Important Developments in the Federal Income Taxation of S Corporations
|
|
- Jonas Norris
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 American Bar Association Section of Taxation S Corporation Committee Important Developments in the Federal Income Taxation of S Corporations Boca Raton, Florida January 21, 2011 Dana Lasley Tax Director Deloitte Tax LLP St. Louis, MO dlasley@deloitte.com William Klein Principal Gray Plant Mooty Minneapolis, MN william.klein@gpmlaw.com
2 Important Developments in the Federal Income Taxation of S Corporations I. Recent Legislation TABLE OF CONTENTS II. Court Opinions A. Winter v. Commissioner, 135 T.C. No. 12 (2010) III. S Corporation Private Letter Rulings A. Private Letter Ruling (09/24/10) B. Private Letter Ruling (11/12/10) IV. Other Administrative Guidance A. Chief Counsel Memorandum (12/10/10) B. Action on Decision , IRB 1 (12/27/2010) C. Legal Memorandum (12/23/2010) D. ECC (11/03/2010) E. ECC (09/27/2010) F Priority Guidance Plan Subchapter S Corporations G. Requests for Comments V. News and Commentary Circular 230 Notice Any tax advice included in this written communication was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used by the taxpayer, for the purpose of avoiding any penalties that may be imposed by any governmental taxing authority or agency. 1
3 Important Developments in the Federal Income Taxation of S Corporations ABA Tax Section S Corporations Committee January 2011 I. Recent Legislation Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 (P.L ) (Act Sec. 752): The amount of a shareholder's basis reduction in the stock of an S corporation by reason of a charitable contribution made by the corporation is equal to the shareholder's pro rata share of the adjusted basis of the contributed property. For contributions made in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009, the amount of the reduction is the shareholder's pro rata share of the fair market value of the contributed property. Section 752 of the Act, however, retroactively extends for two years the rule relating to stock basis reduction equal to the adjusted basis of such property, so that it applies for charitable contributions made in tax years beginning before January 1, II. Court Opinions A. Winter v. Commissioner, 135 T.C. No. 12 (2010) (Inconsistent Reporting) Issue: Whether the Tax Court has jurisdiction to review de novo adjustments arising from inconsistencies between the return of a shareholder and that of the S corporation. Facts: Winter was a shareholder in Builders Financial Corp. ( BFC ), an S corporation and parent of Builder s Bank, a subchapter S bank. Winter reported his share of the company s earnings from its regulatory financial filings and not from the Schedule K-1, which the bank prepared for him. He did not notify the Service of this inconsistent reporting; and only after the issuance of the notice of deficiency did the Service assess the income tax resulting from this inconsistent treatment. Accordingly, the Service contends, among other things, that Winter should have reported his shareholder income consistently with the bank s Schedule K-1 and that he failed to include some dividend, interest, and gambling income on his return. Law: 2
4 Under section 6037(c), a shareholder of an S corporation must treat on such shareholder s return all Subchapter S items consistently with such items treatment on the S corporation s return or file a statement with the Service identifying the inconsistency. If such shareholder fails to notify the Service of any inconsistency, then any adjustment required to make the treatment of the items by such shareholder consistent with the treatment of the items on the corporate return are to be treated as arising out of mathematical or clerical errors and assessed according to section 6213(b)(1). I.R.C. 6037(c)(3). In general, section 6213(b) provides that if a taxpayer is notified that, on account of a mathematical or clerical error appearing on the return, an amount of tax in excess of that shown on the return is due, such notice shall not be considered as a notice of deficiency and the taxpayer shall have no right to file a petition with the Tax Court based on such notice. Conclusion: Nevertheless, the majority concluded that the Tax Court has jurisdiction to consider Winter s claim principally on two alternative grounds. First, the notice of deficiency gives the Tax Court jurisdiction over all the issues needed to redetermine Winter s entire tax liability, including the portion resulting from his inconsistent reporting. Specifically, section 6211(a) defines deficiency as the amount by which the correct tax imposed by the Internal Revenue Code exceeds the amount of tax shown on the return plus the amount of tax previously assessed less any rebates. The amount of tax resulting from the inconsistent treatment was included in the calculation of the deficiency, and the merits of this tax liability are before the Tax Court by the parties pleadings. Therefore, section 6213 gives the Tax Court jurisdiction to redetermine a deficiency when a petition is filed timely in response to a notice of deficiency. Second, the overpayment jurisdictional provisions of section 6512 provide the Tax Court with authority to decide all issues necessary to determine the correct amount of income tax for the taxable year in issue. Winter s has claimed an overpayment in his amended petition. In order to determine whether there is an overpayment, the Tax Court must determine the correct tax that should have been paid. The correct tax for determining overpayment even includes unassessed tax, the assessment of which is barred by the statute of limitations. Bachner v. Commissioner, 109 T. C. 125 (1977), affd. without published opinion 172 F.3d 859 (3d Cir. 1998). Even if the Service made the adjustment based on the Schedule K-1 as a mathematical adjustment, the correctness of the adjustment can still be placed in issue, as can any other previously assessed tax, in order to determine the correct amount of the deficiency or overpayment. III. S Corporation Private Letter Rulings A. Private Letter Ruling (Second Class of Stock) Release Date: 09/24/10 Issued By: CC:PSI:BO3 3
5 Summary of Facts: Company was taxed as a C corporation from its incorporation until it elected to be treated as an S corporation. While it was still taxed as a C corporation, Company adopted an employee stock ownership plan, ESOP. The ESOP purchased a minority interest in Company's stock ( First Purchase Shares ). Later, Company undertook a series of transactions that resulted in ESOP becoming the sole owner of Company's outstanding stock. First, Company made a loan, secured by Company stock, to ESOP ( ESOP Loan ). Next, ESOP used the ESOP Loan proceeds to purchase all of the remaining outstanding shares of Company stock ( Second Purchase Shares ). Among its provisions, ESOP provides generally that benefits are distributed to participants at stated periods of time following their termination of employment due to retirement, disability, death, or other reason. Provision A of ESOP provides that an independent appraiser calculates the fair market value of ESOP's assets and reduces that value by any liabilities of ESOP, including the outstanding balance of the ESOP Loan. Provision B of ESOP provides a special valuation rule with respect to First Purchase Shares for purposes of distributions under the plan. Provision B provides that the value of Company shares purchased in connection with the First Purchase Shares will not be decreased or otherwise affected by the outstanding balance of the ESOP Loan proceeds used to purchase the Second Purchase Shares. Company represents that the purpose of Provision B is to protect the value of the First Purchase Shares from a steep decline in value that is normally associated with a highly leveraged employee stock ownership plan transaction. According to Company, First Purchase Shares continue to fluctuate in value with the fortunes of Company and general market conditions, as would occur in the absence of a leveraged employee stock ownership plan transaction. Issue: Whether Company is considered to have a second class of stock in violation of section 1361(b)(1)(D) solely as a result of Provision B. Law: Treas. Reg. section (l)(1) provides that a corporation that has more than one class of stock does not qualify as a small business corporation. A corporation is treated as having only one class of stock if all outstanding shares of stock of the corporation confer identical rights to distribution and liquidation proceeds. Treas. Reg. section (l)(2)(iii)(B) provides that bona fide agreements to redeem or purchase stock at the time of death, divorce, disability, or termination of employment are disregarded in determining whether a corporation s shares of stock confer identical rights. In disregarding agreements that provide for redemption upon termination of employment, Treas. Reg. section (l)(2)(iii)(B), in effect, distinguishes between redemption agreements for stock of employee shareholders and redemption agreements for stock of 4
6 investor shareholders. In this case, the shareholders whose First Purchase Shares are redeemed through the special valuation rule in Provision B are employee shareholders, rather than investor shareholders. In addition, a redemption agreement is disregarded under section (l)(2)(iii)(A) where the principal purpose of the agreement is not to avoid the one class of stock requirement or when the agreement sets a purchase price that does not greatly vary from the fair market value of the stock. Ruling: Provision B will be disregarded in determining whether the outstanding shares of Company stock confer identical rights, and accordingly, Company will not be considered as having more than one class of stock as a result of ESOP s adopting Provision B. B. Private Letter Ruling (Inadvertent Termination) Release Date: 11/12/10 Issued By: CC:PSI:BO2 Summary of Facts: Each year, S Corp. declared a dividend at the end of the year in an amount equal to S Corp. s estimated taxable income for such year. Such dividends were pro-rata based upon the shareholders proportionate ownership interest in S Corp. In the years in which S Corp. s cash flow was inadequate to cover the amount of the declared dividend, however, S Corp. treated the amount of the shortfall as a deemed distribution to its shareholders, followed by a loan from such shareholders back to S Corp. (the Shareholder Loans ). For Shareholder Loans made in Year 1 and Year 2, S Corp. intended to pay n1% interest to Shareholder Loans from C, D, E, and F and n2% interest on Shareholder Loans from A and B. For Shareholder Loans made in Year 3 and thereafter, S Corp. intended to continue to pay disparate rates of interests to its shareholders. Prior to Year 6, all Shareholder Loans from C, D, E, and F were repaid during the year, while Shareholder Loans from A and B were often carried forward from year to year. During Year 6 and Year 7, Shareholder Loans generally remained outstanding for more than a year. During Year 5, S Corp. loaned funds to B (the B Loans ), and B paid simple interest on the B Loans. B made a significant payment on the B Loans by offsetting the dividend otherwise due to B for Year F, and the B Loans were fully satisfied by offsetting the dividend due to B for Year 6. S Corp. became aware that the Shareholder Loans or the B Loans may have created a second class of stock thereby terminating its S election. S Corp. has either taken corrective action, or represented that it will take such action, to pay the appropriate shareholders a consistent rate of interest on the Shareholder Loans for all Years. 5
7 Ruling: Based solely on the facts submitted and the representations made, S Corp. s S election may have been terminated in Year 1 because S Corp. may have had more than one class of stock. If it s S election as terminated, however, such a termination was inadvertent within the meaning of section 1362(f). IV. Other Administrative Guidance A. Chief Counsel Memorandum (Consolidated Group s Acquisition of S Corporation s Assets) Release Date: 12/10/10 Issued By: CC:CORP:2 Summary of Facts: Oldco, a C corporation, made an election to be treated as an S corporation and elected to treat its subsidiary, Sub 1, as a qualified subchapter S subsidiary, i.e., a QSub. Parent, a limited liability company, owned Holdco, a C corporation, and Holdco owned Newco, which was also C corporation. Under an agreement among Parent, Holdco, Newco, Oldco, and Oldco shareholders, Oldco merged with and into Newco, (the Transaction ). The separate corporate existence of Oldco ceased, and Newco continued as the surviving wholly-owned subsidiary of Holdco. In exchange for all of their stock, Oldco shareholders received cash and promissory notes, and the Oldco stock was cancelled. The Transaction agreement (the Agreement ) provided that the parties intended for the Transaction to qualify as: (1) a merger under the state law, and (2) an asset sale for federal tax purposes. Moreover, the Agreement included a provision that required Oldco shareholders to indemnify Holdco and its affiliates for any pre-closing taxes, which were defined to include any built-in gain tax arising under section Oldco timely filed a final Form 1120S for a short taxable year in which it reported net unrealized built-in gain and the resulting tax due under section 1374(a). Exam proposed to adjust Oldco's tax liability due on its final return based on its determination of additional recognized built-in gain, (the Proposed Adjustment ). Issues: 1. Whether the Proposed Adjustment was attributable to Oldco s final taxable year? 2. Whether Newco is the appropriate entity to whom a statutory notice of deficiency with respect to the Proposed Adjustment should be sent. 3. When did Sub 1 become a member of the Holdco Group. 6
8 4. Whether the overlap in short taxable years of Oldco and the Holdco Group affects which entity is liable for the additional tax arising from the Proposed Adjustment or which entity should receive the related statutory notice of deficiency. Law and Analysis: Issue 1 Built-in Gain Tax Section 1374 provides that [i]f for any taxable year beginning in the recognition period an S corporation has a net recognized built-in gain, there is hereby imposed a tax... on the income of such corporation for such taxable year. The merger constituted a disposition of Oldco s section 1374 assets on Date 5. 1 The 10-year recognition period for Oldco began on Date 0, and the disposition occurred on Date 5, which was within Oldco s recognition period. Notwithstanding termination of Oldco s corporate existence and the termination of its S election, any resulting section 1374 tax is still attributable to Oldco s final taxable year. Issue 2 Successor-in-Interest Liability Under the statute of Newco s state of incorporation, the surviving entity in a merger is responsible for all the liabilities and obligations of each of the constituent entities. Oldco and Newco were the constituent entities, and Newco was the surviving entity under state law. Thus Newco is the legal successor-in-interest, which is liable for Oldco s tax deficiency arising from the Proposed Adjustment subject to any applicable limitations on assessment and collection. Although the indemnification provision in the Agreement determined the rights and obligations of the signing parties among themselves, it has no effect on which party is liable under state law. Accordingly, the statutory notice of deficiency should be issued to Newco, as successor-in-interest to Oldco. Issue 3 End-of-the-Day Rule Under the end-of-the-day rule, set forth in Treas. Reg. section (b)(1)(ii)(A) for C corporations and in Treas. Reg. section (a)(4), Ex. 5 for certain former QSubs, a subsidiary becomes a member of a consolidated group at the end of the day on which its status as a member changes, and its tax year ends at that time for all federal income tax purposes. Accordingly, Sub1 s QSub election terminated as of the effective date of the merger. At the end of that day, Newco is treated as transferring Sub 1 s assets to a newly formed corporation in exchange for Sub 1 stock, at which time the newly formed Sub 1 became a member of the Holdco consolidated group. Issue 4 No Several Liability Oldco was never a member of the affiliated group. Consequently, the gain from the sale of Oldco s section 1374 assets was only includible in Oldco s final taxable year. Notwithstanding the overlap of Oldco s final taxable year and the Holdoc Group s initial 1 For federal income tax purposes, the forward triangular merger of Oldco into Newco constituted a sale of Oldco s assets to Newco followed by a liquidation of Oldco. See Rev. Rul. 69-6, C.B
9 consolidate return year, the rules under Treas. Reg. section , which provide for a member of a consolidated group during any part of the consolidated return year to be severally liable for the resulting tax, do not apply to hold the Holdco Group severally liable for the tax deficiency arising from Oldco s sale or to treat Holdco as Oldco s agent. Rather, as explained under Issue 2 above, Newco, as successor-in-interest to Oldco, is primarily liable for any tax deficiency arising from the Proprosed Adjustment. Accordingly, the statutory notice of deficiency should be issued to Newco. B. Action on Decision , IRB 1 (12/27/2010) (Bank Interest Expenses) The Service will acquiesce in the result only in Vainisi v. Commissioner, 599 F.3d 567 (7 th Cir. 2010) involving an S corporation bank s treatment of interest expenses. Issue: Whether section 291 applies to a bank that converted in 1997 from a C corporation to a qualified subchapter S subsidiary( QSub ) as defined in section 1361(b)(3)(B). Discussion: The QSub bank held debt obligations that, pursuant to section 265(b)(3)(B), were qualified tax-exempt obligations ( QTEOs ) subject to a 20-percent interest expense disallowance rule under section 291(a)(3) and (e)(1)(b). Although banks that hold QTEOs typically are subject to the 20-percent disallowance rule, section 1363(b), which sets forth the computation of an S corporation s taxable income, provides in subsection 1363(b)(4) that section 291 shall apply if the S corporation was a C corporation for any of the three immediately preceding taxable years. The Service s position was that section 291(a)(3) applied to the QSub bank, regardless of section 1363(b)(4), because Treas. Reg. section (a)(3) provides that special bank rules continue to apply separately to each QSub that is a bank. Thus, the Service argued that QSub banks must determine income and deductions by employing special bank rules such as section 291(a)(3) before the QSub bank s income and deductions can be treated as income and deductions of the S corporation parent. The Seventh Circuit concluded that section 1363(b)(4) precluded application of section 291 to the S corporation bank, because it had not been a C corporation for any of the three preceding years. The Service will not apply section 291(a)(3) and (e)(1)(b) to a QSub bank or an S corporation bank unless the bank (or any predecessor) was a C corporation for any of the three immediately preceding taxable years. C. Legal Memorandum (12/23/2010) 8
10 This legal memorandum addresses the application of the section 179D deduction to certain S corporations 2. Issues: Where a government entity allocates a section 179D deduction for energy efficient commercial buildings an S corporation "designer" pursuant to section 179D(d)(4 1. Are the shareholders of the designer required to reduce the adjusted bases in their S corporation stock by the amount of the section 179D deduction? 2. Do the provisions of section 1366(d) limit the benefit of the section 179D deduction to the shareholders' adjusted bases in their S corporation stock? Law: Section 179D(d)(4) provides that in the case of energy efficient commercial building property that is installed on or in property owned by a Federal, State, or local government or a political subdivision thereof, the Secretary shall promulgate a regulation to allow the allocation of the Section 179D deduction "to the person primarily responsible for designing the property [the designer] in lieu of the owner of such property." A designer is a person that creates the technical specifications for installation of energy efficient commercial building property for which a deduction is allowed under section 179D. If a government entity hires a designer to perform work on energy efficient commercial building property, and that designer is organized as an S corporation, the contract for services runs between the government entity and the S corporation, regardless of which individual members of the S corporation personally perform the services under the contract. If the government entity allocates a deduction to the designer pursuant to section 179D(d)(4), it is the S corporation that receives the allocation of the section 179D deduction allocation. Although certain deductions of an S corporation may be claimed directly by its shareholders, in those instances, there exists explicit authority providing for such a result. No such authority is provided under section 179D. Accordingly, the deduction, like any other S corporation item of deduction, is used to calculate the entity's ordinary income or loss. Each shareholder's share of that income or loss requires an adjustment to the shareholders' bases in their ownership interests under section 1367(a), and the shareholders' ability to claim any ordinary loss generated by the deduction is limited to the basis in their ownership interest under section 1366(d). Conclusions: 1. The shareholders of the designer must reduce the adjusted bases in their interests or S corporation stock by the amount of the section 179D deduction. 2 This memorandum also applies to partnerships. 9
11 2. Section 1366(d) limits the benefit of the section 179D deduction to the shareholders' adjusted bases in their S corporation stock. D. ECC (11/03/2010) A corporate officer must sign a power of attorney on behalf of an S corporation. Being a stockholder does not give a person authority to act on behalf of the corporate entity. E. ECC (09/27/2010) A purported loan of securities did not create indebtedness for purposes of section 1366(d)(1)(B), citing Deputy v. Du Pont, 308 U.S. 488 (1940) for the proposition that an obligation to close a short sale is not indebtedness. F Priority Guidance Plan Subchapter S Corporations 1. Guidance under sections1362 and 9100 regarding elections of S corporations. 2. Guidance under section Regulations under section 1367 regarding S corporations and back-to-back loans. G. Comments Requested The IRS has requested comments concerning Revenue Procedure , Late Election Relief for S Corporations and Revenue Procedures , Deemed Corporate Election for Late Electing S Corporations. Written comments should be received on or before February 14, 2011 to be assured of consideration. V. News and Commentary Amy S. Elliott, Economic Substance Concerns Over Common Planning Tool may be Legitimate, Official Says, TAX NOTES TODAY, Nov. 9, 2010, available in LEXIS, Tax Library, Tax Analysts File. Donald T. Williamson, S Corporation Stock Basis in Measuring Ordinary Loss, TAX NOTES TODAY, Oct. 6, 2010, available in LEXIS, Tax Library, Tax Analysts File. 10
Important Developments in the Federal Income Taxation of S Corporations
American Bar Association Section of Taxation S Corporation Committee Important Developments in the Federal Income Taxation of S Corporations Grand Hyatt Washington, D.C. May 6, 2011 Dana Lasley Tax Director
More informationAmerican Bar Association Section of Taxation S Corporation Committee. Important Developments in the Federal Income Taxation of S Corporations
American Bar Association Section of Taxation S Corporation Committee Important Developments in the Federal Income Taxation of S Corporations Hyatt Regency Denver, Colorado October 21, 2011 Dana Lasley
More informationAn Analysis of the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010
January 2011 / Issue 1 A legal update from Dechert s Financial Services Group An Analysis of the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010 d Summary The Regulated Investment Company Modernization
More informationDistrict court concludes that taxpayer s refund suit, relating to the carryback of a deduction for foreign taxes, was untimely
IRS Insights A closer look. In this issue: District court concludes that taxpayer s refund suit, relating to the carryback of a deduction for foreign taxes, was untimely... 1 IRS issues Chief Counsel Advice
More informationLimitation on Loss Duplication and Importation of Built-in Losses
Limitation on Loss Duplication and Importation of Built-in Losses 1 Internal Revenue Service Circular 230 Disclosure: As provided for in Treasury regulations, advice (if any) relating to federal taxes
More information23 rd Annual Health Sciences Tax Conference
23 rd Annual Health Sciences Tax Conference December 11, 2013 Disclaimer Any US tax advice contained herein was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties
More informationB = C = Distributing 1 = Distributing 2 = Controlled 1 = Controlled 2 =
Internal Revenue Service Number: 200230006 Release Date: 7/26/2002 Index Number: 355.00-00 Department of the Treasury Washington, DC 20224 Person to Contact: Telephone Number: Refer Reply To: CC:CORP:1-PLR-158635-01
More informationT.J. Henry Associates, Inc. v. Commissioner 80 T.C. 886 (T.C. 1983)
T.J. Henry Associates, Inc. v. Commissioner 80 T.C. 886 (T.C. 1983) JUDGES: Whitaker, Judge. OPINION BY: WHITAKER OPINION CLICK HERE to return to the home page For the years 1976 and 1977, deficiencies
More informationCurrent Developments in Consolidated Returns
Current Developments in Consolidated Returns Affiliated & Related Corporations Committee American Bar Association Tax Section William D. Alexander Associate Chief Counsel (Corporate) Internal Revenue Service
More informationContinuity of Interest and Continuity of Business Enterprise Regulations
PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE TAX STRATEGIES FOR CORPORATE ACQUISITIONS, DISPOSITIONS, SPIN-OFFS, JOINT VENTURES, FINANCINGS, REORGANIZATIONS AND RESTRUCTURINGS 2014 May 2014 Washington, D.C. Continuity of
More informationS CORPORATION UPDATE By Sydney S. Traum, BBA, JD, LLM, CPA all rights reserved by author.
2007-2008 S CORPORATION UPDATE By Sydney S. Traum, BBA, JD, LLM, CPA all rights reserved by author. Portions of this article are adapted from material written by the author for Aspen Publishers loose-leaf
More informationCapital Gains Exclusion for Small Business Stock Held for More Than 5 Years. By Stephen D. D. Hamilton, July 2011
Capital Gains Exclusion for Small Business Stock Held for More Than 5 Years I. Background. By Stephen D. D. Hamilton, July 2011 A. Enactment of exemption. The Creating Small Business Jobs Act of 2010,
More informationTAX MEMORANDUM. CPAs, Clients & Associates. David L. Silverman, Esq. Shirlee Aminoff, Esq. DATE: April 2, Attorney-Client Privilege
LAW OFFICES DAVID L. SILVERMAN, J.D., LL.M. 2001 MARCUS AVENUE LAKE SUCCESS, NEW YORK 11042 (516) 466-5900 SILVERMAN, DAVID L. TELECOPIER (516) 437-7292 NYTAXATTY@AOL.COM AMINOFF, SHIRLEE AMINOFFS@GMAIL.COM
More informationInternal Revenue Code Section 1374 Tax imposed on certain built-in gains.
Internal Revenue Code Section 1374 Tax imposed on certain built-in gains. CLICK HERE to return to the home page (a) General rule. If for any taxable year beginning in the recognition period an S corporation
More informationRedemptions of Partnership Interests and Divisions of Partnerships
College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository William & Mary Annual Tax Conference Conferences, Events, and Lectures 2006 Redemptions of Partnership Interests and
More informationJune 5, Mr. Daniel I. Werfel Acting Commissioner Internal Revenue Service 1111 Constitution Avenue, Room 3000 Washington, DC 20024
June 5, 2013 Mr. Daniel I. Werfel Acting Commissioner Internal Revenue Service 1111 Constitution Avenue, Room 3000 Washington, DC 20024 Re: Comments on Revenue Ruling 99-5 Dear Mr. Werfel: The American
More informationESTATE PLANNING AND ADMINISTRATION FOR S CORPORATIONS
ESTATE PLANNING AND ADMINISTRATION FOR S CORPORATIONS I. INTRODUCTION... 1 II. ALLOCATING INCOME IN THE YEAR OF DEATH... 1 III. SHAREHOLDER ELIGIBILITY... 2 A. Estates... 2 B. Certain Trusts... 3 1. Grantor
More informationSEATA Presentation. S Corporations. Formation and Termination
SEATA Presentation S Corporations Formation and Termination 1 IRC 1361(a)(1) Defines an S corporation, with respect to any taxable year, as a small business corporation for which an election under IRC
More informationAll Cash D Reorganizations & Selected Issues under Section 108(i)
All Cash D Reorganizations & Selected Issues under Section 108(i) Donald W. Bakke Office of the Tax Legislative Counsel U.S. Department of Treasury Bruce A. Decker Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Corporate)
More informationArticle from: Taxing Times. May 2012 Volume 8 Issue 2
Article from: Taxing Times May 2012 Volume 8 Issue 2 Recent Cases on Changes from Erroneous Accounting Methods Do They Apply to Changes in Basis of Computing Reserves? By Peter H. Winslow and Brion D.
More informationRETIREMENT TAXATION UPDATE
RETIREMENT TAXATION UPDATE UNDERSTANDING EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLANS Marc S. Schechter Butterfield Schechter LLP SCHECHTER LLP ATTORNEYS & COUNSELORS 10616 Scripps Summit Court, Suite 200 San Diego,
More informationPRIVATE RULING atty fees to class counsel.txt PRIVATE RULING PRIVATE RULING
PRIVATE RULING 200518017PRIVATE RULING 200518017 "This document may not be used or cited as precedent. Section 6110(j)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code." Section 61 -- Gross Income Defined; Section 6041
More informationTax Considerations in M&A Transactions. Anthony R. Boggs, Esq. Morris, Manning & Martin, LLP
Tax Considerations in M&A Transactions Anthony R. Boggs, Esq. Morris, Manning & Martin, LLP Diagram Legend C corp for U.S. federal income tax purposes Partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes S
More informationCHOICE OF BUSINESS ENTITY: PRESENT LAW AND DATA RELATING TO C CORPORATIONS, PARTNERSHIPS, AND S CORPORATIONS
CHOICE OF BUSINESS ENTITY: PRESENT LAW AND DATA RELATING TO C CORPORATIONS, PARTNERSHIPS, AND S CORPORATIONS Prepared by the Staff of the JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION April 10, 2015 JCX-71-15 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...
More informationInternal Revenue Service
Internal Revenue Service Number: 9845012 Release Date: 11/06/1998 Department of the Treasury Washington, DC 20224 Third Party Communication: None Date of Communication: Not Applicable Index Number: 0351.00-00;
More information135 T.C. No. 4 UNITED STATES TAX COURT. WILLIAM PRENTICE COOPER, III, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
135 T.C. No. 4 UNITED STATES TAX COURT WILLIAM PRENTICE COOPER, III, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket Nos. 24178-09W, 24179-09W. Filed July 8, 2010. P filed two claims
More informationThe Internal Revenue Service is aware that certain promoters are advising
Part I Income Taxes Meritless Filing Position Based on Sections 932(c) and 934(b) Notice 2004-45 The Internal Revenue Service is aware that certain promoters are advising taxpayers to take highly questionable,
More informationWhether an account receivable established by an election to apply Rev. Proc constitutes related party indebtedness under I.R.C. 965(b)(3).
Office of Chief Counsel Internal Revenue Service Memorandum Number: AM2008-010 Release Date: 9/12/2008 CC:INTL:B03:JLParry POSTN-120024-08 UILC: 965.00-00 date: September 04, 2008 to: from: Area Counsel
More informationALI-ABA Course of Study Consolidated Tax Return Regulations. Cosponsored by the ABA Section of Taxation. September 22-23, 2005 Washington, D.C.
ALI-ABA Course of Study Consolidated Tax Return Regulations Cosponsored by the ABA Section of Taxation September 22-23, 2005 CONTINUITY OF INTEREST AND CONTINUITY OF BUSINESS ENTERPRISE REGULATIONS Mark
More informationNumber: Release Date: 5/24/2002 CC:INTL:4 POSTF UILC: ; ; ; ; 6038B.00-00
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE WASHINGTON, D.C. 20224 OFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL February 19, 2002 Number: 200221046 Release Date: 5/24/2002 CC:INTL:4 POSTF-150593-01 UILC: 367.01-00;
More informationThis revenue procedure facilitates the grant of relief to taxpayers that request
26 CFR 601.105: Examination of returns and claims for refund, credit or abatement; determination of correct tax liability. (Also: Part I, 1361, 1362; 1.1361-1, 1.1361-3, 1.1362-4, 1.1362-6, 301.7701-3,
More informationTax Planning for S Corporations: Mergers and Acquisitions Involving S Corporations (Part 1)
Tax Planning for S Corporations: Mergers and Acquisitions Involving S Corporations (Part 1) Jerald David August and Stephen R. Looney 1.01 INTRODUCTION The tax considerations relating to the sale and purchase
More informationSUMMARY: This document contains final regulations relating to basis of indebtedness
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 07/23/2014 and available online at http://federalregister.gov/a/2014-17336, and on FDsys.gov [4830-01-p] DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
More informationFederal Taxation on Disposition of Partnership Interests
College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository William & Mary Annual Tax Conference Conferences, Events, and Lectures 1994 Federal Taxation on Disposition of Partnership
More informationIRS CIRCULAR 230 (Eff and modified thereafter)
IRS CIRCULAR 230 (Eff. 6-20-05 and modified thereafter) PURPOSE/APPLICATION: Provides ethical standards for attorneys, accountants and other tax professionals practicing before IRS and attempts to provide
More informationPENSION & BENEFITS! T he cross-border transfer of employees can have A BNA, INC. REPORTER
A BNA, INC. PENSION & BENEFITS! REPORTER Reproduced with permission from Pension & Benefits Reporter, 36 BPR 2712, 11/24/2009. Copyright 2009 by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. (800-372-1033) http://www.bna.com
More informationPurchase and Sale of Interests; Asset and Stock Acquisitions; Redemptions; and Terminations in Pass-Through Entities
College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository William & Mary Annual Tax Conference Conferences, Events, and Lectures 1994 Purchase and Sale of Interests; Asset and
More informationDiscussion Topics. Primer on Unsuccessful Subsidiaries in Consolidated Returns. PLI Tax Attributes and Consolidation February 21, 2018
LI Tax Attributes and Consolidation February 21, 2018 Gerald (Jerry) B. Fleming IR, enior Technician Reviewer (Corporate Branch 2) William D. Alexander kadden, Arps, late, Meagher & Flom LL tuart J. Goldring
More informationSection 368(a)(1) defines the term "reorganization" to mean the following seven forms of transactions:
I. INTRODUCTION 1 A. Types of Tax-free Reorganizations Section 368(a)(1) defines the term "reorganization" to mean the following seven forms of transactions: 1. An "A" reorganization -- a statutory merger
More informationTax Matters Partner: Power & Responsibility Partnership Committee American Bar Association, Tax Section January 21, 2011
Tax Matters Partner: Power & Responsibility Partnership Committee American Bar Association, Tax Section January 21, 2011 1. Scope a. The term Tax Matters Partner carries meaning only within TEFRA unified
More information26 CFR : Rulings and determination letters. (Also Part I, 355; ) Rev. Proc
26 CFR 601.201: Rulings and determination letters. (Also Part I, 355; 1.355 1.) Rev. Proc. 96 30 SECTION 355 CHECKLIST QUESTIONNAIRE CONTENTS 1. PURPOSE 2. BACKGROUND 3. CHANGES 4. INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED
More informationRe: Recommendations for Priority Guidance Plan (Notice )
Courier s Desk Internal Revenue Service Attn: CC:PA:LPD:PR (Notice 2018-43) 1111 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20224 Re: Recommendations for 2018-2019 Priority Guidance Plan (Notice 2018-43)
More informationArticle from: Reinsurance News. March 2014 Issue 78
Article from: Reinsurance News March 2014 Issue 78 Determining Premiums Paid For Purposes Of Applying The Premium Excise Tax To Funds Withheld Reinsurance Brion D. Graber This article first appeared in
More informationLegislative Information - LBDC
Page 1 of 9 PART A Section 1. Paragraph (a) of subdivision 6 of section 425 of the real property tax law, as amended by chapter 6 of the laws of 2010, and as further amended by subdivision (b) of section
More informationNEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION TAX SECTION REPORT ON REVENUE RULING v2
NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION TAX SECTION REPORT ON REVENUE RULING 99-6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL RECOMMENDATIONS...4 II. BACKGROUND...5 A. The Ruling... 5 1. Situation 1 Partner
More informationALI-ABA Course of Study Consolidated Tax Return Regulations. Cosponsored by the ABA Section of Taxation. October 5-6, 2006 Washington, D.C.
2229 ALI-ABA Course of Study Consolidated Tax Return Regulations Cosponsored by the ABA Section of Taxation October 5-6, 2006 Washington, D.C. Continuity of Interest and Continuity of Business Enterprise
More informationCHISM ICE CREAM COMPANY v. COMMISSIONER 21 T.C.M. 25 (1962) T.C. Memo Chism Ice Cream Company. Commissioner.
CHISM ICE CREAM COMPANY v. COMMISSIONER 21 T.C.M. 25 (1962) T.C. Memo. 1962-6 Chism Ice Cream Company v. Commissioner. Estate of E. W. Chism, Deceased, Clara Chism, Executrix, and Clara Chism v. Commissioner.
More informationGENERAL EXPLANATION OF TAX LEGISLATION ENACTED IN 2015 JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION
1 [JOINT COMMITTEE PRINT] GENERAL EXPLANATION OF TAX LEGISLATION ENACTED IN 2015 PREPARED BY THE STAFF OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION MARCH 2016 SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING VerDate Sep
More informationDate: November 20, Refer Reply To: CC:IT&A:5 - PLR In Re: * * *
Citations: LTR 200712013 Date: Nov. 20, 2006 No Recognition of Gain Realized on Reverse Like-Kind Exchange The Service has ruled that section 1031(f) will not apply to trigger recognition of any gain realized
More informationAnti-Loss Importation & Anti-Loss Duplication Rules Update
Anti-Loss Importation & Anti-Loss Duplication Rules Update Scott M. Levine Partner Jones Day Krishna Vallabhaneni Attorney-Advisor (Tax Legislation) U.S. Department of the Treasury Office of Tax Policy
More informationCONVERTIBLE PROMISSORY NOTE. , 20 [City], [State]
TECHSTARS FORM OF NOTE http://www.techstars.com/ DRAFT OF 6/9/2011 THIS CONVERTIBLE PROMISSORY NOTE HAS NOT BEEN REGISTERED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS AMENDED. NO SALE OR DISPOSITION MAY BE EFFECTED
More informationThis notice announces that the Department of the Treasury ( Treasury
Additional Guidance Under Section 965; Guidance Under Sections 62, 962, and 6081 in Connection With Section 965; and Penalty Relief Under Sections 6654 and 6655 in Connection with Section 965 and Repeal
More informationUS TAX COURT gges t US TAX COURT JUL * JUL :39 AM. v. Docket No
US TAX COURT gges t US TAX COURT RECEIVED y % sus efiled JUL 19 2018 * JUL 19 2018 12:39 AM RESERVE MECHANICAL CORP. F.K.A. RESERVE CASUALTY CORP., Petitioner, ELECTRONICALLY FILED v. Docket No. 14545-16
More informationS Corporation Shareholder Stock Basis & Bona Fide Shareholder Debt
S Corporation Shareholder Stock Basis & Bona Fide Shareholder Debt Shareholder Debt Basis IRC 1366(d)(1)(B) states that losses are allowed up to the amount of the shareholder's adjusted basis of any indebtedness
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-60978 COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, versus Petitioner-Appellant, BROOKSHIRE BROTHERS HOLDING, INC. and SUBSIDIARIES, Respondent-Appellee.
More informationRev. Proc SECTION 1. PURPOSE
26 CFR 601.105: Examination of returns and claims for refund, credit or abatement; determination of correct tax liability. (Also Part I, 1361, 1362; 1.1361 1, 1.1361 3, 1.1362 4, 1.1362 6, 301.9100 1,
More informationBOARD OF EQUALIZATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
0 In the Matter of the Appeal of: BAYANI B. VILLENA AND THELMA F. VILLENA Representing the Parties: BOARD OF EQUALIZATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA SUMMARY DECISION Case No. 0 Adopted: May, For Appellants: Tax
More informationFederal Income Tax Examinations of Pass-Through Entities
College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository William & Mary Annual Tax Conference Conferences, Events, and Lectures 2006 Federal Income Tax Examinations of Pass-Through
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Peter McLauchlan v. Case: CIR 12-60657 Document: 00512551524 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/06/2014Doc. 502551524 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT PETER A. MCLAUCHLAN, United States
More informationTax Considerations in Buying or Selling a Business
Tax Considerations in Buying or Selling a Business By Charles A. Wry, Jr. mbbp.com Corporate IP Licensing & Strategic Alliances Employment & Immigration Taxation 781-622-5930 CityPoint 230 Third Avenue,
More informationCERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION KKR & CO. INC. ARTICLE I NAME. The name of the Corporation is KKR & Co. Inc. (the Corporation ).
CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION OF KKR & CO. INC. ARTICLE I NAME The name of the Corporation is KKR & Co. Inc. (the Corporation ). ARTICLE II REGISTERED OFFICE AND AGENT The address of the Corporation s registered
More informationUniversity of Baltimore School of Law Corporate Reorganizations Spring, Class 1: Introduction to the Basics of Corporate Reorganizations
University of Baltimore School of Law Corporate Reorganizations Spring, 2018 Class 1: Introduction to the Basics of Corporate Reorganizations Richard Heinecke* 703-815-2488 home RNHeinecke@verizon.net
More informationMassachusetts Society of CPA's 2012 Year End Tax Update - S Corps
Massachusetts Society of CPA's 2012 Year End Tax Update - S Corps Current State Developments a. Reduced corporate rate from 8.25% (2011) to 8.0% (2012) b. S corp rate when gross receipts exceed $9.0M reduced
More informationThe Intersection of Subchapter K and Consolidated Returns
The Intersection of Subchapter K and Consolidated Returns Affiliated & Related Corporations Committee American Bar Association Tax Section Greg Fairbanks Grant Thornton LLP Washington, DC E.J. Forlini
More informationArticle 1 Section moves to amend H.F. No as follows: 1.2 Delete everything after the enacting clause and insert: 1.
1.1... moves to amend H.F. No. 4385 as follows: 1.2 Delete everything after the enacting clause and insert: 1.3 "ARTICLE 1 1.4 FEDERAL TAX CONFORMITY 1.5 Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2017 Supplement,
More informationCurrent Developments: Affiliated and Related Corporations
American Bar Association Section of Taxation Current Developments: Affiliated and Related Corporations January 21, 2011 Michelle Albert Ernst & Young LLP Marcie Barese PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Andrew
More informationM E M O R A N D U M. Executive Summary
M E M O R A N D U M From: Thomas J. Nichols, Esq. Date: March 12, 2019 Re: 2017 Wisconsin Act 368 Authority Executive Summary State income taxes paid by S corporations and partnerships, limited liability
More informationWilliam & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository
College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository William & Mary Annual Tax Conference Conferences, Events, and Lectures 1997 S Corporations Samuel P. Starr Repository
More informationT.C. Memo UNITED STATES TAX COURT. NICHOLAS A. AND MARJORIE E. PALEVEDA, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
T.C. Memo. 1997-416 UNITED STATES TAX COURT NICHOLAS A. AND MARJORIE E. PALEVEDA, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 840-96. Filed September 18, 1997. Nicholas A. Paleveda,
More information142 T.C. No. 4 UNITED STATES TAX COURT. LAW OFFICE OF JOHN H. EGGERTSEN P.C., Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
142 T.C. No. 4 UNITED STATES TAX COURT LAW OFFICE OF JOHN H. EGGERTSEN P.C., Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 15479-11. Filed February 12, 2014. During its taxable
More informationProposed Regulations Would Permit Cross-Border A Reorganizations For the First Time in 70 Years. July 2005
PRACTICING LAW INSTITUTE TAX STRATEGIES FOR CORPORATE ACQUISITIONS, DISPOSITIONS, SPIN-OFFS, JOINT VENTURES, FINANCINGS, REORGANIZATIONS AND RESTRUCTURINGS 2005 Proposed Regulations Would Permit Cross-Border
More informationDay 1 December 1, 2011:
BUSINESS PLANNING WITH S CORPS, PART 1 & PART 2 First Run Broadcast: December 1 & 2, 2011 1:00 p.m. E.T./12:00 p.m. C.T./11:00 a.m. M.T./10:00 a.m. P.T. (60 minutes each day) Though LLCs have become the
More informationALI-ABA Course of Study Consolidated Tax Return Regulations. Cosponsored by the ABA Section of Taxation September 25-26, 2008 Washington, D.C.
1173 ALI-ABA Course of Study Consolidated Tax Return Regulations Cosponsored by the ABA Section of Taxation September 25-26, 2008 Washington, D.C. Recent Developments in the Step Transaction Doctrine By
More informationAppendix B. Internal Revenue Code and Regulations
Appendix B Internal Revenue Code and Regulations Internal Revenue Code Sections 860A 860G (REMICs)... 2 Section 1272(a)(6)... 13 Section 7701(i)... 14 REMIC Regulations Section 1.860A-0 et seq.... 15 Sears
More informationAmerican Bar Association. Section of Taxation. Tax Accounting Committee. January 29, Accounting for Ratable and Non-Ratable Service Contracts
American Bar Association Section of Taxation Tax Accounting Committee January 29, 2016 Accounting for Ratable and Non-Ratable Service Contracts Moderator: Les Schneider, Partner, Ivins, Phillips & Barker,
More informationMisclassification of Employees And Section 530 Relief
taxnotes Misclassification of Employees And Section 530 Relief By Phyllis Horn Epstein Reprinted from Tax Notes, March 13, 2017, p. 1411 Volume 154, Number 11 March 13, 2017 (C) Tax Analysts 2016. All
More informationSubchapter K Regulations. Sec Partners, not partnership, subject to tax.
Subchapter K Regulations Sec. 1.701-1 Partners, not partnership, subject to tax. Partners are liable for income tax only in their separate capacities. Partnerships as such are not subject to the income
More informationT.C. Memo UNITED STATES TAX COURT. KENNETH L. MALLORY AND LARITA K. MALLORY, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
T.C. Memo. 2016-110 UNITED STATES TAX COURT KENNETH L. MALLORY AND LARITA K. MALLORY, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 14873-14. Filed June 6, 2016. Joseph A. Flores,
More informationH. Compensation. Present Law
1. Nonqualified deferred compensation In general H. Compensation Present Law Compensation may be received currently or may be deferred to a later time. The tax treatment of deferred compensation depends
More informationPrivate Letter Ruling Designated Settlement Funds
CLICK HERE to return to the home page Private Letter Ruling 200602017 Designated Settlement Funds September 28, 2005 Release Date: 1/13/2006 In Re: * * * LEGEND: Fund = * * * Life Insurance Co. = * * *
More informationTax Considerations in Buying or Selling a Business
Tax Considerations in Buying or Selling a Business By Charles A. Wry, Jr. @MorseBarnes Boston, MA Cambridge, MA Waltham, MA mbbp.com This article is not intended to constitute legal or tax advice and cannot
More informationMemorandum. Office of Chief Counsel Internal Revenue Service. Number: Release Date: 7/7/2006 CC:PA:APJP:B2:AMIELKE POSTN
Office of Chief Counsel Internal Revenue Service Memorandum Number: 200627023 Release Date: 7/7/2006 CC:PA:APJP:B2:AMIELKE POSTN-112965-06 UILC: 6166.00-00, 6501.00-00, 6213.02-00, 7479.00-00, 7479.01-02
More informationTAX PLANNING FOR THE DISPOSITION OF PARTNERSHIP INTERESTS S
TAX PLANNING FOR THE DISPOSITION OF PARTNERSHIP INTERESTS S by Richard A. Shaw Higgs, Fletcher & Mack LLP 401 West A Street, Suite 2600 San Diego, California 92101 (619) 236-1551 shawr@higgslaw.com I.
More informationGarnett v. Comm r., 132 T.C. No. 19 (2009) Thompson v. United States, [ USTC 50,501] (Fed. Cl. 2009) By C. Fred Daniels and William S.
Garnett v. Comm r., 132 T.C. No. 19 (2009) Thompson v. United States, [2009-2 USTC 50,501] (Fed. Cl. 2009) By C. Fred Daniels and William S. Forsberg The Tax Court and the Court of Federal Claims recently
More informationChapter Two - Formation of a Corporation
Chapter Two - Formation of a Corporation Fundamental income tax elements: 1) Transferor: 351(a) - nonrecognition treatment applicable to the asset transferor (if certain conditions are met); otherwise:
More informationA Comparison of the Merger and Acquisition Provisions of Present Law with the Provisions in the Senate Finance Committee's Draft Bill
Penn State Law elibrary Journal Articles Faculty Works 1-1-1985 A Comparison of the Merger and Acquisition Provisions of Present Law with the Provisions in the Senate Finance Committee's Draft Bill Samuel
More informationTECHNICAL EXPLANATION OF THE REVENUE PROVISIONS OF H.R. 5982, THE SMALL BUSINESS TAX RELIEF ACT OF 2010
TECHNICAL EXPLANATION OF THE REVENUE PROVISIONS OF H.R. 5982, THE SMALL BUSINESS TAX RELIEF ACT OF 2010 Prepared by the Staff of the JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION July 30, 2010 JCX-43-10 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...
More informationS Corporations Corporations that have elected to be taxed as passthrough entities under subchapter S of the IRC
For non-cash donations of $5,000 or greater, the donor must obtain a qualified appraisal by a qualified appraiser as described under IRC 170(f)(11)(E). These guidelines will be considered satisfied if
More informationCHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS OF APPRECIATED PROPERTY
CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS OF APPRECIATED PROPERTY Publication CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS OF APPRECIATED PROPERTY December 14, 2011 The holiday season is a particularly good time for many individuals to consider
More informationPart I. Rulings and Decisions Under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
Part I. Rulings and Decisions Under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 Section 41. Credit for Increasing Research Activities A notice describes filing rules for certain claims arising under section 41 of
More informationIMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR THE LIVE PROGRAM
FOR LIVE PROGRAM ONLY Partnership Terminations: Mastering Section 708 Filing Short Year Returns, Revisiting Elections, Amortization Opportunities, Basis Adjustments and More WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 25, 2017,
More informationThis case is referenced in an endnote at the Bradford Tax Institute. CLICK HERE to go to the home page. T.C. Memo UNITED STATES TAX COURT
This case is referenced in an endnote at the Bradford Tax Institute. CLICK HERE to go to the home page. T.C. Memo. 2004-132 UNITED STATES TAX COURT FRANK CHEN, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
More informationPUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES TAX COURT (T.C. No )
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit January 13, 2009 PUBLISH Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT MMC CORP.; MIDWEST MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS,
More informationEmployee Plans. basic, and field prototype plans must be
Employee Plans Administrative 168.1 Affiliated service group; individually designed plans; amendment. An extension is provided of the time period within which individually designed retirement plans must
More informationInternal Revenue Service
Internal Revenue Service Number: 200329021 Release Date: 7/18/2003 Index: 1031.00-00 Department of the Treasury P.O. Box 7604 Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 Person to Contact: Telephone Number:
More informationReal Estate Tax Forum
TAX LAW AND ESTATE PLANNING SERIES Tax Law and Practice Course Handbook Series Number D-477 19th Annual Real Estate Tax Forum Volume Two Co-Chairs Leslie H. Loffman Sanford C. Presant Blake D. Rubin To
More informationIU INTERNATIONAL CORP. v. U.S., Cite as 77 AFTR 2d (34 Fed Cl 767), 2/08/1996, Code Sec(s) 312; 1502
IU INTERNATIONAL CORP. v. U.S., Cite as 77 AFTR 2d 96-696 (34 Fed Cl 767), 2/08/1996, Code Sec(s) 312; 1502 Irving Salem, New York, N.Y., for Plaintiff. Mildred L. Seidman and Jeffrey H. Skatoff, Dept.
More informationT.C. Memo UNITED STATES TAX COURT. JAMES MAGUIRE AND JOY MAGUIRE, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
T.C. Memo. 2012-160 UNITED STATES TAX COURT JAMES MAGUIRE AND JOY MAGUIRE, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent MARC MAGUIRE AND PAMELA MAGUIRE, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
More informationSUMMARY OF LISTED TRANSACTIONS REVISED 10/26/18
SUMMARY OF LISTED TRANSACTIONS REVISED 10/26/18 1. Revenue Ruling 90-105 Certain Accelerated Deductions for Contributions to a Qualified Cash or Deferred Arrangement or Matching Contributions to a Defined
More informationBobrow v. Comm'r T.C. Memo (T.C. 2014)
CLICK HERE to return to the home page Bobrow v. Comm'r T.C. Memo 2014-21 (T.C. 2014) MEMORANDUM OPINION NEGA, Judge: Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioners' income tax for taxable year 2008
More information