Cooperatives and other fields of law
No. 4 (2022)
US WORKER COOPERATIVES: A DIRE NEED FOR A PROFOUND REVISION OF THEIRTAX REGULATION AT A FEDERAL LEVEL
-
Submitted
-
August 22 2025
-
Published
-
22-08-2025
Abstract
Cooperatives in the USA (US) contribute in important ways to many sectors of society not only from a financial point of view but also, above all, from a non-financial one.Because cooperatives do not act like normal corporations, in many countries they aresubject to different tax laws, which should not be considered a handout but an understanding of their differences and fair compensation for their contribution to society.In the US, the taxation of cooperatives constitutes a verypeculiar regime with great differences from that of many other countries. The system, however, is not that different compared to other US entities, as in many instances the fact that an entity is a cooperative makes no difference for taxation.Therefore, the US system can be considered peculiar in the sense that both its taxation and, above all, its substantive regime are very different from the pattern followed by the vast majority of systems adopted for cooperatives around the world.Thus, the tax treatment of cooperatives in theUS can be regarded as an unusual one with certain peculiarities that originate from the tax clauses in the Internal Revenue Code and judicial doctrine. This happens because how a business is taxed at the federal level in the United States ispartly dependent on how it is organized. This is not an easy topic to study but a worthwhile one.First, because unlike in most legislations where the cooperative form is legally recognized, in the US it is not. What counts when considering anentity a cooperative is not the fact that it has been constituted or registered as such, but that the entity acts on a cooperative basis. Thus, depending on the possible forms that the entity acting on a cooperative basis takes, there are different choices of taxation. This means that there is no single special regime for all cooperatives but several ones, as different tax provisions may apply depending on the legal and tax form chosen. These include both general provisions for those entities and, sometimes, particular ones for acting on a cooperative basis.Second, the regime is complex because different legal provisions apply tocooperatives, which derive from the type of cooperative they are (as regards their social object). For example, tax measures foragricultural cooperativesdo not apply to worker cooperatives or electricity ones. Some of the measures in thissystem date back to the first half of the twentieth century, so the protection of certain activities that appeared reasonable back then may no longer be sotoday;Third,because there are different levels of taxation due to the fact that the US is a multi-level system. There is a federal regime for each of the different legal forms a cooperative may take. Furthermore, there are 47 States and the Districtof Columbia with their state tax regimes. There are also many more local ones, as several municipalitiesimpose corporate income tax.Fourth, certain provisions are only applicable depending on each cooperative’s bylaws, so these need to be acknowledged in advance.Fifth, the regime is made more complex because the different tax measures passed in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 and other measures recently adopted as COVID-19 relief may also apply to cooperatives.Fifth, because there is nocomprehensiveandsubstantive regulatory framework that deals with cooperatives, some of these entities are also regulated by the judicial interpretation of sections 1381–1388 in Subchapter T of the Internal Revenue Code.In summary, the US has different tax measures both in general andspecifically concerning cooperatives that make understanding taxation hard not only for scholars but also especially for cooperatives.This paper has two aims: on one hand,to provide an overview of this very peculiar system froma tax law perspective, concentrating only on cooperatives’ Income Tax. It should be added that many other typesof taxes apply to cooperatives that are not taken into account here, such as Property tax (real estate and personal), Payroll tax or Sales tax (States and local), and License and Excise taxes. There may also be employment taxes such as Social Security andMedicare taxes and Income Tax Withholding and Federal unemployment tax not taken into account for this paper with the purpose of simplification.On theother hand, the paper seeks to delve into the regulation of cooperatives, analyzing their low resiliencedue to lack of proper regulations and the frequent inadequacy of their measures, and suggest a different approach.
References
- ALPEROVITZ, G. (2017), Principles of a Pluralistic Commonwealth, Washington, DC: The Democracy Collaborative.
View in Google Scholar
- ARANA LANDIN, S. (2020), “Social Economy as the Means to Help Achieve the Targets of Sustainable Development Goal 14”, Sustainability, 12.BARTHOLD,T. A. (2016),“Letter to Kevin Brady and Richard Neal”,Joint Committee on Taxation, Washington, DC. Available at https://waysandmeans.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/20160831-Barthold-Letter-to-BradyNeal.pdf.
View in Google Scholar
- BORZAGA, C. and TORTIA, E. C. (2017), “Cooperation as Coordination Mechanism: A New Approach to the Economics of Cooperative Enterprises”. In J. Michie, J. R. Blasi and C. Borzaga (eds.), The OxfordHandbook of Mutual, Cooperative, and Co-owned Business (pp. 55-75). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
View in Google Scholar
- BORZAGA, C. and DEFOURNY, J. (eds.) (2001),The Emergence of Social Enterprise, London:Routledge.
View in Google Scholar
- CECOP (2012), Social Cooperatives and Social and Participative Enterprises, Brussels:CECOP-CICOPA.
View in Google Scholar
- CHAVES, R. (2008), “Public Policies and Social Economy in Spain and Europe”, CIRIEC-España, Revista de Economía Pública, Social y Cooperativa, 62, Special Issue, pp. 35-60
View in Google Scholar
- CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE, A brief overview of business types and their tax treatment, R43104.
View in Google Scholar
- DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY (1992), Integration of the Individual and Corporate Tax Systems: TaxingBusiness Income Once, available at https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/Documents/Report-Integration-1992.pdf.DELLER, S., and others (2009),” Research on the Economic Impact of Cooperatives”, University of Wisconsin Center for Cooperatives, vol. 231, pp. 232-3.GALE, W. G., and others (2018), “Effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act: A Preliminary Analysis.”Washington, DC: Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.
View in Google Scholar
- GUTNECHT, D. (2011), “More on New Co-op Laws”, Encap articles.
View in Google Scholar
- HANSMANN, H. (1996), The Ownership of Enterprise, Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.HANSMANN, H. (1999), “Cooperative Firms in Theory and Practice”, The Finnish Journal of Business Economics, 4, pp. 387-403.HANSMANN, H., (2013),“All Firms Are Cooperatives –and so Are Governments”, JEOD, 2 (2), pp. 1-10, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5947/jeod.2013.007.
View in Google Scholar
- HOFFMANN, E., (2006), “The Ironic Value of Loyalty: Dispute Resolution Strategies in Worker Cooperatives and Conventional Organizations”, Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 17, pp. 163-177.
View in Google Scholar
- HUBBARD, R. G. (1993), “Corporate Tax Integration: A View from the Treasury Department”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 7, n. 1, pp.115-132.
View in Google Scholar
- ILO and ICA, (2016), “Cooperatives and the Sustainable Development Goals: A Contribution to the Post-2015 Development Debate”. Available at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/1247ilo.pdf, accessed 04/05/19.
View in Google Scholar
- JOHANSSON Å., and others (2008), in OECD, Tax and Economic Growth, Economics DepartmentWorking Paper 620.
View in Google Scholar
- KASMIR, S. (2016), “The Mondragon Cooperatives and Global Capitalism: A Critical Analysis”, New Labor Forum, 25 (1), pp. 52-59. DOI: https:doi.org/10.1177/1095796015620424.
View in Google Scholar
- KRUSE, D., FREEMAN, R., and BLASI, J., (2010), Shared Capitalism at Work: Employee Ownership, Profit and Gain Sharing, and Broad-based Stock Options, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
View in Google Scholar
- MALLESON, T. (2014), “Rawls, Property-Owning Democracy and Democratic Socialism”, Journal of Social Philosophy, vol. 45, n. 2, pp. 228-251.
View in Google Scholar
- 156HUBBARD, R. G. (1993), “Corporate Tax Integration: A View from the Treasury Department”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 7, n. 1, pp.115-132. ILO and ICA, (2016), “Cooperatives and the Sustainable Development Goals: A Contribution to the Post-2015 Development Debate”. Available at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/1247ilo.pdf, accessed 04/05/19.JOHANSSON Å., and others (2008), in OECD, Tax and Economic Growth, Economics DepartmentWorking Paper 620.KASMIR, S. (2016), “The Mondragon Cooperatives and Global Capitalism: A Critical Analysis”, New Labor Forum, 25 (1), pp. 52-59. DOI: https:doi.org/10.1177/1095796015620424.KRUSE, D., FREEMAN, R., and BLASI, J., (2010), Shared Capitalism at Work: Employee Ownership, Profit and Gain Sharing, and Broad-based Stock Options, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.MALLESON, T. (2014), “Rawls, Property-Owning Democracy and Democratic Socialism”, Journal of Social Philosophy, vol. 45, n. 2, pp. 228-251.
View in Google Scholar
- MURRAY, C. (2011), “Co-op Survival Rates in British Columbia”, in Summary of Reports by the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export in Quebec: Survival Rate of Co-operatives in Quebec.
View in Google Scholar
- NATIONAL COOPERATIVE BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, (2005), Annual Report, available athttp://ncba.coop/about-us/annual-reports2005.
View in Google Scholar
- NATIONAL LIAISON COMMITTEE FOR MUTUAL COOPERATIVE ANDASSOCIATION ACTIVITIES, (2005), Social Economy Charter, CIRIEC, available at https://www.eesc.europa.eu/resources/docs/qe-30-12-790-en-c.pdf.
View in Google Scholar
- NESS, I. (2011), Ours to Master and to Own: Workers Control from the Commune to the Present, NewYork:ed. Azzelini.
View in Google Scholar
- NESS I. (2013), Worker Cooperatives in the United States: A Historical Perspective and Contemporary Assessment, available athttp://www.workerscontrol.net/authors/worker-cooperatives-united-states-historical-perspective-and-contemporary-assessment.
View in Google Scholar
- NYSSENS, M. (ed.) (2006), Social Enterprise: At the Crossroads of Market, Public Policies andCivil Society,London: Routledge.
View in Google Scholar
- OLSEN, E. K. (2013), “The Relative Survival of Worker Cooperatives and Barriers to Their Creation”, in Douglas, K. (ed.) SharingOwnership, Profits, and Decision-Making in the 21stCentury, Advances in the Economic Analysis of Participatory & Labor-Managed Firms, 14, pp. 83-107, Bingley: Emerald.
View in Google Scholar
- OSTROM, E. (1990). Governing the Commons. The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
View in Google Scholar
- SALAMON, L. M. and HADDOCK, M. A. (2015), “SDGs and NPIs in Private Institutions, the Foot Soldiers for the UN Sustainable Development Goals”, JohnHopkins Center for Civil Society Studies Working Papern. 25, Baltimore.
View in Google Scholar
- SETO, M. and CHASIN, C. (2002), “General Survey of I.R.C. 501(c)(12) Cooperativesand Examination of Current Issues”, CPE.
View in Google Scholar
- TAX POLICY CENTER. “Restoring The Three Martini Lunch Tax Deduction Won’t Feed The COVID-19 Economy”, available at https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/restoring-three-martini-lunch-tax-deduction-wont-feed-covid-19-economy, accessed January 29, 2021.
View in Google Scholar
- TORTIA, E. C., (2018), “The Firm as a Common. Non-Divided Ownership, Patrimonial Stability and Longevity of Co-Operative Enterprises”, Sustainability10 (4), 1023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10041023.
View in Google Scholar
- United Nations General Assembly (2015), “Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”, A/RES/70/1, United Nations General Assembly: Geneva, Switzerland.
View in Google Scholar
- YORK, E. and MURESIANU, A. “The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act Simplified the Tax Filing Process for Millions of Households“, available at https://taxfoundation.org/the-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-simplified-the-tax-filing-process-for-millions-of-americans/
View in Google Scholar
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.