The 2017 tax act signed into law on December 22, 2017 imposes a broad limit on the deductibility of business interest expense for tax years beginning in 2018 and later, which may result in increased tax liability for corporations and investors in pass-through businesses that finance acquisitions with debt.

Date: 12/22/2019 (PDF)

The 2017 tax act signed into law on December 22, 2017 imposes a broad limit on the deductibility of business interest expense for tax years beginning in 2018 and later, which may result in increased tax liability for corporations and investors in pass-through businesses that finance acquisitions with debt.

For purposes of the limitation on the deduction of business interest expense, “interest” also includes substitute interest payments, debt issuance costs, loan commitment fees, certain amounts that affect the economic cost of funds or yield of a borrowing or an interest-generating asset, and certain amounts predominantly associated with the time value of money.

If the business interest limitation applies to any of your businesses, then the amount of business interest expense that you may deduct is limited to the sum of: (1) 30% of adjusted taxable income; plus (2) 100% of business interest income; plus (3) 100% of floor plan financing interest.

For tax years beginning in 2018 through 2021, adjusted taxable income (ATI) is computed by starting with your taxable income for the tax year (disregarding the business interest limitation), and then adding to it and subtracting from it the following amounts:

Add to Taxable Income:

• business interest expense;
• net operating loss deduction;
• deduction for qualified business income;
• depreciation, amortization, or depletion deduction;
• capital loss carrybacks or carryovers; and
• any deduction or loss not properly allocable to a non-excepted trade or business.

Subtract from Taxable Income:

• business interest income;
• floor plan financing interest expense;
• the lesser of (i) gain realized on sale or disposition of property or (ii) deductions for depreciation, amortization or depletion taken for such property during a tax year beginning after 2017 (and similar adjustments for sales or dispositions of property held by a partnership or member of a consolidated group upon the sale or other disposition of the partnership interest or stock of the member); and
• any income or gain that is not properly allocable to a non-excepted trade or business.

For tax years beginning in 2022 and later, deductions for depreciation, amortization, or depletion are not taken into account in computing ATI.

Special rules and other adjustments apply to certain types of taxpayers when computing ATI.

Business interest expense does not include investment interest expense. However, all interest income and all interest expense of a C corporation (including, in certain cases, members of a consolidated group of corporations, REITs, and RICs) is treated as business interest income and business interest expense, unless the interest income or interest expense is allocable to an “excepted trade or business” (defined below). For example, investment interest expense that is passed through by a partnership to a C corporation partner generally would be considered business interest expense.

The business interest limitation generally applies to all taxpayers that have business interest expense. However, a small business taxpayer that meets the “gross receipts test” is exempt from the limitation. A business meets the gross receipts test if it is not a tax shelter and it has average annual gross receipts of $25 million or less for the three previous tax years. The $25 million amount is adjusted for inflation. Please note that “tax shelter” is defined broadly for this purpose, and includes any partnership or S corporation that allocates more than 35% of its losses for the year to limited partners or limited entrepreneurs.

The business interest limitation generally applies at the entity level to all business debt incurred, including debt incurred before 2018.

Interest that is allocable to an “excepted trade or business” is not treated as business interest.

Excepted trades and businesses are those in the trade or business of providing services as an employee, certain regulated utility trades or businesses, certain real property trades or businesses that make an irrevocable election to be excepted from the business interest limitation, and certain farming businesses that make an irrevocable election to be excepted from the business interest limitation.

For those businesses electing to be excepted from the business interest expense limitation, making the election involves a tradeoff: a real property business or farming business that makes the election must use the Alternative Depreciation System to depreciate certain types of property, which requires straight-line depreciation over a longer depreciable recovery period compared to depreciation under the General Depreciation System.

If you are engaged in both an excepted trade or business and a non-excepted trade or business, interest expense that is allocable to an excepted trade or business is not subject to the business interest limitation, and the amount of your items of income, gain, deduction, or loss, including interest income that is allocable to an excepted trade or business, is excluded in determining the business interest limitation. Therefore, you must allocate your tax items between excepted and non-excepted trades and businesses to determine the limitation.

Business interest expense not allowed as a deduction for a tax year is treated as a business expense paid or accrued in the next tax year, and can be carried forward indefinitely. Disallowed business interest expense carryforwards are subject to limitation in change-of-ownership situations.

Special rules regarding the carryover of disallowed business interest apply to partnerships and S corporations. For partnerships, any business interest expense that is not allowed as a deduction is passed through to the partners, and can be deducted by the partners only to the extent that there is excess taxable income from that specific partnership to absorb the deduction. For S corporations, disallowed business interest expense is carried over to the next tax year of the S corporation and is treated as interest expense paid or accrued by the S corporation in that year.

The business interest limitation applies at the consolidated return level, and a consolidated group has a single limitation. In calculating the limitation, a consolidated group's business interest expense and business interest income is, respectively, the sum of its members’ business interest expense and business interest income.

The business interest limitation applies to a foreign corporation that is a controlled foreign corporation (CFC), generally in the same manner as it applies apply to a domestic C corporation. If a CFC is a partner in a partnership, the limitation applies to the partnership in the same manner as if the CFC were a domestic C corporation.

The business interest limitation rules are complex and can significantly impact your tax liability. We suggest that you meet with us as soon as possible to discuss strategies to minimize the impact of the limitation, including determining whether your business qualifies to make an election to be excepted from the limitation, whether making the election is advisable in your situation, and if so, what steps we need to take to make the election.

This article contains general information only.  It is not tax advice and it should not be used as a basis for any business or tax decision. You should consult with a qualified professional before taking any action that may affect your business or you personally.

This article will give you a better understanding of the first-year expensing (also referred to as §179 expensing) and additional first-year depreciation (also referred to as bonus depreciation). Businesses that purchase capital assets are allowed to deduct the decline in value of the assets over their useful lives. This depreciation deduction is intended to help businesses to eventually recover the costs of capital assets.

Date: 12/20/2019 (PDF)

Certain provisions in the tax code enable you to accelerate recovery of your cost of certain plants, machinery, equipment, computer software, and other qualified property that you acquire for business use, rather than having to depreciate those costs over several tax years. Expensing (immediate write-off) is the primary cost recovery vehicle for capital assets (acquired for business use) placed in service from 2018 through 2022. The two mechanisms for deducting the cost of assets in the year they are placed in service are first-year expensing under Internal Revenue Code §179 and bonus depreciation under Internal Revenue Code §168(k).

Individuals and business entities that have taxable income greater than or equal to the amount of qualified first-year expensing property placed in service during the tax year, can elect to claim a first-year expensing deduction for up to $1 million of the cost such property. Most machinery and equipment, certain commercial building improvements, property used to furnish lodging, and certain computer software that businesses purchase (or lease under a capital lease) are qualified first-year expensing property, but rental real estate is not. First-year expensing is available for both new and used assets, and for both purchased and leased (under a capital lease) assets. To be eligible for the first-year expensing deduction, the assets must be used in the United States.

The $1 million annual limit on the first-year expensing deduction is reduced if you place in service more than $2.5 million in qualified first-year expensing property during the year. No first-year expensing deduction is allowed if you place in service $3.5 million or more in qualified first-year expensing property during the year. Because of this property cost limit, larger businesses generally claim bonus depreciation rather than first-year expensing.

In contrast to the first-year expensing deduction, there is no annual dollar limit on the bonus depreciation deduction amount, and bonus depreciation may be deducted even in a loss year. And unlike the first-year expensing deduction, the bonus depreciation deduction is not elective (except in the case of qualifying fruit- and nut-bearing plants). However, you may elect not to deduct bonus depreciation for any class of qualified property.

The bonus depreciation deduction is available to individuals, estates, trusts, and business entities that invest in new or used capital assets that have a depreciation recovery period of 20 years or less, as well as depreciable computer software, certain water utility property, qualified film, television, and live theater productions, and for farmers, specified fruit- and nut-bearing plants. Bonus depreciation is available for both purchased and leased (under a capital lease) assets. To be eligible for bonus depreciation, the assets must be used in the United States.

The percentage of the adjusted basis of qualified property that is deducted as bonus depreciation is 100% for most qualified property placed in service before 2023, but it is scheduled to be reduced by 20% per year from 2023 through 2026, and fully phased out by 2027.

Qualified improvement property — which before 2018 could qualify for both first-year expensing and bonus depreciation — now qualifies for first-year expensing only (subject to the annual dollar limit and the taxable income limit), but does not qualify for bonus depreciation. Qualified improvement property is an improvement to an interior portion of a commercial building if the improvement is placed in service after the date the building was first placed in service. However, qualified improvement property does not include building enlargements, elevators and escalators, and the internal structural framework of a building.

Both first-year expensing and bonus depreciation are highly technical in nature and subject to limits and exceptions. To fully leverage these deductions, it is important to understand their specific requirements. It is also advisable to monitor these provisions for further legislative amendment.

This article contains general information only.  It is not tax advice and it should not be used as a basis for any business or tax decision. You should consult with a qualified professional before taking any action that may affect your business or you personally.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), 816 enacted March 23, 2010, and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (HCERA), 817 enacted March 30, 2010, ushered in a series of changes to the rules for obtaining and providing health care. The laws, as amended, are commonly referred to as the Affordable Care Act (or “ACA”). These rules are administered by the Departments of Treasury (and the IRS), Labor (DOL) and Health and Human Services (HHS), jointly or separately, as appropriate. 818

Date: 12/10/2019 (PDF)

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), 816 enacted March 23, 2010, and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (HCERA), 817 enacted March 30, 2010, ushered in a series of changes to the rules for obtaining and providing health care. The laws, as amended, are commonly referred to as the Affordable Care Act (or “ACA”). These rules are administered by the Departments of Treasury (and the IRS), Labor (DOL) and Health and Human Services (HHS), jointly or separately, as appropriate. 818

816 Pub. L. No. 111-148.

817 Pub. L. No. 111-152.

Note however that White House Executive Order 13765 dated January 20, 2017, directs governmental departments and agencies with authority and responsibility under the Affordable Care Act to “exercise all authority and discretion available to them to waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation of any provision or requirement of the [ACA] that would impose a fiscal burden on any State or a cost, fee, tax, penalty or regulatory burden on individuals, families, healthcare providers, health insurers, patients, recipients of healthcare services, purchasers of health insurance, or makers of medical devices, products or medications.” These directives are to be carried out “[t]o the maximum extent permitted by law,” indicating that compliance with ACA is required until other regulations or guidance is issued. Also, White House Executive Order 13813 dated October 12, 2017, directs the IRS, DOL, and HHS to consider proposing regulations and revising guidance to: expand small businesses’ access to association health plans (AHPs) (see ¶5920.11.C.4.); make available short-term, limited-duration insurance that lasts longer than three months and is renewable (see ¶5920.11.B.21.); and increase the availability of health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs) to workers and allow their use with nongroup coverage (see ¶5920.09.D.3.). In addition, White House Executive Order 13877, dated June 24, 2019, contains several directives, including but not limited to, that: (1) the IRS, DOL, and HHS to solicit comment on a proposal to require providers, issuers, and self-insured group health plans to provide or facilitate access to information about expected out-of-pocket costs before patients receive care; (2) the IRS issue guidance to expand patients' ability to select high-deductible health plans that can be used alongside an HSA, and that cover low-cost preventive care, before the deductible, for medical care that helps maintain health status for individuals with chronic conditions (see ¶5920.08.C.2.b.); (3) the Treasury propose regulations to treat expenses related to certain types of arrangements, potentially including direct primary care arrangements and healthcare sharing ministries, as eligible medical expenses; and (4) the Treasury issue guidance to increase the amount of FSA carryover funds.

(1) Individuals —   TPS 5920.16.A.1.

U.S. citizens and legal residents, unless exempted, must maintain minimum essential health care coverage or face penalties (which are reduced to zero for months beginning after 2018). Individuals may qualify for a health care premium tax credit or cost-sharing reductions to assist them in paying for coverage. 819

819 These requirements took effect starting in 2014. The 2017 tax act (Pub. L. No. 115-97) reduced to penalty amount to zero after 2018, as discussed in ¶5920.16.B.1. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pub. L. No. 111-148, §10108, would have allowed qualifying low-income employees whose employer offers a free choice voucher to obtain health care coverage on their own using funds from the voucher, and would have provided tax benefits to employers offering the vouchers. Pub. L. No. 112-10, §1858, removed the voucher provisions of Pub. L. No. 111-148, §10108.

Group health plans generally are prohibited from imposing any preexisting condition exclusions on individuals. 820

820 This requirement also took effect starting in 2014. From 2010 through 2013, eligible individuals with a preexisting condition may have been able to obtain coverage under a temporary high risk health insurance pool program to provide health insurance coverage that does not impose any preexisting condition exclusion.

(2) Employers —   TPS 5920.16.A.2.

Employers are not required to offer health care coverage to their employees. However, as of 2015, 821 large employers—with 50 or more full-time-equivalent employees in the prior year—who do not offer health care coverage, or who offer coverage that does not meet minimum standards or is unaffordable to their employees, generally are subject to excise taxes (sometimes referred to as “play or pay” penalties) if any of their full-time employees obtain subsidized health insurance coverage through an Exchange.

821 Notice 2013-45 (transition relief provided for one year).

Also, large employers must report information about the health coverage that they offer, and all employers must report information about the health coverage that they provide.

Businesses with fewer than 25 employees may be eligible for tax credits to assist them in setting up or maintaining health plans. Small businesses also may offer plans to their employees through state health exchanges.

In addition, beginning in 2022, employers with self-insured plans and health insurance issuers that offer coverage beyond the required coverage (sometimes called “Cadillac” plan coverage) may have to pay an excise tax.

(3) Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers —   TPS 5920.16.A.3.

Group health plans and health insurance issuers are faced with a variety of plan design and reporting and disclosure changes under the 2010 health care reform legislation. For example, for plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2010, insured group health plans cannot discriminate in favor of highly compensated individuals; plans that offer dependent child coverage must extend the coverage to children under the age of 26; plans cannot impose lifetime or annual limits (with restricted limits allowed during a phase-in period) or rescind coverage; plans must cover preventive health services; plans cannot contain preexisting condition exclusions for enrollees under age 19; and plans must develop and use uniform explanation of coverage documents and standardized definitions. See ¶5920.11.B., above.

Among the many requirements imposed for plan years beginning in and after 2014, plans cannot contain preexisting condition exclusions for adult enrollees or otherwise discriminate against any enrollees based on health status; and plans cannot impose excessive waiting periods. Health plans and health insurance coverage in existence on March 23, 2010, must comply with many new requirements, but are excluded from some requirements to the extent they retain “grandfathered” status. See ¶5920.11.B., above, for discussion of these plan requirements. See ¶5920.16.D.4., below, for discussion of the criteria a plan must satisfy to have grandfathered status.

Some requirements that apply to health plan insurers, but not funded group health plans, also apply to self-funded group health plans. Examples include the requirement to provide a summary of benefits and coverage explanation (see ¶5910.03.D.6.) and the payment of health insurance fees based on the average number of lives covered for each plan year ending after September 30, 2012, through plan years ending after September 30, 2019. 822

822 §4375, added by Pub. L. No. 111-148, §6301(e)(2) (health insurance issuers), discussed at ¶5920.16.E.3, below; §4376, added by Pub. L. No. 111-148, §6301(e)(2) (self-insured plans), discussed at ¶5920.16.D.5., below.

(4) Public Health Insurance Exchanges (Health Insurance Marketplaces) —   TPS 5920.16.A.4.

Each state can elect to establish an American Health Benefit Exchange (health exchange) — a governmental agency or nonprofit entity established to offer qualified health plans to qualified individuals and to provide for the establishment of a Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP Exchange) to assist qualified employers in enrolling their employees in qualified health plans offered in the small group market. 823 If a state does not set up a health exchange, the Secretary of HHS must establish and operate a health exchange within the state to offer qualified health plans. 824 This may be set up as a federally-facilitated exchange (with minimal state involvement) or a state partnership exchange. See ¶5920.11.B.19.b. Most exchanges fall within these last two categories.

823 Pub. L. No. 111-148, §1311(b) and 1311(d), as amended by Pub. L. No. 111-148, §10104(e). See ¶5920.16.C.6. Exchanges under the Affordable Care Act first became available in 2014.

824 Pub. L. No. 111-148, §1321(c); Pub. L. No. 111-148, §1322, as amended by Pub. L. No. 111-148, §10104(l).

This article contains general information only.  It is not tax advice and it should not be used as a basis for any business or tax decision. You should consult with a qualified professional before taking any action that may affect your business or you personally

This article will explain under what circumstances you may be eligible for the §199A deduction for qualified business income (QBI). 

Date: 01/15/2020 (PDF)

Editor's Note: The preamble to the final regulations indicates that for tax years ending in 2018 only, taxpayers may rely on the final regulations (T.D. 9847, 84 Fed. Reg. 2952 (Feb. 8, 2019)) in their entirety, or on the proposed regulations (REG-107892-18, 83 Fed. Reg. 40,884 (Aug. 16 2018)) in their entirety. The final regulations are effective for tax years ending after February 8, 2019. Anti-abuse rules are effective retroactively to the date of enactment of the 2017 tax act (December 22, 2017).

This article will explain under what circumstances you may be eligible for the §199A deduction for qualified business income (QBI).  

If you have income from a pass-through entity (or sole proprietorship) you may be entitled to a deduction equal to the lesser of the deductible amount of your QBI (generally 20% subject to the W-2 wage limitation) or 20% of your taxable income. You may also be able to deduct 20% of your qualified REIT dividends and qualified publicly traded partnership (PTP) income. Special rules apply for these additional items. The deduction applies to reduce your taxable income and is available whether or not you itemize. The deduction does not impact your calculation of self-employment tax.

QBI is your net amount of qualified items of income, gain, deduction, and loss with respect to each of your “qualified trades or businesses.” Qualified items are items that are allowed in the determination of your taxable income for the tax year, and are effectively connected with the conduct of a trade or business within the United States or Puerto Rico. Many items of income, gain, deduction, and loss are not qualified items. These items generally include capital gains and loss, dividends, interest, etc. In the case of a partnership or S corporation, your net amount of qualified items is the net amount of your allocable share of each qualified item. QBI does not include any amount paid by an S corporation to its shareholders that is treated as reasonable compensation; any guaranteed payment by a partnership to a partner for services rendered with respect to the trade or business; or any amount paid by a partnership to a partner who is not acting in his or her capacity as a partner for services rendered to the partnership. While the former three payment items are not QBI, they may serve to reduce QBI if the entity takes a deduction for these payments.

Your QBI must be earned through a trade or business. Trade or business has the same general meaning as it does for other purposes of tax law, with a few exceptions. First, if you rent or license tangible or intangible property to a trade or business which is commonly controlled, your rental activity may be a trade or business for purposes of the QBI deduction. Second, the IRS has proposed a safe harbor under which certain real estate enterprises may qualify as a trade or business if owners, employees, agents, or independent contractors perform 250 or more hours of rental services and other requirements are met. The trade or business of being an employee, is not a trade or business for purposes of the deduction. Additional rules may apply if your trade or business is a specified service trade or business.

If your deduction results from ownership of a pass-through entity, the Schedule K-1 you receive from the entity should report the net amount of QBI attributable to each trade or business or the aggregated trade or business of the entity. If the Schedule K-1 is blank in this regard, QBI is presumed to be zero, and we may need to contact the entity to issue amended schedules.

If the net amount of qualified items from your trade or business is a loss, you will have negative QBI and must proportionally offset your positive QBI from any other trades or businesses. If the net amount of QBI from all your trades or businesses is negative, you must carryover this amount to next year where it will proportionally offset positive QBI from other trades or businesses.

You must determine whether you have one trade or business or multiple trades or businesses. If you have multiple trades or businesses, it is possible that they can be aggregated together as one under special rules. In some cases, due to the W-2 wage limitation discussed below, aggregation may increase the amount of your deduction. You may have also received documentation from a pass-through entity in which you own an interest. If the entity aggregated any of its trades or businesses, you may not treat these trades or businesses as separate trades or businesses. You may, however, aggregate additional trades or businesses with the entity's aggregated group.

Calculation of the deduction is a fact intensive inquiry. If you claim the deduction and you understate the amount of tax required to be shown on your return by 5% or more, you could be subject to the substantial understatement of tax penalty.

If your taxable income does not exceed a threshold of $315,000 (joint filers), or $157,500 (all other taxpayers), your deduction is generally the lesser of: (1) 20% of your net QBI from all of your trades, plus 20% of your qualified REIT dividends and qualified PTP income; or (2) 20% of your taxable income.

Is your pass-through income from a “qualified trade or business”?

A qualified trade or business is defined as any trade or business other than a specified service trade or business or the trade or business of being an employee. A specified service trade or business cannot be aggregated with another trade or business. While no deduction is allowed for your income from the trade or business of being an employee, a deduction is allowed for your income from a specified service trade or business to the extent that your taxable income does not exceed the threshold amount. However, as your taxable income exceeds the threshold amount, your specified service trade or business income is partially or fully excluded from the deduction. The exclusion phases in based on the ratio of your table income in excess of the threshold amount to $100,000 (joint filers) and $50,000 (all other taxpayers). Thus, no deduction is allowed for your income from a specified service trade or business if your taxable income is more than $415,000 (joint filers) or $207,500 (all other taxpayers).

If your trade or business is operated as a pass-through entity, the entity should report to you whether the trade or business is a specified service trade or business. If your trade or business is operated as a sole proprietorship, you will need to determine whether you are engaged in a specified service trade or business. A specified service trade or business generally involves the performance of services in the fields of health, law, accounting, actuarial science, performing arts, consulting, athletics, financial services, brokerage services, or any trade or business where the principal asset of such trade or business is the reputation or skill of one or more of its employees or owners (generally, a trade or business where a person receives fees, compensation, or other income, for endorsing a product, use of their likeness or other associated symbols, or appearances on television or other media), or which involves the performance of services that consist of investing and investment management, trading, or dealing in securities, partnership interests, or commodities. If only a small portion of the gross receipts of your trade or business are attributable to one of the listed fields, a de minimis rule may permit you to treat your trade or business as a qualified trade or business.

Application of the W-2 wage limitation

If your taxable income exceeds the threshold amount, the deductible amount of your QBI is equal to the lesser of 20% of your QBI with respect to the trade or business or the W-2 wage limitation. As your taxable income exceeds the threshold above, the W-2 wage limitation phases in and you will reduce the excess amount of your deduction based on the ratio of your table income in excess of the threshold amount to $100,000 (joint filers) and $50,000 (all other taxpayers).

The W-2 wage limitation is equal to the greater of: (1) 50% of the business's W-2 wages; or (2) the sum of (a) 25% of the business's W-2 wages, plus (b) 2.5% of the unadjusted basis (immediately after acquisition) of all qualified property.

In the case of a partnership or S corporation, you take into account your allocable share of W-2 wages and unadjusted basis (immediately after acquisition) of qualified property for the tax year. These items should be reported to you by the partnership or S corporation on Schedule K-1. If these items are blank they will be presumed to be zero, and we may need to contact the entity to amend the schedule.

W-2 wages are the total wages subject to wage withholding, elective deferrals, and deferred compensation paid by the qualified trade or business with respect to employment of its employees during the calendar year ending during the tax year of the taxpayer. W-2 wages do not include: (1) any amount that is not properly allocable to the QBI as a qualified item of deduction; and (2) any amount that was not properly included in a return filed with the Social Security Administration on or before the 60th day after the due date (including extensions). Amounts paid to independent contractors are not W-2 wages. If your business uses a third party such as a certified professional employer organization to pay your employees’ wages, you may still be able to include these wages in your W-2 wage calculation subject to certain additional rules.

Qualified property is tangible property of a character subject to depreciation: (1) that is held by, and available for use in, the qualified trade or business at the end of the tax year; (2) that is used in the production of QBI; and (3) for which the depreciable period has not ended before the end of the tax year. The depreciable period with respect to qualified property is the period beginning on the date the property is first placed in service by the taxpayer and ending on the later of: (1) the date 10 years after that date; or (2) the last day of the last full year in the applicable recovery period that applies to the property. The unadjusted basis (immediately after acquisition) of qualified property is determined on the date the qualified property is placed in service.

Do you have any qualified REIT dividends or qualified PTP income?

If you have dividends from a REIT that are taxed as ordinary income, you have qualified REIT dividends. Income from a REIT that is taxed as capital gain, such as qualified dividend income and capital gains dividends, is not eligible for the deduction.

If you have income from a publicly traded partnership that is not taxed as a corporation, you may deduct up to 20% of the qualified PTP income from that publicly traded partnership. Qualified PTP income is the QBI, as described above, earned through a publicly traded partnership. If your taxable income is above the threshold amount, and your income from the publicly traded partnership is attributable to a specified service trade or business, your deduction may be partially or fully excluded based on ratio of your taxable income in excess of the threshold amount to $100,000 (joint filers) and $50,000 (all other taxpayers).

If you received either of these items from a pass-through entity, they should be reported to you on Schedule K-1.

This article contains general information only.  It is not tax advice and it should not be used as a basis for any business or tax decision. You should consult with a qualified professional before taking any action that may affect your business or you personally.

As a fundamental rule, taxpayers are entitled to take deductions only where specifically authorized by the Internal Revenue Code. Thus, because deductions are a matter of “legislative grace,” courts closely scrutinize taxpayers’ claims and reject those that do not clearly respect the letter of the law. Each taxpayer bears the burden of proving his or her entitlement to a deduction, and ambiguities are often resolved in favor of the government. Accordingly, taxpayers should carefully review their maintenance and reconditioning expenditures on property used in a trade or business to determine whether such amounts are deductible or capitalizable. Further, they should retain full and adequate records to substantiate all such costs.

Date: 01/16/2020 (PDF)

As a fundamental rule, taxpayers are entitled to take deductions only where specifically authorized by the Internal Revenue Code. Thus, because deductions are a matter of “legislative grace,” courts closely scrutinize taxpayers’ claims and reject those that do not clearly respect the letter of the law. Each taxpayer bears the burden of proving his or her entitlement to a deduction, and ambiguities are often resolved in favor of the government. Accordingly, taxpayers should carefully review their maintenance and reconditioning expenditures on property used in a trade or business to determine whether such amounts are deductible or capitalizable. Further, they should retain full and adequate records to substantiate all such costs.

A business expense deduction is generally allowed for all of the ordinary and necessary expenses paid or incurred by a taxpayer during the tax year in carrying on any trade or business. “Incidental repairs” are deductible business expenses for these purposes. However, expenditures that might be similar to repairs, for example, an expenditure that is for a betterment to the property, restores the unit of property, or adapts the property to a new or different use, must be capitalized or charged to the taxpayer's depreciation reserve rather than deducted. The line between a deductible repair expense and a nondeductible capital expenditure is indistinct; the difference between the two depends upon the factual context surrounding the expenditure. The same outlay that may be treated as a deductible repair in one set of circumstances may be a nondeductible capital expenditure in other situations.

An expenditure is generally deductible as an incidental repair if it is limited to keeping the affected property in its ordinarily efficient operating condition, whereas an amount paid to return a unit of property to its ordinarily efficient operating condition, if the property has deteriorated to a state of disrepair and is no longer functional for its intended use, is a capital expenditure. An expenditure is considered to be a betterment — and thus a capital expenditure — if it ameliorates a material condition or defect that existed before the taxpayer acquired the property (or arose during the production of the property); if it is for a material addition to the property (including a physical enlargement, expansion, extension, or addition of a major component, or a material increase in capacity); or if it is reasonably expected to materially increase the productivity, efficiency, strength, quality, or output of the unit of property.

Repairs incidental to an improvement must be capitalized only if they directly benefit or are incurred by reason of the improvement(s). Expenditures for work performed on depreciable assets that do not qualify as deductible repairs may nonetheless qualify for a bonus depreciation deduction or under the rule that allows you to elect to treat the cost of certain depreciable business assets as a current-year expense. The deductibility of environmental cleanup costs is governed by a special set of detailed rules.

Maintenance expenditures that do not improve the property (i.e., are not paid for a betterment or restoration of the property and do not adapt the property to a new or different use) generally may be deducted. Thus, taxpayers can deduct the costs of various expenditures that alleviate damage or deterioration, so long as the property is not improved. However, taxpayers cannot deduct indirect expenditures (e.g., otherwise deductible repairs) that directly benefit or are incurred by reason of an improvement.

A taxpayer ordinarily can deduct as a repair regularly recurring routine maintenance expenditures that a taxpayer expects to perform to keep the unit of property in its ordinarily efficient operating condition. When such activities happen regularly, an abnormally large expenditure resulting from the same cause is still deductible. On the other hand, a taxpayer must capitalize the cost to replace a major component or a substantial structural part of the unit of property.

There are a host of other factors or considerations that are relevant to the determination of whether a particular expenditure is deductible as a repair:

• Any properly-performed repair adds some value to the property repaired, but that does not necessarily mean its cost cannot be deducted.
• A common rule of thumb is that the cost of property having a useful life greater than one year must be capitalized. However, the test of deductibility considers whether the expenditure simply kept the property in, or restored it to, an efficient operating condition.
• The size of the expenditure does not control whether it is a deductible repair. Taxpayers have been permitted to deduct expenditures of significant magnitude in comparison to the value of the asset being repaired. Courts have also permitted taxpayers to deduct expenditures that were large in absolute terms if the criteria for a repair expense were satisfied. In addition, expenditures for repairs will not be disallowed merely because they significantly exceed the taxpayer's average annual repair expenditures. On the other hand, a taxpayer cannot deduct his cost to replace an asset on the ground that repairing the asset would be roughly comparable in cost.
• Case law suggests that extensive repairs to an asset shortly after its acquisition have materially altered the asset and are not deductible. Regulations state that taxpayers must capitalize expenditures that ameliorate a material condition or defect that existed before the taxpayer's acquisition of the unit of property. Thus, taxpayers should carefully consider the deductibility of repair and restoration expenditures incurred shortly after the acquisition of an asset.
• Taxpayers cannot deduct involuntary expenditures caused by regulatory requirements or some other governmental action if the expenditures do not fit the criteria for a repair deduction.
• Taxpayers can deduct the cost of materials and labor to conduct repairs, but a self-employed taxpayer may not deduct the value of his own labor to perform repairs.

Special rules apply to repair expenses that are incurred due to a casualty and to leased property. If a taxpayer consistently capitalizes a particular type of expenditure or treats it as a repair, any change to that treatment is generally a change in accounting method that may require IRS permission. Some changes are made by an election and are not considered a change in method of accounting.

Many of the rules in this area are complex and also may be affected by other tax laws. For this reason, the facts of your situation should be carefully reviewed.

This article contains general information only.  It is not tax advice and it should not be used as a basis for any business or tax decision. You should consult with a qualified professional before taking any action that may affect your business or you personally

The IRS has released new proposed rules related to charitable contributions made to get around the $10,000/$5,000 cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions. The proposed regulations:

The IRS has released new proposed rules related to charitable contributions made to get around the $10,000/$5,000 cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions. The proposed regulations:

• incorporate the safe harbor in Notice 2019-12 for individuals who have any portion of a charitable deduction disallowed to the receipt of SALT benefits;
• incorporate the safe harbor in Rev. Proc. 2019-12 for business entities to deduct certain payments made to a charitable organization in exchange for SALT benefits; and
• clarify the application of the quid pro quo principle under Code Sec. 170 to benefits received or expected to be received by the donor from a third party.

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.

The IRS issued final regulations in June 2019 that provide that the receipt of a SALT credit for a charitable contribution is the receipt of a return benefit (quid pro quo benefit). Thus, the taxpayer must reduce any contribution deduction by the amount of any SALT credit received or expected to receive in return. The regulations contain a de minimis exception if the SALT credit does not exceed 15 percent of the taxpayer’s charitable payment.

A taxpayer is not required to reduce the charitable contribution deduction because of the receipt of SALT deductions. However, the taxpayer must reduce the charitable deduction if it receives or expects to receive SALT deductions in excess of the taxpayer’s payment or the fair market value of property transferred.

Payments by Individuals

A safe harbor was provided in Notice 2019-12 for individuals who have a portion of a charitable deduction disallowed due to the receipt of a SALT credit. Under the safe harbor, any disallowed portion of the charitable contribution deduction may be treated as the payment of SALT taxes for the purposes of deducting taxes under Code Sec. 164.

The new proposed regulations incorporate the safe harbor in Notice 2019-12. The safe harbor is allowed in the tax year the charitable payment is made, but only to the extent that the SALT credit is applied as provided under state or local law to offset the individual’s SALT liability for the current or preceding tax year. Any unused credit may be carried forward as provided under state and local law.

Payments by Business Entities

The IRS also provided a safe harbor in Rev. Proc. 2019-12 that business entities may continue to deduct charitable contributions in exchange a SALT credit. A business entity may deduct the payments as ordinary and necessary business expenses under Code Sec. 162 if made for a business purpose.

The new proposed regulations incorporate the safe harbor in Rev. Proc. 2019-12. If a C corporation or specified pass-through entity makes the charitable payment in exchange for a SALT credit, it may deduct the payment as a business expense to the extent of any SALT credit received or expected to be received. In addition, the new proposal provides that if the charitable payment bears a direct relationship to the taxpayer’s business then it may be deducted as a business expense rather than a charitable contribution regardless of whether the taxpayer receives or expects to receive a SALT credit.

Benefits Received from Third Party

If a taxpayer receives any goods, services, or other benefits from a charitable organization in consideration for a contribution, then the charitable deduction must be reduced by the value of those benefits. If the contribution exceeds the fair market value of the benefits received, then only the excess is a deductible as a charitable contribution.

The new proposed regulations clarify that this quid pro quo principal applies regardless of whether the party providing the goods, services, or other benefits is the charitable organization or not. A taxpayer will be treated under the proposal as receiving goods and services in consideration for the taxpayer’s charitable contribution if, at the time the taxpayer makes the payment or transfer, the taxpayer receives or expects to receive goods or services in return.

Final regulations provide rules on the attribution of ownership of stock or other interests, for determining whether a person is a related person with respect to a controlled foreign corporation (CFC) under the foreign base company sales income rules. The regulations also provide rules to determine whether a CFC receives rents in the active conduct of a trade or business, for determining the exception from foreign personal holding company income.

Final regulations provide rules on the attribution of ownership of stock or other interests, for determining whether a person is a related person with respect to a controlled foreign corporation (CFC) under the foreign base company sales income rules. The regulations also provide rules to determine whether a CFC receives rents in the active conduct of a trade or business, for determining the exception from foreign personal holding company income.

The regulations adopt without change, proposed regulations published on May 20, 2019 ( NPRM REG-125135-15).

Attribution of Ownership

The regulations provide specific rules for applying principles similar to those in the Code Sec. 958(b) constructive ownership rules when determining related person status under the foreign base company sales income rules. The determination of related person status is relevant for many purposes, including whether certain types of income can be characterized as subpart F foreign base company sales or service income.

A person is a related person with respect to a CFC if the person is:

• an individual who controls the CFC,
• an entity that controls or is controlled by the CFC, or
• an entity that is controlled by the same person that controls the CFC.

Rules similar to those for determining stock ownership in Code Sec. 958 apply for purposes of determining whether a person is a related person. The regulations limit the application of the downward attribution rules in Code Sec. 318(a)(3), which apply by reference to the Code Sec. 958 stock ownership rules, and which attribute ownership downward from the owner of an entity to an entity. The downward attribution rules are applied regardless of the size of the ownership interest in a partnership, estate, or trust, but are applied to corporations based on a 50-percent or more ownership interest.

The regulations address concern that application of the downward attribution rules could inappropriately treat entities (including CFCs) that do not have significant relationships with each other as related persons. Accordingly, the regulations provide that the downward attribution rules of Code Sec. 318(a)(3) and Reg. §1.958-2(d) will not apply for purposes of determining related person status under the foreign base company sales income rules.

The change does not preclude a corporation, partnership, trust, or estate from being treated as controlled by the same person or persons that control the CFC under other rules that remain applicable for the related person rules.

Additionally, an anti-abuse rule is provided with respect to the option attribution rule in Code Sec. 318(a)(4). The option attribution rule in Code Sec. 318(a)(4) and Reg. §1.958-2(e) will not be applied to treat a person with an option as owning the stock or an equity interest for purposes of the related person rule if the principal purpose of using the option was to cause a person to be treated as a related person.

The regulations also incorporate a similar rule issued in section 7(d) of Notice 2007-9, 2007-1 CB 401. The rule applies if the principal purpose for the use of an option is to qualify dividends, interest, rents or royalties paid by a foreign corporation for the Code Sec. 954(c)(6) CFC look-through exception from foreign personal holding company income. The rule applies to tax years of CFCs beginning after December 31, 2006, and ending before November 19, 2019, and to tax years of U.S. shareholders in which or with which such tax years end.

Personal Holding Company Income

The regulations modify the foreign personal holding company rules for amounts paid or incurred by a CFC in connection with the CFC’s rental income and the active rents exception. Rents are excluded from foreign personal holding company income if the rents are:

• received from a person other than a related person, and
• from the active conduct of a trade or business.

If rents are from leasing property as a result of marketing activities, there must be a substantial marketing organization in order to meet the active trade or business test. Under a safe harbor, an organization is substantial if active leasing expenses equal or exceed 25 percent of adjusted leasing profit. If the CFC receives rents from property it does not own, the substantiality of the organization is determined net of those rent payments.

The regulations extend the rule to apply to royalties in addition to rents. As a result, the substantiality of the organization is determined under the safe harbor net of the rents or royalties paid or incurred by the lessor CFC, for the right to use the property (or a component part of the property) that generated the rental income.

Applicability Date

The regulations generally apply to tax years of CFCs ending on or after November 19, 2019, and to tax years of U.S. shareholders in which or with which such tax years end. The regulations on the downward attribution rule, and the option anti-abuse rule for use of the option to treat a person as a related person with respect to a CFC, apply to tax years of CFCs ending on or after May 17, 2019, and to tax years of U.S. shareholders in which or with which such tax years end, with respect to amounts received or accrued by a CFC on or after May 17, 2019, to the extent the amounts are received or accrued in advance of the period to which such amounts are attributable with a principal purpose of avoiding application of the rules.

The IRS has issued final and proposed regulations implementing the base erosion and anti-abuse tax (BEAT) under Code Sec. 59A. The BEAT is a minimum tax that certain large corporations must pay on certain payments made to foreign related parties, and was added by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act ( P.L. 115-97).

The IRS has issued final and proposed regulations implementing the base erosion and anti-abuse tax (BEAT) under Code Sec. 59A. The BEAT is a minimum tax that certain large corporations must pay on certain payments made to foreign related parties, and was added by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act ( P.L. 115-97).

The final regulations adopt proposed rules ( REG-104259-18) published on December 21, 2018 (2018 proposed regulations), with certain modifications. The proposed regulations ( REG-112607-19) (2019 proposed regulations) provide rules under Code Secs. 59A and 6031 regarding certain aspects of the BEAT.

Final Regulations

The 2018 proposed regulations provided guidance related to the mechanics of determining a taxpayer’s BEAT liability, and addressed application of the BEAT to partnerships, banks, registered security dealers, and consolidated groups. The final BEAT regulations retain the basic approach and structure of the 2018 proposed regulations, with certain revisions.

The final regulations continue to be exclude from the denominator of the base erosion percentage Code Sec. 988 losses with respect to transactions with foreign related parties that are excluded from the numerator of the percentage. The final regulations also retain the add-back method for computing modified taxable income and the computation of base erosion minimum tax amount (BEMTA) on a taxpayer-by-taxpayer basis.

Among some of the more significant changes to the proposed rules, the final regulations:

• adopt the "with-or-within" method to determine the gross receipts and the base erosion percentage of an aggregate group;
• disregard transactions between parties if both parties were members of the aggregate group at the time of the transaction;
• exclude the base erosion tax benefits and deductions attributable to the tax year of a member of an aggregate group that begins before January 1, 2018;
• clarify that payments resulting in a reduction to determine gross income are not treated as base erosion payments;
• require that the determination of whether a payment or accrual is a base erosion payment be made under general U.S. federal income tax law;
• clarify the definition of a "base erosion payment," and generally exclude amounts transferred to, or exchanged with, a foreign related party in certain corporate nonrecognition transactions from that definition;
• clarify the rules for determining the portion of U.S. branch interest paid to foreign related parties;
• provide rules for the treatment of an interest expense determined under a U.S. tax treaty;
  include additional detail on the documentation required to satisfy the service cost method (SCM) exception;
• modify the total loss-absorbing capacity (TLAC) exception;
• provide that the additional one percent add-on to the BEAT rate will not apply to a taxpayer that is part of an affiliated group with de minimis banking and securities dealer activities;
• provide that Code Sec. 15 applies only to the change in tax rate set forth in Code Sec. 59A(b)(2) and should not apply to the change in tax rate included in Code Sec. 59A(b)(1)(A) for tax years beginning in calendar year 2018;
• change the Qualified Derivative Payments (QDP) exception;
• clarify the rules regarding how partnerships and their partners are treated for purposes of the BEAT; and
• clarify the anti-abuse rule and certain rules applicable to insurance companies and consolidated groups.

Applicability Dates

The final regulations (other than the reporting requirements for QDPs) apply to tax years ending on or after December 17, 2018. However, taxpayers may apply these final regulations in their entirety for tax years ending before December 17, 2018. Taxpayers may also apply provisions matching Reg. §§1.59A-1 through 1.59A-9 in their entirety for all tax years ending on or before December 6, 2019. Taxpayers choosing to apply the proposed regulations must apply them consistently and cannot selectively choose which particular provisions to apply.

The related Code Sec. 6038A regulations apply to tax years beginning Monday, June 7, 2021. The related consolidated return regulations generally apply to tax years for which the original consolidated return is due (without extensions) after December 6, 2019.

2019 Proposed Regulations

The 2019 proposed regulations provide rules regarding relating to (1) how a taxpayer determines its aggregate group for purposes of determining gross receipts and the base erosion percentage; (2) an election to waive deductions; and (3) application of the BEAT to partnerships.

The 2019 proposed regulations generally apply to tax years beginning on or after the date that the final regulations are filed with the Federal Register. Certain rules, however, have specific applicability dates. In addition, taxpayers may rely on the rules in the proposed regulations in their entirety for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, and before the final regulations are applicable.

Practitioner’s Observations

Arlene Fitzpatrick, a Principal in the National Tax Department of Ernst & Young LLP, told Wolters Kluwer that "there are changes and new proposed rules in the package of final and proposed regulations that are helpful, though not all changes requested through the comment process were made. For example, the rules in the final regulations to exclude, in certain circumstances, from the definition of a base erosion payment amounts transferred to, or exchanged with, a foreign related party pursuant to a specified nonrecognition transaction are welcome. Furthermore, clarifying that a built-in loss recognized on a sale or transfer of property to a foreign related party is not in itself a deduction that causes the payment to be treated as a base erosion payment is helpful. The final regulations however, retain the internal dealings rule whereby a notional payment for purposes of attribution of profits under certain tax treaties may be taken into account for purposes of determining BEAT. Thus, although deductions from internal dealings would not be allowed under the Code or regulations, and only relevant under certain treaties (the regulations do not specify the treaties), the regulations provide such amounts are relevant for purposes of determining BEAT."

The IRS has issued highly anticipated final regulations on the significant changes made to the foreign tax credit rules by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97). The final regulations retain the basic approach and structure of the 2018 proposed regulations ( NPRM REG-105600-18). The final regulations also eliminate deadwood, reflect statutory amendments made prior to TCJA, and update expense allocation rules not updated since 1988.

The IRS has issued highly anticipated final regulations on the significant changes made to the foreign tax credit rules by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97). The final regulations retain the basic approach and structure of the 2018 proposed regulations ( NPRM REG-105600-18). The final regulations also eliminate deadwood, reflect statutory amendments made prior to TCJA, and update expense allocation rules not updated since 1988.

Also adopted are proposed regulations on overall foreign losses, published on June 25, 2012 ( NPRM REG-134935-11), and a U.S. taxpayer’s obligation to notify the IRS of a foreign tax redetermination, published on November 7, 2007 ( NPRM REG-209020-86).

A separate set of 2019 proposed regulations were also issued ( NPRM REG-105495-19).

Final Regulations

The final regulations make extensive changes to the rules on the determination of the foreign tax credit. Many of these changes were required to implement the TCJA, including the items discussed, below.

The final regulations provide details on how income is assigned and expenses are apportioned to the Code Sec. 951A global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI) and foreign branch foreign tax credit separate limitation categories added by TCJA.

The regulations provide that, for purposes of applying the expense allocation and apportionment rules, the portion of gross income related to foreign derived intangible income (FDII) or a GILTI inclusion that is offset by a Code Sec. 250 deduction is treated as exempt income. This means that fewer expenses will be allocated to the GILTI category, resulting in a higher foreign source taxable income, a higher foreign tax credit limitation, and a larger foreign tax credit offset with respect to GILTI income.

The regulations also address how the balance of foreign tax credit carryovers prior to the TCJA are allocated across new and existing separate categories. Under a default rule, foreign tax credit carryovers remain in the general category going forward. A taxpayer can elect to reconstruct the carryover regarding a foreign branch. The final regulations provide a simplified rule under which taxpayers can assign foreign tax credits to the foreign branch category proportionately, according to the ratio of foreign taxes paid or accrued by the taxpayer’s branches to total foreign taxes paid or accrued by the taxpayer in that year.

The regulations modify the proposed rule for determining foreign branch income based on the U.S. tax-adjusted books and records of the foreign branch. The proposed regulations disregarded transfers of intellectual property (IP) between a foreign branch and its owner if the transfer would result in a deemed payment that reallocates income between the foreign branch category and the general branch category. The final regulations limit the rule to transactions that occurred after the date of the proposed regulations and include an exception for transitory ownership.

The regulations provide rules for the treatment of GILTI for purposes of the interest allocation rules. In general, a controlled foreign corporation (CFC) must allocate and apportion its interest expense among groups of income for purposes of determining tested income, subpart F income and other types of net foreign source income. A U.S. taxpayer must characterize the value of its CFC for allocating and apportioning its own interest expense. A CFC allocates and apportions its interest expense using either the modified gross income (MGI) method or the asset method. The U.S. taxpayer uses the same method to characterize the stock of its CFC. The regulations take into account gross tested income from a lower-tier CFC with respect to an upper-tier CFC for allocating the upper-tier CFC’s interest expense when applying the MGI method.

Dividends, interest, rents and royalties (look-through payments) paid to a U.S. shareholder by a CFC were generally allocated to general category income to the extent that they were not treated as passive category income. Because this type of payment made directly by a U.S. shareholder is not included in the GILTI category, the regulations provide that the look-through payments are assigned either to the general category or the foreign branch category. The payments cannot be assigned to the GILTI category.

The final regulations also address certain potentially abusive borrowing arrangements involving loans by U.S. persons to foreign partnerships that artificially increase foreign source income and the foreign tax credit limitation without affecting U.S. taxable income. Under the regulations, the interest income attributable to borrowing through a partnership is allocated across the foreign tax credit separate limitation categories in the same manner as the associated interest expense.

Applicability of Final Regs

The final regulations related to statutory amendments made by the TCJA apply to tax years beginning after December 31, 2017. Regulations that contain both rules that relate to the TCJA and rules that do not relate to the TCJA generally apply to tax years that both (1) begin after December 31, 2017, and (2) end on or after December 4, 2018.

The regulations on the deemed paid credit under Code Sec. 960 apply to tax years that both begin after December 31, 2017, and end on or after December 4, 2018. The final OFL regulations apply to tax years on or after the date the regulations are filed in the Federal Register. The final foreign tax redetermination regulations apply to foreign tax redeterminations occurring in tax years ending on or after the date the regulations are filed in the Federal Register.

Proposed Regulations

Proposed foreign tax credit regulations address changes made by the TCJA, and also respond to issues raised in the 2018 proposed regulations on the foreign tax credit ( NPRM REG-105600-18). The proposed regulations address:

• the allocation and apportionment of deductions under Code Sec. 861 through Code Sec. 865;
• the definition of "financial services income" under Code Sec. 904(d)(2)(D);
• the allocation and apportionment of creditable foreign taxes;
• the interaction of branch loss and dual consolidated loss recapture rules under Code Sec. 904(f) and Code Sec. 904(g);
• the effect of Code Sec. 905(c) foreign tax redeterminations of foreign corporations on the high-tax exception in Code Sec. 954(b)(4) and the required notification and penalty provisions;
• the definition of "personal holding company income" under Code Sec. 954; and
• the application of the foreign tax credit limitation rule to consolidated groups.

Allocation and Apportionment

Under the general rule, a taxpayer may allocate research and experimentation (R&E) expenses to the foreign tax credit separate limitation categories under the sales method or the gross income method. The proposed regulations revise the sales method to provide that R&E expenses are only allocated to income that represents return on intellectual property. When applying these rules, gross intangible income does not include dividends or amounts included under subpart F, GILTI or Code Sec. 1293. As a result, none of a U.S. taxpayer’s R&E expenses are allocated to the GILTI category. The proposed regulations eliminate the gross income method for purposes of allocating R&E expenses.

Stewardship expenses are related and allocable to dividends received or to be received from related corporations. The proposed regulations provide that stewardship expenses are allocated to subpart F and GILTI inclusions, to Code Sec. 78 dividends and all amounts included under the passive foreign investment company (PFIC) provisions.

Under the Code Sec. 818(f) allocation rules that apply to life insurance companies, expenses are generally apportioned ratably across all gross income. Under a new rule, the proposed regulations allocate expenses in a life-nonlife consolidated group solely among items of the insurance company that has reserves (separate entity method).

The final foreign tax credit limitations provide a matching rule for a U.S. partner that makes loans to a foreign partnership. Under the rule, the partner’s gross interest income is apportioned between U.S. and foreign sources in each separate foreign tax credit limitation category based on the partner’s interest expense apportionment ratios. The proposed regulations provide the same rule for loans from partnerships to U.S. partners (upstream partnership loans).

Redeterminations

Portions of the 2007 temporary regulations on foreign tax redeterminations ( T.D. 9362) are reproposed so that taxpayers can provide comments on the rules in light of the changes made by the TCJA. The proposed regulations address foreign tax redeterminations that affect the deemed paid credit under Code Sec. 960; procedural notification rules; and penalties for failure to notify the IRS of a foreign tax redetermination.

The proposed regulations require taxpayers to account for foreign tax redeterminations of foreign subsidiaries on an amended return that reflects the revised foreign taxes deemed paid under Code Sec. 960 and any changes to the taxpayer’s U.S. tax liability. This reflects the repeal of the pooling mechanism to account for redeterminations of foreign taxes.

A transition rule provides that post-2017 redeterminations of pre-2018 foreign income taxes must be made by adjusting the foreign corporation’s taxable income and earnings and profits and post-1986 undistributed earnings and income taxes in the pre-2018 year to which the redetermined foreign taxes relate. The proposed regulations also provide that the foreign tax redetermination rules cover situations in which the foreign tax redetermination affects whether or not the CFC qualifies for the high-tax exceptions under GILTI and subpart F.

Additional Rules

Additional provisions in the proposed regulations:

• modify the definition of a "financial services entity" by adopting a definition of "predominately engaged in the active conduct of a banking, insurance, finance, or similar business" and "income derived in the active conduct of a banking, insurance, finance, or similar business" that is generally consistent with Code Secs. 954(h), 1297(b)(2)(B), and 953(e);
• provide more detailed guidance on the allocation and apportionment of foreign income taxes, and generalize the rules to apply to statutory and residual groupings;
• provide a new ordering rule for overall foreign loss recapture that addresses additional income recognition under the branch loss recapture and dual consolidated loss recapture rules: the amounts are not taken into account for purposes of the ordering rules until Code Sec. 904(f)(3) amounts are determined;
• clarify the rules that apply to jurisdictions that do not impose corporate income tax on CFCs until earnings are distributed. or where foreign tax is contingent on a future distributions, for purposes of the high-tax exception in Code Sec. 954(b)(4);
• apply the principles for allocating and apportioning foreign income taxes for purposes of Code Sec. 965(g); and
• update the Code Sec. 1502 regulations relating to the computation of the consolidated foreign tax credit to reflect changes in the law, and add new rules for the determining the source and separate category of the a consolidated NOL, as well as the portion of a consolidated net operating loss (CNOL) that is apportioned to a separate return year of a member.

Applicability of Proposed Regs

The proposed regulations are generally proposed to apply to tax years that end on or after the date the proposed regulations are filed in the Federal Register, with exceptions. For example, the rules for R&E expenses are proposed to apply to tax years beginning after December 31, 2019. However taxpayers on the sales method for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, and before January 1, 2020, may rely on the proposed regulations if the rules are applied consistently. Thus, a taxpayer on the sales method for its tax year beginning in 2018 may rely on the proposed regulation, but must also apply the sales method (relying on the proposed regulation) for its tax year beginning in 2019.

Practitioner’s Observations

WK: Were you surprised by anything in the final regs?

Martin Milner: The final regulations are generally consistent with the proposed regulations and do not include any major surprises. The changes and clarifications that are in the final regulations are largely helpful. As would be expected, most of the new provisions are in the proposed portion of the package.

WK: With the proposed regs are there areas that you can see may result in pushback? If so why?

Martin Milner: The business community is likely to comment on the proposal to apportion stewardship expenses to dividends, subpart F income and GILTI (including IRC Section 78 gross-ups) because many had hoped that stewardship expenses would not be apportioned to GILTI.

WK: How did you feel about the R&E Expense Apportionment changes?

Martin Milner: The mandatory sales-based apportionment of R&E expenses to all gross intangible income related to the relevant product SIC code will be complicated in practice. However, it is helpful that the proposed rules specifically exclude dividends, subpart F income and GILTI.

The IRS has released guidance that provides that the requirement to report partners’ shares of partnership capital on the tax basis method will not be effective for 2019 partnership tax years, but will first apply to 2020 partnership tax years.

The IRS has released guidance that provides that the requirement to report partners’ shares of partnership capital on the tax basis method will not be effective for 2019 partnership tax years, but will first apply to 2020 partnership tax years.

2019 Reporting

For 2019, partnerships and other persons must report partner capital accounts consistent with the reporting requirements in the 2018 forms and instructions, including the requirement to report negative tax basis capital accounts on a partner-by-partner basis.

Section 704(c) Gain or Loss

As a clarification, the notice also defines the term "partner’s share of net unrecognized Code Sec. 704(c) gain or loss," which must be reported by partnerships and other persons in 2019. Further, the notice exempts publicly traded partnerships from the requirement to report their partners’ shares of net unrecognized Code Sec. 704(c) gain or loss until further notice. Solely for purposes of completing the 2019 Forms 1065, Schedule K-1, Item N, and 8865, Schedule K-1, Item G, the notice defines a partner’s share of "net unrecognized Code Sec. 704(c) gain or loss" as the partner’s share of the net (meaning aggregate or sum) of all unrecognized gains or losses under Code Sec. 704(c) in partnership property, including Code Sec. 704(c) gains and losses arising from revaluations of partnership property.

Section 465 At-Risk Activities

The notice provides that the requirement added by the draft instructions for 2019 for partnerships to report to partners information about separate Code Sec. 465 at-risk activities will not be effective until 2020. The draft of the instructions for the 2019 Form 1065, Schedule K-1, released October 29, 2019, included a new paragraph at page 12, At-Risk Limitations, At-Risk Activity Reporting Requirements, that would expressly require partnerships or other persons that have items of income, loss, or deduction reported on the Schedule K-1 from more than one activity that may be subject to limitation under Code Sec. 465 at the partner level to report certain additional information separately for each activity on an attachment to a partner’s Schedule K-1. The new paragraph would require the partnership to identify the at-risk activity, the items of income, loss, or deduction for the activity, other items of income, loss, or deduction, partnership liabilities, and any other information that relates to the activity, such as distributions and partner loans. This requirement in the draft instructions for the 2019 Form 1065 is in addition to long-standing at-risk reporting requirements included in the instructions to the Form 1065.

Penalty Relief

Taxpayers who follow the provisions of the notice will not be subject to any penalty, including a penalty under Code Sec. 6722 for failure to furnish correct payee statements, under Code Sec. 6698 for failure to file a partnership return that shows required information, and under Code Sec. 6038 for failure to furnish information required on a Schedule K-1 (Form 8865).

The IRS has released final regulations that present guidance on how certain organizations that provide employee benefits must calculate unrelated business taxable income (UBTI) under Code Sec. 512(a).

The IRS has released final regulations that present guidance on how certain organizations that provide employee benefits must calculate unrelated business taxable income (UBTI) under Code Sec. 512(a).

Background

Organizations that are otherwise exempt from tax under Code Sec. 501(a) are subject to tax on their unrelated business taxable income (UBTI) under Code Sec. 511(a). Code Sec. 512(a) defines UBTI of exempt organizations and provides special rules for calculating UBTI for organizations described in Code Sec. 501(c)(7) (social and recreational clubs), voluntary employees’ beneficiary associations (VEBAs) described in Code Sec. 501(c)(9) and supplemental unemployment benefit trusts (SUBs) described in Code Sec. 501(c)(17).

Covered Entity

"Covered entity" describes VEBAs and SUBs subject to the UBTI computation rules under Code Sec. 512(a)(3). A corporation is treated as having exempt function income for a taxable year only if it files a consolidated return with the organization described in Code Sec. 501(c)(7), (9), or (17). These final regulations add a clause to clarify that the term "covered entity" includes a corporation described in Code Sec. 501(c)(2) to the extent provided in Code Sec. 512(a)(3)(C).

Nonrecognition of Gain

If a property used directly in the performance of the exempt function of a covered entity is sold by that covered entity, and other property is subsequently purchased and used by the covered entity directly in the performance of its exempt function—at any point within a four-year period beginning one year before the date of the sale and ending three years after the date of sale—gain, if any, from the sale is recognized only to the extent that the sales price of the old property exceeds the covered entity’s cost of purchasing the other property.

Limitation on Amounts Set Aside for Exempt Purposes

The total amount of investment income earned during the year should be considered when calculating whether an excess exists at the end of the year. Any investment income a covered entity earns during the taxable year is subject to unrelated business income tax (UBIT) to the extent the covered entity’s year-end assets exceed the account limit.

Effective Date

The final regulations apply to tax years beginning on or after December 10, 2019.

The IRS has issued Reg. §20.2010-1(c) to address the effect of the temporary increase in the basic exclusion amount (BEA) used in computing estate and gift taxes. In addition, Reg. §20.2010-1(e)(3) is amended to reflect the increased BEA for years 2018-2025 ($10 million, as adjusted for inflation). Further, the IRS has confirmed that taxpayers taking advantage of the increased BEA in effect from 2018 to 2025 will not be adversely affected after 2025 when the exclusion amount is set to decrease to pre-2018 levels.

The IRS has issued Reg. §20.2010-1(c) to address the effect of the temporary increase in the basic exclusion amount (BEA) used in computing estate and gift taxes. In addition, Reg. §20.2010-1(e)(3) is amended to reflect the increased BEA for years 2018-2025 ($10 million, as adjusted for inflation). Further, the IRS has confirmed that taxpayers taking advantage of the increased BEA in effect from 2018 to 2025 will not be adversely affected after 2025 when the exclusion amount is set to decrease to pre-2018 levels.

The regulations apply to estates of decedents dying on and after November 26, 2019.

Special Rule for Post-2025 Decedents

Reg. §20.2010-1(c) provides a special rule in cases where the portion of the credit against the estate tax that is based on the BEA is less than the sum of the credit amounts attributable to the BEA allowable in computing gift tax payable within the meaning of Code Sec. 2001(b)(2). In that situation, the portion of the credit against the net tentative estate tax that is attributable to the BEA is based upon the greater of those two credit amounts.

Inflation-Adjusted Amounts and DSUE Amount

Because the term "BEA" includes the exclusion amount, as adjusted for inflation, the examples in the regulations reflect hypothetical inflated adjusted BEAs. Reg. §20.2010-1(c)(2)(ii), Example 2, illustrates the application of the special rule based on gifts actually made, and would be inapplicable to a decedent who did not make gifts in excess of the date of death BEA, as adjusted for inflation.

Reg. §20.2010-1(c)(2)(iii) and (iv), Examples 3 and 4, illustrate that if a spouse dies during the increased BEA period, and the deceased spouse’s executor makes the portability election, the surviving spouse’s applicable exclusion amount includes the full amount of the deceased spousal unused exclusion (DSUE) amount based on the deceased spouse’s increased BEA. The DSUE amount is available to reduce the surviving spouse’s transfer tax liability regardless of when transfers are made.

BEA Calculations

The final rules explain how to determine the extent to which a credit allowable in computing gift tax payable is based solely on the BEA. Reg. §20.2010-1(c)(2)(iv), Example 4, addresses the application of the DSUE ordering rule, as well as the computation of the credit based solely on the BEA in a calendar period in which the transfer exhausts the remaining DSUE amount with the result that the BEA is also allowable.

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) has released a report on suitability checks for participation in IRS programs. TIGTA initiated this audit to assess the effectiveness of IRS processes to ensure the suitability of applicants seeking to participate in IRS programs and to follow up on IRS planned corrective actions to address prior TIGTA recommendations.

TIGTA Final Audit Report

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) has released a report on suitability checks for participation in IRS programs. TIGTA initiated this audit to assess the effectiveness of IRS processes to ensure the suitability of applicants seeking to participate in IRS programs and to follow up on IRS planned corrective actions to address prior TIGTA recommendations.

Suitability Checks

The IRS’s suitability checks for applicants to the Acceptance Agent, Enrolled Agent, and e-File Provider Programs generally ensured that only reputable individuals were accepted in the programs during fiscal year 2018. Further, the IRS’s continuous suitability checks also ensured that individuals accepted in the programs prior to the initial suitability checks had not engaged in criminal activity warranting removal from the program. TIGTA also identified that when the Federal Bureau of Investigation reported a criminal history for an applicant, the adjudication process was inconsistent depending on the program to which the individual was applying. Finally, the IRS did not take sufficient actions to address the fraudulent submission of fingerprint cards by some applicants to pass their background investigations.

TIGTA Recommendations

TIGTA recommended that the IRS:

• assess the risk to tax administration of performing inconsistent initial and continuous suitability checks on individuals seeking to participate or enrolled in the e-File Provider, Acceptance Agent, and Enrolled Agent Programs;
• assess the risk of the e-File Provider Program’s use of decision matrices to adjudicate an applicant’s criminal history that are inconsistent with the matrices used by the Acceptance Agent and Enrolled Agent Programs; and
• work with the Federal Bureau of Investigation to identify additional individuals who may have submitted fingerprint cards that match the fingerprints of another individual.

The IRS agreed with all the recommendations.

The IRS has issued final regulations that amend the rules relating to hardship distributions from Code Sec. 401(k) plans. The final regulations are substantially similar to the proposed regulations. Further, plans that complied with the proposed regulations satisfy the final regulations as well. The regulations are effective on September 23, 2019.

The IRS has issued final regulations that amend the rules relating to hardship distributions from Code Sec. 401(k) plans. The final regulations are substantially similar to the proposed regulations. Further, plans that complied with the proposed regulations satisfy the final regulations as well. The regulations are effective on September 23, 2019.

The final regulations:

• reflect statutory changes affecting Code Sec. 401(k) plans, including changes made by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 ( P.L. 115-123); and
• affect participants in, beneficiaries of, employers maintaining, and administrators of plans that include cash or deferred arrangements or provide for employee or matching contributions.

Deemed Immediate and Heavy Financial Need
The final regulations modify the safe harbor list of expenses for which distributions are deemed to be made on account of an immediate and heavy financial need. The final regulations:

• add "primary beneficiary under the plan" as an individual for whom qualifying medical, educational, and funeral expenses may be incurred;
• modify the expense listed in existing Reg. §1.401(k)-1(d)(3)(iii)(B)(6) to provide that the limitations in Code Sec. 165(h)(5) do not apply for this purpose; and
• add to the list a new type of expense, relating to expenses incurred as a result of certain disasters.

Distribution Necessary to Satisfy Financial Need
The final regulations modify the rules for determining whether a distribution is necessary to satisfy an immediate and heavy financial need, by:

• eliminating any requirement that an employee be prohibited from making elective contributions and employee contributions after receipt of a hardship distribution; and
• eliminating any requirement to take plan loans prior to obtaining a hardship distribution.

In particular, the final regulations, like the proposed regulations, eliminate the safe harbor in existing Reg. §1.401(k)-1(d)(3)(iv)(E), under which a distribution is deemed necessary to satisfy the financial need only if elective contributions and employee contributions are suspended for at least six months after a hardship distribution is made and, if available, nontaxable plan loans are taken before the hardship distribution is made.

Expanded Sources for Hardship Distributions
The final regulations modify existing Reg. §1.401(k)-1(d)(3) to permit hardship distributions from Code Sec. 401(k) plans of elective contributions, qualified nonelective contributions (QNECs), qualified matching contributions (QMACs), and earnings on these amounts, regardless of when contributed or earned.

Section 403(b) Plans
A hardship distribution of Code Sec. 403(b) elective deferrals is subject to the rules and restrictions set forth in Reg. §1.401(k)-1(d)(3). Accordingly, the preamble to the proposed regulations had stated that the new rules relating to a hardship distribution of elective contributions from a Code Sec. 401(k) plan generally apply to Code Sec. 403(b) plans. Because this requirement is retained in the final regulations, at Reg. §1.401(k)-1(d)(3)(iii)(B), it applies to Code Sec. 403(b) plans.

Applicability Dates
The changes to the hardship distribution rules made by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 are effective for plan years beginning after December 31, 2018.

Plan Amendments
The Treasury Department and IRS expect that plan sponsors will need to amend their plans’ hardship distribution provisions to reflect the final regulations, and any such amendment must be effective for distributions beginning no later than January 1, 2020. The deadline for amending a disqualifying provision is set forth in Rev. Proc. 2016-37, I.R.B. 2016-29,136.

In order to be tax deductible, compensation must be a reasonable payment for services. Smaller companies, whose employees frequently hold significant ownership interests, are particularly vulnerable to IRS attack on their compensation deductions.

In order to be tax deductible, compensation must be a reasonable payment for services. Smaller companies, whose employees frequently hold significant ownership interests, are particularly vulnerable to IRS attack on their compensation deductions.

Reasonable compensation is generally defined as the amount that would ordinarily be paid for like services by like enterprises under like circumstances. This broad definition is supplemented, for purposes of determining whether compensation is deductible as an ordinary and necessary expense, by a number of more specific factors expressed in varying forms by the IRS, the Tax Court and the Circuit Courts of Appeal, and generally relating to the type and extent of services provided, the financial concerns of the company, and the nature of the relationship between the employee and the employer.

Why IRS Is Interested

A chief concern behind the IRS's keen interest in what a company calls "compensation" is the possibility that what is being labeled compensation is in fact a constructive dividend. If employees with ownership interests are being paid excessive amounts by the company, the IRS may challenge compensation deductions on the grounds that what is being called deductible compensation is, in fact, a nondeductible dividend.

Another area of concern for the IRS is the payment of personal expenses of an employee that are disguised as businesses expenses. There, the business is trying to obtain a business expense deduction without the offsetting tax paid by the employee in recognizing income. In such cases, a business and its owners can end up with a triple loss after an IRS audit: taxable income to the individual, no deduction to the business and a tax penalty due from both parties.

Factors Examined

The factors most often examined by the IRS in deciding whether payments are reasonable compensation for services or are, instead, disguised dividend payments, include:

1. The salary history of the individual employee
2. Compensation paid by comparable employers to comparable employees
3. The salary history of other employees of the company
4. Special employee expertise or efforts
5. Year-end payments
6. Independent inactive investor analysis
7. Deferred compensation plan contributions
8. Independence of the board of directors
9. Viewpoint of a hypothetical investor contemplating purchase of the company as to whether such potential investor would be willing to pay the compensation.

Failure to pass the reasonable compensation test will result in the company's loss of all or part of its deduction. Analysis and examination of a company's compensation deductions in light of the relevant listed factors can provide the company with the assurance that the compensation it pays will be treated as reasonable -- and may in the process prevent the loss of its deductions.

Note: In the case of publicly held corporations, a separate $1 million dollar per person cap is also placed on deductible compensation paid to the CEO and each of the four other highest-paid officers identified for SEC purposes. (Certain types of compensation, including performance-based compensation approved by outside directors, are not included in the $1 million limitation.)

The S Corp Enigma

The opposite side of the reasonable compensation coin is present in the case of some S corporations. By characterizing compensation payments as dividends, the owners of these corporations seek to reduce employment taxes due on amounts paid to them by their companies. In these cases, the IRS attempts to recharacterize dividends as salary if the amounts were, in fact, paid to the shareholders for services rendered to the corporation.

Caution. In the course of performing the compensation-dividend analysis, watch out for contingent compensation arrangements and for compensation that is proportional to stock ownership. While not always indicators that payments are distributions of dividends instead of compensation for services, their presence does suggest the possibility. Compensation plans should not be keyed to ownership interests. Contingent and incentive arrangements are also scrutinized by the IRS. The courts have frequently ruled that a shareholder has a built-in interest in seeing that the company is successful and rewarding him for increasing the value of his own property is inappropriate. Similar to the reasonable compensation test, however, this rule is not hard and fast. Accordingly, the rules followed in each jurisdiction will control there.

Conclusions

Determining whether a shareholder-employee's compensation is reasonable depends upon many variables, such as the contributions that employee makes to your business, the compensation levels within your industry, and whether an independent investor in your company would accept the employee's compensation as reasonable.

Please call our office for a more customized analysis of how your particular compensation package fits into the various rules and guidelines. Further examination of your practices not only may help your business better sustain its compensation deductions; it may also help you take advantage of other compensation arrangements and opportunities.

'Tax risk management" is a fairly recent term first used by large accounting firms to underscore to businesses the opportunities and pitfalls inherent within the particular tax positions taken by a business at any point in time. The collapse of Enron and WorldCom, and Congress's response through Sarbanes/Oxley legislation, have elevated corporate tax departments from what were once sleepy backroom operations to key participants in corporate bottom-line performance. Tax reserves and other tax forecasts now take a more prominent role in SEC-required disclosure and their resulting impact on shareholder value. Corporate boards and top executives are now held directly responsible for tax-related mistakes.

In tandem with tighter legislative rules, the corporate tax world itself has become more complicated. From state and local tax considerations and a growing federal tax code to aggressive audit positions by the IRS on tax-shelter type transactions to the growing body of international tax rules that a global business must follow, the tax world for many businesses has become considerably more dangerous. Like a juggler trying to keep too many balls in the air at once, businesses are feeling more pressure on the tax side of their operations. The greater the number of balls (or tax risk situations) in the air, the greater the need is for preventive management of them.

Tax risk management, however, is no longer confined to large public companies listed on a major stock exchange. The "trickle down" of tax problems from public corporations to private businesses, run as corporations, partnerships or LLCs, to small businesses is evident. Lenders, take-over prospects, and co-owners are all acutely concerned with the financial health of a business. Tax considerations now play an increasingly vital role in determining whether any particular business can receive a clean bill of health. Past positions taken on open-year tax returns, the likelihood of the success of any ongoing tax strategy, stepped up IRS audits, changing tax accounting rules and the growing complexity of the tax code itself, not to mention state and local tax law considerations and the increasingly large penalties that taxing authorities are free to assess if a tax position turns out to be incorrect, make tax risk management essential for the smaller business as well.

How much tax risk is your business carrying? The first step to finding a solution to a problem is determining the extent of the problem. Do you know how many "dropped balls" on the tax-side of your business it would take to bankrupt your operations or set them back several years? If you have neglected this side of managing your business, or if you want some reassurance that you are prepared for "worst case" tax scenarios, please feel free to give this office a call.

For partnerships and entities taxed like partnerships (e.g., limited liability companies), each partner must compute the basis of his/her partnership interest separately from the basis of each asset owned by the partnership. Because the basis of this interest is critical to determining the tax consequences resulting from any number of transactions (e.g., distributions, sale of your interest, etc..), if your business is taxed as a partnership, it is important that you understand the concept of tax basis as well as how to keep track of that basis for tax purposes.

For partnerships and entities taxed like partnerships (e.g., limited liability companies), each partner must compute the basis of his/her partnership interest separately from the basis of each asset owned by the partnership. Because the basis of this interest is critical to determining the tax consequences resulting from any number of transactions (e.g., distributions, sale of your interest, etc..), if your business is taxed as a partnership, it is important that you understand the concept of tax basis as well as how to keep track of that basis for tax purposes.

Note: The term "partnership interest" generally refers to an interest in any type of entity taxed as a partnership. The term "partnership" usually means any entity that is taxed as a partnership, and the term "partner" refers to any owner of an entity taxed as a partnership.

The initial basis in your partnership interest depends on how you acquired your interest. The basis of a partnership interest that you obtained in exchange for a contribution of cash or property to the partnership is equal to the amount of money you invested plus the adjusted basis of any property that you contributed. If you purchased your partnership interest, your initial basis will be the amount of cash you paid plus the fair market value of any property that you provided as part of the purchase price.

Generally, if you receive your partnership interest as a gift, your basis will be the same basis that the donor had in the partnership interest before he or she gave it to you. On the other hand, if you inherit your partnership interest, your initial basis in the partnership interest generally will be the fair market value of the partnership interest on the date of the partner's death.

Each year, various adjustments must be made to the tax basis in your partnership interest to reflect certain partnership transactions that have occurred during the year. The basis in your partnership interest is increased to reflect your proportional share of partnership income (both taxable and tax-exempt income). This increase protects you as a partner from being taxed again when (1) the partnership distributes cash to you or (2) when you dispose of your partnership interest. The basis in your partnership interest also increases if you make additional contributions of cash or other property to the partnership.

The basis in your partnership interest is likewise decreased each year to reflect your share as a partner of any partnership losses and your share of any nondeductible expenses. This adjustment is made to prevent you from obtaining a tax benefit when the partnership makes a distribution to you or when you dispose of your partnership interest. Your basis in the partnership also must be decreased by any actual or deemed distributions you received from the partnership. However, the basis in your partnership interest may never be reduced below zero.

Adjustments to a partner's basis also must be made to reflect any increases or decreases in a partner's share of the partnership's liabilities

It is important that a partnership keep proper records of all transactions that occur during the year and take the time to make the basis adjustments using these basis computation rules as close in time to the occurrence of the transaction as possible.

The general guidelines detailed above will give you a good foundation of knowledge for computing the basis of your partnership interest. For more information about how to track your basis in your partnership interest, please contact the office.

If you are considering selling business property that has substantially appreciated in value, you owe it to your business to explore the possibility of a like-kind exchange. Done properly, a like-kind exchange will allow you to transfer your appreciated business property without incurring a current tax liability. However, since the related tax rules can be complex, careful planning is needed to properly structure the transaction.

If you are considering selling business property that has substantially appreciated in value, you owe it to your business to explore the possibility of a like-kind exchange. Done properly, a like-kind exchange will allow you to transfer your appreciated business property without incurring a current tax liability. However, since the related tax rules can be complex, careful planning is needed to properly structure the transaction.

Like-kind exchanges: The basics

The tax law permits you to exchange property that you use in your business or property that you hold for investment purposes with the same type of property held by another business or investor. These transactions are referred to as "like-kind" exchanges and, if done properly, can save your business from paying the taxes that normally would be due in the year of sale of the appreciated property.

Instead of an immediate tax on any appreciation in the year of sale, a like-kind exchange allows the appreciated value of the property you're transferring to be rolled into the working asset that you'll be receiving in the exchange. Mixed cash and property sales, multi-party exchanges, and time-delayed exchanges are all possible under this tax break.

What property qualifies?

In order to qualify as a tax-free like-kind exchange, the following conditions must be met:

• The property must be business or investment property. You must hold both the property you trade and the property you receive for productive use in your trade or business or for investment. Neither property may be property used for personal purposes, such as your home or family car.
• The property must not be held primarily for sale. The property you trade and the property you receive must not be property you sell to customers, such as merchandise.
• Most securities and instruments of indebtedness or interest are not eligible. The property must not be stocks, bonds, notes, chooses in action, certificates of trust or beneficial interest, or other securities or evidences of indebtedness or interest, including partnership interests. However, you can have a nontaxable exchange of corporate stocks in certain circumstances.
• There must be a trade of like property. The trade of real estate for real estate, or personal property for similar personal property is a trade of like property.

Examples:

Like property:

• An apartment house for a store building
• A panel truck for a pickup truck

Not like property:

• A piece of machinery for a store building
• Real estate in the U.S. for real estate outside the U.S.

• The property being received must be identified by a specified date. The property to be received must be identified within 45 days after the date you transfer the property given up in trade.
• The property being received must be received by a specified date.The property to be received must be received by the earlier of:
  1. The 180th day after the date on which you transfer the property given up in trade, or
  2. The due date, including extensions, for your tax return for the year in which the transfer of the property given up occurs.

Dealing with "boot" received

If you successfully make a straight asset-for-asset exchange, as discussed earlier, you will not pay any immediate tax with respect to the transaction. The property you acquire gets the same tax "basis" (your cost for tax purposes) as the property you gave up. In some circumstances, when you are attempting to make a like-kind exchange, the properties are not always going to be of precisely the same value. Many times, cash or other property is included in the deal. This cash or other property is referred to as "boot." If boot is present in an exchange, you will be required to recognize some of your taxable gain, but only up to the amount of boot you receive in the transaction.

Example:

XYZ Office Supply Co. exchanges its business real estate with a basis of $200,000 and valued at $240,000 for the ABC Restaurant's business real estate valued at $220,000. ABC also gives XYZ $35,000 in cash. XYZ receives property with a total value of $255,000 for an asset with a basis of $200,000. XYZ's gain on the exchange is $55,000, but it only has to report $35,000 on its tax return - the amount of cash or "boot" XYZ received. Note: If no cash changed hands, XYZ would not report any gain or loss on its tax return.

Using like-kind exchanges in your business

There are several different ways that like-kind exchanges can be used in your business and there are, likewise, a number of different ways these exchanges can be structured. Here are a couple of examples:

Multi-party exchanges. If you know another business owner or investor that has a piece of property that you would like to acquire, and he or she only wants to dispose of the property in a like-kind exchange, you can still make a deal even if you do not own a suitable property to exchange. The tax rules permit you to enter into a contract with another business owner that provides that you are going to receive the property that he or she has available in exchange for a property to be identified in the future. This type of multi-party transaction can also be arranged through a qualified intermediary with unknown third (or even fourth) parties.

Multiple property exchanges. Under the like-kind exchange rules, you are not limited in the number of properties that can be involved in an exchange. However, the recognized gain and basis of property is computed differently for multiple property exchanges than for single property-for-property exchanges.

Trade-ins. You could also structure a business to business trade-in of machinery, equipment, or vehicles as a like-kind exchange.

There are many ways that you can advantageously use the like-kind exchange rules when considering disposing of appreciated business assets. However, since the rules are complicated and careful planning is critical, please contact the office for assistance with structuring this type of transaction.

Limited liability companies (LLCs) remain one of the most popular choice of business forms in the U.S. today. This form of business entity is a hybrid that features the best characteristics of other forms of business entities, making it a good choice for both new and existing businesses and their owners.

Limited liability companies (LLCs) remain one of the most popular choice of business forms in the U.S. today. This form of business entity is a hybrid that features the best characteristics of other forms of business entities, making it a good choice for both new and existing businesses and their owners.

An LLC is a legal entity existing separately from its owners that has certain characteristics of both a corporation (limited liability) and a partnership (pass-through taxation). An LLC is created when articles of organization (or the equivalent under each state rules) are filed with the proper state authority, and all fees are paid. An operating agreement detailing the terms agreed to by the members usually accompanies the articles of organization.

Choosing the LLC as a Business Entity

Choosing the form of business entity for a new company is one of the first decisions that a new business owner will have to make. Here's how LLCs compare to other forms of entities:

C Corporation: Both C corporations and LLCs share the favorable limited liability feature and lack of restrictions on number of shareholders. Unlike LLCs, C corporations are subject to double taxation for federal tax purposes - once at the corporate level and the again at the shareholder level. C corporations do not have the ability to make special allocations amongst the shareholders like LLCs.

S Corporation: Both S corporations and LLCs permit pass-through taxation. However, unlike an S corporation, an LLC is not limited to the number or kind of members it can have, potentially giving it greater access to capital. LLCs are also not restricted to a single class of stock, resulting in greater flexibility in the allocation of gains, losses, deductions and credits. And for estate planning purposes, LLCs are a much more flexible tool than S corporations

Partnership: Partnerships, like LLCs, are "pass-through" entities that avoid double taxation. The greatest difference between a partnership and an LLC is that members of LLCs can participate in management without being subject to personal liability, unlike general partners in a partnership.

Sole Proprietorship: Companies that operate as sole proprietors report their income and expenses on Schedule C of Form 1040. Unlike LLCs, sole proprietors' personal liability is unlimited and ownership is limited to one owner. And while generally all of the earnings of a sole proprietorship are subject to self-employment taxes, some LLC members may avoid self-employment taxes under certain circumstances

Tax Consequences of Conversion to an LLC

In most cases, changing your company's form of business to an LLC will be a tax-free transaction. However, there are a few cases where careful consideration of the tax consequences should be analyzed prior to conversion. Here are some general guidelines regarding the tax effects of converting an existing entity to an LLC:

C Corporation to an LLC: Unfortunately, this transaction most likely will be considered a liquidation of the corporation and the formation of a new LLC for federal tax purposes. This type of conversion can result in major tax consequences for the corporation as well as the shareholders and should be considered very carefully.

S Corporation to an LLC: If the corporation was never a C corporation, or wasn't a C corporation within the last 10 years, in most cases, this conversion should be tax-free at the corporate level. However, the tax consequences of such a conversion may be different for the S corporation's shareholders. Since the S corporation is a flow-through entity, and has only one level of tax at the shareholder level, any gain incurred at the corporate level passes through to the shareholders. If, at the time of conversion, the fair market value of the S corporation's assets exceeds their tax basis, the corporation's shareholders may be liable for individual income taxes. Thus, any gain incurred at the corporate level from the appreciation of assets passes through to the S corporation's shareholders when the S corporation transfers assets to the LLC.

Partnership to LLC: This conversion should be tax-free and the new LLC would be treated as a continuation of the partnership.

Sole proprietorship to an LLC: This conversion is another example of a tax-free conversion to an LLC.

While considering the potential tax consequences of conversion is important, keep in mind how your change in entity will also affect the non-tax elements of your business operations. How will a conversion to an LLC effect existing agreements with suppliers, creditors, and financial institutions?

Taxation of LLCs and "Check-the-Box" Regulations

Before federal "check-the-box" regulations were enacted at the end of 1996, it wasn't easy for LLCs to be classified as a partnership for tax purposes. However, the "check-the-box" regulations eliminated many of the difficulties of obtaining partnership tax treatment for an LLC. Under the check-the-box rules, most LLCs with two or more members would receive partnership status, thus avoiding taxation at the entity level as an "association taxed as a corporation."

If an LLC has more than 2 members, it will automatically be classified as a partnership for federal tax purposes. If the LLC has only one member, it will automatically be classified as a sole proprietor and would report all income and expenses on Form 1040, Schedule C. LLCs wishing to change the automatic classification must file Form 8832, Entity Classification Election.

Keep in mind that state tax laws related to LLCs may differ from federal tax laws and should be addressed when considering the LLC as the form of business entity for your business.

Since the information provided is general in nature and may not apply to your specific circumstances, please contact the office for more information or further clarification.