1.936-6—Intangible property income when an election out is made: Cost sharing and profit split options; covered intangibles.
The rules in this section apply for purposes of section 936(h) and also for purposes of section 934(e) where applicable.
Q. 1: Cost sharing payments are based on research undertaken by the affiliated group in the “product area” which includes the possession product. The term “product area” is defined by reference to the three-digit classification under the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code. Which governmental agency has jurisdiction to decide the proper SIC category for any specfic product?
A. 1: Solely for the purpose of determining the tax consequences of operating in a possession, the Secretary or his delegate has exclusive jurisdiction to decide the proper SIC category under which a product is classified. For this purpose, the product area under which a product is classified will be determined according to the 1972 edition of the SIC code. From time to time and in appropriate cases, the Secretary may prescribe regulations or issue rulings determining the proper SIC category under which a particular product is to be classified, and may prescribe regulations for aggregating two or more three-digit classifications of the SIC code and for classifying product areas according to a system other than under the SIC code.
Q. 2: How is the term “affiliated group” defined for purposes of the cost sharing option?
A. 2: For purposes of the cost sharing option, the term “affiliated group” means the possessions corporation and all other organizations, trades or businesses (whether or not incorporated, whether or not organized in the United States, and whether or not affiliated) owned or controlled directly or indirectly by the same interests, within the meaning of section 482.
Q. 3: Are research and development expenditures that are included in product area research limited to research and development expenditures that are deductible under section 174 or that are incurred by U.S. affiliates?
A. 3: No, product area research is not limited to product area research expenditures deductible under section 174 or to expenses incurred by U.S. affiliates. Product area research also includes deductions permitted under section 168 with respect to research property which are not deductible under section 174; qualified research expenses within the meaning of section 30(b); payments (such as royalities) for the use of, or right to use, a patent, invention, formula, process, design, pattern or know-how; and a proper allowance for amounts incurred in the acquisition of manufacturing intangible property. In the case of an acquisition of depreciable or amortizable manufacturing intangible property, the annual amount of product area research shall be be equal to the allowable depreciation or amortization on the intangible property for the taxable year. In the case of an acquisition of nondepreciable or nonamortizable manufacturing intangible property, the amount expended for the acquisition shall be deemed to be amortized over a five year period and included in product area research in the year of the deemed amortization. Any contingent payment made with respect to the acquisition of nonamortizable manufacturing intangible property shall be treated as amounts incurred in the acquisition of nonamortizable manufacturing intangible property when paid or accrued.
Q. 4: Does royalty income from a person outside the affiliated group with respect to the manufacturing intangibles within a product area reduce the product area research pool within the same product area?
A. 4: Yes.
Q. 5: Does income received from a person outside the affiliated group from the sale of a manufacturing intangible reduce the product area research pool within the same product area?
A. 5: In determining product area research, the income from the sale attributable to noncontingent payments will reduce product area research ratably over the remaining useful life of the property in the case of an amortizable intangible and ratably over a 5-year period in the case of a nonamortizable intangible. Any income attributable to contingent amounts received with respect to the sale of manufacturing intangible property shall be treated as amounts received from the sale of the manufacturing intangible property in the year in which such contingent amounts are received or accrued.
Q. 6: If a member of an affiliated group incurs research and development expenses pursuant to a contract with an unrelated person who is entitled to exclusive ownership of all the technology resulting from the expenditures, is the amount of product area research reduced by the amount of such expenditures?
A. 6: To the extent that the product area research expenditures can be allocated solely to the technology produced for the unrelated person, such expenditures will not be included in product area research expenditures provided, however, that the unrelated person has exclusive ownership of all the technology resulting from these expenditures, and further that no member of the affiliated group has a right to use any of the technology.
Q. 7: What is the treatment of product area research expenditures attributable to a component where the component and the integrated product fall within different product areas?
A. 7: For purposes of the computation of product area research expenditures in the product area by the affiliated group, the product area in which the component falls is aggregated with the product area in which the integrated product falls. However, if the component product and integrated product are in separate SIC codes and if the component product is not included in the definition of the possession product, then the product area research expenditures are not aggregated. The same rule applies where the taxpayer elects a component product which encompasses another component product and the two component products fall into separate SIC codes. In such case, the product area in which the first component falls is aggregated with the product area in which the second component falls.
Q. 1: The cost sharing payment is the same proportion of the total cost of product area research which the amount of “possession sales” of the affiliated group bears to the “total sales” of the affiliated group within the product area. How are “possession sales” defined for purposes of the cost sharing fraction?
A. 1: The term “possession sales” means the aggregate sales or other dispositions of the possession product, to persons who are not members of the affiliated group, less returns and allowances and less indirect taxes imposed on the production of the product, for the taxable year. Except as otherwise indicated in § 1.936-6(a)(2), the sales price to be used is the sales price received by the affiliated group from persons who are not members of the affiliated group.
Q. 2: For purposes of the numerator of the cost sharing fraction, how are possession sales computed where the possession product is a component product or an end-product form?
A. 2: (i) The sales price of the component product or end-product form is determined as follows. With respect to a component product, an independent sales price from comparable uncontrolled transactions must be used if such price can be determined in accordance with § 1.482-2(e)(2). If an independent sales price of the component product from comparable uncontrolled transactions cannot be determined, then the sales price of the component product shall be deemed to be equal to the transfer price, determined under the appropriate section 482 method, which the possessions corporation uses under the cost sharing method in computing the income it derives from the active conduct of a trade or business in the possession with respect to the component product. The possessions corporation in lieu of using the transfer price determined under the preceding sentence may treat the sales price for the component product as equal to the same proportion of the third party sales price of the integrated product which the production costs attributable to the component product bear to the total production cost for the integrated product. Production cost will be the sum of direct and indirect production costs as defined in § 1.936-5(b)(4). If the possessions corporation determines the sales price of the component product using the production cost ratio, the transfer price used by the possessions corporation in computing its income from the component product under the cost sharing method may not be greater than such sales price.
(ii)
With respect to an end-product form, the sales price of the end-product form is equal to the difference between the third party sales price of the integrated product and the independent sales price of the excluded component(s) from comparable uncontrolled transactions, if such price can be determined under § 1.482-2(e)(2). If an independent sales price of the excluded component(s) from uncontrolled transactions cannot be determined, then the sales price of the end-product form shall be deemed to be equal to the transfer price, determined under the appropriate section 482 method, which the possessions corporation uses under the cost sharing method in computing the income it derives from the active conduct of a trade or business in the possession with respect to such end-product form. The possessions corporation in lieu of using the transfer price determined under the preceding sentence may use the production cost ratio method described above to determine the sales price of the end-product form (i.e., the same proportion of the third party sales price of the integrated product which the production costs attributable to the end-product form bear to the total production costs for the integrated product). If the possessions corporation determines the sales price of the end-product form using the production cost ratio, the transfer price used by the possessions corporation in computing its income from the end-product form under the cost sharing method may not be greater than such sales price. For similar rules applicable to the profit split option see § 1.936-6(b)(1), question and answer 12.
Q. 3: For purposes of determining possessions sales in the numerator of the cost sharing fraction, will the replacement part price of the product be treated as a price from comparable uncontrolled transactions?
A. 3: Prices for replacement parts are generally higher than prices for equipment sold as part of an original system. Thus, prices for replacement parts cannot generally be used directly as prices for comparable uncontrolled transactions. However, replacement part prices may be used for estimating comparable uncontrolled prices where the price differential can be reasonably determined and taken into account under § 1.482-2(e)(2).
Q. 4: For purposes of determining possession sales in the cost sharing fraction, what is the treatment of components that are purchased by one possessions corporation from an affiliated possessions corporation and which are incorporated into a possession product where the transferor possessions corporation treats the transferred component as a possession product?
A. 4: When one possessions corporation purchases components from a second possessions corporation which is an affiliated corporation, the purchase price of the components paid to the second possessions corporation shall be subtracted from the sales proceeds of the product produced in the possession by the first possessions corporation, and only the remainder is included in the numerator of the cost sharing formula for the first corporation. For example, assume that N corporation manufactures a component for sale to O corporation for $100 (a price which reflects prices in comparable uncontrolled transactions). Both N and O are affiliated possessions corporations. N has designated that component product as its possession product. O then incorporates that product into a second product which is sold to customers for $300 N and O must make separate cost sharing payments. The cost sharing payment of N corporation is determined by including $100 as possession sales, and the payment of O is determined by subtracting that $100 purchase price from the $300 received from customers. Thus, the possessions sales amount of O is $200. This rule is intended to prevent the double counting of the sales of a component produced by one possessions corporation and incorporated into another product by an affiliated possessions corporation.
Q. 5: Are pre-TEFRA sales included in the cost sharing fraction?
A. 5: No. Pre-TEFRA sales are sales of products produced by the possessions corporation and transferred to an affiliate prior to a possessions corporation's first taxable year beginning after December 31, 1982. Pre-TEFRA sales are not included in either the numerator or denominator of the cost sharing fraction. If the U.S. affiliate uses the FIFO method of costing inventory, the pre-TEFRA inventory will be treated as the first inventory sold by the U.S. affiliate during the first year in which section 936(h) applies. If the U.S. affiliate uses the LIFO method of costing inventory (either dollar-value or specific goods LIFO), pre-TEFRA inventor will be treated as inventory sold by the U.S. affiliate in the year in which the U.S. afiliate's LIFO layer containing pre-TEFRA LIFO inventory is liquidated.
Q. 6: How are “possession sales” determined under the cost sharing formula if members of the affiliated group (other than the possessions corporation) include purchases of the possession product, X, in a dollar-value LIFO inventory pool (as provided under § 1.472-8 )?
A. 6: Possession sales may be determined by applying the revenue identification method provided under paragraph (b)(1) Question and Answer 18 of this section.
Q. 7: Do possession sales include excise taxes paid by the possessions corporation when the product is sold for ultimate use or consumption in the possession?
A. 7: No. The amount of excise taxes is excluded from both the numerator and denominator of the cost sharing fraction.
Q. 8: How are “total sales” defined for purposes of the cost sharing fraction?
A. 8: The term “total sales” means aggregate sales or other dispositions of products in the same product area as the possession product, less returns and allowances and less indirect taxes imposed on the production of the product, for the taxable year to persons who are not members of the affiliated group. The sales price to be used is the sales price received by the affiliated group from persons who are not members of the affiliated group.
Q. 9: In computing that cost sharing payment, how are “total sales” computed if the dollar-value LIFO inventory pool includes some products which are not included in the product area (determined under the 3-digit SIC code) on which the denominator of the cost sharing fraction is based?
A. 9: In such case, the amount of the total sales within the product area to persons who are not members of the affiliated group by persons who are members of the affiliated group is determined by multiplying the total sales of the products within the dollar-value LIFO inventory pool by a fraction. The numerator of the fraction includes the dollar-value of purchases by members of the affiliated group (including the possessions corporation) of products within the product area made during the year, plus any added production costs (as defined in § 1.471-11(b), (c), and (d) but not including the costs of materials) incurred by the affiliates during the same period. The denominator of the fraction includes the dollar-value of purchases by members of the affiliated group (including the possessions corporation) of products within the dollar-value LIFO inventory pool made during the same period (including any production costs, as described above, incurred by the affiliate during the same period). For these purposes, purchases of a possession product are determined on the basis of the possessions corporation's cost for its inventory purposes.
Q. 10: May a possessions corporation compute its income under the cost sharing method with respect to a possession product which the possessions corporation sells to a member of its affiliated group and which that member then leases to an unrelated person or uses in its own trade or business?
A. 10: Yes, provided that an independent sales price for the possession product from comparable uncontrolled transactions can be determined in accordance with § 1.482-2(e)(2), and, provided further, that such member complies with the requirements of § 1.936-6(a)(2), question and answer 14. If, however, there is a comparable uncontrolled price for an integrated product and the possession product is a component product or end-product form thereof, the possessions corporation may, if such member complies with the requirements of § 1.936-6(a)(2), question and answer 14, compute its income under the cost sharing method with respect to such possession product. In that case, the cost sharing payment shall be computed under the following question and answer.
Q. 11: How are possession sales and total sales to be determined for purposes of computing the cost sharing payment with respect to a possession product which the possessions corporation sells to a member of its affiliated group where that member then leases the possession product to unrelated persons or uses it in its own trade or business?
A. 11: If the possessions corporation is entitled to compute its income from such sales of the possession product under the cost sharing method, both possession sales and total sales shall be determined as if the possession product had been sold by the affiliate to an unrelated person at the time the possession product was first leased or otherwise placed in service by the affiliate. The sales price on such deemed sale shall be equal to the independent sales price from comparable uncontrolled transactions determined in accordance with § 1.482-2(e)(2), if any. If the possession product is a component product or an end-product form for which there is no such independent sales price but there is a comparable uncontrolled price for the integrated product which includes the possession product, the deemed sales price of the possession product shall be computed under the rules of § 1.936-6(a)(2) question and answer 2. The full amount of income received under the lease shall be treated as income of (and taxed to) the affiliate and not the possessions corporation.
Q. 12: When may a possessions corporation take into account in computing total sales under the cost sharing method products in the same product area as the possession product (other than the possession product itself) where such products are leased by members of the affiliated group to unrelated persons or used by any such member in its own trade or business?
A. 12: For purposes of computing total sales under the cost sharing method, the possessions corporation may take into account products in the same product area as the possession product itself where such products are leased by members of the affiliated group to unrelated persons or used in the trade or business of any such member, but only if an independent sales price of such products from comparable uncontrolled transactions may be determined under § 1.482-2(e)(2). In such cases, the units of such products which are leased or otherwise used internally by members of the affiliated group may be treated as sold to unrelated persons for such independent sales price for purposes of computing total sales.
Q. 13: Assuming that a possessions corporation is entitled to compute its income under the cost sharing method with respect to sales of a possession product to affiliates in cases where those affiliates lease units of the possession product to unrelated persons or use them internally, is the possessions corporation's income from the possession product any different than if the affiliates had sold the product to unrelated parties?
A. 13: No.
Q. 14: If a possessions corporation sells units of a possession product to a member of its affiliated group and that affiliate then leases those units to an unrelated person or uses the units in its own trade or business, what requirements must the affilate meet in order for the possessions corporation to be entitled to the benefits of the cost sharing method with respect to such units?
A. 14: (i) For taxable years of the possessions corporation beginning on or before June 13, 1986, the affiliate need not meet any special requirements in order for the possessions corporation to be entitled to the beneifts of the cost sharing method with respect to such units. Thus, the affiliate's basis in such units shall be equal to the transfer price used for computing the possessions corporation's gross income with respect to such units under section 936(h)(5)(C)(i)(II), and the income derived by the affiliate from such lease or internal use shall be reported by the affiliate when and to the extent actually derived. The affiliate shall not be deemed to have sold such units to an unrelated party at the time they were first leased or otherwise placed in service for any purpose other than the computation of possession sales and total sales. A similar rule applies to other products in the same product area as the possession product which are sold by any member in its own trade or business and which the possessions corporation takes into account in computing total sales under the cost sharing method.
(ii)
For taxable years of the possessions corporations beginning after June 13, 1986, a possessions corporations will not be entitled to the benefits of the cost sharing method with respect to units of the possession product which the possessions corporation sells to an affiliate where the affiliate then leases such units to an unrelated person or uses them in its own trade or business, unless the affiliate agrees to be treated for all tax purposes as having sold such units to an unrelated party at the time they were first leased or otherwise placed in service by such affiliate. The affiliate must demonstrate such agreement by reporting its income from such units as if:
(A)
It had sold such units to an unrelated person at such time at a price equal to the price used to compute possessions sales under § 1.936-6(a)(2), question and answer 11;
(C)
Its basis in such units for all subsequent purposes was equal to its cost basis from such deemed repurchase.
Code of Federal Regulations
(iii)
The principles contained in questions and answers 11, 12, 13, and 14 are illustrated by the following example:
Code of Federal Regulations
Q. 1: Is the cost of product area research paid or accrued by the possessions corporation in a taxable year creditable against the cost sharing payment?
A. 1: Yes, if the cost of the product area research is paid or accrued solely by the possessions corporation. Thus, payments by the possessions corporation under cost sharing arrangements with, or royalties paid to, unrelated persons are so creditable. Amounts (such as royalties) paid directly or indirectly to, or on behalf of, related persons and amounts paid under any cost sharing agreements with related persons are not creditable against the cost sharing payment.
Q. 2: Do royalties or other payments made by an affiliate of the possessions corporation to another member of the affiliated group reduce the cost sharing payment if such royalties or other payments are based, in part, on activity of the possessions corporation?
A. 2: No. Payments made between affiliated corporations do not reduce the cost sharing payment. Thus, for example, if a possessions corporation sells a component to a foreign affiliate for incorporation by the foreign affiliate into an integrated product sold to unrelated persons, and the foreign affiliate pays a royalty to the U.S. parent of the possessions corporation based on the total value of the integrated product, the cost sharing payment of the possessions corporation is not reduced.
Q. 1: S is a possessions corporation engaged in the manufacture and sale of four products (A, B, C, and D) all of which are classified under the same three-digit SIC code. S sells its production to a U.S. affiliate, P, which resells it to unrelated parties in the United States. P's third party sales of each of these products produced in whole or in part by S (computed as provided under paragraph (a)(2) of § 1.936-6) are $1 million or a total of $4 million for A, B, C, and D. P's other sales of products in the same SIC code are $3,000,000; and the defined worldwide product area research of the affiliated group is $350,000. How should S compute the cost sharing amount for products A, B, C, and D?
A. 1: The cost sharing amount is computed separately for each product on Schedule P of Form 5735. S should use the following formula for each of the products A, B, C, and D:
Q. 2: The facts are the same as in question 1 except that S manufactures product D under a license from an unrelated person. S pays the unrelated party an annual license fee of $20,000. Thus, the worldwide product area research expense of the affiliated group is $370,000. How should the cost sharing payment be adjusted?
A. 2: The cost sharing fee should be reduced by the $20,000 license fee made as a direct annual payment to a third party on account of product D. The cost sharing payment with respect to product D in this example will be adjusted as follows:
Q. 3: The facts are the same as in question 1 except that S also manufactures and exports product E to a foreign affiliate, which resells it to unrelated persons for $1 million. S makes a separate election for its export sales. How should S compute the cost sharing amount for product E?
A. 3: The numerator of the cost sharing fraction is the aggregate sales or other dispositions by members of the affiliated group of the units of product E produced in whole or in part in the possession to persons who are not members of the affiliated group. The cost sharing amount for product E would be computed as follows:
or
Q. 4: The facts are the same as in question 1, except that S also receives $10,000 in royalty income from unrelated persons for the licensing of certain manufacturing intangible property rights. What is the amount of the product area research that must be allocated in determining the cost sharing amount?
A. 4: If the affiliated group receives royalty income from unrelated persons with respect to manufacturing intangibles in the same product area, then the product area research to be considered shall be first reduced by such royalty income. In this case, the amount of product area research to be used in determining S's cost sharing payment should be reduced by the $10,000 royalty payment received to $340,000.
Q. 5: May a possessions corporation redetermine the amount of its required cost sharing payment after filing its tax return?
A. 5: If after filing its tax return, a possessions corporation files an amended return, or if an adjustment is made on audit, either of which affects the amount of the cost sharing payment required, then a redetermination of the cost sharing payment must be made. See, however, section 936(h)(5)(C)(i)(III) (a) with respect to the increase in the cost sharing payment due to interest imposed under section 6601(a).
Q. 1: What is the effect of the cost sharing method?
A. 1: The cost sharing payment reduces the amount of deductions (and the amount of reductions in earnings and profits) otherwise allowable to the U.S. affiliates (other than tax-exempt affiliates) within the affiliated group as determined under section 936(h)(5)(C)(i)(I) (b) which have incurred research expenditures (as defined in § 1.936-6(a)(1), question and answer (3) in the same product area for which the cost sharing option is elected, during the taxable year in which the cost sharing payment accrues. If there are no such U.S. affiliates, the reductions with respect to deductions and earnings and profits, as the case may be, are made with respect to foreign affiliates within the same affiliated group which have incurred product area research expenditures in such product area attributable to a U.S. trade or business. If there are no affiliates which have incurred research expenditures in such product area, the reductions are then made with respect to any other U.S. affiliate and, if there is no such U.S. affiliate, then to any other foreign affiliate. The allocations of these reductions in each case shall be made in proportion to the gross income of the affiliates. In the case of foreign affiliates, the allocation shall be made in proportion to gross income attributable to the U.S. trade or business or worldwide gross income, as the case may be. With respect to each group above, the reduction of deductions shall be applied first to deductions under section 174, then to deductions under section 162, and finally to any other deductions on a pro rata basis.
Q. 2: For purposes of estimated tax payments, when is the cost sharing amount deemed to accrue?
A. 2: The cost sharing amount is deemed to accrue to the appropriate affiliate on the last day of the taxable year of each such affiliate in which or with which the taxable year of the possessions corporation ends.
Q. 3: If the cost sharing method is elected and the year of accrual of the cost sharing payment to the appropriate affiliate (described in question and answer 1 of this paragraph (a)(5)) differs from the year of actual payment by the possessions corporation, in what year are the deductions of the recipients reduced?
A. 3: In the year the cost sharing payment has accrued.
Q. 4: What is the treatment of income from intangibles under the cost sharing method?
A. 4: Under the cost sharing method, a possessions corporation is treated as the owner, for purposes of obtaining a return thereon, of manufacturing intangibles related to a possession product. The term “manufacturing intangible” means any patent, invention, formula, process, design, pattern, or know-how. The possessions corporation will not be treated as the owner, for purposes of obtaining a return thereon, of any manufacturing intangibles related to a component product produced by an affiliated corporation and transferred to the possessions corporation for incorporation into the possession product, except in the case that the possession product is treated as including such component product for all purposes of section 936(h)(5). Further, the possessions corporation will not be treated as the owner, for purposes of obtaining a return thereon, of any marketing intangibles except “covered intangibles.” (See § 1.936-6(c).)
Q. 5: If the cost sharing option is elected, is it necessary for the possessions corporation to be the legal owner of the manufacturing intangibles related to the possession product in order for the possessions corporation to receive a full return with respect to such intangibles?
A. 5: No. There is no requirement that manufacturing intangibles be owned by the possessions corporation.
Q. 6: How is income attributable to marketing intangibles treated under the cost sharing method?
A. 6: Except in the case of “covered intangibles” (see § 1.936-6(c) ), the possessions corporation is not treated as the owner of any marketing intangibles, and income attributable to marketing intangible of the possessions corporation will be allocated to the possessions corporation's U.S. shareholders with the proration of income based on shareholdings. If a shareholder of the possessions corporation is a foreign, person or is otherwise tax exempt, the possessions corporation is taxable on that shareholder's pro rata amount of the intangible property income. If the possessions corporation is a corporation any class of the stock of which is regularly traded on an established securities market, then the income attributable to marketing intangibles will be taxable to the possessions corporation rather than the corporation's U.S. shareholders.
Q. 7: What is the source of the intangible property income described in question and answer 6?
A. 7: The intangible property income is U.S. source whether taxed to the U.S. shareholder or taxed to the possessions corporation and section 863 (b) does not apply for this purpose. However, such intangible property income, if treated as income of the possessions corporation, does not enter into the calculation of the 80-percent possession source test or the 65-percent active trade or business test.
Q.7a: What is the source of the taxpayer's gross income derived from a sale in the United States of a possession product purchased by the taxpayer (or an affiliate) from a corporation that has an election in effect under section 936, if the income from such sale is taken into account to determine benefits under cost sharing for the section 936 corporation? Is the result different if the taxpayer (or an affiliate) derives gross income from a sale in the United States of an integrated product incorporating a possession product purchased by the taxpayer (or an affiliate) from the section 936 corporation, if the taxpayer (or an affiliate) processes the possession product or an excluded component in the United States?
A.7a: Under either scenario, the income is U.S. source, without regard to whether the possession product is a component, end-product, or integrated product. Section 863 does not apply in determining the source of the taxpayer's income. This Q&A 7a is applicable for taxable years beginning on or after November 13, 1998.
Q. 8: May marketing intangible income, if any, be allocated to the possessions corporation with respect to custom-made products?
A. 8: No. If the cost sharing option is elected, then income attributable to marketing intangibles (other than “covered intangibles” described in § 1.936-6(c)) will be taxed as discussed in questions and answers 6 and 7 of paragraph (a)(5) of this section. It is immaterial whether the product is custom-made.
Q. 9: In order to sell a pharmaceutical product in the United States, a New Drug Application (“NDA”) for the product must be approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Is an NDA considered a manufacturing or marketing intangible for purposes of the allocation of income under the cost sharing method?
A. 9: A manufacturing intangible.
Q. 10: Can a copyright be, in whole or in part, a manufacturing intangible for purposes of the allocation of income under the cost sharing method?
A. 10: In general, a copyright is a marketing intangible. See section 936(h)(3)(B)(ii). However, copyrights may be treated either as manufacturing intangibles or nonmanufacturing intangibles (or as partly each) depending upon the function or the use of the copyright. If the copyright is used in manufacturing, it will be treated as a manufacturing intangible; but if it is used in marketing, even if it is also classified as know-how, it will be treated as a marketing intangible.
Q. 11: If the cost sharing option is elected and a patent is related to the product produced by the possessions corporation, does the return to the possessions corporation with respect to the manufacturing intangible include the make, use, and sell elements of the patent?
A. 11: Yes. A patent confers an exclusive right for 17 years to sell a product covered by the patent. During this period, the return to the possessions corporation includes the make, use and sell elements of the patent.
Q. 12: For purposes of the cost sharing option, may a safe haven rule be applied to determine the amount of marketing intangible income?
A. 12: No. The amount of marketing intangible income is determined on the basis of all relevant facts and circumstances. The section 482 regulations will continue to apply except to the extent modified by the election. Rev. Proc. 63-10 and Rev. Proc. 68-22 do not apply for this purpose.
Q. 13: If a product covered by the cost sharing election is sold by a possessions corporation to an affiliated corporation for resale to an unrelated party, may the resale price method under section 482 be used to determine the intercompany price of the possessions corporation?
A. 13: In general, the resale price method may be used if (a) no comparable uncontrolled price for the product exists, and (b) the affiliated corporation does not add a substantial amount of value to the product by manufacturing or by the provision of services which are reflected in the sales price of the product to the customer. The possessions corporation will not be denied use of the resale price method for purposes of such inter-company pricing merely because the reseller adds more than an insubstantial amount to the value of the product by the use of intangible property.
Q. 14: If a possessions corporation makes the cost sharing election and uses the cost-plus method under section 482 to determine the arm's-length price of a possession product, will the cost base include the cost of materials which are subject to processing or which are components in the possession product?
A. 14: A taxpayer may include the cost of materials in the cost base if it is appropriate under the regulations under § 1.482-2(e)(4).
Q. 15: If the possessions corporation computes its income with respect to a product under the cost sharing method, and the price of the product is determined under the cost-plus method under section 482, does the cost base used in computing cost-plus under section 482 include the amount of the cost sharing payment?
A. 15: The amount of the cost sharing payment is included in the cost base. However, no profit with respect to the cost sharing payment will be allowed.
Q. 16: If a member of the affiliated group transfers to a possessions corporation a component which is incorporated into a possession product, how will the transfer price for the component be determined?
A. 16: The transfer price for the component will be determined under section 482, and as follows. If the possession product is treated as not including such component for purposes of section 936(h)(5), the transfer price paid for the component will include a return on all intangibles related to the component product. If the posssession product is treated as including such component for purposes of section 936(h)(5), then the transfer price paid for the component by the possessions corporation will not include a return on any manufacturing intangible related to the component product, and the possessions corporation will obtain the return on the manufacturing intangibles associated with the component.
Q. 17: If the possessions corporation computes its income with respect to a product under the cost sharing method, with respect to which units of the product shall the possessions corporation be treated as owning intangible property as a result of having made the cost sharing election?
A. 17: The possessions corporation shall not be treated as owning intangible property, as a result of having made the cost sharing election, with respect to any units of a possession product which were not taken into account by the possessions corporation in applying the significant business presence test for the current taxable year or for any prior taxable year in which the possessions corporation also had a significant business presence in the possession with respect to such product.
Q. 1: In determining combined taxable income from sales of a possession product, how are the allocations and apportionments of expenses, losses, and other deductions to be determined?
A. 1: (i) Expenses, losses, and other deductions are to be allocated and apportioned on a “fully-loaded” basis under § 1.861-8 to the combined gross income of the possessions corporation and other members of the affiliated group (other than foreign affiliates). For purposes of the profit split option, the term “affiliated group” is defined the same as under § 1.936-6 (a)(1) question and answer 2. The amount of research, development, and experimental expenses allocated and apportioned to combined gross income is to be determined under § 1.861-8(e)(3). The amount of research, development and experimental expenses and related deductions (such as royalties paid or accrued with respect to manufacturing intangibles by the possessions corporation or other domestic members of the affiliated group to unrelated persons or to foreign affiliates) allocated and apportioned to combined gross income shall in no event be less than the amount of the cost sharing payment that would have been required under the rules set forth in section 936(h)(5)(C)(i)(II) and paragraph (a) of this section if the cost sharing option had been elected. Other expenses which are subject to § 1.861-8(e) are to be allocated and apportioned in accordance with that section. For example, interest expense (including payments made with respect to bonds issued by the Puerto Rican Industrial, Medical and Environmental Control Facilities Authority (AFICA)) is to be allocated and apportioned under § 1.861-8(e)(2). With the exception of marketing and distribution expenses discussed below, the other remaining expenses which are definitely related to a class of gross income shall be allocated to that class of gross income and shall be apportioned on the basis of any reasonable method, as described in § 1.861-8 (b)(3) and (c)(1). Examples of such methods may include, but are not limited to, those specified in § 1.861-8(c)(1)(i) through (vi).
(ii)
The class of gross income to which marketing and distribution expenses relate and shall be allocated is generally to be defined by the same “product area” as is determined for the relevant research, development, and experimental expenses (i.e., the appropriate 3-digit SIC code), but shall include only gross income generated or reasonably expected to be generated from the geographic area or areas to which the expenses relate. It shall be presumed that marketing and distribution expenses relate to all product sales within the same product area. If, however, it can be established that any of these expenses are separately identifiable expenses, such as advertising, and relate, directly or indirectly, solely to a specific product or a specific group of products, such expenses shall be allocated to the class of gross income defined by the specific product or group of products. Thus, advertising and other separately identifiable marketing expenses which relate specifically and exclusively to a particular product must be allocated entirely to the gross income from that product, even though the taxpayer or other members of an affiliated group which includes the taxpayer produce and market other products in the same 3-digit SIC code classification. The mere display of a company logo or mention of a company name solely in the context of identifying the manufacturer shall not prevent an advertisement from relating specifically and exclusively to a particular product or group of products.
(iii)
If marketing and distribution expenses are allocated to a class of gross income which consists both of income from sales of possession products (the statutory grouping) and other income such as from sale by U.S. affiliates of products not produced in the possession (the residual grouping), then these marketing and distribution expenses shall be apportioned on a “fully loaded” basis which reflects, to a reasonably close extent, the factual relationship between these deductions and the statutory and residual groupings of gross income. Apportionment methods based upon comparisons of amounts incurred before ultimate sale of a product (including apportionment on a comparison of costs of goods sold, other expenses incurred, or other comparisons set forth in § 1.861-8 (c)(1)(v), such as time spent) are not on a “fully-loaded” basis and do not reflect this required factual relationship. These deductions shall be apportioned on a basis of comparison of the amount of gross sales or receipts or another method if it is established that such method similarly reflects the required factual relationship. Thus, for example, a comparison of units sold may be used only where the units are of the same or similar value and are, thus, in fact comparable.