By Anthony Diosdi
Prior to the enactment of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, Controlled Foreign Corporations (“CFCs”) were able to defer the U.S. taxation of foreign source income through tax planning. The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act significantly reduced (but did not eliminate) a CFC’s U.S. shareholder’s ability to defer the U.S. taxation of foreign source income. This article will discuss two remaining options available to CFC shareholders to defer the recognition of U.S. tax on foreign source income. CFC shareholders can make either a so-called 962 election or a high-tax exception (also known as a Section 954 election) to defer the taxation on foreign income. This article will compare and contrast each of these elections.
Section 962 Election
Internal Revenue Code Section 962 allows an individual U.S. shareholder of a CFC to elect to be subject to corporate income tax rates on Subpart F inclusions and global intangible low-tax income (“GILTI”). According to the legislative history of Section 962, “[t]he purpose of [Section 962] is to avoid what might otherwise be a hardship in taxing a U.S. individual at high bracket rates with respect to earnings in a foreign corporation which he or she does not receive. Section 962 gives such individuals assurance that their tax purposes, with respect to these undistributed foreign earnings, will be no heavier than they would have been had they invested in an American corporation doing business abroad.” See S.Rep. No. 1881, 87th Cong. 2d Sess. 92 (1962).
Historically, because corporate and individual rates were both so high, Section 962 elections were economically disadvantageous and thus not used. The attractiveness of Section 962 elections changed drastically as of January 1, 2018. This is because corporate rates fell to 21 percent, and the effective tax rate that U.S. C corporations pay on their GILTI income is only 10.5 percent (after accounting for a 50 percent Section 250 deduction). Individuals, on the other hand, pay 37 percent on all their GILTI income, and are not permitted to take a 50 percent deduction under Internal Revenue Code Section 250. CFC shareholders making a 962 election are also permitted to offset some of their federal tax liability with foreign tax credits.
The Mechanics of a 962 Election
The U.S. federal income tax consequences of a U.S. individual making a Section 962 election are as follows. First, the individual is taxed on amounts in his gross income under corporate tax rates. Second, the individual is entitled to a deemed-paid foreign tax credit under Section 960 as if the individual were a domestic C corporation. Third, when the CFC makes an actual distribution of earnings that has already been included in gross income by the shareholder under the Subpart F or GILTI requires that the earnings be included in the gross income of the shareholder again to the extent they exceed the amount of U.S. income tax paid when the 962 election was made. To implement this rule, the regulations describe two categories of Section 962 E&P. The first category is excludable Section 962 E&P (Section 962 E&P equal to the amount of U.S. tax previously paid on amounts that the individual included in gross income under Section 951(a)). The second is taxable Section 962 E&P (the amount of Section 962 E&P that exceeds excludable Section 962 E&P).
Individuals making a 962 election will be permitted to claim a Section 250 deduction for GILTI inclusions. A Section 250 deduction allows U.S. shareholders to deduct (currently 50 percent of a GILTI inclusion (including any corresponding Section 78 gross-up). The Section 250 deduction decreases to 37.5 percent after December 31, 2025.
Examples of 962 Computations
When a CFC shareholder does not make a Section 962 election, he or she is taxed at ordinary income tax rates and the CFC shareholder cannot claim a foreign tax credit for foreign taxes paid by the CFC.
Below please see Illustration 1 which demonstrates the typical federal tax consequence to a CFC shareholder who did not make a Section 962 election.
Illustration 1.
Tom is a U.S. person taxed at the highest marginal tax rates for federal income tax purposes. Tom wholly owns 100 percent of FC 1 and FC 2. FC 1 and FC 2 are South Korean corporations in the business of providing personal services throughout Asia. FC 1 and FC 2 are CFCs. FC 1 and FC 2 do not own any assets. Tom received pre-tax income of $100,000 FC 1 and $100,000 of pre-tax income from FC 2. Tom paid 19 percent corporate taxes to the South Korea government. For purposes of this example, Tom did not receive any distributions from either FC 1 or FC 2 during the tax year.
| FC1 | FC2 | |
| Pretax earnings and profits | $100,000 | $100,000 |
| Foreign income taxes | $19,000 | $19,000 |
| Earnings and profits | $81,000 | $81,000 |
Assuming that Tom did not make a Section 962 election, federal tax liability on the GILT
Inclusion will be as follows:
FC 1 $100,000
FC 2 $100,000
Total federal tax liability $200,000 x 37% = $74,000
Since Tom did not make a Section 962 election, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, he cannot receive a deduction for the foreign income taxes paid by his CFC.
As discussed above, CFC shareholders making a Section 962 election are taxed at favorable corporate rates on subpart F and GILTI inclusions. CFC shareholders can also claim foreign tax credits for the foreign taxes paid by the CFC. However, when an actual distribution is made from income previously taxed (“PTEP”), the distribution less any federal taxes actually paid under the 962 election will be taxed again.
Below, please see Illustration 2 which discusses the potential federal tax consequences associated with a Section 962 election if an individual was the sole shareholder of two CFCs.
Illustration 2.
Assume the same facts in Illustration 1. However, in this case, Tom made a 962 election.
| FC1 | FC2 | Total | |
| GILTI inclusion | $81,000 | $81,000 | $162,000 |
| Section 78 gross up | $19,000 | $19,000 | $38,000 |
(A Section 78 gross-up amount equal to the deemed-paid credit paid by the foreign corporation is added to Tom’s income)
| Tentative income | $100,000 | $100,000 | $200,000 |
| Section 250 deduction | -$50,000 | -$50,000 | $100,000 |
| Net Income | $50,000 | $50,000 | $100,000 |
| Corporate tax 21% | $21,000 | ||
| Foreign tax credit | -$38,000 | ||
| 962 tax liability | 0 |
When the $162,000 E&P is distributed in a future year to Tom, the distribution will be subject to federal income tax. In this case, the distribution will be taxed at a favorable rate. This is because South Korea is a country that has entered into a bilateral tax treaty with the United States. Under the tax treaty, the $162,000 distribution will be eligible for a preferential 20 percent qualified dividend rate. Thus, in this case, Tom’s federal tax liability associated with FC 1 and FC 2 (excluding Medicare tax) is only $32,400. ($162,000 x 20% = $32,400). By making a 962 election, Tom saved $27,594 ($59,994 – $32,400 = $27,594) in federal income taxes.
However, making a 962 election does not always result in tax savings. Depending on the facts and circumstances of the case, sometimes making a 962 election can result in a CFC shareholder paying more federal income taxes in the long term.
Below, please see Illustration 3 which provides an example when a 962 election resulted in an increased tax liability in the long run.
For Illustration 3, let’s assume that Tom is the sole shareholder of FC 1 and FC 2.
Only this time, FC 1 and FC 2 are incorporated in the British Virgin Islands. FC 1 and FC 2 are both CFCs. Assume that the foreign earnings of FC 1 and FC 2 are the same as in Illustration 1. Let’s also assume that FC 1 and FC 2 did not pay any foreign taxes.
| FC1 | FC2 | Total | |
| GILTI Inclusion | $81,000 | $81,000 | $162,000 |
| Section 78 gross up | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tentative taxable income | $81,000 | $81,000 | $162,000 |
| Section 250 deduction | -$40,500 | -$40,500 | -$81,000 |
| Net income after deduction | $40,500 | $40,500 | $81,000 |
| 21% corporate tax rate | $17,010 | ||
| Foreign tax credit | 0 | ||
| First layer 962 tax | $17,010 |
At the time of the 962 election, Tom will pay $17,010 in taxes (excluding Medicare tax).
However, in the future, Tom must pay a second tax one the E&P from FC 1 and FC 2 associated with the 962 PTEP is distributed to him. In this case Tom will owe an additional $59,994 (assuming federal tax from the first layer of 962 tax cannot be used to offset the second layer of 962 tax) in federal income tax (excluding Medicare tax). Tom’s total federal tax liability associated with the 962 election will be $77,004. In this example, by making the 962 election, Tom increased his tax liability by $17,010 ($77,004 – $59,994 = $17,010). But, Tom has had the benefit of deferring his tax liability.
Translation of Foreign Currency Issues
Anyone considering making a 962 election must understand there will likely be foreign conversion issues. A CFC will probably use a foreign currency as its functional currency. Anytime a 962 election is made for a CFC which has a functional currency that is not the dollar, the rules stated in Section 986 of the Internal Revenue Code must be used to translate the foreign taxes and E&P of the CFC. Section 986 uses the average exchange rate of the year when translating foreign taxes. The average exchange rate of the year is also used for purposes of 951 inclusions on subpart F income and GILTI. In the case of distributions of the CFC, the amount of deemed distributions and the earnings and profits out of which the deemed distribution is made are translated at the average exchange rate for the tax year. See IRC Section 986(b); 989(b)(3).
Making a 962 Election on a Tax Return
The Internal Revenue Service or (“IRS”) must be notified of the Section 962 election on the tax return. There are no special forms that need to be attached to a tax return. However, the individual making a 962 election file the federal tax return with an attachment. According to the 962 regulations, the attachment making the 962 election must contain the following information:
1. Names, address, and taxable year of each CFC to which the taxpayer is a U.S. shareholder.
2. Any foreign entity through which the taxpayer is an indirect owner of a CFC under Section 958(a).
3. The Section 951(a) income included in the Section 962 election on a CFC by CFC basis.
4. Taxpayer’s pro-rata share of E&P and taxes paid for each applicable CFC.
5. Distributions actually received by the taxpayer during the year on a CFC by CFC basis with details on the amounts that relate to 1) excludable Section 962 E&P 2) taxable Section 962 E&P and 3) E&P other than 962.
We will now discuss the pros and cons of making a Section 962 election.
Pros to Making a Section 962 Election
The benefits of making a 962 election is that it provides the CFC shareholder with an opportunity to be taxed for federal income tax purposes at 10.5 percent on GILTI inclusions. It also allows the CFC shareholder the opportunity to claim 80 percent of foreign tax credits. When a 962 election is made, GILTI and subpart F income of the CFC is treated as PTEP which is classified as with “Excludable Section 962 E&P” to the extent of the income paid by the U.S. shareholder, or “Taxable Section 962 E&P” to the extent of the excess of Section 962 E&P over Excludable Section 962 E&P.
Generally, a distribution of E&P that the U.S. shareholder has already included in his or her income is tax-free to the U.S. shareholder. However, when a CFC distributes 962 E&P, the portion of the earnings that compromises Taxable 962 E&P is subject to a second layer shareholder level tax.
A 962 election provides simplicity in that a CFC shareholder can potentially obtain more favorable rates without the cost of restructuring a CFC. In addition, a 962 election provides flexibility. It can be made annually.
Cons to Making a Section 962 Election
Although a 962 election is less complicated than restructuring a CFC to obtain beneficial tax rates and allows a deferral of some foreign source income from taxation, its calculations can be tedious and thus there typically is an added compliance cost. A 962 election also subjects the CFC shareholder to a second layer of tax. This may result in the CFC paying more federal tax than doing nothing in the long run. Furthermore, this second layer of tax may or may not qualify for reduced corporate dividend rates under a tax treaty.
For example, the Section 962 regulations adopt the general Section 962 ordering rules with respect to a CFC’s distribution of E&P, but modify them by providing a priority between 962 E&P and non-962 E&P. First, distributions of E&P that are PTEP under 959(c)(1) (i.e., 956 inclusions) are distributed first, E&P that is PTEP under Section 959(c)(2) (e.g. GILTI and Subpart F inclusions) is distributed second, and all other E&P under Section 959(c)(3) (i.e. E&P related to the net deemed tangible return amount, high-taxed exception) is distributed last. This is the case irrespective of the year in which the E&P is earned. Second, when distributions of E&P that is PTEP under Section 959(c)(1) (e.g. Section 956 inclusions) are made, distributions of E&P come from Non-962 E&P. The distributions of E&P that is PTEP under Section 959(c)(1) then comprise Excludable 962 E&P, and finally Taxable 962 E&P. The same ordering rule applies to distributions of E&P that is PTEP under Section 959(c)(2) (e.g. GILTI and Subpart F inclusions). That is, distributions that are PTEP under Section 959(c)(2) come first from Non-962 E&P, then Excludable 962 E&P, and finally 962 E&P. Finally, within each subset of PTEP (e,g., Sections 959(c)(1) and 959(c)(2))), the ordering rule is LIFO, meaning that E&P from the current year is distributed first, then the E&P from the prior year, and then E&P from all other prior years in descending order.
As indicated above, the tax accounting associated with a 962 election can be extremely complicated and costly.
The Section 954 High-Tax Exception
For many years, CFC shareholders and U.S. multinational corporations were able to utilize a high-tax election to defer Subpart F income. However, when the GILTI taxing regime was announced in late 2017, a corresponding high-tax election was not available. Shortly after the enactment of the GILTI taxing regime, CFC shareholders, U.S. multinational corporations and their advisors began lobbying the Department of Treasury (“Treasury”) and the IRS to issue regulations to permit the use of a high-tax election for GILTI income. On July 20, 2020, the Treasury promulgated final regulations which permit a high-tax election for GILTI. This was welcome news to many CFC shareholders and their advisors. In general, the Final Regulations enable CFC shareholders to exclude amounts that would otherwise be tested income from its GILTI computation if the foreign effective tax rate on such amounts exceeds 90 percent of the top U.S. corporate tax rate (currently 18.9 percent based on the current 21 percent corporate tax rate).
In order to make a GILTI high-tax foreign exclusion, the shareholder must be subject to an effective foreign tax rate of 18.9 percent. This is calculated by dividing the U.S. dollar amount of foreign income taxes paid or accrued by the U.S. dollar amount of the tentative tested income item increased by the U.S. dollar amount of the relevant foreign income tax. This requires determining the tentative gross tested income and the tentative tested income.
Pros to Making a Section 954 Election
The regulations promulgated by the IRS and Treasury allows a CFC shareholder to make a high tax exception to Subpart F income or GILTI inclusions. This exception applies to the extent the foreign income from the CFC exceeds 90 percent of the U.S. federal corporate tax rate. Consequently, if the effective foreign tax rate exceeds 18.9 percent, the CFC shareholder can elect to utilize the high tax exception. This option is far more simple than the 962 election. Thus, the compliance cost should be less than a 962 election. When a high tax exception is used, the CFC retains undistributed profits as E&P. If the CFC is incorporated in a country that has entered into a double tax treaty with the United States, it is possible that the dividend may result in a reduced qualified dividend rate. Making a Section 954 election also eliminates the second layer of tax associated with making a 962 election.
Cons to Making a Section 954 Election
The high tax exception results in the CFC retaining undistributed profits as E&P.
This classification difference makes a big difference for cross-border tax planning. In addition, foreign tax credits may be lost through the use of a 954 election. Finally, a 954 election must be made with respect to all CFC’s controlled by the CFC. The election cannot be made on a CFC basis. This may result in the loss of cross-crediting of high-taxed CFC’s foreign taxes.
Conclusion
There is no one size fits all solution when deciding between a 962 and 954 election. Careful modeling should be done by a qualified international tax attorney prior to making the decision to make a 962 or 954 election.
Anthony Diosdi is an international tax attorney at Diosdi & Liu, LLP. Anthony focuses his practice on domestic and international tax planning for multinational companies, closely held businesses, and individuals. Anthony has written numerous articles on international tax planning and frequently provides continuing educational programs to other tax professionals.
He has assisted companies with a number of international tax issues, including Subpart F, GILTI, and FDII planning, foreign tax credit planning, and tax-efficient cash repatriation strategies. Anthony also regularly advises foreign individuals on tax efficient mechanisms for doing business in the United States, investing in U.S. real estate, and pre-immigration planning. Anthony is a member of the California and Florida bars. He can be reached at 415-318-3990 or adiosdi@sftaxcounsel.com.
This article is not legal or tax advice. If you are in need of legal or tax advice, you should immediately consult a licensed attorney.