When Should Asset Appreciation Be Taxed?: The Case for a Disposition Standard of Realization

The realization requirement is one of the most basic elements of the United States income tax. Due to this requirement, any increase in the value of a person’s property is not taxed when it occurs. Rather, the tax on asset appreciation is deferred until the occurrence of a realization event; that is, until the property is transferred in exchange for money or other consideration. By contrast, all other forms of income (e.g., salary, rents) are taxed immediately. The realization requirement is one of the most basic elements of the United States income tax. Due to this requirement, any increase in the value of a person’s property is not taxed when it occurs. Rather, the tax on asset appreciation is deferred until the occurrence of a realization event; that is, until the property is transferred in exchange for money or other consideration. By contrast, all other forms of income (e.g., salary, rents) are taxed immediately. In light of the inequity, inefficiency, and complexity of the realization requirement, the requirement should be modified. Reformers have long argued that asset appreciation should be taxed as it occurs under a mark-to-market system. However, taxing asset appreciation as it occurs presents serious administrative problems because it requires an annual assessment of the value of every taxpayer’s assets. In addition, strong political resistance exists to taxing “paper gains.” For these reasons, it is unlikely that a comprehensive mark-to-market system will ever be adopted. Due to the dim prospect of adopting a mark-to-market system, this Article proposes the adoption of a “disposition” standard of realization. That standard would treat every transfer of property as a realization event regardless of whether the transferor receives consideration for the transferred property. Unlike current law, the disposition standard would tax lifetime gifts, as well as testamentary transfers, of appreciated property. A disposition standard is a second-best alternative to a mark-to-market system. This new standard would curtail the inequity and inefficiency of the current realization requirement while posing less significant administrative and political problems than a mark-to-market system. In addition, the disposition standard would simplify existing law by substituting a clear and administrable set of rules for the current ambiguous and anachronistic system. Finally, a disposition standard should help to generate much needed tax revenue

What is a Merger?: The Case for Taxing Cash Mergers Like Stock Sales.

In a merger, neither the assets nor the stock of one corporation are physically transferred to another corporation. Rather, the two corporations are unified by operation of law. The absence of a physical transfer of assets or stock obscures the tax effects of a merger. To determine these effects, a merger must be analogized to a sale of assets or a sale of stock. These alternative analogies yield significantly different results when the consideration for the merger is cash. When a cash merger is analogized to an asset sale, a 35% corporate tax is normally imposed. By contrast, no corporate tax normally results when a cash merger is analogized to a stock sale. Mergers have long been taxed like asset sales. Although analogizing cash mergers to asset sales was once defensible, changes in the law have eroded all support for this treatment. More significantly, well-counseled taxpayers can easily avoid the corporate tax resulting from the asset sale analogy. Thus, the continued treatment of cash mergers as asset sales merely traps the unwary. If a cash merger were instead analogized to a stock sale, the same tax consequences would apply to all. To level the playing field, therefore, the asset sale analogy should be abandoned and mergers should be taxed like stock sale

When Should Asset Appreciation Be Taxed?: The Case for a Disposition Standard of Realization

The realization requirement is one of the most basic elements of the United States income tax. Due to this requirement, any increase in the value of a person’s property is not taxed when it occurs. Rather, the tax on asset appreciation is deferred until the occurrence of a realization event; that is, until the property is transferred in exchange for money or other consideration. By contrast, all other forms of income (e.g., salary, rents) are taxed immediately. The realization requirement is one of the most basic elements of the United States income tax. Due to this requirement, any increase in the value of a person’s property is not taxed when it occurs. Rather, the tax on asset appreciation is deferred until the occurrence of a realization event; that is, until the property is transferred in exchange for money or other consideration. By contrast, all other forms of income (e.g., salary, rents) are taxed immediately. In light of the inequity, inefficiency, and complexity of the realization requirement, the requirement should be modified. Reformers have long argued that asset appreciation should be taxed as it occurs under a mark-to-market system. However, taxing asset appreciation as it occurs presents serious administrative problems because it requires an annual assessment of the value of every taxpayer’s assets. In addition, strong political resistance exists to taxing “paper gains.” For these reasons, it is unlikely that a comprehensive mark-to-market system will ever be adopted. Due to the dim prospect of adopting a mark-to-market system, this Article proposes the adoption of a “disposition” standard of realization. That standard would treat every transfer of property as a realization event regardless of whether the transferor receives consideration for the transferred property. Unlike current law, the disposition standard would tax lifetime gifts, as well as testamentary transfers, of appreciated property. A disposition standard is a second-best alternative to a mark-to-market system. This new standard would curtail the inequity and inefficiency of the current realization requirement while posing less significant administrative and political problems than a mark-to-market system. In addition, the disposition standard would simplify existing law by substituting a clear and administrable set of rules for the current ambiguous and anachronistic system. Finally, a disposition standard should help to generate much needed tax revenue