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 »

Risky Business: Playing Fast and Loose with Worker Classification

In light of the IRS’s new Voluntary Worker Classification Settlement Program (VCSP), employers need to consider the benefits and risks of their current classification of employees as independent contractors. This window of opportunity is only available before the IRS or Department of Labor initiates an examination.

Small companies and businesses of many sizes have classified their workers as independent contractors and not employees to gain the following illegal advantages and savings:

• Avoid paying payroll taxes including Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment, and Federal tax withholding.
• Avoid having to pay for medical insurance.
• Avoid making payments of contributions into employer retirement plans.
• Obtaining services at a fixed rate, no matter what the time required to complete the assignment.
• Reducing employee record keeping, clerical and other administrative cost savings.

These tempting advantages have created a tremendous incentive for employers to classify workers as independent contractors when they are truly employees.  The IRS has warned that it is stepping up its policing of this area.  Here are some of the costs and penalties employers face if caught by the IRS:

• Payroll tax liability, plus significant penalties and interest.
• Various civil and criminal sanctions brought by the IRS, including fines and imprisonment.
• Retirement plan disqualification or remediation and penalties.  If these workers were wrongly excluded from coverage under any and all retirement plans, such plans would not meet certain plan qualification tests and could be disqualified.  In the alternative,  the employer would have to go through an IRS plan remediation application and pay various penalties and costs to salvage the plan. For more details on plan remediation see Failing To Update Retirement Plans: Avoid Plan Disqualification & Penalties By Using the VCP Program
• Personal liability for corporate officers of up to 100% of the amount the employer should have withheld from the employee’s compensation in payroll taxes.  Section 6672 imposes personal liability on officers, shareholders and board of directors as “responsible persons.”  For more details read Personal Liability For Corporate Employment Taxes.
• Legal fees, the lost time spent litigating this matter and the related out-of-pocket costs of litigation.  In these cases, payments to accountants and other experts are necessary for the attorney to prepare for the case and for such experts to appear in court. Even if the case avoids full-blown litigation, legal fees and out-of-court settlement fees will result.

A battle with the IRS is only part of the employer’s problem.  Additionally, a disgruntled or vengeful worker can make real trouble for the employer by making the following claims against the employer:

• Medical coverage:  If the employer had medical plans for its other employees, these excluded workers may make claims for lack of coverage.
• Retirement Benefits:  For all the years in which they were erroneously treated as independent contractors, such workers may demand to have contributions made to the employer’s profit-sharing, 401(k), pension or other retirement plan.  This could be a very large liability if the claim involves multiple employees over multiple years.
• Other Fringe Benefits: In addition to retirement plans, workers may demand stock options, disability payments, workers’ compensation and any other fringe benefits being offered by the employer to its other employees.
• Overtime Pay:  These workers would be entitled to overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act if the hours he or she provided to the employer in the past exceeded the standard workweek.
• Unemployment claims.  For those workers erroneously treated as independent, they may assert a claim to collect unemployment for past employment.
• Lawsuits:  Lawsuits brought against the worker may trigger legal action against the employer to hold the employer legally responsible.

Where the worker seeks reclassification and complains to the authorities, the IRS or the Department of Labor may then get involved by auditing the employer  on how it classifies all of its independent contractors. A full-blown audit could result in economic disaster or ruin for an employer.

Bottom Line:  Any employer playing fast and loose in this area needs to look at their employment practices very carefully.  For determining whether a worker is truly independent please read my article Employee or Independent Contractor?  Finally, see Employers Playing Tax Games with Workers: IRS Offers Way to Come Clean for the details and qualification requirements for coming within the IRS’s Voluntary Worker Classification Settlement Program (VCSP).

The key here is to get with your tax attorney to review your situation and take advantage of the VCSP before the IRS comes knocking on your door.

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 »