Any trade or business activity of a limited liability company (LLC) in which a member materially participates is not considered a passive activity. Material participation is a year-by-year determination, and a member meets the material participation standard if he or she is involved in the operations of the activity on a regular, continuous, and substantial basis.
According to Temp. Regs. Sec. 1.469-5T, a member is treated as materially participating in an activity if one of the following seven tests is met. The first four are objective tests based on the current year. The next two tests are based on participation in prior years, while the last one is a broad “facts and circumstances” test based on the statutory definition of material participation.
Example: C spent 300 hours participating in his baking business ( F LLC) and 250 hours participating in his restaurant business ( B LLC). C owns 40% of each LLC and is a named manager of each one. Since he participates more than 100 hours in each activity, each activity is an SPA. Because his participation during the year in all SPAs is more than 500 hours, C is deemed to materially participate in both activities.
Generally speaking, any participation by an LLC member, in any capacity, counts as participation for Sec. 469 purposes (Regs. Sec. 1.469-5(f)(1)). However, there are exceptions to this rule:
Uncertainty has existed about the proper treatment of LLC members under the material participation rules. According to the IRS Passive Activity Loss Audit Technique Guide , an LLC member (even a member-manager) can be a material participant only by meeting the limited partner hourly safe-harbor test, historical participation test, or personal service activity test. However, a number of commentators do not share this view. They point out that while there are similarities between limited partnerships and LLCs (e.g., limited liability), an LLC member can participate in management (while, under state law, limited partners are often prohibited from actively participating in the business). Furthermore, the courts have not agreed with the IRS’s position regarding application of the limited partner material participation rules to LLC members. For example, in Gregg , 186 F. Supp. 2d 1123 (D. Ore. 2000), a district court held that an LLC member was not subject to the higher material participation standard applicable to limited partners but only had to satisfy one of the regular seven material participation tests.
In November 2011, the IRS released proposed regulations changing its position to more narrowly provide that an interest in an entity will be treated as an interest in a limited partnership if the entity is classified as a partnership for federal tax purposes, and the holder of the interest does not have rights to manage the entity at all times during the entity’s tax year under the law of the jurisdiction in which the entity was organized and under the entity’s governing agreement (Prop. Regs. Sec. 1.469-5(e)(3)(i)). This means that the rules would no longer rely on limited liability, but would rely instead on the member’s right to participate in the management of the LLC. Consequently, for members who participate in management, the determination of material participation could be made using any of the seven tests, not just the three tests available for limited partners.
Under the proposed regulations, a limited partner who also has a general partner interest in the same partnership during the entire year would be considered a general partner for determining material participation (Prop. Regs. Sec. 1.469-5(e)(3)(ii)). Presumably, a member in an LLC who holds interests as a manager and a nonmanager would be treated as a manager for determining material participation.
The proposed regulations are scheduled to apply to tax years beginning on or after their publication as final regulations in the Federal Register .
Participation by a member in an LLC classified as a partnership is based on the LLC’s tax year, not the member’s tax year. Under Temp. Regs. Sec. 1.469-5T(f)(4), proof of an individual’s participation in an activity can be established by any reasonable means, including appointment books, calendars, or narrative summaries. However, oral testimony, post-event “ballpark guesstimates,” and a calendar maintained in advance, are not reasonable methods for documenting participation .
When hours of participation may be questioned, practitioners should recommend that clients maintain a contemporaneous log.
This case study has been adapted from PPC’s Guide to Limited Liability Companies , 18th Edition, by Michael E. Mares, Sara S. McMurrian, Stephen E. Pascarella II, Gregory A. Porcaro, Virginia R. Bergman, William R. Bischoff, James A. Keller, and Linda A. Markwood, published by Thomson Tax & Accounting, Fort Worth, Texas, 2012 (800-323-8724; ppc.thomson.com ).
Albert Ellentuck is of counsel with King & Nordlinger LLP in Arlington, Va..