New Revenue Ruling on Staking Income

 Disclaimer

On August 1, 2023, the IRS issued a new Revenue Ruling (Rev. Rul. 2023-14) holding that income received from delegating tokens to a validator ("Staking Income") is taxable at the time the taxpayer has "dominion and control" over the newly received tokens.

No one I know thought that was a surprise.  Arguments that staked tokens were like self created intellectual property or agricultural produce (and therefore not taxable until sold) were theoretically possible (and certainly seem to apply to genesis block tokens held by founders), but they were always a stretch.  Arguments that tokens received from staking were like stock splits or simply inflationary (slicing the pizza into more pieces) denied Treasury's fundamental need to have a clear measurement date and benchmark.

The meaning of "Dominion and Control" is discussed in Rev. Rule 2019-24, which can be found here, in the context of hard forks, but if there ever was any doubt, the new ruling also states explicitly, "A has an accession to wealth as A gains dominion and control through A’s ability, as of this date, to sell, exchange, or otherwise dispose of the 2 units of M received as validation rewards."  At least that means that the taxpayer has taxable income only when he or she can sell the tokens (so the taxable event for locked tokens should be delayed).*

The ruling is silent on two other issues that are relevant:  (1) is there any argument that staking income is capital gain? and (2) what are the withholding tax consequences for staking income (e.g., if an investment partnership allocates staking income from a US based validator to a foreign partner?  It also does not say whether staking income might be UBTI or (perish the thought) "Effectively Connected with a US Trade or Business" ("ECI").  Generally, the view among the professionals I know is that staking income is ordinary, that it is FDAP (and so subject to withholding tax like dividends or royalties), and that it is not UBTI or ECI, but for now we'll have to rely on logic and not authority on those.



                                                                                            JBD   


*    The specific facts of the example in the revenue ruling are pretty clear: "Transactions in M, a cryptocurrency, are validated by a proof-of-stake consensus mechanism. On Date 1, Taxpayer A, a cash-method taxpayer, owns 300 units of M. A stakes 200 of the units of M and validates a new block of transactions on the M blockchain, receiving 2 units of M as validation rewards. Pursuant to the M protocol, during a brief period ending on Date 2, A lacks the ability to sell, exchange, or otherwise dispose of any interest in the 2 units of M in any manner. The following day, on Date 3, A has the ability to sell, exchange, or otherwise dispose of the 2 units of M." [Emphasis added.]

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should I sell my Tokens and realize a loss before year end?

Disclaimer     I have now been asked almost a dozen times about the "Wash Sale Rules" and whether token holders should sell and repurchase tokens before year end. The Wash Sale rules (IRC Section 1091) provide that if you sell a security at a loss and repurchase a substantially identical security within 30 days, your loss will be disallowed (and added to your tax basis in the purchased security). People have been hearing that the Wash Sale rule doesn't apply to tokens because the IRS has not designated tokens as securities.  (Remember that the characterization of tokens as securities by the SEC or as something else by the CFTC is not relevant for tax law purposes.  Tokens may be securities for some purposes and not for others.) If that's true, you could sell your BTC today and buy back BTC an hour later and trigger a loss that you can use to offset capital gain (or up to $3,000 of ordinary income) from some other source. That's a very reasonable argument...
Read more

1. So you want to do an ICO

Disclaimer The number of token offerings through ICOs or otherwise that have crossed my desk in the last 12 months has exploded.  Many of those transactions have been put together with such speed that corporate structure and tax treatment are an afterthought with expensive consequences.  Even now, most of the focus seems to be on the securities law treatment of Tokens.  The following is a brief outline of some issues that are worth considering -- primarily in order to avoid adverse tax issues for founders, issuers and investors.  Following posts will discuss different structures mentioned below in greater detail. Before we get to actual structures, however, it's important to understand what kinds of adverse things can happen to you.  Many people think that selling Tokens should be taxed the same way as a stock sale is taxed -- but there is a specific Internal Revenue Code section that provides stock sales are tax free -- and it doesn't apply to Token sales. ...
Read more

Taxes on Token Sales (in particular CA State taxes)

Disclaimer  Assuming you have successfully designed a Token Network and are selling Tokens (whether directly or through SAFTs) you need to determine where you owe tax and at what rate. The new federal rules  (Section 14202 of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act) may provide significant benefits to Token sellers who can show that their income from Token sales is "foreign derived" (a reduced rate to 13.125%).  Unfortunately, the term "foreign derived" is not well defined and its unclear if Token sellers merely need to prove that the buyers have a foreign address or will need to show actual foreign residence and use, but it's worth watching and tracking whatever information you have on buyers. Fortunately, the California rule is more straight forward and may offer some opportunities. It says that the income from sales of intangible property may be allocated instate (subject to CA tax) and out of state (not subject to CA tax) as follows: "Sales from intangible ...
Read more