- Newsletters

Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Wally Adeyemo was out promoting the positives of the Inflation Reduction Act in an apparent effort to counteract the messaging from Republicans who are working to abolish the law as well as to replace the IRS with a national sales tax.

Speaking January 17, 2023, at a White House event, Deputy Secretary Adeyemo described the law as "the most significant piece of legislation in our country’s history when it comes to building a clean energy future," and highlighted the law’s tax incentives aimed at getting more Americans to invest in clean energy.

For example, he noted the $1,200 available to people for making homes more energy efficient with new insulation, doors, windows, and other upgrades. He also highlighted the up to $2,000 available to upgrade existing furnaces and air conditioners with energy efficient heat pumps, as well as tax credits to help defray the cost of installing solar panels on their home rooftops.

Adeyemo also highlighted the tax incentives related to the purchase of clean vehicles, including up to a $7,500 tax credit for a new vehicle and up to $4,000 for a pre-owned vehicle.

"Treasury is working expeditiously to provide clarity and certainty to taxpayers, so the climate and economic benefits of this historic legislation can be felt as quickly as possible," he said.

Adeyemo also referenced the additional funding the Internal Revenue Service is receiving due to the Inflation Reduction Act. He noted that a "well-resourced IRS … is essential for effective implementation of the IRA’s clean energy credits and other tax benefits, and for ensuring fairness of our tax system overall."

Countering Republican Messaging

Adeyemo’s comments come as Republicans in their new majority in the House of Representatives begin to work on abolishing the IRA and dismantling the IRS.

Already passed in the GOP-led House is the Family and Small Business Taxpayer Protection Act (H.R. 23), which would eliminate the additional IRS funding in the IRA and in particular targets the 87,000 new hires by the agency. GOP messaging continues to misrepresent those new hires as all being IRS agents who will target low- and middle-income taxpayers with audits, despite the stated purposed of those new hires to be primarily for customer service, with the new agents that do get hired to be used to target the wealthiest taxpayers in an effort to ensure they are paying their fair share and to close the tax gap.

Indeed a one-sheet on the H.R. 23 posted to the House Ways and Means website highlights that the bill is targeting the 87,000 new hires which it claims will all be agents. The bill passed the House on January 9, 2023, by a 221-210 vote along party lines. The Senate is likely not going to take up the bill and President Biden already threatened a veto if the bill made it to his desk.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that enacting this bill would actually reduce revenue by nearly $186 billion and increase the deficit by more than $114 billion.

House Republicans also introduce a bill (H.R. 25) that would abolish the IRS and replace its revenue generating taxation authority with a national sales tax of 23 percent, with a means-tested monthly sales tax rebate available to taxpayers who qualify. No further action on this bill has been taken.

Close

The IRS has issued the luxury car depreciation limits for business vehicles placed in service in 2023 and the lease inclusion amounts for business vehicles first leased in 2023.

Luxury Passenger Car Depreciation Caps

The luxury car depreciation caps for a passenger car placed in service in 2023 limit annual depreciation deductions to:

$12,200 for the first year without bonus depreciation
$20,200 for the first year with bonus depreciation
$19,500 for the second year
$11,700 for the third year
$6,960 for the fourth through sixth year

Depreciation Caps for SUVs, Trucks and Vans

The luxury car depreciation caps for a sport utility vehicle, truck, or van placed in service in 2023 are:

$12,200 for the first year without bonus depreciation
$20,200 for the first year with bonus depreciation
$19,500 for the second year
$11,700 for the third year
$6,960 for the fourth through sixth year

Excess Depreciation on Luxury Vehicles

If depreciation exceeds the annual cap, the excess depreciation is deducted beginning in the year after the vehicle’s regular depreciation period ends.

The annual cap for this excess depreciation is:

$6,960 for passenger cars and
$6,960 for SUVS, trucks, and vans.

Lease Inclusion Amounts for Cars, SUVs, Trucks and Vans

If a vehicle is first leased in 2023, a taxpayer must add a lease inclusion amount to gross income in each year of the lease if its fair market value at the time of the lease is more than:

$60,000 for a passenger car, or
$60,000 for an SUV, truck or van.

The 2023 lease inclusion tables provide the lease inclusion amounts for each year of the lease.

The lease inclusion amount results in a permanent reduction in the taxpayer’s deduction for the lease payments.

Vehicles Exempt from Depreciation Caps and Lease Inclusion Amounts

The depreciation caps and lease inclusion amounts do not apply to:

cars with an unloaded gross vehicle weight of more than 6,000 pounds; or
SUVs, trucks and vans with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of more than 6,000 pounds.

So taxpayers who want to avoid these limits should "think big."

Close

IRS has reminded eligible workers from low and moderate income groups to make qualifying retirement contributions and get the Saver’s Credit on their 2022 tax return. Taxpayers have until the due date for filing their 2022 return, that is April 18, 2023, to set up a new IRA or add money to an existing IRA for 2022.

IRS has reminded eligible workers from low and moderate income groups to make qualifying retirement contributions and get the Saver’s Credit on their 2022 tax return. Taxpayers have until the due date for filing their 2022 return, that is April 18, 2023, to set up a new IRA or add money to an existing IRA for 2022. The Retirement Savings Contributions Credit, also known as the Saver’s Credit, helps offset part of the first $2,000 workers voluntarily contribute to Individual Retirement Arrangements, 401(k) plans and similar workplace retirement programs. The credit also helps any eligible person with a disability who is the designated beneficiary of an Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) account, contribute to that account. The Saver’s Credit is available in addition to any other tax savings that apply, and contributions to both, Roth and traditional IRAs qualify for the credit.

Taxpayers participating in workplace retirement plans must make their contributions by December 31, 2022. The Saver’s Credit supplements other tax benefits available to people who set money aside for retirement. The Service also urges employees who are unable to set aside money in 2022, to schedule their 2023 contributions soon, so their employers can begin withholding them in January, 2023.

The IRS also informs taxpayers about the eligibility and restrictions to Saver's Credit:

Saver's Credit can be claimed by married couples filing jointly with incomes up to $68,000 in 2022 or $73,000 in 2023, heads of household with incomes up to $51,000 in 2022 or $54,750 in 2023, married individuals filing separately and singles with incomes up to $34,000 in 2022 or $36,500 in 2023.
Eligible taxpayers must be at least 18 years of age.
Anyone claimed as a dependent on someone else’s return cannot take the credit, and any person enrolled as a full-time student during any part of 5 calendar months during the year, cannot claim the credit.

A taxpayer’s credit amount is based on their filing status, adjusted gross income, tax liability and amount contributed to qualifying retirement programs or ABLE accounts. The Service has cautioned that, though the maximum Saver’s Credit is $1,000 ($2,000 for married couples), it was often much less.

The IRS has also announced that, any distributions from a retirement plan or ABLE account, reduces the contribution amount used to figure the credit. For 2022, this rule applies to distributions received after 2019 and before the due date, including extensions, of the 2022 return.

Close

The IRS and Treasury have announced have released a list of clean vehicles that meet the requirements to claim the new clean vehicle tax credit, along with FAQs to help consumers better understand how to access the various tax incentives for the purchase of new and used electric vehicles available beginning January 1, 2023.

The IRS and Treasury have announced have released a list of clean vehicles that meet the requirements to claim the new clean vehicle tax credit, along with FAQs to help consumers better understand how to access the various tax incentives for the purchase of new and used electric vehicles available beginning January 1, 2023. The Service has clarified the incremental cost of commercial clean vehicles in 2023 and stated that, for vehicles under 14,000 pounds, the tax credit was 15-percent of a qualifying vehicle’s cost and 30-percent if, the vehicle is not gas or diesel powered.

The Service has also given a notice of intent to propose regulations on the tax credit for new clean vehicles, to provide clarity to manufacturers and buyers, on changes that take effect automatically on January 1, such as Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Price limits. The notice has further clarified, that a vehicle would be considered as placed in service, for the purposes of the tax credit, on the date the taxpayer takes possession of the vehicle, which may or may not be the same date as the purchase date.

In order to help manufacturers identify vehicles eligible for tax credit, when the new requirements go into effect after a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is issued in March, the Treasury also released a white paper on the anticipated direction of their upcoming proposed guidance on the critical minerals and battery components requirements and the process for determining whether vehicles qualify under these requirements.

Close

The Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service have issued guidance pertaining to the new credit for qualified commercial clean vehicles, established by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 ( P.L. 117-169). Notice 2023-9 establishes a safe harbor regarding the incremental cost of certain qualified commercial clean vehicles placed in service in calendar year 2023.

Credit for Qualified Commercial Clean Vehicles

The amount of the credit is equal to the lesser of (1) 15% of the basis of the vehicle (30% if the vehicle is not powered by a gasoline or diesel internal combustion engine), or (2) the incremental cost of the vehicle. The credit is limited to $7,500 for a vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of less than 14,000 pounds, and $40,000 for other vehicles.

A qualified commercial clean vehicle’s incremental cost is the excess of the vehicle’s purchase price over the price of a comparable vehicle. A comparable vehicle is any vehicle that is powered solely by a gasoline or diesel internal combustion engine and is comparable in size and use to the qualified vehicle.

Under Code 45W(c), a qualified commercial clean vehicle includes a vehicle treated as a motor vehicle for purposes of title II of the Clean Air Act and manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and highways (not including street vehicles); and mobile machinery (as defined by Code 4053(8)).

Safe Harbor

The Treasury Department reviewed a Department of Energy incremental cost analysis (DOE analysis) of current costs for all street vehicles in calendar year 2023. The DOE analysis determined and/or provided the following:

the incremental cost of all street vehicles (other than compact car PHEVs) that have a gross vehicle weight rating of less than 14,000 pounds will be greater than $7,500;
the incremental cost for compact car PHEVs, including mini-compact and sub-compact cars, will be less than $7,500;
an incremental cost analysis of current costs for several representative classes of street vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 14,000 pounds or more in calendar year 2023; and
the incremental cost will not limit the available credit amount for vehicles placed in service in calendar year 2023.

Accordingly, the Treasury Department and IRS will accept a taxpayer’s use of the incremental cost published in the DOE Analysis to calculate the credit amount for compact car PHEVs placed in service during calendar year 2023, and for the appropriate class of street vehicle to calculate the credit amount for vehicles placed in service during calendar year 2023.

A taxpayer's use of $7,500 as the incremental cost for all street vehicles (other than compact car PHEVs) with a gross vehicle weight rating of less than 14,000 pounds to calculate the credit for vehicles placed in service during calendar year 2023.

Close

The IRS announced a delay in reporting thresholds for third-party settlement organizations (TSPOs). As a result of this delay, third-party settlement organizations will not be required to report tax year 2022 transactions on a Form 1099-K to the IRS or the payee for the lower, $600 threshold amount enacted as part of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 ( P.L. 117-2).

Background

Code Sec. 6050W requires payment settlement entities to file an information return for each calendar year for payments made in settlement of certain reportable payment transactions. The annual information return must set forth the (1) name, address, and taxpayer identification number (TIN) of the participating payee to whom payments were made; and (2) gross amount of the reportable payment transactions with respect to that payee. The returns must be furnished to the participating payees on or before January 31 of the year following the calendar year for which the return was made. Further, the returns must be filed with the IRS on or before February 28 (March 31 if filing electronically) of the year following the calendar year for which the return was made.

Transition Period

A TPSO will not be required to report payments in settlement of third party network transactions with respect to a participating payee unless the gross amount of aggregate payments to be reported exceeds $20,000 and the number of such transactions with that participating payee exceeds 200. This condition applies to calendar years beginning before January 1, 2023. The Service will not assert penalties under Code Sec. 6721 or 6722 for TPSOs failing to file or failing to furnish Forms 1099-K unless the gross amount of aggregate payments to be reported exceeds $20,000 and the number of transactions exceeds 200.

For returns for calendar years beginning after December 31, 2022, a TPSO would be required to report payments in settlement of third party network transactions with any participating payee that exceed a minimum threshold of $600 in aggregate payments, regardless of the number of such transactions. The delay does not affect requirements of Code Sec. 6050W that were not modified by the American Rescue Plan Act. Taxpayers that have performed backup withholding under Code Sec. 3406(a) during calendar year 2022 must file a Form 1099-K, Payment Card and Third-Party Network Transactions, with the IRS and furnish a copy to the payee if total payments to and withholding from the payee exceeded $600 for the calendar year.

Close

The IRS has notified taxpayers of the applicable reference standard required to be used to determine the amount of the energy efficient commercial building (EECB) property deduction allowed under Code Sec. 179D as amended by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) ( P.L. 117-169).

The IRS has notified taxpayers of the applicable reference standard required to be used to determine the amount of the energy efficient commercial building (EECB) property deduction allowed under Code Sec. 179D as amended by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) ( P.L. 117-169). Further, the IRS has announced the existing reference standard, affirmed a new reference standard and clarified when each of the two reference standards will apply to taxpayers. The effective date of this announcement is January 1, 2023.

The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) and the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America Reference Standard 90.1-2019 has been affirmed as the applicable Reference Standard 90.1 for purposes of calculating the annual energy and power consumption and costs with respect to the interior lighting systems, heating, cooling, ventilation, and hot water systems of the reference building as follows:

For property for which construction begins after December 31, 2022, ASHRAE 90.1-2019 will be the applicable standard for property that is placed in service after December 31, 2026.
Taxpayers who already began or will begin construction by December 31, 2022, or who already placed property in service or will place property in service by December 31, 2026, are not subject to the updated Reference Standard 90.1-2019. For such property, the applicable Reference Standard 90.1 is Reference Standard 90.1-2007.
Taxpayers who begin construction before January 1, 2023 may apply Reference Standard 90.1-2007 regardless of when the building is placed in service.

Close

The Treasury Department and the IRS have provided guidance announcing that they intend to issue proposed regulations to address the application of the new one-percent corporate stock repurchase excise tax under Code Sec. 4501, which was added by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 ( P.L. 117-169).

Excise Tax on Stock Repurchases

Beginning in 2023, a publicly traded U.S. corporation is subject to a one-percent excise tax on the value of its stock that the corporation repurchases during the tax year, effective for stock repurchases made after December 31, 2022. Repurchases include stock redemptions, as well as economically similar transactions as determined by the Treasury Secretary.

The excise tax does not apply if:

the total value of the stock repurchased during the tax year does not exceed $1 million;
the repurchased stock (or its value) is contributed to an employee pension plan, employee stock ownership plan (ESOP), or similar plan;
the repurchase is by a regulated investment company (RIC) or a real estate investment trust (REIT);
the repurchase is part of a reorganization in which no gain or loss is recognized;
the repurchase is treated as a dividend; or
the repurchase is by a dealer in securities in the ordinary course of business.

Interim Guidance

The interim guidance is intended to clarify excise tax calculation, and the application of Code Sec. 4501 to certain transactions and other events occurring before the proposed regulations are issued.

Among other things, the interim guidance addresses the $1 million de minimis exception; the stock repurchase excise tax base; redemptions and economically similar transactions; acquisitions by specified affiliates, applicable specified affiliates, or covered surrogate foreign corporations; timing and fair market value of repurchased stock; statutory exceptions; and a netting rule. The guidance also includes illustrative examples.

Reporting

The proposed regulations are anticipated to provide that the stock repurchase excise tax must be reported on IRS Form 720, Quarterly Federal Excise Tax Return. To facilitate the tax computation, the IRS also intends to issue an additional form that taxpayers will be required to attach to Form 720.

Although Form 720 is filed quarterly, the Treasury and IRS expect the proposed regulations to provide that the stock repurchase tax will be reported once per tax year, on the Form 720 that is due for the first full quarter after the close of the taxpayer’s tax year.

Applicability Dates

The proposed regulations are anticipated to provide that rules consistent with those in the guidance will generally apply to repurchases of stock of a covered corporation made after December 31, 2022, and to issuances of stock made during a tax year ending after December 31, 2022. Rules consistent with those in the guidance on purchases funded by applicable specified affiliates will apply to repurchases and acquisitions of stock made after December 31, 2022, that are funded on or after the date the guidance is released to the public.

Until the proposed regulations are issued, taxpayers can rely on the rules in the guidance.

Request for Comments

Interested parties can submit written comments on the rules by or before 60 days after the date the guidance is published in the Internal Revenue Bulletin. Comments may be submitted by the Federal E-rulemaking Portal ( https://www.regulations.gov), or by mail to Internal Revenue Service, CC:PA:LPD:PR ( Notice 2023-2), Room 5203, P.O. Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, D.C., 20044. Refer to Notice 2023-2.

Close

With the transition of leadership from Democrats to Republicans in the House of Representatives comes new rules that legislators must adhere to, and they could have implications on tax policy.

The rules, which were adopted January 9, 2023, almost exclusively along party lines (only one Republican voted against and no Democrats voted in favor), contain two key provisions that could impact tax policy in at least the next two years. First is the need for a supermajority of lawmakers to vote in favor of a tax rate increase and the second is a replacement of the "pay as you go" rule {any increase in spending needs a mechanism to fund the increase) to a "cut as you go" rule, which means any increase in spending in one area must be offset by a cut of funding in another area.

A summary of the rules states that it "restores a requirement for a three-fifths supermajority vote on tax rate increases." This is likely to have little impact as there likely will not be many, if any, proposals to increase taxes coming out of the GOP-led House, especially considering many Republicans signed a pledge to oppose increase taxes.

"While it is unsurprising that Republicans approved this rule, it undermines the stated goal of lowering the debt," Joe Hughes, federal policy analyst at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, stated in a blog on the rules. He added that "there is a clear contradiction in stating that government should take on less debt while putting tight restraints on the government’s ability to pay for things."

The second provision, cut as you go, requires that increases in mandatory spending programs, including programs such as Social Security, Medicare, veterans’ benefits and unemployment compensation, be offset by cuts to other mandatory spending programs.

"This means that the House cannot even pass increases to these programs that are fully paid for with new revenue, unless they also cut some other program in this category," Hughes notes.

This could make passage of enhancements to popular tax provisions more problematic. For example, the cut as you go rule "makes it harder to enhance proven and effective policies like the Child Tax Credit (CTC) or Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) because the refundable portions of the credits—the amount that can exceed the income tax a family would otherwise owe—are counted as mandatory spending under the budget scoring rules used by Congress," Hughes writes, noting that any improvements would require cuts to another essential program like Social Security or Medicare.

"Advocates and lawmakers hoping to restore the 2021 expansion, or otherwise improve the CTC or EITC, will now face an even tougher road ahead" due to the cut as you go rule, he states.

Close

Despite a significant number of challenges faced by taxpayers in 2022, National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins has reason to be more optimistic for 2023.

"We have begun to see the light at the end of the tunnel," Collins wrote in the 2022 annual NTA report to Congress, released on January 11, 2023. "I’m just not sure how much further we have to travel before we see sunlight."

Despite a significant number of challenges faced by taxpayers in 2022, National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins has reason to be more optimistic for 2023.

"We have begun to see the light at the end of the tunnel," Collins wrote in the 2022 annual NTA report to Congress, released on January 11, 2023. "I’m just not sure how much further we have to travel before we see sunlight."

She highlighted three key areas that are providing a foundation for the optimistic outlook for this year:

The IRS has largely worked through its backlog of unprocessed returns, though there still remains a high volume of suspended returns and correspondence;
Congress has provided funding to increase customer service staffing; and
The agency has already added 4,000 new customer service and is seeking to add 700 additional employees to provide in-person help at its Taxpayer Assistance Centers.

Collins did caution that while she is optimistic for the future, the near term will still be faced with challenges. In particular, she noted that while new staff are being trained, some of the issues that have been plaguing the IRS will continue.

"As new employees are added, they must be trained." Collins noted. "For most jobs, IRS does not maintain a separate cadre of instructors. Instead, experienced employees must be pulled off their regular caseloads to provide the initial training and act as on-the-job instructors. In the short run, that may mean that fewer employees are assisting taxpayers, particularly experienced employees who are likely to be the most effective trainers."

2022 Challenges

Taking into consideration the time needed to train new employees, some of the challenges from 2022 that were highlighted in the report could still be an issue early into 2023.

That could mean ongoing processing and refund delays. The COVID-19 pandemic created a significant backlog of unprocessed returns and while the IRS has made strides to reducing that backlog, as of December 23, 2022, the agency reported it still has a backlogged inventory of about 400,000 individual tax returns and about 1 million business tax returns. It could also mean ongoing delays in processing taxpayer correspondence and other cases in the Accounts Management function.

Another issue that could linger as more employees are being trained is getting a live person on the telephone. NTA reported that about one in eight calls from taxpayers to the agency made it through to a live person, with hold times for taxpayers averaged 29 minutes.

Tax professionals were able to get through to a live person about ever one in six calls to the Practitioner Priority Service, with about 25 minutes of hold time on average.

"Tax professionals are key to a successful tax administration," Collins wrote. "The challenges of the past three filing seasons have pushed tax professionals to their limits, raising client doubts in their abilities and created a loss of trust in the system."

Recommendations

The report makes a number of recommendations both to the IRS and legislative recommendations to strengthen taxpayer rights and improve tax administration.

To the IRS, Collins recommends a couple of employee-related items – hiring and training more human resource employees to manage the hiring of all agency employees and ensuring all IRS employees are well-trained to do their jobs.

On the IT front, she also recommended improvements to online account accessibility and functionality to make them comparable to private financial institutions’ online accounts, as well as temporarily expand the uses of the documentation upload tool or similar technology. Also, there was a call to enable all taxpayers to e-file their tax returns.

Among the legislative recommendations are amending the “lookback period” to allow tax refunds for certain taxpayers who took advantage of the postponed filing deadlines due to COVID-19; establish minimum standards for paid tax preparers; expand the U.S. Tax Court’s jurisdiction to adjudicate refund cases and assessable penalties; modify the requirement that written receipts acknowledge charitable contributions must predate the filing of a tax return; and make the Earned Income Tax Credit structure simpler.

Close

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.

Close

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.

Close

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?

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.

Close

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.

Close

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.

Close