Legal entity rationalization: Answers to frequently asked questions about LER

LER is the process of reviewing and restructuring a company’s legal entities to eliminate redundancies, reduce complexity and improve alignment with business strategy. It may involve merging, dissolving, or reorganizing subsidiaries, holding companies or other legal entities.

Companies typically pursue LER to:

• Reduce administrative and compliance costs.
• Simplify financial reporting and governance.
• Improve tax efficiency across jurisdictions.
• Prepare for a sale, initial public offering (IPO) or restructuring.
• Align legal structures with current business operations.

LER is especially valuable for businesses that have grown through acquisitions, expanded internationally or undergone significant strategic changes.

Key benefits include:

• Lower compliance costs: Fewer entities mean fewer tax filings, audits and regulatory obligations.
• Improved transparency: A simplified structure enhances visibility into operations and financial performance.
• Tax efficiency: Rationalization can help preserve tax attributes, reduce exposure and optimize cross-border planning.
• Operational agility: Streamlined structures support faster decision making and easier integration of systems like enterprise resource planning (ERP) solutions.
• Stronger positioning for transactions: Buyers and investors prefer clean, efficient structures with minimal risk.

Common triggers include:

• Post-merger integration
• ERP or finance system implementation
• International expansion
• Rising compliance costs
• Preparing for a liquidity event (e.g., sale, IPO)
• Strategic realignment or restructuring

If your legal structure no longer reflects how your business operates—or if it’s creating friction—LER may be worth exploring.

The process typically involves:

1. Assessment: Reviewing the current legal entity structure, including ownership, jurisdiction, tax attributes and operational roles
2. Planning: Identifying opportunities to merge, dissolve or reorganize entities in a tax-efficient and legally compliant manner
3. Execution: Coordinating with tax, legal, accounting and operational teams to implement changes
4. Compliance: Ensuring all filings, registrations and documentation are updated across jurisdictions

LER requires cross-functional collaboration and careful planning to avoid unintended tax or legal consequences.

Yes—but it’s more than that. While tax efficiency is a major driver, LER also supports broader business goals such as operational simplification, risk reduction and strategic alignment. It’s a multidisciplinary effort involving tax, legal, finance and business leadership.

Absolutely. In fact, cross-border rationalization is often more complex and more beneficial. Multinational companies may face overlapping entities in different jurisdictions, each with its own tax rules and compliance requirements. Coordinating rationalization across countries can reduce global tax exposure and improve operational efficiency.

Maintaining an overly complex legal structure can lead to:

• Higher compliance costs
• Increased audit risk
• Missed tax planning opportunities
• Operational inefficiencies
• Delays in transactions or system implementations

In some cases, legacy entities may carry hidden liabilities or outdated agreements that pose reputational or financial risks.

The timeline depends on the size and complexity of your structure, the jurisdictions involved, and the scope of the changes. A domestic rationalization may take a few months, while a global initiative could span a year or more. Early planning and stakeholder alignment are key to success.

The tax consequences depend on the type of entities involved, their jurisdiction and the method of restructuring. In the U.S., certain mergers or liquidations may qualify as tax-free reorganizations under the Internal Revenue Code, allowing for the carryover of tax attributes such as net operating losses (NOLs) and basis. However, state-level treatment may differ, and some states do not conform to federal rules. Internationally, tax-free treatment may not be available, and cross-border restructurings can trigger gain recognition, withholding taxes or anti-deferral rules.

Yes, but only under specific conditions. In the U.S., NOLs and other tax attributes may be preserved in a tax-free reorganization, provided continuity of ownership and business purpose requirements are met. However, limitations under provisions such as IRC section 382 (change of ownership) or state-level conformity rules may restrict usage. In Canada and the UK, similar rules apply, but the ability to transfer or preserve attributes often depends on the legal form of the transaction and local tax law.

Cross-border rationalization introduces additional complexity. U.S. tax rules governing controlled foreign corporations, Subpart F income and global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI) can be triggered by asset transfers or changes in ownership. Outbound transfers may be taxable unless specific elections are made. Treaty benefits, withholding tax obligations and foreign tax credit planning must also be considered. Coordination between jurisdictions is essential to avoid double taxation or mismatches in tax treatment.

FIRPTA—the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act—applies when foreign persons dispose of U.S. real property interests. In a legal entity rationalization involving foreign ownership, FIRPTA may trigger withholding tax if U.S. real estate is transferred or restructured. Proper documentation and planning are required to determine whether FIRPTA applies and to mitigate its impact.

Earnings and profits (E&P) are critical in determining the tax treatment of distributions and liquidations. In a restructuring, the movement of E&P between entities can affect whether a distribution is treated as a dividend or return of capital. Understanding the E&P profile of each entity is essential for planning tax-efficient reorganizations and avoiding unintended taxable events.

Yes. State tax treatment may differ significantly from federal rules. Some states do not recognize federal tax-free reorganizations, which can result in gain recognition or loss of attributes at the state level. Additionally, rationalization may affect nexus, apportionment factors and filing obligations. A state-by-state analysis is often necessary to fully understand the implications.

Check-the-box elections allow certain foreign entities to be classified as corporations, partnerships or disregarded entities for U.S. tax purposes. These elections can be used strategically during rationalization to trigger liquidations, avoid gain recognition or align tax treatment across jurisdictions. However, timing and documentation are critical, and elections must be coordinated with local country rules to avoid adverse consequences.

Legal entity rationalization is a complex undertaking—especially for multinational businesses with overlapping entities, legacy structures or evolving operational needs. RSM’s international tax professionals help middle market companies simplify their legal entity structures while maintaining compliance and supporting strategic goals.

Our team takes a holistic view of your global footprint to identify opportunities for streamlining, whether through mergers, dissolutions or reorganizations. We coordinate across jurisdictions to help ensure that changes are implemented efficiently and in alignment with local tax and regulatory requirements.

By aligning your legal structure with your business operations, RSM can help you:

• Reduce administrative and compliance burdens.
• Improve visibility into financial and operational performance.
• Support tax planning and preserve valuable attributes.
• Enhance readiness for transactions, system upgrades or strategic shifts.