Tax Regulations

Federal Judge Blocks BOIR Rules Enforcement

In a significant legal development, a federal judge has issued a nationwide preliminary injunction blocking the enforcement of the Beneficial Ownership Information Reporting (BOIR) rules under the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA).

As a result, this would have required 32.6 million existing small businesses and 5 million new entities formed each year from 2025 to 2034,  to report their BOI to the FinCEN. This decision handed on December 3, 2024, has temporarily halted the requirement for businesses to report their BOI to the FinCEN.

This ruling has significant implications for businesses across the United States. Many small-business owners were unaware of the new rules. Additionally, the taxpayers who knew, often struggled to understand whether they were required to file and what information was needed. The injunction provides a reprieve, allowing businesses more time to prepare and understand their obligations.

Uncertainty Still Looming

The blocking of the BOI reporting rules marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over financial transparency. This injunction is temporarily and it will be probably fought all the way up to the Supreme Court. That is why we recommend that you still file your BOIR and comply with CTA. Until this law is found unconstitutional,  make sure to stay informed about the latest developments and consult with tax professionals to ensure compliance.

You can check our YouTube channel for more subjects that you might find useful. Also, if you are in need of a good CPA firm for your business contact us!

Please note that this blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute tax, legal or accounting advice.

This blog post can help you understand the Form 8918. This form, known as the Material Advisor Disclosure Statement, plays a crucial role in the tax reporting process for certain advisors.

Form 8918 is used by material advisors to disclose reportable transactions to the IRS.

Form 8918 is used by material advisors to disclose reportable transactions to the IRS. A material advisor is any person who provides material aid, assistance, or advice regarding the organization, management, promotion, or reporting of a reportable transaction and directly or indirectly derives gross income in excess of a specified threshold from such services.

Do You Need To File This Form?

If you are a material advisor, then you are required to file this form if you are involved in reportable transactions. These transactions are defined by the IRS and include certain types of tax shelters and other transactions that the IRS has identified as having the potential for tax avoidance or evasion.

Why Is This Form Important?

Filing Form 8918 is important for maintaining transparency with the IRS. In addition, failure to file this form can result in significant penalties. It is important that you are aware of the reportable transactions to ensure compliance. In addition, you should consider consulting a tax professional that can provide you guidance.

You can check our YouTube channel for more subjects that you might find useful. Also, if you are in need of a good CPA firm contact us!

Please note that this blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute tax, legal or accounting advice.

In this blog, we’re diving into an important update from the IRS that affects partnerships and their partners. We are talking about the new Form 7217. If you are a partner in a partnership and you receive only cash distributions and/or guaranteed payments from the partnership, you don’t need to worry about this form.

What Is Form 7217?

The IRS recently released this form as a draft document, officially titled “Partner’s Report of Property Distributed by a Partnership”. It is designed for partners to report the distribution of property they receive from a partnership. This form is applicable for the tax year 2024 and beyond.

If you receive property, then you must attach this form to your individual tax return for the year you received the distribution of property. That is because the IRS wants more information about how you determine your basis in the property.

You might need to file more than one form 7217. This is because the IRS requires a form for each date you received a distribution of property subject to section 732. Even in situations when distributions made on different dates are part of the same transaction.

IRC Section 732

Now, let’s talk about how Form 7217 relates to IRC Section 732. This section of the Internal revenue Code deals with the basis of distributed property other than money. Essentially, it outlines how the basis of property distributed by a partnership to a partner should be determined.

According to IRC Section 732, the basis of property distributed to a partner is generally the adjusted basis of the property to the partnership immediately before the distribution. However, there are specific rules for distributions in liquidation of a partner’s interest.

The rules regarding how to determine the basis of property received from a partnership are complicated. They depend on whether the distribution is a liquidating distribution, meaning that your interest in the partnership is entirely terminated or the distribution is a non-liquidating distribution.

The rules also vary depending on the type of property received and if the distribution is considered a deemed sale or not.

What Does This Mean For You?

In summary, the new Form 7217, is a critical tool for partners to report property distributions accurately.

The tax rules related to partnerships are intricate. It is always recommended to have a good tax advisor in these situations.

You can check our YouTube channel for more subjects that you might find useful. If you are in need of a good CPA firm contact us!

Please note that this blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute tax, legal or accounting advice.

The owner of an engineering firm who was cheated by his two partners still had to pay tax on the $1 million stolen by his partners. Let’s see what happened and why if you have an S corporation it’s important to pay attention to how you take money out from your business.

S Corporation Distributions

Now let’s do a quick tax law lesson and talk about the intricacies of the S corporation distributions. This is helpful information to know as a business owner, even if you have a CPA or another tax professional doing your taxes at the end of the year. That is because, in order to save on tax money or even to avoid some unexpected tax traps, you, with the help of your CPA should monitor your S corporation distributions throughout the year, not only at tax time. This ensure you catch any problems with the distributions on time and you can correct them before year-end. You should also monitor your distributions in connection to a concept called shareholder basis, to ensure your distributions remain non-taxable.

Ways To Take Money Out From An S Corporation

When you take money out from an S corporation as a business owner, you can do so in three ways:

• You have to take a reasonable salary for the work you do for your business; which is subject to income tax and payroll tax,
• You can take out distributions of the remaining profits; generally are not subject to income tax or payroll tax, unless you have distributions over basis and this is a discussion for another blog,
• The business can loan you money;

If not done properly, both the distributions and the loans you take out from the business can create a second class of stock for your business.

Why Having A Second Class Of Stock Is A Bad Thing For An S Corporation?

Well, because an S corporation can have only one class of stock. Once you create another class of stock, your S corporation status is invalidated, changing your business’ tax classification to another tax status with unintended tax consequences for you and your business.

Let’s see how distributions could create a second class of stock when the business has more than one owner. The regulations state that a corporation has only one class of stock so long as all the shares confer equal rights to dividends and liquidation proceeds. The regulations also state that identical rights distributions and liquidation proceeds are determined based on the corporations governing provisions. Such as a corporate charter, articles of incorporation, bylaws, or an LLC’s operating agreement. And yes, an LLC can be treated as an S corporation for tax purposes. This means that the S corporation governing provisions should require distributions to owners according to their ownership percentages.

But what happens when even though the business documents require proportional distributions, the partners pay themselves disproportionate distributions? Will your business lose its S corporation status? This is the answer that this new tax court ruling provides. So, let’s see what went on.

Court Case

The business owner in this case opened an engineering firm with a friend who was an investor and they organized their company as an S corporation. In July 2003 the investor friend sold his business interest to our business owner and left the company. Then our business owner sold a 60% interest to two of his friends. One who bought 40% and one who bought 20%. By 2005 our business owner was left with 40%. This meant that each of these three people had to pay tax on their own share of the business profits. Because this is how an S corporation works.

An S corporation is a flow through entity. This means that the business does not pay tax on the profits. Instead, the owners report their share of the profits on their personal tax returns and pay the tax at the individual level. The partners have to pay tax on the profits regardless if they receive the profits or not. Thus, with an S corporation it is important that the business distributes the profits to its owners. Otherwise the owners pay tax on money that they did not receive.

What Happened?

Let’s see what happened in our story. These two new partners joined the board of directors and took on executive roles while our business owner remained the company’s lead engineer. The new co-owner friends almost immediately began to loot the business, or as one says in tax speak, made unauthorized distributions to themselves in excess of their proportionate ownership share. After quite a number of years, by 2012 our business owner had caught on to his new co-owner friends. He hired a CPA to reconcile the corporations accounts. They discovered that his friends embezzled more than 1 million from the company. Or at least this is what our business owner accused his friends of doing.

Eventually they did reach a state court settlement. But our business owner still had the problem of paying taxes on money that he did not receive. In order to avoid having to pay these taxes, he tried to argue that the S corporation status was involuntarily revoked by the unauthorized and grossly unequal distributions that the friends made to themselves. So, in his case, having an S corporation was not advantageous anymore. By looking to have the S corporation status revoked, he was hoping to cause the business to be taxed as a C corporation. In which case the owners have to pay tax only on the money received. But the IRS did not agree and said that doesn’t matter. Because the regulation tells the IRS to focus on shareholder rights under a corporation’s governing documents, not what shareholders actually do.

Court’s Opinion

The court sided with the IRS saying that ” The regulation plainly states that uneven distributions don’t mean that the corporation has more than one class of stock. Treas. Reg. §1.1361-1. A corporation is not treated as having more than one class of stock so long as the governing provisions provide for identical distribution and liquidation rights.”

Conclusion

In the end our business owner had to pay taxes on money he did not receive. Unfortunately for him, he did not employ a CPA from the beginning. A CPA who could have brought to his attention the discrepancies. And only when after years and years, when he started to suspect there is something wrong, he decided to turn to a tax professional. His case is riddled with a lot more issues that could have been avoided with the help of a tax professional.

You can check our YouTube channel for more subjects that you might find useful. If you are in need of a good CPA firm contact us!

Please note that this blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute tax, legal or accounting advice.

There is a new tax court case that shows the importance of retaining records for closed tax years. Even if the statute of limitations had expired for those years, the records are important.

Why Is It Important To Keep Records For Closed Tax Years?

Let’s see why. There is a new tax court ruling, TC Memo 2024-86. According to this, a tax return itself does not establish the basis of items that are carried forward. Instead, you have to have the actual past records to substantiate carry forward items to future tax years. As an example:

• depreciation,
• capital loss carry forwards,
• business credit carry forwards,
• the nondeductible basis in an IRA, or
• NOL carryforward deductions.

For example, you buy this year a piece of equipment for your business costing $5,000. You will need to keep the payment receipt and any other documentation for this piece of equipment for at least 9 years, if you depreciate this equipment using a 5-year asset life.
Why? Well, because the depreciation expense generated by this 5-year life equipment can span over six years of tax returns. This depends on the depreciation method you are using. Plus, three years statute of limitations for year 6 tax return. We get to approximately 9 years that the records must be kept. Of course, there can be situations that extend the statute of limitations beyond the three years and records must be kept even longer.

Court Case

In this new court case, the taxpayer owned a high-end Japanese steakhouse and claimed in 2008 depreciation on significant expenses for build-out improvements and equipment. However, he lacked records, like receipts or invoices to substantiate these capitalized expenses. The IRS accepted the business owner’s 2008 return as filed and it did not audit this return.

However, later returns were inconsistent having no depreciation claimed or very little depreciation for these 2008 capitalized expenses. And some returns were not filed at all for which the IRS prepared substitute returns in which it did not claim any depreciation. The IRS issued a Notice of Deficiency for several years. The business owner hired a CPA to prepare and submit amended returns. The CPA claimed additional depreciation deductions calculated using the basis for the capitalized expenses shown on the 2008 return. The IRS did not accept these amended returns.

What Happened In Court?

In court, the business owner argued that the IRS accepted his 2008 return, which should allow for depreciation deductions in later years under the Cohan rule. That’s because under the Cohan rule, if a taxpayer can show that they incurred a business expense, but cannot substantiate the exact amount, the court can estimate the amount and allow a deduction. The court must have a reasonable basis for the estimate and should approximate as closely as possible, bearing heavily on the taxpayer whose lack of records caused the inexactitude.
The court agreed that our business owner incurred expenses in 2008. But, noted that the figures on the 2008 return were unsubstantiated estimates. In addition, the court ruled that the taxpayer was entitled to depreciation deductions for the years at issue based on only one-half and not on 100% of the basis amounts reported on the 2008 return. If he had the receipts and the documentation for the 2008 restaurant build out improvements and equipment, he would have been allowed the entire amount of depreciation. The amount would have been claimed on the amended returns filed by his CPA for tax years between 2010 and 2012 and 2014 and 2016. Thus, our business owner lost hundreds of thousands of dollars in deductions.

You can check our YouTube channel for more subjects that you might find useful. If you are in need of a good CPA firm contact us!

Please note that this blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute tax, legal or accounting advice.

If you are an influencer on YouTube, TikTok and other social media platforms this article is for you. You need to understand how your income you earn as an influencer is taxed. The problem is, that although the influencer market is big and continues to grow exponentially, the IRS has not yet issued substantial guidance when it comes to the unique tax issues the influencers face.

Activities Generating Income

Let’s analyze some of the activities generating your income. Products you receive to promote, even if unsolicited, might be considered income or not.
If you promote these products, the fair market value of these products would be considered taxable income under the barter transaction rules. Although there is no IRS specific guidance in this area, these promoted products are similar to the high value gift bags and goody bags that celebrities appearing to an awards show might receive to create brand awareness and promote products. The IRS’ position on celebrity gift bags is that these represent taxable income. You can see the IRS’ frequently asked questions about this subject on this link.
If you receive these unsolicited products and you do not promote them, they could be considered a gift that can be excluded from income. The condition for a contribution to be considered a gift that is excluded from gross income is that:

• it has to be a result of the contributor’s detached; and
• disinterested generosity; and
• without the contributor receiving or expecting to receive anything in return.

Otherwise, the item may result in income equal to the fair market value of the item. Because it is hard to determine the intent of the contributor when it comes to influencers and because the tax treatment of unsolicited products that are not promoted is an ambiguous area, it would be best to return unsolicited items that you receive and you do not promote.

To make things easier:

• you can indicate on your social media platform that you do not accept unsolicited gifts for promotion; and
• for the items that you do promote, it is best to have a contract in place regarding your promoting services.

Exclusion Rule

There is an exclusion rule when it comes to low-cost products or services that lets you exclude them from income under the de minimis fringe benefit income exclusion. These are items for which the accounting would be impractical or unreasonable. But keep in mind that the frequency with which you receive these low-cost products matters. If you receive de minimis value items frequently from the same business then you would need to recognize income for these items. Check out the link in the description from our YouTube video for more info on fringe benefits rules.

Other Activities

Other activities you do as an influencer generate taxable income as well, such as:

• if you have sponsored videos,
• sponsorship by a brand for a podcast or
• income you receive related to ads on your videos.

You can check our YouTube channel for more subjects that you might find useful. If you are in need of a good CPA firm contact us!

Please note that this blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute tax, legal or accounting advice.