Newsletters

The IRS began its "Dirty Dozen" list for 2022, which includes potentially abusive arrangements that taxpayers should avoid. The tax scams in this series focus on four transactions that are wrongfully promoted and will likely attract additional agency compliance efforts in the future. Those four abusive transactions involve charitable remainder annuity trusts, Maltese individual retirement arrangements, foreign captive insurance and monetized installment sales. These are the first four entries in this year’s Dirty Dozen series.

The IRS began its "Dirty Dozen" list for 2022, which includes potentially abusive arrangements that taxpayers should avoid. The tax scams in this series focus on four transactions that are wrongfully promoted and will likely attract additional agency compliance efforts in the future. Those four abusive transactions involve charitable remainder annuity trusts, Maltese individual retirement arrangements, foreign captive insurance and monetized installment sales. These are the first four entries in this year’s Dirty Dozen series.

Taxpayers who have already claimed the purported tax benefits of one of these four transactions on a tax return should consider taking corrective steps, including filing an amended return and seeking independent advice. Where appropriate, the IRS will challenge the purported tax benefits from the transactions on this list and may assert accuracy-related penalties. Further, the IRS informed that to combat the evolving variety of these potentially abusive transactions, the IRS created the Office of Promoter Investigations (OPI). The IRS has a variety of means to find potentially abusive transactions, including examinations, promoter investigations, whistleblower claims, data analytics and reviewing marketing materials.

Further, the IRS reminded taxpayers to watch out for and avoid advertised schemes, many of which are now promoted online, that promise tax savings that are too good to be true and will likely cause taxpayers to legally compromise themselves. Additionally, the IRS informed that taxpayers who have engaged in any of these transactions or who are contemplating engaging in them should carefully review the underlying legal requirements and consult independent, competent advisors before claiming any purported tax benefits.

The IRS announced that is completing the processing on a key group of individual tax returns filed during 2021. Business paper returns filed in 2021 will follow shortly after. The Service began 2022 with a larger than usual inventory of paper tax returns and correspondence filed during 2021 due to the pandemic. The IRS will continue to work on the few remaining 2021 individual tax returns that have processing issues or require additional information from the taxpayer. As of June 10, the IRS had processed over 4.5 million individual paper tax returns received in 2021.

The IRS announced that is completing the processing on a key group of individual tax returns filed during 2021. Business paper returns filed in 2021 will follow shortly after. The Service began 2022 with a larger than usual inventory of paper tax returns and correspondence filed during 2021 due to the pandemic. The IRS will continue to work on the few remaining 2021 individual tax returns that have processing issues or require additional information from the taxpayer. As of June 10, the IRS had processed over 4.5 million individual paper tax returns received in 2021.

To date, more than twice as many returns await processing compared to a typical year at this point in the calendar year. A greater percentage of this year’s inventory awaiting processing is comprised of original returns that, generally, take less time to process than amended returns. To address the unprocessed inventory by the end of this year, the IRS has taken aggressive steps including significant, ongoing overtime for staff throughout 2022, creating special teams of employees focused solely on processing aged inventory and expediting hiring of thousands of new workers and contractors. Additionally, the IRS has improved the process for taxpayers whose paper and electronically filed returns were suspended during processing for manual review and correction.

The IRS reminded taxpayers who have not yet filed their 2021 tax returns this year, including those who requested an extension until October 17, to make sure they file their returns electronically with direct deposit to avoid delays. The IRS urged taxpayers to file as soon as they are ready and to not wait until the last minute before the October 17 extension deadline. Filing sooner avoids potential delays for taxpayers and assists the larger ongoing IRS efforts to complete processing tax returns this year.

Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Charles Rettig is pushing back on assertions that the agency is spending less time targeting wealthy taxpayers for audit in favor of lower income taxpayers.

Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Charles Rettig is pushing back on assertions that the agency is spending less time targeting wealthy taxpayers for audit in favor of lower income taxpayers.

"This is damaging to tax administration in this country when people say IRS audits more lower income people than higher income people," Rettig told attendees June 23, 2022, at the NYU Tax Controversy Forum.

He asserted that audit rate figures can be skewed depending on when the calculation is taking place. For example, he noted that if data is published on rates of audit for the 2021 tax year in 2022, the numbers will be considerably off.

"[W]hen you see these audit rates, don't jump on that train and say IRS is only auditing .0000 something," he said. "I go, Wow. Who are these folks we picked up? Right? The average audit gets picked up, particularly for high wealth taxpayer at least 16 months after that return has been filed. Why would we audit in the same calendar year that it's filed?"

Rettig noted that wealthy people may be filing later toward the extended filing deadline and filing more returns covering multiple years simultaneously, which would push back when audits take place. The would give the appearance that audits for more wealthy taxpayers may not be happening as much as for lower income taxpayers when examining a single-year audit rate.

But in reality, he said that audit rates for those who make more than $10 million "runs right around seven or eight percent. And as of this year, it’s at 8.7 percent. You will see that the $5 to $10 million group runs about 4.2%. You will see the $1 to $5 million group runs about 2.2%. Most of you have done the math and you understand exactly what I'm telling you, you go for the higher income folks."

After that, the numbers drop off "considerably," he said.

"The $1 million-and-under person is really the executive who has W-2 and 1099 income and we have that information," Rettig said. "The over $1 million person is the entrepreneur who has a lot of pass-through entities and whatnot, we don't have that information," and they get audited more because of it.

Rettig also used the forum to continue advocacy for more funding and guaranteed funding over multiple years to help improve not only enforcement, but to help improve the services that the agency provides to taxpayers, including hiring for call centers and providing better outreach.

Republican members of the Senate Finance Committee are the latest group to call on the Internal Revenue Service to implement 2-D barcoding technology on individual tax forms.

Republican members of the Senate Finance Committee are the latest group to call on the Internal Revenue Service to implement 2-D barcoding technology on individual tax forms.

"We are writing to strongly encourage the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to work with tax return software companies to implement 2-D barcoding technology for use during the 2023 tax filing season for the 1040 family of paper returns," the GOP senators, led by Ranking Member Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), said in a May 24, 2022, letter to IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig.

Similar calls have been made by other stakeholders, including the National Taxpayer Advocate, who sent a directive to the IRS in March to implement 2-D barcoding in time for use with the 2023 tax season.

The GOP senators noted that the IRS is financially capable of doing this now. In the letter, the senators referenced the 2017 budget request of $8.4 million for implementation of 2-D barcoding and the $1 billion earmarked in the American Rescue Plan of 2021 for IT modernization, of which they state only $98.5 million so far has been spent.

The group also called on the agency to "stop chasing technological perfection" in the letter.

"If we were to wait for the promise of better technology, nothing would ever get implemented," the letter states. "To the contrary, the fact that 2-D technology is a bit older probably means it has been tested and is less expensive. Many states currently use 2-D barcoding for tax returns, so we have proof it works."

2-D barcoding came back into the forefront of needed IT upgrades for the IRS during the pandemic that caused a significant backlog of unprocessed paper returns. As of April 29, the agency still had more than 18 million unprocessed paper returns, though Commissioner Rettig has stated in numerous congressional hearings that the backlog will be back to its "normal" levels by the end of 2022.

The IRS Whistleblower Office has released the fiscal year (FY) 2021 annual report to Congress. In FY 2021, the Whistleblower Office made 179 award payments to whistleblowers totaling $36,144,926, including 20 awards paid under Code Sec. 7623(b). Whistleblower claim numbers assigned in FY 2021 grew by 55 percent year over year and claim closures increased by 13 percent. Additionally, this year’s report introduces the Code Sec. 7623 Payment and Claim Processing Analysis. The analysis shows Code Sec. 7623(b) awards were paid on average in 17 days.

The IRS Whistleblower Office has released the fiscal year (FY) 2021 annual report to Congress. In FY 2021, the Whistleblower Office made 179 award payments to whistleblowers totaling $36,144,926, including 20 awards paid under Code Sec. 7623(b). Whistleblower claim numbers assigned in FY 2021 grew by 55 percent year over year and claim closures increased by 13 percent. Additionally, this year’s report introduces the Code Sec. 7623 Payment and Claim Processing Analysis. The analysis shows Code Sec. 7623(b) awards were paid on average in 17 days.

Code Sec. 7623 Payment and Claim Processing Analysis

The average claim processing time for Code Sec. 7623(b) award payments made during FY 2021 increased by 2.9 percent from the prior year and average claim processing time for Code Sec. 7623(a) award payments increased by 10.4 percent. The report stated that it is likely average claim processing times will continue to increase as claim inventory continues to age while the Whistleblower Office awaits audits, exams, investigations, appeals, tech services, collection, statutes to expire, and whistleblower litigation.

Ten Most Common Allegations Submitted In FY 2021

The ten most common allegations submitted on Form 211, Application for Award for Original Information, for FY 2021 were:

• unreported income;
• general allegations of fraud, tax fraud, wire fraud, insurance fraud, and related allegations;
• false dependent exemptions;
• employee vs. subcontractor;
• failure to file;
• wage under reporter;
• capital gains tax;
• wages being paid in cash or under the table;
• rental income; and
• false deductions or expenses.

The report also provided other information including disclosures made under Taxpayer First Act, additional information on submissions received in FY 2021, information on claim numbers issued, claims remaining open and claims that were closed in each FY from 2019 to 2021, geographic location of all whistleblowers by region, open Code Sec. 7623(b) claims as of FY 2021, and reasons for closures that occurred during FY 2021.

Department of the Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is continuing to promote the agreement on international taxes reached by most members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development on a global corporate minimum tax, but acknowledged that its overall impact will be determined by the final details.

Department of the Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is continuing to promote the agreement on international taxes reached by most members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development on a global corporate minimum tax, but acknowledged that its overall impact will be determined by the final details.

Testifying before the Senate Finance Committee at a June 7, 2022, hearing about the White House’s fiscal 2023 budget request, Secretary Yellen noted in her opening remarks that she is "keenly focused on moving forward on the global agreement on international tax reform, including a global minimum tax that will level the playing field and raise crucial revenues to benefit people around the world."

However, she noted that because the specific details of how the international tax reforms will be defined and implemented, the impact on American businesses cannot be determined.

In response to a question as to whether the agency will provide Congress with the analysis of data currently available on whether the pillar one agreements will have a positive or negative impact, she said "that it could go either way, depending on the details which have not yet been decided. In the pillar one negotiations, the impact on fiscal revenues will be small."

Yellen continued: "Pillar two has a big impact. Pillar one will have a small impact. We're a very large market economy. We will gain revenue from our ability to tax foreign corporations that are doing business in the United States where we consume those services, we will lose some from revenue. Yet, it could be positive or negative, depending on details that have not yet been worked out. And that's why we've not provided data. We will when those details are clear."

That being said, Yellen also highlighted that countries will not be able to skirt the requirements of the treaty, responding to a question on whether China, a signee of the agreement, can be expected to comply with it when the nation has a questionable record complying with other international agreements.

Secretary Yellen testified that she expects China to comply with the terms of the agreement, but if it fails to do so, "this agreement contains an enforcement mechanism that will allow the United States or any other country that has adopted the global minimum tax to impose taxes on China's companies that would be the same as if China had complied. So there is a tough enforcement mechanism in this deal."

She also testified that Treasury will be negotiating on the details to ensure that business tax credits and subsidies will not negatively impact corporations once the international tax reforms are implemented.

Defending the Budget

During the hearing, she also addressed a number of issues that have become common themes among Biden Administration officials in recent months, including a recent focus on the tax gap and the disparities in auditing following a Government Accountability Office report that highlighted those concerns.

"Tackling that $600 billion annual tax gap is absolutely important in ensuring fiscal responsibility," Yellen told members of the Senate Finance Committee in response to a comment that the White House is requesting $80 billion over 10 years to address this. "It would generate substantial revenue in a manner that's efficient and fair. It would enable deficit reduction and help these price pressures by providing the funding a part of the funding we need for the urgent fiscal priorities."

She reinforced a common call to better fund the Internal Revenue Service to make sure it has the proper personnel in place to do things such as conducting more complicated audits to ensure the top earners are paying their fair share of taxes, in addition to helping the IRS serve the overall population and update its information technology infrastructure.

"We absolutely have to invest in the IRS to close that tax gap, which reflects opaque sources of income, mainly by high income earners that are not taxed," she said. "And they need the resources to serve taxpayers to be able to answer their phones to be able to ensure that they receive the payments that they are due, and they need to modernize their technology which is really the oldest dating back to the [19]60s in the federal government."

Yellen also took the opportunity to encourage Congress to extend the child tax credit, noting that while it may have played a minor role in contributing to the inflation issues the nation is tackling, it has had a significant effect on helping to reduce childhood hunger.

"It enabled families to get a little bit of breathing room and to help their kids afford nutritious food and clothing and back to school supplies." Yellen said.

She also mentioned during the Senate Finance Committee hearing that the Treasury Department is looking forward to working with Congress to get a tax deduction for union dues reinstated after it was cut in 2017.

A day later, on June 8, 2022, Secretary Yellen appeared before the House Ways and Means Committee in a hearing also advertised as a review of the White House budget but one that focused heavily on inflation, current energy policy, and international tax reform.

The American Institute of CPAs is calling on Congress to fund the Internal Revenue Service at the level requested by the White House in its fiscal year 2023 budget request. Separately, the group offered its suggestions on the IRS Guidance Priority List. "In advance of the Fiscal Year 2023 appropriations cycle, we request that you fund the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) at necessary levels to allow it to handle all the duties required of it by Congress, including properly administering and enforcing our nation’s tax laws as well as providing needed assistance to taxpayers and their advisers in a timely and professional manner," AICPA said in a May 25, 2022, letter to Democratic and Republican leadership in both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees.

The American Institute of CPAs is calling on Congress to fund the Internal Revenue Service at the level requested by the White House in its fiscal year 2023 budget request. Separately, the group offered its suggestions on the IRS Guidance Priority List. "In advance of the Fiscal Year 2023 appropriations cycle, we request that you fund the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) at necessary levels to allow it to handle all the duties required of it by Congress, including properly administering and enforcing our nation’s tax laws as well as providing needed assistance to taxpayers and their advisers in a timely and professional manner," AICPA said in a May 25, 2022, letter to Democratic and Republican leadership in both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees.

AICPA expressed concern that "service challenges will persist long after the pandemic has ended unless sufficient, targeted funding for technology improvements, human talent and training, and taxpayer services are appropriated."

The organization also noted that there needs to be more than money thrown at the agency to help its functioning. "It should be clear that funding alone will not solve the IRS’s problems,” AICPA wrote. “Structural reforms and organizational alignment from Congress, the President, the Secretary, and the Commissioner are necessary to delivering the promised goals. We look forward to working with all parties involved to this end and create an IRS that taxpayers deserve."

Priority Guidance Recommendations

In a separate letter sent to the IRS May 24, 2022, AICPA outlined its suggestions for the guidance that the agency should be prioritizing. The guidance recommendations cut across a range of programs and legislation, such as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the SECURE Act, and the CARES Act and covering a number of areas such as corporation and shareholder taxation, employee benefits taxation, individual taxation, and international taxation.

R&E Recommendations

AICPA is also recommending the Internal Revenue Service issue specific regulations related to the treatment of research and experimental (R&E) expenditures under Sec. 174.

In a May 26, 2022, letter to the IRS, AICPA said that the Department of the Treasury and the IRS should "issue regulations providing that section 174(a) expenditures include direct costs, including employee compensation, contract labor, and materials, and at the taxpayer’s election, allocable indirect and overhead costs."

AICPA also said that Treasury and the IRS "should issue regulations that illustrate, using detailed examples, which costs are ‘incident to’ the development or improvement of a product as per Reg. §1.174-2."

If the agency doesn’t issue new regulations, AICPA recommended guidance to cover these requests.

Additionally, AICPA identified issues that have arisen with Rev. Proc. 2000-50, which covers the treatment of costs paid or incurred to develop, purchase, or lease computer software.

"IRS should modify the scope limitation under section 4 of Rev. Proc. 2000-50 to clarify that the limitation on costs that a taxpayer has treated as R&E expenditures under section 174 only applies to costs previously subject to an irrevocable election under section 174, including 174(b) or charging the expenses to capital account."

The Department of the Treasury is continuing its push to get funding for much needed information technology infrastructure upgrades from Congress.

The Department of the Treasury is continuing its push to get funding for much needed information technology infrastructure upgrades from Congress.

During a June 14, 2022, hearing before the Senate Appropriations Committee’s Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government, Treasury Deputy Secretary Wally Adeyemo testified as to why the funds were needed.

The "IRS’ technology is decades out of date, written in a programming language no longer taught, and incredibly expensive to maintain the master file that under grids," Adeyemo told the committee in his opening statement. "The tax system dates back to the 1960s when there was no internet, no cell phones, and no spreadsheets or automatic payments."

The White House is requesting a 12 percent budget increase in fiscal year 2023 compared to 2022 enacted levels "to begin to remedy this mismatch between the IRS’ responsibilities and its resources."

Treasury’s request for increasing funds to help address IT infrastructure upgrades for the IRS did not come up during the hearing’s question-and-answer period, as the committee focused its attention on Russian sanctions, the role of using cryptocurrency to evade sanctions, energy policy and independence, and other criminal-focused activities.

The U.S. Supreme Court has granted a petition for certiorari in the case of A. Bittner, CA-5, 2021-2 USTC ¶50,242 . In Bittner, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that each failure to report a qualifying foreign account on the annual Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR) constituted a separate reporting violation subject to penalty. This means that the penalty applies on a per-account basis, not a per-form basis. The Fifth Circuit disagreed with a Ninth Circuit panel that adopted a per-form interpretation ( J. Boyd, CA-9, 2021-1 USTC ¶50,112).

The U.S. Supreme Court has granted a petition for certiorari in the case of A. Bittner, CA-5, 2021-2 USTC ¶50,242 . In Bittner, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that each failure to report a qualifying foreign account on the annual Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR) constituted a separate reporting violation subject to penalty. This means that the penalty applies on a per-account basis, not a per-form basis. The Fifth Circuit disagreed with a Ninth Circuit panel that adopted a per-form interpretation ( J. Boyd, CA-9, 2021-1 USTC ¶50,112).

—

Background

U.S. citizens and residents must keep records and/or file reports when the person makes a transaction or maintains a relation for any person with a foreign financial agency ( 31 USC 5314). Each person with a financial interest in a financial account in a foreign country must report the relationship to the IRS for each year the relationship exists by providing specified information on and filing the FBAR. The FBAR generally must be filed by June 30 of each calendar year for foreign financial accounts over $10,000 maintained during the previous calendar year (31 C.F.R. §§1010.350, 1010.306).

If the person fails to file the FBAR, the IRS can impose a penalty of up to $10,000 for non-willful violations, unless the violation was due to reasonable cause. For a willful violation, the maximum penalty is the greater of $100,000 or 50 percent of (1) the amount of the transaction when a violation involves a transaction, or (2) the balance in the account at the time of the violation when a violation involves a failure to report the existence of an account. There is no reasonable cause exception for willful violations ( 31 USC 5321).

Fifth Circuit: FBAR Penalty Per Account

In A. Bittner, the Fifth Circuit ruled that the text, structure, history, and purpose of the relevant statutory and regulatory provisions showed that the "violation" of 31 USC 5314 contemplated by the 31 USC 5321 penalty was the failure to report a qualifying account, not the failure to file an FBAR. Therefore, the $10,000 penalty cap applied on a per-account basis, not a per-form basis.

The Fifth Circuit agreed with the government that the district court had erred in determining what constituted a "violation" under 31 USC 5314 by focusing on the regulations under section 5314 to the exclusion of section 5314 itself. Section 5314 does not create the obligation to file a single report, stated the Fifth Circuit, but instead gives the Treasury Secretary discretion to prescribe how to fulfill the statute’s requirement of reporting qualifying accounts.

The Fifth Circuit observed that by authorizing a penalty for any "violation of ... any provision of section 5314," as opposed to the regulations under section 5314, section 5314 "naturally reads" as referring to the statutory requirement to report each account, not the regulatory requirement to file FBARs in a particular manner. Further, the circuit court stated that the reasonable cause exception for non-willful violations was framed in terms of "the transaction" and "the account," and thus it also "naturally reads" as excusing the failure to report a transaction or account, not the failure to file an FBAR.

Ninth Circuit: FBAR Penalty Per Form

In J. Boyd, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the IRS can impose only one non-willful penalty when an untimely but accurate FBAR is filed, regardless of the number of foreign financial accounts. The Ninth Circuit determined that the statutory and regulatory scheme under 31 USC 5314 authorizes a single non-willful penalty for the failure to file a timely FBAR, and that the taxpayer’s conduct in failing to timely file the FBAR amounted to one non-willful violation.

The Ninth Circuit was not persuaded by the government's argument that, based on the statutory scheme as a whole and legislative intent, the penalty amount could be assessed on a per-account basis. The Ninth Circuit found nothing in the statute or regulations to suggest that the penalty could be calculated that way for a single failure to file a timely FBAR that is otherwise accurate. The Ninth Circuit presumed that Congress had purposely excluded the per-account language from the non-willful penalty provision because it had included such language in the previously-enacted willful penalty provision. Further, the inclusion of per-account language in the reasonable cause exception supported the view that Congress had intentionally omitted per-account language from the non-willful penalty provision.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (2009 Recovery Act) extended the 50-percent additional first-year bonus depreciation allowed under the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, providing a generous boost for many businesses in 2009 in light of the economic downturn. Under the 2009 Recovery Act, all businesses, large or small, can immediately depreciate an additional 50-percent of the cost of certain qualifying property purchased and placed in service in 2009, from computer software to plants and equipment. Moreover, the 50-percent bonus depreciation allowance can be taken together with any Code Sec. 179 expensing, which was also extended through 2009.

Bonus basics

The 2009 Recovery Act (just as with the 2008 Stimulus Act) allows all businesses to take a bonus first-year depreciation deduction of 50-percent of the adjusted basis of qualified property purchased and placed in service for use in your trade or business after December 1, 2009, and generally before January 1, 2010. Bonus depreciation is allowed only for: (1) tangible property to which MACRS applies that has an applicable recovery period of 20 years or less, (2) water utility property, (3) certain computer software, and (4) qualified leasehold improvement property. It is not allowed for intangible property, with the exception of certain computer software.

Bonus depreciation can be claimed for both regular and alternative minimum tax (AMT) liability. It is also important to note that, since bonus depreciation is treated as a depreciation deduction, it is subject to recapture as ordinary income under certain provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. And if you have a tax year that is less than 12 months, the amount of the bonus depreciation allowance is not affected by a short tax year.

Computing your bonus depreciation

To figure your allowable 50-percent bonus depreciation deduction, you must multiple the unadjusted depreciable basis of the property by 50 percent. This is the amount of additional first-year depreciation you can deduct in 2009. For example, you purchase qualifying property for your business in 2009 that costs $150,000. You are allowed an additional first-year depreciation deduction of $75,000.

Note. The "unadjusted depreciable basis" is the property's cost (including amounts you paid in case, debt obligations, or other property or services, plus any amounts you paid for items such as sales tax, freight charges, installation, or testing fees).

Regular depreciation. After you have computed the 50-percent bonus depreciation allowance for the property, you can use the remaining cost to compute your regular MACRS depreciation for 2009 and subsequent years. Under MACRS, the cost or other basis of an asset is generally recovered over a specific recovery period. In this case, the property must have a recovery period of 20 years or less.

Example. Assume that in 2009 a taxpayer purchases new depreciable property and places it in service. The property's cost is $1,000 and it is 5-year property subject to the half-year convention. The amount of additional first-year depreciation allowed under the provision is $500. The remaining $500 of the cost of the property is deductible under the rules applicable to 5-year property. Thus, 20 percent, or $100, is apportioned to 2009, which computes to an additional $50 regular depreciation deduction in 2009 under the half-year convention. Accordingly, the total depreciation deduction with respect to the property for 2009 is $550. The remaining $450 cost of the property is recovered under otherwise applicable rules for computing depreciation in subsequent years.

Code Sec. 179 expensing. The 50-percent bonus depreciation allowance is taken after any Code Sec. 179 expense deduction and before you compute regular depreciation under MACRS rules. Therefore, the cost (basis) of the property must be reduced by the amount of any Code Sec. 179 expense allowance claimed on the property before computing the 50-percent bonus depreciation allowance (multiplying the property's basis by 50-percent). Regular depreciation under MACRS is then computed after you have reduced the basis by any Code Sec. 179 expensing allowance and the 50-percent bonus depreciation allowance.

Example. On April 14, 2009, Tom bought and placed in service in his business qualified tangible property that cost $1 million. He did not elect to claim the Code Sec. 179 expensing deduction and he claims no other credits or deductions related to the property. He may deduct 50-percent of the cost ($500,000) for purposes of the 2009 special bonus depreciation. He will use the remaining $500,000 of the property's cost to figure his regular MACRS depreciation deduction for 2009 and the years thereafter.

Example. The facts are the same as above, except Tom uses the Code Sec. 179 expensing deduction. On April 14, 2009, Tom bought and placed in service in his business qualified tangible property that cost $750,000. He elects to deduct $250,000 of the property's cost as a Code Sec. 179 deduction. Tom will apply the 50-percent bonus depreciation allowance to $500,000 ($750,000 - $250,000), which is the cost of the property after subtracting the section 179 expensing deduction. Tom will then deduct 50-percent of the cost after section 179 expensing ($250,000) for purposes of the 2009 special bonus depreciation. He will use the remaining $250,000 of the property's cost to figure his regular MACRS depreciation deduction for 2009 and the years thereafter.

Computing bonus depreciation can be a complicated process, as many variables may come into play. Our tax professionals can help determine the best way for your business to utilize the new bonus depreciation allowance together with other tax incentives to achieve significant tax savings.

On December 18, 2007, Congress passed the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007 (Mortgage Debt Relief Act), providing some major assistance to certain homeowners struggling to make their mortgage payments. The centerpiece of the new law is a three-year exception to the long-standing rule under the Tax Code that mortgage debt forgiven by a lender constitutes taxable income to the borrower. However, the new law does not alleviate all the pain of all troubled homeowners but, in conjunction with a mortgage relief plan recently announced by the Treasury Department, the Act provides assistance to many subprime borrowers.

Cancellation of debt income

When a lender forecloses on property, sells the home for less than the borrower's outstanding mortgage debt and forgives all, or part, of the unpaid debt, the Tax Code generally treats the forgiven portion of the mortgage debt as taxable income to the homeowner. This is regarded as "cancellation of debt income" (reported on a Form 1099) and taxed to the borrower at ordinary income tax rates.

Example. Mary's principal residence is subject to a $250,000 mortgage debt. Her lender forecloses on the property in 2008. Her home is sold for $200,000 due to declining real estate values. The lender forgives the $50,000 difference leaving Mary with $50,000 in discharge of indebtedness income. Without the new exclusion in the Mortgage Debt Relief Act, Mary would have to pay income taxes on the $50,000 cancelled debt income.

The Mortgage Debt Relief Act

The Mortgage Debt Relief Act excludes from taxation discharges of up to $2 million of indebtedness that is secured by a principal residence and was incurred to acquire, build or make substantial improvements to the taxpayer's principal residence. While the determination of a taxpayer's principal residence is to be based on consideration of "all the facts and circumstances," it is generally the one in which the taxpayer lives most of the time. Therefore, vacation homes and second homes are generally excluded.

Moreover, the debt must be secured by, and used for, the principal residence. Home equity indebtedness is not covered by the new law unless it was used to make improvements to the home. "Cash out" refinancing, popular during the recent real estate boom, in which the funds were not put back into the home but were instead used to pay off credit card debt, tuition, medical expenses, or make other expenditures, is not covered by the new law. Such debt is fully taxable income unless other exceptions apply, such as bankruptcy or insolvency. Additionally, "acquisition indebtedness" includes refinancing debt to the extent the amount of the refinancing does not exceed the amount of the refinanced debt.

The Mortgage Debt Relief Act is effective for debt that has been discharged on or after January 1, 2007, and before January 1, 2010.

Mortgage workouts

In addition to foreclosure situations, some taxpayers renegotiating the terms of their mortgage with their lender are also covered by the new law. A typical foreclosure nets a lender only about 60 cents on the dollar. When the lender determines that foreclosure is not in its best interests, it may offer a mortgage workout. Generally, in a mortgage workout the terms of the mortgage are modified to result in a lower monthly payment and thus make the loan more affordable.

More help

Recently, Treasury Department officials brokered a plan that brings together private sector mortgage lenders, banks, and the Bush Administration to help homeowners. The plan is called HOPE NOW.

Here's how it works: The HOPE NOW plan is aimed at helping borrowers who were able to afford the introductory "teaser" rates on their adjustable rate mortgage (ARM), but will not be able to afford the loan once the rate resets between 2008 and 2010 (approximately 1.3 million ARMs are expected to reset during this period). The plan will "freeze" these borrowers' interest rates for a period of five years. The plan, however, has some limitations that exclude many borrowers. Only borrowers who are current on their mortgage payments will benefit. Borrowers already in default or who have not remained current on their mortgage payments are excluded.

Under the HOPE NOW plan, borrowers may be able t

- Refinance to a new mortgage;

- Switch to a loan insured by the Federal Housing Authority (FHA);

- Freeze their "teaser" introductory rate for five years.

Without the Mortgage Debt Relief Act, a homeowner who modifies the terms of their mortgage loan, or has their interest rate frozen for a period of time, could be subject to debt forgiveness income under the Tax Code. This is why the provision of the Mortgage Debt Relief Act excluding debt forgiveness income from a borrower's income is a critical component necessary to make the HOPE NOW plan effective.

If you would like to know more about relief under the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007 and the Treasury Department's plan, please call our office. We are happy to help you navigate these complicated issues.

With the holidays quickly approaching, you as an employer may not only be wondering what type of gift to give your employees this season, but the tax consequences of the particular gift you choose. The form of gift that you give this holiday season not only has tax consequences for your employees, but for your business as well. If you plan on giving your employees a gift that can be basted or baked this holiday season, such as a traditional turkey or ham, you should understand how that gift will be treated by the IRS for tax purposes.

With the holidays quickly approaching, you as an employer may not only be wondering what type of gift to give your employees this season, but the tax consequences of the particular gift you choose. The form of gift that you give this holiday season not only has tax consequences for your employees, but for your business as well. If you plan on giving your employees a gift that can be basted or baked this holiday season, such as a traditional turkey or ham, you should understand how that gift will be treated by the IRS for tax purposes.

De minimis fringe benefit

Gifts of holiday turkeys and hams given to employees are considered non-taxable de minimis employee fringe benefits. They are excluded from employees' income and are fully deductible as a non-wage business expense by the employer. Moreover, the value of the turkey and ham is 100 percent deductible; that is, it is not subject to the 50 percent deductible limitation that generally applies to meals.

Generally, gifts provided to employees are treated as supplemental wages subject to income and payroll taxes unless the benefit is specifically excluded from tax by law. However, gifts considered to be a "de minimis" fringe benefit are not taxable to the employee. Code Sec. 132(a)(4) provides that gross income does not include a fringe benefit that qualifies as a "de minimis" fringe benefit. A de minimis fringe benefit is defined in Code Sec. 132(e)(1) as any property or service the value of which is so small as to make accounting for it unreasonable or administratively impracticable after taking into account the frequency with which similar fringe benefits are provided by the employer to the employer's employees.

Generally, de minimis fringe benefits must satisfy the following requirements:

• The value of the gift must be nominal;
• Accounting for the gift would be administratively impractical;
• The gift is provided only occasionally; and
• The gift is given to promote the good will or health of employees.

In Treasury Reg. Sec. 1.132-6(e)(1), the IRS has specifically included traditional holiday gifts (not cash) with a low fair market value as a de minimis fringe benefit excludable from tax. The gift to employees of a holiday turkey or ham has long been recognized as falling within the rules for de minimis employee fringe benefits, and is not taxable to employees.

Gift certificates are taxable

If you give your employees a gift certificate or gift card (or similar item that can readily be converted into cash) for a turkey or ham in lieu of the actual food item itself, the value of the gift certificate or gift card is considered to be additional salary or wages and subject to income and payroll taxes. Gift certificates and gift cards are "cash equivalents" and taxable to employees even though the turkey itself, if provided in kind directly to the employee, is excludable from tax as a de minimis fringe benefit.