The IRS issued guidance on the federal income and employment tax treatment of cash payments made by employers under leave-based donation programs to aid victims of the further Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The IRS issued guidance on the federal income and employment tax treatment of cash payments made by employers under leave-based donation programs to aid victims of the further Russian invasion of Ukraine. Employer leave-based donation payments made by an employer before January 1, 2023, to Code Sec. 170(c) organizations to aid said victims (qualified payments) will not be treated as gross income, wages or compensation of the employees of the employer.

Similarly, employees electing or with an opportunity to elect to forgo leave that funds said qualified payments will not be treated as having constructively received gross income, wages, or compensation. Further, electing employees are not eligible to claim a charitable contribution deduction under Code Sec. 170 for the value of the forgone leave that funds said qualified payments.

During the National Small Business Week, May 1 to 7, the IRS highlighted tax benefits and resources tied to the theme for this year’s celebration: " Building a Better America through Entrepreneurship.".The IRS urged business taxpayers to take advantage of tax benefits for 2022, make estimated tax payments electronically, e-file payroll tax returns, and check out the Work Opportunity Credit.

During the National Small Business Week, May 1 to 7, the IRS highlighted tax benefits and resources tied to the theme for this year’s celebration: " Building a Better America through Entrepreneurship.".The IRS urged business taxpayers to take advantage of tax benefits for 2022, make estimated tax payments electronically, e-file payroll tax returns, and check out the Work Opportunity Credit.

The IRS urged business taxpayers to begin planning now to take advantage of the enhanced 100 percent deduction for business meals and other tax benefits available to them when filing their 2022 income tax return. For 2021 and 2022 only, businesses can generally deduct the full cost of business-related food and beverages purchased from a restaurant. Further, more information about this provision is provided in IRS Publication 463, Travel, Gift, and Car Expenses.

Additionally, many business owners may qualify for the home office deduction, also known as the deduction for business use of a home. Usually, a business owner must use a room or other identifiable portion of the home exclusively for business on a regular basis. Those eligible can figure the deduction using either the regular method or the simplified method. To choose the regular method, taxpayers can fill out and attach Form 8829, Expenses for Business Use of Your Home. Alternatively, business owners can choose the simplified method, based on a six-line worksheet found in the instructions to Schedule C, Profit or Loss from Business. Under both the regular and simplified methods, business expenses in excess of the gross income limitation are not deductible.

Further, the IRS informed taxpayers about a variety of other tax benefits often available to business owners. This includes business start-up expenses, qualified business income deduction and the health-insurance deduction for self-employed individuals. Finally, more information about these and other tax benefits is provided in Publication 535, Business Expenses.

Making Estimated Tax Payments Electronically

The IRS reminded all businesses to make estimated tax payments quarterly and that making them electronically is fast, easy and safe. Estimated tax is used to pay income tax and other taxes including self-employment tax and alternative minimum tax. If a taxpayer doesn’t pay enough tax through withholding and estimated tax payments, they may be charged a penalty. However, generally, paying quarterly estimated taxes will lessen or even eliminate any penalties.

Further, the IRS informed that individuals, including sole proprietors, partners and S corporation shareholders, generally must make estimated tax payments if they expect to owe tax of $1,000 or more when their return is filed. For corporations, the threshold is $500 or more. Self-employed individuals and gig workers who also receive salaries and wages from an employer can avoid paying estimated tax by asking their employer to withhold more tax from their paycheck. They can check the Tax Withholding Estimator on the IRS website for more help. Individuals generally use Form 1040-ES to figure estimated tax while corporations generally use Form 1120-W.

Additionally, for estimated tax purposes, the year is divided into four payment periods. However, alternative payment periods are allowed if enough tax is paid in by the end of the quarter. Further, taxpayers can use the Electronic Federal Tax Payment System for all their federal tax payments. Individual Taxpayers can also create an IRS Online Account or use Direct Pay, a debit, credit card or digital wallet to make their estimated tax payments. The 2022 Form 1040-ES can help taxpayers estimate their first quarterly tax payment. Moreover, taxpayers may also send estimated tax payments with Form 1040-ES by mail. Finally, the IRS also provided a list of resources available to taxpayers, including the Small Business Tax Workshop and E-News for Small Businesses among others.

E-File Payroll Tax Returns

The IRS has urged small businesses to take advantage of filing their payroll tax returns and making tax payments electronically. Further, the IRS announced that payroll taxes include federal income tax withheld from employee wages, as well as both the employer and employee portions of Social Security and Medicare taxes. Payroll taxes also include the Federal Unemployment Tax.

Additionally, the IRS informed taxpayers that taxpayers who file on paper miss out on all the advantages of e-filing. E-filing saves time and is secure and accurate. The IRS acknowledges receipt of an electronically filed return within 24 hours. With electronic filing, any mistake is often discovered and fixed quickly. Additionally, employers choosing to e-file themselves will need to purchase IRS-approved software. Alternatively, the Authorized IRS e-file Providers Locator Service can help employers find a suitable tax professional.

Finally, the IRS informed that though some employers can choose to pay their taxes when they file their payroll tax returns, most need to deposit them regularly with the Treasury Department instead. Federal tax deposits must be made by electronic funds transfer (EFT). A fast, easy and free way to do that is through the Electronic Federal Tax Payments System (EFTPS). Payments can be made either online or by phone. To enroll or for more information, taxpayers can visit EFTPS.gov or call 800-555-4477.

Work Opportunity Tax Credit

The IRS reminded employers to check out the Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC) for hiring long-term unemployment recipients and other group of workers facing significant barriers to employment. The WOTC encourages employers to hire workers certified as members of any of ten targeted groups facing barriers to employment. The WOTC is available for wages paid to certain individuals who begin work on or before December 31, 2025. Further, the IRS also provided a list of the ten groups mentioned above.

Additionally, the IRS announced that to qualify for the credit, an employer must first request certification by submitting IRS Form 8850, Pre-screening Notice and Certification Request for the Work Opportunity Credit, to their state workforce agency (SWA). It must be submitted to the SWA within 28 days after the eligible worker begins work. Further, employers can help new hires by making sure they have the right amount of tax taken out of their pay and encourage them to use the Tax Withholding Estimator. This tool will also help them correctly fill out Form W-4, Employee’s Withholding Certificate.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is behind but making progress on implementing the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 (which includes the Corporate Transparency Act), FinCEN Acting Director Himamauli Das told Congress.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is behind but making progress on implementing the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 (which includes the Corporate Transparency Act), FinCEN Acting Director Himamauli Das told Congress.

According to written testimony provided to the House Committee on Financial Services prior to an April 28, 2022, hearing, Das noted that "timely and effective implementation of the AML Act, which includes the CTA, is a top priority," but he also acknowledged that "we are missing deadlines, and we will likely continue to do so" due to lack of funding from the government forcing the agency to make prioritization decisions, promoting Dim to advocate for Congress to accept the White House budget request of $210.3 million for fiscal year 2023.

That being said, Das highlighted the implementation progress to date.

"The AML Act has helped put FinCEN in the position to address today’s challenges, such as illicit use of digital assets, corruption, and kleptocrats hiding their ill-gotten gains in the U.S. financial system, including through American shell companies and real estate."

Combating the latter is a key focus of the activity surrounding the Corporate Transparency Act that the agency is undertaking. The CTA "will establish a beneficial ownership reporting regime to assist law enforcement in unmasking shell companies used to hide illicit activities," Das said, adding that beneficial ownership information "can add valuable context to financial analysis in support of law enforcement and tax investigations" in addition to providing information to the intelligence and national security professionals protecting the nation.

FinCEN has three regulations planned to implement the CTA, the first of which was published in the Federal Register in December 2021 as a notice of proposed rulemaking and is focused on the reporting requirements of beneficial ownership. The agency is currently reviewing the more than 240 comments received on this NPRM. Das said the timing of when the rule would be finalized "is not clear yet. It is a complex rulemaking that we need to get right—both for law enforcement and because of the effect that it will have on stakeholders such as small businesses and financial institutions."

The second NPRM under development will rules around access to beneficial ownership information by law enforcement, national security agencies, financial institutions, and other relevant stakeholders. That proposed rule is expected to be issued this year.

Finally, FinCEN also is working on a revision to the Customer Due Diligence regulation, which must be issued one year after the reporting requirement rule goes into effect. Dim did not provide a timeframe for when that proposal would be available for comment.

The agency also is developing a beneficial ownership database, known as the Beneficial Ownership Secure System.

"These beneficial ownership reporting obligations will make our economy—and the global economy—stronger and safer from criminals and national security threats," Das said.

FinCEN also is looking at the real estate market to close gaps in the nation’s anti-money laundering framework. Din referenced an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking that was issued in December 2021 to solicit comments on developing a rule to address money-laundering vulnerabilities in the real estate market. The ANPRM generated 150 comments and will ultimately lead to a proposed rule, although he said that "it is still too early to identify the scope of any NPRM or final rule."

The agency also is examining how to use its information collection authorities to enhance transparency and understand money laundering and terrorism financing through investment advisers.

"Even though investment advisers in the United States are not expressly subject to AML/CFT requirements under BSA [Bank Secrecy Act] regulations, investment advisers may fulfill some AML/CFT obligations in certain circumstances," Das said. "For example, investment advisers may perform certain AML/CFT functions because they are a part of a bank holding company, are affiliated with a dually-registered broker-dealer, or share joint custody with a BSA-regulated entity such as a mutual fund."

The testimony outlines a number of other AML Act requirements that the agency is working on, including understanding minimum standards for AML/CFT programs, certain information sharing requirements, technology, and training requirements and other modernization efforts.

"The FinCEN team is working diligently with law enforcement and regulatory stakeholders to promulgate rules and take other steps under the legislation that will further the national security of the United States and promote a more transparent financial system," Das concluded.

The IRS has reminded taxpayers to create or review emergency preparedness plans for surviving natural disasters. The Service has designated the month of May to include National Hurricane Preparedness Week and National Wildfire Awareness Month.

The IRS has reminded taxpayers to create or review emergency preparedness plans for surviving natural disasters. The Service has designated the month of May to include National Hurricane Preparedness Week and National Wildfire Awareness Month. Further, the IRS has advised taxpayers to:

• secure key documents such as tax returns, birth certificates, deeds, titles and insurance policies inside waterproof containers in a secure space, make their copies and scanning them for backup storage on electronic media such as a flash drive;
• record all property, especially expensive and high value items. The IRS disaster-loss workbooks in Publication 584 can help individuals and businesses compile lists of belongings or business equipment;
• employers who use payroll service providers should check fiduciary bonds as they could protect the employer in the event of default by the payroll service provider; and
• reconstruct records after a disaster for tax purposes, getting federal assistance or insurance reimbursement. Further, taxpayers who have lost some or all their records during a disaster can visit IRS’s Reconstructing Records webpage as one of their first steps.

Additionally, the Service has urged taxpayers to not call the IRS to request disaster relief because it automatically identifies taxpayers located in the covered disaster area and applies filing and payment relief. Taxpayers impacted by a disaster with tax-related questions can contact the IRS at 866-562-5227 to speak with an IRS specialist trained to handle disaster-related issues. Taxpayers who do not reside in a covered disaster area, but suffered impact from a disaster should call 866-562-5227 to find out if they qualify for disaster tax relief and to discuss other available options. Moreover, taxpayers can find complete disaster assistance and emergency relief details for both individuals and businesses on the Service’s Around the Nation webpage. Lastly, the taxpayers can also visit the FEMA Prepare for Disasters web page to Build a Kit of emergency supplies.

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is calling on the United States and the European Union to get the global corporate minimum tax into law in their respective territories.

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is calling on the United States and the European Union to get the global corporate minimum tax into law in their respective territories.

The "EU and the United States must show leadership by expeditiously implementing the global minimum tax in our domestic laws," Yellen told attendees May 17, 2022, at the Brussels Economic Forum, according to her prepared remarks distributed by the Department of the Treasury.

Yellen’s remarks promoted the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development agreement signed by 137 countries that would, among other things, set the global corporate minimum tax at 15 percent.

"Once implemented, we can put the revenues produced by this deal toward funding investments to make our economies more sustainable and fairer—not just in the United States and the EU, but also in emerging and developing countries," she said. "And by moving together we will raise these revenues in a way that levels the playing field. Businesses will be able to compete on economic fundamentals, rather than on tax incentives, thereby contributing to our collective prosperity."

According to the Department of the Treasury, Yellen met with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, European Commission Executive Vice President Valdis Dombrovskis and European Commissioner for the Economy Paolo Gentiloni and identified ways to move forward on the international tax reform agreement, although those specific details were not made public. Her remarks also noted that in addition to addressing the global corporate minimum tax issues, known as Pillar 2 of the agreement, "[w]e must resolve the open issues in Pillar 1 so that the multilateral treaty can be ready for signature," although the specific issues that need resolution were not identified in the speech.

"Pillar 1 of this deal, focused on the taxation of digital services, puts an end to trade tensions between the EU and the United States that threaten our companies with multiple layers of taxation and our consumers with rising costs from tariffs."Yellen said. "That dynamic isn’t good for anyone."

She continued: "Pillar 1 will also update and stabilize the international tax architecture, providing a fairer allocation of revenues than the status quo and tax certainty that is good for business and investment. Rather than facing harmful unilateral measures, companies will be able to plan and thus invest their capital efficiently."

The Internal Revenue Service continues to struggle with issues related to staff shortages, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration said.

The Internal Revenue Service continues to struggle with issues related to staff shortages, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration said.

In a May 2, 2022, interim report on the 2022 filing season, the IG stated that "significant staffing shortages continue to hamper the IRS’s efforts to address backlog inventories and continue to affect the IRS’s ability to ensure that current year tax returns are processed timely."

The data in the report comes from March and predates a number of appearances of IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig before Congress where he has pledged that barring another significant spike in the pandemic or some other unforeseen issue, the backlogged inventories will be back to "healthy" by the end of the year.

The report highlights the agency’s overall "IRS Get Healthy Initiatives" and states the IG will be performing separate reviews on how the agency is addressing the backlog as well as hiring shortfalls.

The IG reported that as of March 15, 2022, the IRS onboarded 521 submission processing employees, or 9.5 percent of the hiring goal of 5,437, although Rettig has testified before Congress that in-person and virtual job fairs have yielded higher numbers since then and those hired should be onboarded and complete their training in June. The IG also reported that as of March 17, 2022, the agency onboarded 3,827 accounts management employees, or 76.5 percent of the hiring goal of 5,000 for the 2022 tax season.

Five staffing concerns were highlighted by the report, including:

• The use of a seasonal workforce that does not provide permanent employment or desirable schedules and shifts;
• Entry-level salaries that are lower than what can be obtained in private industry;
• Applicants who apply for multiple jobs, reducing the true number of candidates available to fill vacancies;
• Applicants who fail to respond to or pass pre-screnning or do not show up to work after they have been hired; and
• Long onboarding times.

IG estimates that as of the week ending March 12, 2022, there are nearly 5 million paper tax returns that still need to be processed. Through March 4, for the 2022 filing season, the IRS received nearly 55 million returns, including 1.5 million paper returns, which is 15 percent lower than the paper returns received in roughly the same window (March 5, 2021) during the previous year’s tax filing season.

As of March 4, the IRS has issued about 38 million refunds totaling $129.2 billion. Both represent increases from the same time in the previous tax filing season through March 5 that had about 36 million refunds issued totaling $107.8 billion.

Rettig Defends Budget Request Before Senate Appropriations Committee

Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Charles Rettig appeared May 3 before the Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee to defend the White House budget request for fiscal year 2023.

During the hearing, Commissioner Rettig testified on a number of the usual topics, noting the backlog of unprocessed returns and other written correspondence should be at a "healthy" level by the end of the year, assuming no other spikes in the pandemic or other unanticipated issues, as well as improvements to the workforce due to direct hiring authority granted by Congress, and the need for more funding to update and improve the IT infrastructure. He also touched on the need for more enforcement personnel to help close the tax gap, reiterating that enforcement will be targeted toward the wealthy who are avoiding paying taxes and not the low and middle income taxpayers.

A recent report by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration primarily focused on the need for the Internal Revenue Service to expand its electronic filing capabilities also noted that the agency has destroyed some 30 million paper-filed documents in 2021.

A recent report by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration primarily focused on the need for the Internal Revenue Service to expand its electronic filing capabilities also noted that the agency has destroyed some 30 million paper-filed documents in 2021.

"The continued inability to process backlogs of paper-filed tax returns contributed to management’s decision to destroy an estimated 30 million paper-filed information return documents in March 2021," the report, dated May 4, 2022, states. "The IRS uses these documents to conduct post-processing compliance matches such as the IRS’s Automated Underreporter Program to identify taxpayers not accurately reporting their income."

IRS said in a May 13 statement that the documents destroyed were document "submitted to the IRS by third-party payors, not taxpayers. 99 percent of the information returns we used were matched to corresponding tax returns and processed. The remaining 1 percent of those documents were destroyed due to a software limitation and to make room for new documents relevant to the pending 2021 filing season."

The agency added that there were "no negative taxpayer consequences as a result of this action. Taxpayers or payers have not been and will not be subject to penalties resulting from this action."

The IG report adds that agency management "advised us that once the tax year concludes, the information returns, e.g. Forms 1099-Miscellaneous Information, can no longer be processed due to system limitations. This is because the system used to process these information returns is taken offline for programming updates in preparation for the next filing season."

More E-Filing Needed

The revelation comes as the IG calls for more documents to be able to electronically filed.

Indeed, the first recommendation of the report was that IRS "develop a Service-wide strategy to prioritize and incorporate all forms for e-filing," a recommendation the IRS agreed with.

To put the need in context, the IG report highlights the cost of processing a paper return compared to an electronically filed return in 2020. For example, an individual Form 1040 costs 36 cents to process if the form that was filed electronically, but increases to $15.21 if the Form 1040 was filed in paper form. A Form 1041 costs 37 cents to process electronically and $14.02 to process a paper return.

E-filed returns also allow for "a number of upfront validations that check for more than 1,000 possible errors before the IRS accepts an e-filed tax return for processing" giving e-filed returns a greater degree of accuracy, compared to a paper return that requires an individual to keypunch all the details, a key contributor to the backlog of processing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

And while the agency has been relatively successful in getting individuals to electronically file their returns (a 93.4 percent e-file rate in 2020), it is not having the same success in getting businesses to do the same (63.3 percent e-file rate in 2020). That number goes down to 49 percent when looking at employment tax returns.

IG noted that the agency has not taking previously recommended actions, including:

• Developing a business tax return e-filing Service-wide strategy;
• Developing a less burdensome electronic signature process for employment tax returns; and
• Working with the Department of the Treasury to consider revising current requirements and/or creating new requirements for e-filing business returns.

IG also called upon the IRS to be more active in identifying business who are non-compliant with e-filing mandates and assessing the noncompliance penalties. The report noted that in 2018, there were 897 corporate taxpayers that were mandated to e-file but still filed paper returns. The agency could have assessed more than $2.4 million in penalties that were not assessed on these corporate filers.

The report notes that IRS did not take actions to assess penalties "because of potential implementation issues," an excuse the IG Office of Audit called "insufficient. The IRS could develop processes and procedures to identify these filers post-filing. In view of the paper backlogs of paper tax returns, the IRS should take additional steps in an effort to continue to reduce paper filings."

WASHINGTON–The Internal Revenue Service’s Independent Office Of Appeals has seen its cycle times for handling appeals cases stretch to more than year during the COVID-19 pandemic, but the office is working to get it back to pre-pandemic levels.

WASHINGTON–The Internal Revenue Service’s Independent Office Of Appeals has seen its cycle times for handling appeals cases stretch to more than year during the COVID-19 pandemic, but the office is working to get it back to pre-pandemic levels.

Speaking May 13, 2022, at the American Bar Association’s May Tax Meeting, office Chief Andy Keyso provided an update on where the agency stands as it, and the IRS as a whole, prepare for all offices to open for employees, as the end of June.

The cycle time for closed cases in fiscal year 2021 reached 372 days, up from 194 days in fiscal year 2018. Keyso noted that the upward trend started from there into FY 2019, where it increased to 229 days due to the government shutdown during that time, and then increased again in FY 2020 to 289 days during the first year of the pandemic that including a temporary shutdown as all employees were sent home and began working remotely.

Despite the increase, Keyso is optimistic that change can happen.

"I’m troubled by the increase in cycle time but I am not defeated by it," Keyso said. "I believe that it is reversible, and we will reverse it as we get people back in the office."

His optimism stems from the fact that while cycle times have gone up, it is not because more time is being spent on cases by appeals officers. That time hasn’t changed, he said. The problems are more a function of issues that are plaguing the agency as a whole since the start of the pandemic, including the backlog of processing written correspondence.

Getting that cycle time back down is one of the office’s priorities once people are back in their offices full time, Keyso said.

Cycle times went up despite declines in new case receipts by the office. In FY 2018, the office received 92,430 cases. That number dropped in the following two years to 85,286 in FY 2019 and then to 57,573 in FY 2020 before rebounding to 72,216 cases in the last fiscal year. As expected, total case closures follows a similar trend, with 94,832 cases getting closed in FY 2018, dropping down to 73,207 in FY 2019, and falling again to 62,997 in FY 2020. In the last fiscal year, 66,522 cases were closed.

Collection due process cases make up the most cases handled by the Independent Office of Appeals in FY 2021 (27,420), followed by examination cases (25,247) and then offers in compromise cases (6,858).

The Internal Revenue Service is not providing taxpayers with sufficient tools to manage their accounts online, National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins said.

The Internal Revenue Service is not providing taxpayers with sufficient tools to manage their accounts online, National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins said.

In an April 28, 2022, blog post, Collins stated that despite progress in the development of its online account application, "the IRS has yet to develop and adopt a one-stop solution for online and digital offerings that combine communications and interaction with individual and business taxpayers as well as with tax professionals."

Collins offered a number of solutions the IRS should be working on to help improve its virtual offerings, including:

• providing taxpayers with the ability to navigate to all IRS online information and services;
• making it simple for taxpayers to access various online tools;
• conditioning taxpayers to use Online Account application as the starting and ending point with their online interactions with the agency; and
• providing the option for those who are married and jointly file their tax returns to link their individual accounts.

Additionally, the IRS needs to offer a business version of the Online Account application to increase digital support for businesses that “at minimum” offers the same support features for individual taxpayers, Collins added.

For tax professionals, Collins said there is a need for better access by those professionals to their clients’ Online Account application from within the Tax Pro Account application.

"This one improvement would be significant for tax professionals in assisting taxpayers to meet their filing and payment obligations and provide much-needed assistance and guidance to them," she stated.

Collins also called for the IRS to integrate the "Where’s My Refund" tool into the Online Account application as well as prioritize improving its functionality to help decrease the call volume customer service representatives are dealing with.

The agency "needs to have robust online accounts available for all taxpayers and tax professionals that provide information, guidance, and the capability to work and resolve issues online," she stated.

New IRS guidance aiming to curb certain state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap "workarounds" is the latest "hot topic" tax debate on Capitol Hill. The IRS released proposed amendments to regulations, REG-112176-18, on August 23. The proposed rules would prevent taxpayers, effective August 27, 2018, from using certain charitable contributions to work around the new cap on SALT deductions.

New IRS guidance aiming to curb certain state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap "workarounds" is the latest "hot topic" tax debate on Capitol Hill. The IRS released proposed amendments to regulations, REG-112176-18, on August 23. The proposed rules would prevent taxpayers, effective August 27, 2018, from using certain charitable contributions to work around the new cap on SALT deductions.

SALT Deduction

The SALT deduction limit is one of the most controversial temporarily enacted provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97) signed into law last December. Under the TCJA, beginning in 2018 and running through 2025, taxpayers may not claim more than $10,000 ($5,000 if married filing separately) for all state and local sales, income and property taxes.

After the tax code overhaul, New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut (considered high-tax states) passed legislation that essentially allows taxpayers to circumvent the SALT deduction cap by making charitable contributions to state-run charitable organizations. Indeed, similar workarounds for private-school tuition already exists in other states.

"Congress limited the deduction for state and local taxes that predominantly benefited high-income earners to help pay for major tax cuts for American families,"Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said in a statement. "The proposed rule will uphold that limitation by preventing attempts to convert tax payments into charitable contributions."

Congressional Republicans and Democrats, as with the TCJA, are mostly divided on the topic. House Ways and Means Committee Chair Kevin Brady, R-Tex., praised the IRS proposal for aiming to prevent tax evasion. "These Treasury regulations rightly close the door on improper tax evasion schemes conjured up by state and local politicians who insist on brutally taxing local families and businesses," Brady said in a statement.

Meanwhile, Democratic lawmakers are criticizing the regulations. "The Trump administration doubled down on its attack on the middle class," Ways and Means ranking member Richard Neal, D-Mass., said in a statement. "The administration’s new regulations block affected states’ attempts to cope with this significant change and protect residents."

Tax Policy Experts Weigh-In

Several tax policy experts have criticized states’ efforts to circumvent the SALT deduction cap. Carl Davis, research director at the Democratic-leaning Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, has called the workarounds an "abuse" of the charitable giving deduction. "Anyone who wants a fair and transparent tax system should be cautiously optimistic that these rules will put an end…to the workaround provisions enacted by states more recently," Davis wrote in a recent op-ed about the proposed IRS guidance.

Jared Walczak, senior policy analyst at the conservative-leaning Tax Foundation, has said that states’ strategies to re-characterize SALT payments were pursued to primarily help high-income taxpayers. Additionally, the top one percent of the wealthiest households would reap more than half of the benefit if the SALT cap were eliminated, according to an estimate from the Democratic-leaning Tax Policy Center.

Last year’s Tax Reform created a new 20-percent deduction of qualified business income for passthrough entities, subject to certain limitations. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97) created the new Code Sec. 199A passthrough deduction for noncorporate taxpayers, effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017. However, the provision was enacted only temporarily through 2025. The controversial deduction has remained a buzzing topic of debate among lawmakers, tax policy experts, and stakeholders. In addition to its impermanence, the new passthrough deduction’s ambiguous statutory language has created many questions for taxpayers and practitioners.

Last year’s Tax Reform created a new 20-percent deduction of qualified business income for passthrough entities, subject to certain limitations. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97) created the new Code Sec. 199A passthrough deduction for noncorporate taxpayers, effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017. However, the provision was enacted only temporarily through 2025. The controversial deduction has remained a buzzing topic of debate among lawmakers, tax policy experts, and stakeholders. In addition to its impermanence, the new passthrough deduction’s ambiguous statutory language has created many questions for taxpayers and practitioners.

The IRS released the much-anticipated proposed regulations on the new passthrough deduction, REG-107892-18, on August 8. The guidance has generated a mixed reaction on Capitol Hill, and while significant questions may have been answered, it appears that many remain. Indeed, an IRS spokesperson told Wolters Kluwer Tax & Accounting before the regulations were released that the IRS’s goal was to issue complete regulations but that the guidance "would not cover every question that taxpayers have."

Wolters Kluwer recently spoke with Joshua Wu, member, Clark Hill PLC, about the tax implications of the new passthrough deduction and proposed regulations. That exchange included a discussion of the impact that the new law and IRS guidance, both present and future, may have on taxpayers and tax practitioners.

I. Qualified Business Income and Activities

Wolters Kluwer: What is the effect of the proposed regulations requiring that qualified business activities meet the Code Sec. 162 trade or business standard? And for what industries might this be problematic?

Joshua Wu: The positive aspect of incorporating the Section 162 trade or business standard is that there is an established body of case law and administrative guidance with respect to what activities qualify as a trade or business. However, the test under Section 162 is factually-specific and requires an analysis of each situation. Sometimes courts reach different results with respect to activities constituting a trade or business. For example, gamblers have been denied trade or business status in numerous cases. In Groetzinger, 87-1 ustc ¶9191, 480 U.S. 23 (1987), the Court held that whether professional gambling is a trade or business depends on whether the taxpayer can show he pursued gambling full-time, in good faith, regularly and continuously, and possessed a sincere profit motive. Some courts have held that the gambling activity must be full-time, from 60 to 80 hours per week, while others have questioned whether the full-time inquiry is a mandatory prerequisite or permissive factor to determine whether the taxpayer’s gambling activity is a trade or business. See e.g., Tschetschot , 93 TCM 914, Dec. 56,840(M)(2007). Although Section 162 provides a built-in body of law, plenty of questions remain.

Aside from the gambling industry, the real estate industry will continue to face some uncertainty over what constitutes a trade or business under Code Secs. 162 and 199A. The proposed regulations provide a helpful rule, where the rental or licensing of tangible or intangible property to a related trade or business is treated as a trade or business if the rental or licensing and the other trade or business are commonly controlled. But, that rule does not help taxpayers in the rental industry with no ties to another trade or business. The question remains whether a taxpayer renting out a single-family home or a small group of apartments is engaged in a trade or business for purposes of Code Secs. 162 and 199A. Some case law indicates that just receiving rent with nothing more may not constitute a trade or business. On the other hand, numerous cases have found that managing property and collecting rent can constitute a trade or business. Given the potential tax savings at issue, I suspect there will be additional cases in the real estate industry regarding the level of activity required for the leasing of property to be considered a trade or business.

Qualified Business Income

Wolters Kluwer: How does the IRS define qualified business income (QBI)?

Joshua Wu: QBI is the net amount of effectively connected qualified items of income, gain, deduction, and loss from any qualified trade or business. Certain items are excluded from QBI, such as capital gains/losses, certain dividends, and interest income. Proposed Reg. §1.199A-3(b) provides further clarity on QBI. Most importantly, they provide that a passthrough with multiple trades or businesses must allocate items of QBI to such trades or businesses based on a reasonable and consistent method that clearly reflects income and expenses. The passthrough may use a different reasonable method for different items of income, gain, deduction, and loss, but the overall combination of methods must also be reasonable based on all facts and circumstances. Further, the books and records must be consistent with allocations under the method chosen. The proposed regulations provide no specific guidance or examples of what a reasonable allocation looks like. Thus, taxpayers are left to determine what constitutes a reasonable allocation.

Unadjusted Basis Immediately after Acquisition

Wolters Kluwer: What effect does the unadjusted basis immediately after acquisition (UBIA) of qualified property attributable to a trade or business have on determining QBI?

Joshua Wu: For taxpayers above the taxable income threshold amounts, $157,500 (single or married filing separate) or $315,000 (married filing jointly), the Code limits the taxpayer’s 199A deduction based on (i) the amount of W-2 wages paid with respect to the trade or business, and/or (ii) the unadjusted basis immediately after acquisition (UBIA) of qualified property held for use in the trade or business.

Where a business pays little or no wages, and the taxpayer is above the income thresholds, the best way to maximize the deduction is to look to the UBIA of qualified property. Rather than the 50 percent of W-2 wages limitation, Section 199A provides an alternative limit based on 25 percent of W-2 wages and 2.5 percent of UBIA qualified property. The Code and proposed regulations define UBIA qualified property as tangible, depreciable property which is held by and available for use in the qualified trade or business at the close of the tax year, which is used at any point during the tax year in the production of qualified business income, and the depreciable period for which has not ended before the close of the tax year. The proposed regulations helpfully clarify that UBIA is not reduced for taxpayers who take advantage of the expanded bonus depreciation allowance or any Section 179expensing.

De Minimis Exception

Wolters Kluwer: How is the specified service trade or business (SSTB) limitation clarified under the proposed regulations? And how does the de minimis exception apply?

Joshua Wu: The proposed regulations provide helpful guidance on the definition of a SSTB and avoid what some practitioners feared would be an expansive and amorphous area of section 199A. Under the statute, if a trade or business is an SSTB, its items are not taken into account for the 199A computation. Thus, the performance of services in the fields of health, law, accounting, actuarial science, performing arts, consulting, athletics, financial and brokerage services, investment management, trading, dealing in securities, and any trade or business where the principal asset of such is the reputation or skill of one or more of its employees or owners, do not result in a 199A deduction.

There is a de minimis exception to the general rule for taxpayers with taxable income of less than $157,500 (single or married filing separate) or $315,000 (married filing jointly). Once those thresholds are hit, the 199A deduction phases-out until it is fully eliminated at $207,500 (single) or $415,000 (joint).

The proposed regulations provide guidance for each of the SSTB fields. Importantly, they also limit the "reputation or skill" category. The proposed regulations state that the "reputation or skill" clause was intended to describe a "narrow set of trades or businesses, not otherwise covered by the enumerated specified services." Thus, the proposed regulations limit this definition to cases where the business receives income from endorsing products or services, licensing or receiving income for use of an individual’s image, likeness, name, signature, voice, trademark, etc., or receiving appearance fees. This narrow definition is unlikely to impact most taxpayers.

Wolters Kluwer recently spoke with Joshua Wu, member, Clark Hill PLC, about the tax implications of the new Code Sec. 199A passthrough deduction and its recently-released proposed regulations, REG-107892-18. That exchange included a discussion of the impact that the new law and IRS guidance, both present and future, may have on taxpayers and tax practitioners.

Wolters Kluwer recently spoke with Joshua Wu, member, Clark Hill PLC, about the tax implications of the new Code Sec. 199A passthrough deduction and its recently-released proposed regulations, REG-107892-18. That exchange included a discussion of the impact that the new law and IRS guidance, both present and future, may have on taxpayers and tax practitioners.

II. Aggregation, Winners & Losers

Wolters Kluwer: How do the proposed regulations provide both limitations and flexibility regarding the available election to aggregate trades or businesses?

Joshua Wu: Treasury agreed with various comments that some level of aggregation should be permitted to account for the legal, economic and other non-tax reasons that taxpayers operate a single business across multiple entities. Permissive aggregation allows taxpayers the benefit of combining trades or businesses for applying the W-2 wage limitation, potentially resulting in a higher limit. Under Proposed Reg. §1.199A-4, aggregation is allowed but not required. To use this method, the business must (1) qualify as a trade or business, (2) have common ownership, (3) not be a SSTB, and (4) demonstrate that the businesses are part of a larger, integrated trade or business (for individuals and trusts). The proposed regulations give businesses the benefits of electing aggregation without having to restructure the businesses from a legal standpoint. Businesses failing to qualify under the above test will have to consider whether a legal restructuring would be possible.

Wolters Kluwer: How does Notice 2018-64 Methods for Calculating W-2 Wages for Purposes of Section 199A, which accompanied the release of the proposed regulations, coordinate with aggregation?

Joshua Wu: Notice 2018-64 contains a proposed revenue procedure with guidance on three methods for calculating W-2 wages for purposes of section 199A. The Unmodified Box method uses the lesser of totals in Box 1 of Forms W-2 or Box 5 (Medicare wages). The Modified Box 1 method takes the total amounts in Box 1 of Forms W-2 minus amounts not wages for income withholding purposes, and adding total amounts in Box 12 (deferrals). The Tracking wages method is the most complex and tracks total wages subject to income tax withholding. The calculation method is dependent on the group of Forms W-2 included in the computation and, thus, will vary depending upon whether businesses are aggregated under §1.199A-4 or not. Taxpayers with businesses generating little or no Medicare wages may consider aggregating with businesses that report significant wages in Box 1 that are still subject to income tax withholding. Under the Modified Box 1 method, that may result in a higher wage limitation.

Crack & Pack

Wolters Kluwer: What noteworthy anti-abuse safeguards did the proposed regulations seek to establish? How do the rules address "cracking" or "crack and pack" strategies?

Joshua Wu: Treasury included some anti-abuse provisions in the proposed regulations. One area that Treasury noted was the use of multiple non-grantor trusts to avoid the income threshold limitations on the 199A deduction. Taxpayers could theoretically use multiple non-grantor trusts to increase the 199A deduction by taking advantage of each trust’s separate threshold amount. The proposed regulations, under the authority of 643(f), provide that two or more trusts will be aggregated and treated as a single trust if such trusts have substantially the same grantor(s) and substantially the same primary beneficiary or beneficiaries, and if a principal purpose is to avoid tax. The proposed regulations have a presumption of a principal purpose of avoiding tax if the structure results in a significant tax benefit, unless there is a significant non-tax purpose that could not have been achieved without the creation of the trusts.

Another anti-abuse issue relates to the "crack and pack" strategies. These strategies involve a business that is limited in its 199A deduction because it is an SSTB spinning off some of its business or assets to an entity that is not an SSTB and could claim the 199A deduction. For example, a law firm that owns its building could transfer the building to a separate entity and lease it back. The law firm is an SSTB and, thus, is subject to the 199A limitations. However, the real estate entity is not an SSTB and can generate a 199A deduction (based on the rental income) for the law partners. The proposed regulations provide that a SSTB includes any business with 50 percent common ownership (direct or indirect) that provides 80 percent or more of its property or services to an excluded trade or business. Also, if a trade or business shares 50 percent or more common ownership with an SSTB, to the extent that trade or business provides property or services to the commonly-owned SSTB, the portion of the property or services provided to the SSTB will be treated as an SSTB. The proposed regulations provide an example of a dentist who owns a dental practice and also owns an office building. The dentist rents half the building to the dental practice and half to unrelated persons. Under [Proposed Reg.] §1.199A-5(c)(2), the renting of half of the building to the dental practice will be treated as an SSTB.

Winners & Losers

Wolters Kluwer: Generally, what industries can be seen as "winners" and "losers" in light of the proposed regulations?

Joshua Wu: The most obvious "losers" in the proposed regulations are the specified services businesses (e.g., lawyers, accountants, doctors, etc.) who are further limited by the anti-abuse provisions in arranging their affairs to try and benefit from 199A. On the other hand, certain specific service providers benefit from the proposed regulations. For example, health clubs or spas are exempt from the SSTB limitation. Additionally, broadcasters of performing arts, real estate agents, real estate brokers, loan officers, ticket brokers, and art brokers are all exempt from the SSTB limitation.

Wolters Kluwer: What areas of the Code Sec. 199A provision stand out as most complex when calculating the deduction, and how does this complexity vary among taxpayers?

Joshua Wu: With respect to calculating the deduction, one complex area is planning to maximize the W-2 wages limitation. Because compensation as W-2 wages can reduce QBI, and potentially the 199A deduction, determining the efficient equilibrium point between having enough W-2 wages to limit the impact of the wage limitation, while preserving QBI, will be a fact-driven complex planning issue that must be determined by each taxpayer. Another area of complexity will be how taxpayers track losses which may reduce future QBI and, thus, the 199A deduction. The proposed regulations provide that losses disallowed for taxable years beginning before January 1, 2018, are not taken into account for purposes of computing QBI in a later taxable year. Taxpayers will be left to track pre-2018 and post-2018 losses and determine if a loss in a particular tax year reduces QBI or not.

III. Looking Ahead

Questions Remain

Wolters Kluwer: An IRS spokesperson told Wolters Kluwer that the IRS did not expect the proposed regulations to answer all questions surrounding the deduction. Indeed, Acting IRS Commissioner David Kautter has said that stakeholder feedback would help finalize the regulations. What significant questions remain unanswered for taxpayers and tax practitioners, and has additional uncertainty been created with the release of the IRS guidance?

Joshua Wu: On the whole, the proposed regulations did a good job addressing the most important areas of Section 199A. However, there are many areas where additional guidance would be helpful. Such guidance may be in the form of additional regulations or other administrative pathways. For example, the proposed regulations did not address the differing treatment between a taxpayer operating as a sole proprietor versus an S corporation. Wages paid to an S corporation shareholder boosts the W-2 limitation but are not considered QBI. Thus, with the same underlying facts, the 199Adeduction may vary between taxpayers operating as a sole proprietor versus those operating as an S corporation.

Possible Changes to Proposed Regulations

Wolters Kluwer: In what ways do you see the passthrough deduction rules changing when the final regulations are released?

Joshua Wu: I suspect that the core components of the proposed regulations will not change significantly. However, I would not be surprised if Treasury were to include more specific examples with respect to real estate and whether certain types of activity constitute a trade or business. Additionally, the proposed regulations will likely generate comments and questions from various industry groups related to the SSTB definitions and specific types of services (e.g., do trustees and executors fall under the legal services definition). Treasury may change the definitions of SSTBs in response to comments and clarify definitions for industry groups.

Tax Reform 2.0

Wolters Kluwer: The White House and congressional Republicans are currently moving forward on legislative efforts known as "Tax Reform 2.0." The legislative package proposes making permanent the passthrough deduction. How does the impermanence of this deduction currently impact taxpayers? (Note: On September 13, the House Ways and Means Committee marked up a three-bill Tax Reform 2.0 package. The measure is expected to reach the House floor for a full chamber vote by the end of September.)

Joshua Wu: The 199A deduction has a significant impact on the choice of entity question for businesses. With the 21 percent corporate rate, we have seen many taxpayers considering restructuring away from passthrough entities to a C corporation structure. The 199A deduction is a large consideration in whether to restructure or not, but its limited effective time does raise questions about the cost effectiveness of planning to obtain the 199A deduction where the benefit will sunset in eight years.

Key Takeways

Wolters Kluwer: Aside from advice on specific taxpayer situations, what key takeaways should tax practitioners generally alert clients to ahead of the 2019 tax filing season?

Wolters Kluwer: Aside from advice on specific taxpayer situations, what key takeaways should tax practitioners generally alert clients to ahead of the 2019 tax filing season?

Joshua Wu: Practitioners should remind clients who may benefit from the 199A deduction to keep detailed records of any losses for each line of business, as this may impact the calculation of QBI in the future. Practitioners should also help clients examine the whole of their activity to define their "trades or businesses." This will be essential to calculating the 199A deduction and planning to maximize any such deduction. Finally, practitioners should remember that some of the information that may be necessary to determine a 199A deduction may not be in their client’s possession. Practitioners need to plan in advance with their clients regarding how information about each trade or business will be obtained (e.g., how will a limited partner in a partnership obtain information regarding the partnership’s W-2 wages and/or UBIA of qualified property).

Wolters Kluwer: Any closing thoughts or comments?

Joshua Wu: Practitioners and taxpayers should remember that the regulations are only proposed and may change before they become final. Any planning undertaken this year should carefully weigh the economic costs and be rooted in the statutory language of 199A. It will be some time before case law helps clarify the nuances of Section 199A, and claiming the deduction allows the IRS to more easily impose the substantial understatement penalty if a taxpayer gets it wrong.

Wolters Kluwer has projected annual inflation-adjusted amounts for tax year 2019. The projected amounts include 2019 tax brackets, the standard deduction, and alternative minimum tax amounts, among others. The projected amounts are based on Consumer Price Index figures released by the U.S. Department of Labor on September 12, 2018.

Wolters Kluwer has projected annual inflation-adjusted amounts for tax year 2019. The projected amounts include 2019 tax brackets, the standard deduction, and alternative minimum tax amounts, among others. The projected amounts are based on Consumer Price Index figures released by the U.S. Department of Labor on September 12, 2018.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97) mandated a change from the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) to the Chained Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (C-CPI-U). Official amounts for 2019 should be released by the IRS later in 2018.

Individual Tax Brackets

The projected bracket ranges for individuals in 2019 are as follows.

For married taxpayers filing jointly:

The 10 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes up to $19,400
The 12 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $19,400 and up to $78,900
The 22 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $78,900 and up to $168,400
The 24 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $168,400 and up to $321,450
The 32 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $321,450 and up to $408,200
The 35 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $408,200 and up to $612,350
The 37 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $612,350

For heads of households:

The 10 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes up to $13,850
The 12 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $13,850 and up to $52,850
The 22 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $52,850 and up to $84,200
The 24 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $84,200 and up to $160,700
The 32 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $160,700 and up to $204,100
The 35 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $204,100 and up to $510,300
The 37 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $510,300

For unmarried taxpayers:

The 10 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes up to $9,700
The 12 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $9,700 and up to $39,450
The 22 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $39,450 and up to $84,200
The 24 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $84,200 and up to $160,700
The 32 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $160,700 and up to $204,100
The 35 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $204,100 and up to $510,300
The 37 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $510,300

For married taxpayers filing separately:

The 10 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes up to $9,700
The 12 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $9,700 and up to $39,450
The 22 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $39,450 and up to $84,200
The 24 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $84,200 and up to $160,725
The 32 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $160,725 and up to $204,100
The 35 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $204,100 and up to $306,175
The 37 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $306,175

For estates and trusts:

The 10 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes up to $2,600
The 24 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $2,600 and up to $9,300
The 35 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $9,300 and up to $12,750
The 37 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $12,750

Standard Deduction

TCJA also roughly doubled the amount of the standard deduction. For 2019, the following standard deduction amounts are projected:

For married taxpayers filing jointly, $24,400
For heads of households, $18,350
For unmarried taxpayers and well as married taxpayers filing separately, $12,200

AMT Exemptions

TCJA eliminated the AMT for corporations, and increased the exemption amounts, and the exemption phaseouts, for individuals. For 2019, the AMT exemption amounts are projected to be:

For married taxpayers filing jointly, $111,700
For unmarried individuals and heads of households, $71,700
For married taxpayers filing separately, $55,850

Estate and Gift Tax

The following amounts related to transfer taxes (estate, generation-skipping, and gift taxes) are projected for 2019:

The gift tax annual exemption is projected to be $15,000 in 2019

The estate and gift tax applicable exclusion (increased under TCJA) is projected to be $11,400,000 for decedents dying in 2019

The exclusion for gifts made in 2019 to a spouse who is not a U.S. citizen is projected to be $155,000 for 2019

Other Amounts

The following other amounts are also projected for 2019:

The adoption credit for 2019 is projected to be $14,080 for 2019.

For 2019, the allowed Roth IRA contribution amount is projected to phase out for married taxpayers filing jointly with income between $193,000 and $203,000 For heads of household and unmarried filers, the projected phaseout range is between $122,000 to $137,000.

The maximum amount of deductible contributions that can be made to an IRA is projected to be $6,000 for 2019. The increased contribution amount for taxpayers age 50 and over will, therefore, be $7,000.

The deduction for traditional IRA contributions is projected to begin to phase out for married joint filers whose income is greater than $103,000 if both spouses are covered by a retirement plan at work. If only one spouse is covered by a retirement plan at work, the phaseout is projected to begin when modified adjusted gross income reaches $193,000. For heads of household and unmarried filers who are covered by a retirement plan at work, the 2019 income phaseout range for deductible IRA contributions is projected to begin at $64,000.

For 2019, the $2,500 student loan interest deduction is projected to begin to phase out for married joint filers with modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) above $140,000. For single taxpayers, the 2019 deduction is projected to begin to phase out at a MAGI level of over $70,000.

The amount of the 2019 foreign earned income exclusion under Code Sec. 911 is projected to be $105,900.

The IRS has released long-awaited guidance on new Code Sec. 199A, commonly known as the "pass-through deduction" or the "qualified business income deduction." Taxpayers can rely on the proposed regulations and a proposed revenue procedure until they are issued as final.

The IRS has released long-awaited guidance on new Code Sec. 199A, commonly known as the "pass-through deduction" or the "qualified business income deduction." Taxpayers can rely on the proposed regulations and a proposed revenue procedure until they are issued as final.

Code Sec. 199A allows business owners to deduct up to 20 percent of their qualified business income (QBI) from sole proprietorships, partnerships, trusts, and S corporations. The deduction is one of the most high-profile pieces of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act ( P.L. 115-97).

In addition to providing general definitions and computational rules, the new guidance helps clarify several concepts that were of special interest to many taxpayers.

Trade or Business

The proposed regulations incorporate the Code Sec. 162 rules for determining what constitutes a trade or business. A taxpayer may have more than one trade or business, but a single trade or business generally cannot be conducted through more than one entity.

Taxpayers cannot use the grouping rules of the passive activity provisions of Code Sec. 469 to group multiple activities into a single business. However, a taxpayer may aggregate trades or businesses if:

• each trade or business is itself a trade or business;
• the same person or group owns a majority interest in each business to be aggregated;
• none of the aggregated trades or businesses can be a specified service trade or business; and
• the trades or businesses meet at least two of three factors which demonstrate that they are in fact part of a larger, integrated trade or business.

Specified Service Business

Income from a specified service business generally cannot be qualified business income, although this exclusion is phased in for lower-income taxpayers.

A new de minimis exception allows some business to escape being designated as a specified service trade or business (SSTB). A business qualifies for this de minimis exception if:

• gross receipts do not exceed $25 million, and less than 10 percent is attributable to services; or
• gross receipts exceed $25 million, and less than five percent is attributable to services.

The regulations largely adopt existing rules for what activities constitute a service. However, a business receives income because of an employee/owner’s reputation or skill only when the business is engaged in:

• endorsing products or services;
• licensing the use of an individual’s image, name, trademark, etc.; or
• receiving appearance fees.

In addition, the regulations try to limit attempts to spin-off parts of a service business into independent qualified businesses. Thus, a business that provides 80 percent or more of its property or services to a related service business is part of that service business. Similarly, the portion of property or services that a business provides to a related service business is treated as a service business. Businesses are related if they have at least 50-percent common ownership.

Wages/Capital Limit

A higher-income taxpayer’s qualified business income may be reduced by the wages/capital limit. This limit is based on the taxpayer’s share of the business’s:

• W-2 wages that are allocable to QBI; and
• unadjusted basis in qualified property immediately after acquisition.

The proposed regulations and Notice 2018-64, I.R.B. 2018-34, provide detailed rules for determining the business’s W-2 wages. These rules generally follow the rules that applied to the Code Sec. 199 domestic production activities deduction.

The proposed regulations also address unadjusted basis immediately after acquisition (UBIA). The regulations largely adopt the existing capitalization rules for determining unadjusted basis. However, "immediately after acquisition" is the date the business places the property in service. Thus, UBIA is generally the cost of the property as of the date the business places it in service.

Other Rules

The proposed regulations also address several other issues, including:

• definitions;
• basic computations;
• loss carryovers;
• Puerto Rico businesses;
• coordination with other Code Sections;
• penalties;
• special basis rules;
• previously suspended losses and net operating losses;
• other exclusions from qualified business income;
• allocations of items that are not attributable to a single trade or business;
• anti-abuse rules;
• application to trusts and estates; and
• special rules for the related deduction for agricultural cooperatives.

Effective Dates

Taxpayers may generally rely on the proposed regulations and Notice 2018-64 until they are issued as final. The regulations and proposed revenue procedure will be effective for tax years ending after they are published as final. However:

• several proposed anti-abuse rules are proposed to apply to tax years ending after December 22, 2017;
• anti-abuse rules that apply specifically to the use of trusts are proposed to apply to tax years ending after August 9, 2018; and
• if a qualified business’s tax year begins before January 1, 2018, and ends after December 31, 2017, the taxpayer’s items are treated as having been incurred in the taxpayer’s tax year during which business’s tax year ends.

Comments Requested

The IRS requests comments on all aspects of the proposed regulations. Comments may be mailed or hand-delivered to the IRS, or submitted electronically at www.regulations.gov (indicate IRS and REG-107892-18). Comments and requests for a public hearing must be received by September 24, 2018.

The IRS also requests comments on the proposed revenue procedure for calculating W-2 wages, especially with respect to amounts paid for services in Puerto Rico. Comments may be mailed or hand-delivered to the IRS, or submitted electronically to Notice.comments@irscounsel.treas.gov, with “ Notice 2018-64” in the subject line. These comments must also be received by September 24, 2018.