United States: Building The New Berlin Wall: Treasury's Anti-Inversion Regulations

The Treasury no doubt felt that it could chalk one up in the win column early in April 2016 when, following its release1 of a veritable carpet bombing of new regulations designed to blow-up inversion transactions, the primary target, Pfizer Inc., chose to wave the white flag and cancel—at least for the time being—its efforts to merge with Allergan PLC.

One can easily imagine, deep in the bowels of the IRS headquarters at 1111 Constitution Avenue in Washington, D.C., giddiness reigning supreme, with elated tax policy wonks exchanging awkward "high fives." Let's not go there.

Unfortunately, a more sober assessment is that the Treasury's "victory" was Pyrrhic at best and catastrophic at worst, as the Treasury "doubled down" on a U.S. corporate income tax policy that is in a shambles. Pfizer was trying to leave the U.S. for precisely the same reason that so many corporations have already left, and many others would be delighted to follow. The U.S. has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, and, moreover, asserts (almost uniquely among major countries) the right to tax the world-wide income of every U.S. corporation, including every multinational corporate group with a U.S. parent corporation, regardless of how minimal or tangential the U.S. relationship may otherwise be to that income.

Put it this way: Having a multinational corporate group with substantial worldwide operations owned beneath a U.S. corporation is not merely a "questionable" strategy, or even a "poor" idea; it is provably, mathematically the wrong structure if your goal is to operate the corporation in the best interests of its owners, employees, and other stakeholders.

Distilled to its basics, the current Treasury policy is both bullying and wrong-headed. Treasury has signaled, through three aggressive announcements over the past 18 months,2 that it will do all it can to stop U.S. corporations from leaving—even when the law is not necessarily on the Treasury's side.

Some people think current U.S. policy is accurately described using a "Hotel California" metaphor—you can check-out anytime you like, but you can never leave—but the better analogy, precisely because it so clearly illustrates the melding of bad policy and all-but-certain failure, is the Berlin Wall. Khrushchev built the Berlin Wall in 1961 because growing hordes of East Germans were fleeing, and it grew increasingly awkward to try and defend the workers' paradise of the Eastern Bloc when large swatches of workers were intent on bailing out. So too with U.S. tax policy: Treasury thinks the natural answer to the fact that many U.S. corporations want to escape the U.S. is to make them stay unwillingly, by building the corporate tax equivalent of the Berlin Wall.

Ironically, the current U.S. tax mess is easily fixable, and indeed the United Kingdom, which itself was hemorrhaging corporations to Ireland just a few years ago, has provided an exact blueprint: Bring the corporate tax rate down, and stop trying to tax the repatriation of foreign earnings.3 But accepting this simple, obvious solution and the related consequences seems oddly anathema in Washington D.C. these days.4

So, in the meantime, we are where we are, which is more or less on the wrong side of 1961 Berlin. How this will all shake out in the short- and medium-term is far from clear—politics hangs like a heavy fog—but one thing seems self-evident: In the long term, current U.S. tax policy seems likely to work out every bit as well for the U.S. as building the Berlin Wall did for Khrushchev. It will, eventually, need to come down.

The Unspoken Target of the New Regulations

The desperation of Treasury to find some solution, any solution, to the current U.S. inversion stampede is perhaps best measured by the sheer length of its most recently issued regulations— some 200 pages of new regulations under Section 7874,5 adding a dense layer of picayune provisions governing inversion transactions (but, le t i t be clearly stated, coming nowhere close to actually stopping inversions if the parties are determined and willing to stare down the Treasury's ire), plus, for good measure, another 135 pages under Sect ion 385,6 dealing with rules to distinguish debt from equity, with a special emphasis on preventing so-called "earnings stripping."

Of course, nowhere in the new regulations and the accompanying announcements did Treasury explicitly state that this was all part of an orchestrated "Stop Pfizer" movement, but on the other hand no one in the financial markets was the least bit deceived.

More than 50 former U.S. companies have incorporated outside the United States since 1982, and in recent years the exodus has picked up at an alarming pace, with more than 20 major corporations heading out the door to more congenial tax climes just since 2012.7 The list of the newly departed is both demoralizingly long and peppered with the names of top-notch, even iconic, companies, including Burger King, Medtronic, Liberty Media, Eaton Corporation, Stanley Works, Ingersoll-Rand, Seagate Technology, Fruit of the Loom, and Tyco International.

The latest corporation to announce its fond farewells—and the biggest to date—was supposed to be Pfizer, the huge and highly regarded drug company (ranked #2 in the world)8 heretofore headquartered in New York but soon to be owned via merger by Allergan PLC, a corporation formed under the laws of Ireland but also with a strikingly large managerial presence in New Jersey.

More than a few observers believe that Treasury specifically tailored some of the newly issued regulations specifically to stop the Pfizer-Allergan merger.9 For example, the new regulations contain a three-year look-back period10 that seems suspiciously tailored to Allergan— a composite of an original smallish Irish corporation and several already-inverted U.S. corporations—and raised the question whether Allergan was really "Irish enough" to qualify as an inversion partner.

Admittedly, the only thing more embarrassing than having a corporate heavyweight like Pfizer leave the U.S. was the fact that it was merging into Allergan, a Frankenstein creation of several other previously inverted U.S. drug companies. In fact, previously inverted U.S. companies often seem to become a natural "foreign" partner for subsequent inverting U.S. companies.11 The Treasury calls companies like Allergan "serial inverters," and the three-year look-back rule is designed to prevent serial inversions—but, the problem is, it only applies for a period of three years. Even under the Treasury's new-and-improved rules, Pfizer and Allergan can take a mulligan and redo their inversion transaction all over again—possibly as soon as next year, and in all events by 2018.

Read more


1. "Treasury Announces Additional Action to Curb Inversions, Address Earnings Stripping," 4/4/2016, found at https://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/jl0405.aspx.

2. The first Treasury announcement, announced by press release on 9/22/2014, and followed up by the more formal guidance of Notice 2014-52, 2014-42 IRB 712, contained a variety of interesting and important proposals, and was reviewed in detail in the article by Darby, "Inverted Priorities: Why the Proposed Treasury Rules are Unlikely to Stop Inversion Transactions," 18 Practical International Tax Strategies 2 (2014). As the article title suggests, the first round of Treasury proposals addressed perceived abuses and tightened the rules, but did not prevent inversion transactions. The second announcement, 'Fact Sheet: Additional Treasury Actions to Rein in Corporate Tax Inversions," 11/19/2015, found at https://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/jl0281.aspx , contained further tweaks that expanded and embellished the rules proposed in the first announcement but suggested, by the exceptional length and relatively modest additions of substantive content, that Treasury was already running dry on further ideas. As will be discussed below, the third announcement seems to offer even less substance – except where is it taking steps that at least some commentators believe go beyond the boundaries of the Treasury's rulemaking authority.

3. The Congressional Research Service, in a report "Corporate Expatriation, Inversions, and Mergers: Tax Issues" issued 5/27/2014, stated: "Two features made a country an attractive destination: a low corporate tax rate and a territorial tax system that did not tax foreign source income. Recently, the UK joined countries such as Ireland, Switzerland, and Canada as targets for inverting when it adopted a territorial tax. At the same time the UK also lowered its rate (from 25 percent to 20 percent by 2015)."

4. Congressional Research Service, in its 5/27/2014 report, stated (almost too candidly) as follows: "Some have suggested that lowering the corporate tax rate as part of broader tax reform would slow the rate of inversions. Although a lower rate would reduce the incentives to invert, it would be difficult to reduce the rate to the level needed to stop inversions, especially given revenue concerns." A revised report, issued 10/3/2014, was much less candid on this issue.

5. FR Doc. 2016-07300, filed 4/4/2016, 5:00 pm, publication date 4/8/2016, is a terse, economical 204 pages.

6. FR Doc. 2016-07425, filed 4/4/2016 5:00 pm, publication date 4/8/2016, is 136 pages.

7. Bloomberg has maintained a running list of expatriated U.S. companies since 5/27/2014, which can be found at http://www.bloombergview.com/quicktake/tax-inversion. The list identifies the year, the destination, and, where applicable, the merger partner. Prior to about 2012 (when Treasury first began aggressively jiggering the rules under Section 7874) it was often possible to do a "naked inversion" into a wholly owned foreign subsidiary. Today, the most promising mechanism under Section 7874 is to merge into a foreign corporation in the desired jurisdiction that is at least 25% the size of the U.S. corporation. See Darby, "Inverted Priorities: Why the Proposed Treasury Rules are Unlikely to Stop Inversion Transactions," note 2, supra.

8. A Forbes magazine article dated 6/4/2015 ranked Johnson & Johnson #1, Pfizer #2 and Swiss-based Novartis #3 in size in the pharmaceutical industry. See http://www.forbes.com/sites/liyanchen/2015/06/04/2015-global-2000-the-worlds-largest-drug-and-biotech-companies/#7b9203285768.

9. Among those who think so is Allergan CEO Brent Saunders, who stated so publicly immediately after the merger was called off. See "Allergan CEO: Merger with Pfizer was targeted by U.S. government," published at http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/05/ AbbVie, Inc. had a similar complaint in 2014 when its proposed $52 billion merger with Shire Plc was terminated following the first round of Treasury announcements attacking inversion transactions. The 2014 tax proposals "reinterpreted longstanding tax principles in a uniquely selective manner designed specifically to destroy the financial benefits of these types of transactions," AbbVie said in a statement at the time. See article at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-06/pfizer-allergan-plan-to-mutually-end-merger-cnbc-reports.

10. The new look-back period is described in the Third Announcement as follows: Limiting inversions by disregarding foreign parent stock attributable to certain prior inversions or acquisitions of U.S. companies (Action under section 7874 of the code). Some foreign companies may avoid section 7874 – the tax code's existing curbs on inversions - by acquiring multiple American companies over a short window of time or through a corporate inversion. The value of the foreign company increases to the extent it issues its stock in connection with each successive acquisition, thereby enabling the foreign company to complete another, potentially larger, acquisition of an American company to which section 7874 will not apply. Over a relatively short period of time, a significant portion of a foreign acquirer's size may be attributable to the assets of these recently acquired American companies.

It is not consistent with the purposes of section 7874 to permit a foreign company (including a recent inverter) to increase in its size in order to avoid the inversion threshold under current law for a subsequent acquisition of an American company. For the purposes of computing the ownership percentage when determining if an acquisition is treated as an inversion under current law, today's action excludes stock of the foreign company attributable to assets acquired from an American company within three years prior to the signing date of the latest acquisition.

11. In addition to Allergan, examples include Eaton Corporation, a major manufacturer of valves formerly headquartered in Cleveland, which merged in 2012 into Cooper Industries, a former U.S. corporation that moved to Ireland in 2009. Similarly, Tim Hortons expatriated to Canada in 2007, and then became the foreign merger partner for Burger King, which moved to Canada in 2015.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.