Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Daniel Werfel is looking to build on the successes the agency has experienced with the first year of supplemental funding provided to the agency by the Inflation Reduction Act.

Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Daniel Werfel is looking to build on the successes the agency has experienced with the first year of supplemental funding provided to the agency by the Inflation Reduction Act.

"I look at yeartwo through the lens of what do we need to do with the next filing season to build on the successes of the previous filing season," Werfel said during an August 15 teleconference with press as he highlighted a couple of key objectives he has for the second year of supplemental funding.

"First of all, we had a really strong filing season," he said. "It could be stronger. We want to achieve the highest level of service we can achieve."

Among the improvements he wants to see are a further reduction in wait times on calls to the IRS; expanding the number of self-service options that taxpayers can engage in when they call so they don’t have to wait to be connected to an agency representatives; and getting more people to sign up for an online account with the agency, as well as improving the online account functionality.

"The idea would be from a service standpoint, the filing features should feel very different than the previous year," he said.

Werfel also wants to see more expansion in the walk-in service centers, including hiring more workers to allow for more Saturday hours to help people who might not be able to get there during the week due to work, as well as utilizing more pop-up walk-in centers to help reach people in more remote areas of the United States.

On the enforcement side, Werfel wants to see the "anemic" audit rates of high-wealth individuals, large corporations and complex partnerships continue to rise.

"We started to see real meaningful results there," he noted. "I want to be able to report to the American people that we’re putting the Inflation Reduction Act to work to create and drive a more equitable tax system that’s returning money to the government’s bottom line."

Werfel also said the IRS will continue with reporting the "dirty dozen" tax scams and will continue to be looking at ways to help taxpayers avoid these scams as well as helping the victims of those scams. He highlighted the recent action of ending nearly all unannounced visits by IRS representatives to homes and businesses as a way that taxpayers are being protected.

"My hope is that in each successive year, we’re putting tools out there that taxpayers are leveraging and saying, ‘this is helpful,’ and are appreciative of the fact that the IRS is functioning better than it did in previous years," Werfel said.

Recapping The First Year

Much of the press call focused on highlighting the successes of the first year, with Werfel highlighting that the agency provided better service, including providing assistance to more than 7 million taxpayers over the phone, an increase of 3 million over the previous tax filing season and increased face-to-face help to more than 500,000 people at the taxpayer assistance centers, a 30 percent increase. Werfel also mentioned the use of call-back technology so taxpayers don’t have to wait on the phone on hold and can receive a call-back without losing their place in the queue to talk to an agency representative.

He reiterated gains in enforcement as well as improvements on the technology side such as highlighting the recent announcement of more forms being able to be filed electronically and improvements to document scanning of tax forms.

Another aspect of the Inflation Reduction Act that was highlighted during the law’s one year anniversary was by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, who highlighted the green energy tax provisions at a recent speech in Las Vegas.

She noted a variety of ways the IRA is helping to spur investment in clean energy, including in buildings and in clean vehicles and is helping the nation meet international climate standards.

"The IRA is helping re-shape some of the production that is critical to our clean economy," Yellen said, according to prepared remarks that were published on the Treasury Department website.

She also highlighted that earlier this summer, "Treasury also released proposed guidance that would make it easier for these tax credits to reach a broad range of institutions. We are implementing innovative tools that will enable states, cities, towns, and tax-exempt organizations – like schools and hospitals – to directly access these credits."

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is seeing a "concerning" increase in state and federal payroll tax evasion and workers’ compensation fraud in the U.S. residential and commercial real estate construction industries.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is seeing a "concerning" increase in state and federal payroll tax evasion and workers’ compensation fraud in the U.S. residential and commercial real estate construction industries.

"FinCEN is committed to combating fraud by shedding light on how illicit actors within the construction industry are using shell corporations and other tactics to commit workers’ compensation fraud and avoid payroll taxes," FinCEN Acting Director Himamauli Das said in a statement.

The agency in a FinCEN Notice issued August 15, 2023, highlighted how companies evade payroll taxes. Step one has construction contractors writing checks payable to the shell corporation, which creates the façade that the shell company is performing construction projects. Step two sees the shell company operator deposit cash the checks at a check cashing facility or deposit them into a shell company bank account. Step three sees the shell company return the cash to the construction contractor, minus a fee, for renting the workers’ compensation insurance policy and conducting payroll-related transactions. The final step is the construction contractors using the cash to pay the workers without withholding appropriate payroll-related taxes or paying any workers’ compensation premiums.

The notice also draws attention "a range of red flags to assist financial institutions in detecting, preventing, and reporting suspicions transactions associated with shell companies perpetrating payrolltax evasion and workers’ compensation fraud in the construction industry." Among the 11 red flags highlighted are:

• The customer is a new (i.e., less than two years old) small construction company specializing in one type of construction trade (e.g., framing, drywall, stucco, masonry, etc.) with minimal online presence and has indicators of being a shell company;
• Beneficial owners of the shell company have no known prior involvement with, or in, the construction industry, and the individual opening the account provides a non-U.S. passport as a form of identification;
• A customer receives weekly deposits in their account that exceed normal account activity from several construction contractors involved in multiple construction trades;
• Large volumes of checks for under $1,000 are drawn on the company’s bank account and made payable to separate individuals (i.e., the workers) which are subsequently negotiated for cash by the payee, and
• The company’s bank account has minimal to no tax- or payroll-related payments to the Internal Revenue Service, state and local tax authorities, or a third-party payroll company despite a large volume of deposits from client.

The statement did not provide any statistical data that reflect the rise in payroll tax evasion or workers’ compensation fraud, but said that every year, "state and federal tax authorities lose hundreds of millions of dollars to these schemes, which are perpetrated by illicit actors primarily through banks and check cashers."

The notice also reminds financial institutions’ obligations to file a suspicious activity report if a transaction could be conducted with the intent for fraud or tax evasion, and it provides instructions on how to file the SAR.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md.—National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins is hoping that collections notices from the Internal Revenue Service will resume in the coming months.

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md.—National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins is hoping that collections notices from the Internal Revenue Service will resume in the coming months.

The agency suspended automated collections notices in response to the backlog of unprocessed mail correspondence that resulted from the shutdowns due to the COVID-19 pandemic and have yet to resume sending notices out.

Collis said that the agency is developing a plan on how those collections notices will resume and she said it is an important piece of information that taxpayers with balances due need.

Speaking here August 9, 2023, at the IRS Nationwide Tax Forum event, Collins expressed concern that people are saying "hey, the IRS probably forgot about me because it’s been 18 months. And I am concerned that people do not realize that interest and the failure to pay [penalty] is kicking in."

And while she urged IRS to resume collections notices, she also cautioned that it needs to be done in a staggered fashion so that the agency, as well as tax professionals are not simultaneously inundated with calls about these notices all at once, potentially creating another backlog as the agency continues to clear backlog pandemic inventories.

"So what they’re trying to do is stagger them," Collins said. "Have then come out in different timeframes so that all of them don’t hit at the same time, … because if they turn the spigot on, how many phone calls are they going to get that next day? They won’t be able to handle that volume."

Collins said the agency is looking at how to prioritize which notices should be going out first as well as possibly changing the notices to make them more informative for taxpayers.

"So, stay tuned on that," he told attendees. "I don’t think it’ll be tomorrow, but I’m hoping that it’ll be months from now, not two years from now that we turn it back on."

Another area Collins expressed concerns about is the changing of the 1099-K threshold to $600. She said that her office has been in touch with "the Venmos of the world" to try to get them to put systems in place that will help their customers differentiate between personal transactions and business transactions to help ensure that 1099-Ks that will be issued because of the new threshold will accurate.

"I don’t know what’s going to happen between now and January, but the IRS, and our office as well, has been trying to work on this so it’s not as big a problem," she said. "But I am a little concerned because there’s going to be a lot of 1099 cases, potentially."

Collins also offered a "spoiler alert" that the online accounts for tax professionals "will become useful." She suggested it will not be the fully functioning portal she has been calling for, but there will be more functions added to it to make it a useful tool for tax practitioners.

"It will no longer be just a glorified Power of Attorney form, or the ability to file one,” she said. “It will actually have some usefulness. … Stay tuned."

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

Taxpayers, by the 2024 filing season, will be able to digitally submit all correspondence, non-tax forms, and notice responses electronically to the Internal Revenue Service, the agency announced.

Additionally,"by Filing Season 2025, the IRS is committing to digitally process 100 percent of tax and information returns that are submitted by paper, as well as half of all paper correspondence, non-tax forms, and notice responses,"Department of the Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said August 2, 2023. "It will also digitalize historical documents that are currently in storage at the IRS."

Taxpayers, by the 2024 filing season, will be able to digitally submit all correspondence, non-tax forms, and notice responses electronically to the Internal Revenue Service, the agency announced.

Additionally,"by Filing Season 2025, the IRS is committing to digitally process 100 percent of tax and information returns that are submitted by paper, as well as half of all paper correspondence, non-tax forms, and notice responses,"Department of the Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said August 2, 2023. "It will also digitalize historical documents that are currently in storage at the IRS."

Taxpayers will still have the option of mailing in paper-based correspondence.

Yellen cited the supplemental funding provided by the Inflation Reduction Act to the IRS for giving the agency the ability to transition from "a paper-based agency" to a "digital-first agency."

"This ‘PaperlessProcessing’ initiative is the key that unlocks other customer service improvements," Yellen said. "It will enable taxpayers to see their documents, securely access their data, and save time and money. And it will allow other parts of the IRS to rely on these digital copies to provide faster refunds, reduce errors in tax processing, and delivery a more seamless and responsive customer service experience."

According to a fact sheet issued by the IRS, the agency estimates that "more than 94 percent of individual taxpayers will no longer ever need to send mail to the IRS," and will enable up to 152 million paper documents to be submitted digitally per year.

Additionally, taxpayers will be able to e-file 20 additional tax forms, enabling up to 4 million additional tax forms to be filed digitally each year, including amendments to Forms 940, 941, 941SSPR.

"At least 20 of the most used non-tax forms will be available in digital, mobile-friendly formats that make them easy for taxpayers to complete and submit," the fact sheet continues. "These forms will include a Request for Taxpayer Advocate Service Assistance, making it easier for taxpayers to get the help they need."

The fact sheet also outlines some more targets for the 2025 filing season, including:

• making an additional 150 of the most used non-tax forms available in digital, mobile-friendly formats;
• digitally processing all paper-filed tax and information returns;
• processing at least half of paper-submitted correspondence, with all paper documents – correspondence, non-tax forms, and notice responses – to be processed digitally by Filing Season 2026; and
• digitizing up to 1 billion historical documents.

"When combined with an improved data platform, digitization and data extraction will enable data scientists to implement advanced analytics and pattern recognition methods to pursue cases that can help address the tax [gap], including wealthy individuals and large corporations using complex structures to evade taxes they owe," the fact sheet states.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

An IRS Notice provides a transition rule that generally allows taxpayers to claim the Code Sec. 25C energy efficient home improvement credit for home energy audits conducted in 2023 even if the auditor is not certified. The Notice also describes regulations the IRS intends to propose for qualified home energy audits.

An IRS Notice provides a transition rule that generally allows taxpayers to claim the Code Sec. 25C energy efficient home improvement credit for home energy audits conducted in 2023 even if the auditor is not certified. The Notice also describes regulations the IRS intends to propose for qualified home energy audits.

Taxpayers may rely on the Notice until the proposed regs are issued. The proposed regs are expected to apply to tax years ending after December 31, 2022 .

Energy Efficient Home Improvement Credit for Home Energy Audits

The energy efficient home improvement credit is generally equal to 30 percent of amounts paid or incurred for qualified energy efficiency improvements, residential energy property expenditures, and home energy audits placed in service after 2022. The credit is generally limited to $1,200 per year, but different annual limits apply to particular types of expenses.

The annual credit for home energy audits is limited to $150 per year. For example, if a taxpayer pays $900 for a home energy audit, the credit is limited to $150 rather than 30 percent of the expense ($300).

A qualified home energy audit must:

Transition Rule for 2023

A transition rule applies to home energy audits conducted on or before December 31, 2023, during a tax year ending after December 31, 2022. An audit during this transition period may qualify for the credit even if it is not conducted by a certified home energy auditor. However, an audit conducted after December 31, 2023, will not qualify for the credit unless the auditor is certified.

Proposed Regs: Certified Home Energy Auditor

The proposed regs will define a "qualified home energy audit" as an inspection conducted by or under the supervision of a qualified home energy auditor. The audit must be consistent with the Jobs Task Analysis led by the Department of Energy (DOE) and validated by the industry.

A qualified home energy auditor will have to be certified by a Qualified Certification Program at the time of the audit. DOE maintains a list of qualified certified programs on its website at https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/25c-energy-efficient-home-improvement-credit. These are the only programs that may certify a qualified home energy auditor.

Proposed Regs: Written Report

Under the proposed regs, a qualified home energy audit must include a written report prepared and signed by the qualified home energy auditor. The report must include:

Proposed Regs: Substantiation

Finally, the proposed regs will require the taxpayer to substantiate the home energy audit expenditure by maintaining the certified home energy auditor’s signed written report as a tax record. The taxpayer must also comply with the instructions for Form 5695, Residential Energy Credits, or any successor form.

The Internal Revenue Service will end, except in very limited circumstances, the practice of making unannounced visits to taxpayers’ homes and businesses."This change is effective immediately,"IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel said during a July 24, 2023, teleconference with reporters. Werfel said the change is being made in reaction to an increase in scam activity as well as for IRS employee safety."With a growth in scam artists, taxpayers are increasingly uncertain who was knocking on their doors," Werfel said. "For IRS employees, there were fears about their own personal safety on these visits. I also learned that these concerns were shared by our partners as the National Treasury Employees Union."

The Internal Revenue Service will end, except in very limited circumstances, the practice of making unannounced visits to taxpayers’ homes and businesses."This change is effective immediately,"IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel said during a July 24, 2023, teleconference with reporters. Werfel said the change is being made in reaction to an increase in scam activity as well as for IRS employee safety."With a growth in scam artists, taxpayers are increasingly uncertain who was knocking on their doors," Werfel said. "For IRS employees, there were fears about their own personal safety on these visits. I also learned that these concerns were shared by our partners as the National Treasury Employees Union."

Unannounced visits will be replaced with scheduled visits. If the IRS needs to meet with a taxpayer, that taxpayer will receive an appointment letter, known as a 725-B letter, to schedule a time for a revenue officer to meet with the taxpayer."This will help taxpayers feel more prepared when it is time to meet," Werfel said."“Taxpayers whose cases are assigned to a revenue officer will now be able to schedule face-to-face meetings at a set place and time. They will have the necessary information and documents in hand to reach a resolution of their cases more quickly."

In addressing what the IRS will do if a taxpayer is not reachable by mail or is not responding to a meeting scheduling letter, Werfel stated that there are other actions that the agency can take to help drive compliance, such as imposing a lien or a levy, which can be done remotely. He also stressed that in past cases where revenue officers made unannounced visits, they were in situations where the revenue officer was attempting to collect a sizable debt with a median in these cases of $110,000."These homevisits were not occurring for small tax debt," Werfel said. "These are for big tax debts." Werfel outlined what he described as "rare instances" when unannounced visits will continue to occur, including service of a summons and subpoena as well as in the conduct of sensitive enforcement activities such as the seizure of assets."These activities are just a drop in the bucket compared to the number of visits that have taken place in the past," Werfel said, noting that there were a few hundred each year compared to the tens of thousands of other visits that occurred each year under the decades-old policy.

Werfel said that this policy will not impact activities conducted by the Criminal Investigations division, which operates under its own rules and protocols."Today’s decision is part of a broader plan that will help us work smarter and be more efficient," he said, noting this action is part of the larger IRS transformation effort taking place with the help of the supplemental funding provided by the Inflation Reduction Act.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

The IRS has released a revenue ruling providing additional guidance concerning receipt of cryptocurrency. If a cash-method taxpayer stakes cryptocurrency native to a proof-of-stake blockchain and receives additional units of cryptocurrency as rewards when validation occurs, the fair market value of the validation rewards received is included in the taxpayer's gross income in the tax year in which the taxpayer gains dominion and control over the validation rewards. The same is true if a taxpayer stakes cryptocurrency native to a proof-of-stake blockchain through a cryptocurrency exchange and receives additional units of cryptocurrency as rewards as a result of the validation

The IRS has released a revenue ruling providing additional guidance concerning receipt of cryptocurrency. If a cash-method taxpayer stakes cryptocurrency native to a proof-of-stake blockchain and receives additional units of cryptocurrency as rewards when validation occurs, the fair market value of the validation rewards received is included in the taxpayer's gross income in the tax year in which the taxpayer gains dominion and control over the validation rewards. The same is true if a taxpayer stakes cryptocurrency native to a proof-of-stake blockchain through a cryptocurrency exchange and receives additional units of cryptocurrency as rewards as a result of the validation

Scenario in the Ruling

The revenue ruling presents a scenario in which transactions in a cryptocurrency that is convertible virtual currency are validated by a proof-of-stake consensus mechanism. A cash-method taxpayer validates a new block of transactions on the cryptocurrency blockchain, receiving two units of the cryptocurrency as validation rewards. Pursuant to the cryptocurrency protocol, during a brief period ending on Date 2, the taxpayer lacks the ability to sell, exchange, or otherwise dispose of any interest in the two units of cryptocurrency in any manner. On the following day (Date 3), the taxpayer has the ability to sell, exchange, or otherwise dispose of the two cryptocurrency units.

Analysis and Holding

Cryptocurrency that is convertible virtual currency is treated as property for Federal income tax purposes and general tax principles applicable to property transactions apply to transactions involving cryptocurrency. For example, a taxpayer who receives cryptocurrency as a payment for goods or services or who mines cryptocurrency must include the fair market value of the cryptocurrency in the taxpayer's gross income in the tax year the taxpayer obtains dominion and control of the cryptocurrency.

In the scenario, two units of cryptocurrency represent the taxpayer's reward for staking units and validating transactions on the blockchain. On Date 3, the taxpayer has an accession to wealth as the taxpayer gains dominion and control through the taxpayer's ability, as of this date, to sell, exchange, or otherwise dispose of the two units of cryptocurrency received as validation rewards. Accordingly, the fair market value of the two units of cryptocurrency is included in taxpayer's gross income for the tax year that includes Date 3.

Problems with the Internal Revenue Service’s handling of the Employee Retention Tax Credit took center stage before a House committee hearing, with tax professionals airing issues they have experienced and ongoing concerns they have.

Problems with the Internal Revenue Service’s handling of the Employee Retention Tax Credit took center stage before a House committee hearing, with tax professionals airing issues they have experienced and ongoing concerns they have.

Testifying at a July 28, 2023, hearing of the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Oversight, Larry Gray, partner at AGC CPA, said that as the pandemic started and he started to make educational YouTube videos to help other practitioners navigate the tax law, he found issues with the ERTC, including the growing industry of ERTC mills and the potential for fraud that comes with them.

He noted that many of these mills are simply taking their fee for providing essentially clerical assistance. However, Gray noted that in these ERTC mills, the agreements stated that"they don’t do audit," but they might be able to help find someone of a business does get audited because of the ERTC filing. And unfortunately, as was discussed throughout the hearing, people are falling for these ERTC mills and putting their businesses at risk.

And Gray put the problems that have arisen squarely on the IRS.

"We are getting no guidance," Gray said. "There should have been an ERTC implementation team to coordinate from the top down. We need education. We need guidance."

To that end, the IRS did issue a legal advice memorandum on July 20, 2023, that shows the application of the statutory requirements of the ERTC across five different scenarios.

Gray also took a subtle dig at Congress, acknowledging in his testimony that part of the issues could be related to an IRS that was "understaffed, and they were underfunded" when the COVID-19 pandemic began three years ago.

Roger Harris, President of accounting and tax firm Padgett Advisors, also highlighted issues, starting with the first which was "how we submitted claims to the IRS," which was exclusively on paper at a time when no one was present to handle the processing of paper correspondence because of the pandemic, creating a significant backlog.

"And it’s still ongoing," he continued, causing a "delay in getting the money out to the people who need it."

And with all the moving parts related to potential people who need to amend returns depending on how the business is structured, a mistake in any of these forms could be generating penalties and interest, a problem that is magnified when combined with Gray’s observation of the lack of available guidance to help taxpayers who are trying to do the right thing and collect money they are legitimately owed.

Ahead of the subcommittee hearing, the IRS announced in a July 26, 2023, statement that it received more than 2.5 million claims since the ERTC program began and it has "made substantial progress on these claims this year, with 99 percent of claims approximately three-months old as of mid-July."

However, throughout the hearing, witnesses and committee members questioned the integrity of that figure, noting that IRS has changed numbers on its website as to how many claims remain in the backlog. There also were question on how the figure itself is determined.

Harris also pointed out the problems the ERTC mills are causing with his business and for other tax professionals looking to do the right thing by their clients.

"We have had clients that we have dealt with for many years who have trusted our advice," Harris testified. "But all of a sudden when someone is telling them, ‘Your advisor doesn’t know what they are doing, and if you listen to me, I can give you a half million dollars,’ it’s very hard for as the people who are working with these small businesses to win that argument, in many instances, just because of the sheer amount of money that is being dangled in front of them."

Harris continued: "And as we have heard, the IRS has no choice but to begin enforcement actions to try and correct this."

He said he is asking the IRS "for some help [with] a real-world solution to give us the ability to try to bring these people back into compliance. … [It] is going to take a concerted effort by our industry, the tax practitioner community, to help solve this problem," especially when people may have already spent the money because they were unaware that the weren’t entitled to under the ERTC program and fell for the fraud being perpetrated by the ERTC mills. And that does not even account for the fees that were paid to the ERTC mills that will never be recovered.

He did note that IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel, at last week’s IRS-sponsored tax forum in Atlanta did ask tax practitioners what they needed in regard to the ERTC.

In its July 26 statement, the IRS offered a series of recommendations on how to avoid ERTC scams. At the tax forum, Werfel said that the "amount of misleading marketing around this credit is staggering, and it is creating an array of problems for taxprofessionals and the IRS while adding risk for businesses improperly claiming the credit. A terrible scenario is unfolding that hurts everyone involved – except the promoters" of the misleading ERTC marketing.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

The IRS announced substantial progress in the ongoing effort related to the dubious Employee Retention Credit (ERC) claims. The IRS successfully cleared the backlog of valid ERCs. The period of eligibility for the credit for affected businesses is very limited, covering only between March 13, 2020, and December. 31, 2021. Under the current law, businesses can typically continue to file claims for the credit until April 15, 2025.

The IRS announced substantial progress in the ongoing effort related to the dubious Employee Retention Credit (ERC) claims. The IRS successfully cleared the backlog of valid ERCs. The period of eligibility for the credit for affected businesses is very limited, covering only between March 13, 2020, and December. 31, 2021. Under the current law, businesses can typically continue to file claims for the credit until April 15, 2025.

"The further we get from the pandemic, we believe the percentage of legitimate claims coming in is declining," IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel told attendees at the IRS Nationwide Tax Forum in Atlanta. "Instead, we continue to see more and more questionable claims coming in following the onslaught of misleading marketing from promoters pushing businesses to apply. To address this, the IRS continues to intensify our compliance work in this area," he added.

Taxpayers should be wary of certain signs including (1) unsolicited calls or advertisements mentioning an easy application process; (2) statements that the promoter or company can determine ERC eligibility within minutes; and (3) large upfront fees to claim the credit. Eligible employers who need help claiming the credit should work with a trusted tax professional. Finally, taxpayers can report ERC abuse by submitting Form 14242, Report Suspected Abusive Tax Promotions or Preparers and any supporting materials to the IRS Lead Development Center in the Office of Promoter Investigations.

The Internal Revenue Service is looking for ways get its post-filing alternative dispute resolution programs greater exposure and use.

The agency recently issued a public call for comment on a variety of topics related to the use of ADR, including learning why taxpayers choose not to use ADR; issues that keep taxpayers from using ADR that should be changed to allow for inclusion; how best to improve ADR; how best to education about ADR; feedback on when ADR proved particularly useful; and ideas on how to achieve tax certainty or resolution sooner beyond existing ADR programs, including ideas for new programs.

The Internal Revenue Service is looking for ways get its post-filing alternative dispute resolution programs greater exposure and use.

The agency recently issued a public call for comment on a variety of topics related to the use of ADR, including learning why taxpayers choose not to use ADR; issues that keep taxpayers from using ADR that should be changed to allow for inclusion; how best to improve ADR; how best to education about ADR; feedback on when ADR proved particularly useful; and ideas on how to achieve tax certainty or resolution sooner beyond existing ADR programs, including ideas for new programs.

A list of specific issues the IRS has outlined can be found here, though comments submitted about the ADR should not necessarily be limited to the subject areas listed.

Indu Subbiah, supervisory appeals officer and acting senior advisor in the IRS Independent Office of Appeal, explained the genesis of this request for comment.

"We had a sense the ADR [programs] weren’t being used quite as robustly as we would have liked,” she said in an interview with Federal Tax Daily, adding that a recently issued U.S. Government Accountability Office report “really brought that to our attention."

According to the report, “IRS Could Better Manage Alternative Dispute Resolution Programs To Maximize Benefits,"IRS Could Better Manage Alternative Dispute Resolution Programs To Maximize Benefits," GAO found that while the agency offers six alternative dispute resolution programs,"IRS used ADR programs to resolve disputes in less than half of one percent of all cases reviews by its Independent Office of Appeals"from fiscal year 2013 to 2022. In this time period, the number of cases closed using ADR annually peaked in 2014 (429 cases closed) and then steadily declined during the review period, reaching a low point of 119 cases closed in 2022.

"Beyond these data on ADR usage, IRS does not have the data necessary to manage the ADR programs, such as data on taxpayer requests to use ADR; IRS’ acceptance or rejection of those requests; and the results from using ADR, including rate of resolution, time, and costs," the GAO report states. "Although IRS does not know definitively why ADR usage has declined, potential reasons include taxpayers do not perceive the benefits of using ADR, according to IRS officials"

The report continues: "IRS is missing opportunities to use several management practices for its ADR programs to help increase taxpayers’ willingness to use ADR as well as maximize the programs’ benefits. IRS does not have clear and measurable objectives for its ADR programs that contribute to achieving IRS’s strategic goals and objectives, such as its ability to resolve disputes over specific tax issues and reduce the investment of time and money to do so. IRS does not analyze data to assess whether ADR is achieving benefits. … IRS has not regularly monitored the taxpayer experience with ADR to address problems in real-time."

With these critical observations about the ADR programs being put forth by GAO, the Independent Office of Appeals is now proactively looking at what is going on to make the ADR programs work better for taxpayers and the agency, the first step being this request for comments.

"The whole point of ADR programs is so that taxpayers and the IRS can use ADR to resolve issues, potentially at a lower cost," Subbiah said. "I think everybody would agree that when the process works, the IRS and the taxpayer can avoid costly litigation."

"The question for us is how can we is how can we even improve the ability to resolve a case with Appeals, and to me, it’s maybe can we resolve those cases sooner," Andrew Keyso, chief of the IRS Office of Independent Appeals, said during the interview.

"I think this is a good time to reconsider how we do alternative dispute resolution and mediation because of the" supplemental funding the agency received as part of the Inflation Reduction Act, Keyso said, noting that there are more resources to apply to appeals officers and mediators.

Keyso said that one of the ways the Office of Appeals measures success of ADR "based on how many people are coming in to use ADR and those numbers are fairly small. So I think we’d like to see those numbers increase."

One thing that the IRS will be looking for in the questions is the need for education as a potential way to increase the use of ADR. In fact, one of the questions the agency asked is directly focused on education.

"One of the questions we really focused on was education," Subbiah said, noting that they are looking for stakeholders to "tell us [and] to help us understand whether it is [lack of] education [on ADR and its benefits] or is it something else. I think it will be very telling and very interesting to us to really get at the heart of why it isn’t being used."

Elizabeth Askey, deputy chief of the Office of Independent Appeals, noted, anecdotally, that larger businesses and wealthier taxpayers seem to be a lot more aware of the various tools at their disposal, including ADR. However, the Office also is hearing situations where there is a reluctance on the part of compliance officers to use ADR tools.

Keyso added that while larger businesses and wealthier taxpayers might be more aware of ADR, there needs to be more education for smaller businesses and lower income taxpayers, in addition to education across the IRS itself.

"So, in those cases, it may be a matter of us getting to the root of why some compliance personnel are less inclined to go this route than others," Askey said during the interview. "It’s not just the education of taxpayers and their practitioners, but of our own compliance personnel."

Keyso stressed that this effort was broad, not only in the scope of which taxpayers and practitioners might need education about the availability and use of ADR, but also within the agency. And he remains optimistic that this effort to request commentary from the public will help that.

"We’re optimistic that the public will come in and tell us why we don’t make use of more ADR. We don’t find it productive, for instance, or we can’t get the agency to cooperate," he said. And with the additional IRA funding in hand, the agency can respond and look to see how ADR can be restructured to make it more useful for everyone to help get more issues resolved in a more timely and cost-efficient manner.

"I hope that mindset is shared across the agency," Keyso said."I think it is and is becoming more so in the effort to help resolve cases quickly." He noted there will always be cases where resolution needs a more traditional path, but when this process is complete, there will be a greater recognition where ADR can be and is used.

IRS is asking the public to submit its comments on the ADR programs by August 25, 2023, via email at ap.adr.programs@irs.gov.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins is reiterating her call for the Internal Revenue Service to stop automatically assessing penalties related to international information returns.

National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins is reiterating her call for the Internal Revenue Service to stop automatically assessing penalties related to international information returns.

In an August 22, 2023, blog post, she also called on the agency to "provide taxpayers due process by affording them the opportunity to administratively present their reasonable cause defense and request FTA [first time abatement] and consideration by the Independent Office of Appeals prior to any assessment."

The blog post noted that relief was needed because there is "a misconception that IIRpenalties affect primarily bad-faith, wealthy taxpayers who are experiencing consequences of their own making."

However, that is not the case. Collins wrote that the automatic penalty regime "disproportionately affects individuals and businesses of more moderate resources, and is by no means just a rich person’s problem. Wealthy individuals and large businesses tend to have knowledgeable and well-informed representation and as a result have fewer foot faults. Immigrants, small businesses, and low-income individuals may not be as well-informed about IIRpenalties and may not have return preparers with the same technical expertise on international penalties."

NTA noted that from 2018-2021, 71 percent of the penalties were assessed to taxpayers with incomes of $400,000 or less, with an average penalty to these people being more than $40,000.

One example of how penalties can be triggered is when an immigrant who is a U.S. citizen starts a small business and includes family members who live abroad. This arrangement could trigger the need for an IIR and if it is not filed, the taxpayer could be automatically assessed penalties, which are defined in Internal Revenue Code Sec. 6038 and 6038A. The blog goes through a number of other scenarios which would require an IIR and penalties for failure to do so.

However, when "taxpayers voluntarily correct their failure to file, this good-faith action can sometimes have the unexpected effect of causing the IRS to automatically assess the penalty,"the blog states. "If the IRS does not administratively abate the penalty, taxpayers will need to pay the penalty in full before challenging by filing suit refund in the United States District Court or the United States Court of Federal Appeals."

Collins continues to advocate for legislative changes that would allow for changes in due process that would allow for cases to be heard in court before any penalties are paid, as well as providing a more "efficient and equitable regime governing the initial imposition of IIRpenalties and the mechanisms by which they can be challenged by taxpayers while also protecting their rights."

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

Since passage of the Affordable Care Act, several key requirements for employers have been delayed, including reporting of health coverage offered to employees, known as Code Sec. 6056 reporting. As 2015 nears, and the prospects of further delay appear unlikely, employers and the IRS are preparing for the filing of these new information returns.

Since passage of the Affordable Care Act, several key requirements for employers have been delayed, including reporting of health coverage offered to employees, known as Code Sec. 6056 reporting. As 2015 nears, and the prospects of further delay appear unlikely, employers and the IRS are preparing for the filing of these new information returns.

Three related provisions

Three provisions of the Affordable Care Act are closely related: the employer mandate for applicable large employers (ALEs), the Code Sec. 36B premium assistance tax credit and Code Sec. 6056 reporting. To administer the employer mandate and the Code Sec. 36 credit, the IRS must receive information from ALEs, such as the type of health coverage offered, if any, by the ALE, the number of employees, and the cost of coverage.

Who must report?

Not all employers must report under Code Sec. 6056. The most important exception is for employers with fewer than 50 full-time employees, including full-time equivalent employees. These smaller employers are exempt—at all times—from Code Sec. 6056 reporting and the employer mandate.

For 2015, there is also a temporary exemption for some ALEs from the employer mandate only. ALEs are employers that employ on average at least 50 full-time employees, including full-time equivalents but fewer than 100 full-time employees including full-time equivalents. However, mid-size employers must file Code Sec. 6056 information returns for 2015. All other ALEs are subject to the employer mandate for 2015 as well as Code Sec. 6056.

What must be reported?

The IRS has posted draft forms for Code Sec. 6056 reporting on its website: Form 1094-C Transmittal of Employer-Provided Health Insurance Offer and Coverage Information Returns and Form 1095-C, Employer-Provided Health Insurance Offer and Coverage. Draft Instructions for these forms are expected to be released in the near future.

ALEs generally must report:

• The employer's name, address, and employer identification number;
• The calendar year for which information is being reported;
• A certification as to whether the employer offered to its full-time employees and their dependents the opportunity to enroll in minimum essential coverage under an employer-sponsored plan;
• The number, address and Social Security/taxpayer identification number of all full-time employees;
• The number of full-time employees eligible for coverage under the employer's plan; and
• The employee's share of the lowest cost monthly premium for self-only coverage providing minimum value offered to that full-time employee.

Under IRS regulations, Code Sec. 6056 reporting is optional for 2014. Reporting for 2015 is required. Information returns must be filed no later than March 1, 2016 (February 28, 2016, being a Sunday), or March 31, 2016, if filed electronically.

Simplified method

The IRS has provided ALEs with simplified methods of reporting. Employers that provide a "qualifying offer" to any of their full-time employees may be eligible as are employers that offer coverage to a certain percentage of employees. For more details about the simplified method, please contact our office.

Employers that self-insure

The Affordable Care Act also requires every health insurance issuer, sponsor of a self-insured health plan, government agency that administers government-sponsored health insurance programs, and other entities that provide minimum essential coverage to file information returns. This is known as "Code Sec. 6055 reporting." The IRS has posted draft versions of Form 1094-B, Transmittal of Health Coverage Information Returns, and Form 1095-B, Health Coverage on its website.

Employers that self-insure have a streamlined way to report for purposes of Code Sec. 6055 reporting and Code Sec. 6056 reporting. The top half of Form 1095-C includes information needed for Code Sec. 6056 reporting; the bottom half includes information needed for Code Sec. 6055 reporting.

If you have any questions about Code Sec. 6056 reporting, please contact our office.

As the 2015 filing season approaches, IRS Commissioner John Koskinen is bracing taxpayers for more reductions in customer service unless the agency receives more funding. According to Koskinen, the IRS is facing its biggest challenge in recent years. Koskinen, who spoke at the annual conference of the National Society of Accountants in August, also predicted that taxpayers will have to wait until after the November elections to learn the fate of many popular but expired tax incentives.

As the 2015 filing season approaches, IRS Commissioner John Koskinen is bracing taxpayers for more reductions in customer service unless the agency receives more funding. According to Koskinen, the IRS is facing its biggest challenge in recent years. Koskinen, who spoke at the annual conference of the National Society of Accountants in August, also predicted that taxpayers will have to wait until after the November elections to learn the fate of many popular but expired tax incentives.

Budget pressures

The IRS has experienced budgetary pressures since 2010. The Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA) imposed across-the-board spending cuts on many federal agencies, including the IRS. Some funding was restored last year. Looking ahead, the House has voted to cut the IRS's budget by $341 million for Fiscal Year (FY) 2015. The Senate has proposed to increase the IRS's budget by $240 million. Even with the proposed increase, IRS officials have said that the agency's budget would still be seven percent below funding levels for FY 2010.

The funding cuts have drawn criticism from senior IRS officials. "Funding reductions have significantly hampered the IRS's ability to carry out its mission," National Taxpayer Advocate Nina Olson told Congress. Olson warned that "underfunding of the IRS poses one of the greatest long-term risks to tax administration today."

Koskinen echoed Olson's concerns. "Congress is starving our revenue-generating operation. If voluntary compliance with the tax code drops by 1 percent, it costs the U.S. government $30 billion per year," he explained. "The IRS annual budget is only $11 billion per year.

Customer service

For many taxpayers, the most visible impact of the budget cuts has been reductions in customer service. Koskinen said that the IRS has cut 5,200 call center employees because of lack of funding. Wait times to speak with the IRS will increase, he predicted. During the 2014 filing season, the IRS's level of customer service was around 72 percent. The level of customer service for the 2015 filing season could fall to as low as 50 percent without adequate funding, Koskinen cautioned.

Koskinen acknowledged that the funding cuts have fueled efficiencies in the agency's operations. The agency has reduced hiring, offered buyouts to long-time employees, and cut travel and training costs. "We are becoming more efficient but there is a limit," he said. "Eventually the effects will show up. We are no longer going to pretend that cutting funding makes no difference."

Tax extenders

Unless extended, a host of expired tax incentives will be unavailable to taxpayers when they file their 2014 returns. These include widely-used incentives, such as the state and local sales tax deduction, the higher education tuition deduction, and transit benefits parity. Businesses also would be impacted, with failure to renew popular incentives, including the research tax credit and the Work Opportunity Tax Credit.

Legislation to extend many of these incentives will likely not be passed by Congress until after the November elections, Koskinen predicted. "Congress needs to understand that the later these are passed and the more complicated they are, the more challenging it is for taxpayers to file accurate returns on time." Koskinen added that the IRS will be challenged to reprogram its return processing systems for renewal of the tax extenders. As a result, the start of the 2015 filing season could be delayed, he said.

Identity theft

Koskinen lauded the agency's work to curb tax-related indentity theft. This initiative is a high-profile one. The IRS has worked with other federal agencies and state and local governments to discover and prosecute identity thieves. The IRS has also upgraded its return processing systems to uncover fraudulent returns and has assigned special identity protection numbers to victims of identity theft. "We rejected 5.7 million suspicious returns last year that may have been tied to identity theft," he said.

To learn more information or for updates, please contact our offices.

No. Participatory wellness programs do not require a specific outcome in order for a participant to receive a reward.

No. Participatory wellness programs do not require a specific outcome in order for a participant to receive a reward.

Background

Wellness programs have grown in popularity since passage of the Affordable Care Act but they have been around for some time. Individuals are motivated to participate in wellness programs to receive a reward, such as a discount or rebate of a premium or contribution, a waiver of all or part of cost-sharing, or an additional benefit.

The IRS issued proposed rules in 2006 and more guidance in 2013. The IRS has divided wellness programs into two categories: (1) programs that either do not require an individual to meet a standard related to a health factor to obtain a reward or that do not offer a reward at all; and (2) programs that require individuals to satisfy a standard related to a health factor to obtain a reward. The first category is commonly known as participatory wellness programs. The second category is known as health-contingent wellness programs.

Participatory wellness programs

Participatory wellness programs encompass a wide range of activities. One of the most common type of participatory wellness program is a program that reimburses all or part of the cost of a gym membership. A program that encourages individuals to complete a health risk assessment regarding current health status, without any further action with regard to the health issues identified as part of the assessment is another example of a participatory wellness program.

All of these examples have a similar feature. They do not link a reward to certain outcomes, activities or certain results. An individual may take advantage of the gym membership and rarely go. An individual may attend a health risk assessment and elect not to take action on any findings from that assessment.

Participatory wellness programs must be available to all similarly-situated individuals. Participatory wellness programs also must comply with other federal laws.

Health contingent programs

In contrast to participatory programs, health-contingent programs are linked to a certain activity or result. Some threshold or standard must be attained. These types of programs would generally run afoul of laws prohibiting health plans from treating employees differently based on the status of their health. The Affordable Care Act and other laws have created some exceptions for activity-only programs and outcome-based programs.

A gym membership can be a health-contingent program if it requires an individual to participate for a certain number of sessions or obtain a specific health outcome. Tobacco cessation programs are a common example of outcome-based wellness programs. Participants must attain a specific health goal, such as ceasing to use tobacco products. A health screening that requires participants to take a health or fitness course is another example of a health-contingent program. For example, a cholesterol awareness program may require a certain cholesterol count in order for the participant to receive a reward.

Health contingent programs must satisfy five requirements: (1) Size of award; (2) Frequency of opportunity to take advantage of the program; (3) Reasonableness of design; (4) Uniform availability and reasonable alternatives; and (5) Notice to employees. After January 1, 2014, the maximum size of a health-contingent reward is 30 percent of the total cost of coverage (50 percent for health-contingent programs designed to prevent or reduce tobacco). Of significant importance is the requirement that any reward be available to all similarly-situated individuals. If, for example, an individual cannot meet the threshold or standard to receive a reward, there must be a reasonable alternative.

In addition to the Affordable Care Act, other federal laws, as well as state laws, impact wellness programs. Please contact our office if you have any questions about wellness programs under ACA guidelines.

Life expectancies for many Americans have increased to such an extent that most taxpayers who retire at age 65 expect to live for another 20 years or more. Several years ago, a number of insurance companies began to offer a new financial product, often called the longevity annuity or deferred income annuity, which requires upfront payment of a premium in exchange for a guarantee of a certain amount of fixed income starting after the purchaser reaches age 80 or 85. Despite the wisdom behind the longevity annuity, this new type of product did not sell especially well, principally for tax reasons. These roadblocks, however, have largely been removed by new regulations.

Life expectancies for many Americans have increased to such an extent that most taxpayers who retire at age 65 expect to live for another 20 years or more. Several years ago, a number of insurance companies began to offer a new financial product, often called the longevity annuity or deferred income annuity, which requires upfront payment of a premium in exchange for a guarantee of a certain amount of fixed income starting after the purchaser reaches age 80 or 85. Despite the wisdom behind the longevity annuity, this new type of product did not sell especially well, principally for tax reasons. These roadblocks, however, have largely been removed by new regulations.

Treasury and the IRS recently released final regulations (TD 9673) to encourage taxpayers to purchase "qualified longevity annuity contracts" (QLACs) with a portion of their retirement savings held in IRAs or in retirement accounts held under a 401(k), 403(b) or other defined contribution plans that are subject to the rules for required minimum distributions (RMDs). The final regulations are meant to remove or mitigate some of the tax concerns new retirees may face when deciding whether or not to purchase a deferred income annuity.

Longevity Annuities—Generally

Purchase of a longevity annuity provides for a deferred income stream. Although the terms of specific longevity annuity contracts differ from plan to plan, the arrangement generally requires the purchaser to pay the premium as a lump sum to the insurer. The purchaser could be 65 years of age, 55, 50 or some other age, and the insurer would not begin to make payments under the longevity annuity contract until the purchaser had reached the specified age (of no more than 85 years for the tax benefits contained in the final regulations). The amount of the annuity depends on a number of factors, among them: the age at which the contract is purchased; the amount of the premium paid; the contractual interest rate; and the age at which payments begin.

RMDs

Not every individual who reaches retirement age possesses enough spare cash outside of his or her IRAs or other retirement accounts to purchase an income annuity, let alone a longevity annuity that does not begin to pay out for many years. In such cases individuals can purchase an annuity from within an IRA or defined contribution plan account. Prior to the final regulations, however, the RMD rules requiring taxpayers who reach age 70 ½ to begin taking distributions from these accounts would have forced taxpayers to factor the premium amounts into the calculation of their annual taxable distribution. This would have depleted the account funds more quickly than the actual balance, without premium payment, warranted.

QLACs

The final regulations provide that only qualified longevity annuity contracts (QLACs) are eligible for account balance exclusion from the RMD calculation. The regulations define a QLAC as:

• A longevity annuity whose premium payment does not exceed the lesser of $125,000 or 25 percent of the employee’s account balance;
• A contract that provides for payouts to begin no later than the first day of the month following the purchaser’s 85th birthday;
• A contract that does not provide any commutation benefit, cash surrender right, or other similar feature;
• A contract under which any death benefit offered meets the requirements of paragraph A-17(c) of Reg. §1.401(a)(9)-6 (see below for more details);
• A contract that states when issued that it is intended to be a QLAC; and
• A contract that is not a variable contract under Code Sec. 817, an indexed contract, or a similar contract.

The total value of all QLACs held by one person cannot exceed the lesser of $125,000 (indexed for inflation) or 25 percent of all qualified retirement accounts put together. This limitation does not extend to funds held in non-retirement accounts or to funds held in Roth IRAs.

In addition, the amount used to pay the QLAC premium is not taxable when the QLAC is purchased. This means the account holder has a zero basis in the QLAC. Distributions from the QLAC are fully taxable.

Death Benefit

Most longevity annuities do not provide any death benefit for the purchaser's beneficiaries. While some longevity annuity plans do offer a death benefit for the beneficiaries of annuity purchasers who die prematurely, plans that maximize the annuity payment generally provide that the insurer keeps the entire premium amount, plus interest, if the purchaser dies before payouts begin or the contract basis is exhausted.

Return of premium. The final regulations attempt to mitigate some of the risk retirees face when deciding to purchase a QLAC by allowing a QLAC to provide certain death benefits in limited circumstances. Notably, the final regulations add a feature missing from the proposed regulations: return of premium. Under the final rules, a QLAC is authorized to guarantee the return of a purchaser's premium if the purchaser dies before receiving benefits equal to the premium paid.

Surviving spouse. The final regulations provide that, where the purchaser's sole beneficiary under the QLAC is his or her surviving spouse, generally the only benefit permitted to be paid after the purchaser's death is a life annuity that does not exceed 100 percent of the annuity that would have been paid to the employee. The final regulations also allow QLACs to provide the return of premium feature if a surviving spouse who receives a life annuity under the contract dies before the payments equal the premium.

Non-spouse beneficiary/beneficiaries. QLACs may also provide a lifetime annuity to designated non-spouse beneficiaries, but the annuity would likely be reduced. Calculation of an annuity payable to a non-spouse beneficiary would be calculated based on the applicable percentage provided in one of the tables in the final regulations. However, if the QLAC provides a return of premium feature, the applicable percentage that the beneficiary would receive is zero.

Please contact this office if you have any questions on how a qualified longevity annuity might fit into your retirement plans now that the IRS has relaxed some of the rules.

Code Sec. 162 permits a business to deduct its ordinary and necessary expenses for carrying on the business. However, Code Sec. 274 restricts the deduction of entertainment expenses incurred for business by disallowing expenses of entertainment activities and entertainment facilities. Many expenses are totally disallowed; other amounts, if allowed under Code Sec. 274, are limited to 50 percent of the expense.

The income tax regulations define entertainment as any activity of a type generally considered to be entertainment, amusement, or recreation, such as entertaining at night clubs, lounges, theaters, country clubs, golf and athletic clubs, and sports events, as well as hunting, fishing, vacation and similar trips. There are special rules for the costs of facilities used to entertain the customer, such as a boat or a country club membership. Dues or fees for any social, athletic or sporting club or organization are treated as items involving facilities.

Deduction allowed

Expenses are allowed if the expense was either "directly related" to the active conduct of the taxpayer’s trade or business, or "associated with" the conduct of the trade or business. An activity is "associated with" business if the activity directly precedes or follows a substantial and bona fide business discussion.

Entertainment expenses are not directly related to the business if the activity occurred under circumstances with little or no possibility of engaging in the active conduct of the trade or business. These circumstances include an activity where the distractions are substantial, such as a meeting or discussion at a night club, theater, or sporting event. However, taking a customer to a meal at a restaurant or for drinks at a bar can be considered conducive to a business discussion, if there are no substantial distractions to a discussion.

Substantial business discussion

For expenses that are either directly related to or associated with business, the taxpayer must establish that the he or she conducted a substantial and bona fide business discussion with the customer. The IRS has said that there is no specified length for a discussion to be substantial; all facts and circumstances will be considered. The discussion is substantial if the active conduct of the business was the principal character of the combined business and entertainment activity, but it is not necessary that more time be devoted to business than to entertainment.

For an activity that is associated with, the discussion can directly precede or follow the activity. For a discussion to be directly before or after the activity, it generally must be on the same day as the activity. However, facts and circumstances may allow the entertainment and the discussion to be on consecutive days, for example if the customer is from out of town.

Season tickets

The special rules for facilities do not apply to season tickets. Instead, the taxpayer must allocate the cost of the season tickets to each separate entertainment event. The amount deductible is limited to the face value of the ticket. For a "skybox" or other area leased and used exclusively by the taxpayer and guests, the amount deductible is limited to the face value of non-luxury seats for the area covered by the lease.

Under these rules, it appears that the deductible costs of baseball season tickets must be determined separately for each baseball game. Attendance at a baseball game would involve a "distracting" activity that is not conducive to a business discussion, so the cost of the game would not be directly related to the conduct of the trade or business. However, attendance at a game before or after the conduct of a substantial business discussion could qualify as being associated with the business; in these circumstances, the cost of the event would be deductible.

If the taxpayer provided food to the customer at the baseball game, the cost of the food would be deductible as part of the cost of the event. Some "luxury" seats include food provided by the baseball team to the ticket user. It appears that the taxpayer would have to determine the fair market value of the ticket and the food separately, although the costs of food actually provided to the customer may still be deductible.

One of the most complex, if not the most complex, provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is the employer shared responsibility requirement (the so-called "employer mandate") and related reporting of health insurance coverage. Since passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010, the Obama administration has twice delayed the employer mandate and reporting. The employer mandate and reporting will generally apply to applicable large employers (ALE) starting in 2015 and to mid-size employers starting in 2016. Employers with fewer than 50 employees, have never been required, and continue to be exempt, from the employer mandate and reporting.

Employer mandate

The employer mandate under Code Sec. 4980H and employer reporting under Code Sec. 6056 are very connected. Code Sec. 4980H generally provides that an ALE is required to pay a penalty if it fails to offer minimum essential coverage and any full-time employee receives cost-sharing or the Code Sec. 36B premium assistance tax credit. An ALE would also pay a penalty if it offers coverage and any full-time employee receives cost-sharing or the Code Sec. 36B credit.

To receive the Code Sec. 36B credit, an individual must have obtained coverage through an Affordable Care Act Marketplace. The Marketplaces will report the names of individuals who receive the credit to the IRS. ALEs must report the terms and conditions of health care coverage provided to employees (This is known as Code Sec. 6056 reporting). The IRS will use all of this information to determine if the ALE must pay a penalty.

ALEs

Only ALEs are subject to the employer mandate and must report health insurance coverage under Code Sec. 6056. Employers with fewer than 50 employees are never subject to the employer mandate and do not have to report coverage under Code Sec. 6056.

In February, the Obama administration announced important transition rules for the employer mandate that affects Code Sec. 6056 reporting. The Obama administration limited the employer mandate in 2015 to employers with 100 or more full-time employees. ALEs with fewer than 100 full-time employees will be subject to the employer mandate starting in 2016. At all times, employers with fewer than 50 full-time employees are exempt from the employer mandate and Code Sec. 6056 reporting.

Reporting

The IRS has issued regulations describing how ALEs will report health insurance coverage. The IRS has not yet issued any of the forms that ALEs will use but has advised that ALEs generally will report the requisite information to the agency electronically.

ALEs also must provide statements to employees. The statements will describe, among other things, the coverage provided to the employee.

30-Hour Threshold

A fundamental question for the employer mandate and Code Sec. 6056 reporting is who is a full-time employee. Since passage of the Affordable Care Act, the IRS and other federal agencies have issued much guidance to answer this question. The answer is extremely technical and there are many exceptions but generally a full-time employee means, with respect to any month, an employee who is employed on average at least 30 hours of service per week. The IRS has designed two methods for determining full-time employee status: the monthly measurement method and the look-back measurement method. However, special rules apply to seasonal workers, student employees, volunteers, individuals who work on-call, and many more. If you have any questions about who is a full-time employee, please contact our office.

Form W-2 reporting

The Affordable Care Act also requires employers to disclose the aggregate cost of employer-provided health coverage on an employee's Form W-2. This requirement is separate from the employer mandate and Code Sec. 6056 reporting. The reporting of health insurance costs on Form W-2 is for informational purposes only. It does not affect an employee's tax liability or an employer's liability for the employer mandate.

Shortly after the Affordable Care Act was passed, the IRS provided transition relief to small employers that remains in effect today. An employer is not subject the reporting requirement for any calendar year if the employer was required to file fewer than 250 Forms W-2 for the preceding calendar year. Special rules apply to multiemployer plans, health reimbursement arrangements, and many more.

Please contact our office if you have any questions about ALEs, the employer mandate or Code Sec. 6056 reporting.

Mid-size employers may be eligible for recently announced transition relief from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's employer shared responsibility requirements. Final regulations issued by the IRS in late January include transition relief for mid-size employers for 2015. Mid-size employers for this relief are defined generally as businesses employing at least 50 but fewer than 100 full-time employees. Exceptions and complicated measurement rules continue to apply. The final regulations also describe the treatment of seasonal employees, volunteer workers, student employees, the calculation of the employer shared responsibility payment, and much more.

Mid-size employers may be eligible for recently announced transition relief from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's employer shared responsibility requirements. Final regulations issued by the IRS in late January include transition relief for mid-size employers for 2015. Mid-size employers for this relief are defined generally as businesses employing at least 50 but fewer than 100 full-time employees. Exceptions and complicated measurement rules continue to apply. The final regulations also describe the treatment of seasonal employees, volunteer workers, student employees, the calculation of the employer shared responsibility payment, and much more.

Delayed implementation

As enacted in 2010, the Affordable Care Act required applicable large employers (ALEs) to make an assessable payment if any full-time employee is certified to receive a health insurance premium tax credit or cost-sharing reduction, and either:

• The employer does not offer to its full-time employees and their dependents the opportunity to enroll in minimum essential coverage (MEC) under an eligible employer-sponsored plan; or
• The employer offers its full-time employees and their dependents the opportunity to enroll in MEC under an employer-sponsored plan, but the coverage is either unaffordable or does not provide minimum value.

The employer shared responsibility requirement was scheduled to apply January 1, 2014, the same effective date for the individual mandate and the health insurance premium assistance tax credit. In July 2013, the Obama administration announced that employer shared responsibility requirements would not apply for 2014.

The final regulations make further changes. Under the final regulations, the employer mandate will generally apply to large employers (employers with 100 or more employees) starting in 2015 and to qualified mid-size employers (employers with 50 to 99 employees) starting in 2016. Employers that employ fewer than 50 full-time employees (including full-time equivalents (FTEs)) are not subject to the employer mandate.

Caution. Determining the number of employees for purposes of the employer shared responsibility requirement is a complex calculation for many employers that is beyond the scope of this article. The Affordable Care Act and the final regulations describe how to calculate full-time employees (including FTEs) and also which employees are excluded from that calculation. Please contact our office for details about the Affordable Care Act and your business.

Transition relief for mid-size employers

Qualified employers are not subject to the employer mandate until 2016 if they satisfy certain conditions. Among other requirements, the employer must employ on average at least 50 full-time employees (including FTEs) but fewer than 100 full-time employees (including FTEs) on business days during 2014. Additionally, the final regulations impose a broad maintenance of previously offered heath coverage requirement.

The final regulations do not allow an employer to reduce the size of its workforce or the overall hours of service of its employees in order to satisfy the workforce size condition and thus be eligible for the transition relief. A reduction in workforce size or overall hours of service for bona fide business reasons, however, will not be considered to have been made in order to satisfy the workforce size condition. This provision is certainly one that is expected to generate many questions. The IRS may provide additional guidance and/or clarification in 2014 and our office will keep you posted of developments.

Additionally, the final regulations also modify the extent of required coverage. Proposed regulations required that the employer provide coverage to 95 percent of its full-time employees. The final regulations delay the 95 percent requirement until 2016 for larger employers. For 2015, larger employers need only provide coverage to 70 percent of their full-time employees.

Special types of employees

Since passage of the Affordable Care Act, questions have arisen about the treatment of certain types of employees. These include seasonal employees, short-term employees, volunteer workers, and student employees. The final regulations clarify some of the issues surrounding these employees.

Many industries employ seasonal workers. The final regulations describe who may qualify as a seasonal worker. The retail industry, which employs many workers for the holiday season, asked the IRS to specify which events or periods of time that would be treated as holiday seasons. The final regulations, however, do not indicate specific holidays or the length of any holiday season as these will differ for different employers, the IRS explained.

For volunteer workers, such as volunteer fire fighters and first responders, the final regulations provide that an individual's hours of service do not include hours worked as a "bona fide volunteer." This definition, the IRS explained, encompasses any volunteer who is an employee of a government entity or a Code Sec. 501(c)(3) organization whose compensation is limited to reimbursement of certain expenses or other forms of compensation.

Many college, university and vocational students are engaged in federal and state work-study programs. The final regulations provide that hours of service for purposes of the employer mandate do not include hours of service performed by students in federal or other governmental work-study programs. The IRS noted the potential for abuse by labeling individuals who receive compensation as "interns" to avoid the employer mandate. Therefore, the IRS did not adopt a special rule for student employees working as interns for an outside employer, and the general rules apply.

The final regulations also describe how the employer mandate may or may not apply to adjunct faculty, members of religious orders, airline industry employees, employees who must work “on-call” hours, short-term employees and others. Special rules may apply to these employees in some cases.

Waiting period limitation

The Affordable Care Act generally requires that an employee (or dependent) cannot wait more than 90 days before employer-provided coverage becomes effective. The IRS issued final regulations in February on the 90-day waiting period limitation. The IRS also issued proposed regulations generally allowing employers to require new employees to complete a reasonable orientation period. The proposed regulations set forth one month as the maximum length of any orientation period.

If you have any questions about the final regulations for the employer mandate, the transition relief, the 90-day waiting period, or any aspects of the Affordable Care Act, please contact our office.

TD 9655, TD 9656, NPRM REG-122706-12

The IRS's final "repair" regulations became effective January 1, 2014. The regulations provide a massive revision to the rules on capitalizing and deducting costs incurred with respect to tangible property. The regulations apply to amounts paid to acquire, produce or improve tangible property; every business is affected, especially those with significant fixed assets.

The IRS's final "repair" regulations became effective January 1, 2014. The regulations provide a massive revision to the rules on capitalizing and deducting costs incurred with respect to tangible property. The regulations apply to amounts paid to acquire, produce or improve tangible property; every business is affected, especially those with significant fixed assets.

Required and elective changes

There is a lot of work ahead for most taxpayers to comply with the new rules. There are three categories of changes under the regulations:

• Changes that are required and are retroactive, with full adjustments under Code Sec. 481(a), in effect applying the regulations to previous years;
• Required changes with modified or prospective Code Sec. 481(a) adjustment beginning in 2014; and
• Elective changes that do not require any adjustments under Code Sec. 481.

Required changes with full adjustments include unit of property changes, deducting repairs (including the routine maintenance safe harbor), deducting dealer expenses that facilitate the sale of property, the optional method for rotable spare parts, capitalizing improvements and capitalizing certain acquisition or production costs. Elective changes can include capitalizing repair and maintenance costs of they are capitalized for financial accounting purposes.

Rev. Proc. 2014-16

The IRS issued Rev. Proc. 2014-16, granting automatic consent to taxpayers to change their accounting methods to comply with the final regulations. Rev. Proc. 2014-16 applies to all the significant provisions in the final regulations, such as repairs and improvements; materials and supplies, including rotable and temporary spare parts; and costs that have to be capitalized as improvements. Rev. Proc. 2014-16 supersedes Rev. Proc. 2012-19, which applied to changes made under the temporary and proposed repair regulations issued at the end of 2011.

There are 14 automatic method changes provided by Rev. Proc. 2014-16 for the repair regulations. Taxpayers may file for automatic consent on a single Form 3115, even if they are making changes in more than area. The normal scope limitations on changing accounting methods do not apply to a taxpayer making one or more changes for any tax year beginning before January 1, 2015. Scope changes would normally apply if the taxpayer is under examination, is in the final year of a trade or business, or is changing the same accounting method it changed in the previous five years.

Filing deadlines

For past years, taxpayers can apply the 2011 proposed and temporary (TD 9564) regulations or the 2013 final regulations to either 2012 or 2013, and can do this on a section-by-section basis. Taxpayers that decide to apply the final or temporary regulations to 2013 must file for an automatic change of accounting method (Form 3115) by September 15, 2014. Taxpayers applying the regulations to 2014 must file for an automatic change by September 15, 2015. (Both dates apply to calendar-year taxpayers.) The government has indicated it is unlikely to postpone the effective date of the regulations.

Dispositions

Rev. Proc. 2014-16 does not apply to dispositions of tangible property. The government issued reproposed regulations in this area (NPRM REG-110732-13). Although these regulations may not be finalized until later in 2014, the IRS expects to issue Rev. Proc. 2014-17 before then to allow taxpayers to make automatic accounting method changes under the proposed regulations. The procedure will provide some relief by allowing taxpayers to revoke general asset account elections that they made under the temporary regulations. No comments were submitted on these proposed regulations; it is likely the final regulations will not have any significant changes.

Taxpayers must generally provide documentation to support (or to “substantiate”) a claim for any contributions made to charity that they are planning to deduct from their income. Assuming that the contribution was made to a qualified organization, that the taxpayer has received either no benefit from the contribution or a benefit that was less than the value of the contribution, and that the taxpayer otherwise met the requirements for a qualified contribution, then taxpayers should worry next whether they have the proper records to prove their claim.

Taxpayers must generally provide documentation to support (or to “substantiate”) a claim for any contributions made to charity that they are planning to deduct from their income. Assuming that the contribution was made to a qualified organization, that the taxpayer has received either no benefit from the contribution or a benefit that was less than the value of the contribution, and that the taxpayer otherwise met the requirements for a qualified contribution, then taxpayers should worry next whether they have the proper records to prove their claim.

Cash donations

The taxpayer must provide records to prove a donation of any amount of cash (including payments by cash, check, electronic funds transfer or debit, and credit card). Acceptable records for cash donations of less than $250 generally include:

• An account statement or canceled check;
• A written letter, e-mail or other properly issued receipt from the qualified organization bearing the name of the organization and the date and amount of the contribution; and/or
• A pay stub, Form W–2, or other payroll document showing the amount of a contribution made from payroll.

Caution: A taxpayer cannot substantiate deductions through written records it has prepared on its own behalf, such as a checkbook or personal notes.

Cash donations of more than $250. If a taxpayer donated $250 or more in cash at any one time, the taxpayer must provide a contemporaneous written acknowledgment of the donation from the qualified organization. For each donation of $250 or more, the taxpayer must obtain a separate written acknowledgment. Furthermore, this written acknowledgement must:

• State the amount of the contribution; and
• State whether the qualified organization provided the taxpayer with any goods or services in exchange for the donation, and if so estimate their value; and
• Be received by the taxpayer before the earlier of (1) the return’s filing date or (2) the due date of the return, plus any extensions.

Note: The written acknowledgment ideally would also show the date of the contribution. If it does not, the taxpayer must also provide a bank record that indicates the date.

The acknowledgment must contain a statement of whether or not a taxpayer received any goods or services as a result of the donation, even if no goods or services were received. Even if the donation was for tithes to a religious organization, such as a church, synagogue, or mosque, the acknowledgment should state that the only goods and services received were of intangible religious value. The Tax Court has upheld the disallowance of charitable contribution deductions where the written acknowledgment omitted such a statement regarding goods or services provided.

Noncash contributions

As with cash contributions, the requirements for substantiating noncash contributions increase with the value of the contribution. For example, to substantiate noncash contributions of less than $250, taxpayers must show a receipt or other written communication from the charitable organizations.

To substantiate a noncash contribution between $250 and $500, the taxpayer must obtain a written acknowledgment of the contribution from the qualified organization prior to the earlier of the filing date or due date of its return. The acknowledgment must also describe the type and value of the goods and services, if any, provided to the taxpayer as a result of the donation.

To substantiate noncash contributions totaling between $500 and $5,000 or donations of publically traded securities, a taxpayer must complete Section A of Form 8283, Noncash Charitable Contributions. To substantiate noncash contributions of $5,000 or more (for example, donations of art, jewelry, vehicles, qualified conservation contributions, or intellectual property) the taxpayer must complete Section B of Form 8283. Generally, this would also require the taxpayer to obtain a qualified appraisal of the property’s fair market value.

A word about valuation. A charity is not obligated to provide a value to any noncash contribution; its written receipt only needs to describe the item(s) and note the date of the contribution. The taxpayer, however, is not relieved from making a good-faith estimate of value, which of course the IRS may dispute on any audit. “Thrift-shop” value is often used to value donations of clothing and household goods.

Caution: Last year the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) issued a report finding that the IRS was not accurately monitoring the reporting of noncash contributions requiring completion of Form 8283. The IRS responded that it agreed that it needed to initiate more correspondence audits with taxpayers claiming noncash contributions without the necessary Form 8283 and appraisal.

Vehicles. A taxpayer who donates a motor vehicle, boat, or airplane to charity must deduct either the gross proceeds from the qualified organization’s sale of the vehicle or, if the vehicle is used within the charity’s mission, the fair market value of the vehicle on the date of the contribution, whichever is smaller. The taxpayer must also obtain and attach Form 1098-C, Contributions of Motor Vehicles, Boats, and Airplanes, to its return in addition to Form 8283.

The requirements for substantiating charitable contributions can be complicated. Please contact our office with questions.