26 U.S.C. § 845

Certain reinsurance agreements

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 26 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Allocation in case of reinsurance agreement involving tax avoidance or evasionIn the case of 2 or more related persons (within the meaning of section 482) who are parties to a reinsurance agreement (or where one of the parties to a reinsurance agreement is, with respect to any contract covered by the agreement, in effect an agent of another party to such agreement or a conduit between related persons), the Secretary may—(1) allocate between or among such persons income (whether investment income, premium, or otherwise), deductions, assets, reserves, credits, and other items related to such agreement,(2) recharacterize any such items, or(3) make any other adjustment,if he determines that such allocation, recharacterization, or adjustment is necessary to reflect the proper amount, source, or character of the taxable income (or any item described in paragraph (1) relating to such taxable income) of each such person.(b) Reinsurance contract having significant tax avoidance effect

If the Secretary determines that any reinsurance contract has a significant tax avoidance effect on any party to such contract, the Secretary may make proper adjustments with respect to such party to eliminate such tax avoidance effect (including treating such contract with respect to such party as terminated on December 31 of each year and reinstated on January 1 of the next year).

(Added Pub. L. 98–369, div. A, title II, § 212(a), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 757; amended Pub. L. 108–357, title VIII, § 803(a), Oct. 22, 2004, 118 Stat. 1569.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2004—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 108–357 substituted “amount, source, or character” for “source and character” in concluding provisions.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2004 Amendment

Pub. L. 108–357, title VIII, § 803(b), Oct. 22, 2004, 118 Stat. 1569, provided that: “The amendments made by this section [amending this section] shall apply to any risk reinsured after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 22, 2004].”

Effective Date

Pub. L. 98–369, div. A, title II, § 217(d), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 762, as amended by Pub. L. 99–514, § 2, Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2095, provided that:“(1) Subsection (a) of section 845 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 [formerly I.R.C. 1954] (as added by this title) shall apply with respect to any risk reinsured on or after September 27, 1983.“(2) Subsection (b) of section 845 of such Code (as so added) shall apply with respect to risks reinsured after December 31, 1984.”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1952–2022 · leading case: United States v. Harbarger

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Harbarger (2022) ca5 “, 26 U.S.C. §§ 845 (a), 5861(d). Appealing his conviction, Harbarger argues that the NFA is unconstitutionally vague as applied to his case and that the evidence is insufficient to support conviction.”

Marianao Sugar Trading Corp. v. United States (1952) cusc “It is argued in the brief on behalf of plaintiff that there was no provision in 26 U. S. C. § 845 requiring that such stamp tax be levied, assessed, collected, and paid in the same manner as a duty, nor that such tax shall be treated for the purposes of all provisions of law…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.