Newsletters

During these continued uncertain and challenging times, we wanted to connect with our clients to manage expectations and to share important information early in this season. Our team has worked tirelessly over the past 10 months assisting clients through the COVID-19 economic crisis and the 2019 extended filing season. We continue to navigate and interpret guidance as it becomes available to take a proactive and meaningful approach with our clients’ needs. In this, the firm’s 50^th tax season, our commitment to quality remains key in the services we provide. Quality, in these times, coupled with prioritizing the health, safety and well-being of our clients, community, and team members, will take concentrated time and attention to ensure we are doing what is best for each client in light of the sweeping pandemic legislation enacted during 2020, and doing what is right to protect clients and team members alike from virus exposure.

February 5, 2021

A tax season note to our clients

During these continued uncertain and challenging times, we wanted to connect with our clients to manage expectations and to share important information early in this season. Our team has worked tirelessly over the past 10 months assisting clients through the COVID-19 economic crisis and the 2019 extended filing season. We continue to navigate and interpret guidance as it becomes available to take a proactive and meaningful approach with our clients’ needs. In this, the firm’s 50^th tax season, our commitment to quality remains key in the services we provide. Quality, in these times, coupled with prioritizing the health, safety and well-being of our clients, community, and team members, will take concentrated time and attention to ensure we are doing what is best for each client in light of the sweeping pandemic legislation enacted during 2020, and doing what is right to protect clients and team members alike from virus exposure.

Patience is key this filing season

Please expect that your return turnaround time will be longer than you may be accustomed to from year’s past. We are managing not only tax return workflow, but also a number of COVID-19 related services for clients that are time essential due to the passage of the December 2020 Consolidated Appropriations Act (CAA). You may also find that we are asking questions or requesting information that is different from year’s past. There are a number of new compliance related matters we are required to fulfill based on IRS regulations. We have requested that all individual clients complete the questions provided on pages 5-9 of their 2020 tax organizer to aid in these compliance requirements. If you did not receive your 2020 individual tax organizer, please contact our office.

As previously communicated, business clients (those filing Forms 1065, 1120, and 1120s) will be put on extension if return information is not received by February 19, 2021.

As previously communicated to our individual and trust clients (those filing Forms 1040 and 1041), if substantial information necessary to prepare your tax return is not received by March 31, 2021, your return will be placed on extension. Extensions may also require an accompanying tax payment to avoid penalties and interest on any tax balance due with the return.

If you know that you cannot meet these deadlines and will need to file for an extension, please let us know immediately. We appreciate in advance all efforts in providing us with 2020 tax information early in the season so that we can give the necessary time and attention to preparing accurate returns.

All of this to say, we are asking for patience, with the understanding, that we are doing the very best we can for each client relationship.

Protecting our team members and clients

We continue to follow strict protocols in the office to keep both our team members and clients safe.

While our firm remains open and available to serve client needs, as we found last tax season, we can manage the entire tax return preparation process in both virtual and contactless ways while still providing the level of service our clients have come to expect from the firm.

We are limiting face-to-face client appointments this season to Tuesdays and Thursdays to minimize the risks of COVID exposure. If you need to schedule a face-to-face appointment, please contact the office to schedule a time. We are offering virtual appointments through Zoom, FaceTime, or Microsoft Teams. These virtual appointments can also be scheduled by contacting the office.

For clients, business partners, and vendors traveling to our office, please do not travel to our office if you are sick, but instead allow us to offer electronic means to meet your needs. All clients, business partners, and vendors entering our office are required to wear a mask.

Electronic methods to provide tax information

We are well positioned to operate remotely through the use of secure technology.  We encourage clients and business partners to use the following additional options and ways to provide tax information to our firm:

o    All tax documents and relevant information can be uploaded by using the following secure link           in your web browser  https://www.clientaxcess.com/sharesafe/#/HottelandWillis

o   We can accept your e-file authorizations by the above link, e-mail, fax (540-662-1470) or mail. 

Our commitment to you

We care about the story behind the numbers and appreciate the continued support and confidence our clients have in what we do. We will continue to share information during the season as guidance evolves and changes. Please contact us with any questions as we continue to work in partnership together during these unprecedented times.

For 2022, the Social Security wage cap will be $147,000, and Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits will increase by 5.9 percent. These changes reflect cost-of-living adjustments to account for inflation.

For 2022, the Social Security wage cap will be $147,000, and Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits will increase by 5.9 percent. These changes reflect cost-of-living adjustments to account for inflation.

Wage Cap for Social Security Tax
The Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax on wages is 7.65 percent each for the employee and the employer. FICA tax has two components:

• a 6.2 percent social security tax, also known as old age, survivors, and disability insurance (OASDI); and
• a 1.45 percent Medicare tax, also known as hospital insurance (HI).

For self-employed workers, the Self-Employment tax is 15.3 percent, consisting of:

• a 12.4 percent OASDI tax; and
• a 2.9 percent HI tax.

OASDI tax applies only up to a wage base, which includes most wages and self-employment income up to the annual wage cap.

For 2022, the wage base is $147,000. Thus, OASDI tax applies only to the taxpayer’s first $147,000 in wages or net earnings from self-employment. Taxpayers do not pay any OASDI tax on earnings that exceed $147,000.

There is no wage cap for HI tax.

Maximum Social Security Tax for 2022
For workers who earn $147,000 or more in 2022:

• an employee will pay a total of $9,114 in social security tax ($147,000 x 6.2 percent);
• the employer will pay the same amount; and
• a self-employed worker will pay a total of $18,228 in social security tax ($147,000 x 12.4 percent).

Additional Medicare Tax
Higher-income workers may have to pay an additional Medicare tax of 0.9 percent. This tax applies to wages and self-employment income that exceed:

• $250,000 for married taxpayers who file a joint return;
• $125,000 for married taxpayers who file separate returns; and
• $200,000 for other taxpayers.

The annual wage cap does not affect the additional Medicare tax.

Benefit Increase for 2022
Finally, a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) will increase social security and SSI benefits for 2022 by 5.9 percent. The COLA is intended to ensure that inflation does not erode the purchasing power of these benefits.

The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment that the cap on the federal income tax deduction for money paid in state and local taxes (SALT) is constitutional.

The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment that the cap on the federal income tax deduction for money paid in state and local taxes (SALT) is constitutional. Four states brought a claim against the government alleging that the $10,000 cap on the federal income tax deduction for money paid in state and local taxes, enacted as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act ( P.L. 115-97) (TCJA), violated the Constitution. The states argued that the state and local tax deduction was constitutionally mandated, or alternatively that the cap violated the Tenth Amendment because it coerced them to abandon their preferred fiscal policies. The district court held that the states had standing and that their claims were not barred by the Anti-Injunction Act (AIA). However, the district court concluded that the claims lacked merit. The states' allegations that the cap decreases the frequency and price at which taxable real estate transactions occur by measurably increasing the cost of those transactions reflect specific lost tax revenues and suffice to support standing. Moreover, the exception in South Carolina v. Regan, 84-1 USTC ¶9241, 465 U.S. 367, 373 (1984), applied to the facts of this case, therefore, the court held that the AIA did not foreclose its review of the states' claim.

Background
The federal tax code’s state and local tax (SALT) deduction permitted taxpayers to deduct from their taxable income all the money they paid in state and local income and property taxes. However, in 2017, Congress passed the TCJA which imposed a cap on the SALT deduction. The immediate impact of this cap was felt most acutely in states where the state and local tax liability of residents often exceeded the $10,000 maximum. Four of the most affected states, namely, New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Maryland, sued the government asserting that the cap on the SALT deduction was unconstitutional on its face and unconstitutionally coerced them to abandon their preferred fiscal policies. The government responded by stating that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to consider the states' claims and also defended the cap on the merits. The district court rejected the government's jurisdictional defense but dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim. On appeal, the states argued that the district court erred on the merits.

Affirming an unpublished District Court opinion.

The IRS has reminded employers to check the Work Opportunity Tax Credit available for hiring long-term unemployment recipients and other groups of workers facing significant barriers to employment.

The IRS has reminded employers to check the Work Opportunity Tax Credit available for hiring long-term unemployment recipients and other groups of workers facing significant barriers to employment.

Cash contributions made either to supporting organizations or to establish or maintain a donor advised fund do not qualify. Also, cash contributions carried forward from prior years do not qualify, nor do cash contributions to most private foundations and most cash contributions to charitable remainder trusts.

Subject to certain limits, taxpayers who itemize could generally claim a deduction for charitable contributions made to qualifying charitable organizations. These range from 20 percent to 60 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI) and vary by the type of contribution and type of charitable organization. The law now permits electing individuals to apply an increased limit of up to 100 percent of their AGI, for qualified contributions made during 2021. More information can be found at https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-publication-526.

The Work Opportunity Tax Credit encourages employers to hire workers certified as members of any of the following targeted groups facing barriers to employment:

• temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients;
• unemployed veterans, including disabled veterans;
• formerly incarcerated individuals;
• designated community residents living in Empowerment Zones or Rural Renewal Counties;
• vocational rehabilitation referrals;
• supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients;
• supplemental Security Income (SSI) recipients;
• long-term family assistance recipients; and
• long-term unemployment recipients.

An employer must first request certification by submitting IRS Form 8850, Pre-screening Notice and Certification Request for the Work Opportunity Credit to their state workforce agency (SWA) to qualify for the credit within 28 days after the eligible worker commences work. However, under a special relief provision, a submission deadline on November 8, 2021, applies to qualified summer youth employees residing in Empowerment Zones and designated community residents residing in Empowerment Zones.

Eligible employees must commence work on or after January 1, 2021, and before October 9, 2021, to qualify for the submission deadline. The Work Opportunity Tax Credit is claimed on eligible businesses' federal income tax returns and is usually based on wages paid to qualified workers during the first year of employment. The credit is first figured on Form 5884, Work Opportunity Credit, and then is claimed on Form 3800, General Business Credit.

Under a special rule, employers are permitted to claim the Work Opportunity Tax Credit for hiring qualified veterans, although the credit is not available to tax-exempt organizations for most groups of new hires. Such organizations claim the credit against payroll taxes on Form 5884-C, Work Opportunity Credit for Qualified Tax Exempt Organizations.

The IRS highlighted how expanded tax benefits help both individuals and businesses give to charity before the end of this year.

The IRS highlighted how expanded tax benefits help both individuals and businesses give to charity before the end of this year. The law now permits these taxpayers to claim a limited deduction on their 2021 federal income tax returns for cash contributions made to certain qualifying charitable organizations. These taxpayers, including married individuals filing separate returns, can claim a deduction of up to $300 for cash contributions made to qualifying charities during 2021. The maximum deduction is increased to $600 for married taxpayers filing joint returns. Nearly nine in 10 taxpayers now take the standard deduction and could potentially qualify to claim a limited deduction for cash contributions.

Cash contributions made either to supporting organizations or to establish or maintain a donor advised fund do not qualify. Also, cash contributions carried forward from prior years do not qualify, nor do cash contributions to most private foundations and most cash contributions to charitable remainder trusts.

Subject to certain limits, taxpayers who itemize could generally claim a deduction for charitable contributions made to qualifying charitable organizations. These range from 20 percent to 60 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI) and vary by the type of contribution and type of charitable organization. The law now permits electing individuals to apply an increased limit (Increased Individual Limit), up to 100 percent of their AGI, for qualified contributions made during 2021. More information can be found at https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-publication-526.

The IRS issued a notice clarifying the application of certain extensions granted under the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA) for the election of COBRA coverage and payment of COBRA premiums due to the COVID-19 emergency.

The IRS issued a notice clarifying the application of certain extensions granted under the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA) for the election of COBRA coverage and payment of COBRA premiums due to the COVID-19 emergency. The IRS also addressed the interaction of COBRA continuation coverage under the Emergency Relief Notices with the COBRA premium assistance available for certain individuals under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (the ARP).

Guidance and Application of Extensions
COBRA permits qualified beneficiaries who lose coverage under a group health plan to elect continuation health coverage for a 60-day period after receipt of a COBRA election notice. The initial premium can not be due earlier than 45 days after that election.

Certain extensions were granted due to the COVID-19 (Coronavirus) emergency, and issued in the Joint Notification of Extensions of Certain Timeframes for Employee Benefit Plans, Participants, and Beneficiaries Affected by the COVID-19 Outbreak. Additional guidance was provided by Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) Disaster Relief Notice 2021-01. Under the Emergency Relief Notices, up to one year must be disregarded in determining the due dates for individuals to elect COBRA continuation coverage and pay COBRA premiums during the Outbreak Period. This notice clarifies that the disregarded period for an individual to elect COBRA continuation coverage and the disregarded period for the individual to make initial and subsequent COBRA premium payments generally run concurrently.

For example, if an individual elected COBRA continuation coverage outside of the initial 60-day COBRA election timeframe, that individual generally will have one year and 105 days (60 days plus 45 days) after the date the COBRA notice was provided to make the initial COBRA premium payment. If an individual elected COBRA continuation coverage within the initial 60-day COBRA election timeframe, that individual will only have one year and 45 days after the date of the COBRA election to make the initial COBRA premium payment.

Applying the disregarded periods in this way means that individuals who delay electing COBRA may not have more than one year of total disregarded time for the COBRA election and initial COBRA payment. For example, a taxpayer cannot delay electing COBRA continuation coverage for 6 months and then add another full year to the disregarded period for purposes of determining the deadline for making the initial COBRA premium payment (resulting in a total of 18 months of disregarded time for both the COBRA election and initial COBRA payment).

Transition Relief
To avoid inequitable outcomes, in no event will an individual be required to make the initial premium payment before November 1, 2021, even if November 1, 2021 is more than one year and 105 days after the date the election notice was received, provided that the individual makes the initial premium payment within one year and 45 days after the date of the election.

ARP COBRA Premium Assistance
On March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARP) was enacted, providing for temporary COBRA premium assistance for certain “Assistance Eligible Individuals” for periods of coverage beginning on or after April 1, 2021, through periods of coverage beginning on or before September 30, 2021. The extensions of the timeframes under the Emergency Relief Notices do not apply to the periods for providing the required notice of the ARP extended election period or for electing COBRA continuation coverage with COBRA premium assistance under the ARP.

The IRS identified drought-stricken areas where tax relief is available to taxpayers that sold or exchanged livestock because of drought.

The IRS identified drought-stricken areas where tax relief is available to taxpayers that sold or exchanged livestock because of drought. The relief extends the deadlines for taxpayers to replace the livestock and avoid reporting gain on the sales. These extensions apply until the drought-stricken area has a drought-free year.

When Sales of Livestock are Involuntary Conversions
Sales of livestock due to drought are involuntary conversions of property. Taxpayers can postpone gain on involuntary conversions if they buy qualified replacement property during the replacement period. Qualified replacement property must be similar or related in service or use to the converted property.

Usually, the replacement period ends two years after the tax year in which the involuntary conversion occurs. However, a longer replacement period applies in several situations, such as when sales occur in a drought-stricken area.

Livestock Sold Because of Weather
Taxpayers have four years to replace livestock they sold or exchanged solely because of drought, flood, or other weather condition. Three conditions apply.

First, the livestock cannot be poultry.

Second, the taxpayer must have held the converted livestock for:

• draft;
• breeding; or
• dairy purposes.

Third, the weather condition must make the area eligible for federal assistance.

Persistent Drought
The IRS extends the four-year replacement period when a taxpayer sells or exchanges livestock due to persistent drought. The extension continues until the taxpayer’s region experiences a drought-free year.

The first drought-free year is the first 12-month period that:

• ends on August 31 in or after the last year of the four-year replacement period; and
• does not include any weekly period of drought.

What Areas are Suffering from Drought
The National Drought Mitigation Center produces weekly Drought Monitor maps that report drought-stricken areas. Taxpayers can view these maps at

https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/

However, the IRS also provided a list of areas where the year ending on August 31, 2021, was not a drought-free year. The replacement period in these areas will continue until the area has a drought-free year.

An individual was allowed to deduct the amount of premiums paid to provide health insurance coverage for his ex-spouse as alimony.

An individual was allowed to deduct the amount of premiums paid to provide health insurance coverage for his ex-spouse as alimony. The taxpayer had agreed to pay his then spouse’s health insurance premiums, incident to a separation agreement pending divorce, through a cafeteria plan provided by the taxpayer’s employer. Subsequently, the taxpayer had excluded the amount equal to the health insurance premiums pursuant to Code Secs. 106 and 125 from his gross income and also claimed an alimony deduction pursuant to Code Secs. 62 and 215 for the portion of the premiums covering his then spouse.

Double Deduction
There was no dispute that the taxpayer was entitled to exclude the health insurance compensation from his gross income. However, the IRS had challenged the taxpayer’s attempt to also deduct the alimony payments and argued that permitting the alimony deduction would create a windfall to the taxpayer by granting him the practical equivalent of multiple deductions for the same economic outlay. The tax court held that disallowing the alimony deduction would leave the taxpayer with a greater tax burden that would counter the intended purpose and operation of the general alimony regime. Therefore, the taxpayer undisputably qualified for both the exclusion and the alimony deduction, and no double tax benefit outcome could arise when considering the alimony regime as a whole. By asking to disallow the alimony deduction where the law plainly permits the taxpayer this right, the IRS attempted to disrupt the uniformity of the general alimony regime under the guise of the double deduction rules when no such threat was present.

Deduction for Wholly Tax-Exempt Income
In addition, the IRS contended that Code Sec. 265(a) disallowed the taxpayer’s alimony deduction because it provides that an amount may not be deducted if it is allocable to wholly tax-exempt income (other than interest). The tax court, however, had never applied Code Sec. 265(a)(1) to disallow an alimony deduction, or, in any instance where the supposed exempt item of income at issue was actually included in gross income by a different taxpayer. Moreover, the alimony payments were not considered allocable to wholly tax-exempt income for Code Sec. 265 purposes as the taxpayer was required to include it in her income.

The IRS has reminded taxpayers that the last quarter of 2021 is a good time to check withholding.

The IRS has reminded taxpayers that the last quarter of 2021 is a good time to check withholding. The IRS’s convenient Tax Withholding Estimator (https://www.irs.gov/individuals/tax-withholding-estimator), will help taxpayers determine if they have too much withheld and how to make an adjustment to put more cash into their own pocket now. About 70 percent of taxpayers over withhold their taxes every year, which typically results in a refund. Alternatively, it will help taxpayers see that they should withhold more or make an estimated tax payment to avoid a tax bill when they file their tax return next year.

The following things need to be considered when adjusting withholding for 2021:

• Coronavirus tax relief - Tax help for taxpayers, businesses, tax-exempt organizations, and others, including health plans, affected by coronavirus (COVID-19).
• Disasters such as wildfires and hurricanes – Special tax law provisions may help taxpayers and businesses recover financially from the impact of a disaster, especially when the federal government declares their location to be a major disaster area.
• Job loss – 4128, Tax Impact of Job Loss, explained how this unfortunate circumstance can create new tax issues.
• Workers moving into the gig economy due to the pandemic – The IRS advised people earning income in the gig economy to consider estimated tax payments to avoid a balance or penalties when they file.
• Life changes such as marriage or childbirth – Getting married or having a child are just a couple of life events that can affect your refund or how much you owe.

Taxes are generally paid throughout the year whether from salary withholding, quarterly estimated tax payments, or a combination of both. Taxpayers can pay online, by phone, or from the IRS2Go app. Finally, taxpayers can schedule payments for future dates, which can be useful during filing season, for payment plan payments or for estimated tax payments.

The IRS released standards that a limited liability company (LLC) must satisfy to receive a determination letter recognizing it as tax-exempt under Code Secs. 501(a)(1) and 501(c)(3). This does not affect the status of organizations currently recognized under Code Sec. 501(c)(3).

The IRS released standards that a limited liability company (LLC) must satisfy to receive a determination letter recognizing it as tax-exempt under Code Secs. 501(a)(1) and 501(c)(3). This does not affect the status of organizations currently recognized under Code Sec. 501(c)(3).

Required Provisions
The IRS would issue said letter only if an LLC’s articles of organization and its operating agreement each include:

• provisions requiring that each member of the LLC be either (1) recognized as aforementioned; (2) a governmental unit under Code Sec. 170(c)(1); or (3) wholly-owned instrumentality of such, a governmental unit;
• express charitable purposes and charitable dissolution provisions;
• express chapter 42 compliance provisions under Code Sec. 508(e)(1), if the LLC is a private foundation; and
• an acceptable contingency plan (such as suspension of membership rights) in the event that one or more members cease to be except organizations or governmental units or wholly-owned instrumentalities.

Finally, comments could be made electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov (type IRS-2020-0042 in the search field on regulations.gov to find this Notice and submit comments). Alternatively, send comments by mail: Internal Revenue Service, CC:PA:LPD:PR (Notice 2021-56), Room 5203, P.O. Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044.

Final regulations under Code Sec. 301 update the existing regulations under this provision to reflect statutory changes made by the Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988 ( P.L. 100-647) (the 1988 Act).

Final regulations under Code Sec. 301 update the existing regulations under this provision to reflect statutory changes made by the Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988 ( P.L. 100-647) (the 1988 Act). These changes generally provide that the amount of a Section 301 distribution of property made by a corporation to its shareholder is the fair market value of the distributed property. The final Section 301 regulations adopt prior proposed regulations ( NPRM REG-121694-16), without substantive changes, and apply generally to distributions made after September 22, 2021.

Code Sec. 301 and Amendments by the Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988
Code Sec. 301 provides rules for the treatment of a distribution of property, including money, made by a corporation to its shareholder with respect to that shareholder’s stock ownership in that corporation (a Section 301 distribution).

The 1988 Act amended Code Sec. 301(b)(1) to provide that the amount of any Section 301 distribution is the amount of money received plus the fair market value of the other property received. The 1988 Act also amended Code Sec. 301(d) to provide that the basis of property received in a Section 301 distribution is the fair market value of such property (both amendments, collectively, are referred to as the 1988 amendments).

The current Section 301 regulations reflect the rules of these two provisions as they existed prior to the 1988 amendments. Accordingly, to the extent preempted by statute, the current regulations have no application.

2019 Proposed Regulations
In 2019, the IRS issued proposed regulations under Code Sec. 301 ( NPRM REG-121694-16) to reflect the 1988 amendments (2019 proposed regulations). The scope of the 2019 proposed regulations was limited to:

• deleting provisions made obsolete by statutory changes;
• making minor additions and revisions to reflect current statutory text;
• making certain non-substantive changes for purposes of clarity and readability, including reordering and redesignating paragraphs; and
• amending cross-references in regulations under other provisions to reflect the proposed reordering and redesignating of paragraphs in the Section 301 regulations.

Final Regulations
The final Section 301 regulations adopt the 2019 proposed regulations with no substantive changes and with certain non-substantive changes for purposes of clarity and readability. The final regulations apply to Section 301 distributions made after September 22, 2021. However, these regulations update the previous regulations under Code Sec. 301 to reflect the statutory changes made by the 1988 Act, which apply to distributions made in tax years beginning after December 31, 1986.

The Treasury and IRS have issued final regulations addressing the calculation of qualified business asset investment for qualified improvement property, under the alternative depreciation system (ADS), for purposes of the Code Sec. 250 deduction (for foreign-derived intangible income and Code Sec. 951A global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI)) and for purposes of determining GILTI.

The Treasury and IRS have issued final regulations addressing the calculation of qualified business asset investment for qualified improvement property, under the alternative depreciation system (ADS), for purposes of the Code Sec. 250 deduction (for foreign-derived intangible income and Code Sec. 951A global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI)) and for purposes of determining GILTI.

The regulations also contain transition rules relating to the impact of loss accounts on net operating loss carrybacks allowed under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (P.L. 116-136) (the "CARES Act”").

Treatment of Qualified Improvement Property Under Code Secs. 250 and 951A
The regulations clarify that the technical amendments to Code Sec. 168 made by section 2307(a) of the CARES Act apply to determine the adjusted basis of property under Code Sec. 250 and Code Sec. 951A. The CARES Act classified qualified improvement property as 15-year property with a 20-year recovery period, for purposes of ADS. The rule is treated as effective December 22, 2017. The ADS rules used for determining qualified business asset investments are the rules in effect on December 22, 2017.

NOL Carrybacks
The CARES Act allowed taxpayers to carryback for five years, NOLs incurred in 2018 through 2020. The regulations provide rules analogous to the existing transition rules in Reg. §1.904(f)-12(j) to situations involving an NOL arising in a post-2017 tax year that is carried back to a pre-2018 tax year. The rules of Reg. §1.904(g)-3(b) apply to the NOL carryback, and income in a pre-2018 separate category in the tax year to which the NOL is carried back is generally treated as if it included only income that would be assigned to the same separate category in post-2017 tax years.

Therefore, any separate limitation loss created by reason of a passive category component of a post-2017 NOL that is carried back to offset pre-2018 general category income will be recaptured in post-2017 tax years as general category income, and not as a combination of post-2017 general, foreign branch, or Code Sec. 951A category income. Losses will first ratably offset a taxpayer’s general category income in the carryback year, to the extent thereof, and that no separate limitation loss account will be created as a result of that offset. The amount of income in the general category available to be offset under this rule is determined after first offsetting the general category income in the carryback year by a post-2017 NOL component in the general category that is carried back to the same year.

PFIC Rules
Proposed regulations under Code Sec. 1297 and Code Sec. 1298, for determining whether a foreign corporation is treated as a passive foreign investment company (PFIC) and the treatment of income and assets of a qualifying insurance corporation that is engaged in the active conduct of an insurance business, were not finalized.

The Treasury and IRS intends to finalize the regulations separately.

The Senate has approved a bipartisan IRS reform bill, which now heads to President Trump’s desk. Trump is expected to sign the bill into law.

The Senate has approved a bipartisan IRS reform bill, which now heads to President Trump’s desk. Trump is expected to sign the bill into law.

The reworked Taxpayer First Act ( HR 3151) cleared the Senate on the evening of June 13. The revamped measure had been approved unanimously in the House on June 10.

"After years of good-faith, bipartisan work, our IRS reforms are finally going to become law," House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal, D-Mass., and ranking member Kevin Brady, R-Tex., said in a joint statement. "In this historic legislation, we focused on putting taxpayers first."

Likewise, Senate Finance Committee (SFC) Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, praised the passage of the bipartisan, bicameral IRS reform bill. "It’s a big first step toward strengthening taxpayer protections and turning the IRS into the customer service organization it ought to be," Grassley said in a statement. "I look forward to President Trump signing it into law so the IRS can begin implementing long overdue reforms that will put taxpayers first," he added.

Reworked Bill

The reworked IRS reform bill, originally introduced in the last Congress, was revised earlier in June after the House passed a prior version in April. However, the original House-approved Taxpayer First bill (HR 1957) was deemed doomed in the Senate by May because of recent controversy surrounding the IRS’s Free File program. Thus, the provision codifying the Free File program was stripped from the original bill; the measure was reintroduced as HR 3151. It then quickly cleared each chamber.

Service Improvements

Generally, the Taxpayer First Act aims to reform the IRS for the first time in 20 years to better meet the needs of taxpayers. It requires the IRS to develop a comprehensive customer service strategy, as well as a plan to redesign its structure, modernize its technology, and enhance its cyber security. In addition, the new law will:

• waive the application fee for an offer in compromise (OIC) by a low-income taxpayer;

• clarify information available about low-income taxpayer clinics (LITCs);

• codify the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) Program;

• require notice regarding the closure of taxpayer assistance centers (TACs);

• improve the IRS whistleblower program; and

• modify the private debt collection program.

Identity Protection

The legislation includes a number of provisions to help protect taxpayers from tax ID theft and improve taxpayer interaction with the IRS should they become a victim. For example, the IRS must provide a single point of contact for victims of identity theft, notification of suspected identity theft, and guidelines for stolen identity refund fraud cases.

The IRS is required to expand its current program that allows victims of tax ID theft to obtain a personalized PIN. Any individual must be allowed to request an identity protection personal identification number (IP PIN) to confirm a taxpayer’s identity on tax returns.

Electronic Filing

The IRS reform bill directly impacts taxpayers and other persons by reducing the threshold for filing electronically from 250 or more returns during the year. The threshold is 100 or more returns for 2021, and 10 or more return after 2021. The IRS can waive the e-file requirement for tax return preparers in areas with limited internet access.

E-filing requirements are also extended to all tax-exempt organizations that file returns or statements, regardless of amount of assets, gross receipts, or number of returns to be filed. In addition, the IRS is directed to develop an internet portal to allow taxpayers to file series Form 1099, similar to the portal used to file series Form W-2 with the Social Security Administration.

Other Electronic Services

To help increase the use of electronic services, the IRS must publish within six months uniform standards for accepting electronic signatures on requests for disclosure of taxpayer information (Forms 2848, 4506-T, and 8821). It must also limit the redisclosure of return information by a designee to only those expressly consented to by the taxpayer.

The new law increases the penalty for improper disclosure or use of information by return preparers. It also puts new limits on access to returns and return information by non-IRS employees.

Overall, the IRS must develop procedures to authenticate users of its suite of electronic services, to prevent tax refund fraud. Included in these services, the IRS must develop an automated version of its Income Verification Express Service (IVES) for third-parties.

Planning Note: The legislation also allows the IRS to accept credit and debit card payments for the payment of taxes directly, as opposed to through a third party. In addition, the IRS must establish procedures for taxpayers to report misdirected deposits of refunds.

Other Changes

Additional changes made by the Taxpayer First Act include:

• clarifying procedures for equitable relief from joint liability;

• establish new safeguards on the seizure of funds believed to be structured to avoid the $10,000 financial reporting requirement; and

• modify procedures for the issuance of summons and notice of third party contacts by the IRS.

To help pay for these changes, the minimum penalty for failure to file returns is increased after 2019 to the lesser of $330 (indexed for inflation) or 100 percent of the amount required to be shown on the return.

The IRS has issued final regulations that require taxpayers to reduce the amount any charitable contribution deduction by the amount of any state and local tax (SALT) credit they receive or expect to receive in return. The rules are aimed at preventing taxpayers from getting around the SALT deduction limits. A safe harbor has also been provided to certain individuals to treat any disallowed charitable contribution deduction under this rule as a deductible payment of taxes under Code Sec. 164. The final regulations and the safe harbor apply to charitable contribution payments made after August 27, 2018.

The IRS has issued final regulations that require taxpayers to reduce the amount any charitable contribution deduction by the amount of any state and local tax (SALT) credit they receive or expect to receive in return. The rules are aimed at preventing taxpayers from getting around the SALT deduction limits. A safe harbor has also been provided to certain individuals to treat any disallowed charitable contribution deduction under this rule as a deductible payment of taxes under Code Sec. 164. The final regulations and the safe harbor apply to charitable contribution payments made after August 27, 2018.

SALT Limit

An individual’s itemized deduction of SALT taxes is limited to $10,000 ($5,000 if married filing separately) for tax years beginning after 2017. Some states and local governments have adopted laws that allowed individuals to receive a state tax credit for contributions to certain charitable funds. These laws are aimed at getting around the SALT deduction limit by creating a charitable deduction for federal income tax purposes. Regardless of state and local law, however, federal law controls when determining charitable deductions for federal income tax purposes.

Return Benefit

The final regulations generally adopt the rule in proposal regulations ( NPRM REG-112176-18) that the receipt of a SALT credit for a charitable contribution is the receipt of a return benefit (quid pro quo benefit). If a taxpayer makes a payment or transfers property to Code Sec. 170(c) entity, he or she must reduce any charitable contribution deduction for federal income tax purposes if he or she receives or expects to receive a SALT credit in return. A taxpayer is generally is not required to reduce the charitable deduction on account of its receipt of state or local tax deductions. However, the taxpayer must reduce its charitable deduction if it receives or expects to receive state or local tax deductions in excess of the taxpayer’s payment or the fair market value of property transferred.

De Minimis Exception

The final regulations retain the de minimis exception that a taxpayer’s charitable deduction is not reduced if the SALT credits received as a return benefit do not exceed 15 percent of the taxpayer’s charitable payment. The 15-percent exception applies only if the sum of the taxpayer SALT credit received or excepted to receive does not exceed 15 percent of the taxpayer’s payment or of the fair market value of the property transferred.

Safe Harbor

The IRS has also issued Notice 2019-12 providing a safe harbor for certain individuals if any portion of a charitable contribution deduction disallowed due to the receipt of a SALT credit. Under the safe harbor, any disallowed portion of the charitable deduction may be treated as the payment of SALT taxes for the purposes of deducting taxes under Code Sec. 164.

Eligible taxpayers can use the safe harbor to determine their SALT deduction on their tax-year 2018 return. Those who have already filed may be able to claim a greater SALT deduction by filing an amended return if they have not already claimed the $10,000 maximum amount ($5,000 if married filing separately).

Republicans’ 2017 overhaul of the tax code created a new 20-percent deduction of qualified business income (QBI), subject to certain limitations, for pass-through entities (sole proprietorships, partnerships, limited liability companies, or S corporations). The controversial QBI deduction—also called the "pass-through" deduction—has remained an ongoing topic of debate among lawmakers, tax policy experts, and stakeholders.

Republicans’ 2017 overhaul of the tax code created a new 20-percent deduction of qualified business income (QBI), subject to certain limitations, for pass-through entities (sole proprietorships, partnerships, limited liability companies, or S corporations). The controversial QBI deduction—also called the "pass-through" deduction—has remained an ongoing topic of debate among lawmakers, tax policy experts, and stakeholders.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97), enacted at the end of 2017, created the new Section 199A QBI deduction for noncorporate taxpayers, effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017. However, under current law the QBI deduction will sunset after 2025. In addition to the QBI deduction’s impermanence, its complexity and ambiguous statutory language have created many questions for taxpayers and practitioners.

The IRS first released much-anticipated proposed regulations for the new QBI deduction, REG-107892-18, on August 8, 2018. The proposed regulations were published in the Federal Register on August 16, 2018. The IRS released the final regulations and notice of additional proposed rulemaking on January 18, 2019, followed by a revised version of the final regulations on February 1, 2019. Additionally, Rev. Proc. 2019-11 was issued concurrently to provide further guidance on the definition of wages. Also, a proposed revenue procedure, Notice 2019-7, was issued concurrently to provide a safe harbor under which certain rental real estate enterprises may be treated as a trade or business for purposes of Section 199A.

Wolters Kluwer recently interviewed Tom West, a principal in the passthroughs group of the Washington National Tax practice of KPMG LLP, about the Section 199A QBI deduction regulations. Notably, West formerly served as tax legislative counsel at the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Tax Policy. This article represents the views of the author only and does not necessarily represent the views or professional advice of KPMG LLP.

Wolters Kluwer: What is your general overview of the revised, final regulations for the Section 199A Qualified Business Income (QBI) or "pass-through" deduction?

Tom West: I think it is admirable that Treasury and IRS were able to publish these final regulations so quickly and address so many of the comments and questions that the proposed regulations generated. I think they realized how important this particular package was to so many taxpayers for the 2018 filing season and, while questions obviously remain, having these rules out in time to inform decisions for this year’s tax returns is helpful. In particular, the liberalized aggregation rules and the additional examples regarding certain specified service trades or businesses (SSTBs) are the most consequential in my mind.

Wolters Kluwer: What should taxpayers and practitioners keep in mind in consideration of relying on either the proposed or final regulations for the 2018 tax year?

Tom West: I have to imagine that when choosing between the two, for most taxpayers the final regulations will ultimately provide the better result. The ability to aggregate at the entity level, which was only provided in the final regulations, may be a key consideration for those taxpayers with more complicated or tiered structures. That said, I do think taxpayers need to be careful in their aggregation modeling because you are going to be stuck with your aggregation once you’ve filed. It may be that some taxpayers wait on getting locked into a particular aggregation and continue to study the new rules—and even wait on additional guidance that may be coming. However, it may be important to note that the final regulations provide that if an individual fails to aggregate, the individual may not aggregate trades or businesses on an amended return—other than for the 2018 tax year.

Wolters Kluwer: How is the removal of the proposed 80 percent rule regarding specified service trades or businesses (SSTBs) from the final regulations likely to impact certain taxpayers?

Tom West: First of all, I think the removal of this rule is a demonstration of two important dynamics. One, the critical importance of the engagement of taxpayers in the comment process, and, two, the government’s willingness to listen and adapt in their rule-making. I don’t know if there are particular industries or taxpayers who will be impacted, but I do know that the change is a very logical and appropriate one, and logic doesn’t always prevail in these processes, so I’m happy to give the regulators credit when it does.

Wolters Kluwer: Which industries may have been helped or hindered by the final regulations with respect to SSTB rules?

Tom West: I’m not sure specific industries were helped, but the biggest positive in terms of the SSTB final rules is the carryover from the proposed regulations of the treatment of the skill or reputation provision. Had Treasury and the IRS gone in a different direction, there was a risk of that provision swallowing the rest of the 199A regime—not to mention how much more subjective the already sometimes difficult SSTB determinations would have become.

Wolters Kluwer: Are there any lingering, unanswered questions among taxpayers or practitioners that particularly stand out when determining what constitutes SSTB income?

Tom West: I think many taxpayers who have both SSTB and non-SSTB activities were hoping for more clarity, either in rules or examples, on how to acceptably segregate business lines or on when (or if) certain activities are inextricably tied together. There are also still lingering questions regarding when a trade or business is an SSTB—particularly in the field of health.

Wolters Kluwer: Were there any surprises in the final regulations?

Tom West: I don’t know if I’m surprised, knowing the concerns that led them to the decisions they made, but the fact that Treasury and IRS held the line on some of the SSTB-related rules is notable. I’m thinking specifically of the so-called "cliff" effect of the de minimis rule and the fact that owners of certain kinds of SSTB businesses, e.g., sports teams, are not allowed to benefit from the Section 199A deduction.

Republicans’ 2017 overhaul of the tax code created a new 20-percent deduction of qualified business income (QBI), subject to certain limitations, for pass-through entities (sole proprietorships, partnerships, limited liability companies, or S corporations). The controversial QBI deduction—also called the "pass-through" deduction—has remained an ongoing topic of debate among lawmakers, tax policy experts, and stakeholders.

Republicans’ 2017 overhaul of the tax code created a new 20-percent deduction of qualified business income (QBI), subject to certain limitations, for pass-through entities (sole proprietorships, partnerships, limited liability companies, or S corporations). The controversial QBI deduction—also called the "pass-through" deduction—has remained an ongoing topic of debate among lawmakers, tax policy experts, and stakeholders.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97), enacted at the end of 2017, created the new Section 199A QBI deduction for noncorporate taxpayers, effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017. However, under current law the QBI deduction will sunset after 2025. In addition to the QBI deduction’s impermanence, its complexity and ambiguous statutory language have created many questions for taxpayers and practitioners.

The IRS first released much-anticipated proposed regulations for the new QBI deduction, REG-107892-18, on August 8, 2018. The proposed regulations were published in the Federal Register on August 16, 2018. The IRS released the final regulations and notice of additional proposed rulemaking on January 18, 2019, followed by a revised version of the final regulations on February 1, 2019. Additionally, Rev. Proc. 2019-11, I.R.B. 2019-9, 742, was issued concurrently to provide further guidance on the definition of wages. Also, a proposed Revenue Procedure, Notice 2019-7, I.R.B. 2019-9, 740, was issued, concurrently providing a safe harbor under which certain rental real estate enterprises may be treated as a trade or business for purposes of Section 199A.

Wolters Kluwer recently interviewed Tom West, a principal in the passthroughs group of the Washington National Tax practice of KPMG LLP, about the Section 199A QBI deduction regulations. Notably, West formerly served as tax legislative counsel at the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Tax Policy. This article represents the views of the author only and does not necessarily represent the views or professional advice of KPMG LLP.

Wolters Kluwer: Neither the proposed nor final regulations for Section 199A give guidance as to when rental real estate activity constitutes a Section 162 trade or business. How might the application of the safe harbor provided for in IRS Notice 2019-7 offer taxpayers clarity? And how might failure to qualify for the safe harbor impact the determination of whether the rental activity is a trade or business under Section 199A?

Tom West: The safe harbor is helpful but it appears to be intended for relatively smaller taxpayers who may have had questions about their activities rising to the level of a trade or business. I don’t think falling outside of the safe harbor is dispositive—especially in light of the recent policy statement from Treasury regarding sub-regulatory guidance.

Wolters Kluwer: Can you speak to the some of the complexity that may be involved in tax planning with respect to achieving the right balance between adequate W-2 wages and QBI?

Tom West: Other than for small taxpayers, there is only a benefit under Section 199A if the limitations are met. It does not do any good to have QBI but then have insufficient W-2 wages and qualified property to meet the limitations. So when taxpayers are evaluating what constitutes a qualified trade or business (or whether to aggregate qualified trades or businesses) they will need to determine the amount of W-2 wages with respect to each QTB. Aligning the W-2 wages with the QTB will be important—but the salary expense will also result in a reduction in the amount of QBI and therefore the amount of any Section 199A benefit—so modeling becomes critical. Consideration should also be given to any collateral consequences—for instance the impact of the alignment on allocation and apportionment for state taxes.

Wolters Kluwer: According to a March 18, 2019, Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) report, Reference Number: 2019-44-022, IRS management indicated that the timeline related to the issuance of Section 199A guidance did not provide enough time for the IRS to develop a QBI deduction tax form. Although the IRS did create a worksheet, do you have a prediction on what key elements may be included on the new form once released?

Tom West: I do think that worksheets could be developed that would facilitate the reporting of Section 199A information—particularly through tiered structures—so as to ease the reporting burden and enhance compliance.

Wolters Kluwer: The IRS has estimated that nearly 23.7 million taxpayers may be eligible to claim the Section 199A deduction and that more than 22.2 million (94 percent) of those eligible taxpayers will not require a complex calculation for the deduction. What notable differences do you expect there are between "complex" and the majority of calculations?

Tom West: For taxpayers under the Section 199A income thresholds ($157.5K single, $315K joint), the deduction is very easy to calculate and claim. Those taxpayers don’t need to worry about being in an SSTB, how much wages they paid, or the basis of their property. Once those taxpayers hit those income thresholds though, even in the phase-out range, things very quickly get complex—and that’s as a consequence of the statute; it is not something that the regulators can change.

Wolters Kluwer: Do you anticipate the IRS will issue further guidance on the Section 199A deduction?

Tom West: I do. As I said at the top, I think part of the government’s motivation in finalizing these regulations so quickly was providing guidance to taxpayers ahead of the tax-filing season. And while for the majority of taxpayers who are below the 199A cap there is probably now sufficient guidance, I think there are still a lot of questions for those with more complex situations. Given the number of taxpayers who are eligible for this deduction, and the importance of Section 199A as the big benefit to non-corporate businesses in what the Administration views as a signature legislative achievement, I have to believe that the government will be responsive to taxpayers’ requests for additional help on this provision. However, given that the provision is due to sunset, it will be important that any guidance is forthcoming in fairly short order to be of any usefulness to taxpayers.

Wolters Kluwer: At this time, do you have any recommendations for taxpayers and practitioners moving forward?

Tom West: As people are going through their tax filings this year, I’d keep a list of issues, questions, and areas where additional guidance would be helpful. It often happens that problems with new legislation or regulations don’t reveal themselves until taxpayers have to put pencil to paper and track their real-world numbers through returns. We’ll all have that experience this year and, with those lists of issues and questions in hand, there may be an opportunity to approach the IRS and Treasury in the hopes of getting resolution going forward. Keeping that list could also help identify areas for tax planning and perhaps ease the complexity of filing for 2019.