Template:Isda Tax Event Upon Merger summ: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{subst:M summ 2002 ISDA 5(b)(iv)}}") |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) 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 {{ | 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.