Tax Developments for 2011

taxes, anderson law group, clint coonsWith all the recent discussion about taxes and given this is tax day, I have put together a summary of the most important tax developments that have occurred in the past three months that may affect you, your family, your investments, and your livelihood.  Once this day is behind us and we look to a future of possible tax increases, remember that the requisite for any new tax law is to exempt enough voters to win the next election

Detailed guidance on new law’s 100% bonus depreciation allowance. The IRS has issued detailed guidance on the 2010 Tax Relief Act’s 100% bonus depreciation rules for qualifying new property generally acquired and placed in service after Sept. 8, 2010 and before Jan. 1, 2012. Overall, the rules are quite generous. For example, they permit 100% bonus depreciation for components where work on a larger self-constructed property began before Sept. 9, 2010, allow a taxpayer to elect to “step down” from 100% to 50% bonus depreciation for property placed in service in a tax year that includes Sept. 9, 2010, permit 100% bonus depreciation for qualified restaurant property or qualified retail improvement property that also meets the definition of qualified leasehold improvement property, and provide an escape hatch for some business car owners who would otherwise be subject to a draconian depreciation result.

New law creates a 100% write-off for heavy SUVs used entirely for business. Under the 2010 Tax Relief Act, a taxpayer that buys and places in service a new heavy SUV after Sept. 8, 2010 and before Jan. 1, 2012, and uses it 100% for business, may write off its entire cost in the placed-in-service year. A heavy SUV is one with a GVW rating of more than 6,000 pounds.

IRS further delays health insurance coverage information reporting for small employers. The new health reform legislation generally requires employers to report the cost of health insurance they provide to employees on their W-2 forms. Last fall, the IRS made this new reporting requirement optional for all employers for the 2011 Forms W-2. More recently, the IRS announced that the reporting requirement will continue to be voluntary for small employers at least through 2012.

New settlement offer for those voluntarily disclosing unreported offshore income. The IRS has announced a second 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. It will be available through Aug. 31, 2011. The IRS released details of the new voluntary offer, called the 2011 Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative (OVDI), in the form of 53 frequently asked questions (FAQs). As with the first offer, participants have to pay back taxes and penalties but will avoid criminal prosecution. The offshore penalty is different under the new offer. The general rule is that the penalty is 25% based on amounts in foreign bank accounts, but can be as low as 12.5% or 5% for some taxpayers.

IRS eases lien procedures. The IRS has announced new policies and programs to help taxpayers pay back taxes and avoid tax liens. Its goal is to help individuals and small businesses meet their tax obligations, without adding an unnecessary burden to taxpayers. Specifically, the IRS is:

  • Significantly increasing the dollar threshold when liens are generally issued, resulting in fewer tax liens.
  • Making it easier for taxpayers to obtain lien withdrawals after paying a tax bill.
  • Withdrawing liens in most cases where a taxpayer enters into a Direct Debit Installment Agreement.
  • Creating easier access to Installment Agreements for more struggling small businesses; and
  • Expanding a streamlined Offer in Compromise program to cover more taxpayers.

Tax consequences of governmental homeowner-assistance payments. The IRS has explained the income tax and information return consequences of payments made to or on behalf of homeowners under various government programs designed to prevent avoidable foreclosures of homeowners’ homes and stabilize housing markets. In general, homeowners may exclude the payments from income, and may deduct all payments they actually make during 2010–2012 to the mortgage servicer, HUD (the Department of Housing and Urban Development), or the State HFA (housing finance agency) on the home mortgage. The aid payments aren’t subject to information reporting, and there are transition rules for payments that are incorrectly reported.

Courts differ over whether basis overstatement can trigger 6-year limitations period under new regulations. Late last year, the IRS issued final regulations under which an understated amount of gross income reported on a return resulting from an overstatement of unrecovered cost or other basis is an omission of gross income for purposes of the 6-year period for assessing tax and the minimum period for assessment of tax attributable to partnership items. The 6-year limitations period applies when a taxpayer omits from gross income an amount that’s greater than 25% of the amount of gross income stated in the return. Several courts had held that a basis overstatement is not an omission of gross income for this purpose. In response to these decisions, the IRS issued the new regulations to clarify that an omission can arise in that fashion. Now, some Courts have addressed the regulations. The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and the Tax Court have rejected the regulations. On the other hand, the Federal Circuit has upheld them and the Seventh Circuit has viewed them favorably. As a result, it looks like the Supreme Court will ultimately have to resolve the issue.

New deadline for electing modified carryover basis rules. Estates of decedents dying in 2010 can choose zero estate tax, but at the price of beneficiaries being limited to the decedents’ basis plus certain increases. The IRS has announced that Form 8939, Allocation of Increase in Basis for Property Acquired From a Decedent, is not due Apr. 18, 2011 and should not be filed with the final Form 1040 of persons who died in 2010. The IRS says the due date will be set in forthcoming guidance but does not indicate when that guidance may be issued. The forthcoming guidance will also explain the manner in which an executor of an estate may elect to have the estate tax not apply for a decedent dying in 2010.

Another Appeals Court upholds IRS’s time limit on spousal relief requests. Married joint return filers are jointly and severally liable for the tax arising from their returns. Innocent spouses may request relief from this liability in certain circumstances. An IRS regulation states that a request for equitable innocent spouse relief must be no later than two years from the first collection activity against the spouse. The Tax Court had found this regulation invalidly imposed a time limit. However, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has reversed the Tax Court and upheld the regulation (so has the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit).

Business expenses of professional gamblers not limited. Gambling losses may be deducted only to the extent of gambling winnings, even in the case of an individual engaged in the trade or business of gambling. Previously, the Tax Court had held that losses for purposes of the limitation included both the cost of wagers and business expenses. Earlier this year, the Court overruled its prior position and now says that a professional gambler’s business expenses are not subject to the loss limitation.

Physician statement alone doesn’t establish financial disability to toll limitations period. In general, a taxpayer must file a claim for credit or refund of tax within three years after filing the return or two years after paying the tax, whichever period expires later. (Code Sec. 6511(a)) However, the statute of limitations is suspended for certain taxpayers who are unable to manage their financial affairs because of a medically determinable mental or physical impairment. A physician’s statement must be submitted to claim this relief, but a Court has made clear that the statement alone doesn’t establish that the taxpayer was financially disabled. Thus, it allowed the IRS to seek additional proof of the taxpayer’s condition.

Leave a reply:

Your email address will not be published.

Site Footer

%d bloggers like this: