President Donald Trump targeted federal hiring, including specific rules for the Internal Revenue Service, and the United States’ participation in the global tax framework being developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development among his flurry of executive orders signed on the first day of his second term in the Oval Office.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is keeping beneficial reporting information reporting voluntary even though the Supreme Court has lifted the injunction that was put in place by a lower court to keep the BOI regulation from being enforced.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is keeping beneficial reporting information reporting voluntary even though the Supreme Court has lifted the injunction that was put in place by a lower court to keep the BOI regulation from being enforced.

"In light of a recent federal court order, reporting companies are not currently required to file beneficial ownership information with FinCEN and are not subject to liability if they fail to do so while the order remains in force," the agency posted to its website on January 24, 2025. "However, reporting companies may continue to voluntarily submit beneficial ownership information reports."

The posting follows a Supreme Court order stating on January 23, 2025, that the injunction put in place by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas on December 5, 2024, was removed.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson offered a dissenting opinion on lifting the injunction.

"However likely the Government’s success on the merits may be, in my view, emergency relief is not appropriate because the applicant has failed to demonstrate sufficient exigency to justify our interventions," Justice Jackson wrote, citing two reasons: the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has already expedited the hearing of the case and the government has deferred the implementation of the regulations on its own accord.

"The Government has provided no indication that injury of a more serious or significant nature would result if the Act’s implementation is further delayed while the litigation proceeds in the lower courts. I would therefore deny the application and permit the appellate process to run its course," Justice Jackson added.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

The Treasury and IRS have issued final regulations that provide rules for classifying digital and cloud transactions. The rules apply for purposes of the international provisions of the Code.

The rules retain the overall approach of the proposed regulations (NPRM REG-130700-14, August 14, 2019), with some revisions.

The Treasury and IRS also issued proposed regulations that provide sourcing rules for cloud transactions.

The Treasury and IRS have issued final regulations that provide rules for classifying digital and cloud transactions. The rules apply for purposes of the international provisions of the Code.

The rules retain the overall approach of the proposed regulations (NPRM REG-130700-14, August 14, 2019), with some revisions.

The Treasury and IRS also issued proposed regulations that provide sourcing rules for cloud transactions.

Background

Reg. §1.861-18 provides rules for classifying cross-border transactions involving digitized information, specifically computer programs, broadly grouped into the following categories:

• the transfer of a copyright;
• the transfer of a copyrighted article;
• the provision of services for the development or modification of a computer program; and
• the provision of know-how relating to the development of a computer program.

The 1998 final regulations focus on the distinction between the transfer of the copyright itself and transfer of a copyrighted article, using a substance-over-form characterization approach and by examining the underlying rights granted to the transferee. Transfers of copyrights and copyrighted articles are further characterized as complete or partial transfers, resulting in the transfers being characterized as either sales or licenses, in the case of a copyrights, or sales or leases, in the case of a copyrighted articles.

2025 Final Regulations

The 2025 final regulations maintain the basic framework for characterizing transfers of content and extend the characterization framework to digital content. Digital content is generally defined as any computer program or other content protected by copyright law, not just transactions involving computer programs.

The categories of transactions include:

• the transfer of a copyright in the digital content;
• the transfer of a copy of the digital content (a copyrighted article);
• the provision of services for the development or modification of the digital content; and
• the provision of know-how relating to the development of digital content.

The 2025 final regulations also provide for cloud transactions and characterize the transactions as a provision of services.

Cloud transactions are generally defined as transactions through which a person obtains on-demand network access to computer hardware, digital content, or similar resources.

The 2025 final regulations replace the de minimis rule and the concept of arrangement with a predominant character rule that applies to both digital content transactions and cloud transactions. Under the rule, a transaction with multiple elements is characterized based on the predominant character of the transaction.

Request for Comments on 2025 Final Regulations

The Treasury and IRS are considering whether the characterization rules should apply to all provisions of the Code and have requested comments on any specific areas that would be affected, with examples if appropriate. Comments are also requested on any guidance that would be needed and the approach the guidance should take. In addition to general comments, the Treasury and IRS also request comments on the desirability and effect of applying the rules in specific areas and the guidance need.

Comments should be submitted 90 days after the Notice requesting comments is published in the Internal Revenue Bulletin, with consideration for comments submitted after that date that do not delay the guidance. Comments may be submitted electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal www.regulations.com or or by mail to: Internal Revenue Service, CC:PA:01:PR (Notice 2025-6, Room 5203, P.O. Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, D.C., 20044.

Proposed Sourcing Rules for Cloud Transactions

Gross income from a cloud transaction is sourced as services. Under the Code, gross income from the performance of services is sourced to the place where the service is performed.

To determine the place of performance, the proposed regulations would take into account the location of the employees and assets, including both tangible and intangible assets, that contribute to the provision of cloud transactions. The sourcing rules would apply on a taxpayer-by-taxpayer basis.

The place of performance of a cloud transactions is established through a formula composed of a fraction that has three parts-the intangible property factor, the personnel factor, and the tangible property factor. The factors make up the denominator of the fraction. The numerator is the sum of each portion of each factor that is from sources within the United States. The gross income from a cloud transaction multiplied by the fraction is the U.S. source portion of the gross income.

T.D. 10022

Proposed Regulations, NPRM REG-107420-24

Notice 2025-6

The IRS has released final regulations implementing the clean hydrogen production credit under Code Sec. 45V, as well as the election to treat a clean hydrogen production facility as energy property for purposes of the energy investment credit under Code Sec. 48. The regulations generally apply to tax years beginning after December 26, 2023.

The IRS issued updates to frequently asked questions (FAQs) about the Energy Efficient Home Improvement Credit (Code Sec. 25C) and the Residential Clean Energy Property Credit (Code Sec. 25D). The former credit applies to qualifying property placed in service on or after January 1, 2023, and before January 1, 2033. The updates pertained to FS-2024-15. More information is available here.

The IRS issued updates to frequently asked questions (FAQs) about the Energy Efficient Home Improvement Credit (Code Sec. 25C) and the Residential Clean Energy Property Credit (Code Sec. 25D). The former credit applies to qualifying property placed in service on or after January 1, 2023, and before January 1, 2033. The updates pertained to FS-2024-15. More information is available here.

Energy Efficient Home Improvement Credit

The credit is limited to $2,000 per taxpayer per taxable year in the aggregate for electric or natural gas heat pump water heaters, electric or natural gas heat pumps, and biomass stoves or boilers.

Thus, a taxpayer could claim a total credit of $3,200 if they had sufficient expenditures in property categories (or a home energy audit) subject to the $1,200 limitation and in property categories subject to the $2,000 limitation.

Additionally, a taxpayer can claim the credit only for qualifying expenditures incurred for an existing home, or for an addition to or renovation of an existing home, but not for a newly constructed home.

Residential Clean Energy Property Credit

One of the FAQs mentions that this credit is a nonrefundable personal tax credit. A taxpayer claiming a nonrefundable credit can only use it to decrease or eliminate tax liability.

The credit is generally limited to 30 percent of qualified expenditures made for property placed in service between 2022 and 2032. However, the credit allowed for qualified fuel cell property expenditures is 30 percent of the expenditures, up to a maximum credit of $500 for each half kilowatt of capacity of the qualified fuel cell property.

FS-2025-1

IR-2025-17

The IRS has provided updated guidance on the implementation of section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-600), as amended, regarding controversies involving whether individuals are "employees" for employment tax purposes. Section 530 (which is not an Internal Revenue Code section) provides relief for employers who are involved in worker classification status disputes with the IRS and face large employment tax assessments as a result of the IRS’s proposed reclassifications of workers.

The IRS has provided updated guidance on the implementation of section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-600), as amended, regarding controversies involving whether individuals are "employees" for employment tax purposes. Section 530 (which is not an Internal Revenue Code section) provides relief for employers who are involved in worker classification status disputes with the IRS and face large employment tax assessments as a result of the IRS’s proposed reclassifications of workers.

Section 530 Safe Harbor

Section 530 provides that an employer will not be liable for federal employment taxes regarding an individual or class of workers if certain statutory requirements are met. Section 530 relief applies only if the taxpayer did not treat the individual as an employee for federal employment tax purposes for the period at issue, and meets each of the following requirements for that period:

• the taxpayer filed all required federal tax returns, including information returns, on a basis that is consistent with the taxpayer’s treatment of the individual as not being an employee (reporting consistency requirement);
• the taxpayer did not treat the individual or any individual holding a substantially similar position as an employee (substantive consistency requirement); and
• the taxpayer had a reasonable basis for not treating the individual as an employee (reasonable basis requirement).

Rev. Proc. 85-18, 1985-1 CB 518, provided instructions for implementing section 530 relating to the employment tax status of independent contractors and employees.

Updated Guidance

The updated guidance clarifies provisions in Rev. Proc. 85-18 regarding the definition of employee, the section 530 requirement for the filing of required returns, and the reasonable basis safe harbor rules. The updated guidance also includes new provisions that reflect certain statutory changes made to section 530 since 1986.

Among other things, the updated guidance amplifies guidelines in Rev. Proc. 85-18 which interpreted the word “treat” for purposes of determining whether a taxpayer did not treat an individual as an employee for section 530 purposes. Under the updated guidance, with respect to any individual, actions that indicate “treatment” of the individual as an employee for section 530 purposes include:

• withholding of income tax or FICA taxes from any payments made;
• filing of an original or amended employment tax return;
• filing or issuance of a Form W-2; and
• contracting with a third party to perform acts required of employers.

Provisions in Rev. Proc. 85-18 that explained how refunds, credits, abatements, and handling of claims applied to taxpayers who were under audit or otherwise involved in administrative or judicial processes with the IRS at the time of enactment of section 530 are no longer applicable and were not included in the updated guidance. Section 530 relief remains available at any stage in the administrative or judicial process if the requirements for relief are met.

Effect on Other Documents

Rev. Proc. 85-18, 1985-1 CB 518, is modified and superseded.

Rev. Proc. 2025-10

The IRS has issued final regulation identifying certain partnership related-party basis adjustment transactions as transactions of interest (TOI), a type of reportable transaction under Reg. §1.6011-4. Taxpayers that participate and material advisors to these transactions, and substantially similar transactions, are required to disclose as much to the IRS using Form 8886 and Form 8918, respectively, or be subject to penalties.

Regulations under Code Sec. 2801, which imposes a tax on covered gifts and covered bequests received by a citizen or resident of the United States from a covered expatriate, have been issued.

The IRS has issued a revenue ruling addressing the federal tax treatment of contributions and benefits under state-administered paid family and medical leave (PFML) programs. The ruling clarifies how these contributions and benefits are classified for income tax, employment tax, and reporting purposes, with distinctions drawn between employer and employee contributions.

The IRS has issued a revenue ruling addressing the federal tax treatment of contributions and benefits under state-administered paid family and medical leave (PFML) programs. The ruling clarifies how these contributions and benefits are classified for income tax, employment tax, and reporting purposes, with distinctions drawn between employer and employee contributions.

PFML Contributions

Mandatory contributions made by employers under PFML programs are classified as excise taxes deductible as ordinary and necessary business expenses under Code Sec. 164. These payments are deemed state-imposed obligations for the purpose of funding public programs and are not included in employees' gross income under Code Sec. 61. In contrast, mandatory contributions withheld from employees’ wages are treated as state income taxes under Code Sec. 164(a)(3). Employees may deduct these amounts on their federal tax returns if they itemize deductions, subject to the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap under Code Sec. 164(b)(6).

The ruling further specifies the treatment of benefits paid under PFML programs. Family leave benefits, which provide wage replacement during caregiving periods, are included in the recipient’s gross income under Code Sec. 61 but are not considered wages for federal employment tax purposes under Code Sec. 3121. By comparison, medical leave benefits attributable to employee contributions are excluded from gross income under Code Sec. 104(a)(3). However, medical leave benefits attributable to employer contributions are partially taxable under Code Sec. 105 and are subject to FICA taxes.

The ruling also addresses scenarios where employers voluntarily cover portions of employees’ contributions, referred to as "employer pick-ups." Such pick-ups are treated as additional compensation, included in employees’ gross income under Code Sec. 61, and are subject to federal employment taxes. Employers, however, may deduct these payments as ordinary business expenses under Code Sec. 162.

To ensure compliance, the IRS requires states and employers to report benefits exceeding $600 annually under Code Sec. 6041 using Form 1099. Additionally, benefits subject to employment taxes must be reported on Form W-2.

The ruling modifies prior guidance and includes a transition period for 2025 to allow states and employers to adjust their systems to meet reporting and compliance requirements. This clarification provides a framework for managing the tax implications of PFML programs, ensuring consistent treatment across jurisdictions.

Effective Date

This revenue ruling is effective for payments made on or after January 1, 2025. However, transition relief is provided to the states, the District of Columbia, and employers from certain withholding, payment, and information reporting requirements for state-paid medical leave benefits paid made during calendar year 2025.

Effect on Other Guidance

Rev. Rul. 81-194, Rev. Rul. 81-193, Rev. Rul. 81-192, and Rev. Rul. 81-191 are amplified to include the holdings in this revenue ruling that are applicable to the facts in those rulings. Rev. Rul. 72-191, as modified by Rev. Rul. 81-192, is further modified.

Rev. Rul. 2025-4

IR-2025-16

National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins identified the lengthy processing and uncertainty regarding the employee retention credit as being among the ten most serious problems facing taxpayers.

National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins identified the lengthy processing and uncertainty regarding the employee retention credit as being among the ten most serious problems facing taxpayers.

"Although the [Internal Revenue Service] has processed several hundred thousand claims in recent months, it was still sitting on a backlog of about 1.2 million claims as of October 26, 2024," Collins noted in her just released 2024 Annual Report to Congress. "Many claims have been pending for more than a year, and with the imminent start of the 2025 filing season, the IRS will shift its focus and resources to administering the filing season, resulting in even longer ERC processing delays."

Collins is calling on the IRS to provide more specific information with claims denials, more transparency on the timing of claims processing, and allowing taxpayers to submit documentation and seek an appeal before disallowing a claim that was not subject to an audit.

In addition to ERC processing, Collins identified delays in processing of tax returns as another serious problem taxpayers are facing, including delays associated with the more than 10 million paper 1040 returns and more than 75 million paper-filed returns and forms overall each year, as well as issues surrounding rejections of e-filed returns, most of which are valid returns. These delays end up delaying refunds and can be particularly hard on low-income filers who are receiving the Earned Income Tax Credit.

"We recommend the IRS continue to prioritize automating its tax processing systems, including by scanning all paper-filed tax returns in time for the 2026 filing season and processing amended tax returns automatically," the report states.

Another processing issue identified in the report deals with delays in processing and refunds for victims of identity theft.

Collins reported that the delays in addressing identity theft issues grew to 22 months in fiscal year 2024, affecting nearly 500,000 taxpayers.

"The IRS has advised us that it has begun to prioritize resolution of cases involving refunds over balance-due returns rather than following its traditional ‘first in, first out’ approach," the report states. "This is somewhat good news, but I strongly encourage the IRS to fix this problem once and for all during the coming year."

Other issues in the top 10 include:

• Taxpayer service is often not timely or adequate;
• The prevalence of tax-related scams;
• Employment recruitment, hiring, training, and retention challenges are hindering transformational change within the industry;
• The dependence on paper forms and manual document review in processing Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers is causing delays and potential security risks;
• Limited taxpayer financial and tax literacy;
• The IRS’s administration of civil tax penalties is often unfair, inconsistently deters improper behavior, fails to promote efficient administration, and thus discourages tax compliance; and
• Changes to the IRS’s criminal voluntary disclosure practice requirements may be reducing voluntary compliance and negatively impacting the tax gap.

Collins also called on Congress to ensure the IRS receives adequate funding specifically for taxpayer services and technology upgrades, noting that many improvements that are highlighted in the report were made possible by the Inflation Reduction Act, which provided supplemental funding to the agency.

"Much of the funding has generated controversy – namely, the funding allocated for enforcement," the report notes. "But some of the funding has received strong bipartisan support – namely, the funding allocated for taxpayer services and technology modernization."

She reported that telephone service has improved dramatically, correspondence processing has improved dramatically, and in-person has become more accessible following the IRA funding, as well as technology improvements including increased scanning and processing of paper-filed tax returns electronically; increases in electronic correspondence; expansion of secure messaging; the ability to submit forms from mobile phones; and increases in both chatbot and voicebot technology.

"I want to highlight this distinction so that if Congress decides to cut IRA funding, it does not inadvertently throw the baby out with the bathwater," she reports.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

IR-2025-4

For Canadians trying to purchase their first home, putting together the required down payment, when Canadian house prices in most markets are at record highs, is often the biggest hurdle. And, if that weren’t enough, changes made to the rules governing the financing of home ownership over the past few years have set the bar even higher.

For Canadians trying to purchase their first home, putting together the required down payment, when Canadian house prices in most markets are at record highs, is often the biggest hurdle. And, if that weren’t enough, changes made to the rules governing the financing of home ownership over the past few years have set the bar even higher.

In 2008, the federal government, concerned that borrowing by Canadians was reaching unsustainable levels and that borrowing secured by home equity was a particular problem, tightened the rules with respect to lending practices for home purchases. Notwithstanding those changes, borrowing by Canadians, when measured as a percentage of annual income, continued to increase and the federal government responded with further changes, announced in 2010 and again earlier this year.

Until the summer of 2008, it was possible to buy a home in Canada with a zero down payment (i.e., the entire cost of the home was borrowed) and to amortize repayment of that cost over up to 40 years—a time frame which put most purchasers past the traditional retirement age of 65 by the time the mortgage was paid off. The successive changes implemented by the federal government have whittled away at those practices. Borrowers are now required to have at least a 5% down payment on a residential home purchase. And, under the new rules announced earlier this year, the maximum amortization period on a residential mortgage was reduced from the then 30-year maximum to 25 years. More stringent borrowing requirements are also imposed on would-be home purchasers, in terms of the percentage of income which monthly housing-related costs (mortgage payments, property taxes, and home heating) are permitted to consume.

All of this leaves the would-be first-time home buyer further and further behind when it comes to putting together a sufficient down payment. There is however, another option available to that purchaser, and it’s one not just sanctioned, but created, by the federal government itself. That option is borrowing all or part of the down payment from one’s registered retirement savings plan (RRSP), on a tax-free and interest-free basis, under a program known as the Home Buyers’ Plan (HBP).

The HBP isn’t new, but in 2009 the federal government made some changes to enhance its usefulness. In the federal budget brought down in January 2009, it was announced that, effective for withdrawals made after January 27, 2009, the maximum permitted withdrawal from an RRSP under the HBP would be increased from $20,000 to $25,000, and the limit remains at $25,000 today.

While the rules governing HBPs can be detailed in their application, especially when it comes to any special circumstances or any contravention of those rules, the concept of the program is straightforward. A first-time home buyer who has entered into an agreement to purchase or build a home can withdraw up to $25,000 from his or her RRSP to purchase that home. The amount withdrawn is not taxed on withdrawal, as it usually would be, but must be repaid to the RRSP, without interest, over the subsequent 15 years, with the amount of each annual repayment prescribed by law. Where the first-time home buyer is married, and his or her spouse is also a first-time home buyer, the spouse can also withdraw up to $25,000 from his or her RRSP, and both withdrawals can be pooled to come up with a down payment.

There are some additional rules, as follows. The home purchased using funds borrowed under the HBP must be bought or built before October 1 of the year following the year of withdrawal. As well, the borrower (and his or her spouse, where applicable) must intend to occupy the home as the principal place of residence; the HBP is not intended to provide funds to purchase or build rental residential accommodation. There is, however, no minimum period of time that the buyer must live in the home.

The concept of a “first-time home buyer”, while seemingly self-explanatory, is in fact more flexible than it first appears. For purposes of the HBP, a first-time home buyer can actually be someone who has previously owned and lived in a home, as long as that home ownership ended more than four full calendar years prior to the time a withdrawal under the HBP is made. For instance, an individual who wishes to participate in the HBP by making a withdrawal during 2012 will be considered a first-time home buyer if he or she had not owned or occupied a home after the end of 2007, the four full required calendar years being 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011. Where the prospective homeowner is married (including a common-law partnership), the same requirement must be met by the person’s spouse.

Whatever the amount withdrawn from the RRSP under the HBP (and there is no minimum withdrawal, only a maximum one), that amount must be repaid over the subsequent 15 years. The first repayment is required in the second year following the year of withdrawal so, in the case of the example above, where the withdrawal is made in 2012, the first repayment must be made in 2014. Each repayment is generally 1/15^th of the amount withdrawn so, a maximum withdrawal of $25,000 would mean an annual repayment amount of $1666.66. The taxpayer doesn’t have to keep track of where he or she stands with respect to the repayment schedule—each year, the Notice of Assessment received by the taxpayer after the annual return is filed will summarize the total HBP withdrawals, amounts repaid to date, the current HBP balance, and the amount of the next repayment which must be made. Such repayments are made by making a contribution to the taxpayer’s RRSP during or within 60 days after the end of the year for which the repayment is required, and designating part or all of that contribution as an HBP repayment on Schedule 7, which is filed with the tax return for that year. If the taxpayer does not make the repayment when and in the amount required, any outstanding amount is added to income for the year and taxed at the taxpayer’s top marginal rate.

Like all investment and tax-planning strategies, borrowing money from your RRSP to put together a down payment on a first home has both upsides and potential downsides. The biggest downside is the permanent loss of investment gains on the money temporarily withdrawn from the RRSP during that period of withdrawal. However, it’s also possible that the real estate purchased with the withdrawn funds will enjoy a greater increase in value over that period than would have earned by the funds had they remained in the RRSP. Like all investment and tax-planning decisions, it comes down to a personal decision based on one’s own circumstances.

The rules outlined above summarize the basic structure and operation of the Home Buyers’ Plan. However, anyone contemplating making use of the HBP will need to familiarize themselves with those rules in much greater detail, perhaps with the assistance of professional advisers. A good place to start is the guide to the HBP published by the Canada Revenue Agency, and available on their Web site at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/tg/rc4135/README.html.

Lawmakers have departed Washington to campaign before the November 6 elections and left undone is a long list of unfinished tax business.  In many ways, the last quarter of 2012 is similar to 2010, when Congress and the White House waited until the eleventh hour to extend expiring tax cuts. Like 2010, a host of individual and business tax incentives are scheduled to expire.  Unlike 2010, lawmakers are confronted with massive across-the-board spending cuts scheduled to take effect in 2013.

Lawmakers have departed Washington to campaign before the November 6 elections and left undone is a long list of unfinished tax business.  In many ways, the last quarter of 2012 is similar to 2010, when Congress and the White House waited until the eleventh hour to extend expiring tax cuts. Like 2010, a host of individual and business tax incentives are scheduled to expire.  Unlike 2010, lawmakers are confronted with massive across-the-board spending cuts scheduled to take effect in 2013.

Unfinished business

Since the start of 2012, the list of tax measures waiting for Congressional action has remained unchanged. Among the individual tax provisions scheduled to expire after 2012 are:

• Reduced individual income tax rates
• Reduced capital gains and dividend tax rates
• Temporary repeal of the limitation on itemized deductions and the personal exemption phaseout for higher income taxpayers
• Reduced estate, gift and generation-skipping transfer tax rates
• Enhancements to many education tax incentives, such as the American Opportunity Tax Credit, Coverdell education savings accounts, and more.

Also scheduled to expire at the end of 2012 is the payroll tax holiday.  The employee share of Social Security taxes is 4.2 percent rather than 6.2 percent, up to the Social Security earnings cap of $110,100 for 2012.  Self-employed individuals benefit from a similar reduction.

Additionally, many so-called tax extenders for individuals expired after 2011.  They include the state and local sales tax deduction, the teachers' classroom expense deduction, and more.  The most recent alternative minimum tax (AMT) "patch" expired after 2011.

The list of expiring or expired tax incentives for businesses is just as long.  They include:

• Enhanced Code Sec. 179 expensing (after 2012)
• 100 percent bonus depreciation (generally after 2011)
• 50 percent bonus depreciation (generally after 2012)
• Research tax credit (after 2011)
• Production tax credit for wind energy (after 2012)
• Enhanced Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC) for veterans (after 2012)
• Regular WOTC (after 2011)
• A lengthy laundry list of business tax extenders, such as special expensing rules for television and film productions, the Indian employment credit, and more (after 2011).

Along with all of the expiring provisions are even more pending proposals. They include proposals by the White House to enact tax incentives to encourage employers to hire long-term unemployed individuals, impose a minimum tax on overseas profits and more. The likelihood of any of these proposals being enacted before year-end is slim, but they could be revisited in 2013 depending on the outcome of the November elections. Comprehensive tax reform, including any reduction in the individual tax rates below their 2012 levels and a reduction in the corporate tax rate, is also expected to wait until 2013 or beyond.

Behind the scenes talks

The lame-duck Congress, which will meet after the November elections, may tackle some or all of the expiring tax incentives, or it could do nothing and punt them to the next Congress.  Behind the scenes, some Democrats and Republicans in Congress are reportedly talking about a short-term extension of the expiring/expired provisions, for six months or one year, which would give lawmakers and the White House more time to reach an overall agreement.  However, the dynamic could and likely will change if the GOP takes the White House and wins control of the Senate.

In the Senate, Sen. Kent Conrad, D-ND, has told reporters that he and several other senators from both parties have been discussing whether or not to extend the expiring tax cuts. Conrad, who is retiring at the end of 2012, has acknowledged that Democrats and Republicans are far apart on revenue raisers and spending cuts.  Reports of informal talks among the members of the House Ways and Means Committee have also circulated but no concrete proposals have so far been revealed.

Sequestration

The imminent spending cuts (called sequestration) are the result of the Budget Control Act of 2011.  The 2011 Act imposes approximately $110 billion in spending cuts, impacting defense and non-defense spending, for 2013.  Almost every area of federal spending, including tax enforcement, will be affected. 

In recent months, some lawmakers have proposed to mitigate the spending cuts by raising revenues elsewhere.  One area targeted for tax increases is the oil and gas industry.  However, several attempts to repeal tax preferences for the oil and gas industry failed in Congress in 2012. 

Any extension of the expiring tax breaks will have to take into account the looming across-the-board spending cuts. Tax reform and debt reduction will go hand-in-hand.  However, it is unclear if debt reduction will drive tax reform or vice-versa.  Our office will keep you posted of developments.

Please contact our office if you have any questions about pending federal tax legislation.

In 2013, a new and unique tax will take effect—a 3.8 percent "unearned income Medicare contribution" tax as part of the structure in place to pay for health care reform. The tax will be imposed on the "net investment income" (NII) of individuals, estates, and trusts that exceeds specified thresholds. The tax will generally fall on passive income, but will also apply generally to capital gains from the disposition of property.

In 2013, a new and unique tax will take effect—a 3.8 percent "unearned income Medicare contribution" tax as part of the structure in place to pay for health care reform. The tax will be imposed on the "net investment income" (NII) of individuals, estates, and trusts that exceeds specified thresholds. The tax will generally fall on passive income, but will also apply generally to capital gains from the disposition of property.

Specified thresholds

For an individual, the tax will apply to the lesser of the taxpayer's NII, or the amount of "modified" adjusted gross income (AGI with foreign income added back) above a specified threshold, which is:

• $250,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly and a surviving spouse;
• $125,000 for married taxpayers filing separately;
• $200,000 for single and head of household taxpayers.

Examples. A single taxpayer has modified AGI of $220,000, including NII of $30,000. The tax applies to the lesser of $30,000 or ($220,000 minus $200,000), the specified threshold for single taxpayers. Thus, the tax applies to $20,000.

A single taxpayer has modified AGI of $150,000, including $60,000 of NII. Because the taxpayer's income is below the $200,000 threshold, the taxpayer does not owe the tax, despite having substantial NII.

For an estate or trust, the tax applies to the lesser of undistributed net income, or the excess of AGI over the dollar amount for the highest tax rate bracket for estates and trusts ($11,950 for 2013). Thus, the tax applies to a much lower amount for trusts and estates.

Application of tax

The tax applies to interest, dividends, annuities, royalties, and rents, and capital gains, unless derived from a trade or business. The tax also applies to income and gains from a passive trade or business.

Other items are excluded from NII and from the tax:  distributions from IRAs, pensions, 401(k) plans, tax-sheltered annuities, and eligible 457 plans, for example. Items that are totally excluded from gross income, such as  distributions from a Roth IRA and interest on tax-exempt bonds, are excluded both from NII and from modified AGI.

The tax does not apply to nonresident aliens, charitable trusts, or corporations.

Tax planning techniques

Taxpayers are concerned about having to pay the tax. One technique for avoiding the tax is to sell off capital gain property in 2012, before the tax applies. This can be particularly useful if the taxpayer is facing a large capital gain from the sale of a principal residence (after taking the $250,000/$500,000 exclusion from income). Older taxpayers who do not want to sell their property may want to consider holding on to appreciated property until death, when the property gets a fair market value basis without being subject to income tax.

The technique of "gain harvesting" may be even more attractive if tax rates increase on dividends, capital gains, and AGI in 2013, with the potential expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts. However, the status of these tax rates will not be determined until after the election, potentially in a lame-duck Congressional session. It is also possible that Congress will simply extend existing tax rates for another year and "punt" the decision until 2013, as tax reform discussions heat up.

Taxpayers may also want to change the source of their income. Investing in tax-exempt bonds will be more attractive, since the interest income does not enter into AGI or NII. Converting a 401(k) account or traditional IRA to a Roth IRA will accomplish the same purpose. Income from a Roth conversion is not net investment income, although the income will increase modified AGI, which may put other income in danger of being subject to the 3.8 percent tax. Increasing deductible or pre-tax contributions to existing retirement plans can also lower income and help the taxpayer stay below the applicable threshold.

Trusts and estates should make a point of distributing their income to their beneficiaries. A trust's NII will be taxed at a low threshold (less than $12,000), while the income received by a beneficiary is taxed only if the much higher $200,000/$250,000 thresholds are exceeded.

Uncertainty

There was some uncertainty about the tax taking effect because of litigation challenging the health care law providing the tax, but a June 2012 Supreme Court decision upheld the law. The application of the tax is also uncertain because the Republican leadership has vowed to pursue repeal of the health care law if the Republicans win the presidency and take control of both houses of Congress in the November 2012 elections. But this is speculative. In the meantime, the Supreme Court decision guarantees that the tax will take effect on January 1, 2013.

These can be difficult decisions. While economic considerations for managing assets and income are important, it also makes sense for a taxpayer to look at the tax impact if the certain asset sales or shifts in investment portfolios are otherwise being considered.

As 2013 draws closer, news reports about “taxmageddon” and “taxpocalypse,” describing expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts, are proliferating. Many taxpayers are asking what they can do to prepare. The answer is to prepare early. September may seem too early to be discussing year-end tax planning, but the uncertainty over the Bush-era tax cuts, incentives for businesses, and much more, requires proactive strategizing. Ultimately, the fate of these tax incentives will be resolved; until then, taxpayers need to be flexible in their year-end tax planning.

As 2013 draws closer, news reports about “taxmageddon” and “taxpocalypse,” describing expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts, are proliferating. Many taxpayers are asking what they can do to prepare. The answer is to prepare early. September may seem too early to be discussing year-end tax planning, but the uncertainty over the Bush-era tax cuts, incentives for businesses, and much more, requires proactive strategizing. Ultimately, the fate of these tax incentives will be resolved; until then, taxpayers need to be flexible in their year-end tax planning.

Individuals

In less than three months, the individual income tax rates are scheduled without further action to automatically increase across-the-board, with the highest rate jumping from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. Additionally, the current tax-favorable capital gains and dividends tax rates are scheduled to expire. Higher income taxpayers will also be subject to revived limitations on itemized deductions and their personal exemptions. The child tax credit, one of the most popular incentives in the tax code, will be cut in half. Millions of taxpayers are predicted to be liable for the alternative minimum tax (AMT) because of expiration of the AMT “patch.” Countless other incentives for individuals will either disappear or be substantially reduced after 2012.

In July, the House and Senate passed competing bills to extend many of these expiring incentives one more year (through 2013). No further action is expected on these bills until after the November elections. However, they do signal a highly probable temporary solution to the fate of the Bush-era tax cuts. Regardless of which party wins the White House and Congress, the probability of a one-year extension of the Bush-era tax cuts appears high.

Along with expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts, the two percent payroll tax holiday for 2012 is scheduled to expire. For individuals with income at or above the Social Security wage base for 2012 ($110,100), the payroll tax holiday represented a $2,202 savings. Unlike the Bush-era tax cuts, an extension of the payroll tax holiday is unlikely.

Putting aside the Bush-era tax cuts and the payroll tax holiday for a moment, two new taxes are scheduled to take effect after 2012: an additional 0.9 percent Medicare tax on wages and self-employment income and a 3.8 percent Medicare contribution tax on unearned income. Both new taxes are targeted to individuals with incomes over $200,000 (families with incomes over $250,000). One important misconception about the 3.8 percent Medicare tax is that it is a direct real estate tax. Taxpayers that dispose of real estate may be exempt from the tax either because of income limitations or because of an exclusion provided for primary residence home sales. However, certain high-end homes may feel the sting of the 3.8 percent tax on some or all of the gain realized. Despite some rumblings in the GOP-controlled House, it is unlikely the new Medicare taxes will be repealed before 2013.

All these provisions can be seen as the perfect storm. Year-end tax planning takes on new urgency because of the uncertainty. Some variations on traditional year-end planning techniques may be valuable. Instead of shifting income into a future year, taxpayers may want to recognize income in 2012, when lower tax rates are available, rather than shift income to 2013. The same strategy may apply to recognizing income from capital gains and dividends. Another valuable year-end strategy is to “run the numbers” for regular tax liability and AMT liability. Taxpayers may want to explore if certain deductions should be more evenly divided between 2012 and 2013, and which deductions may qualify, or will not be as valuable, for AMT purposes. Additionally, keep in mind the new Medicare taxes and how they will impact investments and possibly home sales.

Estate tax planning is also in flux. Under current law, the maximum estate tax rate is 35 percent with an applicable exclusion amount of $5 million (indexed for inflation) for decedents dying before January 1, 2013. Unless Congress acts, the estate tax will revert to its less generous pre-2001 rates. Gift and generation-skipping transfer (GST) taxes also will revert to their pre-2001 rates.

Businesses

Businesses are also confronted with uncertainty in tax planning as 2012 ends. Special incentives, such as bonus depreciation, enhanced Code Sec. 179 expensing and a host of business tax extenders, may be unavailable after 2012.

Under current law, 50-percent bonus depreciation applies to qualified property acquired and placed in service after December 31, 2011 and before January 1, 2013 (January 1, 2014 for certain property). For tax years beginning in 2012, the Code Sec, 179 expensing dollar limitation is $139,000 and the investment ceiling is $560,000 for tax years beginning in 2012. After 2012, 50-percent bonus depreciation is scheduled to expire (except for certain property) and the Code Sec. 179 expensing dollar limitation will drop to $25,000 with a $200,000 investment ceiling.

Enhanced Code Sec. 179 expensing is a good candidate for extension after 2012, but at less generous amounts. In July, the Senate approved a Code Sec. 179 dollar amount of $250,000 and an $800,000 investment limitation for tax years beginning after December 31, 2012. The House approved a Code Sec. 179 dollar amount of $100,000 and a $400,000 investment limitation after 2012.

The list of expired business tax extenders is long. The expired incentives include the research tax credit, special expensing for film and television productions, the employer wage credit for military reservists, and many more. A host of related energy incentives have also expired and are awaiting renewal. Unlike past years, Congress is not expected to routinely extend all of the expired provisions. The more widely utilized incentives are likely to be extended; some lesser used incentives may not.

Businesses do have some good news in year-end planning. Temporary “repair” regulations issued in late 2011 include a valuable de minimis rule, which could enable taxpayers to expense otherwise capitalized tangible property. Qualified taxpayers may claim a current deduction for the cost of acquiring items of relatively low-cost property, including materials and supplies, if specific requirements are met. The aggregate cost which may be expensed annually under a taxpayer’s expensing policy is subject to a ceiling equal to the greater of 0.1 percent of gross receipts or two percent of total depreciation and amortization reported on the financial statement.

Businesses should also explore the Code Sec. 199 domestic production activities deduction. This deduction, unlike many other incentives, is permanent and will not expire after 2012. The deduction allows qualified taxpayers to deduct an amount equal to the lesser of a phased-in percentage of taxable income (adjusted gross income for individuals) or qualified production activities income. A taxpayer’s Code Sec. 199 deduction cannot exceed one-half (50 percent) of the W-2 wages paid by the taxpayer during the year.

Sequestration

The fate of the Bush-era tax cuts and the other incentives is linked to sequestration. The Budget Control Act of 2011 imposes across-the-board spending cuts starting in 2013. Many lawmakers want to postpone or repeal the spending cuts but savings must be recouped somehow. Several energy tax incentives, especially for oil and gas producers, have been viewed as likely candidates for elimination to offset repeal of the Budget Control Act.

Please contact our office if you have any questions about the incentives we discussed and how you can develop a year-end tax plan that responds to the current climate of uncertainty.

Is your Medical Loss Ratio (MLR) rebate check taxable? The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) estimates that nearly 12.8 million Americans received more than $1.1 billion in MLR rebates during August 2012 based on insurance company shortfalls in cutting overhead during 2011. If you received a rebate, either as an individual policyholder or as an employer or employee, is it taxable?

Is your Medical Loss Ratio (MLR) rebate check taxable? The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) estimates that nearly 12.8 million Americans received more than $1.1 billion in MLR rebates during August 2012 based on insurance company shortfalls in cutting overhead during 2011. If you received a rebate, either as an individual policyholder or as an employer or employee, is it taxable?

The first round of annual MLR rebates payable under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) (aka ObamaCare) were required to be disbursed to health insurance policyholders by insurance companies on or before August 1, 2012. MLR premium rebates were designed to persuade health insurance companies to spend at least 80 percent of premiums directly on health care as opposed to advertising, certain administrative costs and executive salaries.

The average rebate per household is $151, but with averages ranging from $807 for Vermont to $0 for New Mexico and Rhode Island. Examples of other average household rebates reported by HHS include Calif. ($65), Fl. ($168), N.Y. ($138), Ill. ($380) and Texas ($187). Therefore, while the majority of those estimated 80 million individuals covered by health insurance will not be entitled to the MLR rebates, enough are to raise questions.

Whether a particular MLR rebate paid out this summer is taxable will depend upon a number of variables. Some individuals are receiving their premium rebate checks directly from the health insurance provider. Many more are receiving the rebate payments indirectly from their employers, either as cash payments or in the form of 2012 premium offsets. Some employers are using the rebates to cover plan expenses.

Labor Department rules

Federal tax consequences

The basic rule of thumb in determining whether your MLR rebate is taxable is fairly straightforward: if a tax benefit was previously gained on the premiums now being refunded, the rebate is generally taxable; otherwise, the premiums are usually tax free to the recipient.

Individually-purchased policies. An individual who purchased and paid premiums for health insurance for himself or herself in 2011, without receiving any reimbursement or subsidy for the premiums, will not be taxed on any rebate received in 2012, provided the individual did not receive a tax benefit from deducting the 2011 premiums on 2011 Form 1040, Schedule A or, if self-employed, on line 29 of 2011 Form 1040. The same result applies whether the rebate is received in cash or as a reduction in the amount of premiums due for 2012.

Group policies—after-tax premium payments by employee. As is the case for individually-purchased policies, employees who in 2011 paid their share of the premiums on group policies with after-tax wages (income already taxed and subject to employment taxes) generally will not recognize income on 2012 MLR rebates. For employees who participated in the plan during 2011 and 2012 by paying after-tax premiums, the rebates—whether paid in cash or as a reduction in 2012 premiums—will be income tax free to them, except to the extent they benefited from deducting the premium on 2011 Form 1040.

One important exception: If the employer pays out the rebate based on the employee’s after-tax share of 2012 premiums irrespective of whether the individual was an employee in 2011, the employee receives the rebate as a tax-free purchase price adjustment to 2012 premiums paid. This tax-free treatment applies both to 2012 employees who were employees in 2011 and those who were not and, therefore, irrespective of whether any 2011 premiums were deducted on Form 1040, Schedule A.

Group policies—pre-tax premium payments by employee. MLR rebates are generally taxable if distributed to 2012 participants who pay premiums on a pre-tax basis under the employer’s cafeteria plan. If a 2011-2012 employee who paid in pre-tax premiums receives a rebate check, it is considered a return of wages that have not yet been taxed or subject to employment tax. If that employee receives the rebate in the form of a 2012 premium reduction, the employee’s payment of premiums through a salary reduction contribution in 2012 is decreased by that amount and therefore taxable salary is increased by that amount.

If an employer pays out rebates in 2012 irrespective of whether an employee under the cafeteria plan had worked for the employer in 2011, the MLR rebate is likewise considered additional income and subject to employment taxes. If paid in cash, it is considered additional wage income. If paid as a premium reduction, it is considered a reduction in the pre-tax amount due by the employee under the cafeteria plan and, therefore, increases wage income.

Information reporting
Rebate payments passed along by employers to employees under a cafeteria plan, either as cash or premium reductions, will normally be reflected on each employee’s Form W-2 as increased wage income, subject to income tax withholding and employment taxes.

Rebates that are not considered wage payments generally will only be subject to Form 1099-MISC information reporting if the payment equals or exceeds $600. Payments that are considered taxable must be reported by the individual policyholder irrespective of information reporting requirements.

More than six months after the IRS issued temporary "repair" regulations (T.D. 9564), many complex questions remain about their interpretation and application. These regulations are sweeping in their impact. They have been called game-changers for good reason, affecting all businesses in one way or another and carrying with them both mandatory and optional requirements. Many of these requirements also carry fairly short deadlines.

More than six months after the IRS issued temporary "repair" regulations (T.D. 9564), many complex questions remain about their interpretation and application. These regulations are sweeping in their impact. They have been called game-changers for good reason, affecting all businesses in one way or another and carrying with them both mandatory and optional requirements. Many of these requirements also carry fairly short deadlines.

The new regulations are generally effective for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2012. However, certain portions are effective for amounts paid or incurred in tax years beginning on or after January 2, 2012, a subtle but important difference. To complicate matters further, the regulations are, in effect, retroactive insofar as accounting method changes are needed to be filed with the IRS in many cases and adjustments made to reflect these changes.

The new regulations are called “temporary” only because the IRS reserves the right to fine-tune them and issue “final” regulations – the IRS may do this before year end, but it has a three year deadline to do so. In the meantime, the “temporary” regulations stand in as the law.

Highlights

The new regulations present both compliance challenges and planning opportunities. The major take away from examining these new regulations is that it is to the advantage of virtually all businesses to reconsider how they treat certain repairs and improvements for tax purposes.

The following highlights cover only some of the many changes made by the new repair regulations:

Materials and supplies. The definition of materials and supplies has been revised along with the rules for determining the proper tax year for a deduction. The new regulations allow an election to capitalize materials and supplies, and contain special rules for rotable spare parts.

De minimis expensing. Taxpayers with an "applicable financial statement," such as a certified audited financial statement, may now claim a current deduction for the cost of acquiring items of relatively low-cost property, including materials and supplies, if specific requirements are met. Under the general rule, materials and supplies are usually deducted in the tax year used or consumed. The new election to deduct materials and supplies under the de minimis rule is particularly helpful if the tax year in which the cost of the materials and supplies is paid or incurred occurs before the tax year of use or consumption.

Amounts paid to acquire or produce tangible property. This portion of the regulations explains which costs associated with the acquisition or production of real or personal property must be capitalized to the basis of the property and which costs may be claimed as a current deduction.

Amounts paid to improve tangible property. This is the heart of the new regulations which provides rules for distinguishing repairs from capital expenditures. It divides capital expenditures into three categories of improvements: betterments, restorations, and adaptations. Generally, whether an expenditure is an improvement is based on facts and circumstances. A safe harbor rule is provided for routine maintenance activities. Also, certain regulated taxpayers may elect to use their regulatory accounting method to distinguish between repairs and capital expenditures.

Unit of property defined. The "unit of property" is a critical concept in determining whether an expenditure is a repair or capital expenditure. Generally, the larger the unit of property, the more likely that work on that property will be considered a deductible repair. The regulation contains detailed rules for determining the size of a unit of property in the case of buildings and other types of property. Planning opportunities present themselves within this framework.

MACRS general asset accounts. MACRS stands for modified accelerated cost recovery system, which is the basis system now used for the tax depreciation of most assets. Importantly, an election to recognize gain or loss by reference to the adjusted basis of an asset disposed of from a GAA now applies to virtually any asset disposed of. Previously, a taxpayer was usually required to recognize the entire amount realized upon a disposition as ordinary income, and no loss deduction was allowed. Bottom line: A taxpayer may now place an asset, such as a building, in a GAA and—whenever an asset, such as a structural component, is retired—choose whether to follow the GAA default rule that no loss is recognized or elect to recognize a loss equal to the adjusted depreciable basis of the asset.

Businesses that previously retired a structural component which is currently still being depreciated will need to change accounting methods to bring the treatment of the structural component into compliance with the new rules. For most taxpayers, the change in method will involve making a retroactive MACRS general asset account election and then deciding whether to claim a loss on the retired component through a so-called 481(a) adjustment or to continue to depreciate the retired component.

The IRS has unveiled the IRS Data Retrieval Tool (DTR), a time-saving tool designed to minimize the time required for college-bound students and their parents to complete the Department of Education’s Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). The new IRS DTR is available through the website www.fafsa.gov.

The IRS has unveiled the IRS Data Retrieval Tool (DTR), a time-saving tool designed to minimize the time required for college-bound students and their parents to complete the Department of Education’s Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). The new IRS DTR is available through the website www.fafsa.gov.

The FAFSA form is necessary for college-bound students and their parents who are applying for numerous federal government education programs or subsidies, such as the Pell Grant, low-interest federal student loans, and the Federal Work Study Program. Eligible taxpayers may use the tool for either the initial or the renewal FAFSA.

Completion of the FAFSA requires certain federal tax information such as the student and parents’ adjusted gross income, tax, and exemptions. The free IRS DTR tool enables applicants to automatically transfer their tax return information onto the FAFSA form. The tool will also increase the accuracy of the income information reported on the FAFSA form and minimize processing delays. Taxpayers who are eligible to use the DRT can access it one to two weeks after the federal income tax return is filed if the return is filed electronically. In the cases of a paper tax return, taxpayers may access the tool approximately six to eight weeks after filing.

Who can use the DRT?

To use the DRT to complete the 2012–2013 FAFSA, taxpayers must meet several prerequisites:

1. They must have filed a federal 2011 tax return;
2. Have a valid SSN;
3. Have a valid Federal Student Aid PIN; and
4. Have not changed marital status since December 31, 2011.

What if I don’t have a PIN?

If an individual does not have a Federal Student Aid PIN, he or she may apply for one beforehand through the FAFSA application process. An online application is available at www.pin.ed.gov.

What if I can’t use the DRT?

In some cases the IRS DRT is unavailable. The tool is not accessible for completion of the 2012-2013 FAFSA if either the student or parents:

1. Filed an amended 2011 tax return or did not file a 2011 tax return;
2. Filed their 2011 tax return as married, filing separately; or
3. Filed a foreign tax return or Puerto Rican tax return.

If a student cannot or chooses not to use the IRS DRT, that student, his or her parents or spouse can verify income information submitted to the Financial Aid Office through a tax transcript from the IRS. Applicants may request a transcript on IRS Form 4506-T, Request for Transcript of Tax Return. Transcripts may be requested online through www.irs.gov or by phone at 1-800-908-9946.

As an individual or business, it is your responsibility to be aware of and to meet your tax filing/reporting deadlines. This calendar summarizes important tax reporting and filing data for individuals, businesses and other taxpayers for the month of September 2012.

As an individual or business, it is your responsibility to be aware of and to meet your tax filing/reporting deadlines. This calendar summarizes important tax reporting and filing data for individuals, businesses and other taxpayers for the month of September 2012.

September 6
Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates August 29–31.

September 7
Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates September 1–4.

September 10
Employees who work for tips. Employees who received $20 or more in tips during August must report them to their employer using Form 4070.

September 12
Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates September 5–7.

September 14
Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates September 8–11.

September 17
Corporations. Corporations deposit the third installment of estimated tax for 2012.
Corporations. Corporations and S corporations with 6-month extensions file Form 1120 or 1120S and pay tax due.
Partnerships. Partnerships with 5-month extensions file Form 1065.

September 19
Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates September 12–14.

September 21
Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates September 15–18.

September 26
Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates September 19–21.

September 28
Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates September 22–25.

October 5
Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates September 26–28.

October 6
Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates September 29–30.

When Congress passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and its companion bill, the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (collectively known as the Affordable Care Act) in 2010, lawmakers staggered the effective dates of various provisions.  The most well-known provision, the so-called individual mandate, is scheduled to take effect in 2014.  A number of other provisions are scheduled to take effect in 2013. All of these require careful planning before their effective dates.

When Congress passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and its companion bill, the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (collectively known as the Affordable Care Act) in 2010, lawmakers staggered the effective dates of various provisions.  The most well-known provision, the so-called individual mandate, is scheduled to take effect in 2014.  A number of other provisions are scheduled to take effect in 2013. All of these require careful planning before their effective dates.

2013

Two important changes to the Medicare tax are scheduled for 2013.  For tax years beginning after December 31, 2012, an additional 0.9 percent Medicare tax is imposed on individuals with wages/self-employment income in excess of $200,000 ($250,000 in the case of a joint return and $125,000 in the case of a married taxpayer filing separately). Moreover, and also effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2012, a 3.8 percent Medicare tax is imposed on the lesser of an individual's net investment income for the tax year or modified adjusted gross income in excess of $200,000 ($250,000 in the case of a joint return and $125,000 in the case of a married taxpayer filing separately).

The Affordable Care Act sets out the basic parameters of the new Medicare taxes but the details will be supplied by the IRS in regulations.  To date, the IRS has not issued regulations or other official guidance about the new Medicare taxes (although the IRS did post some general frequently asked questions about the Affordable Care Act's changes to Medicare on its web site).   As soon as the IRS issues regulations or other official guidance, our office will advise you. In the meantime, please contact our office if you have any questions about the new Medicare taxes.

Also in 2013, the Affordable Care Act limits annual salary reduction contributions to a health flexible spending arrangement (health FSA) under a cafeteria plan to $2,500.  If the plan would allow salary reductions in excess of $2,500, the employee will be subject to tax on distributions from the health FSA.  The $2,500 amount will be adjusted for inflation after 2013.

Additionally, the Affordable Care Act also increases the medical expense deduction threshold in 2013.  Under current law, the threshold to claim an itemized deduction for unreimbursed medical expenses is 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income.  Effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2012, the threshold will be 10 percent.  However, the Affordable Care Act temporarily exempts individuals age 65 and older from the increase.

2014

The Affordable Care Act's individual mandate generally requires individuals to make a shared responsibility payment if they do not carry minimum essential health insurance for themselves and their dependents.  The requirement begins in 2014. 

To understand who is covered by the individual mandate, it is easier to describe who is excluded.  Generally, individuals who have employer-provided health insurance coverage are excluded, so long as that coverage is deemed minimum essential coverage and is affordable.  If the coverage is treated as not affordable, the employee could qualify for a tax credit to help offset the cost of coverage.  Individuals covered by Medicare and Medicaid also are excluded from the individual mandate.  Additionally, undocumented aliens, incarcerated persons, individuals with a religious conscience exemption, and people who have short lapses of minimum essential coverage are excluded from the individual mandate.

The individual mandate was at the heart of the legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act after its passage.  These legal challenges reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which in June 2012, held that the individual mandate is a valid exercise of Congress' taxing power.

Like the new Medicare taxes, the Affordable Care Act sets out the parameters of the individual mandate.  The IRS is expected to issue regulations and other official guidance before 2014.  Our office will keep you posted of developments.

2014 will also bring a new shared responsibility payment for employers.  Large employers (generally employers with 50 or more full-time employees but subject to certain limitations) will be liable for a penalty if they fail to offer employees the opportunity to enroll in minimum essential coverage.  Large employers may also be subject to a penalty if they offer coverage but one or more employees receive a premium assistance tax credit.

The employer shared responsibility payment provisions are among the most complex in the Affordable Care Act.  The IRS has requested comments from employers on how to implement the provisions.  In good news for employers, the IRS has indicated may develop a safe harbor to help clarify who is a full-time employee for purposes of the employer shared responsibility payment.

If you have any questions about the provisions in the Affordable Care Act we have discussed, please contact our office.

The tax treatment of computer software can be a confusing area.  Computer software is an intangible product itself, but it can be acquired in a variety of ways.  It may be bundled with a computer processor (hardware), sold on a disc as computer software, downloaded over the Internet, accessed (but not downloaded) over the Internet, or developed by the taxpayer. It may be acquired by itself, or as part of a business.  Thus, the treatment of computer software can vary, depending on the circumstances.  In view of these variations, it is important to get proper advice as to the tax treatment of computer software.

The tax treatment of computer software can be a confusing area.  Computer software is an intangible product itself, but it can be acquired in a variety of ways.  It may be bundled with a computer processor (hardware), sold on a disc as computer software, downloaded over the Internet, accessed (but not downloaded) over the Internet, or developed by the taxpayer. It may be acquired by itself, or as part of a business.  Thus, the treatment of computer software can vary, depending on the circumstances.  In view of these variations, it is important to get proper advice as to the tax treatment of computer software.

Computer software is treated as an intangible under Code Sec. 197 if it is acquired as part of the acquisition of the assets of a trade or business.  In this situation, the software must be amortized over 15 years, a fairly long period. However, if the software is stated and sold separately, not as part of a business acquisition, it can be amortized on a straight-line basis over 36 months. Off-the-shelf computer software can also qualify for Code Sec. 179 small business expensing if it is placed in service in a tax year beginning in 2012. (Code Sec. 179 expensing generally is reserved for tangible personal property.) 

Bundled software that is included in computer hardware must be capitalized and depreciated over the life of the hardware, generally five years for computers.  If the software is leased or licensed, it may be deducted under Code Sec. 162. If the taxpayer prepays for several years use of the software, the payments must be deducted ratably over the period of use.

Software that is developed by the taxpayer is treated like other research expenditures.  It may be deductible over Code Sec. 174(a) as expenses are paid. The taxpayer may instead elect to capitalize the cost of the software under Code Sec. 174(b) and to amortize the costs over 60 months, beginning at the time the software is completed. Finally, the taxpayer could amortize the software over 36 months, beginning after the software is placed in service.

Finally, there also are rules for enterprise research planning (ERP) software. ERP software is a shell that integrates different software modules for financial accounting, inventory control, sales and distribution, production, and human resources. Until the IRS issues regulations on ERP software, taxpayers have relied on a 2002 IRS letter ruling, providing that:

• The cost of purchased ERP software is amortized ratably over 36 months under Code Sec. 167(f);
• Training and related costs under a consulting contract are deductible as current expenses;
• Separately stated computer hardware costs are depreciated as five-year MACRS property ("qualified technological equipment");
• The costs of writing machine-readable code software are treated as developed software and may be deducted currently, like research and development expenditures; and
• The costs of option selection, implementation of ERP templates, and costs of software modeling and design are treated as installation/modification costs and are amortized over 36 months as part of the purchased ERP software.

The domestic production activities deduction under Code Sec. 199 is an additional nine percent deduction from income that is based on the amount of the taxpayer's qualified production activities income (QPAI). QPAI includes receipts for the lease, license, sale or disposition of an item, including computer software that is sold through a disc or download.  However, QPAI generally does not include income from the provision of online services for the use of computer software, because there is no disposition of a product.

Please contact our office if you have any questions about deducting computer software and development costs.

In 2012, many taxpayers will have additional considerations when analyzing whether to sell investments before the end of the year or retain them in 2013. First, the Bush-era tax cuts are scheduled to expire at the end of 2012. This affects ordinary income rates, as well as rates on capital gains and dividends. Second, under the health care law, a new 3.8 percent Medicare tax on unearned income, including interest, dividends and capital gains, will take effect in 2013. Together, these real and potential changes may add up to hefty new taxes in 2013, unless Congress takes action otherwise.

In 2012, many taxpayers will have additional considerations when analyzing whether to sell investments before the end of the year or retain them in 2013. First, the Bush-era tax cuts are scheduled to expire at the end of 2012. This affects ordinary income rates, as well as rates on capital gains and dividends. Second, under the health care law, a new 3.8 percent Medicare tax on unearned income, including interest, dividends and capital gains, will take effect in 2013. Together, these real and potential changes may add up to hefty new taxes in 2013, unless Congress takes action otherwise.

Income tax rates

Current income tax rates continue through the end of 2012.  These include the overall individual income tax rates, currently at 10, 15, 25, 28, 33 and 35 percent. If Congress does not take any action, these rates revert to the higher rates that used to apply: 15, 28, 31, 36, and 39.6 percent. Republicans favor retaining all of the Bush-era rates. President Obama and many Democrats support retaining the 10, 15, 25, and 28 percent rates for lower- and middle-income taxpayers, while reinstating the 36 and 39.6 percent rates for taxpayers with income over $200,000 (single taxpayers) or $250,000 for joint filers.

Additionally, there are calls for tax reform and for an overall lowering of income tax rates, in exchange for ending unspecified tax deductions and benefits. For example, House Republicans have called for replacing current income tax rates with two brackets, of 10 and 25 percent.

Capital gains and dividends

Current income tax rates that extend through the end of 2012 also include the 15 percent rate on capital gains and qualified dividends for qualified taxpayers. If Congress does not act, these rates revert to much higher ordinary income rates, in the case of dividends, and to the 20 percent rate that formerly applied to capital gains. Again, the President and the Republicans would both extend the current rates, but disagree on whether to apply the extensions to all taxpayers (the Republicans) or only to lower- and middle-income taxpayers under the $200,000/$250,000 thresholds (the President).

3.8 percent tax

Adding to the mix is the impending 3.8 percent tax on unearned income. Under the health care law, this tax will apply to 2013 income (and beyond) of single taxpayers with income exceeding $200,000 and joint filers with income exceeding $250,000. The tax is imposed on the lesser of net investment income or the excess of adjusted gross income about the $200,000/$250,000 thresholds.

Net investment income also includes rents, royalties, gain from disposing of property used in a passive activity, and income from a trade or business that is a passive activity. The tax does not apply to distributions from retirement plans and IRAs. Taxpayers cannot necessarily avoid the tax by moving assets to a trust, because the tax will apply if trust income exceeds a threshold currently set at only $11,200.

Sell or hold

Generally, taxpayers should make investment decisions based on economics, holding on to a "good" investment and selling a "bad" investment. This involves looking at past performance and perhaps gazing into a crystal ball. Taxpayers that are debating whether to sell appreciated assets or assets that pay qualified dividends may want to act in 2012, when income tax rates are lower and before the 3.8 percent tax takes effect. Taxpayers considering the sale of declining assets may want to consider holding off until 2013, when losses can offset more highly-taxed gains and reduce the income potentially subject to the 3.8 percent tax.

Because the 3.8 percent tax does not apply to tax-free income, such as municipal bonds and distributions from a Roth IRA, taxpayers may want to shift some of their investments to yield nontaxable income. While the income from converting a traditional IRA to a Roth IRA would be included in the income calculations, qualifying distributions after the conversion would not be included.

Again, the decision must make economic sense. If the taxpayer expects an asset to continue to decline in value during 2012, he or she should sell the asset soon and not wait until 2013. Another consideration is the bunching of income. Taxpayers that sell substantial capital gains assets in 2013 may push their income up to the $200,000/$250,000 thresholds that trigger higher taxes. If the taxpayer is considering a sell-off of assets, it may make more sense to sell assets before 2013.

If a taxpayer wants to shift to more conservative investments, income yields may decline, but so will the incidence of the dividend, capital gains, and unearned income taxes described above. On the other hand, taxpayers looking at more speculative investments should understand that a successful investment may generate income taxed at higher rates in 2013.

Please contact our office if you have any questions.

Stock is a popular and valuable compensation tool for employers and employees. Employees are encouraged to stay with the company and to work harder, to enhance the value of the stock they will earn. Employers do not have to make a cash outlay to provide the compensation, yet they still are entitled to a tax deduction.

Stock is a popular and valuable compensation tool for employers and employees. Employees are encouraged to stay with the company and to work harder, to enhance the value of the stock they will earn. Employers do not have to make a cash outlay to provide the compensation, yet they still are entitled to a tax deduction.

Employers may make a direct transfer of stock to an employee as compensation for services performed. In the simplest case, the employee's rights in the stock are vested upon receipt. Under Code Sec. 83, the employee has income, equal to the fair market value of the stock, less any amount paid for the stock. The employer can take a compensation deduction under Code Sec. 162 for the amount included in the employee's income.

Risk of forfeiture

The employer may decide to impose certain conditions on the employee's right to the stock (such as a requirement that the employee continue to work for the company for two years before the stock "vests"). In this situation, the stock is subject to a substantial risk of forfeiture (or is "nonvested") until the two-year period elapses. After two years, the stock vests, and the employee recognizes income for the excess of the stock's value (at the time of vesting) over the amount paid. If the employee leaves the company within two years, the employee forfeits the stock.

An employee who receives stock subject to a substantial risk of forfeiture may anticipate that he or she will stay with the company for the required two years. The employee may also anticipate (or at least hope) that the stock will appreciate in value. Rather than wait two years and have to recognize income when the stock vests, an employee may elect under Code Sec. 83(b) to treat the property as vested upon receipt and to recognize compensation income (if any) at the time of receipt.

83(b) election

The employee may be required to pay for the stock when received. If the employee paid the fair market value of the stock, making a Code Sec. 83(b) election is particularly advantageous, because the employee will not recognize any income on the election.

Example.  Widget Corporation transfers 10 shares of its common stock to Hal, an employee, subject to a requirement that Hal work for two years before the stock vests. The stock is worth $5 a share. Hal is required to pay $5 a share upon receipt of the stock. By making a Code Sec. 83(b) election, Hal will not recognize any income, because the value and the cost of the stock are the same. If Hal did not have to pay any money for the shares, and made an election, Hal would have $50 of compensation income (10 shares times $5 a share).

After making an election, if the employee then works for two years, and the stock appreciates, the employee does not recognize any further compensation income, because the employee has already been taxed under Code Sec. 83.  By making the election, the employee is treated as owning the stock. When the employee sells the stock, the employee will recognize capital gain or loss, measured by the difference between the amount received and the value of the stock when it vested.

Election formalities

To make an election under Code Sec. 83(b), an employee must file a statement with the IRS, within 30 days of the transfer of the property to the employee. The statement must be filed with the Internal Revenue Service Center where the employee would file his or her income tax return. A copy of the statement must be provided to the employer, who is entitled to a compensation deduction when the election is made. A copy must also be attached to the employee's income tax return.

IRS regulations prescribe the requirements for an election. In Rev. Proc. 2012-29, the IRS also provided sample language for employees to use to make the election. The IRS advised that the sample language is not required. The election must identify the taxpayer, the property being transferred, the date of the transfer, the restrictions on the property, the property's value at the time of transfer (generally determined without the restrictions), the amount paid by the employee, and the amount of compensation income (the value minus the amount paid). The employee must also sign the election.

The election cannot be revoked without the IRS's consent. The IRS will not ordinarily grant consent unless there has been a mistake of fact as to the underlying transaction.

If you have any questions about making a Code Sec. 83(b) election, please contact our office.

Some individuals must pay estimated taxes or face a penalty in the form of interest on the amount underpaid. Self-employed persons, retirees, and nonworking individuals most often must pay estimated taxes to avoid the penalty. But an employee may need to pay them if the amount of tax withheld from wages is insufficient to cover the tax owed on other income. The potential tax owed on investment income also may increase the need for paying estimated tax, even among wage earners.

Some individuals must pay estimated taxes or face a penalty in the form of interest on the amount underpaid. Self-employed persons, retirees, and nonworking individuals most often must pay estimated taxes to avoid the penalty. But an employee may need to pay them if the amount of tax withheld from wages is insufficient to cover the tax owed on other income. The potential tax owed on investment income also may increase the need for paying estimated tax, even among wage earners.

The trick with estimated taxes is to pay a sufficient amount of estimated tax to avoid a penalty but not to overpay. The IRS will refund the overpayment when you file your return, but it will not pay interest on it. In other words, by overpaying tax to the IRS, you are in essence choosing to give the government an interest-free loan rather than invest your money somewhere else and make a profit.

When do I make estimated tax payments?

Individual estimated tax payments are generally made in four installments accompanying a completed Form 1040-ES, Estimated Tax for Individuals. For the typical individual who uses a calendar tax year, payments generally are due on April 15, June 15, and September 15 of the tax year, and January 15 of the following year (or the following business day when it falls on a weekend or other holiday).

Am I required to make estimated tax payments?

Generally, you must pay estimated taxes in 2012 if (1) you expect to owe at least $1,000 in tax after subtracting tax withholding (if you have any) and (2) you expect your withholding and credits to be less than the smaller of 90 percent of your 2012 taxes or 100 percent of the tax on your 2011 return.  There are special rules for higher income individuals.

Usually, there is no penalty if your estimated tax payments plus other tax payments, such as wage withholding, equal either 100 percent of your prior year's tax liability or 90 percent of your current year's tax liability. However, if your adjusted gross income for your prior year exceeded $150,000, you must pay either 110 percent of the prior year tax or 90 percent of the current year tax to avoid the estimated tax penalty. For married filing separately, the higher payments apply at $75,000.

Estimated tax is not limited to income tax. In figuring your installments, you must also take into account other taxes such as the alternative minimum tax, penalties for early withdrawals from an IRA or other retirement plan, and self-employment tax, which is the equivalent of Social Security taxes for the self-employed.

Suppose I owe only a relatively small amount of tax?

There is no penalty if the tax underpayment for the year is less than $1,000. However, once an underpayment exceeds $1,000, the penalty applies to the full amount of the underpayment.

What if I realize I have miscalculated my tax before the year ends?

An employee may be able to avoid the penalty by getting the employer to increase withholding in an amount needed to cover the shortfall. The IRS will treat the withheld tax as being paid proportionately over the course of the year, even though a greater amount was withheld at year-end. The proportionate treatment could prevent penalties on installments paid earlier in the year.

What else can I do?

If you receive income unevenly over the course of the year, you may benefit from using the annualized income installment method of paying estimated tax. Under this method, your adjusted gross income, self-employment income and alternative minimum taxable income at the end of each quarterly tax payment period are projected forward for the entire year. Estimated tax is paid based on these annualized amounts if the payment is lower than the regular estimated payment. Any decrease in the amount of an estimated tax payment caused by using the annualized installment method must be added back to the next regular estimated tax payment.

Determining estimated taxes can be complicated, but the penalty can be avoided with proper attention. This office stands ready to assist you with this determination. Please contact us if we can help you determine whether you owe estimated taxes.

Everybody knows that tax deductions aren't allowed without proof in the form of documentation. What records are needed to "prove it" to the IRS vary depending upon the type of deduction that you may want to claim. Some documentation cannot be collected "after the fact," whether it takes place a few months after an expense is incurred or later, when you are audited by the IRS. This article reviews some of those deductions for which the IRS requires you to generate certain records either contemporaneously as the expense is being incurred, or at least no later than when you file your return. We also highlight several deductions for which contemporaneous documentation, although not strictly required, is extremely helpful in making your case before the IRS on an audit.

Everybody knows that tax deductions aren’t allowed without proof in the form of documentation.  What records are needed to “prove it” to the IRS vary depending upon the type of deduction that you may want to claim.  Some documentation cannot be collected “after the fact,” whether it takes place a few months after an expense is incurred or later, when you are audited by the IRS.  This article reviews some of those deductions for which the IRS requires you to generate certain records either contemporaneously as the expense is being incurred, or at least no later than when you file your return.  We also highlight several deductions for which contemporaneous documentation, although not strictly required, is extremely helpful in making your case before the IRS on an audit.

Charitable contributions.  For cash contributions (including checks and other monetary gifts), the donor must retain a bank record or a written acknowledgment from the charitable organization. A cash contribution of $250 or more must be substantiated with a contemporaneous written acknowledgment from the donee.  “Contemporaneous” for this purpose is defined as obtaining an acknowledgment before you file your return.  So save those letters from the charity, especially for your larger donations.

Tip records.  A taxpayer receiving tips must keep an accurate and contemporaneous record of the tip income.  Employees receiving tips must also report the correct amount to their employers.  The necessary record can be in the form of a diary, log or worksheet and should be made at or near the time the income is received.

Wagering losses.  Gamblers need to substantiate their losses. The IRS usually accepts a regularly maintained diary or similar record (such as summary records and loss schedules) as adequate substantiation, provided it is supplemented by verifiable documentation.  The diary should identify the gambling establishment and the date and type of wager, as well as amounts won and lost. Verifiable documentation can include wagering tickets, canceled checks, credit card records, and withdrawal slips from banks.

Vehicle mileage log.  A taxpayer can deduct a standard mileage rate for business, charitable or medical use of a vehicle.  If the car is also used for personal purposes, the taxpayer should keep a contemporaneous mileage log, especially for business use.  If the taxpayer wants to deduct actual expenses for business use of a car also used for personal purposes, the taxpayer has to allocate costs between the business and personal use, based on miles driven for each.

Material participation in business activity.  Taxpayers that materially participate in a business generally can deduct business losses against other income.  Otherwise, they can only deduct losses against passive income.  An individual’s participation in an activity may be established by any reasonable means.  Contemporaneous time reports, logs, or similar documents are not required but can be particularly helpful to document material participation.  To identify services performed and the hours spent on the services, records may be established using appointment books, calendars, or narrative summaries.

Hobby loss.  Taxpayers who do not engage conduct an activity with a sufficient profit motive may be considered to engage in a hobby and will not be able to deduct losses from the activity against other income.  Maintaining accurate books and records can itself be an indication of a profit motive.  Moreover, the time and activities devoted to a particular business can be essential to demonstrate that the business has a profit motive.  Contemporaneous records can be an important indicator.

Travel and entertainment.  Expenses for travel and entertainment are subject to strict substantiation requirements. Taxpayers should maintain records of the amount spent, the time and place of the activity, its business purpose, and the business relationship of the person being entertained. Contemporaneous records are particularly helpful.

A disregarded entity refers to a business entity with one owner that is not recognized for tax purposes as an entity separate from its owner.  A single-member LLC ("SMLLC"), for example, is considered to be a disregarded entity. For federal and state tax purposes, the sole member of an SMLLC disregards the separate legal status of the SMLLC otherwise in force under state law.

A disregarded entity refers to a business entity with one owner that is not recognized for tax purposes as an entity separate from its owner.  A single-member LLC ("SMLLC"), for example, is considered to be a disregarded entity. For federal and state tax purposes, the sole member of an SMLLC disregards the separate legal status of the SMLLC otherwise in force under state law.

As the result of being “disregarded,” the SMLLC does not file a separate tax return.  Rather, its income and loss is reported on the tax return filed by the single member.

• If the sole owner is an individual, the SMLLC's income and loss is reported on his or her Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return. This method is similar to a sole proprietorship.
• If the owner is a corporation, the SMLLC's income or loss is reported on the corporation's Form 1120, U.S. Corporation Income Tax Return (or on Form 1120S in the case of an S Corporation). This treatment is similar to that applied to a corporate branch or division.

An SMLLC is not the only entity treated as a disregarded entity. Two corporate forms are also disregarded: a qualified subchapter S subsidiary and a qualified REIT subsidiary. However, SMLLCs are by far the most common disregarded entity currently in use.

For federal tax purposes, the SMLLC does not exist. All its assets and liabilities are treated as owned by the acquiring corporation.

Even though a disregarded entity’s tax status is transparent for federal tax purposes, it is not transparent for state law purposes. For example, an owner of an SMLLC is not personally liable for the debts and obligations of the entity. However, since the entity is disregarded, the owner is generally treated as the employer of disregarded entity employees for employment tax purposes.

For further details on disregarded entities or how this tax strategy may fit into your business operations, please contact our offices. 

On February 22, President Obama signed the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012.  The new law extends the employee-side payroll tax holiday, giving wage earners and self-employed individuals 12 months of reduced payroll taxes in 2012. 

2011 payroll tax holiday

Until 2011, the Old-Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance (OASDI) tax rate for employees was 6.2 percent (12.4 percent for self-employed individuals who pay both the employee-share and the employer-share).  These taxes help to fund Social Security.

In 2011, a payroll tax holiday took effect.  The payroll tax holiday reduced the employee-share of OASDI taxes by two percentage points from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent for calendar year 2011 up to the Social Security wage base of $106,800.  The payroll tax holiday also gave a similar percentage reduction to self-employed individuals for calendar year 2011.

Two-month extension

The 2011 payroll tax holiday was originally enacted as a one-year tax break.  It was scheduled to expire after December 31, 2011.

In December 2011, Congress approved a two-month extension of the payroll tax holiday for January and February 2012.  The two-month extension provided for a 4.2 percent OASDI tax rate for individuals receiving wages and a comparable benefit for self-employed individuals through the end of February 2012.

Tough negotiations

In early 2012, lawmakers began negotiations over extending the two-month payroll tax holiday for the remainder of the year.  The 2011 payroll tax holiday had not been offset; that is, the lost revenue had not been made up elsewhere.  The two-month extension had been offset by higher fees on certain government-backed mortgages. Some lawmakers wanted any full-year extension of the payroll tax cut to be offset.

Several offsets were proposed and rejected, including a surtax on individuals with incomes over $1 million and repeal of certain business tax preferences.  In the end, lawmakers could not agree on any offsets and decided to extend the payroll tax holiday without paying for it.  They did agree to pay for extended unemployment benefits and the so-called Medicare “doc fix” with offsets.

The House passed the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of February 17 as did the Senate.  President Obama signed the bill on February 22.

2012 payroll tax holiday

The 2012 payroll tax holiday is essentially an extension of the 2011 payroll tax holiday. This means that wage earners pay OASDI taxes at a rate of 4.2 percent for calendar year 2012 up to the Social Security wage base ($110,100 for 2012). Self-employed individuals also benefit from a two-percentage point reduction in OASDI taxes for calendar year 2012.  The OASDI tax rate for employers, however, is not reduced and remains at 6.2 percent for calendar year 2012.

According to the White House, an “average” taxpayer should expect to see about $1,000 in savings in 2012.  An individual who makes at or above the Social Security wage base for 2012 ($110,100) will see a $2,202 benefit.

No recapture rule

In good news for some taxpayers, the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act repeals a recapture rule Congress had imposed on the two-month extension.  The recapture rule was intended to prevent higher income individuals from enjoying too great a benefit from the payroll tax cut if it was not extended for all of 2012.  Because the payroll tax cut has been extended through the end of 2012, the recapture rule is expressly removed in the new law.

Employers and payroll processors

Because the 2012 payroll tax cut holiday is essentially an extension of the 2011 payroll tax cut holiday, employers and payroll processors should expect few glitches. The IRS has reported it anticipates no problems in administering the extension through the end of 2012. It has already issued a revised 2012 Form 941, Employer’s Quarterly Federal Tax Return, for use by employers to cover their revised reporting responsibilities. 

If you have any questions about the 2012 payroll tax holiday, please contact our office.

Retired employees often start taking benefits by age 65 and, under the minimum distribution rules, must begin taking distributions from their retirement plans when they reach age 70 ½. According to Treasury, a 65-year old female has an even chance of living past age 86, while a 65-year old male has an even chance of living past age 84. The government has become concerned that taxpayers who normally retire at age 65 or even age 70 will outlive their retirement benefits.

The government has found that most employees want at least a partial lump sum payment at retirement, so that some cash is currently available for living expenses. However, under current rules, most employer plans do not offer a partial lump sum coupled with a partial annuity. Employees often are faced with an “all or nothing” decision, where they would have to take their entire retirement benefit either as a lump sum payment when they retire, or as an annuity that does not make available any immediate lump-sum cash cushion. For retirees who live longer, it becomes difficult to stretch their lump sum benefits.

Longevity solution

To address this dilemma, the government is proposing new retirement plan rules to allow plans to make available a partial lump sum payment while allowing participants to take an annuity with the other portion of their benefits. Furthermore, to address the problem of employees outliving their benefits, the government would also encourage plans to offer “longevity” annuities. These annuities would not begin paying benefits until ages 80 or 85. They would provide you a larger annual payment for the same funds than would an annuity starting at age 70 ½. Of course, one reason for the better buy-in price is that you or your heirs would receive nothing if you die before the age 80 or 85 starting date. But many experts believe that it is worth the cost to have the security of knowing that this will help prevent you from “outliving your money.”

To streamline the calculation of partial annuities, the government would allow employees receiving lump-sum payouts from their 401(k) plans to transfer assets into the employer’s existing defined benefit (DB) plan and to purchase an annuity through the DB plan. This would give employees access to the DB plans low-cost annuity purchase rates.

According to the government, the required minimum distribution (RMD) rules are a deterrent to longevity annuities. Because of the minimum distribution rules, plan benefits that could otherwise be deferred until ages 80 or 85 have to start being distributed to a retired employee at age 70 ½. These rules can affect distributions from 401(k) plans, 403(b) tax-sheltered annuities, individual retirement accounts under Code Sec. 408, and eligible governmental deferred compensation plans under Code Sec. 457.

Tentative limitations

The IRS proposes to modify the RMD rules to allow a portion of a participant’s retirement account to be set aside to fund the purchase of a deferred annuity. Participants would be able to exclude the value of this qualified longevity annuity contract (QLAC) from the account balance used to calculate RMDs. Under this approach, up to 25 percent of the account balance could be excluded. The amount is limited to 25 percent to deter the use of longevity annuities as an estate planning device to pass on assets to descendants.

Coming soon

Many of these changes are in proposed regulations and would not take effect until the government issues final regulations. The changes would apply to distributions with annuity starting dates in plan years beginning after final regulations are published, which could be before the end of 2012. Our office will continue to monitor the progress of this important development.

The number of tax return-related identity theft incidents has almost doubled in the past three years to well over half a million reported during 2011, according to a recent report by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA). Identity theft in the context of tax administration generally involves the fraudulent use of someone else’s identity in order to claim a tax refund. In other cases an identity thief might steal a person’s information to obtain a job, and the thief’s employer may report income to the IRS using the legitimate taxpayer’s Social Security Number, thus making it appear that the taxpayer did not report all of his or her income.

In light of these dangers, the IRS has taken numerous steps to combat identity theft and protect taxpayers. There are also measures that you can take to safeguard yourself against identity theft in the future and assist the IRS in the process.  

IRS does not solicit financial information via email or social media

The IRS will never request a taxpayer’s personal or financial information by email or social media such as Facebook or Twitter. Likewise, the IRS will not alert taxpayers to an audit or tax refund by email or any other form of electronic communication, such as text messages and social media channels.

If you receive a scam email claiming to be from the IRS, forward it to the IRS at phishing@irs.gov. If you discover a website that claims to be the IRS but does not begin with 'www.irs.gov', forward that link to the IRS at phishing@irs.gov.

How identity thieves operate

Identity theft scams are not limited to users of email and social media tools. Scammers may also use a phone or fax to reach their victims to solicit personal information. Other means include:

-Stealing your wallet or purse
-Looking through your trash
-Accessing information you provide to an unsecured Internet site.

How do I know if I am a victim?

Your identity may have been stolen if a letter from the IRS indicates more than one tax return was filed for you or the letter states you received wages from an employer you don't know. If you receive such a letter from the IRS, leading you to believe your identity has been stolen, respond immediately to the name, address or phone number on the IRS notice. If you believe the notice is not from the IRS, contact the IRS to determine if the letter is a legitimate IRS notice.

If your tax records are not currently affected by identity theft, but you believe you may be at risk due to a lost wallet, questionable credit card activity, or credit report, you need to provide the IRS with proof of your identity. You should submit a copy of your valid government-issued identification, such as a Social Security card, driver's license or passport, along with a copy of a police report and/or a completed IRS Form 14039, Identity Theft Affidavit, which should be faxed to the IRS at 1-978-684-4542.

What should I do if someone has stolen my identity?

If you discover that someone has filed a tax return using your SSN you should contact the IRS to show the income is not yours. After the IRS authenticates who you are, your tax record will be updated to reflect only your information. The IRS will use this information to minimize future occurrences.

What other precautions can I take?

There are many things you can do to protect your identity. One is to be careful while distributing your personal information. You should show employers your Social Security card to your employer at the start of a job, but otherwise do not routinely carry your card or other documents that display your SSN.

Only use secure websites while making online financial transactions, including online shopping. Generally a secure website will have an icon, such as a lock, located in the lower right-hand corner of your web browser or the address bar of the website with read “https://…” rather than simply “http://.”

Never open suspicious attachments or links, even just to see what they say. Never respond to emails from unknown senders. Install anti-virus software, keep it updated, and run it regularly.

For taxpayers planning to e-file their tax returns, the IRS recommends use of a strong password. Afterwards, save the file to a CD or flash drive and keep it in a secure location. Then delete the personal return information from the computer hard drive.

Finally, if working with an accountant, query him or her on what measures they take to protect your information.

The IRS has released much-anticipated temporary and proposed regulations on the capitalization of costs incurred for tangible property. They impact how virtually any business writes off costs that repair, maintain, improve or replace any tangible property used in the business, from office furniture to roof repairs to photocopy maintenance and everything in between. They apply immediately, to tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2012.

These so-called “repair regulations” are broad and comprehensive. They apply not only to repairs, but to the capitalization of amounts paid to acquire, produce or improve tangible property. They are intended to clarify and expand existing regulations, set out some bright-line tests, and provide some safe harbors for deducting payments.

The regulations are an ambitious effort to address capitalization of specific expenses associated with tangible property. The regulations affect manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors, and retailers—everyone who uses tangible property, whether the property is owned or leased. The rules provide a more defined framework for determining capital expenditures.

Most taxpayers will have to make changes to their method of accounting to comply with the temporary regulations and will need to file Form 3115. Taxpayers who filed for a change of accounting method following the issuance of the 2008 proposed regulations will probably have to change their accounting method again.

The IRS has promised to issue two revenue procedures that will provide transition rules for taxpayers changing their method of accounting, including the granting of automatic consent to make the change. The regulations require taxpayers to make a Code Sec. 481(a) adjustment; this means that taxpayers will have to apply the regulations to costs incurred both prior to and after the effective date of the regulations.

The new regulations provide rules for materials and supplies that can be deducted, rather than capitalized. The rules provide several methods of accounting for rotable and temporary spare parts, and allow taxpayers to apply a de minimis rule so that they can deduct materials and supplies when they are purchased, not when they are consumed.

Costs to acquire, produce or improve tangible property must be capitalized. The regulations address moving and reinstallation costs, work performed prior to placing property into service, and transaction costs. Generally, costs of simply removing property can be deducted, but costs of moving and then reinstalling property may have to be capitalized.

To determine whether a cost incurred for property is an improvement, it is necessary to determine the unit of property. Generally, the larger the unit of property, the easier it is to deduct expenses, rather than have to capitalize them. The regulations provide detailed rules for determining the unit of property for buildings and for non-building tangible property. For buildings, the IRS identified eight component systems as separate units of property, requiring more costs to be capitalized. However, the new rules also provide for deducting the costs of property taken out of service, by treating the retirement as a disposition.

The new regulations require virtually every business to review how repairs, maintenance, improvements and replacements are handled for tax purposes, with both mandatory and optional adjustments made to past treatment as appropriate.

Please feel free to call this office for a more targeted explanation of how these new regulations impact your business operations.

The IRS reopened its offshore voluntary disclosure program in early 2012 in response to what the government described as strong interest among taxpayers. The reopened program, the third of its type in recent years, encourages taxpayers with unreported foreign accounts to make full disclosures in exchange for a reduced penalty framework. Like its predecessors, the terms and conditions of the reopened program are very complex. The IRS has promised to provide more details. In the meantime, the prior offshore disclosure programs are guides to how the IRS intends to implement the third, reopened program.

Previous disclosure programs

The IRS launched two previous offshore disclosure initiatives: one in 2009 and another in 2011. Both programs offered reduced penalties in exchange for full disclosure. In early 2012, the IRS reported it received 33,000 voluntary disclosures from the 2009 and 2011 offshore initiatives. The government has collected over $4.4 billion from the 2009 and 2011 programs. The IRS predicted it will collect more revenue as it continues to work cases.

Reopened program

The reopened program operates very similarly to the 2009 and 2011 programs but with some key differences. The previous programs were temporary. The 2011 program ended in mid-September 2011. The reopened program has no set end date. The IRS cautioned, however, that it could close the program at some future date. The decision to end the program is solely at the discretion of the IRS.

The reopened program requires taxpayers to file all original and amended tax returns and include payment for back-taxes and interest for up to eight years as well as pay accuracy-related and/or delinquency penalties. Additionally, taxpayers must pay a penalty of 27.5 percent of the highest aggregate balance in foreign bank accounts/entities or value of foreign assets during the eight full tax years prior to the disclosure. In comparison, the highest penalty in the 2011 program was 25 percent. IRS officials have said that the penalty was increased because the agency does not want to reward taxpayers who did not participate in the 2009 or 2011 disclosure programs because they anticipated that a future penalty would be lower.

In limited circumstances, taxpayers may qualify for a 12.5 percent penalty or a five percent penalty. Generally, taxpayers whose offshore accounts or assets did not surpass $75,000 in any calendar year may qualify for the 12.5 percent penalty.

The requirements for the five percent penalty are very narrow. The IRS has explained that taxpayers must meet four conditions: (1) The taxpayer did not open or cause the account to be opened; (2) the taxpayer exercised minimal, infrequent contact with the account, for example, to request the account balance, or update account holder information such as a change in address, contact person, or email address; (3) except for a withdrawal closing the account and transferring the funds to an account in the United States, the taxpayer did not withdraw more than $1,000 from the account in any year for which the taxpayer was non-compliant; and (4) the taxpayer can show that all applicable U.S. taxes have been paid on funds deposited to the account (only account earnings have escaped U.S. taxation).

The penalty amounts in the reopened program are not set in stone, the IRS cautioned. It may eventually increase penalties in the program for all or some taxpayers or defined classes of taxpayers.

Quiet disclosures

One goal of the three programs is to caution taxpayers against so-called “quiet disclosures.” A quiet disclosure occurs when a taxpayer files an amended return and pays any tax delinquency without making a formal voluntary disclosure. The IRS warned taxpayers making quiet disclosures that they risked being sanctioned to the fullest extent allowed by law.

Critics

The offshore disclosure programs were not without their critics. The National Taxpayer Advocate recently told Congress that the IRS should streamline what is a very complicated process. The National Taxpayer Advocate also reported that IRS examiners were assuming that all violations were willful unless a taxpayer presented evidence to the contrary. It is possible that the IRS may revisit some of the terms and conditions of the reopened program in light of the National Taxpayer Advocate’s report.

If you have any questions about the reopened offshore voluntary disclosure program, please contact our office.