MTM worksheet public version 8

Here’s a link to the newest version of the MTM worksheet public version.

MTM worksheet

Below is the change log (also included in the worksheet).  Some of the changes relate to notes that you won’t see in the public version.  As a reminder, to download, chose “edit workbook” from the upper right hand corner, and chose edit in excel.   Enable content on the workbook to ensure that macros work.  If you have trouble, you can submit a comment below or email me if you’d like a direct copy.

Version 8 change log
(1) Minor cosmetic things.
(2) Added to note in T16 with respect to 1256(e) contracts talking about interaction with 475(f)(1)(a) and 1.446-4
(3) Split out D22 into a separate investment and hedge tab instead of squishing them together.
(4) Changed D25 to apply 1.446-4/1221 instead of going through all dealer elections since the presumption would be that the dealer has made a 1221 id
(5) Expanded note in T1 to address issue of whether 475(f) is entity-level or trade or business level election.
(6) Added link in note to T13 to ABA commentary, which argued that proposed regulations under 475(f) went further than the statute permitted.
(7) Whereever a partnership was made subject to 1236 in my spreadsheet, added a further tab to elicit that and change the treatment because the definition of security in 1236 does not include partnership interests/trusts (unlike 475)
(8) Moved notes to start in row 9 except for a couple of tabs for easy removal on public versions
(9) Color coded tabs for dealer, trader, investor
(10) Due to definition of securities held for investment in 1.475(b)-1(a)
-Added definition of investment in 1.475(b)-1(a) to notes in D22
-For D12 and D18, drew a link to investment identication as treasury                                               investment identification seems to include trading activity
-Deleted D12.1, D19, D19.1
-Added some discussion of 475(b)(1)(B) to investment tabs.
(11) Eliminated branch dealing with improper investment ID since it was on a path that assumed something was an investment. Kept the information in a footnote though.
(12) Added footnote adding 1.475(b)-1(d) to dealer tabs dealing with 475(b)(1)(C) hedging elections (for hedging another member’s consolidated group risk).
(13) Made a note on trader tabs that 475(b)(1)(C) doesn’t appear to apply to traders by its terms (it only makes 475(a) inapplicable and not 475(f)(1)(A)) and 475(f)(1)(D) doesn’t appear to drag it in either. Deleted tab D13, D13.1, T6 and T10 which linked to 475(b)(1)(C) election in the context of a 475(f) election.
(14) In D15 eliminated third option as that is dealt with in the next step anyway.

New Proposed Regs. for Disregarded Entity Reporting

Some fallout from the Panama Papers?  New reporting requirements that apply to disregarded entities that are wholly-owned by a single non-US person.

Disregarded Entities and 6038

UPDATE:  Yes, definitely fallout from the Panama papers.

NYT article on new legislation

MTM Excel Workbook Sections 475, 1221, 1236, and 1256

Hi all,

I’ve been working on this excel workbook that walks one through the potential treatment under 475,1221,1236, and 1256.  Think of it as an active flowchart using hyperlinks.  Here’s a link to the file:

Workbook link

I believe that the way you get this to work for you is to click on the options in the upper right hand corner and choose to “edit in excel” and then it open it in your excel program. If you can’t get the link to work, you can put something in the comments or email me and I can email you the workbook.  Hopefully it’s self-explanatory but essentially you review the facts of the tab you are on and then choose the hyperlink of the fact that applies to your case.

I have tested this link myself and I do lose my “START” and “GO BACK” macros.  if you want a workbook with those macros, you might email me or put a note in the comments (at least until I figure out how to post a version where the macros work).

This is a free “beta” version of the sheet.  I’m testing this right now but also wondering if people would pay for the full version with annotations and notes as well as updates.   Something along the lines of an annual fee for the annotations as well as updates for the year.

Lastly, if I get any comment (other than style or grammar!) that leads me to correct an error or adds substance to the spreadsheet, you will of course get the full annotated version anyway.