The IRS has advised newly married individuals to review and update their tax information to avoid delays and complications when filing their 2025 income tax returns. Since an individual’s filing sta...
The IRS has announced several online resources and flexible options for individuals who have not yet filed their federal income tax return for the tax year at issue. Those who owe taxes have been enco...
A district court lacked jurisdiction to rule on an individual’s innocent spouse relief under Code Sec. 6015(d)(3), in the first instance. The individual and her husband, as taxpayers, were liable f...
A limited liability company classified as a TEFRA partnership was not entitled to deduct the full fair market value of a conservation easement under Code Sec. 170. The Court of Appeals affirmed the T...
A married couple was not entitled to a tax refund based on a depreciation deduction for a private jet. The Court found the taxpayers’ amended return failed to state the correct legal basis for the c...
Arizona has amended its personal income tax credits for contributions to qualifying charitable and foster care organizations. Modifies the definitions of "qualifying charitable organizations (QCOs)"...
The Louisiana Department of Revenue has issued updated rules reflecting recent legislative changes to the Motion Picture Production Tax Credit Program. LAC 61:I.Chapter 61, Louisiana Department of Re...
The Comptroller of Maryland has issued a technical bulletin explaining the imposition of Maryland sales and use tax on data or information technology services and software publishing services. Tax is ...
The Michigan Department of Treasury has announced that pursuant to Governor Whitmer's emergency declaration for Baraga and Allegan counties and the City of Lansing, individuals and businesses within t...
The Texas Comptroller issued a private letter ruling providing franchise tax guidance to a taxpayer engaged in acquiring and reselling Bitcoin (BTC). The ruling states that BTC is classified as intang...
The Virginia Department of Taxation issued a reminder regarding some new individual income tax law changes that went into effect beginning July 1, 2025.For additional information and a complete list o...
Click here to access resources available at the AICPA. For local resources: click here for Maryland, click here for Virginia and click here for the District of Columbia.
For small business relief, click here . For federal tax relief, click here and here .
On July 25, 2018, in a statement posted to their firm's respective websites, the leaders of the largest CPA firms reaffirmed the audit profession's commitment to audit quality.
On July 25, 2018, in a statement posted to their firm's respective websites, the leaders of the largest CPA firms reaffirmed the audit profession's commitment to audit quality. The statement notes, among other things, that the financial statement audit is the bedrock of our financial system. As a firm steeped in putting audit quality at the forefront of everything we do, we join in this commitment. For us, auditing is our passion and a major component to honoring our public-interest responsibilities.
In a 5 to 4 decision, the US Supreme Court overturned the landmark court case that required a physical presence to establish a seller's responsibility to collect and remit sales tax to a state.
In a 5 to 4 decision, the US Supreme Court overturned the landmark court case that required a physical presence to establish a seller's responsibility to collect and remit sales tax to a state. As noted in the respective CCH Special Report, this case, titled South Dakota v. Wayfair, opens the door for states to follow suit in crafting and enacting laws to require remote sellers to collect and remit sales or use tax. This issue warrants close monitoring to see how states address, among other things, retroactive application and the related implications under ASC 450, Contingencies.
On June 21, 2018, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued its latest updated guidance for nonprofit organizations.
On June 21, 2018, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued its latest updated guidance for nonprofit organizations. Click here for a copy of the newsletter and here for a copy of the new standard.
The principal changes involve helping preparers and auditors more consistently 1) characterize grants and similar contracts (primarily with government agencies) as exchange transactions or contributions; and 2) distinguish between conditional and unconditional contributions.
Ellicott City Main Street has again suffered tragic losses from torrential rain storms.
Ellicott City Main Street has again suffered tragic losses from torrential rain storms. Click here and here on how you can help. And click here for a collection of thoughts from business owners on rebuilding (from The Baltimore Sun).
This represents MACPA's Accounting and Auditing Standards Committee's comments on the exposure draft issued by the Auditing Standards Board addressing changes to the auditor reporting model and the auditor's consideration of disclosures in a financial statement audit.
Welcome to volume 18.02 of our Tax Update newsletter.
Welcome to volume 18.02 of our Tax Update newsletter. Click here to access our newsletter covering highlights of the new tax law from an individual perspective. For a high level comparison of key provisions of the new law with prior law, click here.
Welcome to volume 18.01 of our Tax Update newsletter.
Welcome to volume 18.01 of our Tax Update newsletter. Click here to access our newsletter covering highlights of the new tax law from a business perspective. We welcome comments and suggestions for future editions. Thank you.
By now we are all well aware of the devastation and displacement caused by Hurricanes Harvey and Irma. The effort to restore and rebuild will be massive and long-enduring. For our clients and friends, we have put together this article to be a source of information on matters related to helping those affected. In the coming weeks and months, we will update and revise this resource as needed.
By now we are all well aware of the devastation and displacement caused by Hurricanes Harvey and Irma. The effort to restore and rebuild will be massive and long-enduring. For our clients and friends, we have put together this article to be a source of information on matters related to helping those affected. In the coming weeks and months, we will update and revise this resource as needed.
AICPA:
American Red Cross:
http://www.redcross.org/about-us/our-work/disaster-relief
Insurance Claims Information:
http://www.iii.org/article/insurance-company-claims-filing-telephone-numbers
IRS:
https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-form-1099r
https://www.irs.gov/individuals/tax-law-provisions-for-disaster-areas
https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/tax-relief-for-victims-of-hurricane-irma-in-south-carolina
Retirement Plans Can Make Loans, Hardship Distributions to Victims of Hurricane Harvey
https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/faqs-for-disaster-victims
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p584b.pdf
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rp-16-53.pdf
Louisiana:
http://gov.louisiana.gov/news/major-disaster-declared-for-the-state-of-louisiana-8-14-16
U.S. Government (other than IRS):
https://www.disasterassistance.gov/
https://www.dhs.gov/topic/disasters
https://www.sba.gov/loans-grants/see-what-sba-offers/sba-loan-programs/disaster-loans
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2017-164
Texas:
The proposed ASU is designed to help organizations decide if a transaction should be accounted for as a contribution or as an exchange.
There has been a long standing debate in the financial accounting and reporting community as to the proper treatment of certain government grants. Specifically, the main issue is should these be treated as contributions or revenue from exchange transactions. The answer can have a significant effect on an organization's financial statements assuming they following U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. The proposal aims to provide more guidance around this issue. Also, the proposal provides enhanced guidance around the distinction between conditional versus unconditional contributions. The proposal can be found here. Comments can be submitted at the FASB's website through November 1.
This article discusses the importance of timing of enrollment.
This newsletter covers the recent ASU issued on revenue recognition in context of exchange transactions.
This newsletter summarizes the new ASU addressing accounting for leasing transctions.
FASB In Focus 14.05.28 (updated 16.01)
This represents our firm's comment on the PEEC exposure draft on proposed interpretations under the Integrity and Objectivity Rule.
The U.S. Tax Court lacks jurisdiction over a taxpayer’s appeal of a levy in a collection due process hearing when the IRS abandoned its levy because it applied the taxpayer’s later year overpayments to her earlier tax liability, eliminating the underpayment on which the levy was based. The 8-1 ruling by the Court resolves a split between the Third Circuit and the Fourth and D.C. Circuit.
The U.S. Tax Court lacks jurisdiction over a taxpayer’s appeal of a levy in a collection due process hearing when the IRS abandoned its levy because it applied the taxpayer’s later year overpayments to her earlier tax liability, eliminating the underpayment on which the levy was based. The 8-1 ruling by the Court resolves a split between the Third Circuit and the Fourth and D.C. Circuit.
The IRS determined that taxpayer had a tax liability for 2010 and began a levy procedure. The taxpayer appealed the levy in a collection due process hearing, and then appealed that adverse result in the Tax Court. The taxpayer asserted that she did not have an underpayment in 2010 because her then-husband had made $50,000 of estimated tax payments for 2010 with instructions that the amounts be applied to the taxpayer’s separate 2010 return. The IRS instead applied the payments to the husband’s separate account. While the agency and Tax Court proceedings were pending, the taxpayer filed several tax returns reflecting overpayments, which she wanted refunded to her. The IRS instead applied the taxpayer’s 2013-2016 and 2019 tax overpayments to her 2010 tax debt.
When the IRS had applied enough of the taxpayer’s later overpayments to extinguish her 2010 liability, the IRS moved to dismiss the Tax Court proceeding as moot, asserting that the Tax Court lacked jurisdiction because the IRS no longer had a basis to levy. The Tax Court agreed. The taxpayer appealed to the Third Circuit, which held for the taxpayer that the IRS’s abandonment of the levy did not moot the Tax Court proceedings. The IRS appealed to the Supreme Court, which reversed the Third Circuit.
The Court, in an opinion written by Justice Barrett in which seven other justices joined, held that the Tax Court, as a court of limited jurisdiction, only has jurisdiction under Code Sec. 6330(d)(1) to review a determination of an appeals officer in a collection due process hearing when the IRS is pursuing a levy. Once the IRS applied later overpayments to zero out the taxpayer’s liability and abandoned the levy process, the Tax Court no longer had jurisdiction over the case. Justice Gorsuch dissented, pointing out that the Court’s decision leaves the taxpayer without any resolution of the merits of her 2010 tax liability, and “hands the IRS a powerful new tool to avoid accountability for its mistakes in future cases like this one.”
Zuch, SCt
The Internal Revenue Service collected more than $5.1 trillion in gross receipts in fiscal year 2024. It is the first time the agency broke the $5 trillion mark, according to the 2024 Data Book, an annual publication that reviews IRS activities for the given fiscal year.
The Internal Revenue Service collected more than $5.1 trillion in gross receipts in fiscal year 2024.
It is the first time the agency broke the $5 trillion mark, according to the 2024 Data Book, an annual publication that reviews IRS activities for the given fiscal year. It was an increase over the $4.7 trillion collected in the previous fiscal year.
Individual tax, employment taxes, and real estate and trust income taxes accounted for $4.4 trillion of the fiscal 2024 gross collections, with the balance of $565 billion coming from businesses. The agency issued $120.1 billion in refunds, including $117.6 billion in individual income tax refunds and $428.4 billion in refunds to businesses.
The 2024 Data Book broke out statistics from the pilot year of the Direct File program, noting that 423,450 taxpayers logged into Direct File, with 140,803 using the program, which allows users to prepare and file their tax returns through the IRS website, to have their tax returns filed and accepted by the agency. Of the returns filed, 72 percent received a refund, with approximately $90 million in refunds issued to Direct File users. The IRS had gross collections of nearly $35.3 million (24 percent of filers using Direct File). The rest had a return with a $0 balance due.
Among the data highlighted in this year’s publication were service level improvements.
"The past two filing seasons saw continued improvement in IRS levels of service—one the phone, in person, and online—thanks to the efforts of our workforce and our use of long-term resources provided by Congress," IRS Acting Commissioner Michael Faulkender wrote. "In FY 2024, our customer service representatives answered approximately 20 million live phone calls. At our Taxpayer Assistance Centers around the country, we had more than 2 million contacts, increasing the in-person help we provided to taxpayers nearly 26 percent compared to FY 2023."
On the compliance side, the IRS reported in the 2024 Data Book that for all returns filed for Tax Years 2014 through 2022, the agency "has examined 0.40 percent of individual returns filed and 0.66 percent of corporation returns filed, as of the end of fiscal year 2024."
This includes examination of 7.9 percent of taxpayers filing individual returns reporting total positive incomes of $10 million or more. The IRS collected $29.0 billion from the 505,514 audits that were closed in FY 2024.
By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor
IR-2025-63
The IRS has released guidance listing the specific changes in accounting method to which the automatic change procedures set forth in Rev. Proc. 2015-13, I.R.B. 2015- 5, 419, apply. The latest guidance updates and supersedes the current list of automatic changes found in Rev. Proc. 2024-23, I.R.B. 2024-23.
The IRS has released guidance listing the specific changes in accounting method to which the automatic change procedures set forth in Rev. Proc. 2015-13, I.R.B. 2015- 5, 419, apply. The latest guidance updates and supersedes the current list of automatic changes found in Rev. Proc. 2024-23, I.R.B. 2024-23.
Significant changes to the list of automatic changes made by this revenue procedure to Rev. Proc. 2024-23 include:
- (1) Section 6.22, relating to late elections under § 168(j)(8), § 168(l)(3)(D), and § 181(a)(1), is removed because the section is obsolete;
- (2) The following paragraphs, relating to the § 481(a) adjustment, are clarified by adding the phrase “for any taxable year in which the election was made” to the second sentence: (a) Paragraph (2) of section 3.07, relating to wireline network asset maintenance allowance and units of property methods of accounting under Rev. Proc. 2011-27; (b) Paragraph (2) of section 3.08, relating to wireless network asset maintenance allowance and units of property methods of accounting under Rev. Proc. 2011-28; and (c) Paragraph (3)(a) of section 3.11, relating to cable network asset capitalization methods of accounting under Rev. Proc. 2015-12;
- (3) Section 6.04, relating to a change in general asset account treatment due to a change in the use of MACRS property, is modified to remove section 6.04(2)(b), providing a temporary waiver of the eligibility rule in section 5.01(1)(f) of Rev. Proc. 2015-13, because the provision is obsolete;
- (4) Section 6.05, relating to changes in method of accounting for depreciation due to a change in the use of MACRS property, is modified to remove section 6.05(2) (b), providing a temporary waiver of the eligibility rule in section 5.01(1)(f) of Rev. Proc. 2015-13, because the provision is obsolete;
- (5) Section 6.13, relating to the disposition of a building or structural component (§ 168; § 1.168(i)-8), is clarified by adding the parenthetical “including the taxable year immediately preceding the year of change” to sections 6.13(3)(b), (c), (d), and (e), regarding certain covered changes under section 6.13;
- (6) Section 6.14, relating to dispositions of tangible depreciable assets (other than a building or its structural components) (§ 168; § 1.168(i)-8), is clarified by adding the parenthetical “including the taxable year immediately preceding the year of change” to sections 6.14(3)(b), (c), (d), and (e), regarding certain covered changes under section 6.14; June 9, 2025 1594 Bulletin No. 2025–24;
- (7) Section 7.01, relating to changes in method of accounting for SRE expenditures, is modified as follows. First, to remove section 7.01(3)(a), relating to changes in method of accounting for SRE expenditures for a year of change that is the taxpayer’s first taxable year beginning after December 31, 2021, because the provision is obsolete. Second, newly redesignated section 7.01(3)(a) (formerly section 7.01(3)(b)) is modified to remove the references to a year of change later than the first taxable year beginning after December 31, 2021, because the language is obsolete;
- (8) Section 12.14, relating to interest capitalization, is modified to provide under section 12.14(1)(b) that the change under section 12.14 does not apply to a taxpayer that wants to change its method of accounting for interest to apply either: (1) current §§ 1.263A-11(e)(1)(ii) and (iii); or (2) proposed §§ 1.263A-8(d)(3) and 1.263A-11(e) and (f) (REG-133850-13), as published on May 15, 2024 (89 FR 42404) and corrected on July 24, 2024 (89 FR 59864);
- (9) Section 15.01, relating to a change in overall method to an accrual method from the cash method or from an accrual method with regard to purchases and sales of inventories and the cash method for all other items, is modified by removing the first sentence of section 15.01(5), disregarding any prior overall accounting method change to the cash method implemented using the provisions of Rev. Proc. 2001-10, as modified by Rev. Proc. 2011- 14, or Rev. Proc. 2002-28, as modified by Rev. Proc. 2011-14, for purposes of the eligibility rule in section 5.01(e) of Rev. Proc. 2015-13, because the language is obsolete;
- (10) Section 15.08, relating to changes from the cash method to an accrual method for specific items, is modified to add new section 15.08(1)(b)(ix) to provide that the change under section 15.08 does not apply to a change in the method of accounting for any foreign income tax as defined in § 1.901-2(a);
- (11) Section 15.12, relating to farmers changing to the cash method, is clarified to provide that the change under section 15.12 is only applicable to a taxpayer’s trade or business of farming and not applicable to a non-farming trade or business the taxpayer might be engaged in;
- (11) Section 12.01, relating to certain uniform capitalization (UNICAP) methods used by resellers and reseller-producers, is modified as follows. First, to provide that section 12.01 applies to a taxpayer that uses a historic absorption ratio election with the simplified production method, the modified simplified production method, or the simplified resale method and wants to change to a different method for determining the additional Code Sec. 263A costs that must be capitalized to ending inventories or other eligible property on hand at the end of the taxable year (that is, to a different simplified method or a facts-and-circumstances method). Second, to remove the transition rule in section 12.01(1)(b)(ii)(B) because this language is obsolete;
- (12) Section 15.13, relating to nonshareholder contributions to capital under § 118, is modified to require changes under section 15.13(1)(a)(ii), relating to a regulated public utility under § 118(c) (as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of Public Law 115-97, 131 Stat. 2054 (Dec. 22, 2017)) (“former § 118(c)”) that wants to change its method of accounting to exclude from gross income payments or the fair market value of property received that are contributions in aid of construction under former § 118(c), to be requested under the non-automatic change procedures provided in Rev. Proc. 2015- 13. Specifically, section 15.13(1)(a)(i), relating to a regulated public utility under former § 118(c) that wants to change its method of accounting to include in gross income payments received from customers as connection fees that are not contributions to the capital of the taxpayer under former § 118(c), is removed. Section 15.13(1)(a)(ii), relating to a regulated public utility under former § 118(c) that wants to change its method of accounting to exclude from gross income payments or the fair market value of property received that are contributions in aid of construction under former § 118(c), is removed. Section 15.13(2), relating to the inapplicability of the change under section 15.13(1) (a)(ii), is removed. Section 15.13(1)(b), relating to a taxpayer that wants to change its method of accounting to include in gross income payments or the fair market value of property received that do not constitute contributions to the capital of the taxpayer within the meaning of § 118 and the regulations thereunder, is modified by removing “(other than the payments received by a public utility described in former § 118(c) that are addressed in section 15.13(1)(a)(i) of this revenue procedure)” because a change under section 15.13(1)(a)(i) may now be made under newly redesignated section 15.13(1) of this revenue procedure;
- (13) Section 16.08, relating to changes in the timing of income recognition under § 451(b) and (c), is modified as follows. First, section 16.08 is modified to remove section 16.08(5)(a), relating to the temporary waiver of the eligibility rule in section 5.01(1)(f) of Rev. Proc. 2015-13 for certain changes under section 16.08, because the provision is obsolete. Second, section 16.08 is modified to remove section 16.08(4)(a)(iv), relating to special § 481(a) adjustment rules when the temporary eligibility waiver applies, because the provision is obsolete. Third, section 16.08 is modified to remove sections 16.08(4)(a) (v)(C) and 16.08(4)(a)(v)(D), providing examples to illustrate the special § 481(a) adjustment rules under section 16.08(4)(a) (iv), because the examples are obsolete;
- (14) Section 19.01, relating to changes in method of accounting for certain exempt long-term construction contracts from the percentage-of-completion method of accounting to an exempt contract method described in § 1.460-4(c), or to stop capitalizing costs under § 263A for certain home construction contracts, is modified by removing the references to “proposed § 1.460-3(b)(1)(ii)” in section 19.01(1), relating to the inapplicability of the change under section 19.01, because the references are obsolete;
- (15) Section 19.02, relating to changes in method of accounting under § 460 to rely on the interim guidance provided in section 8 of Notice 2023-63, 2023-39 I.R.B. 919, is modified to remove section 19.02(3)(a), relating to a change in the treatment of SRE expenditures under § 460 for the taxpayer’s first taxable year beginning after December 31, 2021, because the provision is obsolete;
- (16) Section 20.07, relating to changes in method of accounting for liabilities for rebates and allowances to the recurring item exception under § 461(h)(3), is clarified by adding new section 20.07(1)(b) (ii), providing that a change under section 20.07 does not apply to liabilities arising from reward programs;
- (17) The following sections, relating to the inapplicability of the relevant change, are modified to remove the reference to “proposed § 1.471-1(b)” because this reference is obsolete: (a) Section 22.01(2), relating to cash discounts; (b) Section 22.02(2), relating to estimating inventory “shrinkage”; (c) Section 22.03(2), relating to qualifying volume-related trade discounts; (d) Section 22.04(1)(b)(iii), relating to impermissible methods of identification and valuation of inventories; (e) Section 22.05(1)(b)(ii), relating to the core alternative valuation method; Bulletin No. 2025–24 1595 June 9, 2025 (f) Section 22.06(2), relating to replacement cost for automobile dealers’ parts inventory; (g) Section 22.07(2), relating to replacement cost for heavy equipment dealers’ parts inventory; (h) Section 22.08(2), relating to rotable spare parts; (i) Section 22.09(3), relating to the advanced trade discount method; (j) Section 22.10(1)(b)(iii), relating to permissible methods of identification and valuation of inventories; (k) Section 22.11(2), relating to a change in the official used vehicle guide utilized in valuing used vehicles; (l) Section 22.12(2), relating to invoiced advertising association costs for new vehicle retail dealerships; (m) Section 22.13(2), relating to the rolling-average method of accounting for inventories; (n) Section 22.14(2), relating to sales-based vendor chargebacks; (o) Section 22.15(2), relating to certain changes to the cost complement of the retail inventory method; (p) Section 22.16(2), relating to certain changes within the retail inventory method; and (q) Section 22.17(1)(b)(iii), relating to changes from currently deducting inventories to permissible methods of identification and valuation of inventories; and
- (18) Section 22.10, relating to permissible methods of identification and valuation of inventories, is modified to remove section 22.10(1)(d).
Subject to a transition rule, this revenue procedure is effective for a Form 3115 filed on or after June 9, 2025, for a year of change ending on or after October 31, 2024, that is filed under the automatic change procedures of Rev. Proc. 2015-13, 2015-5 I.R.B. 419, as clarified and modified by Rev. Proc. 2015-33, 2015-24 I.R.B. 1067, and as modified by Rev. Proc. 2021-34, 2021-35 I.R.B. 337, Rev. Proc. 2021-26, 2021-22 I.R.B. 1163, Rev. Proc. 2017-59, 2017-48 I.R.B. 543, and section 17.02(b) and (c) of Rev. Proc. 2016-1, 2016-1 I.R.B. 1 .
The Treasury Department and IRS have issued Notice 2025-33, extending and modifying transition relief for brokers required to report digital asset transactions using Form 1099-DA, Digital Asset Proceeds From Broker Transactions. The notice builds upon the temporary relief previously provided in Notice 2024-56 and allows additional time for brokers to comply with reporting requirements.
The Treasury Department and IRS have issued Notice 2025-33, extending and modifying transition relief for brokers required to report digital asset transactions using Form 1099-DA, Digital Asset Proceeds From Broker Transactions. The notice builds upon the temporary relief previously provided in Notice 2024-56 and allows additional time for brokers to comply with reporting requirements.
Reporting Requirements and Transitional Relief
In 2024, final regulations were issued requiring brokers to report digital asset sale and exchange transactions on Form 1099-DA, furnish payee statements, and backup withhold on certain transactions beginning January 1, 2025. Notice 2024-56 provided general transitional relief, including limited relief from backup withholding for certain sales of digital assets during 2026 for brokers using the IRS’s TIN-matching system in place of certified TINs.
Additional Transition Relief from Backup Withholding, Customers Not Previously Classified as U.S. Persons
Under Notice 2025-33, transition relief from backup withholding tax liability and associated penalties is extended for any broker that fails to withhold and pay the backup withholding tax for any digital asset sale or exchange transaction effected during calendar year 2026.
Brokers will not be required to backup withhold for any digital asset sale or exchange transactions effected in 2027 when they verify customer information through the IRS Tax Information Number (TIN) Matching Program. To qualify, brokers must submit a customer's name and tax identification number to the matching service and receive confirmation that the information corresponds with IRS records.
Additionally, penalties that apply to brokers that fail to withhold and pay the full backup withholding due are limited with respect to any decrease in the value of received digital assets between the time of the transaction giving rise to the backup withholding obligation and the time the broker liquidates 24 percent of a customer’s received digital assets.
Finally, the notice also provides additional transition relief for brokers for sales of digital assets effected during calendar year 2027 for certain preexisting customers. This relief applies when brokers have not previously classified these customers as U.S. persons and the customer files contain only non-U.S. residence addresses.
The IRS failed to establish that it issued a valid notice of deficiency to an individual under Code Sec. 6212(b). Thus, the Tax Court dismissed the case due to lack of jurisdiction.
The IRS failed to establish that it issued a valid notice of deficiency to an individual under Code Sec. 6212(b). Thus, the Tax Court dismissed the case due to lack of jurisdiction.
The taxpayer filed a petition to seek re-determination of a deficiency for the tax year at issue. The IRS moved to dismiss the petition under Code Sec. 6213(a), contending that it was untimely and that Code Sec. 7502’s "timely mailed, timely filed" rule did not apply. However, the Court determined that the notice of deficiency had not been properly addressed to the individual’s last known address.
Although the individual attached a copy of the notice to the petition, the Court found that the significant 400-day delay in filing did not demonstrate timely, actual receipt sufficient to cure the defect. Because the IRS could not establish that a valid notice was issued, the Court concluded that the 90-day deadline under Code Sec. 6213(a) was never triggered, and Code Sec. 7502 was inapplicable.
L.C.I. Cano, TC Memo. 2025-65, Dec. 62,679(M)
A limited partnership classified as a TEFRA partnership was not entitled to exclude its limited partners’ distributive shares from net earnings from self-employment under Code Sec. 1402(a)(13). The Tax Court found that the individuals materially participated in the partnership’s investment management business and were not acting as limited partners “as such.”
A limited partnership classified as a TEFRA partnership was not entitled to exclude its limited partners’ distributive shares from net earnings from self-employment under Code Sec. 1402(a)(13). The Tax Court found that the individuals materially participated in the partnership’s investment management business and were not acting as limited partners “as such.”
Furthermore, the Court concluded that the limited partners’ roles were indistinguishable from those of active general partners. Accordingly, their distributive shares were includible in net earnings from self-employment under Code Sec. 1402(a) and subject to tax under Code Sec. 1401. The taxpayer’s argument that the partners’ actions were authorized solely through the general partner was found unpersuasive. The Court emphasized substance over form and found that the partners’ conduct and economic relationship with the firm were determinative.
Additionally, the Court held that the taxpayer failed to meet the requirements under Code Sec. 7491(a) to shift the burden of proof because it did not establish compliance with substantiation and net worth requirements. Lastly, the Tax Court also upheld the IRS’s designation of the general partner LLC as the proper tax matters partner under Code Sec. 6231(a)(7)(B), finding that the attempted designation of a limited partner was invalid because an eligible general partner existed and had the legal authority to serve.
Soroban Capital Partners LP, TC Memo. 2025-52, Dec. 62,665(M)
A new year may find a number of individuals with the pressing urge to take stock, clean house and become a bit more organized. With such a desire to declutter, a taxpayer may want to undergo a housecleaning of documents, receipts and papers that he or she may have stored over the years in the event of an IRS audit. Year to year, fears of an audit for claims for tax deductions, allowances and credits may have led to the accumulation of a number of tax related documents—many of which may no longer need to be kept.
A new year may find a number of individuals with the pressing urge to take stock, clean house and become a bit more organized. With such a desire to declutter, a taxpayer may want to undergo a housecleaning of documents, receipts and papers that he or she may have stored over the years in the event of an IRS audit. Year to year, fears of an audit for claims for tax deductions, allowances and credits may have led to the accumulation of a number of tax related documents—many of which may no longer need to be kept.
However, it is of extreme importance for tax records to support the income, deductions and credits claimed on returns. Therefore, taxpayers must keep such records in the event the IRS inquires about a return or amended return.
Return-related documents
Generally, the IRS recommended that a taxpayer keep copies of tax returns and supporting documents at least three years. However, the IRS noted, there are some documents that should be kept for up to seven years, for those instances where a taxpayer needs to file an amended return or if questions may arise. As a rule of thumb, taxpayers should keep real estate related records for up to seven years following the disposition of property.
Health care related documents
Although health care information statements should be kept with other tax records, taxpayers are to remember that such statements do not need to be sent to the IRS as proof of health coverage. Records that taxpayers are strongly encouraged to keep include records of employer-provided coverage, premiums paid, advance payments of the premium tax credit received and the type of coverage held. As with other tax records, the IRS recommended that taxpayers keep such information for three years from the time of filing the associated tax return.
Last year’s return
Taxpayers are encouraged to keep a copy of last year’s return. The IRS, in efforts to thwart tax related identity theft and refund fraud, continues to make changes to authenticate and protect taxpayer identity in online return-related interactions. Beginning in 2017, some taxpayers who e-file will need to enter either the prior-year adjusted gross income or the prior-year self-select PIN and date of birth—information associated with the prior year’s return—to authenticate their identity.
IRS Chief Counsel recently examined the tax treatment of crowdfunding activities in a new information letter (Information Letter 2016-36). Crowdfunding is a relatively recent phenomenon, used by an individual or entity to raise funds through small individual contributions from a large number of people. The guidance notes that the income tax consequences to a taxpayer of a crowdfunding effort depend on all the facts and circumstances surrounding that effort.
IRS Chief Counsel recently examined the tax treatment of crowdfunding activities in a new information letter (Information Letter 2016-36). Crowdfunding is a relatively recent phenomenon, used by an individual or entity to raise funds through small individual contributions from a large number of people. The guidance notes that the income tax consequences to a taxpayer of a crowdfunding effort depend on all the facts and circumstances surrounding that effort.
In general, Chief Counsel determined, crowdfunding revenues are included in the recipient’s gross income. Code Sec. 61(a) generally provides that gross income includes all income from whatever source derived. However, there are some benefits that a taxpayer receives that are excluded from income because they do not meet the definition of gross income or because a specific exclusion exists.
Chief Counsel observed that money received without an offsetting liability, such as a repayment obligation, that is neither a capital contribution to an entity in exchange for a capital interest in the entity, nor a gift, is included in income. The facts and circumstance surrounding the receipt of crowdfunding revenue must be considered to determine it is income.
Chief Counsel concluded that crowdfunding revenues generally are included in income if they are not (1) loans that must be repaid; (2) capital contributed to an entity in exchange for an equity interest in the entity; or (3) gifts made out of detached generosity and without any “quid pro quo.” Crowdfunding revenues also must generally be included in income to the extent they are received for services rendered or are gains from the sale of property.
Chief Counsel also examined constructive receipt rules in relation to crowdfunding. Income, although not actually reduced to a taxpayer’s possession, is constructively received in the tax year during which it is credited to the taxpayer’s account, set apart for the taxpayer, or otherwise made available. Further, although income is not constructively received if the taxpayer’s control of the income is subject to substantial limitations or restrictions, a self-imposed restriction on the availability of income does not legally defer recognition of that income, Chief Counsel noted.
These are only the specific issues that Chief Counsel addressed in Information Letter 2016-36. As the crowdfunding space develops, more guidance is likely to follow.
Employers and other organizations must obtain an employer identification number (EIN) to identify themselves for tax administration purposes, such as starting a new business, withholding taxes on wages, or creating a trust. Entities apply for an EIN by filing IRS Form SS-4. Page two of the form advises whether an applicant needs an EIN.
Employers and other organizations must obtain an employer identification number (EIN) to identify themselves for tax administration purposes, such as starting a new business, withholding taxes on wages, or creating a trust. Entities apply for an EIN by filing IRS Form SS-4. Page two of the form advises whether an applicant needs an EIN.
Other entities that need an EIN include corporations, partnerships, estates, trusts, state or local governments, and churches and other nonprofit organizations. Unincorporated entities (sole proprietorships) that establish a retirement plan or that file certain tax forms will also need an EIN for filing the relevant forms.
Application process
The IRS does not charge for obtaining an EIN and has sought to simplify the application process. Taxpayers may apply by mail, by fax, or online. International applicants may also apply by phone. In all cases, if the IRS determines that the applicant needs an EIN, the IRS will issue the EIN and transmit it to the taxpayer in the same manner as the application was made.
Applications by mail generally take four weeks, the IRS indicates, once the SS-4 is properly and completely filled out. Entities located in the U.S. or a U.S. territory can apply online. For online applications, the IRS validates the information and issues the EIN immediately. The IRS notes that the principal officer or other relevant party must have a valid taxpayer identification number, such as a Social Security Number, to use the online application process. The IRS will respond to a completed fax application within four business days, if the applicant provides a fax number.
Filing without EIN
The IRS states that it will only issue one EIN per day per responsible party, regardless of the means of applying. If the taxpayer needs to file a return but lacks an EIN because of this limitation, the IRS advises that the taxpayer should attach a completed Form SS-4 to the completed and signed tax return. The IRS will assign an EIN and then process the return.