A client wants to move appreciated property into a corporation. Real estate, equipment, intellectual property, or a combination of all three. The transfer triggers a realized gain, and without a specific statutory exception, that gain is taxable on the spot.
That is the exact problem IRC § 351 was designed to solve. Section 351 provides a nonrecognition rule that allows transferors to defer gain (or loss) when contributing property to a corporation in exchange for stock, provided three requirements are met. It applies to new formations and contributions to existing corporations alike.
But the requirements are specific, the exceptions are real, and the consequences of getting it wrong are immediate. Stock issued for services does not count toward control, liabilities that exceed basis create recognized gain under § 357(c), and nonqualified preferred stock is treated as boot under § 351(g). Each of these traps shows up regularly in practice.
This article walks through every element of Section 351 eligibility, basis mechanics, boot treatment, liability assumptions, and the modern transaction planning considerations that practitioners encounter on live deals.
Section 351(a) provides that no gain or loss is recognized when property is transferred to a corporation solely in exchange for stock, if the transferor (or transferors) control the corporation immediately after the exchange. The statute reads: "No gain or loss shall be recognized if property is transferred to a corporation by one or more persons solely in exchange for stock in such corporation and immediately after the exchange such person or persons are in control (as defined in section 368(c)) of such corporation."
This rule is a nonrecognition provision, not an exclusion. The gain does not disappear. It is preserved through the basis mechanics of §§ 358 and 362, which ensure the deferred gain is recognized when the transferor sells the stock or the corporation disposes of the property.
Section 351 applies to both newly formed corporations and contributions to existing corporations. There is no requirement that the corporation be newly organized. A transferor contributing additional property to a corporation operating for years qualifies, as long as the control requirement is met immediately after that specific exchange per Treas. Reg. § 1.351-1(a)(1).
Every Section 351 analysis comes down to three questions. Miss any one of them and the entire transfer is taxable.
The transferor must transfer "property" to the corporation. Under Treas. Reg. § 1.351-1(a)(1)(i), property includes cash, real estate, equipment, inventory, patents, trade secrets, goodwill, and other intangible assets. The definition is broad, but it has a hard boundary: services are explicitly excluded.
Section 351(d)(1) explicitly provides that stock issued for services rendered (or to be rendered) to or for the benefit of the corporation does not count as issued in return for property. The person receiving stock for services recognizes ordinary income under § 83 on the fair market value of the stock received. That person's stock also cannot be counted toward the control requirement for other transferors in the same transaction.
A common planning structure pairs a nominal property contribution with a services contribution. If someone contributes both property and services, only the stock allocable to the property contribution counts. Treas. Reg. § 1.351-1(a)(1)(ii) requires that the property transferred have a value that is "not relatively small" compared to the stock already owned or to be received for services.
The regulation does not define "relatively small." The IRS has accepted 10% of the value of services stock as sufficient in several private letter rulings, though that threshold is not a safe harbor.
The transferor must receive stock, and only stock, in exchange for the property. When the transferor receives anything other than stock, the additional consideration is called "boot," and it changes the tax treatment under § 351(b).
Boot includes cash, short-term notes, debt instruments of the corporation, and other property. It also includes nonqualified preferred stock (NQPS) under § 351(g), which is treated as boot even though it is technically stock.
NQPS deserves close attention because it shows up in GSC queries and in deal structuring. Section 351(g)(2)(A) defines NQPS as preferred stock that meets any one of four conditions:
The first three conditions apply only if the right or obligation may be exercised within the 20-year period beginning on the issue date, and the right or obligation is not subject to a contingency that makes the likelihood of exercise remote, per § 351(g)(2)(B). Stock with a mandatory redemption feature or a put right exercisable within 20 years will almost always be NQPS.
The transferor (or transferors acting together) must control the corporation "immediately after the exchange." Control is defined under § 368(c) as ownership of at least 80% of the total combined voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote and at least 80% of the total number of shares of all other classes of stock.
Both prongs must be satisfied. Owning 80% of voting stock but only 70% of a nonvoting preferred class fails the test.
The "immediately after" requirement does not mean the transferors must retain control permanently. It means control must exist at the moment the exchange is complete. Prearranged dispositions of stock can break the requirement: if a transferor contributes property and then sells stock to a third party under a binding agreement entered before the contribution, the IRS will argue the transferor never had control "immediately after."
Rev. Rul. 2003-51 addresses step transaction analysis in this context. The ruling examined whether a subsequent public offering of stock, planned before the § 351 exchange, would be integrated with the exchange under the step transaction doctrine. The ruling concluded that the steps were not integrated because the public offering was not mutually interdependent with the exchange, but it reinforced that the IRS will apply step transaction principles when the facts support integration.
Accommodating transferors present a planning opportunity. When the primary transferor alone cannot meet the 80% control threshold, other persons can contribute property in the same transaction to reach the threshold collectively. But the accommodating transferor must contribute property (not services), and that property must not be of "relatively small value" compared to the stock received, under Treas. Reg. § 1.351-1(a)(1)(ii).
The deferral mechanism in Section 351 operates through basis. Understanding the basis rules is essential for computing gain or loss on any subsequent disposition of either the stock or the contributed property.
Under §§ 358(a)(1) and 358(d), the transferor's basis in the stock received equals:
This is a "substituted basis." It preserves the built-in gain (or loss) that existed at the time of the transfer. If the property had a basis of $200,000 and a fair market value of $500,000, and no boot was received, the stock takes a $200,000 basis with $300,000 of built-in gain.
Under § 362(a), the corporation's basis in the property received equals the transferor's adjusted basis in the property, increased by any gain recognized by the transferor on the exchange. This is a "transferred basis" (sometimes called a "carryover basis").
If the transferor recognized $50,000 of gain because of boot, the corporation's basis increases by that $50,000.
Consider this scenario. A transferor contributes equipment with an adjusted basis of $150,000 and a fair market value of $400,000 to a newly formed corporation. The transferor receives stock worth $350,000 and $50,000 in cash.
Gain recognized by transferor: The realized gain is $250,000 ($400,000 FMV minus $150,000 basis). Under § 351(b), gain is recognized to the extent of boot received: $50,000.
Transferor's stock basis under § 358(a): $150,000 (property basis) minus $50,000 (boot received) plus $50,000 (gain recognized) = $150,000.
Corporation's property basis under § 362(a): $150,000 (transferor's basis) plus $50,000 (gain recognized) = $200,000.
The remaining $200,000 of built-in gain ($400,000 FMV minus $200,000 corporate basis) is preserved in the property. The stock also carries $200,000 of built-in gain ($350,000 FMV minus $150,000 basis). Total deferred gain across both positions: $250,000 realized minus $50,000 recognized = $200,000.
When boot is present, Section 351 does not fully shield the transaction from tax. The rules under § 351(b) determine how much gain is recognized and, just as importantly, what is never recognized.
Under § 351(b)(1), if the transferor receives boot in addition to stock, gain is recognized but only to the extent of the fair market value of the boot received. The character of the recognized gain depends on the character of the property transferred. If the transferred property would produce ordinary income on sale (for example, due to depreciation recapture under §§ 1245 or 1250), the recognized gain is ordinary to that extent.
Section 351(b)(2) is absolute on this point: even if boot is received, loss is not recognized. A transferor contributing property with a basis of $500,000 and a fair market value of $300,000 who receives stock worth $250,000 and $50,000 in cash recognizes zero loss. The loss is preserved in the substituted basis of the stock under § 358.
Boot takes several forms in practice:
The presence of boot is not always accidental. In some transactions, transferors intentionally structure boot to recognize gain up to the amount of available losses or to step up the corporation's basis in the contributed property under § 362(a). This "gain recognition election" strategy can be valuable when the transferor has expiring capital losses or when the corporation needs a higher depreciable basis.
When a transferor contributes property subject to a liability, or the corporation assumes a liability of the transferor, the question is whether the assumption constitutes boot. The answer, under § 357, depends on which subsection applies.
Section 357(a) provides that the assumption of a liability by the corporation is not treated as money or other property (boot) for purposes of § 351. This is the default rule, and it allows property transfers to proceed on a tax-deferred basis even when the property carries debt. Without this rule, virtually every real estate contribution with a mortgage would trigger gain recognition.
Section 357(b) overrides the general rule if the principal purpose of the liability assumption was tax avoidance, or if there was no bona fide business purpose for the assumption. When § 357(b) applies, the entire amount of all liabilities assumed in the exchange is treated as boot, not just the liability that triggered the exception. This is a total override: if any one liability fails the business purpose test, every liability in the transaction becomes boot.
The burden of proof is on the transferor to establish a non-tax-avoidance purpose. In practice, this means documenting the business reasons for each liability assumed, particularly when liabilities are incurred shortly before the transfer.
Section 357(c) applies when the total liabilities assumed by the corporation exceed the aggregate adjusted basis of all property transferred by the transferor. In that situation, the excess is treated as gain recognized on the exchange. The character of the gain is determined by looking at the character of the contributed assets, allocated proportionally.
This is a trap in real estate transactions. A transferor contributing property with a basis of $1 million subject to a mortgage of $1.2 million recognizes $200,000 of gain under § 357(c), even if no cash or other boot changes hands.
Section 357(c)(3) provides an exception for liabilities that would give rise to a deduction when paid. Accounts payable of a cash-basis transferor are the most common example. These liabilities are excluded from the § 357(c) calculation, so they do not count toward the aggregate liability amount when testing whether liabilities exceed basis.
This exception prevents cash-basis taxpayers from recognizing gain simply because their payables exceed the basis of their receivables, which is typically zero for a cash-basis taxpayer. If you are working through a § 357(c) analysis with multiple liability types, Bizora can pull the full regulatory framework and published rulings in seconds, with every answer traced to the specific authority.
Section 351 failures are usually not dramatic legal errors. They are planning oversights that surface during audit or due diligence. Here are the ones that show up most often.
Counting services stock toward control: A founder receives 60% of stock for intellectual property and another person receives 25% for services. The founder's 60% alone does not meet the 80% threshold, and the services stock cannot count under § 351(d)(1). The transfer is fully taxable.
Prearranged dispositions: A transferor contributes property and receives stock, then sells half the stock to a private equity buyer under an agreement signed before the contribution. The IRS will argue, under the step transaction doctrine, that the transferor never controlled the corporation immediately after the exchange. Rev. Rul. 2003-51 provides the analytical framework.
Failing to include all necessary transferors: When multiple transferors must act together to reach 80% control, the timing and integration of their contributions matter. If one transferor's contribution closes in January and another's closes in June with no connection between them, the IRS may treat them as separate transactions rather than a single integrated exchange.
Excess liabilities without planning: Contributing highly leveraged property without checking whether the mortgage exceeds basis under § 357(c) creates unexpected gain. This is particularly common with real estate that has been depreciated significantly or refinanced.
Transfers to investment companies: Section 351(e) denies nonrecognition treatment for transfers to "investment companies" as defined in § 351(e)(1). If the transfer results in diversification of the transferors' interests, the exception applies and the entire transfer is taxable. This is relevant when multiple transferors contribute different marketable securities to a single entity.
This checklist covers the documentation and planning steps that prevent the mistakes listed above. Use it as a working reference for each § 351 transaction.
Before the transfer:
During the exchange:
After the transfer:
Section 351 is not just a formation-stage provision. It appears throughout deal structuring and in several areas of modern tax practice.
In private equity acquisitions, sellers frequently "roll over" a portion of their equity into the acquiring entity. If the rollover is structured as a contribution of target stock to a new holding company in exchange for holding company stock, Section 351 can defer the gain on the rolled-over portion. The key is ensuring the rolling sellers, together with the PE fund's contribution, meet the 80% control threshold immediately after the exchange.
Deal teams structure these transactions carefully to avoid tripping the prearranged disposition rules.
Section 351 nonrecognition does not apply automatically to outbound transfers of property to a foreign corporation. Section 367(a)(1) provides that a foreign corporation is not treated as a corporation for purposes of § 351 unless the transfer satisfies exceptions under the § 367(a) regulations. In most outbound transfers of appreciated property, the transferor must recognize gain unless a specific exception applies, such as the active trade or business exception under Treas. Reg. § 1.367(a)-2.
For new businesses considering corporate structure, the § 367(a) override is a critical planning consideration when the corporation will be organized outside the United States.
The contribution of cryptocurrency and other digital assets to a corporation raises Section 351 questions that the IRS has not fully addressed. Digital assets are property for federal tax purposes under Notice 2014-21, so they qualify as "property" for § 351 purposes. The open questions involve valuation, the application of § 351(e) if the corporation is treated as an investment company, and how basis tracking works when the contributed assets are fungible tokens.
Several mutual funds have converted to exchange-traded fund (ETF) structures in recent years. These conversions may involve a transfer of portfolio assets to a new corporate shell in exchange for ETF shares, raising § 351 issues. The § 351(e) investment company exception is particularly relevant here, as the transfer could result in diversification depending on the structure.
Section 1202 provides an exclusion for gain on the sale of qualified small business stock (QSBS). Stock received in a Section 351 exchange can qualify as QSBS if the corporation meets the requirements of § 1202: C corporation status, aggregate gross assets not exceeding $75 million under § 1202(d)(1), and an active business requirement under § 1202(c)(2). The § 351 transfer starts the five-year holding period under § 1202(a)(1), and the transferor's basis under § 358 becomes the basis for computing the § 1202(h) gain limitation.
For founders and early-stage contributors, coordinating § 351 with § 1202 can produce significant tax savings on a future exit.
Section 351 is one of the most frequently used nonrecognition provisions in the Code, and it is also one of the most frequently tested on audit. The difference between a clean deferral and an unexpected tax bill usually comes down to the planning done before the transfer closes, not after.
Every Section 351 analysis should confirm three things: the property qualifies, the consideration is exclusively stock (or the boot consequences are intentional), and the control test is met immediately after the exchange with no prearranged dispositions that undermine it. The basis calculations under §§ 358 and 362 should be documented contemporaneously, not reconstructed years later.
When you are structuring a corporate formation, restructuring, or entity contribution tied to estate and trust planning, the question is never whether § 351 applies in theory. The question is whether your specific facts satisfy every requirement and whether you can defend the position if it gets tested. That means tracing each element to the statute, the regulation, and the published rulings that fill the gaps. Bizora gives you that primary authority trail in seconds, source-cited to the specific section, so you can verify the position before you sign off on it.
Section 351 is a nonrecognition provision that allows transferors to defer gain or loss when contributing property to a corporation in exchange for stock, provided the transferors control the corporation immediately after the exchange. It applies to both new and existing corporations under IRC § 351(a).
Three requirements must all be met: the transferor must transfer "property" (not services) under § 351(d)(1), receive only stock in exchange, and control 80% of the corporation immediately after the exchange per § 368(c). Failure on any single requirement makes the entire transfer taxable.
Under § 351(b)(1), gain is recognized to the extent of boot received (cash, debt instruments, or nonqualified preferred stock). However, loss is never recognized even when boot is present, per § 351(b)(2). The recognized gain character follows the character of the transferred property.
Yes. Section 351 applies to transfers to both newly formed and existing corporations, with no requirement that the corporation be newly organized per Treas. Reg. § 1.351-1(a)(1). The control requirement must be satisfied immediately after the specific exchange in question.
Under § 351(g)(2)(A), nonqualified preferred stock is preferred stock with mandatory redemption rights, put rights, issuer call rights likely to be exercised, or dividend rates tied to external indices, where the right or obligation is exercisable within 20 years per § 351(g)(2)(B). NQPS is treated as boot, not stock, for § 351 purposes.
Under § 357(c), when the total liabilities assumed by the corporation exceed the aggregate adjusted basis of all property transferred, the excess is recognized as gain. However, § 357(c)(3) excludes deductible liabilities (such as accounts payable of a cash-basis taxpayer) from the calculation, which can prevent unexpected gain recognition.
Section 351 is used in equity rollover structures where sellers contribute target stock to a new holding company in exchange for acquirer stock. It also intersects with § 367(a) on cross-border transfers and § 1202 for QSBS qualification on founder stock. Deal teams must confirm the 80% control test and avoid prearranged disposition issues under the step transaction doctrine.
Related articles