§318 — Constructive ownership of stock

Section 318 does not apply here for two reasons.

Section 318 does not apply here for two reasons.

* * * * * * * (c) Constructive Ownership of Stock.-- - 18 - (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, section 318(a) shall apply in determining the ownership of stock for purposes of this section. * * * * * * * (d) Redemptions Treated as Distributions of Property.--Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, if a corporation redeems its stock (within the meaning of section 317(b)), and if subsection (a) of this section does not apply, such redemption shall be

In addition, section - 6 - 318 applies to "those provisions of this subchapter to which the rules contained in this section are expressly made applicable" .

Hurst did in fact experience a reduction in her constructive RHI interest, even after applying section 318’s attribution rules, because her interest was reduced from 100 percent (her 50- percent interest plus Mr.

Determining Stock Ownership for Purposes of Section 382 Section 382(l)(3)(A) provides that, with certain exceptions, the constructive ownership rules of section 318 apply in determining stock ownership. Under the first of those exceptions, set forth in section 382(l)(3)(A)(i), the family attribution rules of section 318(a)(1) and (5)(B) do not apply;5 instead, an individual and all members of his family described in section 318(a)(1) (spouse, children, grandchildren, and parents) are treated as

Determining Stock Ownership for Purposes of Section 382 Section 382(1)(3)(A) provides that, with certain exceptions, the constructive ownership rules of section 318 apply in determining stock ownership.

While Textron is considered to own those shares under section 958(b), which incorporates by reference section 318 (with amendments),2 Textron did not own those shares either 2 Sec.

While Textron is considered to own those shares under section 958(b), which incorporates by reference section 318 (with amendments), Textron did not own those shares either directly or indirectly within the meaning of sections 951(a) and 958(a).

2) the acquiring corporation must have assumed a liability or taken the transferred stock subject to a liability; (3) the transferor shareholder must have incurred the assumed liability to acquire the transferred stock; and (4) the transferred stock must not have been acquired from a person whose stock was attributable to the shareholder under the section 318 attribution rules.

(2) In determining whether a distribution in redemption ofstock is treated as a sale ofstock under section 302(a) or a distribution ofproperty under section 301, the attribution rules ofsection 318 generally apply.

The Code addresses this problem by incorporating rules attributing stock ownership of one person to another (set out in section 318) in the analysis of transactions governed by section 302.

For this purpose, indirect ownership is determined under rules similar to the rules of § 318 but without regard to the family attribution rules of§ 318(a)(1).

For this purpose, indirect ownership is determined under rules similar to the rules of § 318 but without regard to the family attribution rules of§ 318(a)(1).

For this purpose, indirect ownership is determined under rules similar to the rules of § 318 but without regard to the family attribution rules of§ 318(a)(1).

In short, he testified that he did not own an equity interest in either firm, and he did not offer any other evidence in support ofthe proposition that he met the definition ofa "5-percent owner" ofeither firm within the meaning of section 416(i)(1)(B).

For this purpose, indirect ownership is determined under rules similar to the rules of § 318 but without regard to the family attribution rules of§ 318(a)(1).

For this purpose, indirect ownership is determined under rules similar to the rules of § 318 but without regard to the family attribution rules of§ 318(a)(1).

For this purpose, indirect ownership is determined under rules similar to the rules of § 318 but without regard to the family attribution rules of§ 318(a)(1).

For this purpose, indirect ownership is determined under rules similar to the rules of § 318 but without regard to the family attribution rules of§ 318(a)(1).

16, 35 (2005); see also Rev.

ady taken into account in computing the amount realized. Sec. 1034(b). Since Gaggero hasn't argued that any ofthese additional expenses exist, there's no difference between amount realized and adjusted sales price in this case. - 41 - [*41] 82-183, sec. 318, 65 Stat. at 494." See also Clapham v. Commissioner, 63 T.C. 505, 511 (1975). ,Congress enacted the nonrecognitionprovisions in that section because it was aware that the disposition ofone residence and the acquisition ofanother one were ofte

A.5-percent owner for purposes of section 469(c)(7)(D)(ii) is defined in section 416(i) (1) (B) (i) , which provides : (I) .if the employer is a corporation, any person who owns or is considered as owning within the meaning of section 318) more than 5 percent of the outstanding stock of the corporation or stock possessing more than 5 percent of the total combined voting power of all stock of the corporation, or (II) if the employer is not a corporation, any person who .

Petitioner's argument rests on the following: (1) Immediately before the cross-chain sales, the acquiring corporations were wholly owned subsidiaries of Merrill Parent; (2) under the attribution rules of section 318, ownership of the issuing corporations was also attributed to Merrill Parent through its ownership of ML Capital Resources; and (3) after the sale of ML Capital Resources, Merrill Parent.

Petitioner’s argument rests on the following: (1) Immediately before the cross-chain sales, the acquiring corporations were wholly owned subsidiaries of Merrill Parent; (2) under the attribution rules of section 318, ownership of the issuing corporations was also attributed to Merrill Parent through its ownership of ML Capital Resources; and (3) after the sale of ML Capital Resources, Merrill Parent continued constructively to own 100 percent of the stock of the issuing corporations through its

the 1986 cross-chain sale, P had identified the prospective purchaser of MLL, had negotiated a tentative purchase price for MLL, and clearly intended to sell MLL outside the consolidated group, thereby terminating MLL's constructive ownership under sec. 318, I.R.C., of Merlease, the issuing corporation. On its consolidated tax return for TYE Dec. 26, 1986, P claimed a loss from the sale of MLL after treating the gross sale proceeds as a dividend and increasing its basis in MLL's stock by that a

Section 318, as modified by section 304(b)(1), applies in determining whether the requisite control under section 304(a) exists. Section 304(a)(1) recharacterizes what appears to be a sale as a redemption by treating the sale proceeds as a distribution in redemption of the acquiring corporation’s stock and requiring that the tax consequences of the

452, 494, Congress has taken steps to diminish the impact of the Federal income tax on gain arising from the sale or exchange of a taxpayer’s principal residence. Section 112(n) (a predecessor to section 1034)4 provided that a taxpayer would not have to recognize a portion of the gain realized upon the sale or exchange of his pri

IBV and petitioners had an identity of interest. Harmont Plaza, Inc. v. Commissioner, 64 T.C. 632, 645 (1975), affd. 549 F.2d 414 (6th Cir. 1977); see Rickey v. United States, 592 F.2d 1251, 1257-1258 (5th Cir. 1979) (discussing attribution rules of sec. 318). 23 Respondent relied on these facts in arguing that sec. 267(a)(3) applies. Petitioners did not dispute respondent's contention that there was a circular flow of funds. - 75 - Transit's and LWSI's payments to LIIBV which they contend are i