Newsletters

Running a business is easy as long as it's not yours.-John Jennings

The IRS has updated its simplified procedure for estates requesting an extension of time to make a portability election under Code Sec. 2010(c)(5)(A). The updated procedure replaces that provided in Rev. Proc. 2017-34. If the portability election is made, a decedent’s unused exclusion amount (the deceased spousal unused exclusion (DSUE) amount) is available to a surviving spouse to apply to transfers made during life or at death.

The IRS has updated its simplified procedure for estates requesting an extension of time to make a portability election under Code Sec. 2010(c)(5)(A). The updated procedure replaces that provided in Rev. Proc. 2017-34. If the portability election is made, a decedent’s unused exclusion amount (the deceased spousal unused exclusion (DSUE) amount) is available to a surviving spouse to apply to transfers made during life or at death. The simplified method is to be used instead of the letter ruling process. No user fee is due for submissions filed in accordance with the revenue procedure.

A simplified method to obtain an extension of time was available to decedents dying after December 31, 2010, if the estate was only required to file an estate tax return for the purpose of electing portability. However, that method was only available on or before December 31, 2014. Since December 31, 2014, the IRS has issued numerous letter rulings under Reg. §301.9100-3 granting extensions of time to elect portability in situations in which the estate was not required to file a return under Code Sec. 6018(a). The number of ruling requests that were received after December 31, 2014, and the related burden imposed on the IRS, prompted the continued relief for estates that have no filing requirement under Code Sec. 6018(a). Rev. Proc. 2017-34 provided a simplified method to obtain an extension of time to elect portability that is available to the estates of decedents having no filing obligation under Code Sec. 6018(a) for a period the last day of which is the later of January 2, 2018, or the second anniversary of the decedent’s death. An estate seeking relief after the second anniversary of the decedent’s death could do so by requesting a letter ruling in accordance with Reg. §301.9100-3.

Despite this simplified procedure, there remained a significant number of estates seeking relief through letter ruling requests in which the decedent died within five years of the date of the request. The number of these requests has placed a continuing burden on the IRS. Therefore, the updated procedure extends the period within which the estate of a decedent may make the portability election under that simplified method to on or before the fifth anniversary of the decedent’s date of death.

Section 3 provides that the simplified procedure is only available if certain criteria are met. The taxpayer must be the executor of the estate of a decedent who: (1) was survived by a spouse; (2) died after December 31, 2010; and (3) was a U.S. citizen or resident at the time of death. In addition, the estate must not be required to file an estate tax return under Code Sec. 6018(a) and did not file an estate tax return within the time prescribed by Reg. §20.2010-2(a)(1) for filing a return required to elect portability. Finally, all requirements of section 4.01 of the revenue procedure must be met.

The revenue procedure does not apply to estates that filed an estate tax return within the time prescribed by Reg. §20.2010-2(a)(1) to elect portability. For taxpayers that do not qualify for relief because the requirements of section 4.01 are not met, the estate can request an extension of time to file the estate tax return to make the portability election by requesting a letter ruling.

Under Section 4.01, the requirements for relief are: (1) a person permitted to make the election on behalf of a decedent must file a complete and properly-prepared Form 706, United States Estate (and Generation-Skipping Transfer) Tax Return, (as provided in Reg. §20.2010-2(a)(7)) on or before the fifth annual anniversary of the decedent’s date of death; and (2) "FILED PURSUANT TO REV. PROC. 2022-32 TO ELECT PORTABILITY UNDER §2010(c)(5)(A)" must be written at the top of the Form 706. If the requirements of sections 3.01 and 4.01 are met, the estate will be deemed to meet the requirements for relief under Reg. §301.9100-3 and relief will be granted to extend the time to elect portability. If relief is granted pursuant to the revenue procedure and it is later determined that the estate was required to file a federal estate tax return, based on the value of the gross estate, plus any adjusted taxable gifts, the extension of time granted to make the portability election is deemed null and void.

If a decedent’s estate is granted relief under this revenue procedure so that the estate tax return is considered timely for electing portability, the decedent’s deceased spousal unused exclusion amount that is available to the surviving spouse or the surviving spouse’s estate for application to the transfers made by the surviving spouse on or after the decedent’s date of death. If the increase in the surviving spouse’s applicable exclusion amount attributable to the addition of the decedent’s deceased spousal unused exclusion amount as of the date of the decedent’s death result in an overpayment of gift or estate tax by the surviving spouse or his or her estate, no claim for credit or refund may be made if the limitations period for filing a claim for credit or refund with respect to that transfer has expired. A surviving spouse will be deemed to have filed a protective claim for refund or credit of tax if such a claim is filed within the time prescribed in Code Sec. 6511(a) in anticipation of a Form 706 being filed to elect portability pursuant to the revenue procedure.

The revenue procedure is effective July 8, 2022. Through the fifth anniversary of a decedent’s date of death, the procedure described in section 4.01 of this revenue procedure is the exclusive procedure for obtaining an extension of time to make portability election if the decedent and the executor meet the requirements of section 3.01 of this revenue procedure. If a letter ruling request is pending on July 8, 2022, and the estate is within the scope of the revenue procedure, the file on the ruling request will be closed and the user fee will be refunded. The estate may obtain relief as outlined in the revenue procedure by complying with section 4.01. Rev. Proc. 2017-34, I.R.B. 2017-26, 1282, is superceded.

The IRS intends to amend the base erosion and anti-abuse tax (BEAT) regulations under Code Secs. 59A and 6038A to defer the applicability date of the reporting of qualified derivative payments (QDPs) until tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2025.

The IRS intends to amend the base erosion and anti-abuse tax (BEAT) regulations under Code Secs. 59A and 6038A to defer the applicability date of the reporting of qualified derivative payments (QDPs) until tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2025.

Background

Final BEAT regulations adopted with T.D. 9885 include rules under Code Secs. 59A and 6038A addressing the reporting of QDPs, which are not treated as base erosion payments for BEAT purposes. The final regulations generally apply to tax years ending on or after December 17, 2018.

In general, a payment qualifies for the QDP exception if the taxpayer satisfies certain reporting requirements. Reg. §1.6038A-2(b)(7)(ix) requires a taxpayer subject to the BEAT to report on Form 8991, Tax on Base Erosion Payments of Taxpayers With Substantial Gross Receipts, the aggregate amount of QDPs for the tax year, and make a representation that all payments satisfy the reporting requirements of Reg. §1.59A-6(b)(2). If a taxpayer fails to satisfy these reporting requirements with respect to any payments, those payments are not eligible for the QDP exception and are treated as base erosion payments, unless another exception applies.

The QDP reporting rules of Reg. §1.6038A-2(b)(7)(ix) apply to tax years beginning on or after June 7, 2021. Before these rules are applicable (the transition period), a taxpayer is treated as satisfying the QDP reporting requirements to the extent that the taxpayer reports the aggregate amount of QDPs on Form 8991, Schedule A, provided that the taxpayer reports this amount in good faith ( Reg. §1.59A-6(b)(2)(iv); Reg. §1.6038A-2(g)).

In Notice 2021-36, I.R.B. 2021-26, 1227, the IRS announced the intention to extend the transition period through tax years beginning before January 1, 2023, while the IRS studies the interaction of the QDP exception, the BEAT netting rule in Reg. §1.59A-2(e)(3)(vi), and the QDP reporting requirements. The IRS has not yet issued regulations amending the applicability date of Reg. §1.6038A-2(g). The IRS continue to study these provisions and has determined that it is appropriate to further extend the transition period.

Deferred Applicability Date of QDP Reporting and Taxpayer Reliance

The IRS intends to amend Reg. §1.6038A-2(g) to provide that the QDP reporting rules of Reg. §1.6038A-2(b)(7)(ix) will apply to tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2025. Until these rules apply, the transition period rules described above will continue to apply. Taxpayers may rely on this Notice before the amendments to the final regulations are issued.

John Hinman, Director, IRS Whistleblower Office highlighted the importance of whistleblower information in identifying noncompliance and reducing the tax gap in an executive column published by the IRS. Each year, the IRS receives thousands of award claims from individuals who identify taxpayers who may not be abiding by U.S. tax laws. The IRS Whistleblower Office ensures that award claims are reviewed by the appropriate IRS business unit, determines whether an award should be paid and the percentage of any award and ensures that approved awards are paid. The IRS has paid over $1.05 billion in over 2,500 awards to whistleblowers since 2007.

John Hinman, Director, IRS Whistleblower Office highlighted the importance of whistleblower information in identifying noncompliance and reducing the tax gap in an executive column published by the IRS. Each year, the IRS receives thousands of award claims from individuals who identify taxpayers who may not be abiding by U.S. tax laws. The IRS Whistleblower Office ensures that award claims are reviewed by the appropriate IRS business unit, determines whether an award should be paid and the percentage of any award and ensures that approved awards are paid. The IRS has paid over $1.05 billion in over 2,500 awards to whistleblowers since 2007.

Further, Hinman stated that according to the IRS’s Large Business and International (LB&I) division, whistleblowers have provided invaluable insights into violations perpetuated by large corporations, wealthy individuals and their planners. Further, since the inception of the Whistleblower Office, information from whistleblowers has resulted in over 900 criminal tax cases. Hinman stated that individuals can file a Form 211, Application for Award for Original Information, to be considered for an award. Specific, credible and timely claims are most likely to be accepted for additional consideration and referred to one of IRS’s operating divisions. A subject matter expert may contact the whistleblower to ensure the IRS fully understands the information submitted. The IRS will notify whistleblowers when a case for which they provided information is referred for audit or examination.

Further, Hinman noted that the IRS takes the protection of whistleblower identity very seriously.The IRS prevents the disclosure of a whistleblower’s identity, and even the fact that they have provided information, to the maximum extent that the law allows. Additionally, whistleblowers are protected from retaliation by their employers under a law passed in 2019. Finally, Hinman noted that going forward, the Whistleblower Office team will continue to make improvements to this important program, raise awareness about the program for potential whistleblowers and look for ways to gain internal efficiencies to move cases forward as quickly as possible.

A group of Senate Democrats is calling on the IRS to extend the filing deadline for those unable to file for and receive the advanced child tax credit (CTC) due to the processing backlog of individual taxpayer identification number (ITIN) applications.

A group of Senate Democrats is calling on the IRS to extend the filing deadline for those unable to file for and receive the advanced child tax credit (CTC) due to the processing backlog of individual taxpayer identification number (ITIN) applications.

In a July 14, 2022, letter to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig, the Senators, led by Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), called on the IRS to "allow families who applied for an ITIN or ITIN renewal prior to April 15, 2022, to file for and receive the advanced CTC if they file a return before or on October 15, 2022."

An ITIN is needed for taxpayers who do not have and are not eligible to receive a Social Security number but still have a U.S. tax filing requirement. This includes individuals who are nonresident aliens; U.S. resident aliens; dependents or spouses of U.S. citizen/resident alien; dependent or spouse of a nonresident alien visa holder; nonresident alien claiming a tax treaty benefit; or nonresident alien student, professor, or researcher filing a U.S. tax return claiming an exception.

The senators cite figures from the Treasury Inspector General of Tax Administration stating that prior to COVID-19 pandemic, it generally took between seven and 11 weeks to process an ITIN application (depending on if it was filed during tax season).

"But, as reported by TIGTA and the IRS’ own website, processing times have increased—with ITIN application processing averaging three to four months and renewal times doubling to 41 days," the letter states.

"Given that the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes (PATH) Act required that an ITIN had to be issued on or before the due date of the return in order to file for the CTC, many families may not have received their ITIN prior to April 15, 2022," the letter adds, preventing access to the benefit.

The IRS has released a Fact Sheet to help taxpayers understand how and why agency representatives may contact them and how to identify them and avoid scams. Generally, the IRS sends a letter or written notice to a taxpayer in advance, but not always.

The IRS has released a Fact Sheet to help taxpayers understand how and why agency representatives may contact them and how to identify them and avoid scams. Generally, the IRS sends a letter or written notice to a taxpayer in advance, but not always. Depending on the situation, IRS employees may first call or visit with a taxpayer. Further, the IRS clarified that other than IRS Secure Access, the agency does not use text messages to discuss personal tax issues, such as those involving bills or refunds. The IRS does not initiate contact with taxpayers by email to request personal or financial information. The IRS initiates most contacts through regular mail. Taxpayers can report fraudulent emails and text messages by sending an email to phishing@irs.gov.

Further, taxpayers will generally first receive several letters from the IRS in the mail before receiving a phone call. However, the IRS may call taxpayers if they have an overdue tax bill, a delinquent or unfiled tax return or have not made an employment tax deposit. The IRS does not leave pre-recorded, urgent or threatening voice messages and will never call to demand immediate payment using a specific payment method, threaten to immediately bring in law enforcement groups, demand tax payment without giving the taxpayer an opportunity or ask for credit or debit cards over the phone.

Additionally, IRS revenue officers generally make unannounced visits to a taxpayers home or place of business to discuss taxes owed or tax returns due. However, taxpayers would have first been notified by mail of their balance due or missing return. Taxpayers should always ask for credentials or identification when visited by IRS personnel. Finally, the IRS clarified that taxpayers who have filed a petition with the U.S. Tax Court may receive a call or voicemail message from an Appeals Officer. However, the Appeals Officer will provide self-identifying information such as their name, title, badge number and contact information.

The American Institute of CPAs offered the Internal Revenue Service a series of recommendations related to proposed regulations for required minimum distributions from individual retirement accounts.

The American Institute of CPAs offered the Internal Revenue Service a series of recommendations related to proposed regulations for required minimum distributions from individual retirement accounts.

The July 1, 2022, comment letter to the agency covered two specific areas: minimum distribution requirements for designated beneficiaries when death of the employee or IRA owner occurs after the required beginning date, and the definition of employer and guidance for multiple arrangements.

Regarding the minimum distribution requirements, AICPA recommended in the letter that the agency "eliminate the requirement … mandating that a designated beneficiary who is not an eligible designated beneficiary take distribution in each of the 10 years following the death of an employee."

AICPA also recommended that "the final regulations follow the rule … requiring only that the entire interest is to be distributed no later than by the end of the tenth year following the death of the employee/IRA owner."

Regarding the definition of employer and guidance related to multiple employer agreements, AICPA recommended "defining the retirement requirement in section 401 (a)(9)-2(b)(1)(ii) as met at the plan level in reference to MEPs [multiple employer plans] and PEPs [pooled employer plans]; when an employee terminates employment with the employer after attaining age 72 and is reemployed with either the same employer or another employer sponsoring the same MEP or PEP prior to attaining their RBD of April 1 the following year."

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report on stimulus checks during the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. From April 2020 to December 2021, the federal government made direct payments to taxpayers totaling $931 billion to address pandemic-related financial stress.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report on stimulus checks during the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. From April 2020 to December 2021, the federal government made direct payments to taxpayers totaling $931 billion to address pandemic-related financial stress.

Report Findings

Some eligible taxpayers never received payments. Eligible taxpayers can still claim their payments through October 17. There were challenges for the Service and Treasury to get payments especially to nonfilers, or those who were not required to file tax returns. Taxpayers who think they may be eligible but did not receive the third economic impact payment (EIP) or child tax credit (CTC) can request an extension and file a simplified return at https://www.childtaxcredit.gov/. Although no new EIP and advance CTC payments are underway, the Treasury and Service could learn to manage other refundable tax credits such as the earned income tax credit (EITC). Further, the IRS’s new Taxpayer Experience Office could help improve outreach and improve taxpayer experience.

Recommendations

GAO made two recommendations. First, the Treasury and IRS could use available data to update their estimate of eligible taxpayers to better tailor and redirect their ongoing outreach and communications efforts for similar tax credits. Second, both agencies could focus on improving interagency collaboration. They could use data to assess their efforts to educate more taxpayers about refundable tax credits and eligibility requirements.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operations and Development (OECD) is delaying the implementation of Pillar One of the landmark agreement on international tax reform.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operations and Development (OECD) is delaying the implementation of Pillar One of the landmark agreement on international tax reform.

A new Progress Report on Pillar One, which includes "a comprehensive draft of the technical model rules to implement a new taxing right that will allow market jurisdictions to tax profits from some of the largest multinational enterprises," will be open to stakeholder comment through August 19, 2022, OECD said in a statement.

That report notes that the plan is to finalize Pillar One by mid-2023, with the more than 135 countries and jurisdictions that are a part of the agreement able to put the framework into operation in 2024.

The revised timeline "is designed to allow greater engagement with citizens, businesses, and parliamentary bodies which will ultimately have to ratify the agreement," OECD said.

The Department of the Treasury welcomed the delay.

"Treasury welcomes the additional year agreed to at the OECD to allow further time for negotiations among governments and consultations with stakeholders on implementation of the Pillar One agreement, which will make the international tax system more stable and fair for businesses and workers in the United States and globally," a spokesperson for the agency said. "Tremendous progress has been made, and additional time will ensure we all get this historic agreement right."

OECD also noted that technical work under Pillar Two, which will introduce the 15 percent global minimum corporate tax rate, "is largely complete." The implementation framework is expected to be released later this year.

The IRS has released the 2020-2021 special per diem rates. Taxpayers use the per diem rates to substantiate the amount of ordinary and necessary business expenses incurred while traveling away from home. These special per diem rates include the special transportation industry meal and incidental expenses (M&IEs) rates, the rate for the incidental expenses only deduction, and the rates and list of high-cost localities for purposes of the high-low substantiation method. Taxpayers using the rates and list of high-cost localities provided in the guidance must comply with Rev. Proc. 2019-48, I.R.B. 2019-51, 1390.

The IRS has released the 2020-2021 special per diem rates. Taxpayers use the per diem rates to substantiate the amount of ordinary and necessary business expenses incurred while traveling away from home. These special per diem rates include the special transportation industry meal and incidental expenses (M&IEs) rates, the rate for the incidental expenses only deduction, and the rates and list of high-cost localities for purposes of the high-low substantiation method. Taxpayers using the rates and list of high-cost localities provided in the guidance must comply with Rev. Proc. 2019-48, I.R.B. 2019-51, 1390.

The guidance is effective for per diem allowances for lodging, meal and incidental expenses, or for meal and incidental expenses only, that are paid to any employee on or after October 1, 2020, for travel away from home on or after October 1, 2020. For computing the amount allowable as a deduction for travel away from home, the guidance is effective for M&IEs or for incidental expenses only paid or incurred on or after October 1, 2020.

Transportation Industry Rates
The special M&IE rates for taxpayers in the transportation industry are:

• $66 for any locality of travel in the continental United States (CONUS), and
• $71 for any locality of travel outside the continental United States (OCONUS).

Incidental Expenses Only Rate
The rate is $5 per day for any CONUS or OCONUS travel for the incidental expenses only deduction.

High-Low Substantiation Method
For purposes of the high-low substantiation method, the per diem rates in lieu of the rates described in Notice 2019-55 (the per diem substantiation method) are:

• $292 for travel to any high-cost locality, and
• $198 for travel to any other locality within CONUS.

The amount of these rates that is treated as paid for meals, and the per diem rates in lieu of the rates described in Notice 2019-55 (the M&IE only substantiation method), are:

• $71 for travel to any high-cost locality, and
• $60 for travel to any other locality within CONUS

The guidance provides a list of localities that have a federal per diem rate of $245 or more, and are high-cost localities for a specified portion of the calendar year. The list differs from the high-cost locality list in Notice 2019-55:

• Added to the list: Los Angeles, California; San Diego, California; Gulf Breeze, Florida; Kennebunk/Kittery/Sanford, Maine; Virginia Beach, Virginia.
• Localities that have changed the portion of the year in which they are high-cost localities: Sedona, Arizona; Monterey, California; Santa Barbara, California; District of Columbia; Naples, Florida; Jekyll Island/Brunswick, Georgia; Boston/Cambridge, Massachusetts; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Jamestown/Middletown/Newport, Rhode Island; Charleston, South Carolina.
• Removed from the list: Midland/Odessa, Texas; Pecos, Texas.

The IRS has reminded taxpayers that the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act ( P.L. 116-136) can provide favorable tax treatment for withdrawals from retirement plans and Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs). Under the CARES Act, individuals eligible for coronavirus-related relief may be able to withdraw up to $100,000 from IRAs or workplace retirement plans before December 31, 2020, if their plans allow. In addition to IRAs, this relief applies to 401(k) plans, 403(b) plans, profit-sharing plans and others.

The IRS has reminded taxpayers that the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act ( P.L. 116-136) can provide favorable tax treatment for withdrawals from retirement plans and Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs). Under the CARES Act, individuals eligible for coronavirus-related relief may be able to withdraw up to $100,000 from IRAs or workplace retirement plans before December 31, 2020, if their plans allow. In addition to IRAs, this relief applies to 401(k) plans, 403(b) plans, profit-sharing plans and others.

Also, until September 22, 2020, individuals eligible to take coronavirus-related withdrawals may be able to borrow as much as $100,000 (up from $50,000) from a workplace retirement plan, if their plan allows. Loans are not available from an IRA. For eligible individuals, plan administrators can suspend, for up to one year, plan loan repayments due on or after March 27, 2020, and before January 1, 2021. A suspended loan is subject to interest during the suspension period, and the term of the loan may be extended to account for the suspension period.

To be eligible for COVID-19 relief, coronavirus-related withdrawals or loans can only be made to an individual if:

• the individual is diagnosed with COVID-19 by a test approved by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (including a test authorized under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act);
• the individual’s spouse or dependent is diagnosed with COVID-19 by such a test; or
• the individual, their spouse, or a member of the individual’s household experiences adverse financial consequences from: (1) being quarantined, furloughed or laid off, having work hours reduced, being unable to work due to lack of childcare, having a reduction in pay (or self-employment income), or having a job offer rescinded or start date for a job delayed, due to COVID-19; or (2) closing or reducing hours of a business owned or operated by the individual, the individual’s spouse, or a member of the individual’s household, due to COVID-19.

Taxpayers can learn more about these provisions in IRS Notice 2020-50, I.R.B. 2020-28, 35. The IRS has also posted FAQs that provide additional information.

The much-anticipated regulations (REG-136118-15) implementing the new centralized partnership audit regime under the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 (BBA) have finally been released. The BBA regime replaces the current TEFRA (Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982) procedures beginning for 2018 tax year audits, with an earlier "opt-in" for electing partnerships. Originally issued on January 19, 2017 but delayed by a January 20, 2017 White House regulatory freeze, these re-proposed regulations carry with them much of the same criticism leveled against them back in January, as well as several modifications. Most importantly, their reach will impact virtually all partnerships.

The much-anticipated regulations (REG-136118-15) implementing the new centralized partnership audit regime under the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 (BBA) have finally been released. The BBA regime replaces the current TEFRA (Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982) procedures beginning for 2018 tax year audits, with an earlier "opt-in" for electing partnerships. Originally issued on January 19, 2017 but delayed by a January 20, 2017 White House regulatory freeze, these re-proposed regulations carry with them much of the same criticism leveled against them back in January, as well as several modifications. Most importantly, their reach will impact virtually all partnerships.

Scope

Under the proposed regulations, to which Congress left many details to be filled in, the new audit regime covers any adjustment to items of income, gain, loss, deduction, or credit of a partnership and any partner’s distributive share of those adjusted items. Further, any income tax resulting from an adjustment to items under the centralized partnership audit regime is assessed and collected at the partnership level. The applicability of any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount that relates to an adjustment to any such item or share is also determined at the partnership level.

Immediate Impact

Although perhaps streamlined and eventually destined to simplify partnership audits for the IRS, the new centralized audit regime may prove more complicated in several respects for many partnerships. Of immediate concern for most partnerships, whether benefiting or not, is how to reflect this new centralized audit regime within partnership agreements, especially when some of the procedural issues within the new regime are yet to be ironed out.

Issues for many partnerships that have either been generated or heightened by the new regulations include:

• Selecting a method of satisfying an imputed underpayment;
• Designation of a partnership representative;
• Allocating economic responsibility for an imputed underpayment among partners including situations in which partners’ interests change between a reviewed year and the adjustment year; and
• Indemnifications between partnerships and partnership representatives, as well as among current partners and those who were partners during the tax year under audit.

Election out

Starting for tax year 2018, virtually all partnerships will be subject to the new partnership audit regime …unless an “election out” option is affirmatively elected. Only an eligible partnership may elect out of the centralized partnership audit regime. A partnership is an eligible partnership if it has 100 or fewer partners during the year and, if at all times during the tax year, all partners are eligible partners. A special rule applies to partnerships that have S corporation partners.

Consistent returns

A partner’s treatment of each item of income, gain, loss, deduction, or credit attributable to a partnership must be consistent with the treatment of those items on the partnership return, including treatment with respect to the amount, timing, and characterization of those items. Under the new rules, the IRS may assess and collect any underpayment of tax that results from adjusting a partner’s inconsistently reported item to conform that item with the treatment on the partnership return as if the resulting underpayment of tax were on account of a mathematical or clerical error appearing on the partner’s return. A partner may not request an abatement of that assessment.

Partnership representative

The new regulations require a partnership to designate a partnership representative, as well as provide rules describing the eligibility requirements for a partnership representative, the designation of the partnership representative, and the representative’s authority. Actions by the partnership representative bind all the partners as far as the IRS is concerned. Indemnification agreements among partners may ameliorate some, but not all, of the liability triggered by this rule.

Imputed underpayment, alternatives and "push-outs"

Generally, if a partnership adjustment results in an imputed underpayment, the partnership must pay the imputed underpayment in the adjustment year. The partnership may request modification with respect to an imputed underpayment only under the procedures described in the new rules.

In multi-tiered partnership arrangements, the new rules provide that a partnership may elect to "push out" adjustments to its reviewed year partners. If a partnership makes a valid election, the partnership is no longer liable for the imputed underpayment. Rather, the reviewed year partners of the partnership are liable for tax, penalties, additions to tax, and additional amounts plus interest, after taking into account their share of the partnership adjustments determined in the final partnership adjustment (FPA). The new regulations provide rules for making the election, the requirements for partners to file statements with the IRS and furnish statements to reviewed year partners, and the computation of tax resulting from taking adjustments into account.

Retiring, disappearing partners

Partnership agreements that reflect the new partnership audit regime must especially consider the problems that may be created by partners that have withdrawn, and partnerships that have since dissolved, between the tax year being audited and the year in which a deficiency involving that tax year is to be resolved. Collection of prior-year taxes due from a former partner, especially as time lapses, becomes more difficult as a practical matter unless specific remedies are set forth in the partnership agreement. The partnership agreement might specify that if any partner withdraws and disposes of their interest, they must keep the partnership advised of their contact information until released by the partnership in writing.

If you have any questions about how your partnership may be impacted by these new rules, please feel free to call our office.

Taxpayers that plan to operate a business have a variety of choices. A single individual can operate as a C corporation, an S corporation, a limited liability company (LLC), or a sole proprietorship. Two or more individuals can form a partnership, a corporation (C or S), or an LLC.

Taxpayers that plan to operate a business have a variety of choices. A single individual can operate as a C corporation, an S corporation, a limited liability company (LLC), or a sole proprietorship. Two or more individuals can form a partnership, a corporation (C or S), or an LLC.

Nontax considerations

State law and nontax considerations are an important consideration in choosing the form of the business and may play a decisive role. A general partner of a partnership has unlimited liability for the debts of the business. This can be modified by using a limited partnership (LP), which must have at least one general partner and at least one limited partner. The general partner still have unlimited liability, but a limited partner's liability is limited to its contribution to the partnership. A corporation has limited liability; shareholders generally are not responsible for the liabilities of the corporation beyond their contributions to the entity.

Federal tax considerations

At the same time, it is crucial to consider federal tax requirements and consequences when choosing the form of business entity. A primary federal tax consideration is avoiding a double layer of tax on business income. This can be accomplished by operating as a passthrough entity, such as a partnership or S corporation. Income is not taxed at the entity level. It passes through to partners and shareholders and is taxed at their rates.

In contrast, C corporations are taxable entities. Furthermore, when a C corporation pays a dividend to its shareholders, this generally is taxable to the shareholder. It must be noted that income of a passthrough entity is allocable and taxable to its owners, whether or not the income is actually distributed to the partner or shareholder. Dividends are not taxed unless there is an actual distribution.

While a partnership is organized under state law, an S corporation is a creature of the federal tax system. The S corporation is a regular corporation for state law purposes.

Advantages of partnerships

Unlike an S corporation shareholder, anyone or any entity can be a partner. S corporations are limited to 100 shareholders; only certain individuals, estates and trusts are eligible to be shareholders. C corporations and nonresident aliens cannot be shareholders of an S corporation.

S corporations are limited to a single class of stock; income and losses must be allocated on the same basis to each shareholder. Having only one class of stock may affect the corporation's ability to raise capital. A partnership can have different classes of partners and has more flexibility for allocating income and losses to different types of partners.

Partnership liabilities can increase a partner's basis in the partnership, offsetting distributions of cash and reducing their taxation. The increased basis allowed partners to use losses generated by the partnership. Liabilities of an S corporation do not create stock basis; separate bases in stock and debt must be calculated. This lack of basis may limit the use of losses generated by the S corporation.

Contributions of appreciated property by a partner to the partnership generally are not taxable, even if the partner is not part of a group controlling the partnership. Contributions by a shareholder to a corporation are tax-free only if the shareholders are part of a group controlling 80 percent of the corporation after the contribution. However, a partnership must follow special allocation rules for handling built-in gain on contributed property, whereas S corporations do not have special allocation rules in this circumstance.

Conclusion

In general, a partnership offers more flexibility than an S corporation in the treatment of taxes. However, S corporation shareholders do have limited legal liability, while general partners are not insulated from the partnership's debts and liabilities.