Contract analysis

From: Leonard Cross <lcross@calderwoodharkness.com> To: Marcus Whitfield <mwhitfield@penterra.com> Cc: Deborah Staines <dstaines@penterra.com> Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2023 10:17:00 -0000 Subject: 30-Day Letter Received — Procedural Options and Recommended Next Steps (Matter 1018-00009)

I am writing to confirm that we received yesterday, November 8, 2023, the IRS 30-Day Letter for the examination of Penterra Pharmaceuticals Corp. (EIN 22-3741856) for tax years 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020. The letter was issued by the LB&I examination team (Exam Team ID LB&I-NE-TP-2022-00641) and accompanies and formalizes the Notice of Proposed Adjustment (NOPA) issued October 12, 2023. As you will recall from our Oc

I want to walk you through what this letter means procedurally, our recommended course of action, the applicable deadlines, and the immediate steps we need to take together.

The 30-Day Letter formally provides PPC with the right to contest the proposed adjustments before the IRS Office of Appeals. PPC has 30 days from the date of the letter — making the deadline **December 8, 2023** — to file a formal written Protest under Revenue Procedure 2015-41 requesting consideration by Appeals.

PPC's procedural options at this juncture are as follows:

- **(a) Agree to the proposed adjustments.** We do not recommend this course of action. - **(b) Take no action and await a statutory Notice of Deficiency (90-Day Letter).** Under this path, PPC would need to file a petition in the U.S. Tax Court to contest the adjustments — a more costly, time-consuming, and public process. - **(c) File a formal Protest and pursue resolution at Appeals.** This is our recommended path

**2. Recommended Course of Action — File a Formal Protest**

We strongly recommend that PPC file a formal Protest to take this case to IRS Appeals. The Appeals process offers significant structural advantages over both acquiescing and proceeding directly to Tax Court. Most importantly, Appeals Officers are authorized to consider the "hazards of litigation" in reaching settlements, unlike the examination team, which is bound to assert the full proposed adjustment. This means Ap

We believe PPC has strong positions on all issues. Based on the economic analyses prepared by our team and by Whitmore Valuation Group:

- The **CUT analysis** supports PPC's 4.5% legacy IP royalty rate, which falls within the interquartile range of 3.1% to 6.8% derived from 14 comparable pharmaceutical license agreements, with a median of 4.4%. The IRS's proposed rate is not well-supported by the comparable data. - The **CPM/TNMM analysis** validates PBI's operating margins against a set of 22 comparable companies, demonstrating that PBI's results ar

On the economic substance front, the functional analysis demonstrating PBI's operational reality — 185 employees, 42 board meetings held in Dublin during 2017–2020, €47.2 million in cumulative regulatory expenditures, and independent pricing decisions across 68 country markets — provides a strong factual foundation to rebut the IRS's DEMPE/economic substance challenge.

With respect to the penalty, PPC's contemporaneous transfer pricing documentation, prepared by Crestfield & Associates for each tax year, provides a robust basis for the penalty protection defense under IRC § 6662(e)(3)(B). We expect to achieve full penalty abatement at Appeals.

Tax Court litigation remains available if Appeals does not yield an acceptable resolution. However, the cost, duration, and public nature of Tax Court proceedings weigh strongly in favor of seeking resolution at Appeals first.

Given the complexity of the issues at stake — the Protest must comprehensively address the CSA cost-sharing ratio adjustments, the royalty rate dispute, the PCT valuation, PBI's economic substance, and penalty protection across four tax years — 30 days is not sufficient to prepare the kind of thorough, well-supported Protest that will best serve PPC's interests at Appeals.

We plan to send a letter to Supervisory Revenue Agent Gerald Meskill requesting an extension of the Protest filing deadline from December 8, 2023 to **December 22, 2023**. Extensions of this nature are routinely granted, particularly in large transfer pricing cases of this scope and complexity. I would like to submit this request promptly and ask for PPC's authorization to do so.

**4. Protest Preparation — Scope and Process**

The Protest will be a detailed written submission setting forth PPC's statement of facts, legal arguments under IRC § 482 and Treasury Regulations §§ 1.482-4 and 1.482-7, and a thorough presentation of the economic analyses supporting PPC's positions. We will attach key exhibits, including the corporate structure chart, the CSA summary, a summary of Whitmore's economic analyses, PBI substance evidence, and the penalt

Our team will begin drafting immediately. Garrett Simmons and Kaveh Nazari will prepare the initial draft. Sylvia Hartwell and I will review and refine the submission, and we will circulate a near-final version to you and Deborah for client review before filing.

We will also coordinate with Dr. Helena Vasquez at Whitmore Valuation Group to ensure the economic analyses are properly summarized and fully supported in the Protest submission.

I want to flag two additional matters that we are analyzing separately:

- **SEC Disclosure and FIN 48 Reserve.** We are analyzing the implications of the proposed $380.4 million adjustment for PPC's upcoming year-end 10-K disclosure and FIN 48 (ASC 740-10) reserve. PPC's pre-settlement FIN 48 reserve of $62.4 million may need to be reassessed in light of the formalized proposed adjustment. - **Credit Facility Covenants.** We are reviewing whether the proposed adjustment triggers any mate

We will provide a more detailed analysis on both of these points separately to Deborah and Priya Iyer.

To keep this moving efficiently, I would ask the following:

1. **Call to discuss strategy.** I would like to schedule a call with you and Deborah at your earliest convenience — ideally tomorrow (Friday) or Monday — to discuss the extension request and our overall Protest strategy. 2. **Authorization to file the extension request.** Please confirm that we have PPC's authorization to submit the extension request letter to SRA Meskill. 3. **Updated timeline.** Following our call

Marcus, I want to assure you that we believe PPC's transfer pricing positions are well-supported by the economic evidence and the applicable legal standards. Appeals presents the best path to a favorable resolution, and we are confident that PPC can achieve a result at a fraction of the proposed $380.4 million adjustment. We will move quickly and keep you informed at every step.

Please do not hesitate to reach out with any questions in the meantime. I am available by phone or email.

**Leonard Cross** Partner Calderwood & Harkness LLP 1735 Market Street, Suite 3100 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Direct: (215) 864-7200 Email: lcross@calderwoodharkness.com

*PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL — ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION*

*This email and any attachments are privileged and confidential, protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or the work product doctrine, and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, delete this message, and do not read, copy, disclose, or distribute its contents. Thank you.*