The U.S. Tax Court today issued an opinion in a case of “first impression” concluding that a limited liability company was not entitled to capital gain treatment under section 1234A for its right to retain forfeited deposits of $9.7 million from a canceled sale of real property used in its trade or business in 2008.
The case is: CRI-Leslie, LLC v. Commissioner, 147 T.C. No. 8 (September 7, 2016). Read the Tax Court’s opinion [PDF 89 KB]
A limited liability company (LLC) acquired a hotel in Tampa, Florida. In 2006, the LLC agreed to sell the hotel to another entity for $39 million. Because the sale of the property was not closed, the agreement terminated in 2008 with the LLC receiving $9.7 million of deposits that were forfeited when the sale did not close.
The LLC reported the $9.7 million of deposits as net long-term capital gain on Schedule K of the partnership return for 2008. The IRS issued a notice of final partnership administrative adjustment (FPAA) to the LLC for the 2008, asserting that the forfeited deposit was ordinary income, and not capital gain.
The parties agreed and stipulated that the property was real property used in the LLC’s hotel business under section 1221(a)(2) and that the property was classified under section 1231(b)(1) as “property used in a trade or business.”
The sole issue before the Tax Court was whether “capital asset” as used in section 1234A extends to property described in section 1231. The Tax Court agreed with the IRS that because the hotel was section 1231 property, it was by definition not a capital asset (as defined by section 1221) and thus could not fall under section 1234A.
The IRS also asserted that because Congress wrote section 1234A to apply only to gain or loss from a termination of rights or obligations relating to property that is (or on acquisition would be) a capital asset, the statute is to be read narrowly to exclude property described in section 1231. The Tax Court stated:
"Since section 1234A expressly refers to property that is 'a capital asset in the hands of the taxpayer' and no other type of property, and since property described in section 1231 is excluded explicitly from the definition of 'capital asset' in section 1221, we must conclude that the plain meaning of 'capital asset' as used in section 1234A does not extend to section 1231 property. We therefore are not convinced by petitioner’s argument that the statute is inherently ambiguous."
© 2018 KPMG LLP, a Delaware limited liability partnership and the U.S. member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.
The KPMG logo and name are trademarks of KPMG International. KPMG International is a Swiss cooperative that serves as a coordinating entity for a network of independent member firms. KPMG International provides no audit or other client services. Such services are provided solely by member firms in their respective geographic areas. KPMG International and its member firms are legally distinct and separate entities. They are not and nothing contained herein shall be construed to place these entities in the relationship of parents, subsidiaries, agents, partners, or joint venturers. No member firm has any authority (actual, apparent, implied or otherwise) to obligate or bind KPMG International or any member firm in any manner whatsoever. The information contained in herein is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavor to provide accurate and timely information, there can be no guarantee that such information is accurate as of the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. No one should act on such information without appropriate professional advice after a thorough examination of the particular situation. For more information, contact KPMG's Federal Tax Legislative and Regulatory Services Group at: + 1 202 533 4366, 1801 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20006.