Carried interest: United States.
Because the manager is compensated with a profits interest in the fund, the bulk of his or her income from the fund is taxed, not as compensation for services, but as a return on investment. Typically, when a partner receives a profits interest (commonly referred to as a "carried interest"), the partner is not taxed upon receipt, due to the difficulty of ascertaining the present value of an interest in future profits.[8] Instead, the partner is taxed as the partnership earns income. In the case of a hedge fund, this means that the partner defers taxation on the income that the hedge fund earns, which is typically ordinary income (or possibly short-term capital gains), due to the nature of the investments most hedge funds make. Private equity funds, however, typically invest on a longer horizon, with the result that income earned by the funds is long-term capital gain, taxable to individuals at a maximum 15% rate. Because the 20% profits share typically is the bulk of the manager's compensation and because this compensation can reach, in the case of the most successful funds, enormous figures, concern has been raised, both in the U.S. Congress and in the media, that managers are taking advantage of tax loopholes to receive what is effectively a salary without paying the ordinary 35% marginal income tax rates that an average person would have to pay on such income.
To address this concern, U.S. Representative Sander M. Levin introduced H.R. 2834 on June 22, 2007, which would eliminate the ability of persons performing investment-adviser or similar services to partnerships to receive capital-gains tax treatment on their income. [9] On June 27, 2007, Henry Paulson said that altering the tax treatment of a single industry raises tax policy concerns, and that changing the way partnerships in general are taxed is something that should only be done after careful consideration of the potential impact, although he was not speaking only about carried interest.[10] The U.S. Treasury Department addressed carried interest specifically in testimony before the U.S. Senate Finance Committee in July of 2007.[11] U.S. Representative Charles B. Rangel included a revised version of H.R. 2834 as part of the "Mother of All Tax Reform" and the 2007 House extenders package.
