Template:Isda Tax Event Upon Merger summ: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Created page with "{{subst:M summ 2002 ISDA 5(b)(iv)}}"
 
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
This is you can imagine, a red letter day for {{icds}} who quite outdid itself in the complicated permutations for how to terminate an {{isdama}} should there be a {{isdaprov|Tax Event}} or a {{isdaprov|Tax Event Upon Merger}}. Things kick off in Section {{isdaprov|6(b)(ii)}} and it really just gets better from there on in.<ref>It doesn’t.</ref>
This is you can imagine, a red letter day for {{icds}} who quite outdid itself in the complicated permutations for how to terminate an {{isdama}} should there be a {{isdaprov|Tax Event}} or a {{{{{1}}}|Tax Event Upon Merger}}. Things kick off in Section {{isdaprov|6(b)(ii)}} and it really just gets better from there.
 
So, {{{{{1}}}|Tax Event Upon Merger}} considers the scenario where the coming together of two entites — we assume they hail from different jurisdictions or at least have different practical tax residences — has an unfortunate effect on the tax status of payments due by the merged entity under an ''existing'' {{{{{1}}}|Transaction}}.  
 
It introduces a new and unique concept — the “{{isdaprov|Burdened Party}}”, being the one who gets slugged with the tax — and who may or may not be the “{{isdaprov|Affected Party}}” — in this case the one subject to the merger.

Latest revision as of 21:45, 13 October 2023

This is you can imagine, a red letter day for ISDA’s crack drafting squad™ who quite outdid itself in the complicated permutations for how to terminate an ISDA Master Agreement should there be a Tax Event or a {{{{{1}}}|Tax Event Upon Merger}}. Things kick off in Section 6(b)(ii) and it really just gets better from there.

So, {{{{{1}}}|Tax Event Upon Merger}} considers the scenario where the coming together of two entites — we assume they hail from different jurisdictions or at least have different practical tax residences — has an unfortunate effect on the tax status of payments due by the merged entity under an existing {{{{{1}}}|Transaction}}.

It introduces a new and unique concept — the “Burdened Party”, being the one who gets slugged with the tax — and who may or may not be the “Affected Party” — in this case the one subject to the merger.