Since it's the first day back and many of you have spent the last week or so in alcohol and food-induced stupor (and are, therefore, unable to email us anything of interest), you won't mind that we throw out this little story from a few days ago. As you may have heard, eventual-GOP-presidential-candidate-that-no-one-wants Mitt Romney has said that he won't release his tax returns for our viewing pleasure. This is the stance that Romney has taken despite the long history of Republican presidential candidates offering up their 1040s so that we can all learn how unfortunate our lives really are. Mittens has taken a bit of heat for his 1040 blackballing but last week, one his sons, Matt, had a bright idea while he was campaigning for the old man in New Hampshire:
I heard someone suggest the other day that as soon as President Obama releases his grades and birth certificate and sort of a long list of things, then maybe he'd do it."
Immediately Mattens, son of Mittens, was interrupted by his brother, Tagg (Taggens?) who just wanted to make sure that everyone knew that Dad wasn't the one who said that [while shooting an icy stare at his idiot brother]. Later, Matt apologized on Twitter, "I repeated a dumb joke. My bad," which is nice although, as we all know, the statement "My bad," is actually a half-assed apology and actual means, "I'm saying this, not because I want to, but I have to." Anyway, we're all very excited for the day when Mitt Romney finally releases his tax return outside President Obama's mosque to reveal something that we all know: Yes, Mitt Romney is fabulously wealthy.
The IRS Commissioner and his subaltern for preparer regulation this week spilled some of the beans about the “competency tests” that they are imposing on the unwashed (non-CPA, non-lawyer, non-enrolled agent) preparers. Some key bits, as reported by Tax Analysts (sorry, subscriber-only link):
…They will allow you to use Publication 17, Your Federal Income Tax, when you take the competency test, and
They’ll only test on 1040 issues.
This confirms the obvious: the competency test will be a joke. It has to be, or too few preparers would survive to prepare the nation’s returns. It won’t be completely open-book, but it sounds like you will be able to pass if you have adequate skills at reading and using an index.
This all makes it look like the cynics are right – it’s all about extending IRS power over preparers.
Today, I want to talk for a little bit about some of our priority programs, such as the Return Preparer Program, the evolution of our relationship with our largest corporate taxpayers, including Schedule UTP, and our work on what we’re calling a real time tax system.
The common thread that runs through them is points of leverage and working smarter.
Points of leverage sounds like what a wrestler uses to pin an opponent. The IRS can use these “points of leverage” to make preparers more subjects of the government and less advocates for their clients. And in their own sweet time, they will.
FYI to any members of Congress who still think it’s a good idea:
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Wednesday said potential cuts to the Internal Revenue Service budget would damage the agency’s ability to collect revenues. “Any substantial cuts to the IRS budget will hurt revenue collection and service to taxpayers, resulting in unanswered phone calls and letters,” Geithner said in the text of remarks prepared for a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing.
Never mind the fact that taxpayers are getting a lot of bang for their buck:
“The customer service and enforcement programs at the IRS provide one of the best values in the federal government,” Geithner said.
For years prior to 2010, only taxpayers with modified AGI of $100,000 or less generally were permitted to convert a traditional IRA into a Roth IRA. For years beginning in 2010 and after, the AGI limitation has been eliminated. Thus, regardless of AGI, all otherwise eligible taxpayers will be allowed to convert an IRA to a Roth IRA. The amount converted is includible in income as if a withdrawal had been made, but no early withdrawal penalties are assessed.
Two-year income spread if conversion done in 2010 – For conversions occurring in 2010, unless a taxpayer elects otherwise, none of the amount is includible in gross income in 2010, with half of the income resulting from the conversion includible in gross income in 2011 and h , income inclusion is accelerated if converted amounts are distributed before 2012. In that case, the amount included in income in the year of the distribution is increased by the amount distributed, and the amount included in income in 2012 (or 2011 and 2012 in the case of a distribution in 2010) is the lesser of: (1) half of the amount includible in income as a result of the conversion; and (2) the remaining portion of such amount not already included in income. The following example illustrates the application of the accelerated inclusion rule.
Example – Betty has a traditional IRA with a value of $100,000 consisting of deductible contributions and earnings. Betty does not have a Roth IRA. She converts the traditional IRA to a Roth IRA in 2010, and as a result of the conversion, $100,000 is includible in gross income. Unless Betty elects otherwise, $50,000 of the income resulting from the conversion is included in income in 2011 and $50,000 in 2012.
Later in 2010, Betty takes a $20,000 distribution, which is not a qualified distribution and all of which, under the ordering rules, is attributable to amounts includible in gross income as a result of the conversion. Under the accelerated inclusion rule, $20,000 is included in income in 2010.
The amount included in income in 2011 is the lesser of (1) $50,000 (half of the income resulting from the conversion); or (2) $80,000 (the remaining income from the conversion). The amount included in income in 2012 is the lesser of (1) $50,000 (half of the income resulting from the conversion), or (2) $30,000 (the remaining income from the conversion, i.e., $100,000 – $70,000 ($20,000 included in income in 2010 and $50,000 included in income in 2011)).
Preparer note – While you cannot elect out of the two year spread on only a portion of the conversion income in 2010 (it’s an all or nothing election), husband and wife may each make separate elections for their individual IRA accounts. For example, a wife could elect to report her conversion income in 2010 and her husband could report his 2010 conversion income in 2011 and 2012. This may result a better spread of the income. The same taxpayer is allowed to make separate elections for separate IRA accounts.
If you need guidance on answering the question, “should my client convert to a Roth?” check out CPE Link’s Federal Tax Update: Part 2 webcast scheduled November-January.. You’ll get a myriad of planning ideas and even access to a simple, but sophisticated, calculator. (Note: The above information was excerpted from Vern Hoven’s manual used in the webcast.) In addition to coverage of the IRA & Individual Retirement area, you’ll get an update on Real Estate & Investment, and Estates, Trusts & Beneficiaries.
Before you go!
Are you Looking for a fresh accounting career opportunity?
Going Concern now has thousands of open accounting jobs.
