A recent opinion in the ongoing litigation in the case of Clair R. Couturier makes a really important point about the distinction between a penalty and a tax. We will get to that, but I would also like to discuss the larger story of the case as I struggle with what the lesson is. I thought this case might be a good illustration of Reilly’s Second Law of Tax Planning – Sometimes it’s better to just pay the taxes – but I’m not 100 percent sure, so I will let you be the judge.
State Tax Planning with the “80/20 Company” Exclusion
Ted Stotzer
Many multinational groups find that foreign-source dividends and other income earned by domestic affiliates are fully or partially subject to state income taxation, even where the federal system provides an exemption. This state-level “leakage” can be material – particularly in high-tax jurisdictions – and is often overlooked because the income appears sheltered at the federal level. For groups with predominantly foreign operations, a starting structure or a restructuring that causes one or more domestic affiliates to qualify as an “80/20 company” can substantially reduce or eliminate state taxation on that income.
