Some S Corporations May Want to Convert to C Corporations

After last year’s tax reform legislation, some S corporations may choose to revoke their S election to be a C corporation because of the new, flat 21-percent C corporation tax rate. Before taking any action, S corporations should consult their tax advisors.

S Corporations and C Corporations are among the types of business structures. A C corporation is taxed on its earnings, and then the shareholder is taxed when earnings are distributed as dividends. S corporations elect to pass corporate income, losses, deductions and credits through to their shareholders for federal tax purposes. Shareholders of S corporations report the pass-through of income and losses on their personal tax returns and are assessed tax at their individual income tax rates. This allows S corporations to avoid double taxation on the corporate income. S corporations are responsible for tax on certain built-in gains and passive income at the entity level.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act includes two changes that affect a corporation’s revocation of an S election to be a C corporation:

  • The corporation should report net adjustments attributable to the revocation over six years. For more information see Revenue Procedure 2018-44.
  • Distributions of cash following the post-termination transition period may be treated as coming out of the corporation’s accumulated adjustments account and accumulated earnings and profits proportionally resulting in part of the distributions being non-dividend distributions from the C corporation. The non-dividend distributions may not be subject to tax at the shareholder level if the shareholder has sufficient stock basis. Additional guidance will be coming.

These law changes only apply to a C corporation that:

  • Was an S corporation on December 21, 2017,
  • Revokes its S corporation election after December 21, 2017, but before December 22, 2019, and
  • Has the same owners of stock in identical proportions on the date of revocation and on December 22, 2017.
No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

Copy of Hildebrand-2016
August 27, 2023
A creditor having received relief from the automatic stay prior to confirmation of the debtor’s plan is nonetheless bound by the terms of the plan, once confirmed.
Members
December 20, 2020
By James M. Davis, Staff Attorney to Chapter 13 Standing Trustee Henry E. Hildebrand, III (Nashville, TN) Bankruptcy Courts take determinations from the Supreme Court seriously. And rightfully so. But sometimes, some bankruptcy courts are guilty of reading too much into the Court’s statements. The latest example is the soul searching around “nunc pro tunc” (“now for then”) orders. Earlier...
Members
October 27, 2019
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Debtor could cure default beyond 60 months. Agreeing with In re Klaas, 858 F.3d 820 (3d Cir. 2017), bankruptcy court had discretion to permit debtors to cure plan default, allowing a reasonable grace period beyond the 60 months of confirmed plan. Dismissal of the case for plan default was not required under §...
Members
May 12, 2019
By Margaret A. Burks, Esq., Chapter 13 Trustee (Cincinnati, OH) I was recently asked to expound on a “Day in the Life of a Chapter 13 Trustee.” Then Regina (Logsdon, Executive Director of ConsiderChapter13.org) asked me to write an article for the Academy. I believe in fate so here goes. Please see ‘Effective Communication Guide.’ It came out about four...
Members
Merideth Akers
November 6, 2022
“Does wearing these horizontal stripes make me look fat?” My wife, Becky, tells me that clothes with horizontal stripes make one look broad or fat. However, wearing clothes with vertical stripes create the illusion of making one look tall or slim. Smart fashion designers design clothing that creates the illusion that people are something they are not. I must confess...
supremecourt
June 18, 2023
Lac Du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians et al. v. Coughlin Supreme Court rules in favor of borrower of tribal loan –Chapter 13 stay applies.  Justices reject tribal immunity from bankruptcy stay.
ahern_larry_regular
November 13, 2022
Introduction This series reviews developments in bankruptcy procedure during 2022. Amendments to 16 rules and new one new rule take effect December 1, 2022, absent Congressional action. Many reflect changes necessitated by the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA),1 and have been in place in the same or similar form on an interim basis since that legislation took effect.
Members
June 2, 2019
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Middle District of Tennessee If a Chapter 13 debtor does not list a creditor on the creditor matrix when filing the petition and makes no effort to provide supplemental notice to the creditor, the provisions of Rule 3002 allow the extension of time for the creditor to file a...
Members
January 20, 2019
By John P. Gustafson, United States Bankruptcy Judge, Northern District of Ohio, Western Division (Toledo, OH) Click here for Part 1 of 6 Click here for Part 2 of 6 Click here for Part 3 of 6
Members
June 21, 2020
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Objection to proof of claim barred by preclusion. The Chapter 13 debtor objected to Wells Fargo’s proof of claim in an adversary proceeding that alleged the note had been procured by fraud and was unenforceable; but the debtor had previously litigated those and other issues in the state court. Preclusive effect of the...
Members