Estate Planning 2013: Now What? A Must Read For Everyone

We now know what the federal estate tax laws will be this year and in the future.  Our federal government has stated that these estate tax rules are now permanent after a decade of uncertainty.  (A cynic may say that these federal tax laws are permanent until our federal government says they are not!). Anyway, here are some of the more important federal estate tax law changes made on December 31, 2012 along with some related estate planning strategies:

• The federal estate and gift tax exemption is now permanently (there is that word again) $5,000,000, with annual inflation adjustments.  These inflation adjustments generate exemptions of $5,120,000 in 2012 and $5,250,000 in 2013.
  • A husband and a wife each have this exemption, so a family can transfer $10,500,000 free of federal estate taxes in 2013. These very generous tax exemptions will allow the opportunity to transfer large amounts of wealth during lifetime or at death free of federal taxes.
  • Planning Point:  Taxpayers who used their full $5,120,000 exemption in 2012 can now make more gifts of $130,000 in 2013.
  • Planning Point:  With inflation adjustments each year, taxpayers can continue to transfer more each year.
  • Important Shift in Focus To State Inheritance Taxes:  Understand that we are only talking about federal estate and gift taxes and that these large exemptions are only applicable at the federal level. With these large federal exemptions, for most people, estate tax planning now will focus more on minimizing state inheritance taxes. For example, Pennsylvania does not follow the federal exemption rules and taxes almost all assets owned by a decedent.  To learn more about Pennsylvania inheritance tax rules see Pennsylvania Inheritance Tax: The Basics.
• Once assets are above the exemption threshold the estate tax rate is 40%.  This results in a very heavy tax bite and is a real concern for anyone above the threshold.  The following taxpayers may end up above the threshold:
  • A taxpayer or a surviving spouse with assets above the exemption threshold or
  • A family (husband and wife) that has accumulated wealth above the $10,500,000 threshold, or
  • A taxpayer that has made lifetime gifts that have exhausted or substantially depleted their exemption.  See the following Example 1.
• The tax law changes have once again unified the exemption for lifetime gifts and transfers at death.  So, if you use your exemption during your lifetime it is not available when you die.
  • Example 1:  Generous John, gave away his shares of stock of his business corporation valued at $5,000,000 to his son in 2012.  He uses his $5,000,000 exemption to transfer such shares free of gift tax.
  • Example 1A: Generous John dies in 2013 with other assets of $1,250,000 that make up his taxable estate. In 2013, he has a remaining exemption of $250,000 (2013 exemption of $5,250,000 less the $5,000.000 of his exemption used in 2012). Generous John has a taxable estate of $1,000,000 which results in a $400,000 in federal estate tax liability.
• Portability is now permanent.  Portability allows for the exemption that was not used by the first spouse to die to be used by the surviving spouse.  In theory, this provision protects those who have failed to plan or for those who have made errors in estate planning.
  • Important Planning Point:  Portability should be looked at as a fallback position where there was no estate planning done.
    • Employing traditional estate planning techniques may prove more advantageous and in some cases is essential in crafting a well conceived estate plan. For example, in most situations the combined use of a unified credit and a marital deduction trust (or the use of a disclaimer trust mechanism) would result in better tax outcome than relying on portability.
    • In second marriages, it is often imperative to use  a certain form of marital deduction called a Qualified Terminable Interest Property (QTIP) trust, to provide for both the surviving spouse and children of a first marriage.
    • Where assets are expected to appreciate in value over time, use of a by-pass or unified credit trust would offer a better result than relying on portability.
  • There are some very important limitations and concerns with using portability, especially in second marriages or where the surviving spouse remarried.  These issues are more fully explored in my article entitled Estate Planning Mistakes: 5 Not So Easy Pieces.
  • Portability Does Not Save the GST Exemption:   The new tax act provides that the Generation-Skipping Transfer (GST) tax exemption also remains at the same level as the gift and estate tax exemption ($5,000,000, adjusted for inflation). The GST tax, which is in addition to the federal estate tax, is imposed on amounts transferred (by gift or at death) to grandchildren or others more than one generation below the decedent.  The important point here is that “portability” does not apply to the generation skipping transfer (GST) tax rules. Where grandchildren and future generations are part of an estate plan, portability will not save the unused GST tax exemption of the first spouse to die.  In such cases, using something called a “dynasty” or GST exempt trust is the better course of action.
    • Caveat:   In situations where there the estate size is large and there are many generations who are going to share the estate, failure to understand and use the more traditional dynasty trust could result in a very expensive and disastrous mistake.
• Annual Donee Exclusion:  Although not part of the tax law changes, this traditional estate and gift tax planning tool allows for annual tax-free gifts of $14,000 in 2013 (up from $13,000 in 2012 as a result of the annual inflation adjustment).  As a result, taxpayers can now give up to $14,000 to as many people as they wish each year and not use up their unified credit or pay a gift tax.
  • Important Note:  Only gifts that qualify as “present interest” gifts are eligible for the annual donee exclusion.
  • Planning Point:  If you are married, your spouse can join you and, together, you can give up to $28,000 per person per year.
  • Planning Point:  This exclusion is in addition to the $5,250,000 estate tax exclusion and can be combined with such exclusion.  For more insight into how to combine these exclusions as well as the lack of marketability and minority interest discounts please read Gifting Shares of Stock In A Bad Economy.
• Capital Gains and Basis Implications:  Lifetime Gifts versus Transfers At Death:  Although not an estate tax rule, under the new federal tax rules, capital gains on appreciated assets will now be taxed at a 20% rate for taxpayers with income above certain thresholds.  Capital gains below these thresholds will be taxed at the previous 15% rate.  These rules bear heavily in the estate tax planning context especially where recipients receive lifetime gifts versus gifts received at death.
  • Important Tax Basis Rule:  Taxpayers who receive appreciated property by a lifetime gift take a carryover basis, while beneficiaries who receive assets at the decedent’s death get a step up in basis to the date of death value of such assets received.
  • Tax Disaster for the Uninformed, Do It Yourself Estate Planners:  Many times elderly people transfer real estate to children during their lifetime in trying to avoid probate.  For a recipient of such lifetime gift, a disastrous income tax result awaits the uninformed taxpayer as illustrated by the following Example 2.
  • Example 2:  Sam Senior is very sick and wants to avoid probate.  He transfers by quit-claim deed his real estate to his son, Sad Son.  Sam Senior bought his house in the 1970s for $17,000 and made improvements over time of $23,000.  As a result his adjusted basis is $40,000.  The house is now worth $540,000.
    • Sam Senior transfers the house to Sad Son in 2012.  Sad Son takes a carryover basis for the house of $40,000. Sad Son sells the house for $540,000 shortly afterwards and has a capital gain of $500,000 which he surprisingly and sadly finds out will cost him $100,000 (20% x $500,000) in federal taxes alone.  His accountant tells him there will also be state income taxes on this gain. Since he is a Pennsylvania resident, he will pay an extra $15,350 in Pennsylvania income taxes.
    • Alternate Universe:  Sam Senior consults with his tax/estate attorney who drafts a will that transfers the house to son at death. Sad (who now legally changes his name to Happy), has a basis of $540,000 upon his receipt of the house from the estate.  Happy, now sells the house and has zero, yes, zero capital gain (Sale Price, $540,000 less basis of $540,000 = 0)!
      • Note, state inheritance taxes may be applicable in certain states.  For example, in Pennsylvania there would be a 4.5% inheritance tax on the real estate, but this is a lot smaller cost than the capital gains that results from taking a carryover in basis via a lifetime gift.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations:

Federal Estate Tax Implications: The federal estate tax law changes provide for some very generous federal estate tax breaks.  For those close to or above the federal estate tax threshold, the discussion above has explored some of the many planning opportunities to save federal estate taxes.  Such taxpayers should not rely on portability and should meet with an estates attorney to plan the proper course of action based on their particular family situation, needs and goals.

Shift In Focus To State Inheritance Tax Matters: Taxpayers below the federal estate tax thresholds also must continue to plan but the tax focus needs to shift to minimizing state inheritance taxes.

Create An Estate Plan That Fits Your Particular Family and Financial Situation:  It is most important to recognize that everyone has a unique situation with various assets, family members and ideas on how their family members are to be provided for and who should be in charge once they are gone.  As a result, all taxpayers still need to set up an estate plan for non-tax issues such as making sure their assets go to their loved ones in the way they wish.  They need to choose the proper people to administer their estates and any trusts they create.

Young Families:  In younger families, determining a proper guardian for their children and setting up trusts for the protection of their assets and a distribution scheme for such children is of paramount importance and has little to do with taxes.  An objective and unbiased assessment of how much life insurance is required is often needed.

Second Marriages:  Many with second marriages face unique challenges.  An estate plan needs to be developed and implemented to meet the diverse needs and goals of such blended families.

Special Needs Trust:  Those with disabled children or those receiving government benefits may need special needs trusts.

Do Not Try This On Your Own:  Get an Experienced Estate Attorney:  Having experienced estate counsel explore these issues and offer various strategies is at the heart of estate planning.  Coordinating probate and non-probate assets into an integrated estate plan is often overlooked and little understood.

Attention To Details and Documentation: Finally, make sure that you have an experienced estate attorney that can create an integrated estate plan.  Such attorney should have the skills to draft appropriate wills, trusts, durable powers of attorney, living wills and other related documents tailored to your specific family and financial needs.

Please feel free to post comments or ask questions.  Liking and sharing this blog anywhere in cyberspace and recommending the site via the blue Alexa box on the right is always welcomed and appreciated.

As always, do not hesitate to contact me if they want further insight or need my advice or legal assistance.

Copyright © 2013 – Steven J. Fromm & Associates, P.C., 1420 Walnut Street, Suite 300, Philadelphia, PA 19102. All rights reserved. 

Read Full Post »

2012 Year End Tax Planning Strategies

With less than 30 days left in 2012, there is still time to do some year-end tax planning.  This 2012 tax year is more difficult in that no one knows how the tax laws may change before the end of the year.  With certain tax deductions and credits due to expire at the end of 2012 (sunset provisions) and new higher tax brackets kicking in next year (end of the Bush-era tax cuts), year-end tax planning is harder than ever.

However, income tax planning must go on even in this uncertain tax environment.  As a result, it is essential to know the customary year-end planning techniques that cut income taxes.

It all starts with a tax projection of whether you will be in a higher or lower tax bracket next year. Once your tax brackets for 2012 and 2013 are known, there are two basic income tax considerations.

• Should income be accelerated or deferred?
• Should deductions and credits be accelerated or deferred?

Example: For income taxed at a higher tax bracket next year, accelerating such income to 2012 results in less taxes being paid.  At the same time deductions and tax credits deferred into next year will become more valuable as they offset income taxed at a higher bracket.

However, life is never that simple.  Tax law uncertainty, especially this year, makes for some real guesswork.  As discussed below, when it comes to certain deductions that have tax threshold limitations, bunching of deductions to one year may force the timing into a tax year where the tax bracket is lower than the other tax year in question. Year end tax projections must take into account the maddening alternative minimum tax.

In any event, the following lays out the basic ideas for income acceleration and deduction/credit deferral in a rising income tax bracket environment.

Income Acceleration: 

For taxpayers who think that they will be in a higher tax bracket, here are some targeted forms of income to consider accelerating into 2012.

• Receive bonuses before January 1, 2013.  If your employer allows you the choice, this may create some significant income tax savings.  Also, be aware that certain high income earners will pay an extra 0.9% in social security taxes on earned income above certain thresholds starting in 2013.
• Sell appreciated assets.  With capital gains being taxed at a higher rate in 2013, it may make sense to sell such assets before the end of the year.  For a complete discussion of this issue please see 2012 Year End Tax Planning: Should Taxpayers Sell in 2012 Before Rates Rise?  Important 

Example:  Mr. Appreciation has low basis stock that has appreciated by $200,000 as of December, 2012.  He thinks he will need to liquidate his positions either this year or next. His $200,000 gain will generate $30,000 in federal taxes in 2012 (15% tax).  If Mr. Appreciation waits until 2013, the tax rate may be 25% (or more due to the 2013 higher capital gain rate and 3.8 percent surcharge and itemized deduction limitations) with a tax of $50,000 in 2013.  As a result,  a sale in 2012 may save $20,000.

Note, however, that for an older taxpayer or one in ill-health, this strategy may not make sense since there would be no capital gains (because of the step up in basis rules) if the assets passed through his or her estate.

Planning Note:  The wash sale rules do not apply when selling at a gain, so taxpayers can cash out their gains and then repurchase the securities immediately afterwards.

• Redeem U.S. Savings Bonds.  Be aware that starting in 2013, a new 3.8 percent Medicare tax on unearned income, including interest, dividends and capital gains, will take effect.  So cashing in these bonds may make sense in the proper situation. For more on this read 2013 Sneaky New Tax – Not Too Early to Plan for 3.8 % Medicare Tax on Investment Income.
• Complete Roth conversions.  Taking into income the monies in IRA accounts in a year before your tax bracket is due to rise may make for some significant tax savings.
• Accelerate debt forgiveness income with your lender.
• Maximize retirement distributions.  Remember the minimum required distributions (MRDs) are the amounts distributed each year to avoid the draconian 50% MRD penalty.  However, taxpayers with IRAs can choose to take larger distributions this year to have such income taxed at a lower income tax rate than in 2013.
• Electing out or selling outstanding installment contracts.  Disposing of your installment agreement may bring the deferred income into 2012 at a lower tax rate than anticipated in future years.  It may be helpful to pay tax on the entire gain from an installment sale in 2012 by electing out of installment sale treatment under Section 453(d) of the Internal Revenue Code, rather than deferring tax on the gain to later years.  Conversely, in certain situations installment sale treatment may be a better option since it allows for spreading of income over multiple years which may keep taxpayers below the modified adjusted gross income threshold.
• Accelerate billing and collections.  If you report income on a cash basis method of accounting, immediately sending out bills to increase collections before the end of the year may result in significant tax savings.
• Take corporate liquidation distributions in 2012.  Senior or retiring stockholders contemplating the redemption or sale of their shares of stock in their corporation can save considerable taxes by selling their shares in 2012.

Deductions and Tax Credit Deferrals:

• Bunch itemized deductions into 2013 and take the standard deduction into 2012.  Note, however, the AGI limitation rises to 10% in 2013 from the current 7.5% (except for those over age 65), so this limitation may dictate the opposite strategy in certain taxpayer situations.
• Postpone paying certain tax-deductible bills until 2013.
• Pay last state estimated tax installment in 2013.
• Postpone economic performance until 2013 if you are an accrual basis taxpayer.
• Watch adjusted gross income (“AGI”)  limitations on deductions/credits.  For certain expenses such as elective surgery, dental work, eye exams, it would be better to have it done in the year that you are already above the applicable  AGI  threshold.  However, it may be better to incur these expenses in 2012 where the applicable AGI limit (7.5%) is lower than the 2013 limit (10 % for those under 65).  It all depends on the particular tax situation of each taxpayer.
• As mentioned above, watch the AMT. Missing the impact of the AMT can make certain year-end strategies counterproductive. For example, aligning certain income and deductions to cut regular tax liability may in fact increase AMT liability.  It is very easy to have your tax planning backfire by missing the difference between the regular tax and AMT tax rules.

Example: Do not prepay state and local income taxes or property taxes if subject to the AMT.  It will generate no income tax benefit.

• Watch net investment interest restrictions.
• Match passive activity income and losses.
• Purchase machinery and equipment before the end of 2012.  The very generous current Section 179 deductions decline in 2013 to $25,000 and there is no 50% bonus depreciation in 2013.

Final Thoughts and Warnings:

Remember that these are some of the customary year-end income tax strategies and are not all-encompassing.  Taxpayers must take into account slated tax law changes for next year and last-minute tax laws enacted before year-end.  Accelerating tax payments must take into account the impact on cash flow and the present value of money.  This is why it is essential to “run the numbers” to find the best steps to reduce the impact of these new tax laws.

Also keep in mind that recent tax law changes, like the 3.8 medicare tax that applies to 2013, bear heavily on income tax planning.  For more details please read 2013 Sneaky New Tax – Not Too Early to Plan for 3.8 % Medicare Tax on Investment Income.

Most importantly remember that income tax strategies depend on the specific income or expenses of each taxpayer and their overall income, gift and estate tax setting.  This discussion offers some but not all tax strategies.

As always, it is quite beneficial to have tax counsel look at the details of your particular income tax situation to carve out specific tax strategies to cut taxes owed.

Read Full Post »

Hurricane Sandy: Tax Deductions For Casualty Losses

My last post talked about when we can trash tax and other important records. Well, Hurricane Sandy brought a whole new meaning to the concept of trashing records and a whole lot more.  

Experts estimate that Hurricane Sandy has caused $50 billion of damage.  Eqecat Inc., a financial advisory firm out of Oakland, California predicts that insurance will cover $10 to $20 billion of such losses.  Storm victims will be on the hook for the other $30 billion of losses. 

A couple of points to keep in mind before talking about the casualty loss tax implications:

• If your house is damaged from this disaster, contact local building authorities to see if the home is inhabitable,
• Establish an insurance claim, but don’t settle immediately,
• Make temporary repairs and take other remedial action to prevent further damage to homes and belongings, and
• Take photos of the damages.

With so many lives in complete turmoil, many of us on the East coast  crushed by Sandy’s wrath are not thinking of  claiming a casualty loss for tax purposes. However, knowing about how taxpayers can claim tax deductions under casualty loss provisions of the Internal Revenue Code is essential in dealing with insurance companies.  While memories are fresh and evidence is still available, now is the time to develop, document and support such casualty losses.

To aid those affected by this devastation readers should look at my article entitled Casualty Losses For Hurricane Sandy.  This article details  the tax qualification rules for being eligible for casualty losses.  It is a must read for anyone devastated by Sandy.

Read Full Post »

Can I Trash It Now? Tax Record Retention Guidelines

Papers, papers and still more papers.  When can I destroy these documents?

There are no hard and fast rules in this area.  The following offers some general guidance to carefully consider when determining any destruction of documents.

Against the urge to purge, remember that maintaining documents and records is often essential if a tax audit by the IRS, state or local taxing authority occurs.  Be aware that it is the burden of the taxpayer to provide sufficient proof and support for any tax position taken on a tax return.  Prematurely disposing of relevant documentation and proof supporting a tax deduction or tax position could have a disastrous tax impact.

Tax rules offer some guidance as to minimum document retention periods. It is imperative to keep records such as receipts, canceled checks, and other documents that support an item of income or a deduction, or a credit appearing on a return until the statute of limitations expires for that return. Here are some of the key statute of limitation rules for federal tax returns:

• For most returns the statute of limitations is 3 years from the date you filed the return. However, the following are some very important exceptions to this 3 year statute of limitation.
• There is no period of limitations to assess tax when a return is fraudulent or when no return is filed.
• If income that you should have reported is not reported, and it is more than 25% of the gross income shown on the return, the time to assess is 6 years from when the return is filed.
• For filing a claim for credit or refund, the period to make the claim generally is 3 years from the date the original return was filed, or 2 years from the date the tax was paid, whichever is later.
• For filing a claim for a loss from worthless securities the time to make the claim is 7 years from the date the return was due.
• If you are an employer, you must keep all of your employment tax records for at least 4 years after the tax becomes due or is paid, whichever is later.

Additionally, it is often imperative to check state and local statute of limitation rules before destroying files and records.

Keep in mind that documents may need to be retained and preserved for legal reasons other than taxation, such as, insurance claims or facilitating the transfer of  assets in the case of deceased family member.  Documents like death certificates, estate tax closing letters should be kept indefinitely.

For more detailed guidance on how long to keep specific documents and other document retention considerations and safeguards, please read my article Record Retention For Individuals .

For more detailed guidelines for record retention rules and other protective housekeeping measures for businesses see Record Retention Guidance For Business: A Conservative and Basic Approach.

A discussion with your tax attorney and tax accountant may be a prudent and conservative course of action before destroying any documents or files.

Read Full Post »

Philadelphia Now Allows A Tax Credit for Hiring Veterans

Philadelphia has recently amended its Business Privilege Tax (business income and receipts tax)  to allow a credit for employment of veterans of the Armed Forces.  This new Philadelphia tax law defines a “veteran” as a person who has received an honorable discharge, served a minimum of six months in active full-time duty within the past 10 years and has met the qualifications under the federal Vow to Hire Heroes Act of 2011. The period of eligibility for hired veterans is between July 1, 2012, and June 30, 2014.

The law requires that the veteran’s compensation is to other employees in the same position or, if a similar position does not exist, at an average hourly rate of at least 150% of the federal minimum wage.

The business will receive a credit of $2,000 for a full-time position, multiplied by the percentage of the tax year that the veteran worked for the business or $1,000 for a part-time position, multiplied by the percentage of the tax year that the veteran worked for the business.

The credit is available for a total of 24 months of employment, and the total amount of credit a business may receive for a full-time employee over all tax years is $4,000. For a part-time employee for the 24 months of employment, the total credit allowable for the business is $2,000.

This new law is the result of Bill No. 120491, City of Philadelphia, effective June 27, 2012

Read Full Post »

IRS Slams Taxpayers: Attention to Tax Details Matter

Taxpayers found out the hard way that the documentation rules imposed by the IRS better be followed exactly and to the letter.  In Durden, TC Memo, 2012-140, taxpayers claimed a $22,517 charitable contribution for 2007.  The IRS disallowed this deduction and the United States Tax Court agreed.

The taxpayers had canceled checks and a letter dated January 10, 2008 from the church confirming this contribution.  Seems like that would be enough.  Wrong!

The IRS did not accept the church’s acknowledgement because it lacked certain language as required under IRS rules.  For a charitable contribution deduction, Section 170(f)(8) of the Internal Revenue Code requires that a monetary contribution of $250 or more must be substantiated by:

1. A contemporaneous written acknowledgment,
2. That indicates the amount paid by the taxpayer, and
3. Whether the organization provided any goods and services in consideration (or in exchange) for the contribution, and if so, a good faith estimate of the value of such goods and services.

The problem for the taxpayers was that the church failed to include part 3 in their January 10, 2008 letter to the taxpayers.  They then went back to the church and got a second letter dated January 21, 2009 that revised the first letter by containing the required language under part 3 of this test.

But now the problem was that the revised letter was too late so it could not be considered contemporaneous by the IRS.  To be contemporaneous under Section 170(f)(8)(C) of the Internal Revenue Code it must be obtained by the due date of the tax return (here April 15, 2008) plus any extensions or, if earlier, the date the taxpayer files the return.  So now the taxpayers flunked part 1 of the test!

You might think that this is pretty harsh since the taxpayer’s really came close here.  So did the taxpayers.  The taxpayers argued that since they substantially complied they should still get the deduction.  The substantial compliance test has been successfully argued where a taxpayer can show that despite strict compliance they have met the essential statutory purpose of such requirement.  The court pointed out that the essential statutory purpose of the acknowledgement rules are  two-fold:

1. Assist taxpayers in determining their deduction, and
2. To aid the IRS in processing returns.

The court determined that without a statement from the church that no goods and services were provided,  neither of these two essential statutory purposes can be met.

This is a pretty harsh result for the taxpayers, especially since it was clearly the church that failed to provide the requisite language.  But the object lessons here are clear.

First, when dealing with charitable contributions you better make sure this language is present, especially in cases where large gifts are involved.

Second, when it comes to taxes attention to details is essential.

Third and finally, complying with the various federal, state and local income taxes is complicated.  Having an attention-to-detail minded tax attorney, or tax accountant is greatly recommended and probably essential.  With the loss of this large charitable deduction and the cost to bring this matter before the United States Tax Court, the Durdens definitely found this out the hard way.

Read Full Post »

New 2013 Medicare Tax: 3.8% Stealth Tax

The Supreme Court has recently ruled that the new health care act is constitutional.  As a result, on January 1, 2013, as part of this health care law, the new 3.8% medicare tax will start to impact many taxpayers.  It would seem prudent for taxpayers to plan now for this new stealth tax.   Basically, this new extra 3.8% tax applies to the lesser of

1. Net investment income or
2. The excess of modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) over the “threshold amount.”

Threshold Amount: The threshold amounts are dependent on the type of taxpayer.  Here are the threshold amounts for various taxpayers:

1. For married taxpayers filing jointly, the threshold amount is $250,000
2. Married filing separately, the threshold amount is $125,000
3. All other individual taxpayers, the threshold amount is $200,000.
4. For trusts and estates, the threshold amount is $11,650.

This is just a basic overview.  To learn more about this stealth tax please read 2013 SNEAKY NEW TAX:  Not Too Early to Plan For The 3.8 Percent Medicare Tax On Investment Income.  This article provides more details about this tax, its scope, limitations and exclusions.  The article also provides examples of how this tax operates.

With 2013 quickly approaching, it is not too soon to become aware of this new stealth tax and look at methods to possibly lessen the impact of this tax.

Read Full Post »

Summer Camp: Tax Breaks For Those Working or Looking For Work

Now that the summer is in full bloom, parents who have sent or considering sending their children to summer camps may not be aware of the tax implications.  Parents who have placed children in camp while they are working or looking for work may be eligible for various tax breaks such as the dependent care credit  and the deduction for medical expenses in certain special situations.  To get a better grasp of the various tax breaks and the special rules and limitations in this area readers should explore Summer Camp: Tax Treatment.

Read Full Post »

Quiet Disclosures of Offshore Foreign Accounts

Taxpayers with foreign accounts are in a tight spot now.  They can take advantage of the current voluntary disclosure program  (as discussed Foreign Offshore Accounts: IRS Third Amnesty Program) to minimize their tax exposure and to resolve these looming and unresolved problems.  However this disclosure program brings IRS scrutiny and potential civil penalties, and in the most serious situations criminal penalties. In light of these exposures, some taxpayers with interests in foreign assets have tried to sidestep these issues by employing a strategy called a “quiet disclosure.”

The quiet disclosure is implemented by simply amending a previously filed tax return to show the foreign accounts, report the income associated with the account and paying the tax with the amended return.  The problem with this strategy is that the IRS has made clear that this strategy is not acceptable.  The IRS clearly states in its Questions and Answers of May 6, 2009 that quiet disclosures do not satisfy reporting requirements.  On June 1, 2011, IRS announced that it would be opening up examinations against such taxpayers who have employed this strategy.  They have made clear from Q&A #10 of 2009 and Q&A #15 of 2011 of their disclosure programs that such taxpayers who have made quiet disclosures would be best served to come forward to take advantage of the penalty framework of the voluntary disclosure programs.

Be aware that the civil and criminal penalties for foreign bank accounting reporting (hereinafter referred to as FBAR) violations are in most cases based on the intent of  the taxpayer.   (For more on these reporting requirements see Foreign Bank Account Reporting.) Where a taxpayer is aware of the FBAR requirements and the disclosure programs but knowingly attempts a quiet disclosure, the IRS may argue and a judge or jury may decide that this strategy is indicative of negligent, reckless, or perhaps willful conduct.

Equally important to note is that quiet disclosures may be  lacking in other ways.  Although amended returns (quiet disclosures) report income, taxes, and related interest, they do not show accuracy related penalties.  More importantly the amended return may not show the information required by the FBAR form (Form TD F 90-22.1) .

For taxpayers with foreign accounts they need to seek tax counsel to decide the proper course of action in this messy area.  But it would seem that using the quiet disclosure strategy would only compound the problem.  To take advantage of the IRS current amnesty program and to see the operative rules please read Foreign Offshore Accounts: IRS Third Amnesty Program.

Tax Practitioner Warning:  For those accountants subject to SSTS No.1, Tax Return Positions the following sobering warning should be kept in mind:  Tax advisors should “not take a questionable position based on the probabilities that the client’s return will not be chosen by the IRS for audit.”  Additionally, the various criminal and civil penalties under the Internal Revenue Code for tax practitioners should be taken very seriously in this context.  In light of these exposures, practitioners should take pause before  recommending a quiet disclosure.

Read Full Post »

FBAR Deadline is Quickly Approaching For Those With Foreign Bank Accounts

The filing deadline for FBAR is June 30, 2012, and there are no exceptions.  Be aware that FBAR filings  must be received by June 30, not just post-marked.

For more about FBAR filing requirements please read Foreign Bank Account Reporting at the following link: http://www.sjfpc.com/foreign_bank_account_tax_reporting_90-22-1.html

Read Full Post »

IRS Now Examining Recorded Deeds For Unreported Gifts

The IRS is now reviewing recorded deeds to discover gifts of real estate interests transferred without reporting such gifts on the Form 709 gift tax return. Please see my article entitled IRS Checking Real Estate Transfers For Unreported Gifts  that provides an overview of the federal gift tax and the related income tax implications at the following link: http://www.sjfpc.com/IRS_Auditing_Real_Estate_Gifts_Tax_Rules_Returns_Form_709.html  

This area of the law has taken on greater importance as the IRS has now begun an aggressive campaign in auditing taxpayers for gifts of real estate interests.  This is a must read for anyone contemplating a gift or death-bed transfer of real estate as well as real estate agents and real estate attorneys recommending gifting real estate.  Without insight into the gift and income tax implications huge tax mistakes may result.  

Bottom Line:  Before making any gift taxpayers would be well served  to discuss this strategy with their tax attorney or tax accountant to see if it really makes practical, financial and tax sense in your particular situation. 

 

Read Full Post »

Employers Playing Tax Games with Worker Classification: Part II: Employee or Independent Contractor?

Our previous post discussed the IRS new Voluntary Worker Classification Settlement Program (VCSP) offering past payroll tax relief when the employer agrees to reclassify workers as employees.  For the details and discussion of this VCSP program please see our just published article at my website at the following link:  http://www.sjfpc.com/IRS_Payroll_Taxes_VCSP.html.  Many have inquired as to what distinguishes an employee from an independent contractor.  For a discussion of this issue and the IRS and case law criteria involved please see our article entitled Employee or Independent Contractor? at http://sjfpc.com/IRS_tax_rules_employee_versus_independent-contractor.html.  Both of these articles can be seen at our website  (www.sjfpc.com).

Read Full Post »

New Tax Alert: Employers Playing Tax Games with Workers: IRS Offers Way to Come Clean

The IRS has just introduced a new Voluntary Worker Classification Settlement Program offering past payroll tax relief when the employer agrees to reclassify workers as employees.  For the details and discussion of this VCSP program please see my just published article at my website at the following link: http://www.sjfpc.com/IRS_Payroll_Taxes_VCSP.html at my website (www.sjfpc.com).

Read Full Post »

Hidden Offshore Bank Accounts: IRS Offers A Second Chance To Come Forward

The Internal Revenue Service announced on February 8, 2011 a special voluntary disclosure initiative designed to bring offshore money back into the U.S. tax system and help people with undisclosed income from hidden offshore accounts get current with their taxes.  Here are some of the basic provisions of this program.

 

1. Deadline To Come Forward: August 31, 2011

This second new voluntary disclosure initiative will be available to taxpayers through Aug. 31, 2011.

2. 2011 Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative Makes Raises Penalty Charges and Makes Other Changes to the 2009 OVDP

The new IRS program is called the 2011 Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative (OVDI). It includes several changes from the 2009 Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (OVDP). The overall penalty structure for 2011 is higher, meaning that people who did not come in through the 2009 voluntary disclosure program will not be rewarded for waiting.

3. New Penalty Framework

For the 2011 initiative, there is a new penalty framework that requires individuals to pay a penalty of 25 percent of the amount in the foreign bank accounts in the year with the highest aggregate account balance covering the 2003 to 2010 time period. Some taxpayers will be eligible for 12.5 or 5 percent penalties instead of the 25% penalty. Please see the discussion below for such exceptions.

4. Back Taxes Must Be Paid

Participants also must pay back-taxes and interest for up to eight years.

5. Additional and Usual Penalties Imposed

Taxpayers must pay accuracy-related penalties. No reasonable cause arguments can be made to avoid the such penalties. The IRS will also assert failure to file and failure to pay penalties.

6. Returns To Be Filed By August 31 Deadline

Taxpayers participating in the new initiative must file all original and amended tax returns and include payment for taxes, interest and accuracy-related penalties by the Aug. 31 deadline.

7. Special 12.5% Category Instead of 25% Penalty

The IRS also created a new penalty category of 12.5 percent for treating smaller offshore accounts. People whose offshore accounts or assets did not surpass $75,000 in any calendar year covered by the 2011 initiative will qualify for this lower rate.

8. Special 5% Category Instead of the 25% Penalty

If a taxpayer meets all four of the following conditions, then the offshore penalty is reduced to 5%:

 (A) did not open or cause the account to be opened (unless the bank required that a new account be opened, rather than allowing a change in ownership of an existing account, upon the death of the owner of the account);

(B) has exercised minimal, infrequent contact with the account, for example, to request the account balance, or update accountholder information such as a change in address, contact person, or email address;

(C) has, except for a withdrawal closing the account and transferring the funds to an account in the United States, not withdrawn more than $1,000 from the account in any year covered by the voluntary disclosure; and

(D) can establish that all applicable U.S. taxes have been paid on funds deposited to the account (only account earnings have escaped U.S. taxation).

9. Special 5% Category for Foreign Resident

If a taxpayer is a foreign resident who was unaware that he or she was a U.S. citizen, then the offshore penalty is reduced to 5%.

10. Benefits of 2011 Initiative: Avoid Higher Penalties and Possible Criminal Prosecution

The 2011 initiative offers clear benefits to encourage taxpayers to come in now rather than risk IRS detection. Taxpayers hiding assets offshore who do not come forward will face far higher penalty scenarios as well as the possibility of criminal prosecution.

Copyright © 2011, Steven J. Fromm.  All rights reserved. No part of this article may be reproduced or used in any form or fashion without the written permission of Steven J. Fromm.

Read Full Post »

Failing To Update Retirement Plans: How to Avoid IRS Plan Disqualification & Penalties by Using VCP

In our fast paced world, many retirement plans are drafted and then often neglected.  In extreme cases, plans are put aside without ever being updated.  Some plan sponsors have failed to restate their plans for years or even decades.  For many individuals, retirement plan accounts represent the largest portion of their wealth.  As the following discussion will illustrate, the failure to protect this most valuable and important asset by keeping the retirement plan in full compliance with applicable retirement plan laws could result in some very nasty, costly and unforeseen financial repercussions.

The retirement plan laws have always required that plans be updated for tax law changes.  Before 2003, the IRS allowed plans to be periodically restated for tax law changes that occurred over many years.  This resulted in large, periodic major plan restatements.  However, since 2003 the IRS has required amendments to retirement plans for each new tax law resulting in more frequent “interim amendments.”  [For those of you interested in a more detailed discussion of these required interim amendments since 2003, please go to my questions answered at my Linked-In profile.]  For many plans, the deadlines for many of these plan restatements or interim amendments have now expired.  Current rules provide that plans that have not been redrafted to comply with required prior restatements or interim amendments cease to be qualified as of their applicable deadlines.

In the worst case scenario, the IRS may demand that the plan be retroactively disqualified.  If the IRS is successful in disqualifying the plan, the plan sponsor’s tax deductions for contributions taken in the year of disqualification and in later years would be disallowed.  The taxes owed by the plan sponsor due to the disallowance of previously claimed retirement plan deductions plus applicable interest and penalties could be enormous.  In addition, participants of the plan would have to treat as taxable income the value of their plan account as of the date of such disqualification.  The taxes, interest and penalties to the participants from the date of plan disqualification could be equally exorbitant. This would be a truly disastrous and harsh result for both the employer plan sponsor and participants in the disqualified plan.

However, in most cases, the current policy of the IRS is to impose monetary penalties instead of the more severe penalty of plan disqualification.  Even so, when the IRS raises these failures as the result of an audit the penalties can be quite severe.   Penalties can range from $2,500 to $80,000 depending on the failures involved and the size of the plan.  It is worth noting that in recent years, the IRS has increased its auditing of retirement plans.

 Here is Good News: How to Solve This Looming Problem 

The IRS has a voluntary remedial program called the VCP (voluntary compliance program) to correct these plan document deficiencies.  The IRS position is that retirement plans may be re-qualified only by having the plan sponsor voluntarily come forward before an IRS audit by submitting the newly drafted delinquent restatements and/or interim amendments to the IRS in accordance with some very detailed procedures and documentation pursuant to Revenue Procedure 2008-50.  Once the IRS reviews and hopefully approves the application and the newly drafted required documentation, the plan is deemed to be in full compliance with applicable law and such plan is retroactively tax qualified.

Instead of paying a steep monetary penalty, the VCP submission results in the paying of a filing fee to the IRS.  Sometimes, if the violation is quite limited the filing fee can be as low as $375.  (Remember, you will still need to pay for documentation services associated with plan restatements and interim amendments.  However, these costs would have been incurred in any event to keep your plan in full compliance with the law.)  The important point here is that the use of the VCP program avoids the risk of plan disqualification or the imposition of a large monetary penalty.

 How We Can Help:

Numerous VCP program applications under the applicable Revenue Procedure 2008-50 have been submitted by this office.  This application along with the needed plan restatements and interim amendments must be carefully drafted to ensure efficient negotiations and a successful outcome with the IRS.

The Bottom Line:

Plan sponsors should immediately and voluntarily move to correct plan deficiencies pursuant to the more taxpayer friendly and cheaper VCP program before the IRS audits your plan.  Once the IRS commences an audit, the VCP submission strategy is no longer an option and your plan is exposed to disqualification and/or severe monetary penalties.

Looking forward, you must establish a program with your plan adviser to ensure that your plan is kept in compliance with the laws concerning plan restatements, interim amendments and the changing IRS submission requirements and deadlines.  This will avoid having to deal with all of these problems again in the future.  In fact, the Revenue Procedure requires a disclosure in the VCP application as to what new procedures the plan sponsors will use to avoid this problem in the future.

 Do Not Wait

Do not wait for the IRS to audit your retirement plan as it then will be too late to get the cheaper and less painful VCP deal.  For a free initial consult to assess your retirement plan situation, please do not hesitate to call me, Steven J. Fromm, Esquire at 215-735-2336.  All consultations are confidential and covered by attorney-client privilege.

Copyright © 2009, Steven J. Fromm

Read Full Post »

THE SILVER LINING OF A BAD ECONOMY: GIFTING OF SHARES OF STOCK IN A CLOSELY HELD BUSINESS

As with most things in life, when things are bad, there usually is something good that can come out of it.  Our current economic troubles have resulted in many closely held or small businesses being worth far less then they used to be.  This is not a good situation for businesses that are hanging on to survive or have to be sold for various reasons.  However, for people wanting to minimize estate and gift taxes and have been putting off taking a cold hard look at their estate plan, now may be the perfect time to explore the gifting of shares in their businesses.

For example, some businesses have senior family members who own all or most of the shares of the outstanding stock of their corporation.  With the value of the business being down right now, more shares could be gifted to younger family members involved in the business.

Example:  Mr. Senior owns 80% of Deflated, Inc., while his two sons who work in the business own 10% each.  Deflated was worth $3,000,000 in 2007.  By the end of 2008, it was worth $2,500,000.  Mr. Senior talks to tax counsel and after exploring the tax strategies and planning tools discussed below decides to gift 20% of his shares worth $500,000 to each of his sons, leaving him with a 40% stock interest.

The tax advantages are as follows:

1.  The stock gifted to each son was previously worth $600,000. The current market value of such stock to each son is now only $500,000.  If Deflated, Inc. goes back to its value once the economy recovers, then Mr. Senior has just transferred $200,000 ($100,000 to each son) to his sons estate and gift tax free.  At a current marginal estate tax rate of 45%, Mr. Senior’s family can save $90,000 (45%*$200,000).

2.  The gifts to each son are gifts of a minority interest in Deflated, Inc. and such gifts lack marketability due to the limited market for such shares.  Estate and gift tax rules allow discounts for these factors that reduce the value of assets transferred.  (Caveat: There are some legislative proposals being floated in Washington seeking to limit this tax strategy. Stay tuned.) These discounts for minority interests and lack of marketability conservatively can be 25%, sometimes more.   With such discounts the gift of each $500,000 is reduced by $125,000. At a current marginal estate tax rate of 45%, Mr. Senior’s family can save another $112,500 (45%*$250,000).

3.  Outright gifts of stock are eligible for the annual donee exclusion of $13,000.  In addition, Mr. Senior has a spouse who will join in this gift, which will allow for a second $13,000 exclusion.  So the taxable gift to each son is now reduced by $26,000 (Mr. Senior’s annual exclusion of  $13,000 and his spousal joinder of another $13,000).  Additional savings to the family is $23,400 (45%*26,000*2 sons).

4.  If Mr. Senior makes no further gifts and dies with his reduced ownership interest of 40%,  his estate can claim the minority interest and lack of marketability discounts against his remaining shares.  If Mr. Senior dies in 2014, when deflated is worth $4,000,000, his family can take a 25% lack of marketability/minority interest discount, saving his family another $180,000 (45%*$400,000 marketability/minority interest discount[$1,600,000 forty-percent interest*25%]).

Bottom Line:  Mr. Senior can take advantage of the lousy economy, the lack of marketability and minority interest discounts and the annual donee exclusions with a spousal joinder to save his family a tremendous amount of future estate and inheritance taxes.

Caveat:  Remember that this type of planning depends on the particular factual setting of each client.  One difference in the facts can change the outcome.  Also, be aware that state inheritance taxes have not been considered in the above example.  Finally, the above should not be considered as legal advice.  Please consult with tax counsel to discuss your particular factual situation.

Copyright © 2009, Steven J. Fromm.

Read Full Post »