Skip to main content
Date
Rule
801.10(b)
Staff
John Sipple
Response/Comments
Clarified that payment is not received until after the services is provided. If payment was received before the service is provided the countervailing liability/obligation would have to be added to the acquisition price as the assumption of a liability with the exemption. With the exception of this clarification, I explained that I concur with the advice reflected in the letter.

Question

December 10, 1992

John Sipple, Esq.
Director
Pre-Merger Notification Office
Federal Trade Commission
6th & Pennsylvania Avenues, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20580

Re: Hart-Scott-Rodino

Dear Mr. Sipple:

This is to memorialize our conversation of December 1, 1992.

In that conversation, I posed the following factual situation: The acquired company enters into long-term contracts to provide services periodically during the course of the contract. As each periodic service is provided, the acquired company is paid by its customer for that services. If the service is not provided during any particular period, the company is not paid.

The acquired company shows the value of all payments to be received under the contract as an asset on its balance sheet when the contract is signed. In order to comply with the conventions of double-entry bookkeeping, the acquired company also shows the total value of those services yet to be provided as the contract rate as a countervailing liability on its balance sheet. In other worlds, instead of booking the income received through the provision of the service as it is received periodically, the value of the entire contract is recorded as an asset, with the obligation to provide this service stated on the balance sheet as a counterbalancing liability.

My question to you was whether the value of the liabilities associated with the obligation to provide the service upon payment as stated in the companys books must be added to the purchase price when applying the size of transaction test under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act.

You confirmed that because the acquired companys obligation to provide services was not a liability due to a third party irrespective of whether the counterbalancing payment was received, it was not necessary to add that liability to the acquisition price in applying the size of transaction test.

If this letter does not reflect our conversation accurately in any respect, please let me know immediately. Thank you for you usual courtesy and responsiveness in addressing this matter. Best personal regards.

Sincerely,

[redacted]

 

cc: [redacted]

 

[redacted]

About Informal Interpretations

Informal interpretations provide guidance from previous staff interpretations on the applicability of the HSR rules to specific fact situations. You should not rely on them as a substitute for reading the Act and the Rules themselves. These materials do not, and are not intended to, constitute legal advice.

Learn more about Informal Interpretations.