§502 — Feeder organizations

191 cases·29 followed·11 distinguished·3 questioned·3 overruled·145 cited15% support

(a)General rule

An organization operated for the primary purpose of carrying on a trade or business for profit shall not be exempt from taxation under section 501 on the ground that all of its profits are payable to one or more organizations exempt from taxation under section 501.

(b)Special rule

For purposes of this section, the term “trade or business” shall not include—

(1)

the deriving of rents which would be excluded under section 512(b)(3), if section 512 applied to the organization,

(2)

any trade or business in which substantially all the work in carrying on such trade or business is performed for the organization without compensation, or

(3)

any trade or business which is the selling of merchandise, substantially all of which has been received by the organization as gifts or contributions.

  • Treas. Reg. §Treas. Reg. §1.502-1 Feeder organizations
  • Treas. Reg. §Treas. Reg. §1.502-1(a) In the case of an organization operated for the primary purpose of carrying on a trade or business for profit, exemption is not allowed under section 501 on the ground that all the profits of such organization are payable to one or more organizations exempt from taxation under section 501.
  • Treas. Reg. §Treas. Reg. §1.502-1(b) If a subsidiary organization of a tax-exempt organization would itself be exempt on the ground that its activities are an integral part of the exempt activities of the parent organization, its exemption will not be lost because, as a matter of accounting between the two organizations, the subsidiary derives a profit from its dealings with its parent organization, for example, a subsidiary organization which is operated for the sole purpose of furnishing electric power used by its parent organiza
  • Treas. Reg. §Treas. Reg. §1.502-1(c) In certain cases an organization which carries on a trade or business for profit but is not operated for the primary purpose of carrying on such trade or business is subject to the tax imposed under section 511 on its unrelated business taxable income.
  • Treas. Reg. §Treas. Reg. §1.502-1(d) Exception—(1) Taxable years beginning before January 1, 1970.
  • Treas. Reg. §Treas. Reg. §1.502-1(i) §1.502-1(i)

191 Citing Cases

FOLLOWED Zagfly, Inc., Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2013-29 · 2013

des the general rule that "An organization operated for the primary purpose ofcarrying on a trade or business for profit shall not be exempt from taxation under section 501 on the ground that all ofits profits are payable to one or more organizations exempt from taxation under section 501." Because we hold that petitioner will not operate exclusively for an exempt purpose and, therefore, is not an exempt organization under sec.

r than as expressly provided in"this Plans or, the Confirmation Order, whether or not (a) a proof of claim or proof of inter- est based on such debt or interest is Filed or deemed Filed pursuant to section 501 of the Bankruptcy Code, (b) à claim or interëst based on s ch debt or interest is allowed pursuant to section 502 of the Bankrupt-cy Code or (c) the holder of a claim or interest based on such debt or interest has accepted the Plan.

Petitioner suggests, however, that the operation of section 512(b)(4) is irrelevant for purposes of establishing eligibilit for the section 502(b)(1) exclusion . We disagree . Secti n 512(b)(4) provides that "Notwithstanding" the various ex lusi;ons from UBTI contained in section 512(b)(1), (2), (3), and ( ), unrelated debt-financed income is included in UBTI . Section 51 (b)(4) thereby "nullifies these exclusions for income derived fr m `debt-financed property"' . Bartels Trust v . United State

d prior to the Confirmation Date, other than as expressly provided in"this Plans or, the Confirmation Order, whether or not (a) a proof of claim or proof of inter- est based on such debt or interest is Filed or deemed Filed pursuant to section 501 of the Bankruptcy Code, (b) à claim or interëst based on s ch debt or interest is allowed pursuant to section 502 of the Bankrupt-cy Code or (c) the holder of a claim or interest based on such debt or interest has accepted the Plan.

(e.g. derivative or contractual rights to buy or 13 The reference to “property acquired” in the effective date provision more naturally relates to portions of the enacting statute other than the provision that enacted section 1234A. See, e.g., ERTA § 502, 95 Stat. at 327. But in any event we do not view it as inconsistent with our reading. 14 Additionally, we note that the enacting statute included section 1234A in “TITLE V—Tax Straddles” of the Act. See ERTA tit. V, 95 Stat. at 323. 20 sell ca

In general, the confirmation ofa bankruptcy plan "discharges the debtor from any debt that arose before the date ofsuch confirmation". 11 U.S.C. sec. 1141(d)(1)(A). 3(...continued) Commissioner, 118 T.C. 348 (2002), there was no final judgment on the merits as to petitioner's tax liability. - 13 - Thus, in a chapter 11 case, a garden-var

501(c)(3) also provides that a corporation must demonstrate that no part ofits net earnings inures to the benefit ofany private shareholder or individual, that no substantial part ofits activities consists ofpolitical or lobbying activities, and that no part ofits activities constitutes intervention or participation in any pol

Bankruptcy Discharge On November 12, 2015, the bankruptcy court granted petitioners a discharge under section 1328(b) ofthe Bankruptcy Code, and they were relieved from all unsecured debts provided for by the plan or disallowed under section 502 ofthe Bankruptcy Code, except any debt ofa kind specified in section 523(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.

570, 573 (1978)); see also Am.

exclusively for an exempt purpose. -22- [*22] Discussion Section 501(a) provides in relevant part that an organization described in section 501(c)(3) (including a corporation) shall be exempt from Federal income tax unless exemption is denied under section 502 or 503. To qualify as an exempt organization described in section 501(c)(3), a corporation generally must demonstrate that (1) it is organized and will operate exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, educational, or other specif

502 (2006); Kendricks v. Commissioner, 124 T.C. 69, 77 (2005). Petitioner has not argued or demonstratedthat the liabilities for the years at issue should be reviewed de novo. - 14 - 112 T.C. 19, 23 (1999); Farao v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-13, aff'd, 447 F.3d 706 (9th Cir. 2006). We now review collection proceeding requirements. Ifany p

in the following three years. The committee, therefore, modified the 6The 1989 amendments retained the sec. 41(a)(2) 20% basic research payment credit, as well. 7In the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives ImprovementAct of 1999, Pub. L. No. 106-170, sec. 502(c)(1), 113 Stat. at 1919, Congress expanded the definition ofgross receipts offoreign corporations, then set forth in sec. 41(c)(6), for purposes ofthe sec. 41 credit, to include those effectively connected with the conduct ofa trade or busi

Solution Plus, Inc., Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2008-21 · 2008

ry Judgment . C. Whether Petitioner Is Entitled to Exempt Status A corporation that is organized and operated exclusively for charitable purposes, as described in section 501(c)(3), is exempt from Federal income tax unless exemption is denied under section 502 or 503 . Sec . 501(a) . To qualify as an exempt organization under section 501(c)(3), a corporation must satisfy all of the requirements stated therein, specifically including the requirements that the corporation must be both organized an

502(c), 111 Stat. 852. A QFOBI includes an interest as a proprietor in a business carried on as a proprietorship or an interest in an entity carrying on a business if at least 50 percent of the entity is owned, directly or indirectly, by the decedent or a member of the decedent's family. Sec. 2057(e)(1). If an estate qualifies for and elects t

South Community Association, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2005-285 · 2005

Respondent advances the following grounds for revocation: (1) Petitioner had as its primary activity the operation of a trade or business, i.e., its gaming operation, that was not in furtherance of its exempt purpose, (2) petitioner operated as a “feeder organization” within the meaning of section 502, and (3) petitioner’s operation served the private interests of its founder, Parr, and his company.

Peoples Prize, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2004-12 · 2004

le, scientific, and educational 1 Sec. 501, in relevant part, provides: SEC. 501. (a) Exemption From Taxation.— An organization described in subsection (c) * * * shall be exempt from taxation under this subtitle unless such exemption is denied under section 502 or 503. * * * * * * * (c) List of Exempt Organizations.— The following organizations are referred to in subsection (a): * * * * * * * (3) Corporations * * * organized and operated exclusively for * * * charitable * * * purposes, * * * no

Tamaki Foundation, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 1999-166 · 1999

e of Gilford v. Commissioner, supra at 51. Section 501 provides in part: SEC. 501(a). Exemption From Taxation.--An organization described in subsection (c) * * * shall be exempt from taxation under this subtitle unless such exemption is denied under section 502 or 503. * * * * * * * (c) List of Exempt Organizations.--The following organizations are referred to in subsection (a): * * * * * * * (3) Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for r

Shortly after the decision in Squire, Treasury regulations acknowledged the existence of the integral part doctrine in - 76 - providing an exception to the feeder organization rules under section 502.23 Section 1.502-1(b), Income Tax Regs., provides as follows: (b) If a subsidiary organization of a tax-exempt organization would itself be exempt on the ground that its activities are an integral part of the exempt activities of the parent organization, its exemption will not be lost because, as a

Share Network Foundation, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 1999-216 · 1999

lford v. Commissioner, supra at 51. - 9 - Section 501 provides in part: SEC. 501(a). Exemption From Taxation.--An organization described in subsection (c) * * * shall be exempt from taxation under this subtitle unless such exemption is denied under section 502 or 503. * * * * * * * (c) List of Exempt Organizations.--The following organizations are referred to in subsection (a): * * * * * * * (3) Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for re

Tate Family Foundation, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 1999-165 · 1999

e of Gilford v. Commissioner, supra at 51. Section 501 provides in part: SEC. 501(a). Exemption From Taxation.--An organization described in subsection (c) * * * shall be exempt from taxation under this subtitle unless such exemption is denied under section 502 or 503. * * * * * * * (c) List of Exempt Organizations.--The following organizations are referred to in subsection (a): * * * * * * * (3) Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for r

Larry D. Bowen Family Found, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 1999-149 · 1999

351 (1955); Estate of Gilford v. Commissioner, supra at 51. Section 501 provides: (a) Exemption From Taxation.--An organization described in subsection (c) * * * shall be exempt from taxation under this subtitle unless such exemption is denied under section 502 or 503. * * * * * * * (c) List of Exempt Organizations.--The following organizations are referred to in subsection (a): * * * * * * * (3) Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for r

502.64, 502.79 Subd. 2 (West 1990). We also disagree with the estate's alternative argument. The estate has set forth no good reason why we should disregard the validity of the Trust, and we decline to do so. Although the estate states correctly that we must (and do) interpret the language of the Agreement in accordance with the settlors' inte

Gastronomical Workers Union Local 610 v. Dorado Beach Hotel Corp. 617 F.3d 54 · Cir.
Stanley Smith v. Robert Contini 205 F.3d 597 · Cir.
National Security Systems, Inc. v. Iola 700 F.3d 65 · Cir.
CRSO v. Commissioner 128 T.C. 153 · 2007
Shiffman v. Commissioner 32 T.C. 1073 · 1959
U.S. Bank National Ass'n v. Verizon Communications, Inc. 761 F.3d 409 · Cir.
U.S. Bank National Association v. Verizon Communic · Cir.
Edp Medical Computer Systems, Inc. v. United States of America, Docket No. 06-0106-Cv 480 F.3d 621 · Cir.
Milgram v. Orthopedic Associates Defined Contribution Pension Plan 666 F.3d 68 · Cir.
Rocco v. New York State Teamsters Conference Pension & Retirement Fund 281 F.3d 62 · Cir.
Thomas Rocco v. New York State Teamsters Conference Pension And Retirement Fund 281 F.3d 62 · Cir.
Stephen S. Ziegler, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2007-166 · 2007
West End Co. v. Commissioner 23 T.C. 815 · 1955
Plow Realty Co. v. Commissioner 4 T.C. 600 · 1945
Fleet National Bank v. Gray 375 F.3d 51 · Cir.
Ryan v. United States (In Re Ryan) 725 F.3d 623 · Cir.
Templeton v. O'Cheskey (In Re American Housing Foundation) 785 F.3d 143 · Cir.
Robert Templeton v. Walter O'Cheskey · Cir.
William Pender v. Bank of America Corporation 788 F.3d 354 · Cir.
Robert Templeton v. Walter O'Cheskey · Cir.
Jeffrey Perelman v. Raymond Perelman 793 F.3d 368 · Cir.
Musmeci v. Schwegmann Giant Super Markets, Inc. 332 F.3d 339 · Cir.
Milgram v. ORTHOPEDIC ASSOC. DEFINED CONTRIBUTION 666 F.3d 68 · Cir.
Milgram v. ORTHOPEDIC ASSOC. DEFINED CONTRIBUTION 666 F.3d 68 · Cir.
Soto v. Disney Severance Pay Plan 26 F.4th 114 · Cir.
Walter Dean v. National Production Workers Un 46 F.4th 535 · Cir.
Coan v. Kaufman 457 F.3d 250 · Cir.
Ziegler v. Commissioner 282 F. App'x 869 · Cir.
Neil M. Baizer, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 1998-36 · 1998
David A. & Nancy J. Hepburn, Petitioner 109 T.C. No. 22 · 1997
Moody v. Commissioner 95 T.C. 655 · 1990
Wahlstrom v. Commissioner 92 T.C. 703 · 1989
Julien v. Commissioner 82 T.C. 492 · 1984
Mass v. Commissioner 81 T.C. 112 · 1983
CWT Farms, Inc. v. Commissioner 79 T.C. 86 · 1982
McGahen v. Commissioner 76 T.C. 468 · 1981
Eller v. Commissioner 77 T.C. 934 · 1981
Allen Eiry Trust v. Commissioner 77 T.C. 1263 · 1981
Dumaine Farms v. Commissioner 73 T.C. 650 · 1980
Peek v. Commissioner 73 T.C. 912 · 1980
Resource v. Commissioner 70 T.C. 594 · 1978
Jobusch v. Commissioner 68 T.C. 929 · 1977
Orton v. Commissioner 56 T.C. 147 · 1971
C. F. Mueller Co. v. Commissioner 55 T.C. 275 · 1970
Ginsberg v. Commissioner 46 T.C. 47 · 1966
Greenwald v. Commissioner 44 T.C. 137 · 1965
Waller v. Commissioner 39 T.C. 665 · 1963
Van Products, Inc. v. Commissioner 40 T.C. 1018 · 1963
Estate of Landers v. Commissioner 38 T.C. 828 · 1962
Frelbro Corp. v. Commissioner 36 T.C. 864 · 1961
Bradford v. Commissioner 34 T.C. 1059 · 1960
Dwinnell & Co. v. Commissioner 33 T.C. 827 · 1960
Estate of Cunha v. Commissioner 30 T.C. 812 · 1958
Sebago Lumber Co. v. Commissioner 26 T.C. 1070 · 1956
Webster Corp. v. Commissioner 25 T.C. 55 · 1955
Amo Realty Co. v. Commissioner 24 T.C. 812 · 1955
Paolozzi v. Commissioner 23 T.C. 182 · 1954
Estate of Hanch v. Commissioner 19 T.C. 65 · 1952
Hermax Co. v. Commissioner 11 T.C. 442 · 1948
Geller v. Commissioner 9 T.C. 484 · 1947
Grasselli v. Commissioner 7 T.C. 255 · 1946
Estate of Kolb v. Commissioner 5 T.C. 588 · 1945
Lantz Bros. v. Commissioner 5 T.C. 896 · 1945
Riter v. Commissioner 3 T.C. 301 · 1944
Allen v. Commissioner 3 T.C. 1224 · 1944
Goodman v. Commissioner 4 T.C. 191 · 1944
Wemyss v. Commissioner 2 T.C. 876 · 1943
Farish v. Commissioner 2 T.C. 949 · 1943
Lasker v. Commissioner 1 T.C. 208 · 1942
United States v. Freeman · Cir.
United States v. Yellin (In Re Weinstein) 272 F.3d 39 · Cir.
United States v. George 448 F.3d 96 · Cir.
NRDC v. US FDA · Cir.
SC State Ports v. FMC · Cir.
Citizens Coal v. EPA · Cir.
Romero v. Allstate Corp. 404 F.3d 212 · Cir.
Thomas Perez, Secretary v. Herbert Bruister 823 F.3d 250 · Cir.
William Lee v. Verizon Communications, Inc. 837 F.3d 523 · Cir.
Esden v. Bank of Boston 229 F.3d 154 · Cir.
South Carolina State Ports Authority v. Federal Maritime Commission 243 F.3d 165 · Cir.
Esden v. Bank Of Boston 229 F.3d 154 · Cir.
Gene Romero v. The Allstate Corporation 404 F.3d 212 · Cir.
William D. & Joyce M. Reimels v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue 436 F.3d 344 · Cir.
Citizens Coal Council and Kentucky Resources Council, Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency 447 F.3d 879 · Cir.
United States v. Santiago-Mendez 691 F.3d 1 · Cir.