 1.42-14 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 42(n); Section 1.42-15 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 42(n); Section 1.42-16 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 42(n); Section 1.42-17 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 42(n); Section 1.42-18 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 42(h)(6)(F) and 42(h)(6)(K); Section 1.42-19 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 42(n); Sections 1.43-0—1.43-7 also issued under section 26 U.S.C. 43; Section 1.45-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45. Section 1.45-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45. Section 1.45-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45. Section 1.45-12 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45. Section 1.45D-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45D(e)(2) and (i); Section 1.45G-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45G(e)(2); Section 1.45L-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45L. Sections 1.45Q-1, 1.45Q-2, 1.45Q-3, 1.45Q-4, and 1.45Q-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45Q(h). Section 1.45Q-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45Q(f)(2). Section 1.45Q-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45Q(f)(5). Section 1.45Q-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45Q(f)(4). Section 1.45Q-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45Q. Section 1.45U-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45U. Section 1.45V-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45V(c)(1)(B) and 45V(f). Section 1.45V-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45V(c)(1)(B) and 45V(f). Section 1.45V-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45V. Section 1.45V-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45V(c)(1)(B) and 45V(f). Section 1.45V-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45V(c)(1)(B) and 45V(f). Section 1.45V-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45V(c)(1)(B) and 45V(f). Section 1.45X-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45X, 6001, 6417(h) and 6418(h). Section 1.45X-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45X and 1502. Section 1.45X-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6001. Section 1.45X-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6001. Section 1.45Y-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45Y(f). Section 1.45Y-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45Y(f). Section 1.45Y-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45Y(f). Section 1.45Y-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45Y(f). Section 1.45Y-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45Y(b) and (f). Section 1.45Z-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 45Z. Section 1.46-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 46(d)(6) and 26 U.S.C. 47(a)(3)(C); Section 1.46-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 46(f)(7); Section 1.47-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 47(a); Section 1.48-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 48(a)(3)(D)(i) and (16). Section 1.48-13 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 48(a)(10)(C) and (16). Section 1.48-14 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 48(a)(16). Section 1.48-15 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 48(a)(15) Section 1.48D-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 48D(d)(6); Section 1.48D-6T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 48D(d)(2)(E) and (6); Section 1.48(e)-1 issued under 26 U.S.C. 48. Section 1.48E-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 48E(i). Section 1.48E-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 48E(i). Section 1.48E-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 48E(i). Section 1.48E-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 48E(i). Section 1.48E-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 48E(i). Section 1.48E(h)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 48E(i). Section 1.50-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 50(a)(3)(C), and 50(a)(6). Sections 1.50A—1.50B also issued under 85 Stat. 553 (26 U.S.C. 40(b)); Section 1.52-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 52(b); Section 1.56(g)-1 also issued under section 7611(g)(3) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 (Pub. L. 101-239, 103 Stat. 2373). Section 1.59A-0 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 59A(i). Section 1.59A-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 59A(i). Section 1.59A-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 59A(i). Section 1.59A-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 59A(i). Section 1.59A-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 59A(i). Section 1.59A-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 59A(i). Section 1.59A-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 59A(i). Section 1.59A-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 59A(i). Section 1.59A-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 59A(i). Section 1.59A-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 59A(i). Section 1.59A-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 59A(i). Section 1.61-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 61. Section 1.61-21 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 61. Sections 1.62-1T and 1.62-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 62. Section 1.66-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 66(c); Sections 1.67-2T and 1.67-3T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 67(c). Section 1.67-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 67(c). Section 1.67-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 67(e). Sections 1.72-4, 1.72-5, 1.72-6, 1.72-7, 1.72-8, and 1.72-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 72(c). Section 1.78-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 245A(g). Section 1.101-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 101(d)(2)(B)(ii). Section 1.103-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 103(b)(6). Section 1.103A-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 103A(j). Section 1.108-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 108(e)(8) and 108(e)(10(B). Section 1.108-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 108. Section 1.108-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 108, 267, and 1502. Section 1.108-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 108. Section 1.108-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 108. Section 1.108(c)-1 also issued under the authority of 26 U.S.C. 108(d)(9). Section 1.108(i)-0 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 108(i)(7) and 1502. Section 1.108(i)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 108(i)(7) and 1502. Section 1.108(i)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 108(i)(7). Section 1.108(i)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 108(i)(7) and 1502. Section 1.110-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 110(d). Sections 1.132-0 through 1.132-8T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 132(o). Section 1.139E-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 139E. Section 1.139E-1(d)(6) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7872. Section 1.139E-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 139E. Section 1.148-0 through 1.148-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 148(i). Section 1.148-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 148 (f), (g), and (i). Section 1.149(b)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 149(b)(3)(B) (v). Section 1.149(d)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 149(d)(7). Section 1.149(e)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 149(e). Section 1.149(g)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 149(g)(5). Section 1.150-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 150 (c)(5). Section 1.152-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 152(e). Section 1.162-24 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 162(h). Section 1.162(k)-1 is also issued under section 26 U.S.C. 162(k). Section 1.163-8T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 469(k)(4). Section 1.163-9T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 163(h)(3)(D). Section 1.163(j)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 163(j)(8)(B) and 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.163(j)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.163(j)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.163(j)-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 163(j)(8)(B) and 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.163(j)-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.163(j)-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 163(j)(8)(B) and 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.163(j)-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 163(j)(8)(B) and 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.163(j)-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 163(j)(8)(B). Section 1.163(j)-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 163(j)(7)(B) and (C) and 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.163(j)-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 163(j)(8)(B) and 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.163(j)-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.165-12 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 165(j)(3). Section 1.166-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 166(f). Section 1.168(d)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 168(d)(3). Section 1.168(f)(8)-1T also added under sec. 112(c), Black Lung Benefits Revenue Act of 1981 (Pub. L. 97-119). Section 1.168(h)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 168. Section 1.168(i)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 168(i)(4). Section 1.168(i)-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 168(i)(4). Section 1.168(i)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 168. Section 1.168(i)-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 168(i)(5). Section 1.168(j)-1T also added under 26 U.S.C. 168(j)(10). Section 1.170A-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 170(a). Section 1.170A-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 170(f)(4); 26 U.S.C. 642(c)(5). Section 1.170A-12 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 170(f)(4). Section 1.170A-13 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 170(f)(8). Section 1.170A-14 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 170(f)(11) and 170(h)(7). Section 1.170A-15 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 170(a)(1). Section 1.170A-16 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 170(f)(11), 170(f)(19), 170(h)(7)(G), 6001, and 6011. Section 1.170A-17 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 170(a)(1) and 170(f)(11). Section 1.170A-18 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 170(a)(1). Section 1.171-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 171(e). Section 1.171-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 171(e). Section 1.171-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 171(c). Section 1.179-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 179(d)(6) and (10). Section 1.179-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 179(c). Section 1.179-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 179(c). Section 1.179D-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 179D. Section 1.197-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 197. Section 1.199A-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 199A(f)(4). Section 1.199A-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 199A(b)(5), (f)(1)(A), (f)(4), and (h). Section 1.199A-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 199A(c)(4)(C) and (f)(4). Section 1.199A-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 199A(f)(4). Section 1.199A-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 199A(f)(4). Section 1.199A-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 199A(f)(1)(B) and (f)(4). Section 1.199A-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 199A(f)(4) and (g)(6). Section 1.199A-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 199A(g)(6). Section 1.199A-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 199A(g)(6). Section 1.199A-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 199A(g)(6). Section 1.199A-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 199A(g)(6). Section 1.199A-12 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 199A(g)(6). Section 1.216-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 216(d). Section 1.221-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 221(d). Section 1.224-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 224(d)(2)(C) and (g) and sec. 70201(h) of Public Law 119-21, 139 Stat. 72 (July 4, 2025), commonly known as the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act. Section 1.245A-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 245A(g), 951A(a), 954(c)(6)(A), and 965(o). Sections 1.245A-6 through 1.245A-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 245A(g), 882(c)(1)(A), 951A, 954(b)(5), 954(c)(6), and 965(o). Section 1.245A(d)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 245A(g). Section 1.245A(e)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 245A(g). Section 1.250-0 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 250(c). Section 1.250-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 250(c). Section 1.250(a)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 250(c) and 6001. Section 1.250(b)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 250(c) and 6001. Section 1.250(b)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 250(c). Section 1.250(b)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 250(c). Section 1.250(b)-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 250(c). Section 1.250(b)-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 250(c). Section 1.250(b)-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 250(c). Section 1.263A-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 263A(j). Section 1.263A-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 263A(j). Section 1.263A-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 263A(j). Section 1.263A-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 263A. Section 1.263A-4T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 263A. Section 1.263A-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 263A. Section 1.263A-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 263A. Section 1.263A-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 263A(j). Section 1.263A-7T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 263A. Sections 1.263A-8 through 1.263A-15 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 263A(j). Sections 1.267A-1 through 1.267A-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 267A(e). Section 1.267(a)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 267(a)(3)(A) and (a)(3)(B)(ii). Section 1.267(f)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 267 and 1502. Section 1.269-3(d) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m). Section 1.274-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 274(o). Section 1.274-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 274(p). Section 1.274-5T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 274(d). Section 1.274-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 274(o). Section 1.274-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 274(o). Section 1.274-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 274. Section 1.274-12 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 274. Section 1.274-13 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 274. Section 1.274-14 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 274. Section 1.274(d)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 274(d). Section 1.274(d)-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 274(d). Section 1.280C-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 280C(c)(4). Section 1.280F-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 280F. Section 1.280F-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 280F. Section 1.280F-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 280F(c). Section 1.280G-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 280G(b) and (e). Section 1.301-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 357(d)(3). Section 1.301-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 357(d)(3). Section 1.304-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 304. Section 1.304-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 304(b)(5)(C). Section 1.305-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 305. Section 1.305-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 305. Section 1.305-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 305. Section 1.332-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 332(d)(4). Section 1.334-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(b). Section 1.336-1 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 336. Section 1.336-2 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 336. Section 1.336-3 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 336. Section 1.336-4 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 336. Section 1.336-5 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 336. Section 1.337(d)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d). Section 1.337(d)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d). Section 1.337(d)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d). Section 1.337(d)-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337. Section 1.337(d)-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337. Section 1.337(d)-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337. Section 1.337(d)-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337. Section 1.337(d)-7T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d) and 355(h). Section 1.338-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d), 338, and 1502. Section 1.338-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d), 338, and 1502. Section 1.338-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d), 338, and 1502. Section 1.338-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d), 338, and 1502. Section 1.338-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d), 338, and 1502. Section 1.338-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d), 338, and 1502. Section 1.338-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d), 338, and 1502. Section 1.338-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d), 338, and 1502. Section 1.338-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d), 338, and 1502. Section 1.338-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d), 338, and 1502. Section 1.338-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 338. Section 1.338-11T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 338. Section 1.338(h)(10)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d), 338, and 1502. Section 1.338(h)(10)-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d), 338 and 1502. Section 1.338(i)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d), 338, and 1502. Section 1.351-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 351. Section 1.351-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 351(g)(4). Section 1.354-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 351(g)(4). Section 1.355-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 351(g)(4). Section 1.355-2(g) and (i) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 355(b)(3)(D). Section 1.355-2T(g) and (i) are also issued under 26 U.S.C. 355(b)(3)(D). Section 1.355-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 355(d)(9). Section 1.355-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 355(e)(5). Section 1.355-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 336(e), 355(e)(3)(B), 355(e)(5), and 355(f). Section 1.356-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 351(g)(4). Section 1.356-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 351(g)(4). Section 1.358-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 358(b)(1). Section 1.358-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 358(h)(2). Section 1.358-5T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 358(h)(2). Section 1.358-7 also issued under Public Law 106-554, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A-638 (2001). Section 1.362-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(b). Section 1.362-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 362(e)(2)(C)(ii). Section 1.367(a)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(a). Section 1.367(a)-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(a). Section 1.367(a)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(a). Section 1.367(a)-3T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(a). Section 1.367(a)-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(a), (b), (c), and 337(d). Section 1.367(a)-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(a) and (b). Section 1.367(a)-9T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(a) and (b). Section 1.367(b)-0 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(b). Section 1.367(b)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(a) and (b). Section 1.367(b)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(a) and (b). Sections 1.367(b)-2(c)(1) and (2) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(b)(1) and (2). Section 1.367(b)-2(d)(3) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(b)(1) and (2). Section 1.367(b)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(a) and (b). Section 1.367(b)-3T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(a) and (b). Section 1.367(b)-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(a) and (b) and 954(c)(6)(A). Section 1.367(b)-4(b)(1) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(b). Section 1.367(b)-4(d) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(b)(1) and (2). Section 1.367(b)-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(b). Section 1.367(b)-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(a) and (b), 26 U.S.C. 902, and 26 U.S.C. 904. Section 1.367(b)-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(b). Section 1.367(b)-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(a) and (b), 26 U.S.C. 902, and 26 U.S.C. 904. Section 1.367(b)-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(b). Section 1.367(b)-12 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(a) and (b). Section 1.367(b)-13 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(b). Section 1.367(d)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(d). Section 1.367(e)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(e)(1). Section 1.367(e)-1(a) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(e). Section 1.367(e)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367(e)(2). Section 1.382-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m). Section 1.382-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(k)(1), (l)(3), (m), and 26 U.S.C. 383. Section 1.382-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(g)(4)(C), (i), (k)(1) and (6), (l)(3), (m), and 26 U.S.C. 383. Section 1.382-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(g)(4)(C) and 26 U.S.C. 382(m). Section 1.382-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(l)(3) and 382(m). Section 1.382-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m). Section 1.382-5T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m). Section 1.382-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(b)(3)(A), 26 U.S.C.(d)(1), 26 U.S.C. 382(m), and 26 U.S.C.383(d). Section 1.382-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C 382(m). Section 1.382-7T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m). Section 1.382-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m). Section 1.382-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(l)(3) and (m). Section 1.382-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C 382(m). Section 1.382-10T is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m). Section 1.382-12 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(f) and 26 U.S.C. 382(m). Section 1.383-0 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m) and 26 U.S.C. 383. Section 1.383-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m) and 26 U.S.C. 383. Section 1.383-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 383. Section 1.385-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 385. Section 1.385-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 385, 701, 1502, 1504(a)(5)(A), and 7701(l). Section 1.385-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 385 and 1502. Section 1.401-12 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(d)(1). Section 1.401(a)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401 Section 1.401(a)(2)-1 also issued under Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act, Public Law 96-364, 410, (94 Stat. 1208, 1308)(1980). Section 1.401(a)(5)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(a)(5). Section 1.401(a)(9)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(a)(9). Section 1.401(a)(9)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(a)(9). Section 1.401(a)(9)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(a)(9). Section 1.401(a)(9)-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(a)(9). Section 1.401(a)(9)-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(a)(9). Section 1.401(a)(9)-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(a)(9). Section 1.401(a)(9)-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(a)(9). Section 1.401(a)(9)-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(a)(9). Section 1.401(a)(9)-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(a)(9). Section 1.401(a)(17)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(a)(17). Sections 1.401(a)(26)-1 through (a)(26)-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(a)(26). Section 1.401(a)(35)-1 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(a)(35). Section 1.401(a)-21 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401 and section 104 of the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, Public Law 106-229 (114 Stat. 464). Section 1.401(b)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(b). Section 1.401(k)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(m)(9). Section 1.401(k)-3 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(m)(9). Section 1.401(l)-0 through 1.401(l)-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(l). Section 1.402A-1 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 402A Section 1.403(b)-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 403(b)(10). Section 1.404(k)-3 is also issued under sections 26 U.S.C. 162(k) and 404(k)(5)(A). Section 1.408-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 408(a) and 26 U.S.C. 408(q). Section 1.408-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 408. Section 1.408-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 408(a)(6) and (b)(3). Section 1.408-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 408. Section 1.408(q)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 408(q). Section 1.408A-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 408A. Section 1.408A-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 408A. Section 1.408A-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 408A. Section 1.408A-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 408A. Section 1.408A-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 408A. Section 1.408A-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 408A. Section 1.408A-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 408A. Section 1.408A-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 408A. Section 1.408A-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 408A. Section 1.409(p)-1 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 409(p)(7). Section 1.410(b)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 410(b)(6). Section 1.410(b)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 410(b)(6). Section 1.410(b)-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 410(b)(6). Section 1.410(b)-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 410(b)(6). Section 1.410(b)-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 410(b)(6) and section 664 of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-16, 115 Stat. 38). Section 1.410(b)-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 410(b)(6). Section 1.410(b)-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 410(b)(6). Section 1.410(b)-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 410(b)(6). Section 1.410(b)-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 410(b)(6). Section 1.411(a)-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 411(a)(7)(B)(i). Section 1.411(a)(13)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 411(a)(13). Section 1.411(b)(5)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 411(b)(5). Section 1.411(d)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 411(d)(6) and section 645(b) of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, Public Law 107-16 (115 Stat. 38). Section 1.411(d)-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 411(d)(6). Section 1.411(d)-6 issued under Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1978, 29 U.S.C. 1001nt. §§ 1.414(c)-1 through 1.414(c)-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 414(c). Section 1.414(c)-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 414(b), (c), and (o). Section 1.414(q)-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 414(q). Sections 1.414(r)-0 through 1.414(r)-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 414(r). Section 1.414(r)-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 410(b) and 414(r). Section 1.414(r)-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 401(a)(26) and 414(r). Section 1.414(r)-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 129 and 414(r). Section 1.414(r)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 414(r). Section 1.414(s)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 414(s). Section 1.414(v)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 414(v)(7)(D). Section 1.417(e)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 417(e)(3)(A)(ii)(II). Section 1.417(e)-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 417(e)(3)(A)(ii)(II). Section 1.419A(f)(6)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 419A(i). Section 1.420-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 420(c)(3)(E). Section 1.430(j) 1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 430(j)(4)(F). Section 1.441-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 441(f). Section 1.441-3T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 441. Section 1.442-2T and 1.442-3T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 422, 706, and 1378. Section 1.444-0T through 1.444-3T and Section 1.444-4 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 444(g). Section 1.446-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 446 and 461(h). Section 1.446-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.446-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 446 and 26 U.S.C. 860G. Section 1.446-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 446. Section 1.451-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 451(b)(1)(A)(ii), (b)(3)(C) and 461(h). Section 1.451-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 451(c)(2)(A), (3), (4)(A)(iii), (4)(b)(vii), and 461(h). Section 1.453-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 453(j)(1) and (k). Section 1.453A-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 453A. Section 1.458-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 458. Section 1.460-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 460(h). Section 1.460-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 460(h). Section 1.460-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 460(h). Section 1.460-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 460(h) and 1502. Section 1.460-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 460(h). Section 1.460-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 460(h). Section 1.461-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 461(h). Section 1.461-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 461(h). Section 1.461-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 461(h). Section 1.461-4(d) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 460 and 26 U.S.C. 461(h). Section 1.461-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 461(h). Section 1.461-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 461(h). Section 1.465-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 465. Section 1.465-20 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 465. Section 1.465-27 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 465(b)(6)(B)(iii). Section 1.466-1 through 1.466-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 466. Section 1.467-1 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 467. Section 1.467-2 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 467. Section 1.467-3 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 467. Section 1.467-4 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 467. Section 1.467-5 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 467. Section 1.467-6 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 467. Section 1.467-7 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 467. Section 1.467-8 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 467. Section 1.467-9 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 467. Section 1.468A-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 468A(e)(5). Section 1.468A-5T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 468A(e)(5). Section 1.468B-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 461(h) and 468B(g). Section 1.468B-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 461(h) and 468B(g). Section 1.468B-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 461(h) and 468B(g). Section 1.468B-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 461(h) and 468B(g). Section 1.468B-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 461(h) and 468B(g). Section 1.468B-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 461(h) and 468B(g). Section 1.468B-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 461(h) and 468B(g). Section 1.469-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 469. Section 1.469-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 469. Section 1.469-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 469(l). Section 1.469-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 469(l). Section 1.469-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 469(l). Section 1.469-3T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 469(l). Section 1.469-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 469(l). Section 1.469-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 469(l). Section 1.469-5T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 469(l). Section 1.469-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 469(l). Section 1.469-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 469(c)(6), (h)(2), and (l)(1). Section 1.469-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 469(l). Section 1.471 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 471. Section 1.471-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 471(a). Section 1.471-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 263A. Section 1.471-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 263A. Section 1.471-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 471. Section 1.472-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 472. Section 1.475(a)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 475(e). Section 1.475(a)-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 475(g). Section 1.475(b)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 475(b)(4) and 26 U.S.C. 475(e). Section 1.475(b)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 475(b)(2) and 26 U.S.C. 475(e). Section 1.475(b)-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 475(b)(2), 26 U.S.C. 475(e), and 26 U.S.C. 6001. Section 1.475(c)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 475(e). Section 1.475(c)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 475(e) and 26 U.S.C. 860G(e). Section 1.475(d)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 475(e). Section 1.475(e)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 475(e). Section 1.481-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 481. Section 1.481-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 481. Section 1.481-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 481. Section 1.481-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 481. Section 1.481-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 481. Section 1.481-6 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 481. Section 1.482-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 482 and 936. Sections 1.482-1 and 1.482-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 482. Section 1.482-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 482. Section 1.482-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 482. Section 1.482-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 482. Section 1.482-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 482. Section 1.482-7 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 482. Section 1.482-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 482. Section 1.482-2A also issued under 26 U.S.C. 482. Section 1.482-7A also issued under 26 U.S.C. 482. Section 1.483-1 through 1.483-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 483(f). Section 1.483-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 483(f). Section 1.501(c)(29)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(29)(B)(i). Section 1.501(c)(29)-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(29)(B)(i). Sections 1.504-1 and 1.504-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 504(b). Section 1.514(c)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 514(c)(9)(E)(iii). Section 1.527-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 527(h)(2)(B)(i). Sections 1.529A-0 through 1.529A-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 529A(g). Section1.585-5 through 1.585-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 585(b)(3). Section1.597-1 through 1.597-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 597 and 1502. Section1.597-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 597. Section 1.642(c)-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 642(c)(5). Section 1.642(h)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 642(h). Section 1.642(h)-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 642(h). Section 1.643(a)-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7). Section 1.643(f)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(f). Section 1.643(h)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7). Section 1.642(c)-6A also issued under 26 U.S.C. 642(c)(5). Section 1.645-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 645. Sections 1.663(c)-1, 1.663(c)-2, 1.663(c)-3, 1.663(c)-4, 1.663(c)-5, and 1.663(c)-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 663(c). Section 1.664-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 664(a). Section 1.664-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 664(a). Section 1.664-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 664(a). Section 1.664-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 664(a). Section 1.664-4A also issued under 26 U.S.C. 664(a). Section 1.671-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 672(f)(6). Section 1.672(f)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 672(f)(6). Section 1.672(f)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 672(f)(3) and (6). Section 1.672(f)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 672(f)(2) and (6). Section 1.672(f)-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 672(f)(4) and (6). Section 1.672(f)-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 672(f)(6). Section 1.679-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 679(d). Section 1.679-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 679(d). Section 1.679-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 679(d). Section 1.679-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7), 679(a)(3) and 679(d). Section 1.679-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 679(d). Section 1.679-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 679(d). Section 1.684-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 684(a). Section 1.684-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 684(a). Section 1.684-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 684(a). Section 1.684-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 684(a). Section 1.684-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 643(a)(7) and 684(a). Section 1.701-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 701 through 761. Section 1.704-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 704(c). Section 1.704-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 704(c). Section 1.705-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 705 and 1032. Section 1.706-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 706(b). Section 1.706-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 170(h)(7)(G). Section 1.706-3T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 444(f). Section 1.706-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 170(h)(7)(G). Sections 1.707-2 through 1.707-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 707(a)(2). Section 1.721-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 721. Section 1.721(c)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 721(c). Section 1.721(c)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 721(c). Section 1.721(c)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 721(c). Section 1.721(c)-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 721(c). Section 1.721(c)-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 721(c). Section 1.721(c)-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 721(c). Section 1.721(c)-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 721(c). Section 1.731-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 731(c). Section 1.732-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 732. Section 1.732-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 732. Section 1.732-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d), 732(f)(8), and 1502. Section 1.734-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 734. Section 1.743-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 743. Section 1.751-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 751. Section 1.752-1(a) also issued under Public Law 106-554, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A-638 (2001). Section 1.752-6 also issued under Public Law 106-554, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A-638 (2001). Section 1.752-7 also issued under Public Law 106-554, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A-638 (2001). Section 1.754-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 754. Section 1.755-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 755. Section 1.755-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 755 and 26 U.S.C. 1060. Section 1.761-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 446(b), 761(a), 6031(a), 6417(d), and 6417(h). Section 1.807-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 817A(e). Section 1.807-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 807(e)(6). Section 1.809-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 809(b)(2) and (g)(3). Section 1.811-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 817A(e). Section 1.812-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 817A(e). Section 1.817-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 817(h). Section 1.817A-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 817A(e). Section 1.832-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 832(b)(5)(A). Section 1.846-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 846. Section 1.848-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 845(b) and 26 U.S.C. 848(d)(4)(B). Section 1.848-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 848(d)(4)(B). Sections 1.851-3 and 1.851-5 are also issued under 26 U.S.C. 851(c). Section 1.852-11 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 852(b)(3)(C), 852(b)(8), and 852(c). Section 1.853-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 901(j). Section 1.853-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 901(j). Section 1.853-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 901(j). Section 1.853-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 901(j) and 26 U.S.C. 6011. Section 1.860A-0 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 860G(e). Section 1.860A-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 860G(b) and 860G(e). Section 1.860C-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 860C(b)(1) and 860G(e). Section 1.860D-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 860G(e). Section 1.860E-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 860E and 860G(e). Section 1.860E-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 860E(e). Section 1.860F-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 860G(e). Section 1.860F-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 860G(e) and 26 U.S.C. 6230(k). Section 1.860F-4T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 860G(c)(3) and (e). Section 1.860G-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 860G(a)(1)(B), (d)(2)(E), and (e). Section 1.860G-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 860G(e). Section 1.860G-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 860G(b) and 26 U.S.C. 860G(e). Section 1.861-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a). Section 1.861-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a). Section 1.861-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 250(c), 26 U.S.C. 864(e)(7), and 26 U.S.C. 882(c). Section 1.861-8T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a), 864(e), 865(i), and 7701(f). Section 1.861-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 861, 863(a), 864(e), 864(e)(7), 865(i), 987, and 989(c), and 7701(f). Section 1.861-9T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 861, 863(a), 864(e), 864(e)(7), 865(i), and 7701(f). Section 1.861-10(e) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a), 26 U.S.C. 864(e)(7), 26 U.S.C. 865(i), and 26 U.S.C. 7701(f). Section 1.861-10T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a), 864(e), 865(i), and 7701(f). Section 1.861-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a), 26 U.S.C. 864(e)(7), 26 U.S.C. 865(i), and 26 U.S.C. 7701(f). Section 1.861-11T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a), 864(e), 865(i), and 7701(f). Section 1.861-12 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 864(e)(7). Section 1.861-12T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a), 864(e), 865(i), and 7701(f). Section 1.861-13 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 864(e)(7). Section 1.861-13T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a), 864(e), 865(i), and 7701(f). Section 1.861-14 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 864(e)(7). Section 1.861-14T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a), 864(e), 865(i), and 7701(f). Section 1.861-17 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 864(e)(7). Section 1.863-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a). Section 1.863-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863. Section 1.863-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a) and (b), and 26 U.S.C. 936(h). Section 1.863-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863. Section 1.863-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863. Section 1.863-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a) and 871(m). Section 1.863-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a), (b) and (d). Section 1.863-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a), (d) and (e). Section 1.864-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7701(l). Section 1.864-8T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 864(d)(8). Section 1.864(c)(8)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 864(c)(8) and 897(g). Section 1.864(c)(8)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 864(c)(8)(E), 6001 and 6031(b). Section 1.865-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a) and 865(j)(1). Section 1.865-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a) and 865(j)(1). Section 1.865-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 865(j). Section 1.871-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7701(l). Section 1.871-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7701(l). Section 1.871-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7701(b)(11). Sections 1.871-15 and 1.871-15T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 871(m). Section 1.874-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 874. Section 1.881-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7701(l). Section 1.881-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7701(l). Section 1.881-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7701(l). Section 1.882-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 882(c). Section 1.882-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 882(c), 26 U.S.C. 864(e), 26 U.S.C. 988(d), and 26 U.S.C. 7701(l). Section 1.883-1 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 883. Section 1.883-2 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 883. Section 1.883-3 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 883. Section 1.883-4 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 883. Section 1.883-5 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 883. Section 1.884-0 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 884 (g). Section 1.884-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 884. Section 1.884-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 884 (g). Section 1.884-1 (d) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 884 (c) (2) (A). Section 1.884-1 (d) (13) (i) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 884 (c) (2). Section 1.884-1 (e) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 884 (c) (2) (B). Section 1.884-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 884(g). Section 1.884-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 884 (g). Section 1.884-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 884 (g). Section 1.884-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 884 (g). Section 1.884-5 (e) and (f) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 884 (e) (4) (C). Section 1.892-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 892(c). Section 1.892-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 892(c). Section 1.892-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 892(c). Section 1.892-3T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 892(c). Section 1.892-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 892(c). Section 1.892-4T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 892(c). Section 1.892-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 892(c). Section 1.892-5T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 892(c). Section 1.892-6T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 892(c). Section 1.892-7T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 892(c). Section 1.894-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 894 and 7701(l). Section 1.897-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 897 and 897(l)(3). Section 1.897-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 897. Sections 1.897-5T, 1.897-6T and 1.897-7T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 897 (d), (e), (g) and (j) and 26 U.S.C. 367(e)(2). Section 1.897-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 897(g). Section 1.897(l)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 897(l). Section 1.901(j)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 901(j)(4). Sections 1.901(m)-1 through 1.901-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 901(m)(7). Section 1.901(m)-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 901(m)(3)(B)(ii). Sections 1.902-1 and 902-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 902(c)(7). Section 1.904-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 904(d)(7). Section 1.904-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 904(d)(7). Section 1.904-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 904(d)(7). Section 1.904-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 250(c), 26 U.S.C. 865(j), 26. U.S.C. 904(d)(2)(J)(i), 26 U.S.C. 904(d)(6)(C), 26 U.S.C. 904(d)(7), and 26 U.S.C. 951A(f)(1)(B). Section 1.904-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 904(d)(7) and 26 U.S.C. 951A(f)(1)(B). Section 1.904-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 904(d)(7). Section 1.904-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 904(d)(6). Section 1.904(b)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1(h)(11)(C)(iv) and 904(b)(2)(C). Section 1.904(b)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1(h)(11)(C)(iv) and 904(b)(2)(C). Section 1.904(f)-(2) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 904 (f)(3)(b). Section 1.904(g)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 904(g)(4). Section 1.904(g)-3T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 904(g)(4). Section 1.904(i)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 904(i). Section 1.905-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 989(c)(4). Sections 1.905-3T and 1.905-4T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 989(c)(4). Section 1.905-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 989(c)(4), 26 U.S.C. 6227(d), 26 U.S.C. 6241(11), and 26 U.S.C. 6689(a). Section 1.907(b)-1 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 907(b). Section 1.907(b)-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 907(b). Sections 1.909-1 through 1.906-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 909(e). Section 1.911-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 911(d)(9). Section 1.931-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7654(e). Section 1.932-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7654(e). Section 1.934-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 934(b)(4). Section 1.935-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7654(e). Section 1.936-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 936(h). Section 1.936-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 936(h). Section 1.936-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 863(a) and (b), and 26 U.S.C. 936(h). Section 1.936-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 936(h). Section 1.936-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 936(j). Section 1.937-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 937(a). Section 1.937-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 937(a). Section 1.937-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 937(b). Section 1.937-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 937(b). Section 1.951-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7701(a). Section 1.951A-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 882(c)(1)(A) and 954(b)(5). Section 1.951A-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 951A(d)(4). Section 1.951A-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 951A(f)(1)(B). Section 1.952-11T is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 852(b)(3)(C), 852(b)(8), and 852(c). Section 1.953-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7701(b)(11). Section 1.954-0 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 954 (b) and (c). Section 1.954-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 954 (b) and (c). Section 1.954-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 954 (b) and (c). Section 1.956-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 245A(g), 956(d), and 956(e). Section 1.956-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 956(d) and 956(e). Section 1.956-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 956(d) and 956(e). Section 1.956-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 864(d)(8) and 956(e). Section 1.956-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 956(d) and 956(e). Section 1.957-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 957. Section 1.957-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 957(c). Section 1.960-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 960(f). Section 1.960-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 960(f). Section 1.960-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 960(f). Section 1.960-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 951A(f)(1)(B) and 26 U.S.C. 960(f). Section 1.962-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 965(o). Section 1.965-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 965(c)(3)(B)(iii)(V), 965(d)(2), 965(o), 989(c), and 7701(a). Section 1.965-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 965(b)(3)(A)(ii), 965(o), and 961(a) and (b). Section 1.965-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 965(c)(3)(D) and 965(o). Section 1.965-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 965(c)(3)(F) and 965(o). Sections 1.965-5 through 1.965-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 965(o) and 26 U.S.C. 902(c)(8) (as in effect on December 21, 2017). Section 1.965-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 965(h)(3), 965(h)(5), 965(i)(2), 965(i)(8)(B), 965(m)(2)(A), 965(n)(3), and 965(o). Section 1.965-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 965(o). Section 1.965-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 965(o). Section 1.985-0 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 985. Section 1.985-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 985. Section 1.985-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 985. Section 1.985-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 985. Section 1.985-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 985. Section 1.985-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 985, 987, and 989. Section 1.986(a)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 986(a)(1)(C) and 26 U.S.C. 986(a)(1)(D)(ii). Section 1.986(c)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 965(o) and 26 U.S.C. 989(c). Section 1.987-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 987, 989, and 1502. Section 1.987-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 987, 989, and 1502. Section 1.987-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 987 and 989. Section 1.987-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 987 and 989. Section 1.987-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 987 and 989. Section 1.987-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 904, 987, and 989. Section 1.987-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 987 and 989. Section 1.987-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 987 and 989. Section 1.987-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 987, 989, and 6001. Section 1.987-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 987, 989, and 6001. Section 1.987-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 987, 989, and 1502. Section 1.987-12 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 987 and 989. Section 1.987-13 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 987 and 989. Section 1.987-14 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 987 and 989. Section 1.987-15 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 987 and 989. Section 1.988-0 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 988. Section 1.988-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 988 and 989. Section 1.988-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 988. Section 1.988-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 988. Section 1.988-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 988 and 989. Section 1.988-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 988. Sections 1.989(a)-0T and 1.989(a)-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 989(c). Section 1.989(a)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 989. Section 1.989(b)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 989(b). Section 1.989-1(c) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 989(c). Section 1.1001-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 148(i), 26 U.S.C. 988(d), 26 U.S.C. 1275(d), and 26 U.S.C. 7701(l). Section 1.1014-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1014(f). Section 1.1014-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1014(f). Section 1.1014-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1014(f). Section 1.1036-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 351(g)(4). Section 1.1059(e)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1059 (e)(1) and (e)(2). Section 1.1060-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1060. Section 1.1061-0 added under 26 U.S.C. 1061(f). Section 1.1061-1 added under 26 U.S.C. 1061(f). Section 1.1061-2 added under 26 U.S.C. 1061(f). Section 1.1061-3 added under 26 U.S.C. 1(h)(9) and 1061(f). Section 1.1061-4 added under 26 U.S.C. 1061(f). Section 1.1061-5 added under 26 U.S.C. 1061(f). Section 1.1061-6 added under 26 U.S.C. 1061(f). Sections 1.1092(b)-1T and 1.1092(b)-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1092 (b)(1). Section 1.1092(b)-4T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1092(b)(2). Section 1.1092(b)-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1092(b)(1). Section 1.1092(b)-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1092(b)(2). Section 1.1092(c)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1092(c)(4)(H). Section 1.1092(c)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1092(c)(4)(H). Section 1.1092(c)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1092(c)(4)(H). Section 1.1092(c)-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1092(c)(4)(H). Section 1.1092(d)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1092(b)(1). Section 1.1092(d)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1092(d)(3)(B). Section 1.1202-2 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1202(k). Section 1.1221-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1221(b)(2)(A)(iii), (b)(2)(B), and (b)(3); 1502 and 6001. Section 1.1244(e)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1244(e). Section 1.1248-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1248(a) and (c)(1) and (2). Section 1.1254-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1254(b). Section 1.1254-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1254(b). Section 1.1254-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1254(b). Section 1.1254-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1254(b). Section 1.1254-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1254(b). Section 1.1254-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1254(b). Section 1.1271-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1272-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1272-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1272-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1273-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1273-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1274-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1274-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1274-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1274-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1274-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1274A-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1274A(e) and 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1275-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1275-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1275-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1275-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1275-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1275-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1275-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(d). Section 1.1286-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275(D) and 1286(f). Section 1.1286-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1286(f). Section 1.1287-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 165 (j)(3). Section 1.1291-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1291. Section 1.1291-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1298(a) and (g). Section 1.1291-9, also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1298(a) and (g). Section 1.1298-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1298(f). Section 1.1291-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1291(d)(2). Section 1.1291-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1291(d)(2). Section 1.1293-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1293. Section 1.1294-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1294. Section 1.1295-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1295. Section 1.1295-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1295. Section 1.1296-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1296(g) and 26 U.S.C. 1298(f). Section 1.1296(e)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1296(e). Section 1.1297-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1298(g). Section 1.1297-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1298(g). Section 1.1297-3T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1297(b)(1). Section 1.1297-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1297(b)(2)(B) and 1298(g). Section 1.1297-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1297(b)(2)(B) and 1298(g). Section 1.1297-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1297(b)(2)(B) and 1298(g). Section 1.1298-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1298(f) and (g). Section 1.1298-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1298(b)(3) and (g). Section 1.1298-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1298(g). Section 1.1301-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1301(c). Section 1.1301-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1301(c). Section 1.1361-1(j) (6), (10) and (11) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1361(d)(2)(B)(iii). Section 1.1361-1(l) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1361(c)(5)(C). Sections 1.1362-1, 1.1362-2, 1.1362-3, 1.1362-4, 1.1362-5, 1.1362-6, 1.1362-7, and 1.1363-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1377. Section 1.1363-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d). Section 1.1368-1(f) and (g) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1377(c). Section 1.1368-2(b) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1368(c). Section 1.1374-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1374(e) and 337(d). Section 1.1374-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1374(e) and 337(d). Section 1.1374-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1374(e) and 337(d). Section 1.1374-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1374(e) and 337(d). Section 1.1374-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1374(e) and 337(d). Section 1.1374-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1374(e) and 337(d). Section 1.1374-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1374(e) and 337(d). Section 1.1374-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d) and 1374(e). Section 1.1374-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1374(e) and 337(d). Section 1.1374-8T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d) and 1374(e). Section 1.1374-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1374(e) and 337(d). Section 1.1374-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d) and 1374(e). Section 1.1374-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1374(e) and 337(d). Section 1.1374-10T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d) and 1374(e). Section 1.1377-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1377(a)(2) and (c). Section 1.1394-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1397D. Section 1.1396-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1397D. Section 1.1397E-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1397E. Section 1.1400Z2(a)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1400Z-2(e)(4). Section 1.1400Z2(b)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1400Z-2(e)(4). Section 1.1400Z2(c)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1400Z-2(e)(4). Section 1.1400Z2(d)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1400Z-2(e)(4). Section 1.1400Z2(d)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1400Z-2(e)(4). Section 1.1400Z2(f)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1400Z-2(e)(4). Section 1.1402 (e)-5T also is issued under 26 U.S.C. 1402(e)(1) and (2). Section 1.1411-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 367. Section 1.1441-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1441(c)(4) and 26 U.S.C. 3401(a)(6). Section 1.1441-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1441(c)(4), 26 U.S.C. 3401(a)(6) and 26 U.S.C. 7701(l). Section 1.1441-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1441(c)(4) and 26 U.S.C. 3401(a)(6). Section 1.1441-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1441(c)(4), 26 U.S.C. 3401(a)(6) and 26 U.S.C. 7701(b)(11). Section 1.1441-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1441(c)(4) and 26 U.S.C. 3401(a)(6). Section 1.1441-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1441(c)(4), 26 U.S.C. 3401(a)(6) and 26 U.S.C. 7701(l). Section 1.1443-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1443(a). Section 1.1445-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1445. Section 1.1445-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1445(e)(7). Section 1.1445-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1445(e)(7). Section 1.1446-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1446(g). Section 1.1446-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1446(g). Section 1.1446(f)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1446(f)(6) and 1446(g). Section 1.1446(f)-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1446(f)(6) and 1446(g). Section 1.1446(f)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1446(f)(6) and 1446(g). Section 1.1446(f)-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1446(f)(6) and 1446(g). Section 1.1446(f)-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1446(f)(6) and 1446(g). Section 1.1461-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1441(c)(4) and 26 U.S.C. 3401(a)(6). Section 1.1461-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1441(c)(4) and 26 U.S.C. 3401(a)(6). Section 1.1462-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1441(c)(4) and 26 U.S.C. 3401(a)(6). Section 1.1471-1 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1471 Section 1.1471-2 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1471 Section 1.1471-3 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1471 Section 1.1471-4 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1471 Section 1.1471-5 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1471 Section 1.1471-6 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1471 Section 1.1472-1 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1472 Section 1.1473-1 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1473 Section 1.1474-1 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1474 Section 1.1474-2 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1474 Section 1.1474-3 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1474 Section 1.1474-4 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1474 Section 1.1474-5 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1474 Section 1.1474-6 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1474 Section 1.1474-7 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1474 Section 1.1502-0 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-12 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 250(c) and 1502. Section 1.1502-13 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 250(c), 987, 989, and 1502. Section 1.1502-14Z also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1400Z-2(e)(4) and 1502. Section 1.1502-15 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-17 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 446 and 1502. Section 1.1502-18 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-19 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 301, 1502, and 1503. Section 1.1502-20 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d) and 1502. Section 1.1502-20T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d) and 1502. Section 1.1502-21 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502 and 6402(i). Section 1.1502-21(b)(1) and (b)(3)(v) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-21T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-21T(b)(1) and (b)(3)(v) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-22 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-23 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-26 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-28 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-30 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-31 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-32 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 301, 1502, and 1503. Section 1.1502-32 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-32(a)(2), (b)(3)(iii)(C), (b)(3)(iii)(D), and (b)(4)(vi) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-32T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-33 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-34 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-35 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-35T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-36 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-36 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 337(d). Section 1.1502-43 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-47 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502, 1503(c) and 1504(c). Section 1.1502-50 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 250(c) and 1502. Section 1.1502-51 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-55 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-59A also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-68 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-75 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-76 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-77 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502 and 6402(j). Section 1.1502-78 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502, 6402(j), and 6411(c). Section 1.1502-79 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-80 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-81T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-90 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m) and 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-91 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m) and 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-92 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m) and 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-93 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m) and 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-94 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m) and 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-95 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m) and 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-96 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m) and 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-98 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m) and 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-99 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 382(m) and 26 U.S.C. 1502. Section 1.1502-100 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. Sections 1.1503(d)-1 through 8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 953(d), 1502, 1503(d) and (d)(2)(B), (d)(3), and (d)(4), and 7701. Section 1.1503-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1503(d). Section 1.1504-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1400Z-2(e)(4) and 1504(a)(5). Section 1.1504-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1504(a)(5). Section 1.1502-77A also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502 and 6402(j). Section 1.1502-77B also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502 and 6402(j). Section 1.1561-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1561. Section 1.5000A-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 5000A(e)(4). Section 1.5000C-1 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 5000C Section 1.5000C-2 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 5000C Section 1.5000C-3 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 5000C Section 1.5000C-4 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 5000C Section 1.5000C-5 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 5000C Section 1.5000C-6 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 5000C Section 1.6011-4T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6001 and 6011(a). Section 1.6011-4T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6011. Section 1.6011-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6011(a). Section 1.6011-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6011(e). Section 1.6011-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6001 and 6011. Section 1.6011-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6001 and 6011. Section 1.6011-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6001 and 6011. Section 1.6011-15 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6001 and 26 U.S.C. 6011. Section 1.6011-18 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6001 and 26 U.S.C. 6011. Section 1.6012-2 is also issued under the authority of 26 U.S.C. 6011 and 6012. Section 1.6013-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7701(b)(11). Section 1.6015-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6015(h). Section 1.6015-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6015(h). Section 1.6015-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6015(h). Section 1.6015-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6015(h). Section 1.6015-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6015(h). Section 1.6015-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6015(h). Section 1.6015-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6015(h). Section 1.6015-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6015(h). Section 1.6015-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6015(h). Section 1.6031(a)-1 also issued under section 404 of the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (Public Law 97-248; 96 Stat. 324, 669) (TEFRA). Section 1.6033-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6033. Section 1.6033-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6033(i)(1). Section 1.6035-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6035. Section 1.6035-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6035(b). Section 1.6035-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6035. Section 1.6037-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6037. Section 1.6038-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038. Section 1.6038-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038(d). Section 1.6038-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038. Section 1.6038-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6001, 6011, 6012, 6031, and 6038. Section 1.6038-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038. Section 1.6038A-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6001. Section 1.6038A-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038A and 6038C. Section 1.6038A-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038A and 7701(l). Section 1.6038A-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038A. Section 1.6038A-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038A. Section 1.6038A-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038A. Section 1.6038A-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038A. Section 1.6038B-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038B. Section 1.6038B-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C 6038B. Section 1.6038B-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038B. Section 1.6038B-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038B. Section 1.6038D-0 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038D. Section 1.6038D-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038D. Section 1.6038D-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038D. Section 1.6038D-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038D. Section 1.6038D-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038D. Section 1.6038D-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038D. Section 1.6038D-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038D. Section 1.6038D-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038D. Section 1.6038D-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6038D. Section 1.6039I-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6039I. Section 1.6041-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6041(a). Section 1.6041-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6041(d). Section 1.6041-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 62 and 6041(a). Section 1.6042-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6045. Section 1.6043-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6043(c). Section 1.6045-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6045. Section 1.6045-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6045(a). Section 1.6045-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6045(g). Section 1.6045-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6045. Section 1.6045-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6045. Section 1.6045-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6045. Section 1.6045A-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6045A(a), (b), (c). Section 1.6045B-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6045B(a), (c), (e). Section 1.6046-1 also issued 26 U.S.C. 6046(b). Section 1.6046A-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6046A. Section 1.6047-2 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6047(d). Section 1.6049-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6049 (a), (b), and (d). Section 1.6049-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6049 (a), (b), and (d). Section 1.6049-5T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6049. Section 1.6049-6 also issued under 6049(a), (b), and (d). Section 1.6049-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 860G(e), 1275(c) and 26 U.S.C. 6049(d)(7)(D). Section 1.6049-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6049(a). Section 1.6049-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6049(a). Section 1.6050E-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050E. Section 1.6050H-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050H. Section 1.6050H-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050H. Section 1.6050H-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050H(h). Section 1.6050I-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050I. Section 1.6050I-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050I. Section 1.6050K-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050K(a). Section 1.6050M-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050M. Section 1.6050P-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050P. Section 1.6050P-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050P. Section 1.6050S-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050S(g). Section 1.6050S-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050S(g). Section 1.6050S-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050S(g). Section 1.6050S-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050S(g). Section 1.6050X-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050X(a), (b). Section 1.6050Y-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050Y(a). Section 1.6050Y-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050Y(b). Section 1.6050Y-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050Y(c). Sections 1.6055-1 and 1.6055-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6055. Section 1.6060-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6060(a). Section 1.6061-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6061. Section 1.6065-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6065. Section 1.6081-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6081. Section 1.6081-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6081. Section 1.6081-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6081. Section 1.6081-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6081. Section 1.6081-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6081. Section 1.6081-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6081. Section 1.6081-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6081. Section 1.6081-6T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6081. Section 1.6081-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6081. Section 1.6081-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6081(a). Section 1.6081-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6081(a). Section 1.6081-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6081. Section 1.6081-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6081. Section 1.6109-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6109(a). Sections 1.6302-1, 1.6302-2, 1.6302-3 and 1.6302-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6302(h). Section 1.6411-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6402(i) and 6411(c). Section 1.6417-0 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6417(h). Section 1.6417-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6417(h). Section 1.6417-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6417(h). Section 1.6417-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6417(h). Section 1.6417-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6417(h). Section 1.6417-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6417(h). Section 1.6417-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6417(h). Section 1.6418-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6418(g) and (h). Section 1.6418-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6418(g) and (h). Section 1.6418-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6418(g) and (h). Section 1.6418-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6418(g) and (h). Section 1.6418-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 48(a)(10)(C) and 6418(g) and (h). Section 1.6418-4T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6418(g)(1) and (h). Section 1.6654-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6654(n). Section 1.6655-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6655(i)(2). Section 1.6662-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6662. Section 1.6695-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6060(b) and 6695(b). Section 1.6695-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6695(b). Section 1.6695-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6695(g). Section 1.6695-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6695(g). Section 1.6851-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C 6851(d). Section 1.7520-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7520(c)(2). Section 1.7520-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7520(c)(2). Section 1.7520-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7520(c)(2). Section 1.7520-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7520(c)(2). Section 1.7520-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7520(c)(2). Section 1.7701(l)-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7701(l). Section 1.7701(l)-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7701(l). Section 1.7701(l)-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7701(l) and 954(c)(6)(A). Section 1.7702-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7702(k). Section 1.7872-5(b)(17) also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7872. Section 1.7872-5T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7872. Section 1.7872-15 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1275 and 7872. Section 1.7874-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7874(c)(6) and (g). Section 1.7874-1T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7874(c)(6) and (g). Section 1.7874-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7874(c)(6) and (g). Section 1.7874-3 is also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7874(c)(6) and (g). Section 1.7874-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7874(c)(6) and (g). Section 1.7874-4T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7874(c)(6) and (g). Section 1.7874-5 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7874(c)(6) and (g). Section 1.7874-5T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7874(c)(6) and (g). Section 1.7874-6 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7874(c)(6) and (g). Section 1.7874-7 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7874(c)(6) and (g). Section 1.7874-8 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7874(c)(6) and (g). Section 1.7874-9 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7874(c)(6) and (g). Section 1.7874-10 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7874(c)(4) and (g). Section 1.7874-11 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7874(g). Section 1.7874-12 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 7874(g).

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960; T.D. 9989, 89 FR 17606, Mar. 11, 2024, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, T.D. 9381, 73 FR 8604, Feb. 15, 2008, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11607, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11737, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11814, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11910, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted. RELATED RULES

Amendments

[T.D. 9169, 69 FR 78154, Dec. 29, 2004]

Amendments

§1.482-1T. Allocation of income and deductions among taxpayers (temporary).

26 C.F.R. § 1.482-1T

(a)

through (f)(2) [Reserved]. For further guidance see § 1.482-1(a) through (f)(2).

(i)

Compensation independent of the form or character of controlled transaction—

(A)

In general. All value provided between controlled taxpayers in a controlled transaction requires an arm's length amount of compensation determined under the best method rule of § 1.482-1(c). Such amount must be consistent with, and must account for all of, the value provided between the parties in the transaction, without regard to the form or character of the transaction. For this purpose, it is necessary to consider the entire arrangement between the parties, as determined by the contractual terms, whether written or imputed in accordance with the economic substance of the arrangement, in light of the actual conduct of the parties. See, e.g., § 1.482-1(d)(3)(ii)(B) (identifying contractual terms) and (f)(2)(ii)(A) (regarding reference to realistic alternatives).

(B)

Aggregation. The combined effect of two or more separate transactions (whether before, during, or after the year under review), including for purposes of an analysis under multiple provisions of the Code or regulations, may be considered if the transactions, taken as a whole, are so interrelated that an aggregate analysis of the transactions provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result determined under the best method rule of § 1.482-1(c). Whether two or more transactions are evaluated separately or in the aggregate depends on the extent to which the transactions are economically interrelated and on the relative reliability of the measure of an arm's length result provided by an aggregate analysis of the transactions as compared to a separate analysis of each transaction. For example, consideration of the combined effect of two or more transactions may be appropriate to determine whether the overall compensation in the transactions is consistent with the value provided, including any synergies among items and services provided.

(C)

Coordinated best method analysis and evaluation. Consistent with the principles of paragraphs (f)(2)(i)(A) and (B) of this section, a coordinated best method analysis and evaluation of two or more controlled transactions to which one or more provisions of the Code or regulations apply may be necessary to ensure that the overall value provided, including any synergies, is properly taken into account. A coordinated best method analysis would include a consistent consideration of the facts and circumstances of the functions performed, resources employed, and risks assumed in the relevant transactions, and a consistent measure of the arm's length results, for purposes of all relevant statutory and regulatory provisions.

(D)

Allocations of value. In some cases, it may be necessary to allocate one or more portions of the arm's length result that was properly determined under a coordinated best method analysis described in paragraph (f)(2)(i)(C) of this section. Any such allocation of the arm's length result determined under the coordinated best method analysis must be made using the method that, under the facts and circumstances, provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result for each allocated amount. For example, if the full value of compensation due in controlled transactions whose tax treatment is governed by multiple provisions of the Code or regulations has been most reliably determined on an aggregate basis, then that full value must be allocated in a manner that provides the most reliable measure of each allocated amount.

(E)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the provisions of this paragraph (f)(2)(i). For purposes of the examples in this paragraph (E), P is a domestic corporation, and S1, S2, and S3 are foreign corporations that are wholly owned by P.

(ii)

(A)

[Reserved]. For further guidance see § 1.482-1(f)(2)(ii)(A).

(B)

Example. The following example illustrates this paragraph (f)(2)(ii):

(iii)

through (j)(6) [Reserved]. For further guidance see § 1.482-1(f)(2)(iii) through (j)(6).

(7)

Certain effective/applicability dates—

(i)

Paragraphs (f)(2)(i)(A) through (E) and (f)(2)(ii)(B) of this section apply to taxable years ending on or after September 14, 2015.

(ii)

Expiration date. The applicability of paragraphs (f)(2)(i)(A) through (E) and (f)(2)(ii)(B) of this section expires on or before September 14, 2018.

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[T.D. 9738, 80 FR 55541, Sept. 16, 2015]

Authority

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960; T.D. 9989, 89 FR 17606, Mar. 11, 2024, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, T.D. 9381, 73 FR 8604, Feb. 15, 2008, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11607, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11737, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11814, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11910, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted. RELATED RULES

Amendments

[T.D. 9169, 69 FR 78154, Dec. 29, 2004]

Amendments

[T.D. 9738, 80 FR 55541, Sept. 16, 2015]

§1.482-2. Determination of taxable income in specific situations.

26 C.F.R. § 1.482-2

(a)

Loans or advances—

(1)

Interest on bona fide indebtedness—

(i)

In general. Where one member of a group of controlled entities makes a loan or advance directly or indirectly to, or otherwise becomes a creditor of, another member of such group and either charges no interest, or charges interest at a rate which is not equal to an arm's length rate of interest (as defined in paragraph (a)(2) of this section) with respect to such loan or advance, the district director may make appropriate allocations to reflect an arm's length rate of interest for the use of such loan or advance.

(ii)

Application of paragraph (a) of this section—

(A)

Interest on bona fide indebtedness. Paragraph (a) of this section applies only to determine the appropriateness of the rate of interest charged on the principal amount of a bona fide indebtedness between members of a group of controlled entities, including—

(1) Loans or advances of money or other consideration (whether or not evidenced by a written instrument); and

(2) Indebtedness arising in the ordinary course of business from sales, leases, or the rendition of services by or between members of the group, or any other similar extension of credit.

(B)

Alleged indebtedness. This paragraph (a) does not apply to so much of an alleged indebtedness which is not in fact a bona fide indebtedness, even if the stated rate of interest thereon would be within the safe haven rates prescribed in paragraph (a)(2)(iii) of this section. For example, paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to payments with respect to all or a portion of such alleged indebtedness where in fact all or a portion of an alleged indebtedness is a contribution to the capital of a corporation or a distribution by a corporation with respect to its shares. Similarly, this paragraph (a) does not apply to payments with respect to an alleged purchase-money debt instrument given in consideration for an alleged sale of property between two controlled entities where in fact the transaction constitutes a lease of the property. Payments made with respect to alleged indebtedness (including alleged stated interest thereon) shall be treated according to their substance. See § 1.482-2(a)(3)(i).

(iii)

Period for which interest shall be charged—

(A)

General rule. This paragraph (a)(1)(iii) is effective for indebtedness arising after June 30, 1988. See § 1.482-2(a)(3) (26 CFR Part 1 edition revised as of April 1, 1988) for indebtedness arising before July 1, 1988. Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs (a)(1)(iii)(B) through (E) of this section, the period for which interest shall be charged with respect to a bona fide indebtedness between controlled entities begins on the day after the day the indebtedness arises and ends on the day the indebtedness is satisfied (whether by payment, offset, cancellation, or otherwise). Paragraphs (a)(1)(iii)(B) through (E) of this section provide certain alternative periods during which interest is not required to be charged on certain indebtedness. These exceptions apply only to indebtedness described in paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(A)(2) of this section (relating to indebtedness incurred in the ordinary course of business from sales, services, etc., between members of the group) and not evidenced by a written instrument requiring the payment of interest. Such amounts are hereinafter referred to as intercompany trade receivables. The period for which interest is not required to be charged on intercompany trade receivables under this paragraph (a)(1)(iii) is called the interest-free period. In general, an intercompany trade receivable arises at the time economic performance occurs (within the meaning of section 461(h) and the regulations thereunder) with respect to the underlying transaction between controlled entities. For purposes of this paragraph (a)(1)(iii), the term United States includes any possession of the United States, and the term foreign country excludes any possession of the United States.

(B)

Exception for certain intercompany transactions in the ordinary course of business. Interest is not required to be charged on an intercompany trade receivable until the first day of the third calendar month following the month in which the intercompany trade receivable arises.

(C)

Exception for trade or business of debtor member located outside the United States. In the case of an intercompany trade receivable arising from a transaction in the ordinary course of a trade or business which is actively conducted outside the United States by the debtor member, interest is not required to be charged until the first day of the fourth calendar month following the month in which such intercompany trade receivable arises.

(D)

Exception for regular trade practice of creditor member or others in creditor's industry. If the creditor member or unrelated persons in the creditor member's industry, as a regular trade practice, allow unrelated parties a longer period without charging interest than that described in paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(B) or (C) of this section (whichever is applicable) with respect to transactions which are similar to transactions that give rise to intercompany trade receivables, such longer interest-free period shall be allowed with respect to a comparable amount of intercompany trade receivables.

(E)

Exception for property purchased for resale in a foreign country—(1) General rule. If in the ordinary course of business one member of the group (related purchaser) purchases property from another member of the group (related seller) for resale to unrelated persons located in a particular foreign country, the related purchaser and the related seller may use as the interest-free period for the intercompany trade receivables arising during the related seller's taxable year from the purchase of such property within the same product group an interest-free period equal the sum of—

(i) The number of days in the related purchaser's average collection period (as determined under paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E)(2) of this section) for sales of property within the same product group sold in the ordinary course of business to unrelated persons located in the same foreign country; plus

(ii) Ten (10) calendar days.

(2) Interest-free period. The interest-free period under this paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E), however, shall in no event exceed 183 days. The related purchaser does not have to conduct business outside the United States in order to be eligible to use the interest-free period of this paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E). The interest-free period under this paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E) shall not apply to intercompany trade receivables attributable to property which is manufactured, produced, or constructed (within the meaning of § 1.954-3(a)(4)) by the related purchaser. For purposes of this paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E) a product group includes all products within the same three-digit Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code (as prepared by the Statistical Policy Division of the Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President.)

(3) Average collection period. An average collection period for purposes of this paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E) is determined as follows—

(i) Step 1. Determine total sales (less returns and allowances) by the related purchaser in the product group to unrelated persons located in the same foreign country during the related purchaser's last taxable year ending on or before the first day of the related seller's taxable year in which the intercompany trade receivable arises.

(ii) Step 2. Determine the related purchaser's average month-end accounts receivable balance with respect to sales described in paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E)(2)(i) of this section for the related purchaser's last taxable year ending on or before the first day of the related seller's taxable year in which the intercompany trade receivable arises.

(iii) Step 3. Compute a receivables turnover rate by dividing the total sales amount described in paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E)(2)(i) of this section by the average receivables balance described in paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E)(2)(ii) of this section.

(iv) Step 4. Divide the receivables turnover rate determined under paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E)(2)(iii) of this section into 365, and round the result to the nearest whole number to determine the number of days in the average collection period.

(v) Other considerations. If the related purchaser makes sales in more than one foreign country, or sells property in more than one product group in any foreign country, separate computations of an average collection period, by product group within each country, are required. If the related purchaser resells fungible property in more than one foreign country and the intercompany trade receivables arising from the related party purchase of such fungible property cannot reasonably be identified with resales in particular foreign countries, then solely for the purpose of assigning an interest-free period to such intercompany trade receivables under this paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E), an amount of each such intercompany trade receivable shall be treated as allocable to a particular foreign country in the same proportion that the related purchaser's sales of such fungible property in such foreign country during the period described in paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E)(2)(i) of this section bears to the related purchaser's sales of all such fungible property in all such foreign countries during such period. An interest-free period under this paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E) shall not apply to any intercompany trade receivables arising in a taxable year of the related seller if the related purchaser made no sales described in paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E)(2)(i) of this section from which the appropriate interest-free period may be determined.

(4) Illustration. The interest-free period provided under paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E) of this section may be illustrated by the following example:

(iii)

Interest-free period. Accordingly, for intercompany trade receivables incurred by X during Y's 1988 calendar taxable year attributable to the purchase of property from Y for resale to unrelated persons located in country Z and included in the product group, X may use an interest-free period of 175 days (165 days in the average collection period plus 10 days, but not in excess of a maximum of 183 days). All other intercompany trade receivables incurred by X are subject to the interest-free periods described in paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) (B), (C), or (D), whichever are applicable. If X makes sales in other foreign countries in addition to country Z or makes sales of property in more than one product group in any foreign country, separate computations of X's average collection period, by product group within each country, are required in order for X and Y to determine an interest-free period for such product groups in such foreign countries under this paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E).

(iv)

Payment; book entries—

(A)

Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph (a)(1)(iv), in determining the period of time for which an amount owed by one member of the group to another member is outstanding, payments or other credits to an account are considered to be applied against the earliest amount outstanding, that is, payments or credits are applied against amounts in a first-in, first-out (FIFO) order. Thus, tracing payments to individual intercompany trade receivables is generally not required in order to determine whether a particular intercompany trade receivable has been paid within the applicable interest-free period determined under paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this section. The application of this paragraph (a)(1)(iv)(A) may be illustrated by the following example:

(B)

Notwithstanding the first-in, first-out payment application rule described in paragraph (a)(1)(iv)(A) of this section, the taxpayer may apply payments or credits against amounts owed in some other order on its books in accordance with an agreement or understanding of the related parties if the taxpayer can demonstrate that either it or others in its industry, as a regular trade practice, enter into such agreements or understandings in the case of similar balances with unrelated parties.

(2)

Arm's length interest rate—

(i)

In general. For purposes of section 482 and paragraph (a) of this section, an arm's length rate of interest shall be a rate of interest which was charged, or would have been charged, at the time the indebtedness arose, in independent transactions with or between unrelated parties under similar circumstances. All relevant factors shall be considered, including the principal amount and duration of the loan, the security involved, the credit standing of the borrower, and the interest rate prevailing at the situs of the lender or creditor for comparable loans between unrelated parties.

(ii)

Funds obtained at situs of borrower. Notwithstanding the other provisions of paragraph (a)(2) of this section, if the loan or advance represents the proceeds of a loan obtained by the lender at the situs of the borrower, the arm's length rate for any taxable year shall be equal to the rate actually paid by the lender increased by an amount which reflects the costs or deductions incurred by the lender in borrowing such amounts and making such loans, unless the taxpayer establishes a more appropriate rate under the standards set forth in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section.

(iii)

Safe haven interest rates for certain loans and advances made after May 8, 1986—

(A)

Applicability— (1) General rule. Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, paragraph (a)(2)(iii)(B) applies with respect to the rate of interest charged and to the amount of interest paid or accrued in any taxable year—

(i) Under a term loan or advance between members of a group of controlled entities where (except as provided in paragraph (a)(2)(iii)(A)(2)(ii) of this section) the loan or advance is entered into after May 8, 1986; and

(ii) After May 8, 1986 under a demand loan or advance between such controlled entities.

(2) Grandfather rule for existing loans. The safe haven rates prescribed in paragraph (a)(2)(iii)(B) of this section shall not apply, and the safe haven rates prescribed in § 1.482-2(a)(2)(iii) (26 CFR part 1 edition revised as of April 1, 1985), shall apply to—

(i) Term loans or advances made before May 9, 1986; and

(ii) Term loans or advances made before August 7, 1986, pursuant to a binding written contract entered into before May 9, 1986.

(B)

Safe haven interest rate based on applicable Federal rate. Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph (a)(2), in the case of a loan or advance between members of a group of controlled entities, an arm's length rate of interest referred to in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section shall be for purposes of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code—

(1) The rate of interest actually charged if that rate is—

(i) Not less than 100 percent of the applicable Federal rate (lower limit); and

(ii) Not greater than 130 percent of the applicable Federal rate (upper limit); or

(2) If either no interest is charged or if the rate of interest charged is less than the lower limit, then an arm's length rate of interest shall be equal to the lower limit, compounded semiannually; or

(3) If the rate of interest charged is greater than the upper limit, then an arm's length rate of interest shall be equal to the upper limit, compounded semiannually, unless the taxpayer establishes a more appropriate compound rate of interest under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section. However, if the compound rate of interest actually charged is greater than the upper limit and less than the rate determined under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section, or if the compound rate actually charged is less than the lower limit and greater than the rate determined under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section, then the compound rate actually charged shall be deemed to be an arm's length rate under paragraph (a)(2)(i). In the case of any sale-leaseback described in section 1274(e), the lower limit shall be 110 percent of the applicable Federal rate, compounded semiannually.

(C)

Applicable Federal rate. For purposes of paragraph (a)(2)(iii)(B) of this section, the term applicable Federal rate means, in the case of a loan or advance to which this section applies and having a term of—

(1) Not over 3 years, the Federal short-term rate;

(2) Over 3 years but not over 9 years, the Federal mid-term rate; or

(3) Over 9 years, the Federal long-term rate, as determined under section 1274(d) in effect on the date such loan or advance is made. In the case of any sale or exchange between controlled entities, the lower limit shall be the lowest of the applicable Federal rates in effect for any month in the 3-calendar- month period ending with the first calendar month in which there is a binding written contract in effect for such sale or exchange (lowest 3-month rate, as defined in section 1274(d)(2)). In the case of a demand loan or advance to which this section applies, the applicable Federal rate means the Federal short-term rate determined under section 1274(d) (determined without regard to the lowest 3-month short term rate determined under section 1274(d)(2)) in effect for each day on which any amount of such loan or advance (including unpaid accrued interest determined under paragraph (a)(2) of this section) is outstanding.

(D)

Lender in business of making loans. If the lender in a loan or advance transaction to which paragraph (a)(2) of this section applies is regularly engaged in the trade or business of making loans or advances to unrelated parties, the safe haven rates prescribed in paragraph (a)(2)(iii)(B) of this section shall not apply, and the arm's length interest rate to be used shall be determined under the standards described in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section, including reference to the interest rates charged in such trade or business by the lender on loans or advances of a similar type made to unrelated parties at and about the time the loan or advance to which paragraph (a)(2) of this section applies was made.

(E)

Foreign currency loans. The safe haven interest rates prescribed in paragraph (a)(2)(iii)(B) of this section do not apply to any loan or advance the principal or interest of which is expressed in a currency other than U.S. dollars.

(3)

Coordination with interest adjustments required under certain other Code sections. If the stated rate of interest on the stated principal amount of a loan or advance between controlled entities is subject to adjustment under section 482 and is also subject to adjustment under any other section of the Internal Revenue Code (for example, section 467, 483, 1274 or 7872), section 482 and paragraph (a) of this section may be applied to such loan or advance in addition to such other Internal Revenue Code section. After the enactment of the Tax Reform Act of 1964, Pub. L. 98-369, and the enactment of Pub. L. 99-121, such other Internal Revenue Code sections include sections 467, 483, 1274 and 7872. The order in which the different provisions shall be applied is as follows—

(i)

First, the substance of the transaction shall be determined; for this purpose, all the relevant facts and circumstances shall be considered and any law or rule of law (assignment of income, step transaction, etc.) may apply. Only the rate of interest with respect to the stated principal amount of the bona fide indebtedness (within the meaning of paragraph (a)(1) of this section), if any, shall be subject to adjustment under section 482, paragraph (a) of this section, and any other Internal Revenue Code section.

(ii)

Second, the other Internal Revenue Code section shall be applied to the loan or advance to determine whether any amount other than stated interest is to be treated as interest, and if so, to determine such amount according to the provisions of such other Internal Revenue Code section.

(iii)

Third, whether or not the other Internal Revenue Code section applies to adjust the amounts treated as interest under such loan or advance, section 482 and paragraph (a) of this section may then be applied by the district director to determine whether the rate of interest charged on the loan or advance, as adjusted by any other Code section, is greater or less than an arm's length rate of interest, and if so, to make appropriate allocations to reflect an arm's length rate of interest.

(iv)

Fourth, section 482 and paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section and §§ 1.482-3 through 1.482-7, if applicable, may be applied by the district director to make any appropriate allocations, other than an interest rate adjustment, to reflect an arm's length transaction based upon the principal amount of the loan or advance and the interest rate as adjusted under paragraph (a)(3) (i), (ii) or (iii) of this section. For example, assume that two commonly controlled taxpayers enter into a deferred payment sale of tangible property and no interest is provided, and assume also that section 483 is applied to treat a portion of the stated sales price as interest, thereby reducing the stated sales price. If after this recharacterization of a portion of the stated sales price as interest, the recomputed sales price does not reflect an arm's length sales price under the principles of § 1.482-3, the district director may make other appropriate allocations (other than an interest rate adjustment) to reflect an arm's length sales price.

(4)

Examples. The principles of paragraph (a)(3) of this section may be illustrated by the following examples:

(b)

Rendering of services. For rules governing allocations under section 482 to reflect an arm's length charge for controlled transactions involving the rendering of services, see § 1.482-9.

(c)

Use of tangible property—

(1)

General rule. Where possession, use, or occupancy of tangible property owned or leased by one member of a group of controlled entities (referred to in this paragraph as the owner) is transferred by lease or other arrangement to another member of such group (referred to in this paragraph as the user) without charge or at a charge which is not equal to an arm's length rental charge (as defined in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section) the district director may make appropriate allocations to properly reflect such arm's length charge. Where possession, use, or occupancy of only a portion of such property is transferred, the determination of the arm's length charge and the allocation shall be made with reference to the portion transferred.

(2)

Arm's length charge—

(i)

In general. For purposes of paragraph (c) of this section, an arm's length rental charge shall be the amount of rent which was charged, or would have been charged for the use of the same or similar property, during the time it was in use, in independent transactions with or between unrelated parties under similar circumstances considering the period and location of the use, the owner's investment in the property or rent paid for the property, expenses of maintaining the property, the type of property involved, its condition, and all other relevant facts.

(ii)

Safe haven rental charge. See § 1.482-2(c)(2)(ii) (26 CFR Part 1 revised as of April 1, 1985), for the determination of safe haven rental charges in the case of certain leases entered into before May 9, 1986, and for leases entered into before August 7, 1986, pursuant to a binding written contract entered into before May 9, 1986.

(iii)

Subleases—

(A)

Except as provided in paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(B) of this section, where possession, use, or occupancy of tangible property, which is leased by the owner (lessee) from an unrelated party is transferred by sublease or other arrangement to the user, an arm's length rental charge shall be considered to be equal to all the deductions claimed by the owner (lessee) which are attributable to the property for the period such property is used by the user. Where only a portion of such property was transferred, any allocations shall be made with reference to the portion transferred. The deductions to be considered include the rent paid or accrued by the owner (lessee) during the period of use and all other deductions directly and indirectly connected with the property paid or accrued by the owner (lessee) during such period. Such deductions include deductions for maintenance and repair, utilities, management and other similar deductions.

(B)

The provisions of paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(A) of this section shall not apply if either—

(1) The taxpayer establishes a more appropriate rental charge under the general rule set forth in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section; or

(2) During the taxable year, the owner (lessee) or the user was regularly engaged in the trade or business of renting property of the same general type as the property in question to unrelated persons.

(d)

Transfer of property. For rules governing allocations under section 482 to reflect an arm's length consideration for controlled transactions involving the transfer of property, see §§ 1.482-3 through 1.482-6.

(e)

Cost sharing arrangement. For rules governing allocations under section 482 to reflect an arm's length consideration for controlled transactions involving a cost sharing arrangement, see § 1.482-7.

(f)

Effective/applicability date—

(1)

In general. The provision of paragraph (b) of this section is generally applicable for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2006. The provision of paragraph (e) of this section is generally applicable on January 5, 2009.

(2)

Election to apply paragraph (b) to earlier taxable years. A person may elect to apply the provisions of paragraph (b) of this section to earlier taxable years in accordance with the rules set forth in § 1.482-9(n)(2).

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[T.D. 8552, 59 FR 35002, July 8, 1994; 60 FR 16381, 16382, Mar. 30, 1995; T.D. 9278, 71 FR 44484, Aug. 4, 2006; T.D. 9456, 74 FR 38842, Aug. 4, 2009; T.D. 9568, 76 FR 80090, Dec. 22, 2011]

Authority

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960; T.D. 9989, 89 FR 17606, Mar. 11, 2024, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, T.D. 9381, 73 FR 8604, Feb. 15, 2008, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11607, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11737, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11814, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11910, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted. RELATED RULES

Amendments

[T.D. 9169, 69 FR 78154, Dec. 29, 2004]

Amendments

[T.D. 8552, 59 FR 35002, July 8, 1994; 60 FR 16381, 16382, Mar. 30, 1995; T.D. 9278, 71 FR 44484, Aug. 4, 2006; T.D. 9456, 74 FR 38842, Aug. 4, 2009; T.D. 9568, 76 FR 80090, Dec. 22, 2011]

§1.482-3. Methods to determine taxable income in connection with a transfer of tangible property.

26 C.F.R. § 1.482-3

(a)

In general. The arm's length amount charged in a controlled transfer of tangible property must be determined under one of the six methods listed in this paragraph (a). Each of the methods must be applied in accordance with all of the provisions of § 1.482-1, including the best method rule of § 1.482-1(c), the comparability analysis of § 1.482-1(d), and the arm's length range of § 1.482-1(e). The methods are—

(1)

The comparable uncontrolled price method, described in paragraph (b) of this section;

(2)

The resale price method, described in paragraph (c) of this section;

(3)

The cost plus method, described in paragraph (d) of this section;

(4)

The comparable profits method, described in § 1.482-5;

(5)

The profit split method, described in § 1.482-6; and

(6)

Unspecified methods, described in paragraph (e) of this section.

(b)

Comparable uncontrolled price method—

(1)

In general. The comparable uncontrolled price method evaluates whether the amount charged in a controlled transaction is arm's length by reference to the amount charged in a comparable uncontrolled transaction.

(2)

Comparability and reliability considerations—

(i)

In general. Whether results derived from applications of this method are the most reliable measure of the arm's length result must be determined using the factors described under the best method rule in § 1.482-1(c). The application of these factors under the comparable uncontrolled price method is discussed in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) and (iii) of this section.

(ii)

Comparability—

(A)

In general. The degree of comparability between controlled and uncontrolled transactions is determined by applying the provisions of § 1.482-1(d). Although all of the factors described in § 1.482-1(d)(3) must be considered, similarity of products generally will have the greatest effect on comparability under this method. In addition, because even minor differences in contractual terms or economic conditions could materially affect the amount charged in an uncontrolled transaction, comparability under this method depends on close similarity with respect to these factors, or adjustments to account for any differences. The results derived from applying the comparable uncontrolled price method generally will be the most direct and reliable measure of an arm's length price for the controlled transaction if an uncontrolled transaction has no differences with the controlled transaction that would affect the price, or if there are only minor differences that have a definite and reasonably ascertainable effect on price and for which appropriate adjustments are made. If such adjustments cannot be made, or if there are more than minor differences between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions, the comparable uncontrolled price method may be used, but the reliability of the results as a measure of the arm's length price will be reduced. Further, if there are material product differences for which reliable adjustments cannot be made, this method ordinarily will not provide a reliable measure of an arm's length result.

(B)

Adjustments for differences between controlled and uncontrolled transactions. If there are differences between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions that would affect price, adjustments should be made to the price of the uncontrolled transaction according to the comparability provisions of § 1.482-1(d)(2). Specific examples of the factors that may be particularly relevant to this method include—

(1) Quality of the product;

(2) Contractual terms (e.g., scope and terms of warranties provided, sales or purchase volume, credit terms, transport terms);

(3) Level of the market (i.e., wholesale, retail, etc.);

(4) Geographic market in which the transaction takes place;

(5) Date of the transaction;

(6) Intangible property associated with the sale;

(7) Foreign currency risks; and

(8) Alternatives realistically available to the buyer and seller.

(iii)

Data and assumptions. The reliability of the results derived from the comparable uncontrolled price method is affected by the completeness and accuracy of the data used and the reliability of the assumptions made to apply the method. See § 1.482-1(c) (Best method rule).

(3)

Arm's length range. See § 1.482-1(e)(2) for the determination of an arm's length range.

(4)

Examples. The principles of this paragraph (b) are illustrated by the following examples.

(5)

Indirect evidence of comparable uncontrolled transactions—

(i)

In general. A comparable uncontrolled price may be derived from data from public exchanges or quotation media, but only if the following requirements are met—

(A)

The data is widely and routinely used in the ordinary course of business in the industry to negotiate prices for uncontrolled sales;

(B)

The data derived from public exchanges or quotation media is used to set prices in the controlled transaction in the same way it is used by uncontrolled taxpayers in the industry; and

(C)

The amount charged in the controlled transaction is adjusted to reflect differences in product quality and quantity, contractual terms, transportation costs, market conditions, risks borne, and other factors that affect the price that would be agreed to by uncontrolled taxpayers.

(ii)

Limitation. Use of data from public exchanges or quotation media may not be appropriate under extraordinary market conditions.

(iii)

Examples. The following examples illustrate this paragraph (b)(5).

(c)

Resale price method—

(1)

In general. The resale price method evaluates whether the amount charged in a controlled transaction is arm's length by reference to the gross profit margin realized in comparable uncontrolled transactions. The resale price method measures the value of functions performed, and is ordinarily used in cases involving the purchase and resale of tangible property in which the reseller has not added substantial value to the tangible goods by physically altering the goods before resale. For this purpose, packaging, repackaging, labelling, or minor assembly do not ordinarily constitute physical alteration. Further the resale price method is not ordinarily used in cases where the controlled taxpayer uses its intangible property to add substantial value to the tangible goods.

(2)

Determination of arm's length price—

(i)

In general. The resale price method measures an arm's length price by subtracting the appropriate gross profit from the applicable resale price for the property involved in the controlled transaction under review.

(ii)

Applicable resale price. The applicable resale price is equal to either the resale price of the particular item of property involved or the price at which contemporaneous resales of the same property are made. If the property purchased in the controlled sale is resold to one or more related parties in a series of controlled sales before being resold in an uncontrolled sale, the applicable resale price is the price at which the property is resold to an uncontrolled party, or the price at which contemporaneous resales of the same property are made. In such case, the determination of the appropriate gross profit will take into account the functions of all members of the group participating in the series of controlled sales and final uncontrolled resales, as well as any other relevant factors described in § 1.482-1(d)(3).

(iii)

Appropriate gross profit. The appropriate gross profit is computed by multiplying the applicable resale price by the gross profit margin (expressed as a percentage of total revenue derived from sales) earned in comparable uncontrolled transactions.

(iv)

Arm's length range. See § 1.482-1(e)(2) for determination of the arm's length range.

(3)

Comparability and reliability considerations—

(i)

In general. Whether results derived from applications of this method are the most reliable measure of the arm's length result must be determined using the factors described under the best method rule in § 1.482-1(c). The application of these factors under the resale price method is discussed in paragraphs (c)(3) (ii) and (iii) of this section.

(ii)

Comparability—

(A)

Functional comparability. The degree of comparability between an uncontrolled transaction and a controlled transaction is determined by applying the comparability provisions of § 1.482-1(d). A reseller's gross profit provides compensation for the performance of resale functions related to the product or products under review, including an operating profit in return for the reseller's investment of capital and the assumption of risks. Therefore, although all of the factors described in § 1.482-1(d)(3) must be considered, comparability under this method is particularly dependent on similarity of functions performed, risks borne, and contractual terms, or adjustments to account for the effects of any such differences. If possible, appropriate gross profit margins should be derived from comparable uncontrolled purchases and resales of the reseller involved in the controlled sale, because similar characteristics are more likely to be found among different resales of property made by the same reseller than among sales made by other resellers. In the absence of comparable uncontrolled transactions involving the same reseller, an appropriate gross profit margin may be derived from comparable uncontrolled transactions of other resellers.

(B)

Other comparability factors. Comparability under this method is less dependent on close physical similarity between the products transferred than under the comparable uncontrolled price method. For example, distributors of a wide variety of consumer durables might perform comparable distribution functions without regard to the specific durable goods distributed. Substantial differences in the products may, however, indicate significant functional differences between the controlled and uncontrolled taxpayers. Thus, it ordinarily would be expected that the controlled and uncontrolled transactions would involve the distribution of products of the same general type (e.g., consumer electronics). Furthermore, significant differences in the value of the distributed goods due, for example, to the value of a trademark, may also affect the reliability of the comparison. Finally, the reliability of profit measures based on gross profit may be adversely affected by factors that have less effect on prices. For example, gross profit may be affected by a variety of other factors, including cost structures (as reflected, for example, in the age of plant and equipment), business experience (such as whether the business is in a start-up phase or is mature), or management efficiency (as indicated, for example, by expanding or contracting sales or executive compensation over time). Accordingly, if material differences in these factors are identified based on objective evidence, the reliability of the analysis may be affected.

(C)

Adjustments for differences between controlled and uncontrolled transactions. If there are material differences between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions that would affect the gross profit margin, adjustments should be made to the gross profit margin earned with respect to the uncontrolled transaction according to the comparability provisions of § 1.482-1(d)(2). For this purpose, consideration of operating expenses associated with functions performed and risks assumed may be necessary, because differences in functions performed are often reflected in operating expenses. If there are differences in functions performed, however, the effect on gross profit of such differences is not necessarily equal to the differences in the amount of related operating expenses. Specific examples of the factors that may be particularly relevant to this method include—

(1) Inventory levels and turnover rates, and corresponding risks, including any price protection programs offered by the manufacturer;

(2) Contractual terms (e.g., scope and terms of warranties provided, sales or purchase volume, credit terms, transport terms);

(3) Sales, marketing, advertising programs and services, (including promotional programs, rebates, and co-op advertising);

(4) The level of the market (e.g., wholesale, retail, etc.); and

(5) Foreign currency risks.

(D)

Sales agent. If the controlled taxpayer is comparable to a sales agent that does not take title to goods or otherwise assume risks with respect to ownership of such goods, the commission earned by such sales agent, expressed as a percentage of the uncontrolled sales price of the goods involved, may be used as the comparable gross profit margin.

(iii)

Data and assumptions—

(A)

In general. The reliability of the results derived from the resale price method is affected by the completeness and accuracy of the data used and the reliability of the assumptions made to apply this method. See § 1.482-1(c) (Best method rule).

(B)

Consistency in accounting. The degree of consistency in accounting practices between the controlled transaction and the uncontrolled comparables that materially affect the gross profit margin affects the reliability of the result. Thus, for example, if differences in inventory and other cost accounting practices would materially affect the gross profit margin, the ability to make reliable adjustments for such differences would affect the reliability of the results. Further, the controlled transaction and the uncontrolled comparable should be consistent in the reporting of items (such as discounts, returns and allowances, rebates, transportation costs, insurance, and packaging) between cost of goods sold and operating expenses.

(4)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (c).

(d)

Cost plus method—

(1)

In general. The cost plus method evaluates whether the amount charged in a controlled transaction is arm's length by reference to the gross profit markup realized in comparable uncontrolled transactions. The cost plus method is ordinarily used in cases involving the manufacture, assembly, or other production of goods that are sold to related parties.

(2)

Determination of arm's length price—

(i)

In general. The cost plus method measures an arm's length price by adding the appropriate gross profit to the controlled taxpayer's costs of producing the property involved in the controlled transaction.

(ii)

Appropriate gross profit. The appropriate gross profit is computed by multiplying the controlled taxpayer's cost of producing the transferred property by the gross profit markup, expressed as a percentage of cost, earned in comparable uncontrolled transactions.

(iii)

Arm's length range. See § 1.482-1(e)(2) for determination of an arm's length range.

(3)

Comparability and reliability considerations—

(i)

In general. Whether results derived from the application of this method are the most reliable measure of the arm's length result must be determined using the factors described under the best method rule in § 1.482-1(c).

(ii)

Comparability—

(A)

(B)

Other comparability factors. Comparability under this method is less dependent on close physical similarity between the products transferred than under the comparable uncontrolled price method. Substantial differences in the products may, however, indicate significant functional differences between the controlled and uncontrolled taxpayers. Thus, it ordinarily would be expected that the controlled and uncontrolled transactions involve the production of goods within the same product categories. Furthermore, significant differences in the value of the products due, for example, to the value of a trademark, may also affect the reliability of the comparison. Finally, the reliability of profit measures based on gross profit may be adversely affected by factors that have less effect on prices. For example, gross profit may be affected by a variety of other factors, including cost structures (as reflected, for example, in the age of plant and equipment), business experience (such as whether the business is in a start-up phase or is mature), or management efficiency (as indicated, for example, by expanding or contracting sales or executive compensation over time). Accordingly, if material differences in these factors are identified based on objective evidence, the reliability of the analysis may be affected.

(C)

Adjustments for differences between controlled and uncontrolled transactions. If there are material differences between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions that would affect the gross profit markup, adjustments should be made to the gross profit markup earned in the comparable uncontrolled transaction according to the provisions of § 1.482-1(d)(2). For this purpose, consideration of the operating expenses associated with the functions performed and risks assumed may be necessary, because differences in functions performed are often reflected in operating expenses. If there are differences in functions performed, however, the effect on gross profit of such differences is not necessarily equal to the differences in the amount of related operating expenses. Specific examples of the factors that may be particularly relevant to this method include—

(1) The complexity of manufacturing or assembly;

(2) Manufacturing, production, and process engineering;

(3) Procurement, purchasing, and inventory control activities;

(4) Testing functions;

(5) Selling, general, and administrative expenses;

(6) Foreign currency risks; and

(7) Contractual terms (e.g., scope and terms of warranties provided, sales or purchase volume, credit terms, transport terms).

(D)

Purchasing agent. If a controlled taxpayer is comparable to a purchasing agent that does not take title to property or otherwise assume risks with respect to ownership of such goods, the commission earned by such purchasing agent, expressed as a percentage of the purchase price of the goods, may be used as the appropriate gross profit markup.

(iii)

Data and assumptions—

(A)

In general. The reliability of the results derived from the cost plus method is affected by the completeness and accuracy of the data used and the reliability of the assumptions made to apply this method. See § 1.482-1(c) (Best method rule).

(B)

Consistency in accounting. The degree of consistency in accounting practices between the controlled transaction and the uncontrolled comparables that materially affect the gross profit markup affects the reliability of the result. Thus, for example, if differences in inventory and other cost accounting practices would materially affect the gross profit markup, the ability to make reliable adjustments for such differences would affect the reliability of the results. Further, the controlled transaction and the comparable uncontrolled transaction should be consistent in the reporting of costs between cost of goods sold and operating expenses. The term cost of producing includes the cost of acquiring property that is held for resale.

(4)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (d).

(e)

Unspecified methods—

(1)

In general. Methods not specified in paragraphs (a)(1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) of this section may be used to evaluate whether the amount charged in a controlled transaction is arm's length. Any method used under this paragraph (e) must be applied in accordance with the provisions of § 1.482-1. Consistent with the specified methods, an unspecified method should take into account the general principle that uncontrolled taxpayers evaluate the terms of a transaction by considering the realistic alternatives to that transaction, and only enter into a particular transaction if none of the alternatives is preferable to it. For example, the comparable uncontrolled price method compares a controlled transaction to similar uncontrolled transactions to provide a direct estimate of the price to which the parties would have agreed had they resorted directly to a market alternative to the controlled transaction. Therefore, in establishing whether a controlled transaction achieved an arm's length result, an unspecified method should provide information on the prices or profits that the controlled taxpayer could have realized by choosing a realistic alternative to the controlled transaction. As with any method, an unspecified method will not be applied unless it provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result under the principles of the best method rule. See § 1.482-1(c). Therefore, in accordance with § 1.482-1(d) (Comparability), to the extent that a method relies on internal data rather than uncontrolled comparables, its reliability will be reduced. Similarly, the reliability of a method will be affected by the reliability of the data and assumptions used to apply the method, including any projections used.

(2)

Example. The following example illustrates an application of the principle of this paragraph (e).

(f)

Coordination with intangible property rules. The value of an item of tangible property may be affected by the value of intangible property, such as a trademark affixed to the tangible property (embedded intangible). Ordinarily, the transfer of tangible property with an embedded intangible will not be considered a transfer of such intangible if the controlled purchaser does not acquire any rights to exploit the intangible property other than rights relating to the resale of the tangible property under normal commercial practices. Pursuant to § 1.482-1(d)(3)(v), however, the embedded intangible must be accounted for in evaluating the comparability of the controlled transaction and uncontrolled comparables. For example, because product comparability has the greatest effect on an application of the comparable uncontrolled price method, trademarked tangible property may be insufficiently comparable to unbranded tangible property to permit a reliable application of the comparable uncontrolled price method. The effect of embedded intangibles on comparability will be determined under the principles of § 1.482-4. If the transfer of tangible property conveys to the recipient a right to exploit an embedded intangible (other than in connection with the resale of that item of tangible property), it may be necessary to determine the arm's length consideration for such intangible separately from the tangible property, applying methods appropriate to determining the arm's length result for a transfer of intangible property under § 1.482-4. For example, if the transfer of a machine conveys the right to exploit a manufacturing process incorporated in the machine, then the arm's length consideration for the transfer of that right must be determined separately under § 1.482-4.

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[T.D. 8552, 59 FR 35011, July 8, 1994; 60 FR 16382, Mar. 30, 1995]

Authority

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960; T.D. 9989, 89 FR 17606, Mar. 11, 2024, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, T.D. 9381, 73 FR 8604, Feb. 15, 2008, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11607, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11737, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11814, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11910, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted. RELATED RULES

Amendments

[T.D. 9169, 69 FR 78154, Dec. 29, 2004]

Amendments

[T.D. 8552, 59 FR 35011, July 8, 1994; 60 FR 16382, Mar. 30, 1995]

§1.482-4. Methods to determine taxable income in connection with a transfer of intangible property.

26 C.F.R. § 1.482-4

(a)

In general. The arm's length amount charged in a controlled transfer of intangible property must be determined under one of the four methods listed in this paragraph (a). Each of the methods must be applied in accordance with all of the provisions of § 1.482-1, including the best method rule of § 1.482-1(c), the comparability analysis of § 1.482-1(d), and the arm's length range of § 1.482-1(e). The arm's length consideration for the transfer of an intangible determined under this section must be commensurate with the income attributable to the intangible. See § 1.482-4(f)(2) (Periodic adjustments). The available methods are—

(1)

The comparable uncontrolled transaction method, described in paragraph (c) of this section;

(2)

The comparable profits method, described in § 1.482-5;

(3)

The profit split method, described in § 1.482-6; and

(4)

Unspecified methods described in paragraph (d) of this section.

(b)

Definition of intangible. For purposes of section 482, an intangible is an asset that comprises any of the following items and has substantial value independent of the services of any individual—

(1)

Patents, inventions, formulae, processes, designs, patterns, or know-how;

(2)

Copyrights and literary, musical, or artistic compositions;

(3)

Trademarks, trade names, or brand names;

(4)

Franchises, licenses, or contracts;

(5)

Methods, programs, systems, procedures, campaigns, surveys, studies, forecasts, estimates, customer lists, or technical data; and

(6)

Other similar items. For purposes of section 482, an item is considered similar to those listed in paragraph (b)(1) through (5) of this section if it derives its value not from its physical attributes but from its intellectual content or other intangible properties.

(c)

Comparable uncontrolled transaction method—

(1)

In general. The comparable uncontrolled transaction method evaluates whether the amount charged for a controlled transfer of intangible property was arm's length by reference to the amount charged in a comparable uncontrolled transaction. The amount determined under this method may be adjusted as required by paragraph (f)(2) of this section (Periodic adjustments).

(2)

Comparability and reliability considerations—

(i)

In general. Whether results derived from applications of this method are the most reliable measure of an arm's length result is determined using the factors described under the best method rule in § 1.482-1(c). The application of these factors under the comparable uncontrolled transaction method is discussed in paragraphs (c)(2)(ii), (iii), and (iv) of this section.

(ii)

Reliability. If an uncontrolled transaction involves the transfer of the same intangible under the same, or substantially the same, circumstances as the controlled transaction, the results derived from applying the comparable uncontrolled transaction method will generally be the most direct and reliable measure of the arm's length result for the controlled transfer of an intangible. Circumstances between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions will be considered substantially the same if there are at most only minor differences that have a definite and reasonably ascertainable effect on the amount charged and for which appropriate adjustments are made. If such uncontrolled transactions cannot be identified, uncontrolled transactions that involve the transfer of comparable intangibles under comparable circumstances may be used to apply this method, but the reliability of the analysis will be reduced.

(iii)

Comparability—

(A)

In general. The degree of comparability between controlled and uncontrolled transactions is determined by applying the comparability provisions of § 1.482-1(d). Although all of the factors described in § 1.482-1(d)(3) must be considered, specific factors may be particularly relevant to this method. In particular, the application of this method requires that the controlled and uncontrolled transactions involve either the same intangible property or comparable intangible property, as defined in paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(B)(1) of this section. In addition, because differences in contractual terms, or the economic conditions in which transactions take place, could materially affect the amount charged, comparability under this method also depends on similarity with respect to these factors, or adjustments to account for material differences in such circumstances.

(B)

Factors to be considered in determining comparability— (1) Comparable intangible property. In order for the intangible property involved in an uncontrolled transaction to be considered comparable to the intangible property involved in the controlled transaction, both intangibles must—

(i) Be used in connection with similar products or processes within the same general industry or market; and

(ii) Have similar profit potential. The profit potential of an intangible is most reliably measured by directly calculating the net present value of the benefits to be realized (based on prospective profits to be realized or costs to be saved) through the use or subsequent transfer of the intangible, considering the capital investment and start-up expenses required, the risks to be assumed, and other relevant considerations. The need to reliably measure profit potential increases in relation to both the total amount of potential profits and the potential rate of return on investment necessary to exploit the intangible. If the information necessary to directly calculate net present value of the benefits to be realized is unavailable, and the need to reliably measure profit potential is reduced because the potential profits are relatively small in terms of total amount and rate of return, comparison of profit potential may be based upon the factors referred to in paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(B)(2) of this section. See Example 3 of § 1.482-4(c)(4). Finally, the reliability of a measure of profit potential is affected by the extent to which the profit attributable to the intangible can be isolated from the profit attributable to other factors, such as functions performed and other resources employed.

(2) Comparable circumstances. In evaluating the comparability of the circumstances of the controlled and uncontrolled transactions, although all of the factors described in § 1.482-1(d)(3) must be considered, specific factors that may be particularly relevant to this method include the following—

(i) The terms of the transfer, including the exploitation rights granted in the intangible, the exclusive or nonexclusive character of any rights granted, any restrictions on use, or any limitations on the geographic area in which the rights may be exploited;

(ii) The stage of development of the intangible (including, where appropriate, necessary governmental approvals, authorizations, or licenses) in the market in which the intangible is to be used;

(iii) Rights to receive updates, revisions, or modifications of the intangible;

(iv) The uniqueness of the property and the period for which it remains unique, including the degree and duration of protection afforded to the property under the laws of the relevant countries;

(v) The duration of the license, contract, or other agreement, and any termination or renegotiation rights;

(vi) Any economic and product liability risks to be assumed by the transferee;

(vii) The existence and extent of any collateral transactions or ongoing business relationships between the transferee and transferor; and

(viii) The functions to be performed by the transferor and transferee, including any ancillary or subsidiary services.

(iv)

Data and assumptions. The reliability of the results derived from the comparable uncontrolled transaction method is affected by the completeness and accuracy of the data used and the reliability of the assumptions made to apply this method. See § 1.482-1(c) (Best method rule).

(3)

Arm's length range. See § 1.482-1(e)(2) for the determination of an arm's length range.

(4)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (c).

(d)

Unspecified methods—

(1)

In general. Methods not specified in paragraphs (a)(1), (2), and (3) of this section may be used to evaluate whether the amount charged in a controlled transaction is arm's length. Any method used under this paragraph (d) must be applied in accordance with the provisions of § 1.482-1. Consistent with the specified methods, an unspecified method should take into account the general principle that uncontrolled taxpayers evaluate the terms of a transaction by considering the realistic alternatives to that transaction, and only enter into a particular transaction if none of the alternatives is preferable to it. For example, the comparable uncontrolled transaction method compares a controlled transaction to similar uncontrolled transactions to provide a direct estimate of the price the parties would have agreed to had they resorted directly to a market alternative to the controlled transaction. Therefore, in establishing whether a controlled transaction achieved an arm's length result, an unspecified method should provide information on the prices or profits that the controlled taxpayer could have realized by choosing a realistic alternative to the controlled transaction. As with any method, an unspecified method will not be applied unless it provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result under the principles of the best method rule. See § 1.482-1(c). Therefore, in accordance with § 1.482-1(d) (Comparability), to the extent that a method relies on internal data rather than uncontrolled comparables, its reliability will be reduced. Similarly, the reliability of a method will be affected by the reliability of the data and assumptions used to apply the method, including any projections used.

(2)

Example. The following example illustrates an application of the principle of this paragraph (d).

(e)

Coordination with tangible property rules. See § 1.482-3(f) for the provisions regarding the coordination between the tangible property and intangible property rules.

(f)

Special rules for transfers of intangible property—

(1)

Form of consideration. If a transferee of an intangible pays nominal or no consideration and the transferor has retained a substantial interest in the property, the arm's length consideration shall be in the form of a royalty, unless a different form is demonstrably more appropriate.

(2)

Periodic adjustments—

(i)

General rule. If an intangible is transferred under an arrangement that covers more than one year, the consideration charged in each taxable year may be adjusted to ensure that it is commensurate with the income attributable to the intangible. Adjustments made pursuant to this paragraph (f)(2) shall be consistent with the arm's length standard and the provisions of § 1.482-1. In determining whether to make such adjustments in the taxable year under examination, the district director may consider all relevant facts and circumstances throughout the period the intangible is used. The determination in an earlier year that the amount charged for an intangible was an arm's length amount will not preclude the district director in a subsequent taxable year from making an adjustment to the amount charged for the intangible in the subsequent year. A periodic adjustment under the commensurate with income requirement of section 482 may be made in a subsequent taxable year without regard to whether the taxable year of the original transfer remains open for statute of limitation purposes. For exceptions to this rule see paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of this section.

(ii)

Exceptions—

(A)

Transactions involving the same intangible. If the same intangible was transferred to an uncontrolled taxpayer under substantially the same circumstances as those of the controlled transaction; this transaction serves as the basis for the application of the comparable uncontrolled transaction method in the first taxable year in which substantial periodic consideration was required to be paid; and the amount paid in that year was an arm's length amount, then no allocation in a subsequent year will be made under paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this paragraph for a controlled transfer of intangible property.

(B)

Transactions involving comparable intangible. If the arm's length result is derived from the application of the comparable uncontrolled transaction method based on the transfer of a comparable intangible under comparable circumstances to those of the controlled transaction, no allocation will be made under paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section if each of the following facts is established—

(1) The controlled taxpayers entered into a written agreement (controlled agreement) that provided for an amount of consideration with respect to each taxable year subject to such agreement, such consideration was an arm's length amount for the first taxable year in which substantial periodic consideration was required to be paid under the agreement, and such agreement remained in effect for the taxable year under review;

(2) There is a written agreement setting forth the terms of the comparable uncontrolled transaction relied upon to establish the arm's length consideration (uncontrolled agreement), which contains no provisions that would permit any change to the amount of consideration, a renegotiation, or a termination of the agreement, in circumstances comparable to those of the controlled transaction in the taxable year under review (or that contains provisions permitting only specified, non-contingent, periodic changes to the amount of consideration);

(3) The controlled agreement is substantially similar to the uncontrolled agreement, with respect to the time period for which it is effective and the provisions described in paragraph (f)(2)(ii)(B)(2) of this section;

(4) The controlled agreement limits use of the intangible to a specified field or purpose in a manner that is consistent with industry practice and any such limitation in the uncontrolled agreement;

(5) There were no substantial changes in the functions performed by the controlled transferee after the controlled agreement was executed, except changes required by events that were not foreseeable; and

(6) The aggregate profits actually earned or the aggregate cost savings actually realized by the controlled taxpayer from the exploitation of the intangible in the year under examination, and all past years, are not less than 80% nor more than 120% of the prospective profits or cost savings that were foreseeable when the comparability of the uncontrolled agreement was established under paragraph (c)(2) of this section.

(C)

Methods other than comparable uncontrolled transaction. If the arm's length amount was determined under any method other than the comparable uncontrolled transaction method, no allocation will be made under paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section if each of the following facts is established—

(2) The consideration called for in the controlled agreement was an arm's length amount for the first taxable year in which substantial periodic consideration was required to be paid, and relevant supporting documentation was prepared contemporaneously with the execution of the controlled agreement;

(3) There have been no substantial changes in the functions performed by the transferee since the controlled agreement was executed, except changes required by events that were not foreseeable; and

(4) The total profits actually earned or the total cost savings realized by the controlled transferee from the exploitation of the intangible in the year under examination, and all past years, are not less than 80% nor more than 120% of the prospective profits or cost savings that were foreseeable when the controlled agreement was entered into.

(D)

Extraordinary events. No allocation will be made under paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section if the following requirements are met—

(1) Due to extraordinary events that were beyond the control of the controlled taxpayers and that could not reasonably have been anticipated at the time the controlled agreement was entered into, the aggregate actual profits or aggregate cost savings realized by the taxpayer are less than 80% or more than 120% of the prospective profits or cost savings; and

(2) All of the requirements of paragraph (f)(2)(ii) (B) or (C) of this section are otherwise satisfied.

(E)

Five-year period. If the requirements of § 1.482-4 (f)(2)(ii)(B) or (f)(2)(ii)(C) are met for each year of the five-year period beginning with the first year in which substantial periodic consideration was required to be paid, then no periodic adjustment will be made under paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section in any subsequent year.

(iii)

Examples. The following examples illustrate this paragraph (f)(2).

(3)

Ownership of intangible property—

(i)

Identification of owner—

(A)

In general. The legal owner of intangible property pursuant to the intellectual property law of the relevant jurisdiction, or the holder of rights constituting an intangible property pursuant to contractual terms (such as the terms of a license) or other legal provision, will be considered the sole owner of the respective intangible property for purposes of this section unless such ownership is inconsistent with the economic substance of the underlying transactions. See § 1.482-1(d)(3)(ii)(B) (identifying contractual terms). If no owner of the respective intangible property is identified under the intellectual property law of the relevant jurisdiction, or pursuant to contractual terms (including terms imputed pursuant to § 1.482-1(d)(3)(ii)(B)) or other legal provision, then the controlled taxpayer who has control of the intangible property, based on all the facts and circumstances, will be considered the sole owner of the intangible property for purposes of this section.

(B)

Cost sharing arrangements. The rules in this paragraph (f)(3) regarding ownership with respect to cost shared intangibles and cost sharing arrangements will apply only as provided in § 1.482-7.

(ii)

Examples. The principles of this paragraph (f)(3) are illustrated by the following examples:

(4)

Contribution to the value of intangible property owned by another—

(i)

In general. The arm's length consideration for a contribution by one controlled taxpayer that develops or enhances the value, or may be reasonably anticipated to develop or enhance the value, of intangible property owned by another controlled taxpayer will be determined in accordance with the applicable rules under section 482. If the consideration for such a contribution is embedded within the contractual terms for a controlled transaction that involves such intangible property, then ordinarily no separate allocation will be made with respect to such contribution. In such cases, pursuant to § 1.482-1(d)(3), the contribution must be accounted for in evaluating the comparability of the controlled transaction to uncontrolled comparables, and accordingly in determining the arm's length consideration in the controlled transaction.

(ii)

Examples. The principles of this paragraph (f)(4) are illustrated by the following examples:

(5)

Consideration not artificially limited. The arm's length consideration for the controlled transfer of an intangible is not limited by the consideration paid in any uncontrolled transactions that do not meet the requirements of the comparable uncontrolled transaction method described in paragraph (c) of this section. Similarly, the arm's length consideration for an intangible is not limited by the prevailing rates of consideration paid for the use or transfer of intangibles within the same or similar industry.

(6)

Lump sum payments—

(i)

In general. If an intangible is transferred in a controlled transaction for a lump sum, that amount must be commensurate with the income attributable to the intangible. A lump sum is commensurate with income in a taxable year if the equivalent royalty amount for that taxable year is equal to an arm's length royalty. The equivalent royalty amount for a taxable year is the amount determined by treating the lump sum as an advance payment of a stream of royalties over the useful life of the intangible (or the period covered by an agreement, if shorter), taking into account the projected sales of the licensee as of the date of the transfer. Thus, determining the equivalent royalty amount requires a present value calculation based on the lump sum, an appropriate discount rate, and the projected sales over the relevant period. The equivalent royalty amount is subject to periodic adjustments under § 1.482-4(f)(2)(i) to the same extent as an actual royalty payment pursuant to a license agreement.

(ii)

Exceptions. No periodic adjustment will be made under paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section if any of the exceptions to periodic adjustments provided in paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of this section apply.

(iii)

Example. The following example illustrates the principle of this paragraph (f)(5).

(g)

Coordination with rules governing cost sharing arrangements. Section 1.482-7 provides the specific methods to be used to determine arm's length results of controlled transactions in connection with a cost sharing arrangement. This section provides the specific methods to be used to determine arm's length results of a transfer of intangible property, including in an arrangement for sharing the costs and risks of developing intangibles other than a cost sharing arrangement covered by § 1.482-7. In the case of such an arrangement, consideration of the principles, methods, comparability, and reliability considerations set forth in § 1.482-7 is relevant in determining the best method, including an unspecified method, under this section, as appropriately adjusted in light of the differences in the facts and circumstances between such arrangement and a cost sharing arrangement.

(h)

Effective/applicability date—

(1)

In general. Except as provided in the succeeding sentence, the provisions of paragraphs (f)(3) and (4) of this section are generally applicable for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2006. The provisions of paragraphs (f)(3)(i)(B) and (g) of this section are generally applicable on January 5, 2009.

(2)

Election to apply regulation to earlier taxable years. A person may elect to apply the provisions of paragraphs (f)(3) and (4) of this section to earlier taxable years in accordance with the rules set forth in § 1.482-9(n)(2).

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[T.D. 8552, 59 FR 35016, July 8, 1994; T.D. 9278, 71 FR 44484, Aug. 4, 2006; T.D. 9456, 74 FR 38842, Aug. 4, 2009; T.D. 9568, 76 FR 80090, Dec. 22, 2011]

Authority

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960; T.D. 9989, 89 FR 17606, Mar. 11, 2024, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, T.D. 9381, 73 FR 8604, Feb. 15, 2008, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11607, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11737, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11814, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11910, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted. RELATED RULES

Amendments

[T.D. 9169, 69 FR 78154, Dec. 29, 2004]

Amendments

[T.D. 8552, 59 FR 35016, July 8, 1994; T.D. 9278, 71 FR 44484, Aug. 4, 2006; T.D. 9456, 74 FR 38842, Aug. 4, 2009; T.D. 9568, 76 FR 80090, Dec. 22, 2011]

§1.482-5. Comparable profits method.

26 C.F.R. § 1.482-5

(a)

In general. The comparable profits method evaluates whether the amount charged in a controlled transaction is arm's length based on objective measures of profitability (profit level indicators) derived from uncontrolled taxpayers that engage in similar business activities under similar circumstances.

(b)

Determination of arm's length result—

(1)

In general. Under the comparable profits method, the determination of an arm's length result is based on the amount of operating profit that the tested party would have earned on related party transactions if its profit level indicator were equal to that of an uncontrolled comparable (comparable operating profit). Comparable operating profit is calculated by determining a profit level indicator for an uncontrolled comparable, and applying the profit level indicator to the financial data related to the tested party's most narrowly identifiable business activity for which data incorporating the controlled transaction is available (relevant business activity). To the extent possible, profit level indicators should be applied solely to the tested party's financial data that is related to controlled transactions. The tested party's reported operating profit is compared to the comparable operating profits derived from the profit level indicators of uncontrolled comparables to determine whether the reported operating profit represents an arm's length result.

(2)

Tested party—

(i)

In general. For purposes of this section, the tested party will be the participant in the controlled transaction whose operating profit attributable to the controlled transactions can be verified using the most reliable data and requiring the fewest and most reliable adjustments, and for which reliable data regarding uncontrolled comparables can be located. Consequently, in most cases the tested party will be the least complex of the controlled taxpayers and will not own valuable intangible property or unique assets that distinguish it from potential uncontrolled comparables.

(ii)

Adjustments for tested party. The tested party's operating profit must first be adjusted to reflect all other allocations under section 482, other than adjustments pursuant to this section.

(3)

Arm's length range. See § 1.482-1(e)(2) for the determination of the arm's length range. For purposes of the comparable profits method, the arm's length range will be established using comparable operating profits derived from a single profit level indicator.

(4)

Profit level indicators. Profit level indicators are ratios that measure relationships between profits and costs incurred or resources employed. A variety of profit level indicators can be calculated in any given case. Whether use of a particular profit level indicator is appropriate depends upon a number of factors, including the nature of the activities of the tested party, the reliability of the available data with respect to uncontrolled comparables, and the extent to which the profit level indicator is likely to produce a reliable measure of the income that the tested party would have earned had it dealt with controlled taxpayers at arm's length, taking into account all of the facts and circumstances. The profit level indicators should be derived from a sufficient number of years of data to reasonably measure returns that accrue to uncontrolled comparables. Generally, such a period should encompass at least the taxable year under review and the preceding two taxable years. This analysis must be applied in accordance with § 1.482-1(f)(2)(iii)(D). Profit level indicators that may provide a reliable basis for comparing operating profits of the tested party and uncontrolled comparables include the following—

(i)

Rate of return on capital employed. The rate of return on capital employed is the ratio of operating profit to operating assets. The reliability of this profit level indicator increases as operating assets play a greater role in generating operating profits for both the tested party and the uncontrolled comparable. In addition, reliability under this profit level indicator depends on the extent to which the composition of the tested party's assets is similar to that of the uncontrolled comparable. Finally, difficulties in properly valuing operating assets will diminish the reliability of this profit level indicator.

(ii)

Financial ratios. Financial ratios measure relationships between profit and costs or sales revenue. Since functional differences generally have a greater effect on the relationship between profit and costs or sales revenue than the relationship between profit and operating assets, financial ratios are more sensitive to functional differences than the rate of return on capital employed. Therefore, closer functional comparability normally is required under a financial ratio than under the rate of return on capital employed to achieve a similarly reliable measure of an arm's length result. Financial ratios that may be appropriate include the following—

(A)

Ratio of operating profit to sales; and

(B)

Ratio of gross profit to operating expenses. Reliability under this profit level indicator also depends on the extent to which the composition of the tested party's operating expenses is similar to that of the uncontrolled comparables.

(iii)

Other profit level indicators. Other profit level indicators not described in this paragraph (b)(4) may be used if they provide reliable measures of the income that the tested party would have earned had it dealt with controlled taxpayers at arm's length. However, profit level indicators based solely on internal data may not be used under this paragraph (b)(4) because they are not objective measures of profitability derived from operations of uncontrolled taxpayers engaged in similar business activities under similar circumstances.

(c)

Comparability and reliability considerations—

(1)

(2)

Comparability—

(i)

In general. The degree of comparability between an uncontrolled taxpayer and the tested party is determined by applying the provisions of § 1.482-1(d)(2). The comparable profits method compares the profitability of the tested party, measured by a profit level indicator (generally based on operating profit), to the profitability of uncontrolled taxpayers in similar circumstances. As with all methods that rely on external market benchmarks, the greater the degree of comparability between the tested party and the uncontrolled taxpayer, the more reliable will be the results derived from the application of this method. The determination of the degree of comparability between the tested party and the uncontrolled taxpayer depends upon all the relevant facts and circumstances, including the relevant lines of business, the product or service markets involved, the asset composition employed (including the nature and quantity of tangible assets, intangible assets and working capital), the size and scope of operations, and the stage in a business or product cycle.

(ii)

Functional, risk and resource comparability. An operating profit represents a return for the investment of resources and assumption of risks. Therefore, although all of the factors described in § 1.482-1(d)(3) must be considered, comparability under this method is particularly dependent on resources employed and risks assumed. Moreover, because resources and risks usually are directly related to functions performed, it is also important to consider functions performed in determining the degree of comparability between the tested party and an uncontrolled taxpayer. The degree of functional comparability required to obtain a reliable result under the comparable profits method, however, is generally less than that required under the resale price or cost plus methods. For example, because differences in functions performed often are reflected in operating expenses, taxpayers performing different functions may have very different gross profit margins but earn similar levels of operating profit.

(iii)

Other comparability factors. Other factors listed in § 1.482-1(d)(3) also may be particularly relevant under the comparable profits method. Because operating profit usually is less sensitive than gross profit to product differences, reliability under the comparable profits method is not as dependent on product similarity as the resale price or cost plus method. However, the reliability of profitability measures based on operating profit may be adversely affected by factors that have less effect on results under the comparable uncontrolled price, resale price, and cost plus methods. For example, operating profit may be affected by varying cost structures (as reflected, for example, in the age of plant and equipment), differences in business experience (such as whether the business is in a start-up phase or is mature), or differences in management efficiency (as indicated, for example, by objective evidence such as expanding or contracting sales or executive compensation over time). Accordingly, if material differences in these factors are identified based on objective evidence, the reliability of the analysis may be affected.

(iv)

Adjustments for the differences between the tested party and the uncontrolled taxpayers. If there are differences between the tested party and an uncontrolled comparable that would materially affect the profits determined under the relevant profit level indicator, adjustments should be made according to the comparability provisions of § 1.482-1(d)(2). In some cases, the assets of an uncontrolled comparable may need to be adjusted to achieve greater comparability between the tested party and the uncontrolled comparable. In such cases, the uncontrolled comparable's operating income attributable to those assets must also be adjusted before computing a profit level indicator in order to reflect the income and expense attributable to the adjusted assets. In certain cases it may also be appropriate to adjust the operating profit of the tested party and comparable parties. For example, where there are material differences in accounts payable among the comparable parties and the tested party, it will generally be appropriate to adjust the operating profit of each party by increasing it to reflect an imputed interest charge on each party's accounts payable. As another example, it may be appropriate to adjust the operating profit of a party to account for material differences in the utilization of or accounting for stock-based compensation (as defined by § 1.482-7(d)(3)(i)) among the tested party and comparable parties.

(3)

Data and assumptions—

(i)

In general. The reliability of the results derived from the comparable profits method is affected by the quality of the data and assumptions used to apply this method.

(ii)

Consistency in accounting. The degree of consistency in accounting practices between the controlled transaction and the uncontrolled comparables that materially affect operating profit affects the reliability of the result. Thus, for example, if differences in inventory and other cost accounting practices would materially affect operating profit, the ability to make reliable adjustments for such differences would affect the reliability of the results.

(iii)

Allocations between the relevant business activity and other activities. The reliability of the allocation of costs, income, and assets between the relevant business activity and other activities of the tested party or an uncontrolled comparable will affect the reliability of the determination of operating profit and profit level indicators. If it is not possible to allocate costs, income, and assets directly based on factual relationships, a reasonable allocation formula may be used. To the extent direct allocations are not made, the reliability of the results derived from the application of this method is reduced relative to the results of a method that requires fewer allocations of costs, income, and assets. Similarly, the reliability of the results derived from the application of this method is affected by the extent to which it is possible to apply the profit level indicator to the tested party's financial data that is related solely to the controlled transactions. For example, if the relevant business activity is the assembly of components purchased from both controlled and uncontrolled suppliers, it may not be possible to apply the profit level indicator solely to financial data related to the controlled transactions. In such a case, the reliability of the results derived from the application of this method will be reduced.

(d)

Definitions. The definitions set forth in paragraphs (d)(1) through (6) of this section apply for purposes of this section.

(1)

Sales revenue means the amount of the total receipts from sale of goods and provision of services, less returns and allowances. Accounting principles and conventions that are generally accepted in the trade or industry of the controlled taxpayer under review must be used.

(2)

Gross profit means sales revenue less cost of goods sold.

(3)

Operating expenses— includes all expenses not included in cost of goods sold except for interest expense, foreign income taxes (as defined in § 1.901-2(a)), domestic income taxes, and any other expenses not related to the operation of the relevant business activity. Operating expenses ordinarily include expenses associated with advertising, promotion, sales, marketing, warehousing and distribution, administration, and a reasonable allowance for depreciation and amortization.

(4)

Operating profit means gross profit less operating expenses. Operating profit includes all income derived from the business activity being evaluated by the comparable profits method, but does not include interest and dividends, income derived from activities not being tested by this method, or extraordinary gains and losses that do not relate to the continuing operations of the tested party.

(5)

Reported operating profit means the operating profit of the tested party reflected on a timely filed U.S. income tax return. If the tested party files a U.S. income tax return, its operating profit is considered reflected on a U.S. income tax return if the calculation of taxable income on its return for the taxable year takes into account the income attributable to the controlled transaction under review. If the tested party does not file a U.S. income tax return, its operating profit is considered reflected on a U.S. income tax return in any taxable year for which income attributable to the controlled transaction under review affects the calculation of the U.S. taxable income of any other member of the same controlled group. If the comparable operating profit of the tested party is determined from profit level indicators derived from financial statements or other accounting records and reports of comparable parties, adjustments may be made to the reported operating profit of the tested party in order to account for material differences between the tested party's operating profit reported for U.S income tax purposes and the tested party's operating profit for financial statement purposes. In addition, in accordance with § 1.482-1(f)(2)(iii)(D), adjustments under section 482 that are finally determined may be taken into account in determining reported operating profit.

(6)

Operating assets. The term operating assets means the value of all assets used in the relevant business activity of the tested party, including fixed assets and current assets (such as cash, cash equivalents, accounts receivable, and inventories).

The term does not include investments in subsidiaries, excess cash, and portfolio investments. Operating assets may be measured by their net book value or by their fair market value, provided that the same method is consistently applied to the tested party and the comparable parties, and consistently applied from year to year. In addition, it may be necessary to take into account recent acquisitions, leased assets, intangibles, currency fluctuations, and other items that may not be explicitly recorded in the financial statements of the tested party or uncontrolled comparable. Finally, operating assets must be measured by the average of the values for the beginning of the year and the end of the year, unless substantial fluctuations in the value of operating assets during the year make this an inaccurate measure of the average value over the year. In such a case, a more accurate measure of the average value of operating assets must be applied.

(e)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the application of this section.

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[T.D. 8552, 59 FR 35021, July 8, 1994; 60 FR 16703, Mar. 31, 1995; T.D. 9088, 68 FR 51177, Aug. 26, 2003; T.D. 9441, 74 FR 352, Jan. 5, 2009;T.D. 9568, 76 FR 80090, Dec. 22, 2011]

Authority

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960; T.D. 9989, 89 FR 17606, Mar. 11, 2024, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, T.D. 9381, 73 FR 8604, Feb. 15, 2008, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11607, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11737, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11814, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11910, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted. RELATED RULES

Amendments

[T.D. 9169, 69 FR 78154, Dec. 29, 2004]

Amendments

[T.D. 8552, 59 FR 35021, July 8, 1994; 60 FR 16703, Mar. 31, 1995; T.D. 9088, 68 FR 51177, Aug. 26, 2003; T.D. 9441, 74 FR 352, Jan. 5, 2009;T.D. 9568, 76 FR 80090, Dec. 22, 2011]

§1.482-6. Profit split method.

26 C.F.R. § 1.482-6

(a)

(b)

Appropriate share of profits and losses. The relative value of each controlled taxpayer's contribution to the success of the relevant business activity must be determined in a manner that reflects the functions performed, risks assumed, and resources employed by each participant in the relevant business activity, consistent with the comparability provisions of § 1.482-1(d)(3). Such an allocation is intended to correspond to the division of profit or loss that would result from an arrangement between uncontrolled taxpayers, each performing functions similar to those of the various controlled taxpayers engaged in the relevant business activity. The profit allocated to any particular member of a controlled group is not necessarily limited to the total operating profit of the group from the relevant business activity. For example, in a given year, one member of the group may earn a profit while another member incurs a loss. In addition, it may not be assumed that the combined operating profit or loss from the relevant business activity should be shared equally, or in any other arbitrary proportion. The specific method of allocation must be determined under paragraph (c) of this section.

(c)

Application—

(1)

In general. The allocation of profit or loss under the profit split method must be made in accordance with one of the following allocation methods—(i) The comparable profit split, described in paragraph (c)(2) of this section; or

(ii)

The residual profit split, described in paragraph (c)(3) of this section.

(2)

Comparable profit split—

(i)

In general. A comparable profit split is derived from the combined operating profit of uncontrolled taxpayers whose transactions and activities are similar to those of the controlled taxpayers in the relevant business activity. Under this method, each uncontrolled taxpayer's percentage of the combined operating profit or loss is used to allocate the combined operating profit or loss of the relevant business activity.

(ii)

Comparability and reliability considerations—(A) In general. Whether results derived from application of this method are the most reliable measure of the arm's length result is determined using the factors described under the best method rule in § 1.482-1(c).

(B)

Comparability— (1) In general. The degree of comparability between the controlled and uncontrolled taxpayers is determined by applying the comparability provisions of § 1.482-1(d). The comparable profit split compares the division of operating profits among the controlled taxpayers to the division of operating profits among uncontrolled taxpayers engaged in similar activities under similar circumstances. Although all of the factors described in § 1.482-1(d)(3) must be considered, comparability under this method is particularly dependent on the considerations described under the comparable profits method in § 1.482-5(c)(2) or § 1.482-9(f)(2)(iii) because this method is based on a comparison of the operating profit of the controlled and uncontrolled taxpayers. In addition, because the contractual terms of the relationship among the participants in the relevant business activity will be a principal determinant of the allocation of functions and risks among them, comparability under this method also depends particularly on the degree of similarity of the contractual terms of the controlled and uncontrolled taxpayers. Finally, the comparable profit split may not be used if the combined operating profit (as a percentage of the combined assets) of the uncontrolled comparables varies significantly from that earned by the controlled taxpayers.

(2) Adjustments for differences between the controlled and uncontrolled taxpayers. If there are differences between the controlled and uncontrolled taxpayers that would materially affect the division of operating profit, adjustments must be made according to the provisions of § 1.482-1(d)(2).

(C)

Data and assumptions. The reliability of the results derived from the comparable profit split is affected by the quality of the data and assumptions used to apply this method. In particular, the following factors must be considered—

(1) The reliability of the allocation of costs, income, and assets between the relevant business activity and the participants' other activities will affect the accuracy of the determination of combined operating profit and its allocation among the participants. If it is not possible to allocate costs, income, and assets directly based on factual relationships, a reasonable allocation formula may be used. To the extent direct allocations are not made, the reliability of the results derived from the application of this method is reduced relative to the results of a method that requires fewer allocations of costs, income, and assets. Similarly, the reliability of the results derived from the application of this method is affected by the extent to which it is possible to apply the method to the parties' financial data that is related solely to the controlled transactions. For example, if the relevant business activity is the assembly of components purchased from both controlled and uncontrolled suppliers, it may not be possible to apply the method solely to financial data related to the controlled transactions. In such a case, the reliability of the results derived from the application of this method will be reduced.

(2) The degree of consistency between the controlled and uncontrolled taxpayers in accounting practices that materially affect the items that determine the amount and allocation of operating profit affects the reliability of the result. Thus, for example, if differences in inventory and other cost accounting practices would materially affect operating profit, the ability to make reliable adjustments for such differences would affect the reliability of the results. Further, accounting consistency among the participants in the controlled transaction is required to ensure that the items determining the amount and allocation of operating profit are measured on a consistent basis.

(D)

Other factors affecting reliability. Like the methods described in §§ 1.482-3, 1.482-4, 1.482-5, and 1.482-9, the comparable profit split relies exclusively on external market benchmarks. As indicated in § 1.482-1(c)(2)(i), as the degree of comparability between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions increases, the relative weight accorded the analysis under this method will increase. In addition, the reliability of the analysis under this method may be enhanced by the fact that all parties to the controlled transaction are evaluated under the comparable profit split. However, the reliability of the results of an analysis based on information from all parties to a transaction is affected by the reliability of the data and the assumptions pertaining to each party to the controlled transaction. Thus, if the data and assumptions are significantly more reliable with respect to one of the parties than with respect to the others, a different method, focusing solely on the results of that party, may yield more reliable results.

(3)

Residual profit split—

(i)

In general. Under this method, the combined operating profit or loss from the relevant business activity is allocated between the controlled taxpayers following the two-step process set forth in paragraphs (c)(3)(i)(A) and (B) of this section.

(A)

Allocate income to routine contributions. The first step allocates operating income to each party to the controlled transactions to provide a market return for its routine contributions to the relevant business activity. Routine contributions are contributions of the same or a similar kind to those made by uncontrolled taxpayers involved in similar business activities for which it is possible to identify market returns. Routine contributions ordinarily include contributions of tangible property, services and intangible property that are generally owned by uncontrolled taxpayers engaged in similar activities. A functional analysis is required to identify these contributions according to the functions performed, risks assumed, and resources employed by each of the controlled taxpayers. Market returns for the routine contributions should be determined by reference to the returns achieved by uncontrolled taxpayers engaged in similar activities, consistent with the methods described in §§ 1.482-3, 1.482-4, 1.482-5 and 1.482-9.

(B)

Allocate residual profit— (1) Nonroutine contributions generally. The allocation of income to the controlled taxpayer's routine contributions will not reflect profits attributable to each controlled taxpayer's contributions to the relevant business activity that are not routine (nonroutine contributions). A nonroutine contribution is a contribution that is not accounted for as a routine contribution. Thus, in cases where such nonroutine contributions are present, there normally will be an unallocated residual profit after the allocation of income described in paragraph (c)(3)(i)(A) of this section. Under this second step, the residual profit generally should be divided among the controlled taxpayers based upon the relative value of their nonroutine contributions to the relevant business activity. The relative value of the nonroutine contributions of each taxpayer should be measured in a manner that most reliably reflects each nonroutine contribution made to the controlled transaction and each controlled taxpayer's role in the nonroutine contributions. If the nonroutine contribution by one of the controlled taxpayers is also used in other business activities (such as transactions with other controlled taxpayers), an appropriate allocation of the value of the nonroutine contribution must be made among all the business activities in which it is used.

(2) Nonroutine contributions of intangible property. In many cases, nonroutine contributions of a taxpayer to the relevant business activity may be contributions of intangible property. For purposes of paragraph (c)(3)(i)(B)(1) of this section, the relative value of nonroutine intangible property contributed by taxpayers may be measured by external market benchmarks that reflect the fair market value of such intangible property. Alternatively, the relative value of nonroutine intangible property contributions may be estimated by the capitalized cost of developing the intangible property and all related improvements and updates, less an appropriate amount of amortization based on the useful life of each intangible property. Finally, if the intangible property development expenditures of the parties are relatively constant over time and the useful life of the intangible property contributed by all parties is approximately the same, the amount of actual expenditures in recent years may be used to estimate the relative value of nonroutine intangible property contributions.

(ii)

Comparability and reliability considerations—

(A)

In general. Whether results derived from this method are the most reliable measure of the arm's length result is determined using the factors described under the best method rule in § 1.482-1(c). Thus, comparability and the quality of data and assumptions must be considered in determining whether this method provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result. The application of these factors to the residual profit split is discussed in paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(B), (C), and (D) of this section.

(B)

Comparability. The first step of the residual profit split relies on market benchmarks of profitability. Thus, the comparability considerations that are relevant for the first step of the residual profit split are those that are relevant for the methods that are used to determine market returns for the routine contributions. The second step of the residual profit split, however, may not rely so directly on market benchmarks. Thus, the reliability of the results under this method is reduced to the extent that the allocation of profits in the second step does not rely on market benchmarks.

(C)

Data and assumptions. The reliability of the results derived from the residual profit split is affected by the quality of the data and assumptions used to apply this method. In particular, the following factors must be considered—

(1) The reliability of the allocation of costs, income, and assets as described in paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C)(1) of this section;

(2) Accounting consistency as described in paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C)(2) of this section;

(3) The reliability of the data used and the assumptions made in valuing the intangible property contributed by the participants. In particular, if capitalized costs of development are used to estimate the value of intangible property, the reliability of the results is reduced relative to the reliability of other methods that do not require such an estimate, for the following reasons. First, in any given case, the costs of developing the intangible may not be related to its market value. Second, the calculation of the capitalized costs of development may require the allocation of indirect costs between the relevant business activity and the controlled taxpayer's other activities, which may affect the reliability of the analysis. Finally, the calculation of costs may require assumptions regarding the useful life of the intangible property.

(D)

Other factors affecting reliability. Like the methods described in §§ 1.482-3, 1.482-4, 1.482-5, and 1.482-9, the first step of the residual profit split relies exclusively on external market benchmarks. As indicated in § 1.482-1(c)(2)(i), as the degree of comparability between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions increases, the relative weight accorded the analysis under this method will increase. In addition, to the extent the allocation of profits in the second step is not based on external market benchmarks, the reliability of the analysis will be decreased in relation to an analysis under a method that relies on market benchmarks. Finally, the reliability of the analysis under this method may be enhanced by the fact that all parties to the controlled transaction are evaluated under the residual profit split. However, the reliability of the results of an analysis based on information from all parties to a transaction is affected by the reliability of the data and the assumptions pertaining to each party to the controlled transaction. Thus, if the data and assumptions are significantly more reliable with respect to one of the parties than with respect to the others, a different method, focusing solely on the results of that party, may yield more reliable results.

(iii)

Example. The provisions of this paragraph (c)(3) are illustrated by the following example.

(d)

Effective/applicability date—

(1)

In general. The provisions of paragraphs (c)(2)(ii)(B)(1) and (D), (c)(3)(i)(A) and (B), and (c)(3)(ii)(D) of this section are generally applicable for taxable years beginning after July 31, 2009.

(2)

Election to apply regulation to earlier taxable years. A person may elect to apply the provisions of paragraphs (c)(2)(ii)(B)(1) and (D), (c)(3)(i)(A) and (B), and (c)(3)(ii)(D) of this section to earlier taxable years in accordance with the rules set forth in § 1.482-9(n)(2).

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[T.D. 8552, 59 FR 35025, July 8, 1994; 60 FR 16382, Mar. 30, 1995, as amended by T.D. 9278, 71 FR 44486, Aug. 4, 2006; T.D. 9456, 74 FR 38844, Aug. 4, 2009; 74 FR 46345, Sept. 9, 2009]

Authority

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960; T.D. 9989, 89 FR 17606, Mar. 11, 2024, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, T.D. 9381, 73 FR 8604, Feb. 15, 2008, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11607, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11737, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11814, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11910, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted. RELATED RULES

Amendments

[T.D. 9169, 69 FR 78154, Dec. 29, 2004]

Amendments

[T.D. 8552, 59 FR 35025, July 8, 1994; 60 FR 16382, Mar. 30, 1995, as amended by T.D. 9278, 71 FR 44486, Aug. 4, 2006; T.D. 9456, 74 FR 38844, Aug. 4, 2009; 74 FR 46345, Sept. 9, 2009]

§1.482-7. Methods to determine taxable income in connection with a cost sharing arrangement.

26 C.F.R. § 1.482-7

(a)

In general. The arm's length amount charged in a controlled transaction reasonably anticipated to contribute to developing intangibles pursuant to a cost sharing arrangement (CSA), as described in paragraph (b) of this section, must be determined under a method described in this section. Each method must be applied in accordance with the provisions of § 1.482-1, except as those provisions are modified in this section.

(1)

RAB share method for cost sharing transactions (CSTs). See paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section regarding the requirement that controlled participants, as defined in section (j)(1)(i) of this section, share intangible development costs (IDCs) in proportion to their shares of reasonably anticipated benefits (RAB shares) by entering into cost sharing transactions (CSTs).

(2)

Methods for platform contribution transactions (PCTs). The arm's length amount charged in a platform contribution transaction (PCT) described in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section must be determined under the method or methods applicable under the other section or sections of the section 482 regulations, as supplemented by paragraph (g) of this section. See § 1.482-1(b)(2)(ii) (Selection of category of method applicable to transaction), § 1.482-1(b)(2)(iii) (Coordination of methods applicable to certain intangible development arrangements), and paragraph (g) of this section (Supplemental guidance on methods applicable to PCTs).

(3)

Methods for other controlled transactions—

(i)

Contribution to a CSA by a controlled taxpayer that is not a controlled participant. If a controlled taxpayer that is not a controlled participant contributes to developing a cost shared intangible, as defined in section (j)(1)(i) of this section, it must receive consideration from the controlled participants under the rules of § 1.482-4(f)(4) (Contribution to the value of an intangible owned by another). Such consideration will be treated as an intangible development cost for purposes of paragraph (d) of this section.

(ii)

Transfer of interest in a cost shared intangible. If at any time (during the term, or upon or after the termination, of a CSA) a controlled participant transfers an interest in a cost shared intangible to another controlled taxpayer, the controlled participant must receive an arm's length amount of consideration from the transferee under the rules of §§ 1.482-4 through 1.482-6 as supplemented by paragraph (f)(4) of this section regarding arm's length consideration for a change in participation. For this purpose, a capability variation described in paragraph (f)(3) of this section is considered to be a controlled transfer of interests in cost shared intangibles.

(iii)

Other controlled transactions in connection with a CSA. Controlled transactions between controlled participants that are not PCTs or CSTs and are not described in paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section (for example, provision of a cross operating contribution, as defined in paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section, or make-or-sell rights, as defined in paragraph (c)(4) of this section) require arm's length consideration under the rules of §§ 1.482-1 through 1.482-6, and 1.482-9 as supplemented by paragraph (g)(2)(iv) of this section.

(iv)

Controlled transactions in the absence of a CSA. If a controlled transaction is reasonably anticipated to contribute to developing intangibles pursuant to an arrangement that is not a CSA described in paragraph (b)(1) or (5) of this section, whether the results of any such controlled transaction are consistent with an arm's length result must be determined under the applicable rules of the other sections of the regulations under section 482. For example, an arrangement for developing intangibles in which one controlled taxpayer's costs of developing the intangibles significantly exceeds its share of reasonably anticipated benefits from exploiting the developed intangibles would not in substance be a CSA, as described in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section or paragraph (b)(5)(i) of this section. In such a case, unless the rules of this section are applicable by reason of paragraph (b)(5) of this section, the arrangement must be analyzed under other applicable sections of regulations under section 482 to determine whether it achieves arm's length results, and if not, to determine any allocations by the Commissioner that are consistent with such other regulations under section 482. See § 1.482-1(b)(2)(ii) (Selection of category of method applicable to transaction) and (iii) (Coordination of methods applicable to certain intangible development arrangements).

(4)

Coordination with the arm's length standard. A CSA produces results that are consistent with an arm's length result within the meaning of § 1.482-1(b)(1) if, and only if, each controlled participant's IDC share (as determined under paragraph (d)(4) of this section) equals its RAB share, each controlled participant compensates its RAB share of the value of all platform contributions by other controlled participants, and all other requirements of this section are satisfied.

(b)

Cost sharing arrangement. A cost sharing arrangement is an arrangement by which controlled participants share the costs and risks of developing cost shared intangibles in proportion to their RAB shares. An arrangement is a CSA if and only if the requirements of paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section are met.

(1)

Substantive requirements—

(i)

CSTs. All controlled participants must commit to, and in fact, engage in cost sharing transactions. In CSTs, the controlled participants make payments to each other (CST Payments) as appropriate, so that in each taxable year each controlled participant's IDC share is in proportion to its respective RAB share.

(ii)

PCTs. All controlled participants must commit to, and in fact, engage in platform contributions transactions to the extent that there are platform contributions pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section. In a PCT, each other controlled participant (PCT Payor) is obligated to, and must in fact, make arm's length payments (PCT Payments) to each controlled participant (PCT Payee) that provides a platform contribution. For guidance on determining such arm's length obligation, see paragraph (g) of this section.

(iii)

Divisional interests. Each controlled participant must receive a non-overlapping interest in the cost shared intangibles without further obligation to compensate another controlled participant for such interest.

(iv)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (b)(1):

(2)

Administrative requirements. The CSA must meet the requirements of paragraph (k) of this section.

(3)

Date of a PCT. The controlled participants must enter into a PCT as of the earliest date on or after the CSA is entered into on which a platform contribution is reasonably anticipated to contribute to developing cost shared intangibles.

(4)

Divisional interests—

(i)

In general. Pursuant to paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section, each controlled participant must receive a non-overlapping interest in the cost shared intangibles without further obligation to compensate another controlled participant for such interest. Each controlled participant must be entitled to the perpetual and exclusive right to the profits from transactions of any member of the controlled group that includes the controlled participant with uncontrolled taxpayers to the extent that such profits are attributable to such interest in the cost shared intangibles.

(ii)

Territorial based divisional interests. The CSA may divide all interests in cost shared intangibles on a territorial basis as follows. The entire world must be divided into two or more non-overlapping geographic territories. Each controlled participant must receive at least one such territory, and in the aggregate all the participants must receive all such territories. Each controlled participant will be assigned the perpetual and exclusive right to exploit the cost shared intangibles through the use, consumption, or disposition of property or services in its territories. Thus, compensation will be required if other members of the controlled group exploit the cost shared intangibles in such territory.

(iii)

Field of use based divisional interests. The CSA may divide all interests in cost shared intangibles on the basis of all uses (whether or not known at the time of the division) to which cost shared intangibles are to be put as follows. All anticipated uses of cost shared intangibles must be identified. Each controlled participant must be assigned at least one such anticipated use, and in the aggregate all the participants must be assigned all such anticipated uses. Each controlled participant will be assigned the perpetual and exclusive right to exploit the cost shared intangibles through the use or uses assigned to it and one controlled participant must be assigned the exclusive and perpetual right to exploit cost shared intangibles through any unanticipated uses.

(iv)

Other divisional bases.

(A)

In the event that the CSA does not divide interests in the cost shared intangibles on the basis of exclusive territories or fields of use as described in paragraphs (b)(4)(ii) and (iii) of this section, the CSA may adopt some other basis on which to divide all interests in the cost shared intangibles among the controlled participants, provided that each of the following criteria is met:

(1) The basis clearly and unambiguously divides all interests in cost shared intangibles among the controlled participants.

(2) The consistent use of such basis for the division of all interests in the cost shared intangibles can be dependably verified from the records maintained by the controlled participants.

(3) The rights of the controlled participants to exploit cost shared intangibles are non-overlapping, exclusive, and perpetual.

(4) The resulting benefits associated with each controlled participant's interest in cost shared intangibles are predictable with reasonable reliability.

(B)

See paragraph (f)(3) of this section for rules regarding the requirement of arm's length consideration for changes in participation in CSAs involving divisions of interest described in this paragraph (b)(4)(iv).

(v)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (b)(4):

(5)

Treatment of certain arrangements as CSAs—

(i)

Situation in which Commissioner must treat arrangement as a CSA. The Commissioner must apply the rules of this section to an arrangement among controlled taxpayers if the administrative requirements of paragraph (b)(2) of this section are met with respect to such arrangement and the controlled taxpayers reasonably concluded that such arrangement was a CSA meeting the requirements of paragraphs (b)(1), (3), and (4) of this section.

(ii)

Situation in which Commissioner may treat arrangement as a CSA. For arrangements among controlled taxpayers not described in paragraph (b)(5)(i) of this section, the Commissioner may apply the provisions of this section if the Commissioner concludes that the administrative requirements of paragraph (b)(2) of this section are met, and, notwithstanding technical failure to meet the substantive requirements of paragraph (b)(1), (3), or (4) of this section, the rules of this section will provide the most reliable measure of an arm's length result. See § 1.482-1(c)(1) (the best method rule). For purposes of applying this paragraph (b)(5)(ii), any such arrangement shall be interpreted by reference to paragraph (k)(1)(iv) of this section.

(iii)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (b)(5). In the examples, assume that Companies P and S are both members of the same controlled group.

(6)

Entity classification of CSAs. See § 301.7701-1(c) of this chapter for the classification of CSAs for purposes of the Internal Revenue Code.

(c)

Platform contributions—

(1)

In general. A platform contribution is any resource, capability, or right that a controlled participant has developed, maintained, or acquired externally to the intangible development activity (whether prior to or during the course of the CSA) that is reasonably anticipated to contribute to developing cost shared intangibles. The determination whether a resource, capability, or right is reasonably anticipated to contribute to developing cost shared intangibles is ongoing and based on the best available information. Therefore, a resource, capability, or right reasonably determined not to be a platform contribution as of an earlier point in time, may be reasonably determined to be a platform contribution at a later point in time. The PCT obligation regarding a resource or capability or right once determined to be a platform contribution does not terminate merely because it may later be determined that such resource or capability or right has not contributed, and no longer is reasonably anticipated to contribute, to developing cost shared intangibles. Notwithstanding the other provisions of this paragraph (c), platform contributions do not include rights in land or depreciable tangible property, and do not include rights in other resources acquired by IDCs. See paragraph (d)(1) of this section.

(2)

Terms of platform contributions—

(i)

Presumed to be exclusive. For purposes of a PCT, the PCT Payee's provision of a platform contribution is presumed to be exclusive. Thus, it is presumed that the platform resource, capability, or right is not reasonably anticipated to be committed to any business activities other than the CSA Activity, as defined in paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section, whether carried out by the controlled participants, other controlled taxpayers, or uncontrolled taxpayers.

(ii)

Rebuttal of exclusivity. The controlled participants may rebut the presumption set forth in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section to the satisfaction of the Commissioner. For example, if the platform resource is a research tool, then the controlled participants could rebut the presumption by establishing to the satisfaction of the Commissioner that, as of the date of the PCT, the tool is reasonably anticipated not only to contribute to the CSA Activity but also to be licensed to an uncontrolled taxpayer. In such case, the PCT Payments may need to be prorated as described in paragraph (c)(2)(iii) of this section.

(iii)

Proration of PCT Payments to the extent allocable to other business activities—

(A)

In general. Some transfer pricing methods employed to determine the arm's length amount of the PCT Payments do so by considering the overall value of the platform contributions as opposed to, for example, the value of the anticipated use of the platform contributions in the CSA Activity. Such a transfer pricing method is consistent with the presumption that the platform contribution is exclusive (that is, that the resources, capabilities or rights that are the subject of a platform contribution are reasonably anticipated to contribute only to the CSA Activity). See paragraph (c)(2)(i) (Terms of platform contributions—Presumed to be exclusive) of this section. The PCT Payments determined under such transfer pricing method may have to be prorated if the controlled participants can rebut the presumption that the platform contribution is exclusive to the satisfaction of the Commissioner as provided in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section. In the case of a platform contribution that also contributes to lines of business of a PCT Payor that are not reasonably anticipated to involve exploitation of the cost shared intangibles, the need for explicit proration may in some cases be avoided through aggregation of transactions. See paragraph (g)(2)(iv) of this section (Aggregation of transactions).

(B)

Determining the proration of PCT Payments. Proration will be done on a reasonable basis in proportion to the relative economic value, as of the date of the PCT, reasonably anticipated to be derived from the platform contribution by the CSA Activity as compared to the value reasonably anticipated to be derived from the platform contribution by other business activities. In the case of an aggregate valuation done under the principles of paragraph (g)(2)(iv) of this section that addresses payment for resources, capabilities, or rights used for business activities other than the CSA Activity (for example, the right to exploit an existing intangible without further development), the proration of the aggregate payments may have to reflect the economic value attributable to such resources, capabilities, or rights as well. For purposes of the best method rule under § 1.482-1(c), the reliability of the analysis under a method that requires proration pursuant to this paragraph is reduced relative to the reliability of an analysis under a method that does not require proration.

(3)

Categorization of the PCT. For purposes of § 1.482-1(b)(2)(ii) and paragraph (a)(2) of this section, a PCT must be identified by the controlled participants as a particular type of transaction (for example, a license for royalty payments). See paragraph (k)(2)(ii)(H) of this section. Such designation must be consistent with the actual conduct of the controlled participants. If the conduct is consistent with different, economically equivalent types of transactions then the controlled participants may designate the PCT as being any of such types of transactions. If the controlled participants fail to make such designation in their documentation, the Commissioner may make a designation consistent with the principles of paragraph (k)(1)(iv) of this section.

(4)

Certain make-or-sell rights excluded—

(i)

In general. Any right to exploit an existing resource, capability, or right without further development of such item, such as the right to make, replicate, license, or sell existing products, does not constitute a platform contribution to a CSA (and the arm's length compensation for such rights (make-or-sell rights) does not satisfy the compensation obligation under a PCT) unless exploitation without further development of such item is reasonably anticipated to contribute to developing or further developing a cost shared intangible.

(ii)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (c)(4):

(5)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (c). In each example, Companies P and S are members of the same controlled group, and execute a CSA providing that each will have the exclusive right to exploit cost shared intangibles in its own territory. See paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of this section (Territorial based divisional interests).

(d)

Intangible development costs—

(1)

Determining whether costs are IDCs. Costs included in IDCs are determined by reference to the scope of the intangible development activity (IDA).

(i)

Definition and scope of the IDA. For purposes of this section, the IDA means the activity under the CSA of developing or attempting to develop reasonably anticipated cost shared intangibles. The scope of the IDA includes all of the controlled participants' activities that could reasonably be anticipated to contribute to developing the reasonably anticipated cost shared intangibles. The IDA cannot be described merely by a list of particular resources, capabilities, or rights that will be used in the CSA, because such a list would not identify reasonably anticipated cost shared intangibles. Also, the scope of the IDA may change as the nature or identity of the reasonably anticipated cost shared intangibles changes or the nature of the activities necessary for their development become clearer. For example, the relevance of certain ongoing work to developing reasonably anticipated cost shared intangibles or the need for additional work may only become clear over time.

(ii)

Reasonably anticipated cost shared intangible. For purposes of this section, reasonably anticipated cost shared intangible means any intangible, within the meaning of § 1.482-4(b), that, at the applicable point in time, the controlled participants intend to develop under the CSA. Reasonably anticipated cost shared intangibles may change over the course of the CSA. The controlled participants may at any time change the reasonably anticipated cost shared intangibles but must document any such change pursuant to paragraph (k)(2)(ii)(A)(1) of this section. Removal of reasonably anticipated cost shared intangibles does not affect the controlled participants' interests in cost shared intangibles already developed under the CSA. In addition, the reasonably anticipated cost shared intangibles automatically expand to include the intended result of any further development of a cost shared intangible already developed under the CSA, or applications of such an intangible. However, the controlled participants may override this automatic expansion in a particular case if they separately remove specified further development of such intangible (or specified applications of such intangible) from the IDA, and document such separate removal pursuant to paragraph (k)(2)(ii)(A)(3) of this section.

(iii)

Costs included in IDCs. For purposes of this section, IDCs mean all costs, in cash or in kind (including stock-based compensation, as described in paragraph (d)(3) of this section), but excluding acquisition costs for land or depreciable property, in the ordinary course of business after the formation of a CSA that, based on analysis of the facts and circumstances, are directly identified with, or are reasonably allocable to, the IDA. Thus, IDCs include costs incurred in attempting to develop reasonably anticipated cost shared intangibles regardless of whether such costs ultimately lead to development of those intangibles, other intangibles developed unexpectedly, or no intangibles. IDCs shall also include the arm's length rental charge for the use of any land or depreciable tangible property (as determined under § 1.482-2(c) (Use of tangible property)) directly identified with, or reasonably allocable to, the IDA. Reference to generally accepted accounting principles or Federal income tax accounting rules may provide a useful starting point but will not be conclusive regarding inclusion of costs in IDCs. IDCs do not include interest expense, foreign income taxes (as defined in § 1.901-2(a)), or domestic income taxes.

(iv)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (d)(1):

(2)

Allocation of costs. If a particular cost is directly identified with, or reasonably allocable to, a function the results of which will benefit both the IDA and other business activities, the cost must be allocated on a reasonable basis between the IDA and such other business activities in proportion to the relative economic value that the IDA and such other business activities are anticipated to derive from such results.

(3)

Stock-based compensation—

(i)

In general. As used in this section, the term stock-based compensation means any compensation provided by a controlled participant to an employee or independent contractor in the form of equity instruments, options to acquire stock (stock options), or rights with respect to (or determined by reference to) equity instruments or stock options, including but not limited to property to which section 83 applies and stock options to which section 421 applies, regardless of whether ultimately settled in the form of cash, stock, or other property.

(ii)

Identification of stock-based compensation with the IDA. The determination of whether stock-based compensation is directly identified with, or reasonably allocable to, the IDA is made as of the date that the stock-based compensation is granted. Accordingly, all stock-based compensation that is granted during the term of the CSA and, at date of grant, is directly identified with, or reasonably allocable to, the IDA is included as an IDC under paragraph (d)(1) of this section. In the case of a repricing or other modification of a stock option, the determination of whether the repricing or other modification constitutes the grant of a new stock option for purposes of this paragraph (d)(3)(ii) will be made in accordance with the rules of section 424(h) and related regulations.

(iii)

Measurement and timing of stock-based compensation IDC—

(A)

In general. Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph (d)(3)(iii), the cost attributable to stock-based compensation is equal to the amount allowable to the controlled participant as a deduction for federal income tax purposes with respect to that stock-based compensation (for example, under section 83(h)) and is taken into account as an IDC under this section for the taxable year for which the deduction is allowable.

(1) Transfers to which section 421 applies. Solely for purposes of this paragraph (d)(3)(iii)(A), section 421 does not apply to the transfer of stock pursuant to the exercise of an option that meets the requirements of section 422(a) or 423(a).

(2) Deductions of foreign controlled participants. Solely for purposes of this paragraph (d)(3)(iii)(A), an amount is treated as an allowable deduction of a foreign controlled participant to the extent that a deduction would be allowable to a United States taxpayer.

(3) Modification of stock option. Solely for purposes of this paragraph (d)(3)(iii)(A), if the repricing or other modification of a stock option is determined, under paragraph (d)(3)(ii) of this section, to constitute the grant of a new stock option not identified with, or reasonably allocable to, the IDA, the stock option that is repriced or otherwise modified will be treated as being exercised immediately before the modification, provided that the stock option is then exercisable and the fair market value of the underlying stock then exceeds the price at which the stock option is exercisable. Accordingly, the amount of the deduction that would be allowable (or treated as allowable under this paragraph (d)(3)(iii)(A)) to the controlled participant upon exercise of the stock option immediately before the modification must be taken into account as an IDC as of the date of the modification.

(4) Expiration or termination of CSA. Solely for purposes of this paragraph (d)(3)(iii)(A), if an item of stock-based compensation identified with, or reasonably allocable to, the IDA is not exercised during the term of a CSA, that item of stock-based compensation will be treated as being exercised immediately before the expiration or termination of the CSA, provided that the stock-based compensation is then exercisable and the fair market value of the underlying stock then exceeds the price at which the stock-based compensation is exercisable. Accordingly, the amount of the deduction that would be allowable (or treated as allowable under this paragraph (d)(3)(iii)(A)) to the controlled participant upon exercise of the stock-based compensation must be taken into account as an IDC as of the date of the expiration or termination of the CSA.

(B)

Election with respect to options on publicly traded stock— (1) In general. With respect to stock-based compensation in the form of options on publicly traded stock, the controlled participants in a CSA may elect to take into account all IDCs attributable to those stock options in the same amount, and as of the same time, as the fair value of the stock options reflected as a charge against income in audited financial statements or disclosed in footnotes to such financial statements, provided that such statements are prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles by or on behalf of the company issuing the publicly traded stock.

(2) Publicly traded stock. As used in this paragraph (d)(3)(iii)(B), the term publicly traded stock means stock that is regularly traded on an established United States securities market and is issued by a company whose financial statements are prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles for the taxable year.

(3) Generally accepted accounting principles. For purposes of this paragraph (d)(3)(iii)(B), a financial statement prepared in accordance with a comprehensive body of generally accepted accounting principles other than United States generally accepted accounting principles is considered to be prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles provided that either—

(i) The fair value of the stock options under consideration is reflected in the reconciliation between such other accounting principles and United States generally accepted accounting principles required to be incorporated into the financial statement by the securities laws governing companies whose stock is regularly traded on United States securities markets; or

(ii) In the absence of a reconciliation between such other accounting principles and United States generally accepted accounting principles that reflects the fair value of the stock options under consideration, such other accounting principles require that the fair value of the stock options under consideration be reflected as a charge against income in audited financial statements or disclosed in footnotes to such statements.

(4) Time and manner of making the election. The election described in this paragraph (d)(3)(iii)(B) is made by an explicit reference to the election in the written contract required by paragraph (k)(1) of this section or in a written amendment to the CSA entered into with the consent of the Commissioner pursuant to paragraph (d)(3)(iii)(C) of this section. In the case of a CSA in existence on August 26, 2003, the election by written amendment to the CSA may be made without the consent of the Commissioner if such amendment is entered into not later than the latest due date (with regard to extensions) of a federal income tax return of any controlled participant for the first taxable year beginning after August 26, 2003.

(C)

Consistency. Generally, all controlled participants in a CSA taking options on publicly traded stock into account under paragraph (d)(3)(ii), (d)(3)(iii)(A), or (d)(3)(iii)(B) of this section must use that same method of identification, measurement and timing for all options on publicly traded stock with respect to that CSA. Controlled participants may change their method only with the consent of the Commissioner and only with respect to stock options granted during taxable years subsequent to the taxable year in which the Commissioner's consent is obtained. All controlled participants in the CSA must join in requests for the Commissioner's consent under this paragraph (d)(3)(iii)(C). Thus, for example, if the controlled participants make the election described in paragraph (d)(3)(iii)(B) of this section upon the formation of the CSA, the election may be revoked only with the consent of the Commissioner, and the consent will apply only to stock options granted in taxable years subsequent to the taxable year in which consent is obtained. Similarly, if controlled participants already have granted stock options that have been or will be taken into account under the general rule of paragraph (d)(3)(iii)(A) of this section, then except in cases specified in the last sentence of paragraph (d)(3)(iii)(B)(4) of this section, the controlled participants may make the election described in paragraph (d)(3)(iii)(B) of this section only with the consent of the Commissioner, and the consent will apply only to stock options granted in taxable years subsequent to the taxable year in which consent is obtained.

(4)

IDC share. A controlled participant's IDC share for a taxable year is equal to the controlled participant's cost contribution for the taxable year, divided by the sum of all IDCs for the taxable year. A controlled participant's cost contribution for a taxable year means all of the IDCs initially borne by the controlled participant, plus all of the CST Payments that the participant makes to other controlled participants, minus all of the CST Payments that the participant receives from other controlled participants.

(5)

Examples. The following examples illustrate this paragraph (d):

(e)

Reasonably anticipated benefits share—

(1)

Definition—

(i)

In general. A controlled participant's share of reasonably anticipated benefits is equal to its reasonably anticipated benefits divided by the sum of the reasonably anticipated benefits, as defined in paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section, of all the controlled participants. RAB shares must be updated to account for changes in economic conditions, the business operations and practices of the participants, and the ongoing development of intangibles under the CSA. For purposes of determining RAB shares at any given time, reasonably anticipated benefits must be estimated over the entire period, past and future, of exploitation of the cost shared intangibles, and must reflect appropriate updates to take into account the most reliable data regarding past and projected future results available at such time. RAB shares determined for a particular purpose shall not be further updated for that purpose based on information not available at the time that determination needed to be made. For example, RAB shares determined in order to determine IDC shares for a particular taxable year (as set forth in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (d)(4) of this section) shall not be recomputed based on information not available at that time. Similarly, RAB shares determined for the purpose of using a particular method such as the acquisition price method (as set forth in paragraph (g)(5)(ii) of this section) to evaluate the arm's length amount charged in a PCT shall not be recomputed based on information not available at the date of that PCT. However, nothing in this paragraph (e)(1)(i) shall limit the Commissioner's use of subsequently available information for purposes of its allocation determinations in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (i) (Allocations by the Commissioner in connection with a CSA) of this section.

(ii)

Reliability. A controlled participant's RAB share must be determined by using the most reliable estimate. In determining which of two or more available estimates is most reliable, the quality of the data and assumptions used in the analysis must be taken into account, consistent with § 1.482-1(c)(2)(ii) (Data and assumptions). Thus, the reliability of an estimate will depend largely on the completeness and accuracy of the data, the soundness of the assumptions, and the relative effects of particular deficiencies in data or assumptions on different estimates. If two estimates are equally reliable, no adjustment should be made based on differences between the estimates. The following factors will be particularly relevant in determining the reliability of an estimate of RAB shares:

(A)

The basis used for measuring benefits, as described in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section.

(B)

The projections used to estimate benefits, as described in paragraph (e)(2)(iii) of this section.

(iii)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (e)(1):

(2)

Measure of benefits—

(i)

In general. In order to estimate a controlled participant's RAB share, the amount of each controlled participant's reasonably anticipated benefits must be measured on a basis that is consistent for all such participants. See paragraph (e)(2)(ii)(E) Example 9 of this section. If a controlled participant transfers a cost shared intangible to another controlled taxpayer, other than by way of a transfer described in paragraph (f) of this section, that controlled participant's benefits from the transferred intangible must be measured by reference to the transferee's benefits, disregarding any consideration paid by the transferee to the controlled participant (such as a royalty pursuant to a license agreement). Reasonably anticipated benefits are measured either on a direct basis, by reference to estimated benefits to be generated by the use of cost shared intangibles (generally based on additional revenues plus cost savings less any additional costs incurred), or on an indirect basis, by reference to certain measurements that reasonably can be assumed to relate to benefits to be generated. Such indirect bases of measurement of anticipated benefits are described in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section. A controlled participant's reasonably anticipated benefits must be measured on the basis, whether direct or indirect, that most reliably determines RAB shares. In determining which of two bases of measurement is most reliable, the factors set forth in § 1.482-1(c)(2)(ii) (Data and assumptions) must be taken into account. It normally will be expected that the basis that provided the most reliable estimate for a particular year will continue to provide the most reliable estimate in subsequent years, absent a material change in the factors that affect the reliability of the estimate. Regardless of whether a direct or indirect basis of measurement is used, adjustments may be required to account for material differences in the activities that controlled participants undertake to exploit their interests in cost shared intangibles. See Examples 4 and 7 of paragraph (e)(2)(ii)(E) of this section.

(ii)

Indirect bases for measuring anticipated benefits. Indirect bases for measuring anticipated benefits from participation in a CSA include the following:

(A)

Units used, produced, or sold. Units of items used, produced, or sold by each controlled participant in the business activities in which cost shared intangibles are exploited may be used as an indirect basis for measuring its anticipated benefits. This basis of measurement will more reliably determine RAB shares to the extent that each controlled participant is expected to have a similar increase in net profit or decrease in net loss attributable to the cost shared intangibles per unit of the item or items used, produced, or sold. This circumstance is most likely to arise when the cost shared intangibles are exploited by the controlled participants in the use, production, or sale of substantially uniform items under similar economic conditions.

(B)

Sales. Sales by each controlled participant in the business activities in which cost shared intangibles are exploited may be used as an indirect basis for measuring its anticipated benefits. This basis of measurement will more reliably determine RAB shares to the extent that each controlled participant is expected to have a similar increase in net profit or decrease in net loss attributable to cost shared intangibles per dollar of sales. This circumstance is most likely to arise if the costs of exploiting cost shared intangibles are not substantial relative to the revenues generated, or if the principal effect of using cost shared intangibles is to increase the controlled participants' revenues (for example, through a price premium on the products they sell) without affecting their costs substantially. Sales by each controlled participant are unlikely to provide a reliable basis for measuring RAB shares unless each controlled participant operates at the same market level (for example, manufacturing, distribution, etc.).

(C)

Operating profit. Operating profit of each controlled participant from the activities in which cost shared intangibles are exploited, as determined before any expense (including amortization) on account of IDCs, may be used as an indirect basis for measuring anticipated benefits. This basis of measurement will more reliably determine RAB shares to the extent that such profit is largely attributable to the use of cost shared intangibles, or if the share of profits attributable to the use of cost shared intangibles is expected to be similar for each controlled participant. This circumstance is most likely to arise when cost shared intangibles are closely associated with the activity that generates the profit and the activity could not be carried on or would generate little profit without use of those intangibles.

(D)

Other bases for measuring anticipated benefits. Other bases for measuring anticipated benefits may in some circumstances be appropriate, but only to the extent that there is expected to be a reasonably identifiable relationship between the basis of measurement used and additional revenue generated or net costs saved by the use of cost shared intangibles. For example, a division of costs based on employee compensation would be considered unreliable unless there were a relationship between the amount of compensation and the expected additional revenue generated or net costs saved by the controlled participants from using the cost shared intangibles.

(E)

Examples. The following examples illustrates this paragraph (e)(2)(ii):

(iii)

Projections used to estimate benefits—

(A)

In general. The reliability of an estimate of RAB shares also depends upon the reliability of projections used in making the estimate. Projections required for this purpose generally include a determination of the time period between the inception of the research and development activities under the CSA and the receipt of benefits, a projection of the time over which benefits will be received, and a projection of the benefits anticipated for each year in which it is anticipated that the cost shared intangible will generate benefits. A projection of the relevant basis for measuring anticipated benefits may require a projection of the factors that underlie it. For example, a projection of operating profits may require a projection of sales, cost of sales, operating expenses, and other factors that affect operating profits. If it is anticipated that there will be significant variation among controlled participants in the timing of their receipt of benefits, and consequently benefit shares are expected to vary significantly over the years in which benefits will be received, it normally will be necessary to use the present value of the projected benefits to reliably determine RAB shares. See paragraph (g)(2)(v) of this section for best method considerations regarding discount rates used for this purpose. If it is not anticipated that benefit shares will significantly change over time, current annual benefit shares may provide a reliable projection of RAB shares. This circumstance is most likely to occur when the CSA is a long-term arrangement, the arrangement covers a wide variety of intangibles, the composition of the cost shared intangibles is unlikely to change, the cost shared intangibles are unlikely to generate unusual profits, and each controlled participant's share of the market is stable.

(B)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (e)(2)(iii):

(f)

Changes in participation under a CSA—

(1)

In general. A change in participation under a CSA occurs when there is either a controlled transfer of interests or a capability variation. A change in participation requires arm's length consideration under paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section, and as more fully described in this paragraph (f).

(2)

Controlled transfer of interests. A controlled transfer of interests occurs when a participant in a CSA transfers all or part of its interests in cost shared intangibles under the CSA in a controlled transaction, and the transferee assumes the associated obligations under the CSA. For example, a change in the territorial based divisional interests or field of use based divisional interests, as described in paragraph (b)(4), is a controlled transfer of interests. After the controlled transfer of interests occurs, the CSA will still exist if at least two controlled participants still have interests in the cost shared intangibles. In such a case, the transferee will be treated as succeeding to the transferor's prior history under the CSA as pertains to the transferred interests, including the transferor's cost contributions, benefits derived, and PCT Payments attributable to such rights or obligations. A transfer that would otherwise constitute a controlled transfer of interests for purposes of this paragraph (f)(2) shall not constitute a controlled transfer of interests if it also constitutes a capability variation for purposes of paragraph (f)(3) of this section.

(3)

Capability variation. A capability variation occurs when, in a CSA in which interests in cost shared intangibles are divided as described in paragraph (b)(4)(iv) of this section, the controlled participants' division of interests or their relative capabilities or capacities to benefit from the cost shared intangibles are materially altered. For purposes of paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section, a capability variation is considered to be a controlled transfer of interests in cost shared intangibles, in which any controlled participant whose RAB share decreases as a result of the capability variation is a transferor, and any controlled participant whose RAB share thus increases is the transferee of the interests in cost shared intangibles.

(4)

Arm's length consideration for a change in participation. In the event of a change in participation, the arm's length amount of consideration from the transferee, under the rules of §§ 1.482-1 and 1.482-4 through 1.482-6 and paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section, will be determined consistent with the reasonably anticipated incremental change in the returns to the transferee and transferor resulting from such change in participation. Such changes in returns will themselves depend on the reasonably anticipated incremental changes in the benefits from exploiting the cost shared intangibles, IDCs borne, and PCT Payments (if any). However, any arm's length consideration required under this paragraph (f)(4) with respect to a capability variation shall be reduced as necessary to prevent duplication of an adjustment already performed under paragraph (i)(2)(ii)(A) of this section that resulted from the same capability variation. If an adjustment has been performed already under this paragraph (f)(4) with respect to a capability variation, then for purposes of any adjustment to be performed under paragraph (i)(2)(ii)(A) of this section, the controlled participants' projected benefit shares referred to in paragraph (i)(2)(ii)(A) of this section shall be considered to be the controlled participants' respective RAB shares after the capability variation occurred.

(5)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (f):

(g)

Supplemental guidance on methods applicable to PCTs—

(1)

In general. This paragraph (g) provides supplemental guidance on applying the methods listed in this paragraph (g)(1) for purposes of evaluating the arm's length amount charged in a PCT. Each method will yield a value for the compensation obligation of each PCT Payor consistent with the product of the combined pre-tax value to all controlled participants of the platform contribution that is the subject of the PCT and the PCT Payor's RAB share. Each method must yield results consistent with measuring the value of a platform contribution by reference to the future income anticipated to be generated by the resulting cost shared intangibles. The methods are—

(i)

The comparable uncontrolled transaction method described in § 1.482-4(c), or the comparable uncontrolled services price method described in § 1.482-9(c), as further described in paragraph (g)(3) of this section;

(ii)

The income method, described in paragraph (g)(4) of this section;

(iii)

The acquisition price method, described in paragraph (g)(5) of this section;

(iv)

The market capitalization method, described in paragraph (g)(6) of this section;

(v)

The residual profit split method, described in paragraph (g)(7) of this section; and

(vi)

Unspecified methods, described in paragraph (g)(8) of this section.

(2)

Best method analysis applicable for evaluation of a PCT pursuant to a CSA—

(i)

In general. Each method must be applied in accordance with the provisions of § 1.482-1, including the best method rule of § 1.482-1(c), the comparability analysis of § 1.482-1(d), and the arm's length range of § 1.482-1(e), except as those provisions are modified in this paragraph (g).

(ii)

Consistency with upfront contractual terms and risk allocation—the investor model—

(A)

In general. Although all of the factors entering into a best method analysis described in § 1.482-1(c) and (d) must be considered, specific factors may be particularly relevant in the context of a CSA. In particular, the relative reliability of an application of any method depends on the degree of consistency of the analysis with the applicable contractual terms and allocation of risk under the CSA and this section among the controlled participants as of the date of the PCT, unless a change in such terms or allocation has been made in return for arm's length consideration. In this regard, a CSA involves an upfront division of the risks as to both reasonably anticipated obligations and reasonably anticipated benefits over the reasonably anticipated term of the CSA Activity. Accordingly, the relative reliability of an application of a method also depends on the degree of consistency of the analysis with the assumption that, as of the date of the PCT, each controlled participant's aggregate net investment in the CSA Activity (including platform contributions, operating contributions, as such term is defined in paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section, operating cost contributions, as such term is defined in paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section, and cost contributions) is reasonably anticipated to earn a rate of return (which might be reflected in a discount rate used in applying a method) appropriate to the riskiness of the controlled participant's CSA Activity over the entire period of such CSA Activity. If the cost shared intangibles themselves are reasonably anticipated to contribute to developing other intangibles, then the period described in the preceding sentence includes the period, reasonably anticipated as of the date of the PCT, of developing and exploiting such indirectly benefited intangibles.

(B)

Example. The following example illustrates the principles of this paragraph (g)(2)(ii):

(iii)

Consistency of evaluation with realistic alternatives—

(A)

In general. The relative reliability of an application of a method also depends on the degree of consistency of the analysis with the assumption that uncontrolled taxpayers dealing at arm's length would have evaluated the terms of the transaction, and only entered into such transaction, if no alternative is preferable. This condition is not met, therefore, where for any controlled participant the total anticipated present value of its income attributable to its entering into the CSA, as of the date of the PCT, is less than the total anticipated present value of its income that could be achieved through an alternative arrangement realistically available to that controlled participant. In principle, this comparison is made on a post-tax basis but, in many cases, a comparison made on a pre-tax basis will yield equivalent results. See also paragraph (g)(2)(v)(B)(1) of this section (Discount rate variation between realistic alternatives).

(B)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (g)(2)(iii):

(iv)

Aggregation of transactions. The combined effect of multiple contemporaneous transactions, consisting either of multiple PCTs, or of one or more PCT and one or more other transactions in connection with a CSA that are not governed by this section (such as transactions involving cross operating contributions or make-or-sell rights), may require evaluation in accordance with the principles of aggregation described in § 1.482-1(f)(2)(i). In such cases, it may be that the multiple transactions are reasonably anticipated, as of the date of the PCT(s), to be so interrelated that the method that provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length charge is a method under this section applied on an aggregate basis for the PCT(s) and other transactions. A section 482 adjustment may be made by comparing the aggregate arm's length charge so determined to the aggregate payments actually made for the multiple transactions. In such a case, it generally will not be necessary to allocate separately the aggregate arm's length charge as between various PCTs or as between PCTs and such other transactions. However, such an allocation may be necessary for other purposes, such as applying paragraph (i)(6) (Periodic adjustments) of this section. An aggregate determination of the arm's length charge for multiple transactions will often yield a payment for a controlled participant that is equal to the aggregate value of the platform contributions and other resources, capabilities, and rights covered by the multiple transactions multiplied by that controlled participant's RAB share. Because RAB shares only include benefits from cost shared intangibles, the reliability of an aggregate determination of payments for multiple transactions may be reduced to the extent that it includes transactions covering resources, capabilities, and rights for which the controlled participants' expected benefit shares differ substantially from their RAB shares.

(v)

Discount rate—

(A)

In general. The best method analysis in connection with certain methods or forms of payment may depend on a rate or rates of return used to convert projected results of transactions to present value, or to otherwise convert monetary amounts at one or more points in time to equivalent amounts at a different point or points in time. For this purpose, a discount rate or rates should be used that most reliably reflect the market-correlated risks of activities or transactions and should be applied to the best estimates of the relevant projected results, based on all the information potentially available at the time for which the present value calculation is to be performed. Depending on the particular facts and circumstances, the market-correlated risk involved and thus, the discount rate, may differ among a company's various activities or transactions. Normally, discount rates are most reliably determined by reference to market information.

(B)

Considerations in best method analysis of discount rate— (1) Discount rate variation between realistic alternatives. Realistic alternatives may involve varying risk exposure and, thus, may be more reliably evaluated using different discount rates. See paragraphs (g)(4)(i)(F) and (vi)(F) of this section. In some circumstances, a party may have less risk as a licensee of intangibles needed in its operations, and so require a lower discount rate, than it would have by entering into a CSA to develop such intangibles, which may involve the party's assumption of additional risk in funding its cost contributions to the IDA. Similarly, self-development of intangibles and licensing out may be riskier for the licensor, and so require a higher discount rate, than entering into a CSA to develop such intangibles, which would relieve the licensor of the obligation to fund a portion of the IDCs of the IDA.

(2) Implied discount rates. In some circumstances, the particular discount rate or rates used for certain activities or transactions logically imply that certain other activities will have a particular discount rate or set of rates (implied discount rates). To the extent that an implied discount rate is inappropriate in light of the facts and circumstances, which may include reliable direct evidence of the appropriate discount rate applicable for such other activities, the reliability of any method is reduced where such method is based on the discount rates from which such an inappropriate implied discount rate is derived. See paragraphs (g)(4)(vi)(F)(2) and (g)(4)(viii), Example 8 of this section.

(3) Discount rate variation between forms of payment. Certain forms of payment may involve different risks than others. For example, ordinarily a royalty computed on a profits base would be more volatile, and so require a higher discount rate to discount projected payments to present value, than a royalty computed on a sales base.

(4) Post-tax rate. In general, discount rate estimates that may be inferred from the operations of the capital markets are post-tax discount rates. Therefore, an analysis would in principle apply post-tax discount rates to income net of expense items including taxes (post-tax income). However, in certain circumstances the result of applying a post-tax discount rate to post-tax income is equivalent to the product of the result of applying a post-tax discount rate to income net of expense items other than taxes (pre-tax income), and the difference of one minus the tax rate (as defined in paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section). Therefore, in such circumstances, calculation of pre-tax income, rather than post-tax income, may be sufficient. See, for example, paragraph (g)(4)(i)(G) of this section.

(C)

Example. The following example illustrates the principles of this paragraph (g)(2)(v):

(vi)

Financial projections. The reliability of an estimate of the value of a platform or operating contribution in connection with a PCT will often depend upon the reliability of projections used in making the estimate. Such projections should reflect the best estimates of the items projected (normally reflecting a probability weighted average of possible outcomes and thus also reflecting non-market-correlated risk). Projections necessary for this purpose may include a projection of sales, IDCs, costs of developing operating contributions, routine operating expenses, and costs of sales. Some method applications directly estimate projections of items attributable to separate development and exploitation by the controlled participants within their respective divisions. Other method applications indirectly estimate projections of items from the perspective of the controlled group as a whole, rather than from the perspective of a particular participant, and then apportion the items so estimated on some assumed basis. For example, in some applications, sales might be directly projected by division, but worldwide projections of other items such as operating expenses might be apportioned among divisions in the same ratio as the divisions' respective sales. Which approach is more reliable depends on which provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result, considering the competing perspectives under the facts and circumstances in light of the completeness and accuracy of the underlying data, the reliability of the assumptions, and the sensitivity of the results to possible deficiencies in the data and assumptions. For these purposes, projections that have been prepared for non-tax purposes are generally more reliable than projections that have been prepared solely for purposes of meeting the requirements in this paragraph (g).

(vii)

Accounting principles—

(A)

In general. Allocations or other valuations done for accounting purposes may provide a useful starting point but will not be conclusive for purposes of the best method analysis in evaluating the arm's length charge in a PCT, particularly where the accounting treatment of an asset is inconsistent with its economic value.

(B)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (g)(2)(vii):

(viii)

Valuations of subsequent PCTs—

(A)

Date of subsequent PCT. The date of a PCT may occur subsequent to the inception of the CSA. For example, an intangible initially developed outside the IDA may only subsequently become a platform contribution because that later time is the earliest date on which it is reasonably anticipated to contribute to developing cost shared intangibles within the IDA. In such case, the date of the PCT, and the analysis of the arm's length amount charged in the subsequent PCT, is as of such later time.

(B)

Best method analysis for subsequent PCT. In cases where PCTs occur on different dates, the determination of the arm's length amount charged, respectively, in the prior and subsequent PCTs must be coordinated in a manner that provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result. In some circumstances, a subsequent PCT may be reliably evaluated independently of other PCTs, as may be possible for example, under the acquisition price method. In other circumstances, the results of prior and subsequent PCTs may be interrelated and so a subsequent PCT may be most reliably evaluated under the residual profit split method of paragraph (g)(7) of this section. In those cases, for purposes of allocating the present value of nonroutine residual divisional profit or loss, and so determining the present value of the subsequent PCT Payments, in accordance with paragraph (g)(7)(iii)(C) of this section, the PCT Payor's interest in cost shared intangibles, both already developed and in process, are treated as additional PCT Payor operating contributions as of the date of the subsequent PCT.

(ix)

Arm's length range—

(A)

In general. The guidance in § 1.482-1(e) regarding determination of an arm's length range, as modified by this section, applies in evaluating the arm's length amount charged in a PCT under a transfer pricing method provided in this section (applicable method). Section 1.482-1(e)(2)(i) provides that the arm's length range is ordinarily determined by applying a single pricing method selected under the best method rule to two or more uncontrolled transactions of similar comparability and reliability although use of more than one method may be appropriate for the purposes described in § 1.482-1(c)(2)(iii). The rules provided in § 1.482-1(e) and this section for determining an arm's length range shall not override the rules provided in paragraph (i)(6) of this section for periodic adjustments by the Commissioner. The provisions in paragraphs (g)(2)(ix)(C) and (D) of this section apply only to applicable methods that are based on two or more input parameters as described in paragraph (g)(2)(ix)(B) of this section. For an example of how the rules of this section for determining an arm's length range of PCT Payments are applied, see paragraph (g)(4)(viii) of this section.

(B)

Methods based on two or more input parameters. An applicable method may determine PCT Payments based on calculations involving two or more parameters whose values depend on the facts and circumstances of the case (input parameters). For some input parameters (market-based input parameters), the value is most reliably determined by reference to data that derives from uncontrolled transactions (market data). For example, the value of the return to a controlled participant's routine contributions, as such term is defined in paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section, to the CSA Activity (which value is used as an input parameter in the income method described in paragraph (g)(4) of this section) may in some cases be most reliably determined by reference to the profit level of a company with rights, resources, and capabilities comparable to those routine contributions. See § 1.482-5. As another example, the value for the discount rate that reflects the riskiness of a controlled participant's role in the CSA (which value is used as an input parameter in the income method described in paragraph (g)(4) of this section) may in some cases be most reliably determined by reference to the stock beta of a company whose overall risk is comparable to the riskiness of the controlled participant's role in the CSA.

(C)

Variable input parameters. For some market-based input parameters (variable input parameters), the parameter's value is most reliably determined by considering two or more observations of market data that have, or with adjustment can be brought to, a similar reliability and comparability, as described in § 1.482-1(e)(2)(ii) (for example, profit levels or stock betas of two or more companies). See paragraph (g)(2)(ix)(B) of this section.

(D)

Determination of arm's length PCT Payment. For purposes of applying this paragraph (g)(2)(ix), each input parameter is assigned a single most reliable value, unless it is a variable input parameter as described in paragraph (g)(2)(ix)(C) of this section. The determination of the arm's length payment depends on the number of variable input parameters.

(1) No variable input parameters. If there are no variable input parameters, the arm's length PCT Payment is a single value determined by using the single most reliable value determined for each input parameter.

(2) One variable input parameter. If there is exactly one variable input parameter, then under the applicable method, the arm's length range of PCT Payments is the interquartile range, as described in § 1.482-1(e)(2)(iii)(C), of the set of PCT Payment values calculated by selecting—

(i) Iteratively, the value of the variable input parameter that is based on each observation as described in paragraph (g)(2)(ix)(C) of this section; and

(ii) The single most reliable values for each other input parameter.

(3) More than one variable input parameter. If there are two or more variable input parameters, then under the applicable method, the arm's length range of PCT Payments is the interquartile range, as described in § 1.482-1(e)(2)(iii)(C), of the set of PCT Payment values calculated iteratively using every possible combination of permitted choices of values for the input parameters. For input parameters other than a variable input parameter, the only such permitted choice is the single most reliable value. For variable input parameters, such permitted choices include any value that is—

(i) Based on one of the observations described in paragraph (g)(2)(ix)(C) of this section; and

(ii) Within the interquartile range (as described in § 1.482-1(e)(2)(iii)(C)) of the set of all values so based.

(E)

Adjustments. Section 1.482-1(e)(3), applied as modified by this paragraph (g)(2)(ix), determines when the Commissioner may make an adjustment to a PCT Payment due to the taxpayer's results being outside the arm's length range. Adjustment will be to the median, as defined in § 1.482-1(e)(3). Thus, the Commissioner is not required to establish an arm's length range prior to making an allocation under section 482.

(x)

Valuation undertaken on a pre-tax basis. PCT Payments in general may increase the PCT Payee's tax liability and decrease the PCT Payor's tax liability. The arm's length amount of a PCT Payment determined under the methods in this paragraph (g) is the value of the PCT Payment itself, without regard to such tax effects. Therefore, the methods under this section must be applied, with suitable adjustments if needed, to determine the PCT Payments on a pre-tax basis. See paragraphs (g)(2)(v)(B) and (4)(i)(G) of this section.

(3)

Comparable uncontrolled transaction method. The comparable uncontrolled transaction (CUT) method described in § 1.482-4(c), and the comparable uncontrolled services price (CUSP) method described in § 1.482-9(c), may be applied to evaluate whether the amount charged in a PCT is arm's length by reference to the amount charged in a comparable uncontrolled transaction. Although all of the factors entering into a best method analysis described in § 1.482-1(c) and (d) must be considered, comparability and reliability under this method are particularly dependent on similarity of contractual terms, degree to which allocation of risks is proportional to reasonably anticipated benefits from exploiting the results of intangible development, similar period of commitment as to the sharing of intangible development risks, and similar scope, uncertainty, and profit potential of the subject intangible development, including a similar allocation of the risks of any existing resources, capabilities, or rights, as well as of the risks of developing other resources, capabilities, or rights that would be reasonably anticipated to contribute to exploitation within the parties' divisions, that is consistent with the actual allocation of risks between the controlled participants as provided in the CSA in accordance with this section. When applied in the manner described in § 1.482-4(c) or 1.482-9(c), the CUT or CUSP method will typically yield an arm's length total value for the platform contribution that is the subject of the PCT. That value must then be multiplied by each PCT Payor's respective RAB share in order to determine the arm's length PCT Payment due from each PCT Payor. The reliability of a CUT or CUSP that yields a value for the platform contribution only in the PCT Payor's division will be reduced to the extent that value is not consistent with the total worldwide value of the platform contribution multiplied by the PCT Payor's RAB share.

(4)

Income method—

(i)

In general—

(A)

Equating cost sharing and licensing alternatives. The income method evaluates whether the amount charged in a PCT is arm's length by reference to a controlled participant's best realistic alternative to entering into a CSA. Under this method, the arm's length charge for a PCT Payment will be an amount such that a controlled participant's present value, as of the date of the PCT, of its cost sharing alternative of entering into a CSA equals the present value of its best realistic alternative. In general, the best realistic alternative of the PCT Payor to entering into the CSA would be to license intangibles to be developed by an uncontrolled licensor that undertakes the commitment to bear the entire risk of intangible development that would otherwise have been shared under the CSA. Similarly, the best realistic alternative of the PCT Payee to entering into the CSA would be to undertake the commitment to bear the entire risk of intangible development that would otherwise have been shared under the CSA and license the resulting intangibles to an uncontrolled licensee. Paragraphs (g)(4)(i)(B) through (vi) of this section describe specific applications of the income method, but do not exclude other possible applications of this method.

(B)

Cost sharing alternative. The PCT Payor's cost sharing alternative corresponds to the actual CSA in accordance with this section, with the PCT Payor's obligation to make the PCT Payments to be determined and its commitment for the duration of the IDA to bear cost contributions.

(C)

Licensing alternative. The licensing alternative is derived on the basis of a functional and risk analysis of the cost sharing alternative, but with a shift of the risk of cost contributions to the licensor. Accordingly, the PCT Payor's licensing alternative consists of entering into a license with an uncontrolled party, for a term extending for what would be the duration of the CSA Activity, to license the make-or-sell rights in to-be-developed resources, capabilities, or rights of the licensor. Under such license, the licensor would undertake the commitment to bear the entire risk of intangible development that would otherwise have been shared under the CSA. Apart from any difference in the allocation of the risks of the IDA, the licensing alternative should assume contractual provisions with regard to non-overlapping divisional intangible interests, and with regard to allocations of other risks, that are consistent with the actual CSA in accordance with this section. For example, the analysis under the licensing alternative should assume a similar allocation of the risks of any existing resources, capabilities, or rights, as well as of the risks of developing other resources, capabilities, or rights that would be reasonably anticipated to contribute to exploitation within the parties' divisions, that is consistent with the actual allocation of risks between the controlled participants as provided in the CSA in accordance with this section. Accordingly, the financial projections associated with the licensing and cost sharing alternatives are necessarily the same except for the licensing payments to be made under the licensing alternative and the cost contributions and PCT Payments to be made under the CSA.

(D)

Only one controlled participant with nonroutine platform contributions. This method involves only one of the controlled participants providing nonroutine platform contributions as the PCT Payee. For a method under which more than one controlled participant may be a PCT Payee, see the application of the residual profit method pursuant to paragraph (g)(7) of this section.

(E)

Income method payment forms. The income method may be applied to determine PCT Payments in any form of payment (for example, lump sum, royalty on sales, or royalty on divisional profit). For converting to another form of payment, see generally paragraph (h) (Form of payment rules) of this section.

(F)

Discount rates appropriate to cost sharing and licensing alternatives. The present value of the cost sharing and licensing alternatives, respectively, should be determined using the appropriate discount rates in accordance with paragraphs (g)(2)(v) and (g)(4)(vi)(F) of this section. See, for example, § 1.482-7(g)(2)(v)(B)(1) (Discount rate variation between realistic alternatives). In circumstances where the market-correlated risks as between the cost sharing and licensing alternatives are not materially different, a reliable analysis may be possible by using the same discount rate with respect to both alternatives.

(G)

The effect of taxation on determining the arm's length amount. (1) In principle, the present values of the cost sharing and licensing alternatives should be determined by applying post-tax discount rates to post-tax income (including the post-tax value to the controlled participant of the PCT Payments). If such approach is adopted, then the post-tax value of the PCT Payments must be appropriately adjusted in order to determine the arm's length amount of the PCT Payments on a pre-tax basis. See paragraph (g)(2)(x) of this section.

(2) In certain circumstances, post-tax income may be derived as the product of the result of applying a post-tax discount rate to pre-tax income, and a factor equal to one minus the tax rate (as defined in (j)(1)(i)). See paragraph (g)(2)(v)(B) of this section.

(3) To the extent that a controlled participant's tax rate is not materially affected by whether it enters into the cost sharing or licensing alternative (or reliable adjustments may be made for varying tax rates), the factor (that is, one minus the tax rate) may be cancelled from both sides of the equation of the cost sharing and licensing alternative present values. Accordingly, in such circumstance it is sufficient to apply post-tax discount rates to projections of pre-tax income for the purpose of equating the cost sharing and licensing alternatives. The specific applications of the income method described in paragraphs (g)(4)(ii) through (iv) of this section and the examples set forth in paragraph (g)(4)(viii) of this section assume that a controlled participant's tax rate is not materially affected by whether it enters into the cost sharing or licensing alternative.

(ii)

Evaluation of PCT Payor's cost sharing alternative. The present value of the PCT Payor's cost sharing alternative is the present value of the stream of the reasonably anticipated residuals over the duration of the CSA Activity of divisional profits or losses, minus operating cost contributions, minus cost contributions, minus PCT Payments.

(iii)

Evaluation of PCT Payor's licensing alternative—

(A)

Evaluation based on CUT. The present value of the PCT Payor's licensing alternative may be determined using the comparable uncontrolled transaction method, as described in § 1.482-4(c)(1) and (2). In this case, the present value of the PCT Payor's licensing alternative is the present value of the stream, over what would be the duration of the CSA Activity under the cost sharing alternative, of the reasonably anticipated residuals of the divisional profits or losses that would be achieved under the cost sharing alternative, minus operating cost contributions that would be made under the cost sharing alternative, minus the licensing payments as determined under the comparable uncontrolled transaction method.

(B)

Evaluation based on CPM. The present value of the PCT Payor's licensing alternative may be determined using the comparable profits method, as described in § 1.482-5. In this case, the present value of the licensing alternative is determined as in paragraph (g)(4)(iii)(A) of this section, except that the PCT Payor's licensing payments, as defined in paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section, are determined in each period to equal the reasonably anticipated residuals of the divisional profits or losses that would be achieved under the cost sharing alternative, minus operating cost contributions that would be made under the cost sharing alternative, minus market returns for routine contributions, as defined in paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section. However, treatment of net operating contributions as operating cost contributions shall be coordinated with the treatment of other routine contributions pursuant to this paragraph so as to avoid duplicative market returns to such contributions.

(iv)

Lump sum payment form. Where the form of PCT Payment is a lump sum as of the date of the PCT, then, based on paragraphs (g)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section, the PCT Payment equals the difference between—

(A)

The present value, using the discount rate appropriate for the cost sharing alternative, of the stream of the reasonably anticipated residuals over the duration of the CSA Activity of divisional profits or losses, minus cost contributions and operating cost contributions; and

(B)

The present value of the licensing alternative.

(v)

Application of income method using differential income stream. In some cases, the present value of an arm's length PCT Payment may be determined as the present value, discounted at the appropriate rate, of the PCT Payor's reasonably anticipated stream of additional positive or negative income over the duration of the CSA Activity that would result (before PCT Payments) from undertaking the cost sharing alternative rather than the licensing alternative (differential income stream). See Example 9 of paragraph (g)(4)(viii) of this section.

(vi)

Best method analysis considerations.

(A)

Coordination with § 1.482-1(c). Whether results derived from this method are the most reliable measure of an arm's length result is determined using the factors described under the best method rule in § 1.482-1(c). Thus, comparability and the quality of data, the reliability of the assumptions, and the sensitivity of the results to possible deficiencies in the data and assumptions, must be considered in determining whether this method provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result.

(B)

Assumptions Concerning Tax Rates. This method will be more reliable to the extent that the controlled participants' respective tax rates are not materially affected by whether they enter into the cost sharing or licensing alternative. Even if this assumption of invariant tax rates across alternatives does not hold, this method may still be reliable to the extent that reliable adjustments can be made to reflect the variation in tax rates.

(C)

Coordination with § 1.482-4(c)(2). If the licensing alternative is evaluated using the comparable uncontrolled transactions method, as described in paragraph (g)(4)(iii)(A) of this section, any additional comparability and reliability considerations stated in § 1.482-4(c)(2) may apply.

(D)

Coordination with § 1.482-5(c). If the licensing alternative is evaluated using the comparable profits method, as described in paragraph (g)(4)(iii)(B) of this section, any additional comparability and reliability considerations stated in § 1.482-5(c) may apply.

(E)

Certain Circumstances Concerning PCT Payor. This method may be used even if the PCT Payor furnishes significant operating contributions, or commits to assume the risk of significant operating cost contributions, to the PCT Payor's division. However, in such a case, any comparable uncontrolled transactions described in paragraph (g)(4)(iii)(A) of this section, and any comparable transactions used under § 1.482-5(c) as described in paragraphs (g)(4)(iii)(B) of this section, should be consistent with such contributions (or reliable adjustments must be made for material differences).

(F)

Discount rates— (1) Reflection of similar risk profiles of cost sharing alternative and licensing alternative. Because the financial projections associated with the licensing and cost sharing alternatives are the same, except for the licensing payments to be made under the licensing alternative and the cost contributions and PCT Payments to be made under the cost sharing alternative, the analysis of the risk profile and financial projections for a realistic alternative to the cost sharing alternative must be closely associated with the risk profile and financial projections associated with the cost sharing alternative, differing only in the treatment of licensing payments, cost contributions, and PCT Payments. When using discount rates in applying the income method, this means that even if different discount rates are warranted for the two alternatives, the risk profiles for the two discount rates are closely related to each other because the discount rate for the licensing alternative and the discount rate for the cost sharing alternative are both derived from the single probability-weighted financial projections associated with the CSA Activity. The difference, if any, in market-correlated risks between the licensing and cost sharing alternatives is due solely to the different effects on risks of the PCT Payor making licensing payments under the licensing alternative, on the one hand, and the PCT Payor making cost contributions and PCT Payments under the cost sharing alternative, on the other hand. That is, the difference in the risk profile between the two scenarios solely reflects the incremental risk, if any, associated with the cost contributions taken on by the PCT Payor in developing the cost shared intangible under the cost sharing alternative, and the difference, if any, in risk associated with the particular payment forms of the licensing payments and the PCT Payments, in light of the fact that the licensing payments in the licensing alternative are partially replaced by cost contributions and partially replaced by PCT Payments in the cost sharing alternative, each with its own payment form. An analysis under the income method that uses a different discount rate for the cost sharing alternative than for the licensing alternative will be more reliable the greater the extent to which the difference, if any, between the two discount rates reflects solely these differences in the risk profiles of these two alternatives. See, for example, paragraph (g)(2)(iii), Example 2 of this section.

(2) Use of differential income stream as a consideration in assessing the best method. An analysis under the income method that uses a different discount rate for the cost sharing alternative than for the licensing alternative will be more reliable the greater the extent to which the implied discount rate for the projected present value of the differential income stream is consistent with reliable direct evidence of the appropriate discount rate applicable for activities reasonably anticipated to generate an income stream with a similar risk profile to the differential income stream. Such differential income stream is defined as the stream of the reasonably anticipated residuals of the PCT Payor's licensing payments to be made under the licensing alternative, minus the PCT Payor's cost contributions to be made under the cost sharing alternative. See Example 8 of paragraph (g)(4)(viii) of this section.

(vii)

Routine platform and operating contributions. For purposes of this paragraph (g)(4), any routine contributions that are platform or operating contributions, the valuation and PCT Payments for which are determined and made independently of the income method, are treated similarly to cost contributions and operating cost contributions, respectively. Accordingly, wherever used in this paragraph (g)(4), the term “routine contributions” shall not include routine platform or operating contributions, and wherever the terms “cost contributions” and “operating cost contributions” appear in this paragraph, they shall include net routine platform contributions and net routine operating contributions, respectively. Net routine platform contributions are the value of a controlled participant's total reasonably anticipated routine platform contributions, plus its reasonably anticipated PCT Payments to other controlled participants in respect of their routine platform contributions, minus the reasonably anticipated PCT Payments it is to receive from other controlled participants in respect of its routine platform contributions. Net routine operating contributions are the value of a controlled participant's total reasonably anticipated routine operating contributions, plus its reasonably anticipated arm's length compensation to other controlled participants in respect of their routine operating contributions, minus the reasonably anticipated arm's length compensation it is to receive from other controlled participants in respect of its routine operating contributions.

(viii)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (g)(4):

(5)

Acquisition price method—

(i)

In general. The acquisition price method applies the comparable uncontrolled transaction method of § 1.482-4(c), or the comparable uncontrolled services price method described in § 1.482-9(c), to evaluate whether the amount charged in a PCT, or group of PCTs, is arm's length by reference to the amount charged (the acquisition price) for the stock or asset purchase of an entire organization or portion thereof (the target) in an uncontrolled transaction. The acquisition price method is ordinarily used where substantially all the target's nonroutine contributions, as such term is defined in paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section, made to the PCT Payee's business activities are covered by a PCT or group of PCTs.

(ii)

Determination of arm's length charge. Under this method, the arm's length charge for a PCT or group of PCTs covering resources, capabilities, and rights of the target is equal to the adjusted acquisition price, as divided among the controlled participants according to their respective RAB shares.

(iii)

Adjusted acquisition price. The adjusted acquisition price is the acquisition price of the target increased by the value of the target's liabilities on the date of the acquisition, other than liabilities not assumed in the case of an asset purchase, and decreased by the value of the target's tangible property on that date and by the value on that date of any other resources, capabilities, and rights not covered by a PCT or group of PCTs.

(iv)

Best method analysis considerations. The comparability and reliability considerations stated in § 1.482-4(c)(2) apply. Consistent with those considerations, the reliability of applying the acquisition price method as a measure of the arm's length charge for the PCT Payment normally is reduced if—

(A)

A substantial portion of the target's nonroutine contributions to the PCT Payee's business activities is not required to be covered by a PCT or group of PCTs, and that portion of the nonroutine contributions cannot reliably be valued;

(B)

A substantial portion of the target's assets consists of tangible property that cannot reliably be valued; or

(C)

The date on which the target is acquired and the date of the PCT are not contemporaneous.

(v)

Example. The following example illustrates the principles of this paragraph (g)(5):

(6)

Market capitalization method—

(i)

In general. The market capitalization method applies the comparable uncontrolled transaction method of § 1.482-4(c), or the comparable uncontrolled services price method described in § 1.482-9(c), to evaluate whether the amount charged in a PCT, or group of PCTs, is arm's length by reference to the average market capitalization of a controlled participant (PCT Payee) whose stock is regularly traded on an established securities market. The market capitalization method is ordinarily used where substantially all of the PCT Payee's nonroutine contributions to the PCT Payee's business are covered by a PCT or group of PCTs.

(ii)

Determination of arm's length charge. Under the market capitalization method, the arm's length charge for a PCT or group of PCTs covering resources, capabilities, and rights of the PCT Payee is equal to the adjusted average market capitalization, as divided among the controlled participants according to their respective RAB shares.

(iii)

Average market capitalization. The average market capitalization is the average of the daily market capitalizations of the PCT Payee over a period of time beginning 60 days before the date of the PCT and ending on the date of the PCT. The daily market capitalization of the PCT Payee is calculated on each day its stock is actively traded as the total number of shares outstanding multiplied by the adjusted closing price of the stock on that day. The adjusted closing price is the daily closing price of the stock, after adjustments for stock-based transactions (dividends and stock splits) and other pending corporate (combination and spin-off) restructuring transactions for which reliable arm's length adjustments can be made.

(iv)

Adjusted average market capitalization. The adjusted average market capitalization is the average market capitalization of the PCT Payee increased by the value of the PCT Payee's liabilities on the date of the PCT and decreased by the value on such date of the PCT Payee's tangible property and of any other resources, capabilities, or rights of the PCT Payee not covered by a PCT or group of PCTs.

(v)

Best method analysis considerations. The comparability and reliability considerations stated in § 1.482-4(c)(2) apply. Consistent with those considerations, the reliability of applying the comparable uncontrolled transaction method using the adjusted market capitalization of a company as a measure of the arm's length charge for the PCT Payment normally is reduced if—

(A)

A substantial portion of the PCT Payee's nonroutine contributions to its business activities is not required to be covered by a PCT or group of PCTs, and that portion of the nonroutine contributions cannot reliably be valued;

(B)

A substantial portion of the PCT Payee's assets consists of tangible property that cannot reliably be valued; or

(C)

Facts and circumstances demonstrate the likelihood of a material divergence between the average market capitalization of the PCT Payee and the value of its resources, capabilities, and rights for which reliable adjustments cannot be made.

(vi)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (g)(6):

(7)

Residual profit split method—

(i)

In general. The residual profit split method evaluates whether the allocation of combined operating profit or loss attributable to one or more platform contributions subject to a PCT is arm's length by reference to the relative value of each controlled participant's contribution to that combined operating profit or loss. The combined operating profit or loss must be derived from the most narrowly identifiable business activity (relevant business activity) of the controlled participants for which data are available that include the CSA Activity. The residual profit split method may not be used where only one controlled participant makes significant nonroutine contributions (including platform or operating contributions) to the CSA Activity. The provisions of § 1.482-6 shall apply to CSAs only to the extent provided and as modified in this paragraph (g)(7). Any other application to a CSA of a residual profit method not described in paragraphs (g)(7)(ii) and (iii) of this section will constitute an unspecified method for purposes of sections 482 and 6662(e) and the regulations under those sections.

(ii)

Appropriate share of profits and losses. The relative value of each controlled participant's contribution to the success of the relevant business activity must be determined in a manner that reflects the functions performed, risks assumed, and resources employed by each participant in the relevant business activity, consistent with the best method analysis described in § 1.482-1(c) and (d). Such an allocation is intended to correspond to the division of profit or loss that would result from an arrangement between uncontrolled taxpayers, each performing functions similar to those of the various controlled participants engaged in the relevant business activity. The profit allocated to any particular controlled participant is not necessarily limited to the total operating profit of the group from the relevant business activity. For example, in a given year, one controlled participant may earn a profit while another controlled participant incurs a loss. In addition, it may not be assumed that the combined operating profit or loss from the relevant business activity should be shared equally, or in any other arbitrary proportion.

(iii)

Profit split—

(A)

In general. Under the residual profit split method, the present value of each controlled participant's residual divisional profit or loss attributable to nonroutine contributions (nonroutine residual divisional profit or loss) is allocated between the controlled participants that each furnish significant nonroutine contributions (including platform or operating contributions) to the relevant business activity in that division.

(B)

Determine nonroutine residual divisional profit or loss. The present value of each controlled participant's nonroutine residual divisional profit or loss must be determined to reflect the most reliable measure of an arm's length result. The present value of nonroutine residual divisional profit or loss equals the present value of the stream of the reasonably anticipated residuals over the duration of the CSA Activity of divisional profit or loss, minus market returns for routine contributions, minus operating cost contributions, minus cost contributions, using a discount rate appropriate to such residuals in accordance with paragraph (g)(2)(v) of this section. As used in this paragraph (g)(7), the phrase “market returns for routine contributions” includes market returns for operating cost contributions and excludes market returns for cost contributions.

(C)

Allocate nonroutine residual divisional profit or loss— (1) In general. The present value of nonroutine residual divisional profit or loss in each controlled participant's division must be allocated among all of the controlled participants based upon the relative values, determined as of the date of the PCTs, of the PCT Payor's as compared to the PCT Payee's nonroutine contributions to the PCT Payor's division. For this purpose, the PCT Payor's nonroutine contribution consists of the sum of the PCT Payor's nonroutine operating contributions and the PCT Payor's RAB share of the PCT Payor's nonroutine platform contributions. For this purpose, the PCT Payee's nonroutine contribution consists of the PCT Payor's RAB share of the PCT Payee's nonroutine platform contributions.

(2) Relative value determination. The relative values of the controlled participants' nonroutine contributions must be determined so as to reflect the most reliable measure of an arm's length result. Relative values may be measured by external market benchmarks that reflect the fair market value of such nonroutine contributions. Alternatively, the relative value of nonroutine contributions may be estimated by the capitalized cost of developing the nonroutine contributions and updates, as appropriately grown or discounted so that all contributions may be valued on a comparable dollar basis as of the same date. If the nonroutine contributions by a controlled participant are also used in other business activities (such as the exploitation of make-or-sell rights described in paragraph (c)(4) of this section), an allocation of the value of the nonroutine contributions must be made on a reasonable basis among all the business activities in which they are used in proportion to the relative economic value that the relevant business activity and such other business activities are anticipated to derive over time as the result of such nonroutine contributions.

(3) Determination of PCT Payments. Any amount of the present value of a controlled participant's nonroutine residual divisional profit or loss that is allocated to another controlled participant represents the present value of the PCT Payments due to that other controlled participant for its platform contributions to the relevant business activity in the relevant division. For purposes of paragraph (j)(3)(ii) of this section, the present value of a PCT Payor's PCT Payments under this paragraph shall be deemed reduced to the extent of the present value of any PCT Payments owed to it from other controlled participants under this paragraph (g)(7). The resulting remainder may be converted to a fixed or contingent form of payment in accordance with paragraph (h) (Form of payment rules) of this section.

(4) Routine platform and operating contributions. For purposes of this paragraph (g)(7), any routine platform or operating contributions, the valuation and PCT Payments for which are determined and made independently of the residual profit split method, are treated similarly to cost contributions and operating cost contributions, respectively. Accordingly, wherever used in this paragraph (g)(7), the term “routine contributions” shall not include routine platform or operating contributions, and wherever the terms “cost contributions” and “operating cost contributions” appear in this paragraph (g)(7), they shall include net routine platform contributions and net routine operating contributions, respectively, as defined in paragraph (g)(4)(vii) of this section. However, treatment of net operating contributions as operating cost contributions shall be coordinated with the treatment of other routine contributions pursuant to paragraphs (g)(4)(iii)(B) and (7)(iii)(B) of this section so as to avoid duplicative market returns to such contributions.

(iv)

Best method analysis considerations—

(A)

In general. Whether results derived from this method are the most reliable measure of the arm's length result is determined using the factors described under the best method rule in § 1.482-1(c). Thus, comparability and quality of data, reliability of assumptions, and sensitivity of results to possible deficiencies in the data and assumptions, must be considered in determining whether this method provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result. The application of these factors to the residual profit split in the context of the relevant business activity of developing and exploiting cost shared intangibles is discussed in paragraphs (g)(7)(iv)(B) through (D) of this section.

(B)

Comparability. The derivation of the present value of nonroutine residual divisional profit or loss includes a carveout on account of market returns for routine contributions. Thus, the comparability considerations that are relevant for that purpose include those that are relevant for the methods that are used to determine market returns for the routine contributions.

(C)

(1) The reliability of the allocation of costs, income, and assets between the relevant business activity and the controlled participants' other activities that will affect the reliability of the determination of the divisional profit or loss and its allocation among the controlled participants. See § 1.482-6(c)(2)(ii)(C)(1).

(2) The degree of consistency between the controlled participants and uncontrolled taxpayers in accounting practices that materially affect the items that determine the amount and allocation of operating profit or loss affects the reliability of the result. See § 1.482-6(c)(2)(ii)(C)(2).

(3) The reliability of the data used and the assumptions made in estimating the relative value of the nonroutine contributions by the controlled participants. In particular, if capitalized costs of development are used to estimate the relative value of nonroutine contributions, the reliability of the results is reduced relative to the reliability of other methods that do not require such an estimate. This is because, in any given case, the costs of developing a nonroutine contribution may not be related to its market value and because the calculation of the capitalized costs of development may require the allocation of indirect costs between the relevant business activity and the controlled participant's other activities, which may affect the reliability of the analysis.

(D)

Other factors affecting reliability. Like the methods described in §§ 1.482-3 through 1.482-5 and § 1.482-9(c), the carveout on account of market returns for routine contributions relies exclusively on external market benchmarks. As indicated in § 1.482-1(c)(2)(i), as the degree of comparability between the controlled participants and uncontrolled transactions increases, the relative weight accorded the analysis under this method will increase. In addition, to the extent the allocation of nonroutine residual divisional profit or loss is not based on external market benchmarks, the reliability of the analysis will be decreased in relation to an analysis under a method that relies on market benchmarks. Finally, the reliability of the analysis under this method may be enhanced by the fact that all the controlled participants are evaluated under the residual profit split. However, the reliability of the results of an analysis based on information from all the controlled participants is affected by the reliability of the data and the assumptions pertaining to each controlled participant. Thus, if the data and assumptions are significantly more reliable with respect to one of the controlled participants than with respect to the others, a different method, focusing solely on the results of that party, may yield more reliable results.

(v)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (g)(7):

(8)

Unspecified methods. Methods not specified in paragraphs (g)(3) through (7) of this section may be used to evaluate whether the amount charged for a PCT is arm's length. Any method used under this paragraph (g)(8) must be applied in accordance with the provisions of § 1.482-1 and of paragraph (g)(2) of this section. Consistent with the specified methods, an unspecified method should take into account the general principle that uncontrolled taxpayers evaluate the terms of a transaction by considering the realistic alternatives to that transaction, and only enter into a particular transaction if none of the alternatives is preferable to it. Therefore, in establishing whether a PCT achieved an arm's length result, an unspecified method should provide information on the prices or profits that the controlled participant could have realized by choosing a realistic alternative to the CSA. See paragraph (k)(2)(ii)(J) of this section. As with any method, an unspecified method will not be applied unless it provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result under the principles of the best method rule. See § 1.482-1(c) (Best method rule). In accordance with § 1.482-1(d) (Comparability), to the extent that an unspecified method relies on internal data rather than uncontrolled comparables, its reliability will be reduced. Similarly, the reliability of a method will be affected by the reliability of the data and assumptions used to apply the method, including any projections used.

(h)

Form of payment rules—

(1)

CST Payments. CST Payments may not be paid in shares of stock in the payor (or stock in any member of the controlled group that includes the controlled participants).

(2)

PCT Payments—

(i)

In general. The consideration under a PCT for a platform contribution may take one or a combination of both of the following forms:

(A)

Payments of a fixed amount (fixed payments), either paid in a lump sum payment or in installment payments spread over a specified period, with interest calculated in accordance with § 1.482-2(a) (Loans or advances).

(B)

Payments contingent on the exploitation of cost shared intangibles by the PCT Payor (contingent payments). Accordingly, controlled participants have flexibility to adopt a form and period of payment, provided that such form and period of payment are consistent with an arm's length charge as of the date of the PCT. See also paragraphs (h)(2)(iv) and (3) of this section.

(ii)

No PCT Payor Stock. PCT Payments may not be paid in shares of stock in the PCT Payor (or stock in any member of the controlled group that includes the controlled participants).

(iii)

Specified form of payment—

(A)

In general. The form of payment selected (subject to the rules of this paragraph (h)) for any PCT, including, in the case of contingent payments, the contingent base and structure of the payments as set forth in paragraph (h)(2)(iii)(B) of this section, must be specified no later than the due date of the applicable tax return (including extensions) for the later of the taxable year of the PCT Payor or PCT Payee that includes the date of that PCT.

(B)

Contingent payments. In accordance with paragraph (k)(1)(iv)(A) of this section, a provision of a written contract described in paragraph (k)(1) of this section, or of the additional documentation described in paragraph (k)(2) of this section, that provides for payments for a PCT (or group of PCTs) to be contingent on the exploitation of cost shared intangibles will be respected as consistent with economic substance only if the allocation between the controlled participants of the risks attendant on such form of payment is determinable before the outcomes of such allocation that would have materially affected the PCT pricing are known or reasonably knowable. A contingent payment provision must clearly and unambiguously specify the basis on which the contingent payment obligations are to be determined. In particular, the contingent payment provision must clearly and unambiguously specify the events that give rise to an obligation to make PCT Payments, the royalty base (such as sales or revenues), and the computation used to determine the PCT Payments. The royalty base specified must be one that permits verification of its proper use by reference to books and records maintained by the controlled participants in the normal course of business (for example, books and records maintained for financial accounting or business management purposes).

(C)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (h)(2).

(iv)

Conversion from fixed to contingent form of payment. With regard to a conversion of a fixed present value to a contingent form of payment, see paragraphs (g)(2)(v) (Discount rate) and (vi) (Financial projections) of this section.

(3)

Coordination of best method rule and form of payment. A method described in paragraph (g)(1) of this section evaluates the arm's length amount charged in a PCT in terms of a form of payment (method payment form). For example, the method payment form for the acquisition price method described in paragraph (g)(5) of this section, and for the market capitalization method described in paragraph (g)(6) of this section, is fixed payment. Applications of the income method provide different method payment forms. See paragraphs (g)(4)(i)(E) and (iv) of this section. The method payment form may not necessarily correspond to the form of payment specified pursuant to paragraphs (h)(2)(iii) and (k)(2)(ii)(l) of this section (specified payment form). The determination under § 1.482-1(c) of the method that provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result is to be made without regard to whether the respective method payment forms under the competing methods correspond to the specified payment form. If the method payment form of the method determined under § 1.482-1(c) to provide the most reliable measure of an arm's length result differs from the specified payment form, then the conversion from such method payment form to such specified payment form will be made to the satisfaction of the Commissioner.

(i)

Allocations by the Commissioner in connection with a CSA—

(1)

In general. The Commissioner may make allocations to adjust the results of a controlled transaction in connection with a CSA so that the results are consistent with an arm's length result, in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph (i).

(2)

CST allocations—

(i)

In general. The Commissioner may make allocations to adjust the results of a CST so that the results are consistent with an arm's length result, including any allocations to make each controlled participant's IDC share, as determined under paragraph (d)(4) of this section, equal to that participant's RAB share, as determined under paragraph (e)(1) of this section. Such allocations may result from, for purposes of CST determinations, adjustments to—

(A)

Redetermine IDCs by adding any costs (or cost categories) that are directly identified with, or are reasonably allocable to, the IDA, or by removing any costs (or cost categories) that are not IDCs;

(B)

Reallocate costs between the IDA and other business activities;

(C)

Improve the reliability of the selection or application of the basis used for measuring benefits for purposes of estimating a controlled participant's RAB share;

(D)

Improve the reliability of the projections used to estimate RAB shares, including adjustments described in paragraph (i)(2)(ii) of this section; and

(E)

Allocate among the controlled participants any unallocated interests in cost shared intangibles.

(ii)

Adjustments to improve the reliability of projections used to estimate RAB shares—

(A)

Unreliable projections. A significant divergence between projected benefit shares and benefit shares adjusted to take into account any available actual benefits to date (adjusted benefit shares) may indicate that the projections were not reliable for purposes of estimating RAB shares. In such a case, the Commissioner may use adjusted benefit shares as the most reliable measure of RAB shares and adjust IDC shares accordingly. The projected benefit shares will not be considered unreliable, as applied in a given taxable year, based on a divergence from adjusted benefit shares for every controlled participant that is less than or equal to 20% of the participant's projected benefits share. Further, the Commissioner will not make an allocation based on such divergence if the difference is due to an extraordinary event, beyond the control of the controlled participants, which could not reasonably have been anticipated at the time that costs were shared. The Commissioner generally may adjust projections of benefits used to calculate benefit shares in accordance with the provisions of § 1.482-1. In particular, if benefits are projected over a period of years, and the projections for initial years of the period prove to be unreliable, this may indicate that the projections for the remaining years of the period are also unreliable and thus should be adjusted. For purposes of this paragraph (i)(2)(ii)(A), all controlled participants that are not U.S. persons are treated as a single controlled participant. Therefore, an adjustment based on an unreliable projection of RAB shares will be made to the IDC shares of foreign controlled participants only if there is a matching adjustment to the IDC shares of controlled participants that are U.S. persons. Nothing in this paragraph (i)(2)(ii)(A) prevents the Commissioner from making an allocation if a taxpayer did not use the most reliable basis for measuring anticipated benefits. For example, if the taxpayer measures its anticipated benefits based on units sold, and the Commissioner determines that another basis is more reliable for measuring anticipated benefits, then the fact that actual units sold were within 20% of the projected unit sales will not preclude an allocation under this section.

(B)

Foreign-to-foreign adjustments. Adjustments to IDC shares based on an unreliable projection also may be made among foreign controlled participants if the variation between actual and projected benefits has the effect of substantially reducing U.S. tax.

(C)

Correlative adjustments to PCTs. Correlative adjustments will be made to any PCT Payments of a fixed amount that were determined based on RAB shares that are subsequently adjusted on a finding that they were based on unreliable projections. No correlative adjustments will be made to contingent PCT Payments regardless of whether RAB shares were used as a parameter in the valuation of those payments.

(D)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (i)(2)(ii):

(iii)

Timing of CST allocations. If the Commissioner makes an allocation to adjust the results of a CST, the allocation must be reflected for tax purposes in the year in which the IDCs were incurred. When a CST payment is owed by one controlled participant to another controlled participant, the Commissioner may make appropriate allocations to reflect an arm's length rate of interest for the time value of money, consistent with the provisions of § 1.482-2(a) (Loans or advances).

(3)

PCT allocations. The Commissioner may make allocations to adjust the results of a PCT so that the results are consistent with an arm's length result in accordance with the provisions of the applicable sections of the regulations under section 482, as determined pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

(4)

Allocations regarding changes in participation under a CSA. The Commissioner may make allocations to adjust the results of any controlled transaction described in paragraph (f) of this section if the controlled participants do not reflect arm's length results in relation to any such transaction.

(5)

Allocations when CSTs are consistently and materially disproportionate to RAB shares. If a controlled participant bears IDC shares that are consistently and materially greater or lesser than its RAB share, then the Commissioner may conclude that the economic substance of the arrangement between the controlled participants is inconsistent with the terms of the CSA. In such a case, the Commissioner may disregard such terms and impute an agreement that is consistent with the controlled participants' course of conduct, under which a controlled participant that bore a disproportionately greater IDC share received additional interests in the cost shared intangibles. See §§ 1.482-1(d)(3)(ii)(B) (Identifying contractual terms) and 1.482-4(f)(3)(ii) (Identification of owner). Such additional interests will consist of partial undivided interests in the other controlled participant's interest in the cost shared intangible. Accordingly, that controlled participant must receive arm's length consideration from any controlled participant whose IDC share is less than its RAB share over time, under the provisions of §§ 1.482-1 and 1.482-4 through 1.482-6 to provide compensation for the latter controlled participants' use of such partial undivided interest.

(6)

Periodic adjustments—

(i)

In general. Subject to the exceptions in paragraph (i)(6)(vi) of this section, the Commissioner may make periodic adjustments for an open taxable year (the Adjustment Year) and for all subsequent taxable years for the duration of the CSA Activity with respect to all PCT Payments, if the Commissioner determines that, for a particular PCT (the Trigger PCT), a particular controlled participant that owes or owed a PCT Payment relating to that PCT (such controlled participant being referred to as the PCT Payor for purposes of this paragraph (i)(6)) has realized an Actually Experienced Return Ratio (AERR) that is outside the Periodic Return Ratio Range (PRRR). The satisfaction of the condition stated in the preceding sentence is referred to as a Periodic Trigger. See paragraphs (i)(6)(ii) through (vi) of this section regarding the PRRR, the AERR, and periodic adjustments. In determining whether to make such adjustments, the Commissioner may consider whether the outcome as adjusted more reliably reflects an arm's length result under all the relevant facts and circumstances, including any information known as of the Determination Date. The Determination Date is the date of the relevant determination by the Commissioner. The failure of the Commissioner to determine for an earlier taxable year that a PCT Payment was not arm's length will not preclude the Commissioner from making a periodic adjustment for a subsequent year. A periodic adjustment under this paragraph (i)(6) may be made without regard to whether the taxable year of the Trigger PCT or any other PCT remains open for statute of limitations purposes or whether a periodic adjustment has previously been made with respect to any PCT Payment.

(ii)

PRRR. Except as provided in the next sentence, the PRRR will consist of return ratios that are not less than .667 nor more than 1.5. Alternatively, if the controlled participants have not substantially complied with the documentation requirements referenced in paragraph (k) of this section, as modified, if applicable, by paragraphs (m)(2) and (3) of this section, the PRRR will consist of return ratios that are not less than .8 nor more than 1.25.

(iii)

AERR—

(A)

In general. The AERR is the present value of total profits (PVTP) divided by the present value of investment (PVI). In computing PVTP and PVI, present values are computed using the applicable discount rate (ADR), and all information available as of the Determination Date is taken into account.

(B)

PVTP. The PVTP is the present value, as of the CSA Start Date, as defined in section (j)(1)(i) of this section, of the PCT Payor's actually experienced divisional profits or losses from the CSA Start Date through the end of the Adjustment Year.

(C)

PVI. The PVI is the present value, as of the CSA Start Date, of the PCT Payor's investment associated with the CSA Activity, defined as the sum of its cost contributions and its PCT Payments, from the CSA Start Date through the end of the Adjustment Year. For purposes of computing the PVI, PCT Payments means all PCT Payments due from a PCT Payor before netting against PCT Payments due from other controlled participants pursuant to paragraph (j)(3)(ii) of this section.

(iv)

ADR—

(A)

In general. Except as provided in paragraph (i)(6)(iv)(B) of this section, the ADR is the discount rate pursuant to paragraph (g)(2)(v) of this section, subject to such adjustments as the Commissioner determines appropriate.

(B)

Publicly traded companies. If the PCT Payor meets the conditions of paragraph (i)(6)(iv)(C) of this section, the ADR is the PCT Payor WACC as of the date of the Trigger PCT. However, if the Commissioner determines, or the controlled participants establish to the satisfaction of the Commissioner, that a discount rate other than the PCT Payor WACC better reflects the degree of risk of the CSA Activity as of such date, the ADR is such other discount rate.

(C)

Publicly traded. A PCT Payor meets the conditions of this paragraph (i)(6)(iv)(C) if—

(1) Stock of the PCT Payor is publicly traded; or

(2) Stock of the PCT Payor is not publicly traded, provided the PCT Payor is included in a group of companies for which consolidated financial statements are prepared; and a publicly traded company in such group owns, directly or indirectly, stock in PCT Payor. Stock of a company is publicly traded within the meaning of this paragraph (i)(6)(iv)(C) if such stock is regularly traded on an established United States securities market and the company issues financial statements prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles for the taxable year.

(D)

PCT Payor WACC. The PCT Payor WACC is the WACC, as defined in paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section, of the PCT Payor or the publicly traded company described in paragraph (i)(6)(iv)(C)(2)(ii) of this section, as the case may be.

(E)

Generally accepted accounting principles. For purposes of paragraph (i)(6)(iv)(C) of this section, a financial statement prepared in accordance with a comprehensive body of generally accepted accounting principles other than United States generally accepted accounting principles is considered to be prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles provided that the amounts of debt, equity, and interest expense are reflected in any reconciliation between such other accounting principles and United States generally accepted accounting principles required to be incorporated into the financial statement by the securities laws governing companies whose stock is regularly traded on United States securities markets.

(v)

Determination of periodic adjustments. In the event of a Periodic Trigger, subject to paragraph (i)(6)(vi) of this section, the Commissioner may make periodic adjustments with respect to all PCT Payments between all PCT Payors and PCT Payees for the Adjustment Year and all subsequent years for the duration of the CSA Activity pursuant to the residual profit split method as provided in paragraph (g)(7) of this section, subject to the further modifications in this paragraph (i)(6)(v). A periodic adjustment may be made for a particular taxable year without regard to whether the taxable years of the Trigger PCT or other PCTs remain open for statute of limitation purposes.

(A)

In general. Periodic adjustments are determined by the following steps:

(1) First, determine the present value, as of the date of the Trigger PCT, of the PCT Payments under paragraph (g)(7)(iii)(C)(3) of this section pursuant to the Adjusted RPSM as defined in paragraph (i)(6)(v)(B) of this section (first step result).

(2) Second, convert the first step result into a stream of contingent payments on a base of reasonably anticipated divisional profits or losses over the entire duration of the CSA Activity, using a level royalty rate (second step rate). See paragraph (h)(2)(iv) of this section (Conversion from fixed to contingent form of payment). This conversion is made based on all information known as of the Determination Date.

(3) Third, apply the second step rate to the actual divisional profit or loss for taxable years preceding and including the Adjustment Year to yield a stream of contingent payments for such years, and convert such stream to a present value as of the CSA Start Date under the principles of paragraph (g)(2)(v) of this section (third step result). For this purpose, the second step rate applied to a loss for a particular year will yield a negative contingent payment for that year.

(4) Fourth, convert any actual PCT Payments up through the Adjustment Year to a present value as of the CSA Start Date under the principles of paragraph (g)(2)(v) of this section. Then subtract such amount from the third step result. Determine the nominal amount in the Adjustment Year that would have a present value as of the CSA Start Date equal to the present value determined in the previous sentence to determine the periodic adjustment in the Adjustment Year.

(5) Fifth, apply the second step rate to the actual divisional profit or loss for each taxable year after the Adjustment Year up to and including the taxable year that includes the Determination Date to yield a stream of contingent payments for such years. For this purpose, the second step rate applied to a loss will yield a negative contingent payment for that year. Then subtract from each such payment any actual PCT Payment made for the same year to determine the periodic adjustment for such taxable year.

(6) For each taxable year subsequent to the year that includes the Determination Date, the periodic adjustment for such taxable year (which is in lieu of any PCT Payment that would otherwise be payable for that year under the taxpayer's position) equals the second step rate applied to the actual divisional profit or loss for that year. For this purpose, the second step rate applied to a loss for a particular year will yield a negative contingent payment for that year.

(7) If the periodic adjustment for any taxable year is a positive amount, then it is an additional PCT Payment owed from the PCT Payor to the PCT Payee for such year. If the periodic adjustment for any taxable year is a negative amount, then it is an additional PCT Payment owed by the PCT Payee to the PCT Payor for such year.

(B)

Adjusted RPSM as of Determination Date. The Adjusted RPSM is the residual profit split method pursuant to paragraph (g)(7) of this section applied to determine the present value, as of the date of the Trigger PCT, of the PCT Payments under paragraph (g)(7)(iii)(C)(3) of this section, with the following modifications.

(1) Actual results up through the Determination Date shall be substituted for what otherwise were the projected results over such period, as reasonably anticipated as of the date of the Trigger PCT.

(2) Projected results for the balance of the CSA Activity after the Determination Date, as reasonably anticipated as of the Determination Date, shall be substituted for what otherwise were the projected results over such period, as reasonably anticipated as of the date of the Trigger PCT.

(3) The requirement in paragraph (g)(7)(i) of this section, that at least two controlled participants make significant nonroutine contributions, does not apply.

(vi)

Exceptions to periodic adjustments—

(A)

Controlled participants establish periodic adjustment not warranted. No periodic adjustment will be made under paragraphs (i)(6)(i) and (v) of this section if the controlled participants establish to the satisfaction of the Commissioner that all the conditions described in one of paragraphs (i)(6)(vi)(A)(1) through (4) of this section apply with respect to the Trigger PCT.

(1) Transactions involving the same platform contribution as in the Trigger PCT.

(i) The same platform contribution is furnished to an uncontrolled taxpayer under substantially the same circumstances as those of the relevant Trigger PCT and with a similar form of payment as the Trigger PCT;

(ii) This transaction serves as the basis for the application of the comparable uncontrolled transaction method described in paragraph (g)(3) of this section, in the first year and all subsequent years in which substantial PCT Payments relating to the Trigger PCT were required to be paid; and

(iii) The amount of those PCT Payments in that first year was arm's length.

(2) Results not reasonably anticipated. The differential between the AERR and the nearest bound of the PRRR is due to extraordinary events beyond the control of the controlled participants that could not reasonably have been anticipated as of the date of the Trigger PCT.

(3) Reduced AERR does not cause Periodic Trigger. The Periodic Trigger would not have occurred had the PCT Payor's divisional profits or losses used to calculate its PVTP both taken into account expenses on account of operating cost contributions and routine platform contributions, and excluded those profits or losses attributable to the PCT Payor's routine contributions to its exploitation of cost shared intangibles, nonroutine contributions to the CSA Activity, operating cost contributions, and routine platform contributions.

(4) Increased AERR does not cause Periodic Trigger—(i) The Periodic Trigger would not have occurred had the divisional profits or losses of the PCT Payor used to calculate its PVTP included its reasonably anticipated divisional profits or losses after the Adjustment Year from the CSA Activity, including from its routine contributions, its operating cost contributions, and its nonroutine contributions to that activity, and had the cost contributions and PCT Payments of the PCT Payor used to calculate its PVI included its reasonably anticipated cost contributions and PCT Payments after the Adjustment Year. The reasonably anticipated amounts in the previous sentence are determined based on all information available as of the Determination Date.

(ii) For purposes of this paragraph (i)(6)(vi)(A)(4), the controlled participants may, if they wish, assume that the average yearly divisional profits or losses for all taxable years prior to and including the Adjustment Year, in which there has been substantial exploitation of cost shared intangibles resulting from the CSA (exploitation years), will continue to be earned in each year over a period of years equal to 15 minus the number of exploitation years prior to and including the Determination Date.

(B)

Circumstances in which Periodic Trigger deemed not to occur. No Periodic Trigger will be deemed to have occurred at the times and in the circumstances described in paragraph (i)(6)(vi)(B)(1) or (2) of this section.

(1) 10-year period. In any year subsequent to the 10-year period beginning with the first taxable year in which there is substantial exploitation of cost shared intangibles resulting from the CSA, if the AERR determined is within the PRRR for each year of such 10-year period.

(2) 5-year period. In any year of the 5-year period beginning with the first taxable year in which there is substantial exploitation of cost shared intangibles resulting from the CSA, if the AERR falls below the lower bound of the PRRR.

(vii)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the rules of this paragraph (i)(6):

(j)

Definitions and special rules—

(1)

Definitions—

(i)

In general. For purposes of this section—

(ii)

Examples. The following examples illustrate certain definitions in paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section:

(2)

Special rules—

(i)

Consolidated group. For purposes of this section, all members of the same consolidated group shall be treated as one taxpayer. For these purposes, the term consolidated group means all members of a group of controlled entities created or organized within a single country and subjected to an income tax by such country on the basis of their combined income.

(ii)

Trade or business. A participant that is a foreign corporation or nonresident alien individual will not be treated as engaged in a trade or business within the United States solely by reason of its participation in a CSA. See generally § 1.864-2(a).

(iii)

Partnership. A CSA, or an arrangement to which the Commissioner applies the rules of this section, will not be treated as a partnership to which the rules of subchapter K of the Internal Revenue Code apply. See § 301.7701-1(c) of this chapter.

(3)

Character—

(i)

CST Payments. CST Payments generally will be considered the payor's costs of developing intangibles at the location where such development is conducted. For these purposes, IDCs borne directly by a controlled participant that are deductible are deemed to be reduced to the extent of any CST Payments owed to it by other controlled participants pursuant to the CSA. Each cost sharing payment received by a payee will be treated as coming pro rata from payments made by all payors and will be applied pro rata against the deductions for the taxable year that the payee is allowed in connection with the IDCs. Payments received in excess of such deductions will be treated as in consideration for use of the land and tangible property furnished for purposes of the CSA by the payee. For purposes of the research credit determined under section 41, CST Payments among controlled participants will be treated as provided for intra-group transactions in § 1.41-6(i). Any payment made or received by a taxpayer pursuant to an arrangement that the Commissioner determines not to be a CSA will be subject to the provisions of §§ 1.482-1 through 1.482-6 and 1.482-9. Any payment that in substance constitutes a cost sharing payment will be treated as such for purposes of this section, regardless of its characterization under foreign law.

(ii)

PCT Payments. A PCT Payor's payment required under paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section is deemed to be reduced to the extent of any payments owed to it under such paragraph from other controlled participants. Each PCT Payment received by a PCT Payee will be treated as coming pro rata out of payments made by all PCT Payors. PCT Payments will be characterized consistently with the designation of the type of transaction pursuant to paragraphs (c)(3) and (k)(2)(ii)(H) of this section. Depending on such designation, such payments will be treated as either consideration for a transfer of an interest in intangible property or for services.

(iii)

Examples. The following examples illustrate this paragraph (j)(3):

(k)

CSA administrative requirements. A controlled participant meets the requirements of this paragraph if it substantially complies, respectively, with the CSA contractual, documentation, accounting, and reporting requirements of paragraphs (k)(1) through (4) of this section.

(1)

CSA contractual requirements—

(i)

In general. A CSA must be recorded in writing in a contract that is contemporaneous with the formation (and any revision) of the CSA and that includes the contractual provisions described in this paragraph (k)(1).

(ii)

Contractual provisions. The written contract described in this paragraph (k)(1) must include provisions that—

(A)

List the controlled participants and any other members of the controlled group that are reasonably anticipated to benefit from the use of the cost shared intangibles, including the address of each domestic entity and the country of organization of each foreign entity;

(B)

Describe the scope of the IDA to be undertaken and each reasonably anticipated cost shared intangible or class of reasonably anticipated cost shared intangibles;

(C)

Specify the functions and risks that each controlled participant will undertake in connection with the CSA;

(D)

Divide among the controlled participants all divisional interests in cost shared intangibles and specify each controlled participant's divisional interest in the cost shared intangibles, as described in paragraphs (b)(1)(iii) and (4) of this section, that it will own and exploit without any further obligation to compensate any other controlled participant for such interest;

(E)

Provide a method to calculate the controlled participants' RAB shares, based on factors that can reasonably be expected to reflect the participants' shares of anticipated benefits, and require that such RAB shares must be updated, as described in paragraph (e)(1) of this section (see also paragraph (k)(2)(ii)(F) of this section);

(F)

Enumerate all categories of IDCs to be shared under the CSA;

(G)

Specify that the controlled participant must use a consistent method of accounting to determine IDCs and RAB shares, as described in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, respectively, and must translate foreign currencies on a consistent basis;

(H)

Require the controlled participant to enter into CSTs covering all IDCs, as described in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section, in connection with the CSA;

(I)

Require the controlled participants to enter into PCTs covering all platform contributions, as described in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section, in connection with the CSA;

(J)

Specify the form of payment due under each PCT (or group of PCTs) in existence at the formation (and any revision) of the CSA, including information and explanation that reasonably supports an analysis of applicable provisions of paragraph (h) of this section; and

(K)

Specify the date on which the CSA is entered into (CSA Start Date) and the duration of the CSA, the conditions under which the CSA may be modified or terminated, and the consequences of a modification or termination (including consequences described under the rules of paragraph (f) of this section).

(iii)

Meaning of contemporaneous—

(A)

In general. For purposes of this paragraph (k)(1), a written contractual agreement is contemporaneous with the formation (or revision) of a CSA if, and only if, the controlled participants record the CSA, in its entirety, in a document that they sign and date no later than 60 days after the first occurrence of any IDC described in paragraph (d) of this section to which such agreement (or revision) is to apply.

(B)

Example. The following example illustrates the principles of this paragraph (k)(1)(iii):

(iv)

Interpretation of contractual provisions—

(A)

In general. The provisions of a written contract described in this paragraph (k)(1) and of the additional documentation described in paragraph (k)(2) of this section must be clear and unambiguous. The provisions will be interpreted by reference to the economic substance of the transaction and the actual conduct of the controlled participants. See § 1.482-1(d)(3)(ii)(B) (Identifying contractual terms). Accordingly, the Commissioner may impute contractual terms in a CSA consistent with the economic substance of the CSA and may disregard contractual terms that lack economic substance. An allocation of risk between controlled participants after the outcome of such risk is known or reasonably knowable lacks economic substance. See § 1.482-1(d)(3)(iii)(B) (Identification of taxpayer that bears risk). A contractual term that is disregarded due to a lack of economic substance does not satisfy a contractual requirement set forth in this paragraph (k)(1) or documentation requirement set forth in paragraph (k)(2) of this section. See paragraph (b)(5) of this section for the treatment of an arrangement among controlled taxpayers that fails to comply with the requirements of this section.

(B)

Examples. The following examples illustrate the principles of this paragraph (k)(1)(iv). In each example, it is assumed that the Commissioner will exercise the discretion granted pursuant to paragraph (b)(5)(ii) of this section to apply the provisions of this section to the arrangement that purports to be a CSA.

(2)

CSA documentation requirements—

(i)

In general. The controlled participants must timely update and maintain sufficient documentation to establish that the participants have met the CSA contractual requirements of paragraph (k)(1) of this section and the additional CSA documentation requirements of this paragraph (k)(2).

(ii)

Additional CSA documentation requirements. The controlled participants to a CSA must timely update and maintain documentation sufficient to—

(A)

Describe the current scope of the IDA and identify— (1) Any additions or subtractions from the list of reasonably anticipated cost shared intangibles reported pursuant to paragraph (k)(1)(ii)(B) of this section;

(2) Any cost shared intangible, together with each controlled participant's interest therein; and

(3) Any further development of intangibles already developed under the CSA or of specified applications of such intangible which has been removed from the IDA (see paragraphs (d)(1)(ii) and (j)(1)(i) of this section for the definitions of reasonably anticipated cost shared intangible and cost shared intangible) and the steps (including any accounting classifications and allocations) taken to implement such removal;

(B)

Establish that each controlled participant reasonably anticipates that it will derive benefits from exploiting cost shared intangibles;

(C)

Describe the functions and risks that each controlled participant has undertaken during the term of the CSA;

(D)

Provide an overview of each controlled participant's business segments, including an analysis of the economic and legal factors that affect CST and PCT pricing;

(E)

Establish the amount of each controlled participant's IDCs for each taxable year under the CSA, including all IDCs attributable to stock-based compensation, as described in paragraph (d)(3) of this section (including the method of measurement and timing used in determining such IDCs, and the data, as of the date of grant, used to identify stock-based compensation with the IDA);

(F)

Describe the method used to estimate each controlled participant's RAB share for each year during the course of the CSA, including—

(1) All projections used to estimate benefits;

(2) All updates of the RAB shares in accordance with paragraph (e)(1) of this section; and

(3) An explanation of why that method was selected and why the method provides the most reliable measure for estimating RAB shares;

(G)

Describe all platform contributions;

(H)

Designate the type of transaction involved for each PCT or group of PCTs;

(I)

Specify, within the time period provided in paragraph (h)(2)(iii) of this section, the form of payment due under each PCT or group of PCTs, including information and explanation that reasonably supports an analysis of applicable provisions of paragraph (h) of this section;

(J)

Describe and explain the method selected to determine the arm's length payment due under each PCT, including—

(1) An explanation of why the method selected constitutes the best method, as described in § 1.482-1(c)(2), for measuring an arm's length result;

(2) The economic analyses, data, and projections relied upon in developing and selecting the best method, including the source of the data and projections used;

(3) Each alternative method that was considered, and the reason or reasons that the alternative method was not selected;

(4) Any data that the controlled participant obtains, after the CSA takes effect, that would help determine if the controlled participant's method selected has been applied in a reasonable manner;

(5) The discount rate or rates, where applicable, used for purposes of evaluating PCT Payments, including information and explanation that reasonably supports an analysis of applicable provisions of paragraph (g)(2)(v) of this section;

(6) The estimated arm's length values of any platform contributions as of the dates of the relevant PCTs, in accordance with paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this section;

(7) A discussion, where applicable, of why transactions were or were not aggregated under the principles of paragraph (g)(2)(iv) of this section;

(8) The method payment form and any conversion made from the method payment form to the specified payment form, as described in paragraph (h)(3) of this section; and

(9) If applicable under paragraph (i)(6)(iv) of this section, the WACC of the parent of the controlled group that includes the controlled participants.

(iii)

Coordination rules and production of documents—

(A)

Coordination with penalty regulations. See § 1.6662-6(d)(2)(iii)(D) regarding coordination of the rules of this paragraph (k) with the documentation requirements for purposes of the accuracy-related penalty under section 6662(e) and (h).

(B)

Production of documentation. Each controlled participant must provide to the Commissioner, within 30 days of a request, the items described in this paragraph (k)(2) and paragraph (k)(3) of this section. The time for compliance described in this paragraph (k)(2)(iii)(B) may be extended at the discretion of the Commissioner.

(3)

CSA accounting requirements—

(i)

In general. The controlled participants must maintain books and records (and related or underlying data and information) that are sufficient to—

(A)

Establish that the controlled participants have used (and are using) a consistent method of accounting to measure costs and benefits;

(B)

Permit verification that the amount of any contingent PCT Payments due have been (and are being) properly determined;

(C)

Translate foreign currencies on a consistent basis; and

(D)

To the extent that the method of accounting used materially differs from U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, explain any such material differences.

(ii)

Reliance on financial accounting. For purposes of this section, the controlled participants may not rely solely upon financial accounting to establish satisfaction of the accounting requirements of this paragraph (k)(3). Rather, the method of accounting must clearly reflect income. Thor Power Tools Co. v. Commissioner, 439 U.S. 522 (1979).

(4)

CSA reporting requirements—

(i)

CSA Statement. Each controlled participant must file with the Internal Revenue Service, in the manner described in this paragraph (k)(4), a “Statement of Controlled Participant to § 1.482-7 Cost Sharing Arrangement” (CSA Statement) that complies with the requirements of this paragraph (k)(4).

(ii)

Content of CSA Statement. The CSA Statement of each controlled participant must—

(A)

State that the participant is a controlled participant in a CSA;

(B)

Provide the controlled participant's taxpayer identification number;

(C)

List the other controlled participants in the CSA, the country of organization of each such participant, and the taxpayer identification number of each such participant;

(D)

Specify the earliest date that any IDC described in paragraph (d)(1) of this section occurred; and

(E)

Indicate the date on which the controlled participants formed (or revised) the CSA and, if different from such date, the date on which the controlled participants recorded the CSA (or any revision) contemporaneously in accordance with paragraphs (k)(1)(i) and (iii) of this section.

(iii)

Time for filing CSA Statement—

(A)

90-day rule. Each controlled participant must file its original CSA Statement with the Internal Revenue Service Ogden Campus (addressed as follows: “Attn: CSA Statements, Mail Stop 4912, Internal Revenue Service, 1973 North Rulon White Blvd., Ogden, Utah 84404-0040”), no later than 90 days after the first occurrence of an IDC to which the newly-formed CSA applies, as described in paragraph (k)(1)(iii)(A) of this section, or, in the case of a taxpayer that became a controlled participant after the formation of the CSA, no later than 90 days after such taxpayer became a controlled participant. A CSA Statement filed in accordance with this paragraph (k)(4)(iii)(A) must be dated and signed, under penalties of perjury, by an officer of the controlled participant who is duly authorized (under local law) to sign the statement on behalf of the controlled participant.

(B)

Annual return requirement— (1) In general. Each controlled participant must attach to its U.S. income tax return, for each taxable year for the duration of the CSA, a copy of the original CSA Statement that the controlled participant filed in accordance with the 90-day rule of paragraph (k)(4)(iii)(A) of this section. In addition, the controlled participant must update the information reflected on the original CSA Statement annually by attaching a schedule that documents changes in such information over time.

(2) Special filing rule for annual return requirement. If a controlled participant is not required to file a U.S. income tax return, the participant must ensure that the copy or copies of the CSA Statement and any updates are attached to Schedule M of any Form 5471, any Form 5472 “Information Return of a Foreign Owned Corporation,” or any Form 8865 “Return of U.S. Persons With Respect to Certain Foreign Partnerships,” filed with respect to that participant.

(iv)

Examples. The following examples illustrate this paragraph (k)(4). In each example, Companies A and B are members of the same controlled group.

(l)

Effective/applicability dates. Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph (l), this section applies on December 16, 2011. Paragraphs (g)(2)(v)(B)(2), (g)(4)(vi)(F)(2), and (g)(4)(viii), Example 8 of this section apply to taxable years beginning on or after December 19, 2011. Paragraphs (g)(4)(v) and (g)(4)(viii), Example 9 apply to taxable years beginning on or after August 27, 2013.

(m)

Transition rule—

(1)

In general. An arrangement in existence on January 5, 2009, will be considered a CSA, as described under paragraph (b) of this section, if, prior to such date, it was a qualified cost sharing arrangement under the provisions of § 1.482-7 (as contained in the 26 CFR part 1 edition revised as of January 1, 1996, hereafter referred to as “former § 1.482-7”), but only if the written contract, as described in paragraph (k)(1) of this section, is amended, if necessary, to conform with, and only if the activities of the controlled participants substantially comply with, the provisions of this section, as modified by paragraphs (m)(2) and (m)(3) of this section, by July 6, 2009.

(2)

Transitional modification of applicable provisions. For purposes of this paragraph (m), conformity and substantial compliance with the provisions of this section shall be determined with the following modifications:

(i)

CSTs and PCTs occurring prior to January 5, 2009, shall be subject to the provisions of former § 1.482-7 rather than this section.

(ii)

Except to the extent provided in paragraph (m)(3) of this section, PCTs that occur under a CSA that was a qualified cost sharing arrangement under the provisions of former § 1.482-7 and remained in effect on January 5, 2009, shall be subject to the periodic adjustment rules of § 1.482-4(f)(2) rather than the rules of paragraph (i)(6) of this section.

(iii)

Paragraphs (b)(1)(iii) and (b)(4) of this section shall not apply.

(iv)

Paragraph (k)(1)(ii)(D) of this section shall not apply.

(v)

Paragraphs (k)(1)(ii)(H) and (I) of this section shall be construed as applying only to transactions entered into on or after January 5, 2009.

(vi)

The deadline for recordation of the revised written contractual agreement pursuant to paragraph (k)(1)(iii) of this section shall be no later than July 6, 2009.

(vii)

Paragraphs (k)(2)(ii)(G) through (J) of this section shall be construed as applying only with reference to PCTs entered into on or after January 5, 2009.

(viii)

Paragraph (k)(4)(iii)(A) of this section shall be construed as requiring a CSA Statement with respect to the revised written contractual agreement described in paragraph (m)(2)(vi) of this section no later than September 2, 2009.

(ix)

Paragraph (k)(4)(iii)(B) of this section shall be construed as only applying for taxable years ending after the filing of the CSA Statement described in paragraph (m)(2)(viii) of this section.

(3)

Special rule for certain periodic adjustments. The periodic adjustment rules in paragraph (i)(6) of this section (rather than the rules of § 1.482-4(f)(2)) shall apply to PCTs that occur on or after the date of a material change in the scope of the CSA from its scope as of January 5, 2009. A material change in scope would include a material expansion of the activities undertaken beyond the scope of the intangible development area, as described in former § 1.482-7(b)(4)(iv). For this purpose, a contraction of the scope of a CSA, absent a material expansion into one or more lines of research and development beyond the scope of the intangible development area, does not constitute a material change in scope of the CSA. Whether a material change in scope has occurred is determined on a cumulative basis. Therefore, a series of expansions, any one of which is not a material expansion by itself, may collectively constitute a material expansion.

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[T.D. 9568, 76 FR 80090, Dec. 22, 2011, as amended by T.D. 9569, 76 FR 80250, Dec. 23, 2011; 77 FR 3606, Jan. 25, 2012, 77 FR 8814, Feb. 14, 2012; T.D. 9630, 78 FR 52855, Aug. 27, 2013; 78 FR 62426, Oct. 22, 2013]

Authority

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960; T.D. 9989, 89 FR 17606, Mar. 11, 2024, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, T.D. 9381, 73 FR 8604, Feb. 15, 2008, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11607, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11737, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11814, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11910, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted. RELATED RULES

Amendments

[T.D. 9169, 69 FR 78154, Dec. 29, 2004]

Amendments

§1.482-8. Examples of the best method rule.

26 C.F.R. § 1.482-8

(a)

Introduction. In accordance with the best method rule of § 1.482-1(c), a method may be applied in a particular case only if the comparability, quality of data, and reliability of assumptions under that method make it more reliable than any other available measure of the arm's length result. The following examples illustrate the comparative analysis required to apply this rule. As with all of the examples in these regulations, these examples are based on simplified facts, are provided solely for purposes of illustrating the type of analysis required under the relevant rule, and do not provide rules of general application. Thus, conclusions reached in these examples as to the relative reliability of methods are based on the assumed facts of the examples, and are not general conclusions concerning the relative reliability of any method.

(b)

Examples.

(c)

Effective/applicability date—

(1)

In general. Paragraphs (a) and (b) Examples 10 through 12 of this section are generally applicable for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2006. Paragraph (b) Examples 13 through 18 of this section are generally applicable on January 5, 2009.

(2)

Election to apply regulation to earlier taxable years. A person may elect to apply the provisions of paragraph (b) Examples 10,11, and 12 of this section to earlier taxable years in accordance with the rules set forth in § 1.482-9(n)(2).

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[T.D. 8552, 59 FR 35028, July 8, 1994, as amended by T.D. 9278, 71 FR 44487, Aug. 4, 2006; T.D. 9441, 74 FR 388, Jan. 5, 2009; T.D. 9456, 74 FR 38845, Aug. 4, 2009; 74 FR 46346, Sept. 9, 2009; T.D. 9568, 76 FR 80134, Dec. 22, 2011]

Authority

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960; T.D. 9989, 89 FR 17606, Mar. 11, 2024, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, T.D. 9381, 73 FR 8604, Feb. 15, 2008, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11607, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11737, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11814, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11910, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted. RELATED RULES

Amendments

[T.D. 9169, 69 FR 78154, Dec. 29, 2004]

Amendments

§1.482-9. Methods to determine taxable income in connection with a controlled services transaction.

26 C.F.R. § 1.482-9

(a)

In general. The arm's length amount charged in a controlled services transaction must be determined under one of the methods provided for in this section. Each method must be applied in accordance with the provisions of § 1.482-1, including the best method rule of § 1.482-1(c), the comparability analysis of § 1.482-1(d), and the arm's length range of § 1.482-1(e), except as those provisions are modified in this section. The methods are—

(1)

The services cost method, described in paragraph (b) of this section;

(2)

The comparable uncontrolled services price method, described in paragraph (c) of this section;

(3)

The gross services margin method, described in paragraph (d) of this section;

(4)

The cost of services plus method, described in paragraph (e) of this section;

(5)

The comparable profits method, described in § 1.482-5 and in paragraph (f) of this section;

(6)

The profit split method, described in § 1.482-6 and in paragraph (g) of this section; and

(7)

Unspecified methods, described in paragraph (h) of this section.

(b)

Services cost method—

(1)

In general. The services cost method evaluates whether the amount charged for certain services is arm's length by reference to the total services costs (as defined in paragraph (j) of this section) with no markup. If a taxpayer applies the services cost method in accordance with the rules of this paragraph (b), then it will be considered the best method for purposes of § 1.482-1(c), and the Commissioner's allocations will be limited to adjusting the amount charged for such services to the properly determined amount of such total services costs.

(2)

Eligibility for the services cost method. To apply the services cost method to a service in accordance with the rules of this paragraph (b), all of the following requirements must be satisfied with respect to the service—

(i)

The service is a covered service as defined in paragraph (b)(3) of this section;

(ii)

The service is not an excluded activity as defined in paragraph (b)(4) of this section;

(iii)

The service is not precluded from constituting a covered service by the business judgment rule described in paragraph (b)(5) of this section; and

(iv)

Adequate books and records are maintained as described in paragraph (b)(6) of this section.

(3)

Covered services. For purposes of this paragraph (b), covered services consist of a controlled service transaction or a group of controlled service transactions (see § 1.482-1(f)(2)(i) (aggregation of transactions)) that meet the definition of specified covered services or low margin covered services.

(i)

Specified covered services. Specified covered services are controlled services transactions that the Commissioner specifies by revenue procedure. Services will be included in such revenue procedure based upon the Commissioner's determination that the specified covered services are support services common among taxpayers across industry sectors and generally do not involve a significant median comparable markup on total services costs. For the definition of the median comparable markup on total services costs, see paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section. The Commissioner may add to, subtract from, or otherwise revise the specified covered services described in the revenue procedure by subsequent revenue procedure, which amendments will ordinarily be prospective only in effect.

(ii)

Low margin covered services. Low margin covered services are controlled services transactions for which the median comparable markup on total services costs is less than or equal to seven percent. For purposes of this paragraph (b), the median comparable markup on total services costs means the excess of the arm's length price of the controlled services transaction determined under the general section 482 regulations without regard to this paragraph (b), using the interquartile range described in § 1.482-1(e)(2)(iii)(C) and as necessary adjusting to the median of such interquartile range, over total services costs, expressed as a percentage of total services costs.

(4)

Excluded activity. The following types of activities are excluded activities:

(i)

Manufacturing.

(ii)

Production.

(iii)

Extraction, exploration, or processing of natural resources.

(iv)

Construction.

(v)

Reselling, distribution, acting as a sales or purchasing agent, or acting under a commission or other similar arrangement.

(vi)

Research, development, or experimentation.

(vii)

Engineering or scientific.

(viii)

Financial transactions, including guarantees.

(ix)

Insurance or reinsurance.

(5)

Not services that contribute significantly to fundamental risks of business success or failure. A service cannot constitute a covered service unless the taxpayer reasonably concludes in its business judgment that the service does not contribute significantly to key competitive advantages, core capabilities, or fundamental risks of success or failure in one or more trades or businesses of the controlled group, as defined in § 1.482-1(i)(6). In evaluating the reasonableness of the conclusion required by this paragraph (b)(5), consideration will be given to all the facts and circumstances.

(6)

Adequate books and records. Permanent books of account and records are maintained for as long as the costs with respect to the covered services are incurred by the renderer. Such books and records must include a statement evidencing the taxpayer's intention to apply the services cost method to evaluate the arm's length charge for such services. Such books and records must be adequate to permit verification by the Commissioner of the total services costs incurred by the renderer, including a description of the services in question, identification of the renderer and the recipient of such services, and sufficient documentation to allow verification of the methods used to allocate and apportion such costs to the services in question in accordance with paragraph (k) of this section.

(7)

Shared services arrangement—

(i)

In general. If the services cost method is used to evaluate the amount charged for covered services, and such services are the subject of a shared services arrangement, then the arm's length charge to each participant for such services will be the portion of the total costs of the services otherwise determined under the services cost method of this paragraph (b) that is properly allocated to such participant pursuant to the arrangement.

(ii)

Requirements for shared services arrangement. A shared services arrangement must meet the requirements described in this paragraph (b)(7).

(A)

Eligibility. To be eligible for treatment under this paragraph (b)(7), a shared services arrangement must—

(1) Include two or more participants;

(2) Include as participants all controlled taxpayers that reasonably anticipate a benefit (as defined under paragraph (l)(3)(i) of this section) from one or more covered services specified in the shared services arrangement; and

(3) Be structured such that each covered service (or each reasonable aggregation of services within the meaning of paragraph (b)(7)(iii)(B) of this section) confers a benefit on at least one participant in the shared services arrangement.

(B)

Allocation. The costs for covered services must be allocated among the participants based on their respective shares of the reasonably anticipated benefits from those services, without regard to whether the anticipated benefits are in fact realized. Reasonably anticipated benefits are benefits as defined in paragraph (l)(3)(i) of this section. The allocation of costs must provide the most reliable measure of the participants' respective shares of the reasonably anticipated benefits under the principles of the best method rule. See § 1.482-1(c). The allocation must be applied on a consistent basis for all participants and services. The allocation to each participant in each taxable year must reasonably reflect that participant's respective share of reasonably anticipated benefits for such taxable year. If the taxpayer reasonably concluded that the shared services arrangement (including any aggregation pursuant to paragraph (b)(7)(iii)(B) of this section) allocated costs for covered services on a basis that most reliably reflects the participants' respective shares of the reasonably anticipated benefits attributable to such services, as provided for in this paragraph (b)(7), then the Commissioner may not adjust such allocation basis.

(C)

Documentation. The taxpayer must maintain sufficient documentation to establish that the requirements of this paragraph (b)(7) are satisfied, and include—

(1) A statement evidencing the taxpayer's intention to apply the services cost method to evaluate the arm's length charge for covered services pursuant to a shared services arrangement;

(2) A list of the participants and the renderer or renderers of covered services under the shared services arrangement;

(3) A description of the basis of allocation to all participants, consistent with the participants' respective shares of reasonably anticipated benefits; and

(4) A description of any aggregation of covered services for purposes of the shared services arrangement, and an indication whether this aggregation (if any) differs from the aggregation used to evaluate the median comparable markup for any low margin covered services described in paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section.

(iii)

Definitions and special rules—

(A)

Participant. A participant is a controlled taxpayer that reasonably anticipates benefits from covered services subject to a shared services arrangement that substantially complies with the requirements described in this paragraph (b)(7).

(B)

Aggregation. Two or more covered services may be aggregated in a reasonable manner taking into account all the facts and circumstances, including whether the relative magnitude of reasonably anticipated benefits of the participants sharing the costs of such aggregated services may be reasonably reflected by the allocation basis employed pursuant to paragraph (b)(7)(ii)(B) of this section. The aggregation of services under a shared services arrangement may differ from the aggregation used to evaluate the median comparable markup for any low margin covered services described in paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section, provided that such alternative aggregation can be implemented on a reasonable basis, including appropriately identifying and isolating relevant costs, as necessary.

(C)

Coordination with cost sharing arrangements. To the extent that an allocation is made to a participant in a shared services arrangement that is also a participant in a cost sharing arrangement subject to § 1.482-7T, such amount with respect to covered services is first allocated pursuant to the shared services arrangement under this paragraph (b)(7). Costs allocated pursuant to a shared services arrangement may (if applicable) be further allocated between the intangible property development activity under § 1.482-7T and other activities of the participant.

(8)

Examples. The application of this section is illustrated by the following examples. No inference is intended whether the presence or absence of one or more facts is determinative of the conclusion in any example. For purposes of Examples 1 through 14, assume that Company P and its subsidiaries, Company Q and Company R, are corporations and members of the same group of controlled entities (PQR Controlled Group). For purposes of Example 15, assume that Company P and its subsidiary, Company S, are corporations and members of the same group of controlled entities (PS Controlled Group). For purposes of Examples 16 through 24, assume that Company P and its subsidiaries, Company X, Company Y, and Company Z, are corporations and members of the same group of controlled entities (PXYZ Group) and that Company P and its subsidiaries satisfy all of the requirements for a shared services arrangement specified in paragraphs (b)(7)(ii) and (iii) of this section.

(v)

Based on these facts, Company P may reasonably conclude that the employee headcount allocation basis most reliably reflects the participants' respective shares of the reasonably anticipated benefits attributable to service A.

(ii)

Companies X, Y and Z reasonably anticipate benefits from service B. Company P does not reasonably anticipate benefits from service B. Assume that if relative reasonably anticipated benefits were precisely known, the appropriate allocation of charges pursuant to paragraph (k) of this section to Companies X, Y and Z for service B is as follows:

(iii)

The total number of employees (employee headcount) in each company is as follows— Company X—600.

Company Y—200.

Company Z—200.

(iv)

The total number of transactions (transaction volume) with uncontrolled customers by each company is as follows:

Company X—2,000.

Company Y—4,000.

Company Z—3,500.

(v)

If Company P allocated the 500 total services costs of service B based on employee headcount, the resulting allocation would be as follows:

(vi)

In contrast, if Company P used volume of transactions with uncontrolled customers as the allocation basis under the shared services arrangement, the allocation would be as follows:

(vii)

Based on these facts, Company P may reasonably conclude that the transaction volume, but not the employee headcount, allocation basis most reliably reflects the participants' respective shares of the reasonably anticipated benefits attributable to service B.

(c)

Comparable uncontrolled services price method—

(1)

In general. The comparable uncontrolled services price method evaluates whether the amount charged in a controlled services transaction is arm's length by reference to the amount charged in a comparable uncontrolled services transaction.

(2)

Comparability and reliability considerations—

(i)

In general. Whether results derived from application of this method are the most reliable measure of the arm's length result must be determined using the factors described under the best method rule in § 1.482-1(c). The application of these factors under the comparable uncontrolled services price method is discussed in paragraphs (c)(2)(ii) and (iii) of this section.

(ii)

Comparability—

(A)

In general. The degree of comparability between controlled and uncontrolled transactions is determined by applying the provisions of § 1.482-1(d). Although all of the factors described in § 1.482-1(d)(3) must be considered, similarity of the services rendered, and of the intangible property (if any) used in performing the services, generally will have the greatest effects on comparability under this method. In addition, because even minor differences in contractual terms or economic conditions could materially affect the amount charged in an uncontrolled transaction, comparability under this method depends on close similarity with respect to these factors, or adjustments to account for any differences. The results derived from applying the comparable uncontrolled services price method generally will be the most direct and reliable measure of an arm's length price for the controlled transaction if an uncontrolled transaction has no differences from the controlled transaction that would affect the price, or if there are only minor differences that have a definite and reasonably ascertainable effect on price and for which appropriate adjustments are made. If such adjustments cannot be made, or if there are more than minor differences between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions, the comparable uncontrolled services price method may be used, but the reliability of the results as a measure of the arm's length price will be reduced. Further, if there are material differences for which reliable adjustments cannot be made, this method ordinarily will not provide a reliable measure of an arm's length result.

(B)

Adjustments for differences between controlled and uncontrolled transactions. If there are differences between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions that would affect price, adjustments should be made to the price of the uncontrolled transaction according to the comparability provisions of § 1.482-1(d)(2). Specific examples of factors that may be particularly relevant to application of this method include—

(1) Quality of the services rendered;

(2) Contractual terms (for example, scope and terms of warranties or guarantees regarding the services, volume, credit and payment terms, allocation of risks, including any contingent-payment terms and whether costs were incurred without a provision for current reimbursement);

(3) Intangible property (if any) used in rendering the services;

(4) Geographic market in which the services are rendered or received;

(5) Risks borne (for example, costs incurred to render the services, without provision for current reimbursement);

(6) Duration or quantitative measure of services rendered;

(7) Collateral transactions or ongoing business relationships between the renderer and the recipient, including arrangement for the provision of tangible property in connection with the services; and

(8) Alternatives realistically available to the renderer and the recipient.

(iii)

Data and assumptions. The reliability of the results derived from the comparable uncontrolled services price method is affected by the completeness and accuracy of the data used and the reliability of the assumptions made to apply the method. See § 1.482-1(c) (best method rule).

(3)

Arm's length range. See § 1.482-1(e)(2) for the determination of an arm's length range.

(4)

Examples. The principles of this paragraph (c) are illustrated by the following examples:

(5)

Indirect evidence of the price of a comparable uncontrolled services transaction—

(i)

In general. The price of a comparable uncontrolled services transaction may be derived based on indirect measures of the price charged in comparable uncontrolled services transactions, but only if—

(A)

The data are widely and routinely used in the ordinary course of business in the particular industry or market segment for purposes of determining prices actually charged in comparable uncontrolled services transactions;

(B)

The data are used to set prices in the controlled services transaction in the same way they are used to set prices in uncontrolled services transactions of the controlled taxpayer, or in the same way they are used by uncontrolled taxpayers to set prices in uncontrolled services transactions; and

(C)

The amount charged in the controlled services transaction may be reliably adjusted to reflect differences in quality of the services, contractual terms, market conditions, risks borne (including contingent-payment terms), duration or quantitative measure of services rendered, and other factors that may affect the price to which uncontrolled taxpayers would agree.

(ii)

Example. The following example illustrates this paragraph (c)(5):

(d)

Gross services margin method—

(1)

In general. The gross services margin method evaluates whether the amount charged in a controlled services transaction is arm's length by reference to the gross profit margin realized in comparable uncontrolled transactions. This method ordinarily is used in cases where a controlled taxpayer performs services or functions in connection with an uncontrolled transaction between a member of the controlled group and an uncontrolled taxpayer. This method may be used where a controlled taxpayer renders services (agent services) to another member of the controlled group in connection with a transaction between that other member and an uncontrolled taxpayer. This method also may be used in cases where a controlled taxpayer contracts to provide services to an uncontrolled taxpayer (intermediary function) and another member of the controlled group actually performs a portion of the services provided.

(2)

Determination of arm's length price—

(i)

In general. The gross services margin method evaluates whether the price charged or amount retained by a controlled taxpayer in the controlled services transaction in connection with the relevant uncontrolled transaction is arm's length by determining the appropriate gross profit of the controlled taxpayer.

(ii)

Relevant uncontrolled transaction. The relevant uncontrolled transaction is a transaction between a member of the controlled group and an uncontrolled taxpayer as to which the controlled taxpayer performs agent services or an intermediary function.

(iii)

Applicable uncontrolled price. The applicable uncontrolled price is the price paid or received by the uncontrolled taxpayer in the relevant uncontrolled transaction.

(iv)

Appropriate gross services profit. The appropriate gross services profit is computed by multiplying the applicable uncontrolled price by the gross services profit margin in comparable uncontrolled transactions. The determination of the appropriate gross services profit will take into account any functions performed by other members of the controlled group, as well as any other relevant factors described in § 1.482-1(d)(3). The comparable gross services profit margin may be determined by reference to the commission in an uncontrolled transaction, where that commission is stated as a percentage of the price charged in the uncontrolled transaction.

(v)

Arm's length range. See § 1.482-1(e)(2) for determination of the arm's length range.

(3)

Comparability and reliability considerations—

(i)

In general. Whether results derived from application of this method are the most reliable measure of the arm's length result must be determined using the factors described under the best method rule in § 1.482-1(c). The application of these factors under the gross services margin method is discussed in paragraphs (d)(3)(ii) and (iii) of this section.

(ii)

Comparability—

(A)

Functional comparability. The degree of comparability between an uncontrolled transaction and a controlled transaction is determined by applying the comparability provisions of § 1.482-1(d). A gross services profit provides compensation for services or functions that bear a relationship to the relevant uncontrolled transaction, including an operating profit in return for the investment of capital and the assumption of risks by the controlled taxpayer performing the services or functions under review. Therefore, although all of the factors described in § 1.482-1(d)(3) must be considered, comparability under this method is particularly dependent on similarity of services or functions performed, risks borne, intangible property (if any) used in providing the services or functions, and contractual terms, or adjustments to account for the effects of any such differences. If possible, the appropriate gross services profit margin should be derived from comparable uncontrolled transactions by the controlled taxpayer under review, because similar characteristics are more likely found among different transactions by the same controlled taxpayer than among transactions by other parties. In the absence of comparable uncontrolled transactions involving the same controlled taxpayer, an appropriate gross services profit margin may be derived from transactions of uncontrolled taxpayers involving comparable services or functions with respect to similarly related transactions.

(B)

Other comparability factors. Comparability under this method is not dependent on close similarity of the relevant uncontrolled transaction to the related transactions involved in the uncontrolled comparables. However, substantial differences in the nature of the relevant uncontrolled transaction and the relevant transactions involved in the uncontrolled comparables, such as differences in the type of property transferred or service provided in the relevant uncontrolled transaction, may indicate significant differences in the services or functions performed by the controlled and uncontrolled taxpayers with respect to their respective relevant transactions. Thus, it ordinarily would be expected that the services or functions performed in the controlled and uncontrolled transactions would be with respect to relevant transactions involving the transfer of property within the same product categories or the provision of services of the same general type (for example, information-technology systems design). Furthermore, significant differences in the intangible property (if any) used by the controlled taxpayer in the controlled services transaction as distinct from the uncontrolled comparables may also affect the reliability of the comparison. Finally, the reliability of profit measures based on gross services profit may be adversely affected by factors that have less effect on prices. For example, gross services profit may be affected by a variety of other factors, including cost structures or efficiency (for example, differences in the level of experience of the employees performing the service in the controlled and uncontrolled transactions). Accordingly, if material differences in these factors are identified based on objective evidence, the reliability of the analysis may be affected.

(C)

Adjustments for differences between controlled and uncontrolled transactions. If there are material differences between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions that would affect the gross services profit margin, adjustments should be made to the gross services profit margin, according to the comparability provisions of § 1.482-1(d)(2). For this purpose, consideration of the total services costs associated with functions performed and risks assumed may be necessary because differences in functions performed are often reflected in these costs. If there are differences in functions performed, however, the effect on gross services profit of such differences is not necessarily equal to the differences in the amount of related costs. Specific examples of factors that may be particularly relevant to this method include—

(1) Contractual terms (for example, scope and terms of warranties or guarantees regarding the services or function, volume, credit and payment terms, and allocation of risks, including any contingent-payment terms);

(2) Intangible property (if any) used in performing the services or function;

(3) Geographic market in which the services or function are performed or in which the relevant uncontrolled transaction takes place; and

(4) Risks borne, including, if applicable, inventory-type risk.

(D)

Buy-sell distributor. If a controlled taxpayer that performs an agent service or intermediary function is comparable to a distributor that takes title to goods and resells them, the gross profit margin earned by such distributor on uncontrolled sales, stated as a percentage of the price for the goods, may be used as the comparable gross services profit margin.

(iii)

Data and assumptions—

(A)

In general. The reliability of the results derived from the gross services margin method is affected by the completeness and accuracy of the data used and the reliability of the assumptions made to apply this method. See § 1.482-1(c) (best method rule).

(B)

(4)

Examples. The principles of this paragraph (d) are illustrated by the following examples:

(e)

Cost of services plus method—

(1)

In general. The cost of services plus method evaluates whether the amount charged in a controlled services transaction is arm's length by reference to the gross services profit markup realized in comparable uncontrolled transactions. The cost of services plus method is ordinarily used in cases where the controlled service renderer provides the same or similar services to both controlled and uncontrolled parties. This method is ordinarily not used in cases where the controlled services transaction involves a contingent-payment arrangement, as described in paragraph (i)(2) of this section.

(2)

Determination of arm's length price—

(i)

In general. The cost of services plus method measures an arm's length price by adding the appropriate gross services profit to the controlled taxpayer's comparable transactional costs.

(ii)

Appropriate gross services profit. The appropriate gross services profit is computed by multiplying the controlled taxpayer's comparable transactional costs by the gross services profit markup, expressed as a percentage of the comparable transactional costs earned in comparable uncontrolled transactions.

(iii)

Comparable transactional costs. Comparable transactional costs consist of the costs of providing the services under review that are taken into account as the basis for determining the gross services profit markup in comparable uncontrolled transactions. Depending on the facts and circumstances, such costs typically include all compensation attributable to employees directly involved in the performance of such services, materials and supplies consumed or made available in rendering such services, and may include as well other costs of rendering the services. Comparable transactional costs must be determined on a basis that will facilitate comparison with the comparable uncontrolled transactions. For that reason, comparable transactional costs may not necessarily equal total services costs, as defined in paragraph (j) of this section, and in appropriate cases may be a subset of total services costs. Generally accepted accounting principles or Federal income tax accounting rules (where Federal income tax data for comparable transactions or business activities are available) may provide useful guidance but will not conclusively establish the appropriate comparable transactional costs for purposes of this method.

(iv)

Arm's length range. See § 1.482-1(e)(2) for determination of an arm's length range.

(3)

Comparability and reliability considerations—

(i)

(ii)

Comparability—

(A)

Functional comparability. The degree of comparability between controlled and uncontrolled transactions is determined by applying the comparability provisions of § 1.482-1(d). A service renderer's gross services profit provides compensation for performing services related to the controlled services transaction under review, including an operating profit for the service renderer's investment of capital and assumptions of risks. Therefore, although all of the factors described in § 1.482-1(d)(3) must be considered, comparability under this method is particularly dependent on similarity of services or functions performed, risks borne, intangible property (if any) used in providing the services or functions, and contractual terms, or adjustments to account for the effects of any such differences. If possible, the appropriate gross services profit markup should be derived from comparable uncontrolled transactions of the same taxpayer participating in the controlled services transaction because similar characteristics are more likely to be found among services provided by the same service provider than among services provided by other service providers. In the absence of such services transactions, an appropriate gross services profit markup may be derived from comparable uncontrolled services transactions of other service providers. If the appropriate gross services profit markup is derived from comparable uncontrolled services transactions of other service providers, in evaluating comparability the controlled taxpayer must consider the results under this method expressed as a markup on total services costs of the controlled taxpayer, because differences in functions performed may be reflected in differences in service costs other than those included in comparable transactional costs.

(B)

Other comparability factors. Comparability under this method is less dependent on close similarity between the services provided than under the comparable uncontrolled services price method. Substantial differences in the services may, however, indicate significant functional differences between the controlled and uncontrolled taxpayers. Thus, it ordinarily would be expected that the controlled and uncontrolled transactions would involve services of the same general type (for example, information-technology systems design). Furthermore, if a significant amount of the controlled taxpayer's comparable transactional costs consists of service costs incurred in a tax accounting period other than the tax accounting period under review, the reliability of the analysis would be reduced. In addition, significant differences in the value of the services rendered, due for example to the use of valuable intangible property, may also affect the reliability of the comparison. Finally, the reliability of profit measures based on gross services profit may be adversely affected by factors that have less effect on prices. For example, gross services profit may be affected by a variety of other factors, including cost structures or efficiency-related factors (for example, differences in the level of experience of the employees performing the service in the controlled and uncontrolled transactions). Accordingly, if material differences in these factors are identified based on objective evidence, the reliability of the analysis may be affected.

(C)

Adjustments for differences between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions. If there are material differences between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions that would affect the gross services profit markup, adjustments should be made to the gross services profit markup earned in the comparable uncontrolled transaction according to the provisions of § 1.482-1(d)(2). For this purpose, consideration of the comparable transactional costs associated with the functions performed and risks assumed may be necessary, because differences in the functions performed are often reflected in these costs. If there are differences in functions performed, however, the effect on gross services profit of such differences is not necessarily equal to the differences in the amount of related comparable transactional costs. Specific examples of the factors that may be particularly relevant to this method include—

(1) The complexity of the services;

(2) The duration or quantitative measure of services;

(3) Contractual terms (for example, scope and terms of warranties or guarantees provided, volume, credit and payment terms, allocation of risks, including any contingent-payment terms);

(4) Economic circumstances; and

(5) Risks borne.

(iii)

Data and assumptions—

(A)

In general. The reliability of the results derived from the cost of services plus method is affected by the completeness and accuracy of the data used and the reliability of the assumptions made to apply this method. See § 1.482-1(c) (Best method rule).

(B)

Consistency in accounting. The degree of consistency in accounting practices between the controlled transaction and the uncontrolled comparables that materially affect the gross services profit markup affects the reliability of the results under this method. Thus, for example, if differences in cost accounting practices would materially affect the gross services profit markup, the ability to make reliable adjustments for such differences would affect the reliability of the results obtained under this method. Further, reliability under this method depends on the extent to which the controlled and uncontrolled transactions reflect consistent reporting of comparable transactional costs. For purposes of this paragraph (e)(3)(iii)(B), the term comparable transactional costs includes the cost of acquiring tangible property that is transferred (or used) with the services, to the extent that the arm's length price of the tangible property is not separately evaluated as a controlled transaction under another provision.

(4)

Examples. The principles of this paragraph (e) are illustrated by the following examples:

(f)

Comparable profits method—

(1)

In general. The comparable profits method evaluates whether the amount charged in a controlled transaction is arm's length, based on objective measures of profitability (profit level indicators) derived from uncontrolled taxpayers that engage in similar business activities under similar circumstances. The rules in § 1.482-5 relating to the comparable profits method apply to controlled services transactions, except as modified in this paragraph (f).

(2)

Determination of arm's length result—

(i)

Tested party. This paragraph (f) applies where the relevant business activity of the tested party as determined under § 1.482-5(b)(2) is the rendering of services in a controlled services transaction. Where the tested party determined under § 1.482-5(b)(2) is instead the recipient of the controlled services, the rules under this paragraph (f) are not applicable to determine the arm's length result.

(ii)

Profit level indicators. In addition to the profit level indicators provided in § 1.482-5(b)(4), a profit level indicator that may provide a reliable basis for comparing operating profits of the tested party involved in a controlled services transaction and uncontrolled comparables is the ratio of operating profit to total services costs (as defined in paragraph (j) of this section).

(iii)

Comparability and reliability considerations— Data and assumptions—Consistency in accounting. Consistency in accounting practices between the relevant business activity of the tested party and the uncontrolled service providers is particularly important in determining the reliability of the results under this method, but less than in applying the cost of services plus method. Adjustments may be appropriate if materially different treatment is applied to particular cost items related to the relevant business activity of the tested party and the uncontrolled service providers. For example, adjustments may be appropriate where the tested party and the uncontrolled comparables use inconsistent approaches to classify similar expenses as “cost of goods sold” and “selling, general, and administrative expenses.” Although distinguishing between these two categories may be difficult, the distinction is less important to the extent that the ratio of operating profit to total services costs is used as the appropriate profit level indicator. Determining whether adjustments are necessary under these or similar circumstances requires thorough analysis of the functions performed and consideration of the cost accounting practices of the tested party and the uncontrolled comparables. Other adjustments as provided in § 1.482-5(c)(2)(iv) may also be necessary to increase the reliability of the results under this method.

(3)

Examples. The principles of this paragraph (f) are illustrated by the following examples:

(g)

Profit split method—

(1)

In general. The profit split method evaluates whether the allocation of the combined operating profit or loss attributable to one or more controlled transactions is arm's length by reference to the relative value of each controlled taxpayer's contribution to that combined operating profit or loss. The relative value of each controlled taxpayer's contribution is determined in a manner that reflects the functions performed, risks assumed and resources employed by such controlled taxpayer in the relevant business activity. For application of the profit split method (both the comparable profit split and the residual profit split), see § 1.482-6. The residual profit split method may not be used where only one controlled taxpayer makes significant nonroutine contributions.

(2)

Examples. The principles of this paragraph (g) are illustrated by the following examples:

(h)

Unspecified methods. Methods not specified in paragraphs (b) through (g) of this section may be used to evaluate whether the amount charged in a controlled services transaction is arm's length. Any method used under this paragraph (h) must be applied in accordance with the provisions of § 1.482-1. Consistent with the specified methods, an unspecified method should take into account the general principle that uncontrolled taxpayers evaluate the terms of a transaction by considering the realistic alternatives to that transaction, including economically similar transactions structured as other than services transactions, and only enter into a particular transaction if none of the alternatives is preferable to it. For example, the comparable uncontrolled services price method compares a controlled services transaction to similar uncontrolled transactions to provide a direct estimate of the price to which the parties would have agreed had they resorted directly to a market alternative to the controlled services transaction. Therefore, in establishing whether a controlled services transaction achieved an arm's length result, an unspecified method should provide information on the prices or profits that the controlled taxpayer could have realized by choosing a realistic alternative to the controlled services transaction (for example, outsourcing a particular service function, rather than performing the function itself). As with any method, an unspecified method will not be applied unless it provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length result under the principles of the best method rule. See § 1.482-1(c). Therefore, in accordance with § 1.482-1(d) (comparability), to the extent that an unspecified method relies on internal data rather than uncontrolled comparables, its reliability will be reduced. Similarly, the reliability of a method will be affected by the reliability of the data and assumptions used to apply the method, including any projections used.

(i)

Contingent-payment contractual terms for services—

(1)

Contingent-payment contractual terms recognized in general. In the case of a contingent-payment arrangement, the arm's length result for the controlled services transaction generally would not require payment by the recipient to the renderer in the tax accounting period in which the service is rendered if the specified contingency does not occur in that period. If the specified contingency occurs in a tax accounting period subsequent to the period in which the service is rendered, the arm's length result for the controlled services transaction generally would require payment by the recipient to the renderer on a basis that reflects the recipient's benefit from the services rendered and the risks borne by the renderer in performing the activities in the absence of a provision that unconditionally obligates the recipient to pay for the activities performed in the tax accounting period in which the service is rendered.

(2)

Contingent-payment arrangement. For purposes of this paragraph (i), an arrangement will be treated as a contingent-payment arrangement if it meets all of the requirements in paragraph (i)(2)(i) of this section and is consistent with the economic substance and conduct requirement in paragraph (i)(2)(ii) of this section.

(i)

General requirements—

(A)

Written contract. The arrangement is set forth in a written contract entered into prior to, or contemporaneous with, the start of the activity or group of activities constituting the controlled services transaction.

(B)

Specified contingency. The contract states that payment for a controlled services transaction is contingent (in whole or in part) upon the happening of a future benefit (within the meaning of § 1.482-9(l)(3)) for the recipient directly related to the activity or group of activities. For purposes of the preceding sentence, whether the future benefit is directly related to the activity or group of activities is evaluated based on all the facts and circumstances.

(C)

Basis for payment. The contract provides for payment on a basis that reflects the recipient's benefit from the services rendered and the risks borne by the renderer.

(ii)

Economic substance and conduct. The arrangement, including the contingency and the basis for payment, is consistent with the economic substance of the controlled transaction and the conduct of the controlled parties. See § 1.482-1(d)(3)(ii)(B).

(3)

Commissioner's authority to impute contingent-payment terms. Consistent with the authority in § 1.482-1(d)(3)(ii)(B), the Commissioner may impute contingent-payment contractual terms in a controlled services transaction if the economic substance of the transaction is consistent with the existence of such terms.

(4)

Evaluation of arm's length charge. Whether the amount charged in a contingent-payment arrangement is arm's length will be evaluated in accordance with this section and other applicable regulations under section 482. In evaluating whether the amount charged in a contingent-payment arrangement for the manufacture, construction, or development of tangible or intangible property owned by the recipient is arm's length, the charge determined under the rules of §§ 1.482-3 and 1.482-4 for the transfer of similar property may be considered. See § 1.482-1(f)(2)(ii).

(5)

Examples. The principles of this paragraph (i) are illustrated by the following examples:

(j)

Total services costs. For purposes of this section, total services costs means all costs of rendering those services for which total services costs are being determined. Total services costs include all costs in cash or in kind (including stock-based compensation) that, based on analysis of the facts and circumstances, are directly identified with, or reasonably allocated in accordance with the principles of paragraph (k)(2) of this section to, the services. In general, costs for this purpose should comprise provision for all resources expended, used, or made available to achieve the specific objective for which the service is rendered. Reference to generally accepted accounting principles or Federal income tax accounting rules may provide a useful starting point but will not necessarily be conclusive regarding inclusion of costs in total services costs. Total services costs do not include interest expense, foreign income taxes (as defined in § 1.901-2(a)), or domestic income taxes.

(k)

Allocation of costs—

(1)

In general. In any case where the renderer's activity that results in a benefit (within the meaning of paragraph (l)(3) of this section) for one recipient in a controlled services transaction also generates a benefit for one or more other members of a controlled group (including the benefit, if any, to the renderer), and the amount charged under this section in the controlled services transaction is determined under a method that makes reference to costs, costs must be allocated among the portions of the activity performed for the benefit of the first mentioned recipient and such other members of the controlled group under this paragraph (k). The principles of this paragraph (k) must also be used whenever it is appropriate to allocate and apportion any class of costs (for example, overhead costs) in order to determine the total services costs of rendering the services. In no event will an allocation of costs based on a generalized or non-specific benefit be appropriate.

(2)

Appropriate method of allocation and apportionment—

(i)

Reasonable method standard. Any reasonable method may be used to allocate and apportion costs under this section. In establishing the appropriate method of allocation and apportionment, consideration should be given to all bases and factors, including, for example, total services costs, total costs for a relevant activity, assets, sales, compensation, space utilized, and time spent. The costs incurred by supporting departments may be apportioned to other departments on the basis of reasonable overall estimates, or such costs may be reflected in the other departments' costs by applying reasonable departmental overhead rates. Allocations and apportionments of costs must be made on the basis of the full cost, as opposed to the incremental cost.

(ii)

Use of general practices. The practices used by the taxpayer to apportion costs in connection with preparation of statements and analyses for the use of management, creditors, minority shareholders, joint venturers, clients, customers, potential investors, or other parties or agencies in interest will be considered as potential indicators of reliable allocation methods, but need not be accorded conclusive weight by the Commissioner. In determining the extent to which allocations are to be made to or from foreign members of a controlled group, practices employed by the domestic members in apportioning costs among themselves will also be considered if the relationships with the foreign members are comparable to the relationships among the domestic members of the controlled group. For example, if for purposes of reporting to public stockholders or to a governmental agency, a corporation apportions the costs attributable to its executive officers among the domestic members of a controlled group on a reasonable and consistent basis, and such officers exercise comparable control over foreign members of the controlled group, such domestic apportionment practice will be considered in determining the allocations to be made to the foreign members.

(3)

Examples. The principles of this paragraph (k) are illustrated by the following examples:

(l)

Controlled services transaction—

(1)

In general. A controlled services transaction includes any activity (as defined in paragraph (l)(2) of this section) by one member of a group of controlled taxpayers (the renderer) that results in a benefit (as defined in paragraph (l)(3) of this section) to one or more other members of the controlled group (the recipient(s)).

(2)

Activity. An activity includes the performance of functions, assumptions of risks, or use by a renderer of tangible or intangible property or other resources, capabilities, or knowledge, such as knowledge of and ability to take advantage of particularly advantageous situations or circumstances. An activity also includes making available to the recipient any property or other resources of the renderer.

(3)

Benefit—

(i)

In general. An activity is considered to provide a benefit to the recipient if the activity directly results in a reasonably identifiable increment of economic or commercial value that enhances the recipient's commercial position, or that may reasonably be anticipated to do so. An activity is generally considered to confer a benefit if, taking into account the facts and circumstances, an uncontrolled taxpayer in circumstances comparable to those of the recipient would be willing to pay an uncontrolled party to perform the same or similar activity on either a fixed or contingent-payment basis, or if the recipient otherwise would have performed for itself the same activity or a similar activity. A benefit may result to the owner of intangible property if the renderer engages in an activity that is reasonably anticipated to result in an increase in the value of that intangible property. Paragraphs (l)(3)(ii) through (v) of this section provide guidelines that indicate the presence or absence of a benefit for the activities in the controlled services transaction.

(ii)

Indirect or remote benefit. An activity is not considered to provide a benefit to the recipient if, at the time the activity is performed, the present or reasonably anticipated benefit from that activity is so indirect or remote that the recipient would not be willing to pay, on either a fixed or contingent-payment basis, an uncontrolled party to perform a similar activity, and would not be willing to perform such activity for itself for this purpose. The determination whether the benefit from an activity is indirect or remote is based on the nature of the activity and the situation of the recipient, taking into consideration all facts and circumstances.

(iii)

Duplicative activities. If an activity performed by a controlled taxpayer duplicates an activity that is performed, or that reasonably may be anticipated to be performed, by another controlled taxpayer on or for its own account, the activity is generally not considered to provide a benefit to the recipient, unless the duplicative activity itself provides an additional benefit to the recipient.

(iv)

Shareholder activities. An activity is not considered to provide a benefit if the sole effect of that activity is either to protect the renderer's capital investment in the recipient or in other members of the controlled group, or to facilitate compliance by the renderer with reporting, legal, or regulatory requirements applicable specifically to the renderer, or both. Activities in the nature of day-to-day management generally do not relate to protection of the renderer's capital investment. Based on analysis of the facts and circumstances, activities in connection with a corporate reorganization may be considered to provide a benefit to one or more controlled taxpayers.

(v)

Passive association. A controlled taxpayer generally will not be considered to obtain a benefit where that benefit results from the controlled taxpayer's status as a member of a controlled group. A controlled taxpayer's status as a member of a controlled group may, however, be taken into account for purposes of evaluating comparability between controlled and uncontrolled transactions.

(4)

Disaggregation of transactions. A controlled services transaction may be analyzed as two separate transactions for purposes of determining the arm's length consideration, if that analysis is the most reliable means of determining the arm's length consideration for the controlled services transaction. See the best method rule under § 1.482-1(c).

(5)

Examples. The principles of this paragraph (l) are illustrated by the following examples. In each example, assume that Company X is a U.S. corporation and Company Y is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Company X in Country B.

(m)

Coordination with transfer pricing rules for other transactions—

(1)

Services transactions that include other types of transactions. A transaction structured as a controlled services transaction may include other elements for which a separate category or categories of methods are provided, such as a loan or advance, a rental, or a transfer of tangible or intangible property. See §§ 1.482-1(b)(2) and 1.482-2(a), (c), and (d). Whether such an integrated transaction is evaluated as a controlled services transaction under this section or whether one or more elements should be evaluated separately under other sections of the section 482 regulations depends on which approach will provide the most reliable measure of an arm's length result. Ordinarily, an integrated transaction of this type may be evaluated under this section and its separate elements need not be evaluated separately, provided that each component of the transaction may be adequately accounted for in evaluating the comparability of the controlled transaction to the uncontrolled comparables and, accordingly, in determining the arm's length result in the controlled transaction. See § 1.482-1(d)(3).

(2)

Services transactions that effect a transfer of intangible property. A transaction structured as a controlled services transaction may in certain cases include an element that constitutes the transfer of intangible property or may result in a transfer, in whole or in part, of intangible property. Notwithstanding paragraph (m)(1) of this section, if such element relating to intangible property is material to the evaluation, the arm's length result for the element of the transaction that involves intangible property must be corroborated or determined by an analysis under § 1.482-4.

(3)

Coordination with rules governing cost sharing arrangements. Section 1.482-7 provides the specific methods to be used to determine arm's length results of controlled transactions in connection with a cost sharing arrangement. This section provides the specific methods to be used to determine arm's length results of a controlled service transaction, including in an arrangement for sharing the costs and risks of developing intangibles other than a cost sharing arrangement covered by § 1.482-7. In the case of such an arrangement, consideration of the principles, methods, comparability, and reliability considerations set forth in § 1.482-7 is relevant in determining the best method, including an unspecified method, under this section, as appropriately adjusted in light of the differences in the facts and circumstances between such arrangement and a cost sharing arrangement.

(4)

Other types of transactions that include controlled services transactions. A transaction structured other than as a controlled services transaction may include one or more elements for which separate pricing methods are provided in this section. Whether such an integrated transaction is evaluated under another section of the section 482 regulations or whether one or more elements should be evaluated separately under this section depends on which approach will provide the most reliable measure of an arm's length result. Ordinarily, a single method may be applied to such an integrated transaction, and the separate services component of the transaction need not be separately analyzed under this section, provided that the controlled services may be adequately accounted for in evaluating the comparability of the controlled transaction to the uncontrolled comparables and, accordingly, in determining the arm's length results in the controlled transaction. See § 1.482-1(d)(3).

(5)

Examples. The principles of this paragraph (m) are illustrated by the following examples:

(6)

Global dealing operations. [Reserved]

(n)

Effective/applicability date—

(1)

In general. This section is generally applicable for taxable years beginning after July 31, 2009. In addition, a person may elect to apply the provisions of this section to earlier taxable years. See paragraph (n)(2) of this section.

(2)

Election to apply regulations to earlier taxable years—

(i)

Scope of election. A taxpayer may elect to apply § 1.482-1(a)(1), (b)(2)(i), (d)(3)(ii)(C) Examples 3 through 6, (d)(3)(v), (f)(2)(ii)(A), (f)(2)(iii)(B), (g)(4)(i), (g)(4)(iii) Example 1, (i), (j)(6)(i) and (j)(6)(ii), § 1.482-2(b), (f)(1) and (2), § 1.482-4(f)(3)(i)(A), (f)(3)(ii) Examples 1 and 2, (f)(4), (h)(1) and (2), § 1.482-6(c)(2)(ii)(B)(1), (c)(2)(ii)(D), (c)(3)(i)(A), (c)(3)(i)(B), (c)(3)(ii)(D), and (d), § 1.482-8(b) Examples 10 through 12, (c)(1) and (c)(2), § 1.482-9(a) through (m)(2), and (m)(4) through (n)(2), § 1.861-8(a)(5)(ii), (b)(3), (e)(4), (f)(4)(i), (g) Examples 17, 18, and 30, § 1.6038A-3(a)(3) Example 4 and (i), § 1.6662-6(d)(2)(ii)(B), (d)(2)(iii)(B)(4), (d)(2)(iii)(B)(6), and (g), and § 31.3121(s)-1(c)(2)(iii) and (d) of this chapter to any taxable year beginning after September 10, 2003. Such election requires that all of the provisions of such sections be applied to such taxable year and all subsequent taxable years (earlier taxable years) of the taxpayer making the election.

(ii)

Effect of election. An election to apply the regulations to earlier taxable years has no effect on the limitations on assessment and collection or on the limitations on credit or refund (see Chapter 66 of the Internal Revenue Code).

(iii)

Time and manner of making election. An election to apply the regulations to earlier taxable years must be made by attaching a statement to the taxpayer's timely filed U.S. tax return (including extensions) for its first taxable year beginning after July 31, 2009.

(iv)

Revocation of election. An election to apply the regulations to earlier taxable years may not be revoked without the consent of the Commissioner.

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[T.D. 9456, 74 FR 38846, Aug. 4, 2009, as amended by 74 FR 46345, Sept. 9, 2009; T.D. 9568, 76 FR 80136, Dec. 22, 2011]

Authority

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960; T.D. 9989, 89 FR 17606, Mar. 11, 2024, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 21, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11402, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, T.D. 9381, 73 FR 8604, Feb. 15, 2008, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11607, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11737, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11814, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11910, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted.

Source

Source: Sections 1.1401-1 through 1.1403-1 contained in T.D. 6691, 28 FR 12796, Dec. 3, 1963, unless otherwise noted. RELATED RULES

Amendments

[T.D. 9169, 69 FR 78154, Dec. 29, 2004]

Amendments

[T.D. 9456, 74 FR 38846, Aug. 4, 2009, as amended by 74 FR 46345, Sept. 9, 2009; T.D. 9568, 76 FR 80136, Dec. 22, 2011]