Tuesday, March 2, 2010
(Indiana-Bloomington) presents A Tisket, a Tasket: Basketing and Corporate Tax Shelters
at the University of Toronto today as part of the James Hausman Tax Law and Policy Workshop Series
. Here is the abstract:
In an income tax system comporting with the Haig-Simons norm, deductible expenses would not face source-based limitations. A true Haig-Simons income tax system therefore would not take the schedular approach of sorting different types of expenses and losses into distinct conceptual “baskets” containing corresponding types of income. Practical realities often require departing from the Haig-Simons norm, however. The U.S. federal income tax system does require individuals to basket a number of types of expenses and losses. For example, individuals’ passive activity losses can only be deducted from passive income gains. By contrast, most corporations taxed under Subchapter C of the Internal Revenue Code are not subject to many of these restrictions. Thus, corporations generally can deduct their passive/investment expenses and losses from their active business income. That ability allowed the creation of infamous tax strategies such as the FLIP/OPIS basis-shifting shelter and the CINS contingent installment sale shelter.
As a device to prevent the resurgence of abusive tax shelters, the article proposes to extend to the domestic corporate context the passive/active distinction that already exists for individuals. If corporations’ passive-source expenses and losses were required to be basketed with their passive income (such as income from interest; dividends; and rents and royalties, other than those produced by an active business), most abusive tax shelters involving financial products would not work. The article also considers the three principal objections to the proposalthat it is overbroad, underinclusive, and too complexarguing that the proposal is tailored so as to minimize these costs.