Loan-out corporation

Last updated

A loan-out corporation, also known as a loan-out company, or personal service corporation, is a form of US business entity in which the creator is an 'employee' whose services are loaned out by the corporate body. The creator of the corporation is typically the sole shareholder, [1] and thus the corporation is used as a means to reduce their personal liability, protect their assets and exploit taxation advantages. Loan-Out corporations are especially prominent in the entertainment and professional sports industries, as the creator's services are typically performed on individual contract bases, and receive large, irregular sums of income throughout the year. [2]

Contents

The corporate body is engaged by external third parties to fulfill services, rather than the individual directly. Consequently, it is the creator's loan-out corporation that is referred to and liable in contracts to perform the services required.

History

The OECD Model Income Tax treaty of 1930, lies as the foundation by which loan-out corporation structures may be used. Under Article 17, the model outlines the manner in which athletes, celebrities, or artists operating across numerous countries, and therefore earning income under numerous taxation systems, may only be taxed in their home jurisdiction's source of income, even without an established corporate body. This rationale was initiated due to the difficulties of taxing individuals who operate on numerous contracts, such as professional sportspeople or artists. [3]

Major changes have come into effect as of 2017, increasing the benefits and incentivizing the exploitation of the Loan-out corporation structure. The predominant change that has come into place through the passing of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act 2017 lies in end of the itemized tax deduction for unreimbursed employee expenses. [4] The consequence of this legislation is that all individuals representing themselves, operating on a contract-by-contract basis, will be able to deduct almost all reasonable, business related expenses from their taxable income whilst operating under the loan-out corporate body. This legislation has sparked a rejuvenation of the concept of operating under a corporate body, which facilitates all payments, with the individual creator of the corporation loaning out their services, while allowing for expense deduction and asset protection.

Benefits

When a corporation loans out the services of an individual, the borrowing party pays a contractual amount for the services, and therefore pays a salary to the individual performing the services, via the corporation. The borrowing entity may pay a token dividend or provide additional fringe benefits to cover insurances, medical, or retirement plans. [5] An effective use of the corporation status over that of an individual employment contract, may minimise the corporation's taxable income to near zero, even in the case of a C corporation. The key benefits of creating a loan-out corporation business entity are expense deductions, asset protection and tax deferral.

Expense deductions

The Loan-Out corporation is considered a separate tax entity to that of the creator, and thus, the creator may take advantage on the minimization of taxable income, through tax-deductible expenses. The creator's business expenses may be processed through the loan-out corporation, so treated as corporate expenses rather than personal employee expenses. [6] This entitles the creator to deduct more expenses than otherwise applicable. Prior to the introduction of the new Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, employees were only able to deduct their unreimbursed business expenses up to a value of 2% of their gross income. But under the new legislation, employees are no longer able to deduct unreimbursed business expenses at all. [7] Consequently, there is no limit to the value of corporate expense deductions, and can therefore deduct almost all reasonable business expenses, and thus minimize their taxation liability. [5]

Asset protection

Limited liability companies (LLC) offer personal liability protection, ensuring that a financial loss or incident that occurs to the corporation does not impact shareholder's own finances or assets. [8] The loan-out corporate structure is therefore ideal as it forms a separate legal entity to the creator, and thus the creator is not liable for external claims against the corporation's assets in the event of a legal dispute, or the repayment of debt. That is, if the company is sued or required to pay substantial debt that it is unable to honour, the assets of the creator are not subject to liquidation; Only the corporate body's asset's are liable. [9]

Tax deferral

Loan-out corporations are able to defer their taxable income to the following taxable year. This is a result of the corporation being able to select its taxable year of income, from any fiscal year. [10] However, the loan-out corporation must select a fiscal year that ends between September and December. The advantage of this, is that the creator of the corporation may use a fiscal year that ends earlier than that of the U.S. Personal income tax period, which ends December 31. The corporation must pay its shareholder(s) compensation as bonuses equal to or less than the payment made in the prior tax year, or 95% of the corporations taxable income earned in the taxable year ended December 31. [11] Consequently, a loan-out corporation experiencing increasing revenues will benefit from the use of fiscal year tax deferral.

Common law

Section 269A of the Internal Revenue Code: Personal service corporations formed or availed of to avoid or evade income tax

Section 269A of the Internal Revenue Code defines the conditions upon which the creator's of a loan-out corporation body must satisfy, for the official recognition of a loan-out corporation business entity structure. The corporate structure must satisfy the following two conditions to render the entity as an official loan-out corporate structure: [12]

  1. "Substantially all of the services of a personal service corporation are performed for (or on behalf of) 1 other corporation, partnership, or other entity, and"
  2. "the principal purpose for forming, or availing of, such personal service corporation is the avoidance or evasion of Federal income tax by reducing the income of, or securing the benefit of any expense, deduction, credit, exclusion, or other allowance for, any employee-owner which would not otherwise be available," "then the Secretary may allocate all income, deductions, credits, exclusions, and other allowances between such personal service corporation and its employee-owners, if such allocation is necessary to prevent avoidance or evasion of Federal income tax or clearly to reflect the income of the personal service corporation or any of its employee-owners." [13]

In the given context, employee-owner refers to an employee of the company that at any given point in time, holds greater than 10% of the loan-out corporation's outstanding stock.

Therefore, it is essential for the potential creators of loan-out corporations, to ensure that all services performed are on behalf of the loan-out corporation, purely as a means for avoiding U.S. federal taxation.

Section 482 of the Internal Revenue Code: Reallocation of Income

Section 482 of the Internal Revenue Code allows for a reallocation of income from the Loan-Out corporation to the individual, if necessary to avoid unintended tax evasion, or to more reasonably reflect the genuine revenues generated by the corporation.

In the case of athletes, their services or talents are considered to be a business in their own right, and the sportsperson may therefore be recognised as multiple operating entities. This can be avoided by athletes if they only perform services through the Loan-Out corporation, not forming additional contracts with other external parties for their athletic services. [10]

Drawbacks for creators

Although loan-out corporations are typically established to exploit taxation benefits and asset protection, there is risk associated with the poor formation and management of loan-out corporations. Poor management of the loan-out corporate structure, may result in the costs of incorporation exceeding the benefits received through the separation of legal entity between the creator and the corporate structure.

Double taxation

In a general corporate setting, the corporation pays tax on profits made from generating business revenues, and pays out a dividend to shareholders. Subsequently, these shareholders pay tax on the income received in the form of dividend. However, in the loan-out corporation format, the creator of the corporation is typically the sole shareholder. To avoid paying tax twice, at the corporate and personal income tax levels, the loan-out corporation will pay out its profits to the sole shareholder as a salary or bonus. Since the payment is treated as a salary expense, it is tax deductible as it is a typical part of business operations, rather than the elective payment of a dividend, minimising company profit to or near zero. [14]

Unreasonable compensation

Employers may be denied a tax deduction on salaries, if the compensation paid to the sole shareholder is seen as unreasonable. The 'reasonable' level of compensation faces scrutiny and controversy, as there is no definitive or quantitative measurement of what is, or is not reasonable. Consequently, the only bases for comparison are other incomes seen in the industry, on similar circumstances. As a result, if a portion of the payable salary is denied, due to being deemed as unreasonable and objectionable, both the corporation, and the creator, will be subject to taxation.

The U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, ensures the progression of artistic, and scientific endeavours by instilling a time limit for exclusive rights on works created. The currently standing Copyright Act of 1976, permits that all works created after January 1, 1978, endures exclusive copyright protection from creation, to 70 years after the original author, or creator of the work passes. [15] However, section 201 clearly identifies that copyright ownership becomes void for works made under hire. Consequently, the entity receiving the work, (e.g. the producing or directing company of a film, rather than the actor loaning their services), is deemed the author of the work, and thus the exclusive owner of all the copyright, negating the creator of the Loan-Out corporation exclusive rights to their own work. [16]

Complications for non-U.S. residents

Nonresidents are subject to U.S. taxation to the extent of the services that they perform within the United States, whereas U.S. residents are subject to U.S. taxation for the gross income they receive globally. [17] The determination of whether an individual is a permanent or predominate resident of the United States and thus classified under the United States taxation requirements is essential in planning for tax minimisation advantages. This residency is an essential establishment as corporate entities not deemed to have permanent establishment in the United States, may be eligible to apply taxation treaty provisions existing between their primary nation of residence and the U.S., and thus avoid double taxation on income received via the loan-out corporate entity. [18]

This difficulty is often faced by athletes performing in the major U.S. sporting codes such as the NBA, NFL, and NHL, as athletes living globally are involved, and teams compete across Canada and the U.S. This is especially prominent as athletes often compete in the U.S., or Canada for a period of 8 months or more, and therefore determining the athletes primary country of residence and therefore their corporate tax liability. [17]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Taxation in the United States</span> United States tax codes

The United States has separate federal, state, and local governments with taxes imposed at each of these levels. Taxes are levied on income, payroll, property, sales, capital gains, dividends, imports, estates and gifts, as well as various fees. In 2020, taxes collected by federal, state, and local governments amounted to 25.5% of GDP, below the OECD average of 33.5% of GDP.

An income tax is a tax imposed on individuals or entities (taxpayers) in respect of the income or profits earned by them. Income tax generally is computed as the product of a tax rate times the taxable income. Taxation rates may vary by type or characteristics of the taxpayer and the type of income.

A dividend tax is a tax imposed by a jurisdiction on dividends paid by a corporation to its shareholders (stockholders). The primary tax liability is that of the shareholder, though a tax obligation may also be imposed on the corporation in the form of a withholding tax. In some cases the withholding tax may be the extent of the tax liability in relation to the dividend. A dividend tax is in addition to any tax imposed directly on the corporation on its profits. Some jurisdictions do not tax dividends.

An expense is an item requiring an outflow of money, or any form of fortune in general, to another person or group as payment for an item, service, or other category of costs. For a tenant, rent is an expense. For students or parents, tuition is an expense. Buying food, clothing, furniture, or an automobile is often referred to as an expense. An expense is a cost that is "paid" or "remitted", usually in exchange for something of value. Something that seems to cost a great deal is "expensive". Something that seems to cost little is "inexpensive". "Expenses of the table" are expenses for dining, refreshments, a feast, etc.

A tax deduction or benefit is an amount deducted from taxable income, usually based on expenses such as those incurred to produce additional income. Tax deductions are a form of tax incentives, along with exemptions and tax credits. The difference between deductions, exemptions, and credits is that deductions and exemptions both reduce taxable income, while credits reduce tax.

Negative gearing is a form of financial leverage whereby an investor borrows money to acquire an income-producing investment and the gross income generated by the investment is less than the cost of owning and managing the investment, including depreciation and interest charged on the loan. The investor may enter into a negatively geared investment expecting tax benefits or the capital gain on the investment after it is sold to exceed the accumulated losses of holding the investment. The investor would take into account the tax treatment of negative gearing, which may generate additional benefits to the investor in the form of tax benefits if the loss on a negatively geared investment is tax-deductible against the investor's other taxable income and if the capital gain on the sale is given a favourable tax treatment.

A corporate tax, also called corporation tax or company tax, is a type of direct tax levied on the income or capital of corporations and other similar legal entities. The tax is usually imposed at the national level, but it may also be imposed at state or local levels in some countries. Corporate taxes may be referred to as income tax or capital tax, depending on the nature of the tax.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">S corporation</span> US tax term for a type of company

An S corporation, for United States federal income tax, is a closely held corporation that makes a valid election to be taxed under Subchapter S of Chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code. In general, S corporations do not pay any income taxes. Instead, the corporation's income and losses are divided among and passed through to its shareholders. The shareholders must then report the income or loss on their own individual income tax returns.

A flow-through entity (FTE) is a legal entity where income "flows through" to investors or owners; that is, the income of the entity is treated as the income of the investors or owners. Flow-through entities are also known as pass-through entities or fiscally-transparent entities.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Income tax in the United States</span> Form of taxation in the United States

The United States federal government and most state governments impose an income tax. They are determined by applying a tax rate, which may increase as income increases, to taxable income, which is the total income less allowable deductions. Income is broadly defined. Individuals and corporations are directly taxable, and estates and trusts may be taxable on undistributed income. Partnerships are not taxed, but their partners are taxed on their shares of partnership income. Residents and citizens are taxed on worldwide income, while nonresidents are taxed only on income within the jurisdiction. Several types of credits reduce tax, and some types of credits may exceed tax before credits. Most business expenses are deductible. Individuals may deduct certain personal expenses, including home mortgage interest, state taxes, contributions to charity, and some other items. Some deductions are subject to limits, and an Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) applies at the federal and some state levels.

Income taxes in Canada constitute the majority of the annual revenues of the Government of Canada, and of the governments of the Provinces of Canada. In the fiscal year ending March 31, 2018, the federal government collected just over three times more revenue from personal income taxes than it did from corporate income taxes.

Tax deferral refers to instances where a taxpayer can delay paying taxes to some future period. In theory, the net taxes paid should be the same. Taxes can sometimes be deferred indefinitely, or may be taxed at a lower rate in the future, particularly for deferral of income taxes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corporate tax in the United States</span>

Corporate tax is imposed in the United States at the federal, most state, and some local levels on the income of entities treated for tax purposes as corporations. Since January 1, 2018, the nominal federal corporate tax rate in the United States of America is a flat 21% following the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. State and local taxes and rules vary by jurisdiction, though many are based on federal concepts and definitions. Taxable income may differ from book income both as to timing of income and tax deductions and as to what is taxable. The corporate Alternative Minimum Tax was also eliminated by the 2017 reform, but some states have alternative taxes. Like individuals, corporations must file tax returns every year. They must make quarterly estimated tax payments. Groups of corporations controlled by the same owners may file a consolidated return.

Taxes in Iceland are levied by the state and the municipalities. Property rights are strong and Iceland is one of the few countries where they are applied to fishery management. Taxpayers pay various subsidies to each other, similar to European countries that are welfare states, but the spending is less than in most European countries. Despite low tax rates in relation to European welfare states, overall taxation and consumption is still much higher than in countries such as Ireland. Employment regulations are relatively flexible. The tax is collected by Skatturinn, the Iceland Revenue and Customs Agency and is due in March each year.

The alternative minimum tax (AMT) is a tax imposed by the United States federal government in addition to the regular income tax for certain individuals, estates, and trusts. As of tax year 2018, the AMT raises about $5.2 billion, or 0.4% of all federal income tax revenue, affecting 0.1% of taxpayers, mostly in the upper income ranges.

Taxation in Finland is mainly carried out through the Finnish Tax Administration, an agency of the Ministry of Finance. Finnish Customs and the Finnish Transport and Communications Agency Traficom, also collect taxes. Taxes collected are distributed to the Government, municipalities, church, and the Social Insurance Institution, Kela.

Taxes in Germany are levied at various government levels: the federal government, the 16 states (Länder), and numerous municipalities (Städte/Gemeinden). The structured tax system has evolved significantly, since the reunification of Germany in 1990 and the integration within the European Union, which has influenced tax policies. Today, income tax and Value-Added Tax (VAT) are the primary sources of tax revenue. These taxes reflect Germany's commitment to a balanced approach between direct and indirect taxation, essential for funding extensive social welfare programs and public infrastructure. The modern German tax system accentuate on fairness and efficiency, adapting to global economic trends and domestic fiscal needs.

Taxation in Estonia consists of state and local taxes. A relatively high proportion of government revenue comes from consumption taxes whilst revenue from capital taxes is one of the lowest in the European Union.

In Slovakia, taxes are levied by the state and local governments. Tax revenue stood at 19.3% of the country's gross domestic product in 2021. The tax-to-GDP ratio in Slovakia deviates from OECD average of 34.0% by 0.8 percent and in 2022 was 34.8% which ranks Slovakia 19th in the tax-to-GDP ratio comparison among the OECD countries. The most important revenue sources for the state government are income tax, social security, value-added tax and corporate tax.

Taxation in Belgium consists of taxes that are collected on both state and local level. The most important taxes are collected on federal level, these taxes include an income tax, social security, corporate taxes and value added tax. At the local level, property taxes as well as communal taxes are collected. Tax revenue stood at 48% of GDP in 2012.

References

  1. Riley, P. (2018). The "Loan Out" Corporation. Retrieved from Arts Tax Info website: http://www.artstaxinfo.com/loan_out.shtml
  2. Crabb, K. (2005). The Movie Business: The Definitive Guide to the Legal and Financial Secrets of Getting Your Movie Made. New York City, NY: Simon & Schuster
  3. Nitikman, J. A. (2001). Intertax (Vol. 29). Alphen aan den Rijn, ZH: Kluwer Law Online.
  4. Kocher, Chris (January 19, 2018). "Tax Cuts and Jobs Act ... Miscellaneous Itemized Deductions". LCI Taxes, LLC.
  5. 1 2 LaFrance, M. (1995). The Separate Tax Status of Loan-Out Corporations. Scholarly Commons @ UNLV Law, 426, 880–944.
  6. Baker, W. H. (1999). Taxation and Professional Sports – A Look Inside the Huddle. Marquette Sports Law Review, 9(2), 287–306.
  7. Moll, J. (2019). What is a Loan-Out Corporation. Retrieved from Jason Moll CPA website: https://jasonmollcpa.com/what-is-a-loan-out-corporation/
  8. Cenkus, B. (2018). Does Forming an LLC or Corporation Fully Protect You From Liability? Retrieved from Cenkus Law website: https://cenkuslaw.com/llc-corporation-liability-protection/
  9. Freedman,A. (2018). Benefits of Establishing a Loan-Out Company for a Music Artist. Retrieved from Medium website: https://medium.com/@adamcolefreedman/benefits-of-establishing-a-loan-out-company-for-a-music-artist-e1b544a961cb
  10. 1 2 Kanis, B. M. (1995). Utility of Personal Service Corporations for Athletes. Pepperdine Law Review, 22(2), 630–667.
  11. Moore, S. M. (2008). Taxation of the entertainment industry. New York, NY: Wolters Kluwer Publishing.
  12. Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). 26 U.S. Code § 269A. Personal service corporations formed or availed of to avoid or evade income tax. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/269A
  13. I.R.C § 269(a).
  14. Short, G. (1981). The Loan-out Corporation in Tax Planning for Entertainers. Law and Contemporary Problems, 44(4), 51–78. doi:10.2307/1191224
  15. Lovitz, M. (2017). Loan-Out Companies: Unintended Consequences for Creators? Delaware Lawyer, 35(3), 16–19. http://www.delawarebarfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/DeLawFall2017-.pdf
  16. Basin, K., & Moss, A. J. (2012). Copyright Termination and Loan-Out Corporations: Reconciling Practice and Policy. Harvard Law School: Journals of Sports & Entertainment Law, 3(1), 56–102.
  17. 1 2 Salmas, J. (1997). Professional Athletes Taxed to Death Even They Can Strike Out. Sports Lawyers Journal, 4, 255–278.
  18. Dobray, D.; Kreatschman, T. (1988). Taxation issues facing the foreign athlete or entertainer. New York Law School Journal of International and Comparative Law, 9(Issues & 3), 265–292