Funds Investing in U.S. Manufacturing Companies: Foreign Investor Considerations

20 August 2014 Manufacturing Industry Advisor Blog

Operators of manufacturing companies, especially those considering a sale or capital raise, should understand investors’ concerns regarding direct investment. Today, investment funds with investors and investments in multiple jurisdictions constitute a large part of the U.S. manufacturing direct investment landscape. However, tax challenges exist for these fund managers and investors.

The tax treatment of foreign investors depends largely on the type of income generated by a fund. For example, assume that an investment fund is structured as a domestic limited partnership, with both U.S. and foreign investors. Further, assume that the fund acquires a U.S.-based manufacturing company, which is also structured as a domestic limited partnership. Unless structured properly, the foreign investors will have to file U.S. income tax returns and pay U.S. income tax on their share of the income from the manufacturing operations. This structure poses little concern for those American investors, but it is quite troublesome for foreign investors.

Effects on Foreign Investors & Fund Managers

The income derived by foreign fund investors from manufacturing operations conducted through an entity that is treated for U.S. federal income tax purposes as a flowthrough entity will generally be deemed to be “effectively connected” to a U.S. “trade or business.” As a result, the foreign investors will be (1) subject to U.S. tax on their income generated via the investment fund, (2) required to make annual U.S. tax filings, and (3) subject to U.S. withholding taxes on fund income. Additionally, a foreign investor that is classified for U.S. federal income tax purposes as a corporation will generally be subject to U.S. branch-profits tax. Similarly, if the fund manager invests fund assets in loans originated by the fund manager, then such loan origination activity could also give rise to mandatory U.S. taxes and filings for foreign fund investors. This treatment of ordinary operating income also applies to capital gains.

“Blocker” Corporations

There are two ways to limit a foreign investor’s U.S. tax and reporting obligations. First, the investor can hold its fund investment through an entity treated as a C-corporation for U.S. income tax purposes. Alternatively, the investment fund can hold its interest in the flowthrough manufacturing entity through an entity treated as a C-corporation. These structuring methods are referred to as using a “blocker” corporation because it blocks the foreign investor from income otherwise considered “effectively connected” income. Instead, the blocker converts such income into “FDAP-type” income which generally does not necessitate a direct U.S. tax or reporting obligation for the foreign investor. The only downside is that the blocker entity itself will be a taxable entity for U.S. tax purposes. The blocker will be subject to U.S. federal income tax at a 35% rate and to possible state income tax. However, this cost may be lowered by implementing a capital structure that employs both debt and equity. Any distributions paid by the blocker will generally be subject to a U.S. dividend withholding tax at a rate of 30% (or a lower rate if a treaty is applicable). In many situations, this withholding tax is not expected to be material, because the amount of distributions paid by the blocker before final exit is expected to be relatively small. So long as the blocker is not a “United States real property holding corporation” (i.e., does not derive most of its value from U.S. real property interests), an exit in the form of a sale of the shares of the blocker will generally not trigger U.S. income tax.

There are a number of tax issues that investment funds and their investors face when structuring their funds and investments. Given the magnitude of foreign investment, American manufacturing companies would be wise to understand the myriad tax issues affecting their potential sources of capital.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services


What’s Next for Blockchain and Crypto?
01 December 2022
Innovative Technology Insights
Case Law Update: Disputes Relating to Supply Chain Disruptions Hit the Courts
01 December 2022
Manufacturing Industry Advisor
Foley Partner André Thiollier Moderates Global Venture Market Session at BayBrazil Conference
01 December 2022
Foley Ignite
Podcast Episode 96: Eric Williams, Associate
01 December 2022
Foley Career Perspectives
What You Should Know About Payor/Provider Convergence
25-26 January 2023
Los Angeles, CA
ATA EDGE2022 Policy Conference | American Telemedicine Association
7-9 December 2022
Washington, D.C.
CLE Weeks
5-16 December 2022
Milwaukee, WI
Foley Sponsors Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year® Program
1 December 2021 - 30 November 2022
Michigan and Northwest Ohio Region