[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 26, Volume 17]
[Revised as of April 1, 2004]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 26CFR53.4941(d)-4]

[Page 61-65]
 
                       TITLE 26--INTERNAL REVENUE
 
    CHAPTER I--INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 
                               (CONTINUED)
 
PART 53_FOUNDATION AND SIMILAR EXCISE TAXES--Table of Contents
 
                     Subpart B_Taxes on Self-Dealing
 
Sec. 53.4941(d)-4  Transitional rules.

    (a) Certain transactions involving securities acquired by a 
foundation before May 27, 1969--(1) In general. Under section 
101(l)(2)(A) of the Tax Reform Act of 1969 (83 Stat. 533), any 
transaction between a private foundation and a corporation which is a 
disqualified person shall not be an act of self-dealing if such 
transaction is pursuant to the terms of securities of such corporation, 
if such terms were in existence at the time such securities were 
acquired by the foundation, and if such securities were acquired by the 
foundation before May 27, 1969.
    (2) Example. The provisions of this paragraph may be illustrated by 
the following example:

    Example. Private foundation X purchased preferred stock of 
corporation M, a disqualified person with respect to X, on March 15, 
1969. The terms of such securities on such date provided that the stock 
could be called by M at any time if M paid the outstanding shareholders 
cash equal to 105 percent of the face amount of the stock. If M 
exercises this right and calls the stock owned by X on February 15, 
1970, such call shall not constitute an act of self-dealing even if such 
price is not equivalent to fair market value on such date and even if 
not all of the securities of that class are called.

    (b) Disposition of certain business holdings--(1) In general. Under 
section 101(l)(2)(B) of the Tax Reform Act of 1969 (83 Stat. 533), the 
sale, exchange, or other disposition of property which is owned by a 
private foundation on May 26, 1969, to a disqualified person shall not 
be an act of self-dealing if the foundation is required to dispose of 
such property in order not to be liable for tax under section 4943 
(determined without regard to section 4943(c)(2)(C) and as if every 
disposition by the foundation were made to disqualified persons) and if 
such disposition satisfies the requirements of subparagraph (2) of this 
paragraph. For purposes of applying this paragraph in the case of a 
disposition completed before January 1, 1975, or after October 4, 1976, 
and before January 1, 1977, the amount of excess business holdings is 
determined under section 4943(c) without taking subsection (c)(4) into 
account.

[[Page 62]]

    (2) Terms of the disposition. Subparagraph (1) of this paragraph 
shall not apply unless:
    (i) The private foundation receives an amount which equals or 
exceeds the fair market value of the business holdings at the time of 
disposition or at the time a contract for such disposition was 
previously executed; and
    (ii) At the time with respect to which subdivision (i) of this 
subparagraph is applied, the transaction would not have constituted a 
prohibited transaction within the meaning of section 503(b) or the 
corresponding provisions of prior law if such provisions had been 
applied at such time.
    (3) Property received under a trust or will. For purposes of this 
paragraph, property shall be considered as owned by a private foundation 
on May 26, 1969, if such property is acquired by such foundation under 
the terms of a will executed on or before such date, under the terms of 
a trust which was irrevocable on such date, or under the terms of a 
revocable trust executed on or before such date if the property would 
have passed under a will which would have met the requirements of this 
subparagraph but for the fact that a grantor dies without having revoked 
the trust. An amendment or republication of a will which was executed on 
or before May 26, 1969, does not prevent any interest in a business 
enterprise which was to pass under the terms of such will (which terms 
were in effect on May 26, 1969, and at all times thereafter) from being 
treated as owned by a private foundation on or before May 26, 1969, 
solely because:
    (i) There is a reduction in the interest in the business enterprise 
which the foundation was to receive under the terms of the will (for 
example, if the foundation is to receive the residuary estate and one 
class of stock is disposed of by the decedent during his lifetime or by 
a subsequent codicil),
    (ii) Such amendment or republication is necessary in order to comply 
with section 508(e) and the regulations thereunder,
    (iii) There is a change in the executor of the will, or
    (iv) There is any other change which does not otherwise change the 
rights of the foundation with respect to such interest in the business 
enterprise.

However, if under such amendment or republication there is an increase 
of the interest in the business enterprise which the foundation was to 
receive under the terms of the will in effect on May 26, 1969, such 
increase shall not be treated as owned by the private foundation on or 
before May 26, 1969, but under such circumstances the interest which 
would have been acquired before such increase shall be treated as owned 
by the private foundation on or before May 26, 1969.
    (4) Examples. The provisions of this paragraph may be illustrated by 
the following examples:

    Example (1) On May 26, 1969, private foundation X owns 10 percent of 
corporation Y's voting stock, which is traded on the New York Stock 
Exchange. Disqualified persons with respect to X own an additional 40 
percent of such voting stock. X is on a calendar year basis. Prior to 
January 1, 1975, X privately sold its entire 10 percent for cash to B, a 
disqualified person, at the price quoted on the stock exchange at the 
close of the day less commissions. Since the 10 percent owned by X would 
constitute excess business holdings without the application of section 
4943(c) (2)(C) or (4), the disposition will not constitute an act of 
self-dealing.
    Example (2) Assume the facts as stated in example (1), except that 
the only stock of corporation Y which X owns is 1.5 percent of Y's 
voting stock. Since the 1.5 percent owned by X would constitute excess 
business holdings without the application of section 4943(c) (2)(C) or 
(4), the disposition of the stock to B for cash will not constitute an 
act of self-dealing.
    Example (3) Assume the facts as stated in example (1), except that 
B, instead of paying cash as consideration for the stock, issued a 10-
year secured promissory note as consideration for the stock. The 
issuance of such promissory note will not be treated as an act of self-
dealing until taxable years beginning after December 31, 1979, unless 
such issuance would have been a prohibited transaction under section 
503(b), or unless the transaction does not remain throughout its life at 
least as favorable as an arm's-length contract negotiated currently. See 
paragraph (c) of this section.

    (c) Existing leases and loans--(1) In general. Under section 
101(1)(2)(C) of the Tax Reform Act of 1969 (83 Stat. 533), the leasing 
of property or the lending of money (or other extension of credit)

[[Page 63]]

between a disqualified person and a private foundation pursuant to a 
binding contract which was in effect on October 9, 1969 (or pursuant to 
a renewal or modification of such a contract, as described in 
subparagraph (2) of this paragraph), shall not be an act of self-dealing 
until taxable years beginning after December 31, 1979, if:
    (i) At the time the contract was executed, such contract was not a 
prohibited transaction (within the meaning of section 503(b) or the 
corresponding provisions of prior law), and
    (ii) The leasing or lending of money (or other extension of credit) 
remains throughout the term of the lease or extension of credit at least 
as favorable as a current arm's-length transaction with an unrelated 
person.
    (2) Renewal or modification of existing contracts. A renewal or a 
modification of an existing contract is referred to in subparagraph (1) 
of this paragraph only if any modifications of the terms of such 
contract are not substantial and the relative advantages of the modified 
contract compared with contracts entered into at arm's-length with an 
unrelated person at the time of the renewal or modification are at least 
as favorable to the private foundation as the relative advantages of the 
original contract compared with contracts entered into at arm's-length 
with an unrelated person at the time of execution of the original 
contract. Such renewal or modification need not be provided for in the 
original contract; it may take place before or after the expiration of 
the original contract and at any time before the first day of the first 
taxable year of the private foundation beginning after December 31, 
1979. Where, in a normal commercial setting, an unrelated party in the 
position of a private foundation could be expected to insist upon a 
renegotiation or termination of a binding contract, the private 
foundation must so act. Thus, for example, if a disqualified person 
leases office space from a private foundation on a month-to-month basis, 
and a party in the position of the private foundation could be expected 
to renegotiate the rent required in such contract because of a rise in 
the fair market value of such office space, the private foundation must 
so act in order to avoid participation in an act of self-dealing. Where 
the private foundation has no right to insist upon renegotiation, an act 
of self-dealing shall occur if the terms of the contract become less 
favorable to the foundation than an arm's-length contract negotiated 
currently, unless:
    (i) The variation from current fair market value is de minimis, or
    (ii) The contract is renegotiated by the foundation and the 
disqualified person so that the foundation will receive no less than 
fair market value. For purposes of subdivision (i) of this subparagraph 
de minimis ordinarily shall be no more than one-half of 1 percent in the 
rate of return in the case of a loan, or 10 percent of the rent in the 
case of a lease.
    (3) Example. The provisions of subparagraphs (1) and (2) of this 
paragraph may be illustrated by the following example.

    Example. Under a binding contract entered into on January 1, 1964, 
X, a private foundation, leases a building for 10 years from Z, a 
disqualified person. At the time the contract was executed, the lease 
was not a ``prohibited transaction'' within the meaning of section 
503(b), since the rent charged X was only 50 percent of the rent which 
would have been charged in an arm's-length transaction with an unrelated 
person. On January 1, 1974, X renewed the lease for 5 additional years. 
The terms of the renewal agreement provided for a 20 percent increase in 
the amount of rent charged X. However, at the time of such renewal, the 
rent which would have been charged in an arm's-length transaction had 
also increased by 20 percent from that of 1964. The renewal agreement 
shall not be treated as an act of self-dealing.

    (4) Certain exchanges of stock or securities for bonds, debentures 
or other indebtedness. (i) In the case of a transaction described in 
paragraph (a) or (b) of this section or paragraph (d) of Sec. 
53.4941(d)-3, where a bond, debenture, or other indebtedness of a 
disqualified person is acquired by a private foundation in exchange for 
stock or securities which it held on October 9, 1969, and at all times 
thereafter, such indebtedness shall be treated as an extension of credit 
pursuant to a binding contract in effect on October 9, 1969, to which 
this paragraph applies. Thus, so long as the extension of credit remains 
at least as favorable as an arm's-length transaction with an

[[Page 64]]

unrelated person and neither the acquisition of the securities which 
were exchanged for the indebtedness nor the exchange of such securities 
for the indebtedness was a prohibited transaction within the meaning of 
section 503(b) (or the corresponding provisions of prior law) at the 
time of such acquisition, such extension of credit shall not be an act 
of self-dealing until taxable years beginning after December 31, 1979.
    (ii) The provisions of this subparagraph may be illustrated by the 
following examples:

    Example (1). Assume the facts as stated in example (2) of Sec. 
53.4941 (d)-3 (d)(2), except that the preferred stock was held by Y on 
October 9, 1969, and at all times thereafter until the redemption 
occurred on January 2, 1972. In addition, assume that the acquisition of 
the preferred stock was not a prohibited transaction within the meaning 
of section 503(b) at the time of such acquisition and the exchange of 
the preferred stock for the debentures would not have been a prohibited 
transaction within the meaning of section 503(b). For 1973 through 1979, 
the extension of credit arising from the holding of the debentures is 
not an act of self-dealing so long as the extension of credit remains at 
least as favorable as an arm's-length transaction with an unrelated 
person. See, however, example (3) of Sec. 53.4941 (e)-1 (e)(1)(ii).
    Example (2). Assume the same facts as stated in example (1) of Sec. 
53.4941 (d)-4 (b)(4), except that private foundation X sold its entire 
10 percent of corporation Y's voting stock in exchange for Y's secured 
notes which mature on December 31, 1985. For taxable years beginning 
before January 1, 1980, the extension of credit arising from the holding 
of such notes by X is not an act of self-dealing so long as the 
extension of credit remains at least as favorable as an arm's-length 
transaction with an unrelated person and neither the acquisition of the 
securities which were exchanged for the indebtedness nor the exchange of 
such securities for the indebtedness was a prohibited transaction within 
the meaning of section 503(b) (or the corresponding provisions of prior 
law). Under Sec. 53.4941(e)-1, a new extension of credit occurs on the 
first day of each taxable year in which an indebtedness is outstanding; 
therefore, if the secured notes are held by X after December 31, 1979, a 
new extension of credit not excepted from the definition of an act of 
self-dealing will occur on the first day of the first taxable year 
beginning after December 31, 1979, and on the first day of each 
succeeding taxable year in which X holds such secured notes.

    (d) Sharing of goods, services, or facilities before January 1, 
1980. (1) Under section 101(1)(2)(D) of the Tax Reform Act of 1969 (83 
Stat. 533), the use (other than leasing) of goods, services, or 
facilities which are shared by a private foundation and a disqualified 
person shall not be an act of self-dealing until taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 1979, if:
    (i) The use is pursuant to an arrangement in effect before October 
9, 1969, and at all times thereafter;
    (ii) The arrangement was not a prohibited transaction (within the 
meaning of sec. 503(b) or the corresponding provisions of prior law) at 
the time it was made; and
    (iii) The arrangement would not be a prohibited transaction if 
section 503(b) continued to apply.

For purposes of this paragraph, such arrangement need not be a binding 
contract.
    (2) The provisions of this paragraph may be illustrated by the 
following example:

    Example. In 1964 X, a private foundation, and B, a disqualified 
person, arranged for the sharing of computer time in B's son's company 
for a 10-year period commencing January 1, 1965. B's son has the 
unilateral right to terminate the arrangement at any time. X uses the 
computer facilities in connection with an analysis of its grant-making 
activities, while B's use is related to his business affairs. Both X and 
B make reasonable fixed payments to the computer company based on the 
number of hours of computer use and comparable to fees charged in arm's-
length transactions with unrelated parties. The company imposes a 
maximum limit per month on the sum of the number of hours for which X 
and B use the computer facilities. Under these circumstances, the 
sharing of computer time is not an act of self-dealing.

    (e) Use of certain property acquired before October 9, 1969. (1) 
Under section 101(1)(2)(E) of the Tax Reform Act of 1969 (83 Stat. 533), 
the use of property in which a private foundation and a disqualified 
person have a joint or common interest will not be an act of self-
dealing if the interests of both in such property were acquired before 
October 9, 1969.
    (2) The provisions of this paragraph may be illustrated by the 
following example:


[[Page 65]]


    Example. Prior to October 9, 1969, C, a disqualified person, gave 
beachfront property to private foundation X for use as a recreational 
facility for underprivileged, inner-city children during the summer 
months. However, C retained the right to use such property for his life. 
The use of such property by C or X is not an act of self-dealing.

    (f) Disposition of leased property--(1) In general. Under section 
101(l)(2)(F) of the Tax Reform Act of 1969, as amended by the Tax Reform 
Act of 1976 (90 Stat. 1713), the sale, exchange or other disposition 
(other than by lease) to a disqualified person of property being leased 
to the disqualified person by a private foundation is not an act of 
self-dealing if:
    (i) The private foundation is leasing substantially all of the 
property to the disqualified person under a lease to which paragraph (c) 
of this section applies;
    (ii) The disposition occurs after October 4, 1976, and before 
January 1, 1978; and
    (iii) The disposition satisfies the requirements of paragraph (f)(2) 
of this section.
    (2) Terms of disposition. Paragraph (f)(1) of this section applies 
only if:
    (i) The private foundation receives an amount that equals or exceeds 
the fair market value of the property either at the time of the 
disposition or at the time (after June 30, 1976) the contract for such 
disposition was executed;
    (ii) In computing the fair market value of the property, no 
diminution of that value results from the fact that the property is 
subject to any lease to disqualified persons; and
    (iii) At the time with respect to which paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this 
section is applied, the transaction would not have constituted a 
prohibited transaction within the meaning of section 503(b) or the 
corresponding provisions of prior law if those provisions had been 
applied at the time of the transaction.

[T.D. 7270, 38 FR 9493, Apr. 17, 1973, as amended by T.D. 7678, 45 FR 
12416, Feb. 26, 1980]