Tag: Going concern
A business which is actually operating, e.g. at the time of takeover. The advantage of taking over a business as a going concern (if it is operating profitably) is usually recognized by a payment for goodwill as well as for other assets.
/ Assembled workforce, Buy-in payment, Cost Contribution Arrangements, Digital Economy, Fair market value, Going concern, Goodwill, Intangibles - Goodwill Know-how Patents, Pre-existing intangibles, Residual-business assets, United States, Valuation, Valuation - DCF and CUT/CUPs
In the course of restructuring its European businesses in a way that would shift a substantial amount of income from U.S.-based entities to the European subsidiaries, appellee Amazon.com, Inc. entered into a cost sharing arrangement in which a holding company for the European subsidiaries made a “buy-in” payment for Amazon’s assets that met the regulatory definition of an “intangible.” See 26 U.S.C. § 482. Tax regulations required that the buy-in payment reflect the fair market value of Amazon’s pre-existing intangibles. After the Commissioner of Internal Revenue concluded that the buy-in payment had not been determined at arm’s length in accordance with the transfer pricing regulations, the Internal Revenue Service performed its own calculation, and Amazon filed a petition in the Tax Court challenging that valuation. At issue is the correct method for valuing the preexisting intangibles under the then-applicable transfer pricing regulations. The Commissioner sought to include all intangible assets of value, including “residual-business assets” such as Amazon’s culture of ... Continue to full case
/ Business Restructuring, Digital Economy, Going concern, Intangibles - Goodwill Know-how Patents, Israel, Limited Risk Distributors (LRD), M&A, Microsoft, Purchase Price Allocation (PPA), Synergies, Transfer of intangibles, Value does not disappear
In November 2006 Microsoft Corp. purchased 100% of the shares of Gteko Ltd. (IT Support technology), for USD 90 million. The purchase was made with the intention of integrating Gteko’s technology into Microsoft’s own products. Following this purchase of Gteko Ltd., the employees were transferred to the local Microsoft subsidiary and a few months later another agreement was entered transferring Gteko’s intellectual property/intangibles to Microsoft. This transfer was priced at USD 26 million based on the purchase price allocation (PPA). The tax authorities of Israel found that the price of 26 mio USD used in the transaction was not at arm’s length. It was further argued, that the transaction was not only a transfer of some intangibles but rather a transfer of all assets owned by Gteko as a going concern to Microsoft Corp. The arm’s length price for the transfer was set at USD 80 million. The District Court agreed with the assessment and held that “value does not disappear or evaporate” and that Gteko had not succeeded in ... Continue to full case