Common use of Tax Basis Clause in Contracts

Tax Basis. A U.S. Xxxxxx’s tax basis in the notes will equal the amount paid by that holder to acquire them. Upon receipt of a cash payment at maturity or upon a sale, exchange, or redemption of the notes prior to maturity, a U.S. Holder generally will recognize capital gain or loss equal to the difference between the amount realized and the U.S. Holder’s basis in the notes. Subject to the discussion below concerning the potential application of the “constructive ownership” rules under Section 1260 of the Code, this capital gain or loss generally will be long-term capital gain or loss if the U.S. Holder held the notes for more than one year. The deductibility of capital losses is subject to limitations. If the Market Measure is or includes the type of financial asset described under Section 1260 of the Code (including, among others, any equity interest in pass-thru entities such as exchange traded funds, regulated investment companies, real estate investment trusts, partnerships, and passive foreign investment companies, each a “Section 1260 Financial Asset”), while the matter is not entirely clear, there may exist a risk that an investment in the notes will be treated, in whole or in part, as a “constructive ownership transaction” to which Section 1260 of the Code applies. If Section 1260 of the Code applies, all or a portion of any long-term capital gain recognized by a U.S. Holder in respect of the notes will be recharacterized as ordinary income (the “Excess Gain”). In addition, an interest charge will also apply to any deemed underpayment of tax in respect of any Excess Gain to the extent such gain would have resulted in gross income inclusion for the U.S. Holder in taxable years prior to the taxable year of the sale, exchange, or settlement (assuming such income accrued at a constant rate equal to the applicable federal rate as of the date of sale, exchange, or settlement). If an investment in the notes is treated as a constructive ownership transaction, it is not clear to what extent any long-term capital gain of a U.S. Holder in respect of the notes will be recharacterized as ordinary income. It is possible, for example, that the amount of the Excess Gain (if any) that would be recharacterized as ordinary income in respect of the notes will equal the excess of (i) any long-term capital gain recognized by the U.S. Holder in respect of the notes and attributable to Section 1260 Financial Assets, over (ii) the “net underlying long-term capital gain” (as defined in Section 1260 of the Code) such U.S. Holder would have had if such U.S. Holder had acquired an amount of the corresponding Section 1260 Financial Assets at fair market value on the original issue date for an amount equal to the portion of the issue price of the notes attributable to the corresponding Section 1260 Financial Assets and sold such amount of Section 1260 Financial Assets upon the date of sale, exchange, or settlement of the notes at fair market value. Alternatively, the IRS may contend that the Excess Gain should not be limited to amounts attributable to a Section 1260 Financial Asset, but should instead apply to the entire Market Measure. U.S. Holders should consult their tax advisors regarding the potential application of Section 1260 of the Code to an investment in the notes. Table of Contents As described above, the IRS, as indicated in the Notice, is considering whether Section 1260 of the Code generally applies or should apply to the notes, including in situations where the Market Measure is not the type of financial asset described under Section 1260 of the Code. Due to the absence of authorities that directly address the proper tax treatment of the notes, prospective investors are urged to consult their tax advisors regarding all possible alternative tax treatments of an investment in the notes. In particular, the IRS could seek to subject the notes to the Treasury regulations governing contingent payment debt instruments (the “Contingent Payment Regulations”). If the IRS were successful in that regard, the timing and character of income on the notes would be affected significantly. Among other things, a U.S. Holder would be required to accrue original issue discount every year at a “comparable yield” determined at the time of issuance. In addition, any gain realized by a U.S. Holder at maturity, or upon a sale or other disposition of the notes generally would be treated as ordinary income, and any loss realized at maturity would be treated as ordinary loss to the extent of the U.S. Holder’s prior accruals of original issue discount, and as capital loss thereafter. Even if the Contingent Payment Regulations do not apply to the notes, other alternative U.S. federal income tax characterizations of the notes are possible which, if applied, also could affect the timing and the character of a U.S. Holder’s income or loss. It is possible, for example, that the notes could be treated as a unit consisting of a loan and a forward contract, in which case a U.S. Holder would be required to accrue interest income or original issue discount on a current basis. Proposed Treasury regulations require the accrual of income on a current basis for contingent payments made under certain notional principal contracts. The preamble to the regulations states that the “wait and see” method of accounting does not properly reflect the economic accrual of income on those contracts, and requires current accrual of income for some contracts already in existence. While the proposed regulations do not apply to prepaid forward contracts, the preamble to the proposed regulations expresses the view that similar timing issues exist in the case of prepaid forward contracts. If the IRS or Treasury publishes future guidance requiring current economic accrual for contingent payments on prepaid forward contracts, it is possible that you could be required to accrue income over the term of the notes. Further, if the Market Measure consists of a single currency, the principles of, or principles similar to those of, Revenue Ruling 2008-1 (“Ruling”) may apply to the notes, depending on their terms. In the Ruling, the IRS held that a three year instrument linked to the euro-U.S. dollar exchange rate should be treated as a euro-denominated debt instrument for U.S. federal income tax purposes in effect because it was principal protected in euros. If principles such as those apply to the notes, the notes may be treated as non-U.S. dollar denominated debt instruments for U.S. federal income tax purposes and may result in adverse consequences for U.S. holders. For example, all or a portion of the return on such notes may be treated as ordinary income and U.S. holders may be forced to recognize all or a portion of such income on a current basis over the term of the notes.