Posts Tagged ‘tax’

Massachusetts DOR Issues Guidelines on 2010 Sales Tax Holiday

Monday, August 9th, 2010 by Moore McLaughlin

The Massachusetts Department of Revenue provided guidelines on the 2010 sales tax holiday for August 14 and 15, 2010, during which most purchases made by individuals for personal use will not be subject to Massachusetts sales or use taxes. During these two days, nonbusiness retail sales of tangible personal property costing $2,500 or less are exempt from sales and use taxes subject to certain exclusions. All motor vehicles, motorboats, meals, telecommunications services, gas, steam, tobacco products, and any single item costing over $2,500 do not qualify for the sales tax holiday exemption and remain subject to tax. ( Massachusetts Technical Information Release 10-10, 08/05/2010 .)

Qualifying purchases. The sales tax exemption applies to sales of tangible personal property for personal use only. Purchases exempt from sales tax are also exempt from use tax. Therefore, eligible items of tangible personal property purchased on the Massachusetts sales tax holiday from out-of-state retailers for use in Massachusetts are exempt from Massachusetts use tax. Alcoholic beverages sold for off-premises consumption by liquor or package stores qualify for the 2010 sales tax holiday.

Nonexempt sales. The sales tax holiday does not apply to sales of motorboats, meals, telecommunications services, gas, steam, electricity, tobacco products, any single item costing in excess of $2,500, and all sales of motor vehicles. Layaway sales do not qualify for the exemption even if the last required payment or payments necessary to complete the transaction are made on August 14 or 15, 2010. Sales of the excluded items remain taxable.

Specific rules. The Department provided specific rules to be applied by retailers in administering the Massachusetts sales tax holiday exemption.

Threshold: Generally, sales or use tax is due on the entire sales price of a single item worth more than $2,500. The sales price is not reduced by the threshold amount. However, since there is no sales tax on any article of clothing worth less than $175, only the increment of the sales price of the article of clothing over $175 is subject to tax.

Multiple items on one invoice: Separate invoices do not have to be prepared when a customer purchases multiple items during the sales tax holiday. As long as each item is priced $2,500 or less, there is no upper limit on the tax-free amount each customer may purchase.

Bundled transactions: When several items are offered for sale at a single price, the entire package is exempt if the sales price of the package is $2,500 or less. Items that are priced separately and are to be sold separately qualify for the sales tax holiday exemption if the price of each item is $2,500 or less.

Coupons and discounts: If a store coupon or discount reduces the sales price of an article, the discounted sales price determines whether the sales price is within the sales tax holiday threshold. If the purchaser bought both an eligible property and a taxable property and the coupon or discount applies to the total amount paid by the purchaser, the seller allocates the discount on a pro rata basis to each article sold.

Exchanges: In case of an even exchange, no tax is due even if the exchange is made after the sales tax holiday.

Special orders: Special order items are eligible for the sales tax holiday exemption provided they are ordered and paid in full on the sales tax holiday weekend and the cost of each item is $2,500 or less even if the items are delivered at a later date. A prior special order purchase with a deposit made before August 14, 2010 will not qualify for the sales tax holiday exemption even if the customer pays the entire remaining balance due on August 14 or 15, 2010.

Rain checks: Eligible property bought with the use of a rain check during the sales tax holiday weekend qualifies for the exemption regardless of when the rain check was issued. Issuance of a rain check during the sales tax holiday weekend will not qualify otherwise eligible property for the sales tax holiday exemption if the property is actually purchased after the sales tax holiday.

Rentals: Generally, rentals for 30 days or less of eligible tangible personal property are eligible for the sales tax holiday even if the rental period covers days before or after the holiday provided payment in full is made during the sales tax holiday weekend.

Rebates: A rebate is generally treated as a cash discount and is excluded from the sales price. So, the discounted sales price determines whether the sales price is within the sales tax holiday threshold, and tax must be charged on the full purchase price if it is over $2,500. If the customer receives a rebate after the sale by mailing a coupon to the manufacturer, the full purchase price of the property determines whether the sales price is within the sales tax holiday price threshold and tax must be charged on the full purchase price if it is over $2,500. If the customer receives a cash discount from the vendor upon the purchase of tangible property and a manufacturer’s rebate after the sale, only the cash discount given by the vendor is excluded from the sales price for purposes of the sales tax holiday exemption.

Internet sales: An eligible property ordered over the Internet is exempt if it is ordered and paid for on August 14 or 15, 2010, Eastern Daylight Time, even if the property is delivered after the sales tax holiday period.

Splitting items normally sold together: Articles normally sold as a single unit cannot be priced separately and sold as individual items in order to qualify for the sales tax holiday exemption.

Returns: Under the law, sales tax may only be refunded if returns are made within 90 days of the sale. During the 90-day period after August 14 or 15, 2010, a retailer may not credit a retail customer who returns an item that could have qualified for the sales tax holiday exemption, unless the customer provides a receipt or invoice showing the tax was paid or the seller’s records show that tax was paid.

Erroneously collected taxes: Customers who were erroneously charged sales tax for an exempt purchase may obtain a tax refund from the vendor. The vendor that has remitted erroneously collected tax to the Department may file an abatement application within three years with satisfactory evidence that the vendor credited or refunded the tax to the purchaser.

Responsibilities of retailers. All Massachusetts businesses normally making taxable sales of tangible personal property on August 14 and 15, 2010 and out-of-state retailers registered to collect Massachusetts sales and use taxes must participate in the sales tax holiday. Any sales or use tax erroneously collected by a retailer during the sales tax holiday must be remitted to the Department. Retailers must keep normal business records showing the date of sale, items purchased and selling price. Purchasers paying for tangible personal property with business credit cards or checks must be charged tax on the items purchased. Normal business records showing the date of sale, items purchased, and selling price must be kept by the retailer/vendor. However, a separate certification of nonbusiness use from the purchaser will not be required for the 2010 Sales Tax Holiday regardless of the amount of the otherwise qualifying purchase.

Penalties. Retailers that back-date sales occurring after August 15, 2010 or that forward-date sales that occurred before August 14, 2010 in order to make them appear to qualify for the sales tax holiday may be subject to the tax evasion penalties of Mass. Gen. L. § 73 , including a felony conviction, a fine of not more than $100,000 or $500,000 in the case of a corporation, or by imprisonment for not more than five years, or both, and may also be required to pay the costs of prosecution.

Transfer of home to closely held shareholders was constructive dividend—penalties imposed

Monday, August 9th, 2010 by Moore McLaughlin

A new Tax Court decision illustrates the need for closely held corporations to be wary of constructive dividends when dealing with their owners. In RVJ Cezar Corporation et al, TC Memo 2010 –173 a closely held construction company’s transfer of a home to its shareholders resulted in dividend/capital gain income to them, and taxable gain to the corporation. What’s more, both the shareholders and the corporation were held liable for accuracy related penalties.

Background. A dividend is a distribution of property from a corporation to its shareholders out of the corporation’s earnings and profits. (IRC Section 316(a)) The amount of the distribution equals the fair market value of the distributed property on the distribution date. (IRC Sections 301(b)(1) and (3)) For dividends received before 2011, qualified dividend income is taxed at the same rates as long-term capital gain. (IRC Section 1(h)(11)) After 2010, unless Congress changes the rules, dividend income will be taxed as ordinary income. The amount of a distribution that exceeds earnings and profits, and is therefore not a dividend, is taxable capital gain to the recipient. (IRC Section 301(c)(3)) Under long-established case law, dividends may be formally declared or they may be constructive. A constructive dividend arises when a corporation confers a benefit on a shareholder by distributing available earnings and profits without expectation of repayment.

A corporation that distributes appreciated property to a shareholder recognizes gain as if the property were sold to the shareholder at its fair market value. (IRC Section 311(b)(1)) Gain is recognized to the extent that the property’s fair market value exceeds the corporation’s adjusted basis in the property.

Taxpayers are liable for an accuracy-related penalty for any portion of an underpayment of income tax attributable to negligence or disregard of rules and regulations, unless they establish that there was reasonable cause for the underpayment and that they acted in good faith. (IRC Section 6662(a), IRC Section 6662(b)(1), IRC Section 6664(c)(1)) Under IRC Section 6662(b), an accuracy related applies for a substantial understatement of income tax, i.e., the amount of the understatement exceeds the greater of 10% of the tax required to be shown on the return, or $10,000.

Facts. Mr and Mrs. Cezar were the sole shareholders of RVJ Cezar Corporation, which built “spec” houses that it sold to the public. They paid $500 for their stock. Mr. Cezar, a general contractor, was the sole employee of the corporation. In 2001, Cezar Corp paid $150,000 for a lot, financing part of the purchase price with a mortgage, and spent $502,000 building an amenity-rich home approximately twice the size of its usual spec homes. Cezar Corp was listed as the sole owner of the spec home on the blueprints, permit, and notice of completion. Some of the construction materials were paid with a credit card issued in both Mr. Cezar’s name and Cezar Corp, and the Cezars were unable to document most of the labor costs of building the home.

The home was finished in 2004 and was offered for sale, but there were no takers. That year, Cezar Corp transferred the lot and improvements to the Cezars by quitclaim deed; they assumed the outstanding mortgage of $57,227. At the time of the transfer the lot and improvements had a total fair market value of $920,000. The transfer of ownership report filed with the Assessor’s Office did not indicate that the property interest transferred to the Cezars was a partial interest. The Cezars did not report the receipt of the lot or the improvements on their return for 2004, nor did the corporation report the distribution of the lot and the improvements on its return for 2004.

On audit, IRS determined that the distribution of the lot and the improvements was a constructive dividend from the corporation. It determined that the Cezars received a qualified dividend up to the amount of the corporation’s earnings and profits, and treated the balance of the distribution, less their $500 initial capital contribution, as long-term capital gain. IRS also determined that both the Cezars and their corporation were liable for the accuracy related penalty.

Tax Court sides with IRS. The Cezars conceded that they received the lot as a constructive dividend from the corporation. However, they argued that the improvements were not a constructive dividend because they owned the improvements by having paid for the construction materials and having done all the work to construct the improvements. The Tax Court agreed with IRS’s assessment that improvements are built on land that one owns or else there would be an agreement identifying the rights and responsibilities of the parties. The Cezars failed to show that there was an agreement between them and the corporation that would have allowed them to construct a home on the corporation’s property. Their ownership argument also was directly contradicted by Mr. Cezar’s statements during the audit that the lot and the improvements were both corporate assets. Moreover, there was no credible evidence to support the Cezars’ claim that they owned the improvements by paying the construction costs and personally completing the labor. The only records the Cezars produced to establish that they paid the construction costs were insufficient. Furthermore, the corporation was the sole owner of the lot as well as the improvements from the start of construction until the distribution to the Cezars. The corporation received property tax bills for both the lot and the improvements and did not protest that it had been billed for improvements that it did not own. The Tax Court also find it compelling that the corporation, which was in the business of building and selling homes, offered the lot and the improvements for sale without obtaining any transfer of interest from the Cezars. No prospective buyer would buy only the improvements and not the lot or vice versa. The Tax Court also noted that no other spec home that the corporation sold before or since was owned by the Cezars individually. Rather, all the homes and lots were owned and offered for sale by the corporation.

As a result, the Tax Court found that the Cezars did not establish that they owned the improvements, and sustained IRS’s determination that the Cezars must include the distribution of the lot and the improvements in gross income as a constructive dividend from the corporation. The Tax Court also found that treatment of the home as a constructive dividend to the Cezars caused the corporation to recognize taxable income to the extent that the fair market value of the lot and improvement exceeded its adjusted basis.

The Tax Court also hit the Cezars with an accuracy related penalty for the underpayment of income tax attributable to negligence or disregard of rules and regulations. It also hit Cezar Corp with an accuracy related penalty for substantial understatement of its income tax.

With proper planning, this tax and the penalties could have been avoided.  The tax attorneys at McLaughlin & Quinn, LLC regularly provide planning for taxpayers in situations such as the one faced by the Cezars.  For more information, contact F. Moore McLaughlin, IV, Esq., CPA by e-mail at MMcLaughlin@McLaughlinQuinn.com or by phone at 401-421-5115 ext. 212.

The Truth About Frivolous Tax Arguments

Wednesday, February 10th, 2010 by Moore McLaughlin

Don't go to jailThe IRS has issued a detailed, 80-page document discussing and rebutting many of the more common frivolous arguments made by individuals and groups that oppose compliance with federal tax laws. An accompanying news release reminds taxpayers that the penalty for frivolous tax returns is $5,000, and applies when a person submits a tax return or other specified submission, and any portion of the submission is based on a position that IRS identifies as frivolous. The tax attorneys at McLaughlin & Quinn, LLC frequently see taxpayers try to raise these arguments.  Partners Moore McLaughlin, Esq., CPA and Thomas P. Quinn, Esq. generally convince them to be realistic and deal with the IRS in a forthright manner.

The IRS’s “The Truth About Frivolous Tax Arguments” responds to some of the more common frivolous “legal” arguments about the federal tax system. Each contention is briefly explained, followed by a discussion of the legal authority that rejects the contention.

The document covers these broad categories of frivolous arguments: 

  • Various contentions that: the federal income tax system is voluntary; terms in the Code such as taxable income, gross income and “the taxpayer” are improperly defined; and payment of taxes is unconstitutional. Other arguments in the category have fictional legal bases, for example, that IRS is not an agency of the U.S., or that taxpayers are entitled to the refund of social security taxes paid over their lifetime. 

 

  • Frivolous arguments in collection due process cases, including various contentions that assessments are invalid, or that the statutory notice of deficiency, notice of federal tax lien or statutory notice and demand is invalid.

 

  • Contentions that the Tax Court is not authorized to decide legal issues, or that IRS personnel do not have the authority to seize property in satisfaction of unpaid taxes, or that IRS employees lack credentials.

 

A final section of the IRS’s frivolous tax arguments document explains in detail the penalties that courts may impose on those who pursue tax cases on frivolous grounds, and cites scores of cases rejecting various frivolous arguments and imposing penalties.

For a copy of this complete report, contact Moore McLaughlin, Esq., CPA by e-mail at mmclaughlin@mclaughlinquinn.com.

If you or someone you know owes taxes and needs help dealing with the IRS or state taxing authority, please contact Thomas P. Quinn, Esq. by e-mail at tquinn@mclaughlinquinn.com or Moore McLaughlin, Esq., CPA by e-mail at mmclaughlin@mclaughlinquinn.com or either of them by phone at 401-421-5115.

IRS Commissioner Doesn’t Prepare His Own taxes – Too Complicated

Sunday, January 24th, 2010 by Moore McLaughlin

Douglas ShulmanThe Commissioner of the IRS, Douglas Shulman, recently admitted that the tax code is too complex for even the commissioner of the IRS.  Click here for full story.  I have long been a proponent of the flat tax as a way to ensure a higher degree of compliance.  The tax attorneys at McLaughlin & Quinn, LLC represent taxpayers before the IRS and state taxing authorities on a daily basis.  Many times, any errors that are found come from an honest misunderstanding of the tax code.  Often, the IRS proposes changes based on uncertain areas of the law, where no one is really sure what the right answer is.

Until Congress decides to stop its social engineering experiments, and picking winners (homeowners, ethanol) and losers (renters), Tom, Frank and I will have plenty of work.  In my opinion, the tax code should be used solely for raising revenue, not for dictating to people how to live their lives.

In the meantime, taxpayers, such as the IRS Commissioner, will have to rely on paid professionals.

End-of-Year Tax Planning Considerations

Sunday, November 29th, 2009 by Moore McLaughlin

As the New Year approaches, taxpayers around the nation are thinking about making gifts or other financial moves before January 1 that will benefit them come April 15, 2010. Jill E. Sugarman, Esq. and I are providing some year-end considerations of particular interest to seniors.

Year-End Tax Planning for Seniors

Year-End Tax Planning for Seniors

A Reprieve on RMDs

Last year, as the stock market plunged and the economy teetered on the brink, Congress suspended the penalty for seniors who fail to take the required minimum distribution (RMD) from their IRA and employer retirement accounts in 2009.

There is normally a penalty for failure to withdraw once the account owner reaches retirement age — after age 70 1/2. Taxpayers generally must begin taking annual distributions from their retirement accounts by the April 1 occurring after they reach age 70 1/2 or pay a whopping 50 percent excise tax on the amount that should have been distributed but was not. To prevent seniors from being forced to sell stocks in a down market, Congress suspended the required minimum distribution rule for 2009.

If you turned age 70 1/2 before 2009, you would normally be required to take your 2009 distribution by December 31, 2009. If you turned or will turn age 70 1/2 in 2009, you would normally be required to take your required distribution no later than April 1, 2010. In either case, you will not need to take this distribution. The new law also waives 2009 distributions for beneficiaries of inherited IRAs and employer retirement accounts. However, taxpayers still must take their 2010 distributions no later than December 31, 2010.

Gift Threshold Now $13,000

The amount that may be gifted each year to any one person without the need to file a gift tax return rose from $12,000 to $13,000 on January 1, 2009. The increase to $13,000 means that more can be given away for estate tax planning purposes. For example, a married couple with four children will be able to give away up to $104,000 in 2009 with no gift tax implications.

Charitable Donations From an IRA Not Taxable

As part of the large financial rescue package, Congress retroactively extended the IRA charitable rollover provision from January 1, 2008, through December 31, 2009. This reinstates the rollover exemption that was part of the Pension Protection Act of 2006.

Previously, those wishing to make charitable donations using money in their IRA accounts were required to withdraw funds from their IRA and pay income tax on the withdrawal before they could take a charitable donation deduction on their annual tax returns. But under the new law, so long as the donation is transferred directly from a traditional or Roth IRA or rollover IRA account to an eligible public charity, the donor doesn’t have to pay any income tax on the withdrawal at all. As far as the federal government is concerned, money donated to the charity simply is not income. (But note that the transfer is no longer eligible for the charitable tax deduction, either.)  For details and restrictions, consult your CPA or financial advisor.

Rollover Retirement Distributions

Those 70 1/2 or older who took a distribution from a retirement plan or IRA earlier in the year may be able to avoid tax on the payout by rolling it over into an eligible retirement plan (including an IRA) before December 1, 2009.

Retirement Contributions

A great way to reduce taxable income is to contribute funds to an IRA or to your 401(k) through work. In addition, the income on assets in the IRA or qualified plan are deferred until the withdrawal is made. The contribution limits for traditional and Roth IRAs remain the same for 2009 as in 2008: $5,000 for a single person and $10,000 for a couple, or $6,000 for a single person if over 50 and $12,000 if both spouses are over 50 and married. If you are self-employed, the contribution limite for a SEP-IRA or a simple IRA is $49,000 per year. Keep in mind that there are limitations on the contributions that may be made based on income and other specific data.

Take Advantage of Losses

Even though the market has posted gains since the dark days of last March, many investors still have long-term capital losses on investments held longer than one year. You can deduct up to $3,000 of these losses a year against ordinary income, with the excess carried forward for use in future years.

If you have questions about how to take advantage of tax-saving opportunities before year’s end, be sure to consult one of the attorneys at McLaughlin &Quinn, LLC or your CPA or financial advisor.

IRS Releases New Estate Tax Return But Is Silent on 2010 repeal

Wednesday, October 7th, 2009 by Moore McLaughlin

IRS has released a revised Form 706 for use by estates of decedents dying after December 31, 2008 and before January 1, 2010.  Changes reflected in the revision include some law and indexing changes. The revision makes no mention of next year’s scheduled repeal of the estate tax.IRS Form 706

Items reflected on the revised form. The instructions stress that this revision is to be used only for decedents dying in calendar year 2009. They also note these changes:

  • The applicable exclusion amount for estates of decedents dying in calendar year 2009 is $3.5 million.
  • Various dollar amounts and limitations relevant to Form 706 are indexed for inflation. For decedents dying in 2009, the following amounts have increased: (a) the ceiling on special-use valuation is $1 million; and (b) the amount used in computing the 2% portion of estate tax payable in installments is $1.33 million. IRS says it will publish amounts for future years in an annual revenue procedure.

Reminder. The instructions also point out that, in 2008, IRS added a worksheet to help executors figure how much of the estate tax may be paid in installments under Code Sec. 6166.

Which estates must file. For decedents dying in 2009, Form 706 must be filed by the executor for the estate of every U.S. citizen or resident whose gross estate, plus adjusted taxable gifts and specific exemption, is more than $3.5 million.
(more…)

Preparing for more permissive IRA-to-Roth-IRA conversion rules in 2010

Wednesday, August 12th, 2009 by Moore McLaughlin

2010 will be a pivotal one for retirement planning, as it will be the first year in which taxpayers will be able to convert funds in regular IRAs (as well as qualified plan funds) to Roth IRAs regardless of their income level. The tax attorneys at McLaughlin & Quinn, LLC are currently advising clients and CPAs on these new rules.  This new conversion option poses significant tax planning challenges and opportunities for 2009, 2010 and 2011. The following takes a look at the new conversion option, and explains how to prepare for it.

Conversions to Roth IRAs. For 2009, taxpayers (other than married persons filing separately) with modified adjusted gross income (AGI) of $100,000 or less may convert IRA-to-Roth Conversionamounts in a traditional IRA to amounts in a Roth IRA. Amounts from a SEP-IRA or a SIMPLE IRA also may be converted to a Roth IRA, but a conversion from a SIMPLE IRA may be made only after the 2-year period beginning on the date on which the taxpayer first participated in any SIMPLE IRA maintained by the taxpayer’s employer.

For purposes of conversions to Roth IRAs, AGI is defined as it is for traditional IRA purposes except that it does not include income resulting from the conversion from a traditional IRA to a Roth IRA. AGI-for purposes of determining conversion eligibility only-does not include any required minimum distribution from an IRA under Code Sec. 408(a)(6) and Code Sec. 408(b)(3).

(more…)

Rhode Island Budget Bill Eliminates Favorable Treatment of Capital Gains

Thursday, July 9th, 2009 by Moore McLaughlin

In Rhode Island’s state budget bill for fiscal year 2010, signed by Governor Donald L. Carcieri on June 30, 2009, the lower capital gains rate is eliminated for personal income tax RI Capital Gains Tax Ratepurposes.  For tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2010 capital gains will be treated as ordinary income.  As a result, some capital gains in Rhode Island that could have been taxed at rates as low as 1.67% will now be taxed at rates up to 9.9%.

Click here for Providence Journal article.

At the new higher rates, 1031 exchanges and other tax-deferral techniques will see a rebound in popularity.  For more information on 1031 exchanges, visit the All States 1031 Exchange Facilitator, LLC website by clicking here.