Category: Tax

What’s New in Business Taxation, Federal Payroll, and Retirement Plans?

Feeling ready for tax season? Ready for those Schedule C’s and Schedule F’s? Here’s a quick list of the things you will want to be familiar with to properly advise your small business clients.


• New Health Bill provisions. You’ll want to understand the small employer health insurance credit and what new employer health plans look like.

• Self-employed health insurance can be deducted on the business return for the first time, which reduces SE tax.

• Health reimbursement “qualified” arrangements

• The new $500,000 Section 179 expensing allowance, a brand new $250,000 Section 179 for real property assets including leasehold improvements and restaurant property, and the unexpected renewal of the 50% bonus depreciation.

• The 2010 Federal mileage, lodging and meal per diem rates. Recordkeeping for travel, entertainment and the new rules on cell phones.

• The “away-from-home-overnight” requirement for travel expense deductions.

• How to handle the blizzard of Form-1099Cs business clients are receiving and how this cancellation of debt income can be avoided or deferred.

• The status of “hobby loss” and the office-in-home limitation rules

• The new NOL carryback provisions

• The new depreciable lives on restaurant buildings

• The new 9% domestic production activity deduction, who qualifies, what qualifies and where to put it on the return

Got it all? Need help pulling all the information together? Get the details on these and other issues related to business tax in Part 3 of CPE Link’s Federal Tax Update webcasts scheduled November-January. Course includes downloadable manual containing hyperlinks to applicable code sections.

From Traditional IRA to Roth IRA: New Rollover Rules

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.

Top 10 Tax Changes to Know Now

In March 2010, the President approved two huge pieces of tax legislation: the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Numerous tax provisions from these two bills take effect over the next several years. Will you be able to identify the tax changes that may impact your clients’ tax returns? Here’s a quick list of the things you will want to be familiar with.


1. Tax timeline in the health care reform act—when each provision takes effect. These are major tax changes spread over the next 8 years!

2. The additional Medicare Tax on unearned income and wages found in the new Health Bill (the hottest tax topic of the year)

3. How the Gillet case affects the tax return of a same-sex couple. Is filing “Married Filing Joint” permitted?

4. The 5 tests for qualifying a child as a dependent and who can claim the child after a divorce.

5. The new rules for basis reporting starting in 2011 (Form 1099-B).

6. Cancellation of debt (and exceptions to COD Income (Section 108).

7. The myriad adjustments to gross income such as health savings accounts and prepaid tuition accounts.

8. Changes to itemized deductions including the new charitable contribution rules, the home mortgage rules and medical expenses.

9. Features and effective dates for the American Opportunity Tax Credit (Hope Credit) and the Lifetime Learning Credit.

10. The over 60 provisions that expire at the end of 2010; Ordinary income tax rates, capital gains rates, EIC, child tax credit, dependent care credit, limit on itemized deductions and exemptions, etc. will all revert to 2001 law.

Need help pulling all the information together? Get the details on these and other issues related to individual income taxes in Part 1 of CPE Link’s Federal Tax Update webcasts scheduled November-January. Course includes 120 page downloadable manual containing hyperlinks to applicable code sections.

IRS Unit Fully Intends to Make Rich People’s Audit Experience as Unpleasant as Possible

As you my have heard, being mega-rich these days has its disadvantages, including but not limited to – 1) governments getting overly reliant on the wealthy pitching in with revenues; 2) people giving you a hard time when you buy new toys; 3) your own kind selling you out.

Because times are tough and elected officials are having difficulty convincing anyone that higher taxes for the middle class are a good idea, the affluent are having the unfortunate luck to experience the rigor of the Global High Wealth Industry Group – a new unit within the IRS designed to perform the financial equivalent of a full rectal exam:

The reviews performed so far have been particularly harsh, say attorneys. Investors are being asked to turn over numerous hard-to-get documents in short order. These are “the audits from hell that your grandfather warned you about,” says Charles P. Rettig, a partner at Hochman, Salkin, Rettig, Toscher & Perez in Beverly Hills, Calif.

And don’t think for a second that the Service is putting scrubs on these assignments. Extra-special auditees deserve extra-special auditors:

Miriam L. Fisher, a tax attorney and partner at law firm Morgan Lewis in Washington, says the audit teams comprise “A-list examiners” drawn from around the country who are knowledgeable and experienced with various financial products and industries. The audits are so intensive that each team is handling only a few right now and they aren’t far along in the process, she says.

IRS spokeswoman Michelle Eldridge says the group is looking at “individuals who have a complex set of situations, and looking at the complete financial set up.” She acknowledged that “these cases are full audits.”

Although you would never expect an IRS audit to be as delightful as, say, your average weekend in the Hamptons but haven’t rich people suffered enough? The least the IRS examiners could do is bring something from Maison du Chocolat to bring the tension down a notch.

[via TaxProf]

Tax Experts Weigh in on the Fiscal Commission Report

Plenty is being said about Bowles and Simpson’s Fiscal Commission report but we prefer to go with experts on the matter. Some musings from around the tax blogosphere

Joe Kristan loves the zero option, harkening back to the Reagan days:

If no “tax expenditures” were added back, the plan would reduce individual rates to 8, 14 and 23%, with a flat 26% corporate rate. There would be no reduced rate for capital gains, greatly simplifying tax lives for most of us.

This is an excellent idea. I would only apply more of the savings to reducing rates and add a dividends paid deduction to integrate the individual and corporate systems — a huge simplification. Nancy Pelosi isn’t crazfriends didn’t like the first zero option either.

From the aforementioned Tax Policy Center:

[T]his proposal is so provocative it almost seems as if Bowles and Simpson realize they have no chance of building consensus on their own commission. As a result, they may have decided to take their best shot now rather than watch their plan get nibbled to death. If so, it may not have been a bad idea. The fiscal panel may fade away in shame, but I have a feeling this plan may live on.

Tax Foundation’s Tax Policy Blog notes there’s plenty of displeasure to go around:

On the spending side, hawks will wince at the defense cuts while defenders of entitlement spending will dislike the higher retirement age and lower cost-of-living adjustments. One line item calls for all earmarks to be eliminated. Federal employee unions will not like the idea of a 3-year federal pay freeze and a reduction in non-defense employment by 10 percent through attrition.

On the tax side, there are certainly tax hikes for tax-haters to hate: gas taxes, dividend and capital gains taxes, and payroll taxes on high earners. Also, the revenue cap that the chairmen suggest, 21% of GDP, is higher than revenue has been in two generations.

Robert Flach is pleasantly surprised by the report but warns:

By just saying “add back in any desired tax expenditures, and pay for them by increasing one or all of the rates from their zero expenditure low” without limitations or restrictions we all know that the supporters of every single existing “tax expenditure”, as well as proposed new ones, will fund a lobby to throw money at Congress to keep or add their particular benefit. And individual Congresscritters will negotiate back and forth – “I’ll support your tax break if you support mine”. Before you know it we will end up with the same mucking fess we have now!

Meanwhile Dan Meyers needs oxygen:

[T]he report was nothing if not breathtakingly audacious by Washington standards.

Kay Bell notes the contention that has already begun over Social Security:

The debate over what typically is an inviolable government benefits program (remember Dubya’s failed attempt to privatize Social Security?) is going to rage for a bit…Perhaps most of the other members are as upset with the Social Security and tax suggestions as a lot of other people are right now. When the points of view of those 16 other commission members are taken into account, some of the recommendations might change … or disappear.

As Joe mentioned above, Nancy Pelosi hates the report, quoted by The Hill as, “simply unacceptable,” plus we gave you Dick Durbin’s thoughts yesterday.

Personally, we’re fans of the report because if nothing else, it forces politicians to entertain real solutions rather than hide behind the bullshit rhetoric we hear about “tax reform” and “cut spending.” And finally, as Gerald Seib writes at the Journal, there aren’t any more excuses:

By making their ideas public, they made it harder for other commission members to run and hide. The commission now can’t simply bury controversial or unpopular ideas. It has to say to the world that it has rejected them and take responsibility for having done so.

It’s about time.

Eric Cantor Will Not Be Entertaining Any of This Talk of Compromise on Tax Cuts

The presumed next Majority Leader in the House has gone on the record (with Fox News no less) that any pragmatism on the President’s part will be slapped away like a homeless vet’s outstretched hand:

The Obama administration’s hopes of reaching a tax deal with Republicans that would decouple rates on the rich from the middle class appear dead.

House GOP Whip Eric Cantor (Va.) threw cold water on the proposed plan, which would temporarily extend tax cuts for the wealthy while permanently extending tax cuts for the middle class. “Taxes shouldn’t be going up on anybody right now,” Cantor said.

So, in other words President Obama, you can take any of this “compromise” talk and stick it in your tea because that’s what was mandated by the people:

“This election … was really the American people saying they are tired of the lack of results in Washington,” he said. “They want to see more jobs for more Americans. They want to see us … cut government spending, rein in the size of government so we can get this economy growing again. That was the prescription, that was the mandate that came from the people.”

So a fair amount of ellipsises there, so maybe he’s not exactly sure what he’s saying but Cantor is a fool if he thinks that “cutting government spending” and” reining in the size of government” is not part of the GOP agenda despite what Paul Ryan writes in the Financial Times.

Security Agency spending seems to be a pretty big piece of the shopping spree; doesn’t it make sense to start there? If not, are we going to continue buying predator drones on the credit card and cut education again since raising taxes is absolutely out of the question?

Cantor, Republicans signal Obama tax proposal is dead in the water [The Briefing Room/The Hill]

Keyshawn Johnson Successfully Withstands the Fox Business Tax Policy Rhetoric

Dare we say, Keyshawn is being pragmatic here?


A few favorite moments:

Keyshawn: That’s what I’m being told. I don’t know any better. [Every Fox employee is laughing hysterically]

Charles Payne: If there was only 30% of what you made there. When do you say, “You know what? Who’s the Republican running for office?”

Keyshawn: Let’s not always make it about money. [If you listen carefully you can hear Charles Payne soiling himself.]

Payne: Even the guy that is 3rd string?

Keyshawn: Some of those New York Jets guys, as we know, are that responsible when they drink? [Sanchez?]

Any other takeaways? Discuss.

[via TaxProf]

Lame Duck Tax Policy Prognostication

From tax policy cynic Joe Kristan:

It’s unlikely that the lame ducks will accomplish much.

Jesus, that’s no way to start.

I expect an AMT patch to pass (though you should bet the other way if they offer points). I would bet against the extenders getting past the lame ducks, though it could happen. Action on the Bush tax cuts and the estate tax seems unlikely to me. It would require a triumphal GOP to work out a deal with a President whose response to disagreement so far has been to repeat himself slower and louder. The same dynamics bode poorly for the next Congress when it meets in January.

After such an ugly campaign, we wouldn’t put it past a bunch of losers (read: Democrats) to spite the entire country just because they couldn’t effectively communicate any accomplishments from the past two years. Of course, that’s us being cynical to a fault.

Thinking a little more practically, we agree with Joe on his AMT patch prediction. The rules are such a mess that it could stand a complete overhaul but we realize that’s nothing short of water into wine with less than two months left in 2010.

As far as the tax cuts are concerned, the shred of political capital that the members of Congress who will remain in DC have left simply cannot be lost. And besides, the President and Congress fundamentally agree on a major portion of the policy – that is, to extend tax cuts for the middle class. Again, this could be a pipe dream, but compromising on the extension of the cuts for the wealthiest Americans for two years seems like a simple solution (as bad of an idea as it is).

As for the estate tax – it’s toast. No one seems to give a shit about it except for Jon Kyl but once the first decrepit billionaire (who is unwilling to pull the plug on themselves) kicks the bucket in 2011, thus paying 55% tax on the estate, it will only take one phone call and Congress will spring into action.

Sigh. Place your bets.

Earlier:
After Tomorrow, a Bunch of Losers Will Have to Quit Their Pouting and Come Up with Some Tax Policy Solutions