🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242
Private Letter Ruling 201949012 Released December 6, 2019 Approved

Three businesses satisfy active-business test despite shared employee

Apply this to your situation

This page covers one taxpayer's ruling from 2019, which can't be cited as precedent. Ezel answers your situation under the current Code and IRS guidance, with citations.

Currency note: this determination was released in 2019
Statutory amendments, regulation changes, court decisions, or later IRS guidance may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current tax advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, threshold, or position mentioned here.
Not precedent. Under 26 U.S.C. § 6110(k)(3), this written determination may not be used or cited as precedent. It resolved one taxpayer's situation on its specific facts, and identifying details were redacted by the IRS before release. The official IRS release (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source.
About this page: The plain-English summary and ruling snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official IRS release. The full text is the IRS's own document.
View official IRS release (PDF)

Plain-English summary

A corporation owned equally by three shareholders proposed dividing one operating business into three equal companies. It would contribute one-third of the business to each of two newly formed corporations and split them off to two shareholders, leaving the third shareholder with the original corporation. Each company would independently continue its portion of the integrated business with separate employees, although all three would share one employee and pay that employee directly for services. Addressing only the significant section 355(b) issue, the IRS ruled that all three companies would be engaged in the active conduct of a trade or business immediately after the distributions.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: Would the distributing corporation and both controlled corporations satisfy the section 355(b) active-business requirement after the split-offs?
  • Outcome: Approved on that significant issue; the ruling did not address the transaction's overall tax consequences.
  • Key authorities: IRC §§ 355(b) and 368(a)(1)(D); Rev. Proc. 2017-52; Rev. Proc. 2018-53.

Full text (IRS public release)

Internal Revenue Service Department of the Treasury
Washington, DC 20224

Number: 201949012 Third Party Communication: None
Release Date: 12/6/2019 Date of Communication: Not Applicable
Index Number: 355.03-00
Person To Contact:
------------------- ------------------------, ID No. ------------------
-------------- ----------------------------------------------------
-------------- Telephone Number:
----------------- ----------------------
------------------------ Refer Reply To:
CC:CORP:B05
PLR-105515-19
Date:
September 05, 2019

Legend

Distributing = --------------

State A = --------------

Shareholder 1 = --------------

Shareholder 2 = ----------------

Shareholder 3 = -------------------

Business A = --------------------------

Employee = ---------------

X Services = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Other Individuals = ----------------------

Y Services = -------------------------------------------------------

Z Services = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
PLR-105515-19 2

Dear -----------:

   This letter responds to your letter dated March 8, 2019, requesting a ruling on

certain federal income tax consequences of the Proposed Transaction, defined below.
The information submitted in that letter and in subsequent correspondence is
summarized below.

   The ruling contained in this letter is based upon information and representations

submitted by the taxpayer and accompanied by a penalty of perjury statement executed
by an appropriate party. While this office has not verified any of the material submitted
in support of the request for the ruling, it is subject to verification on examination.

   This letter is issued pursuant to section 4 of Rev. Proc. 2017-52, 2017-41 I.R.B.

283, amplified and modified by Rev. Proc. 2018-53, 2018-43 I.R.B. 667, and section
6.03(2) of Rev. Proc. 2018-1, 2018-1 I.R.B. 1, regarding a significant issue under
section 355 of the Internal Revenue Code. The ruling contained in this letter only
addresses a significant issue involved in the Proposed Transaction. This office
expresses no opinion as to the overall tax consequences of the Proposed Transaction
or as to any issue not specifically addressed by the ruling below.

                               Summary of Facts

   Distributing, a State A corporation, is owned equally by Shareholder 1,

Shareholder 2, and Shareholder 3 (the “Shareholders”). Distributing is directly engaged
in Business A. The Shareholders and Employee, as employees of Distributing, perform
X Services for Business A. Other Individuals, who are not employees of Distributing,
perform Y Services and the majority of Z Services for Business A.

                            Proposed Transaction

  For what are represented to be valid corporate business purposes, Distributing

proposes to engage in the following transaction (the “Proposed Transaction”):

  1. Distributing will form Controlled 1 and Controlled 2 as State A corporations.
    Distributing will contribute a portion of the assets of Business A to Controlled 1 in
    exchange for all of the stock of Controlled 1 and the assumption by Controlled 1
    of a portion of Distributing’s liabilities (“Contribution 1”), and a portion of the
    assets of Business A to Controlled 2 in exchange for all of the stock of Controlled
    2 and the assumption by Controlled 2 of a portion of Distributing’s liabilities
    (“Contribution 2”). Immediately after Contribution 1 and Contribution 2,
    Distributing (not including the value of the stock of Controlled 1 and Controlled 2),
    Controlled 1, and Controlled 2 each will have a fair market value (assets less its
    assumed liabilities) that is equal to one-third of Distributing’s fair market value
    immediately prior to Contribution 1 and Contribution 2.
    PLR-105515-19 3

    1. Distributing will distribute all of the stock of Controlled 1 to Shareholder 1 in
      exchange for all of Shareholder 1’s stock in Distributing (“Distribution 1”), and
      Distributing will distribute all of the stock of Controlled 2 to Shareholder 2 in
      exchange for all of Shareholder 2’s stock in Distributing (“Distribution 2, and
      together with Distribution 1, the “Distributions”).

      Following the Distributions, Shareholder 3 and Employee will perform X Services
      for the portion of Business A remaining in Distributing; Shareholder 1 and Employee will
      perform X Services for the portion of Business A contributed to Controlled 1; and
      Shareholder 2 and Employee will perform X Services for the portion of Business A
      contributed to Controlled 2.

    Distributing has submitted all of the information required by § 3.03(3) of Rev.
    Proc. 2017-52 for each of the Distributions.

                                  Representations
    

    With respect to each of the Distributions, Distributing has made the following
    representations in the Appendix to Rev. Proc. 2017-52: 9, 10, 12, and 15(a).

    Distributing also makes the following representations:
    
  2. Following the Distributions, Distributing, Controlled 1, and Controlled 2 each will
    continue, independently and with its separate employees, the active conduct of
    its share of all the integrated activities of the business on which it relies to meet
    the active trade or business requirement of section 355(b), as conducted by
    Distributing prior to consummation of the transaction, except that Distributing,
    Controlled 1, and Controlled 2 will share the services of Employee. Distributing,
    Controlled 1, and Controlled 2 each will pay Employee directly for the value of his
    services.

  3. Except for the issue of whether section 355(b) has been satisfied, Contribution 1
    and Distribution 1 will qualify as a transaction in which no gain or loss is
    recognized to Distributing, Controlled 1, or Distributing’s shareholders, and no
    amount is included in the income of Distributing’s shareholders, under section
    368(a)(1)(D) and section 355.

  4. Except for the issue of whether section 355(b) has been satisfied, Contribution 2
    and Distribution 2 will qualify as a transaction in which no gain or loss is
    recognized to Distributing, Controlled 2, or Distributing’s shareholders, and no
    amount is included in the income of Distributing’s shareholders, under section
    368(a)(1)(D) and section 355.
    PLR-105515-19 4

                                       Ruling
    

    Based solely on the facts and information submitted and the representations
    made, we rule as follows:

    Distributing, Controlled 1, and Controlled 2 each is engaged immediately after
    the Distributions in the active conduct of a trade or business within the meaning
    of section 355(b).

                             Procedural Statements
    

    This ruling is directed only to the taxpayer requesting it. Section 6110(k)(3)
    provides that it may not be used or cited as precedent.

    A copy of this letter must be attached to any income tax return to which it is
    relevant. Alternatively, taxpayers filing their returns electronically may satisfy this
    requirement by attaching a statement to their return that provides the date and control
    number of the letter ruling.

     In accordance with the Power of Attorney on file with this office, a copy of this
    

    letter is being sent to your authorized representative.

                                   Sincerely,
    
                                   _Russell P. Subin__________________
                                   Russell P. Subin
                                   Senior Counsel, Branch 3
                                   Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Corporate)
    

cc:

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what the IRS ruled for one taxpayer in 2019, and it can't be cited as precedent. Ezel checks the current Internal Revenue Code and IRS guidance and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.