3M Company v. Commissioner Archives

IRS roundup: September 19 – October 1, 2025

Check out our summary of significant Internal Revenue Service (IRS) guidance and relevant tax matters for September 19, 2025 – October 1, 2025.

September 19, 2025: The US Department of the Treasury (Treasury) and the IRS issued proposed regulations, providing guidance on the “no tax on tips” provision of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The proposed regulations define “qualified tips” and identify which occupations customarily and regularly receive tips on or before December 31, 2024.

September 23, 2025: The IRS issued Notice 2025-54, providing guidance on the 2025 – 2026 special per diem rates for taxpayers when determining their ordinary and necessary business expenses incurred while traveling away from home, including meal and incidental expenses rates, rates for the incidental expenses only deduction, and rates for (and a list of) high-cost localities for purposes of the high-low substantiation method.

September 29, 2025: The IRS issued Revenue Procedure 2025-30, providing updated procedures for taxpayers requesting private letter rulings from the IRS after September 29, 2025, regarding transactions intended to qualify under Internal Revenue Code § 3551. This guidance specially provides details on the representations, information, and analysis taxpayers should submit when requesting these rulings.

September 30, 2025: The IRS issued Notice 2025-46 and Notice 2025-49, providing guidance on the application of the corporate alternative minimum tax (CAMT).

Notice 2025-46 provides interim guidance to domestic corporate transactions, financially troubled companies, and tax consolidated groups. This notice also announces the Treasury and the IRS’s intent to partially withdraw the CAMT Proposed Regulations (described in Section 2.03 of this notice) and instead issue revised proposed regulations with guidance similar to Sections 3 – 6 of this notice. The proposed regulations will reduce compliance burdens related to, and costs associated with, application of the CAMT.

Notice 2025-49 provides interim guidance regarding application of the CAMT as it relates to §§ 55, 56A, and 59. This notice also announced the Treasury and the IRS’s intent to partially withdraw the CAMT Proposed Regulations (described in Section 2.03 of this notice) and instead issue revised proposed regulations with guidance similar to Sections 3 – 10 of this notice.

October 1, 2025: The Treasury and the IRS issued final regulations, providing guidance on interest capitalization requirements on designated property. The final regulations specifically remove the associated property rule (including similar rules in existing regulations), modifies how “improvement” is defined when applying those similar rules, and primarily affects taxpayers making improvements to real or tangible personal property if those improvements are the production of designated property.

October 1, 2025: The US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit released its opinion in 3M Company v. Commissioner. The Eighth Circuit reversed the US Tax Court’s decision that 3M must pay taxes on royalties – that it could not legally receive – from a Brazilian subsidiary and remanded the Tax Court’s decision with instructions to redetermine 3M’s tax liability. Relying [...]

Continue Reading

3M Company, IRS File Reply Briefs in “Blocked Income” Case; Tax Court Orders Oral Argument

As discussed in an earlier post, 3M Co. v. Commissioner, T.C. Dkt. No. 5816-13, involves 3M Company’s (3M) challenge to the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) determination that Brazilian legal restrictions on the payment of royalties from a subsidiary in that country to its US parent should not be taken into account in determining the arm’s-length royalty between 3M and its subsidiary under Treas. Reg. § 1.482-1(h)(2). The case has been submitted fully stipulated under Tax Court Rule 122. We discussed the parties’ opening briefs, filed on March 21, 2016, here. Reply briefs were filed on June 29, with the IRS filing an amended reply brief on August 18.

3M returns to its argument that Treas. Reg. § 1.482-1(h)(2) is “procedurally invalid” because Treasury and the IRS failed to satisfy the requirements of section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (the APA) when they promulgated the regulations. 3M notes that the IRS completely ignored this argument in its opening brief. Citing the Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Encino Motorcars, discussed in more detail here, 3M points out that Treasury and the IRS made significant changes to the regulation, but offered no explanation for the changes. This, 3M argues, renders the regulation invalid. 3M observes that compliance with the two-step Chevron test would not save a regulation that is procedurally invalid, noting that such compliance is “a necessary but not a sufficient condition for a regulation to be upheld.”

(more…)