By: Zack Leder | 07/10/20
Many practitioners are familiar with the benefit of using disregarded entities (DREs) or Single Member Limited Liability Companies (SMLLCs) in structuring merger and acquisition transactions. However, advisors should also consider the advantages of using F reorganizations to solve certain issues that can be encountered when forming a SMLLC.
An F reorganization, tax-free under IRC Section 368(a)(1)(F), is typically defined as a mere change in identity, form or place of organization. An F reorganization is very useful when the Target selling corporation has a business or tax reason to implement a disregarded entity, but there are impediments to forming a SMLLC.
Businesses encounter various issues when forming a DRE, including:
The usual manner to implement a DRE is commonly called a “drop-down,” where the Target transfers assets and liabilities into a SMLLC. The F reorganization can effectively achieve the same result as a drop-down while avoiding some of the negative consequences listed above.
A common example of using an F reorganization would involve a transaction where the seller is an S-Corporation. Assume further that the selling S-Corporation and Buyer are considering an IRC Section 338(h)(10) election, IRC Section 336(e) election or a drop-down, but are faced with the rigidity of elections and obtaining potentially hundreds of legal consents. The F reorganization allow for more flexibility and the structure is typically accomplished by the following steps:
Thus, you now have the desired result of an S-Corporation which owns 100 percent of an LLC without triggering any of the negative consequences of a drop-down.
The F reorganization structure places the seller in a position where they can have flexibility to do the following:
The F reorganization structure places the buyer in a position where they have flexibility to do the following:
Under Section 197(f), an intangible asset acquired by a taxpayer cannot be amortized if the taxpayer or a related person held or used the intangible during the period between July 25, 1991 and August 10, 1993. This section of the code is commonly referred to as the Anti-Churning Rules and can prevent the taxpayer from amortizing the step-up in the basis of the assets if the seller receiving rollover equity is related to the taxpayer. In general, under IRC Section 197(f), a seller is considered related to the post-transaction entity if it owns more than 20 percent of the entity. The related party and attribution rules should be closely analyzed as they can pose certain traps for the unwary.
However, flexibility to convert the SMLLC to a partnership prior to the sale can help the buyer capture the full benefit of the step-up in tax basis as the anti-churning rules typically do not apply to an increase in the basis of partnership property under IRC Section 743(b). In general, an increase in the basis of partnership property under IRC Section 743(b) is achieved when a new or existing partner acquires a partnership interest from an existing partner and an IRC Section 754 election is in place.
If your company is weighing the advantages of using a F reorganization in a merger and acquisition transaction, Bennett Thrasher’s M&A practice is here to help. We can help you weight the benefits and costs of an F reorganization versus other strategies. Because of our experience in guiding companies through this process, we are confident we can find a solution that works for you.
Contact Zack Leder or Chris Edwards at 770.396.2200 to learn more about transaction advisory services.
Back to insightsNever miss an update. Sign up to receive our monthly newsletter to unlock our experts' insights.
Subscribe Now