Calculator on your desktop 1-888-469-3003

Posted by : Daniel Stoica in (Blog) On: October 30th, 2010

Tax Scare – Halloween Tax Tips and Tricks

Tax Scare – Halloween Tax Tips and Tricks

Tax and Taxes – Scariest Halloween Subject

Tax Planning for this year has been challenging.

Here are some Tax Tips:

Roni  Deutch posted the following on her blog:

Top 10 Halloween Season Tax Tips
Halloween is one of my favorite holidays. I always look forward to my law firm’s annual celebration. However, there is more to Halloween than costumes and trick-or-treating. The end of the year is only a few weeks away, and Halloween season is a good time to start thinking about taxes. To help my readers save a little money this year, I have put together ten spooky Halloween tax tips.

Top 10 Halloween Season Tax Tips

Halloween is one of my favorite holidays. I always look forward to my law firm’s annual celebration. However, there is more to Halloween than costumes and trick-or-treating. The end of the year is only a few weeks away, and Halloween season is a good time to start thinking about taxes. To help my readers save a little money this year, I have put together ten spooky Halloween tax tips.   Read more >>>

Wayne Davies posted the following on his blog:

Halloween Tax Tips: How to Eliminate All Fear of the IRS

Ready for a scary tax story?  A few years ago, one of my clients (let’s call him Mr. Jones) got one of those IRS “love letters” requesting more information. The IRS wanted to meet with Mr. Jones in person to discuss the situation.

Mr. Jones (a small business owner) was required to show up at the local IRS office with all his records. The IRS was questioning the legitimacy of several business deductions. The IRS was doing what it is allowed by law to do — demand that the taxpayer prove that those deductions were valid.

Turns out that Mr. Jones lost the audit and ended up owing the IRS a significant amount of money — the additional tax, plus penalty and interest for late payment of that tax. Why did Mr. Jones’ lose the audit? Mr. Jones made two “classic” taxpayer mistakes:  Read more >>>

Here are some Tax Tricks:

Michelle Malkin posted the following on her blog:

Halloween tax trickery: Iowa goes after pumpkins

This sounds like an Onion parody, but it’s on the wires and everyone keeps sending it to me this morning:  Read more >>>

Kruse & Crawford posted the following on their blog:

A Halloween Tax Story

This is from the Associated Press. I generally don’t cut-and-paste other articles on this blog, but this one struck me as the banner-waving-poster-child of taxes run amok.  Read more >>>

The scariest Income Tax Scare Cartoon I have ever seen:

Scariest Income Tax Cartoon

Calculator on your desktop 1-888-469-3003

Posted by : Daniel Stoica in (Blog) On: October 29th, 2010

Easy ways to settle Payday Loans

Easy ways to settle Payday Loans
Payday loan is a great solution when you are confronted with sudden cash
crunches. It is a small term loan, which you take out on the condition that
you will pay it off by your next payday. But the only drawback that bothers
consumers is the high APR that these loans carry. Here you default on your
loan and there goes up your outstanding loan figure. Are you in a similar
trouble? Has your payday loan spiraled out of your control and you cannot
afford to make the entire payment? Then, you can consider settling your
payday loan.
If you do not know how to settle payday loan debt, then here are some
useful tips on how to go about it:
First, notify your payday lender in writing that you are financially
strapped and cannot make payments on the loan.
Then, request in writing that the lender stop all communication with
you. Under the FDCPA, any creditor/debt collector must cease all
communication with the debtor if the debtor requests for the same.
Then, propose a settlement offer to the lender. Tell them that if your
settlement offer is declined, you might have to file for bankruptcy.
Always keep in mind that creditors know that a bankrupt debtor is a
lost venture whereas a settlement offer is more profitable. So, your
lender is likely to accept your settlement offer.
Try and offer a lump-sum as settlement amount, because the bigger
the settlement amount, the more are the chances of getting your
settlement offer accepted. So, it is advised that before you start
negotiating with your creditor, save up substantially in order to make
your settlement offer. But do not agree on anything more than 50% of
your outstanding amount.
You can pay the settlement amount either in a single payment or
in installments. Once your settlement amount is determined, try to
gauge whether you will pay it in installments or in a single payment.
If you think you cannot make it in a single payment then negotiate
a payment plan with your creditor so you can pay off the settlement
amount in affordable installments.
But if you fail to negotiate a fair settlement deal with your lender, then you
can enroll with a Better Business Bureau accredited debt settlement firm in
your state and get your payday loans settled. Also, do not forget to learn
about the payday lending regulations in your state, while you are dealing
with your payday lenders.

Easy ways to settle Payday Loans

Payday loan is a great solution when you are confronted with sudden cash

crunches. It is a small term loan, which you take out on the condition that

you will pay it off by your next payday. But the only drawback that bothers

consumers is the high APR that these loans carry. Here you default on your

loan and there goes up your outstanding loan figure. Are you in a similar

trouble? Has your payday loan spiraled out of your control and you cannot

afford to make the entire payment? Then, you can consider settling your

payday loan.

If you do not know how to settle payday loan debt, then here are some

useful tips on how to go about it:

  • First, notify your payday lender in writing that you are financially strapped and cannot make payments on the loan.
  • Then, request in writing that the lender stop all communication with you. Under the FDCPA, any creditor/debt collector must cease all communication with the debtor if the debtor requests for the same.
  • Then, propose a settlement offer to the lender. Tell them that if your settlement offer is declined, you might have to file for bankruptcy.  Always keep in mind that creditors know that a bankrupt debtor is a lost venture whereas a settlement offer is more profitable.  So, your lender is likely to accept your settlement offer.
  • Try and offer a lump-sum as settlement amount, because the bigger the settlement amount, the more are the chances of getting your settlement offer accepted. So, it is advised that before you start negotiating with your creditor, save up substantially in order to make your settlement offer. But do not agree on anything more than 50% of your outstanding amount.
  • You can pay the settlement amount either in a single payment or in installments. Once your settlement amount is determined, try to gauge whether you will pay it in installments or in a single payment. If you think you cannot make it in a single payment then negotiate a payment plan with your creditor so you can pay off the settlement amount in affordable installments.

But if you fail to negotiate a fair settlement deal with your lender, then you

can enroll with a Better Business Bureau accredited debt settlement firm in

your state and get your payday loans settled. Also, do not forget to learn

about the payday lending regulations in your state, while you are dealing

with your payday lenders.

Calculator on your desktop 1-888-469-3003

Posted by : Daniel Stoica in (Blog) On: October 28th, 2010

IRS Seeks Applications for Advisory Committee for the Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division

IRS Seeks Applications for Advisory Committee for the Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division
IR-2010-109, Oct. 28, 2010
WASHINGTON — The Internal Revenue Service is seeking applications for vacancies on the Advisory Committee on Tax Exempt and Government Entities (ACT). The committee provides a venue for public input on relevant areas of tax administration.
Vacancies exist in the following customer segments:
Employee Plans – two vacancies
Exempt Organizations – two vacancies
Tax Exempt Bonds – one vacancy
Indian Tribal Governments – two vacancies
Federal, State and Local Governments – three vacancies
Members are appointed by the Department of the Treasury and serve two-year terms, beginning in June 2011. Applications will be accepted through Dec. 1, 2010.
The ACT is an organized public forum for the IRS and representatives who deal with employee plans, exempt organizations, tax-exempt bonds, and federal, state, local and Indian tribal governments. The ACT allows the IRS to receive regular input on administrative policy and procedures of the Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division (TE/GE).
Applications can be made by letter or by completing an application form available on IRS.gov. In either case, applications should reflect the proposed member’s qualifications. Members of the ACT may not be federally registered lobbyists. A notice published in the Federal Register, dated Oct. 28, 2010, contains more details about the ACT and the application process.
Applications should be sent to Steven Pyrek, TE/GE Communications and Liaison Director, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Ave., NW– SE:T:CL Penn Bldg., Washington, DC 20224, or by fax to 202-283-9956 (not a toll-free number).

IRS Seeks Applications for Advisory Committee for the Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division

IR-2010-109, Oct. 28, 2010

WASHINGTON — The Internal Revenue Service is seeking applications for vacancies on the Advisory Committee on Tax Exempt and Government Entities (ACT). The committee provides a venue for public input on relevant areas of tax administration.

Vacancies exist in the following customer segments:

  • Employee Plans – two vacancies
  • Exempt Organizations – two vacancies
  • Tax Exempt Bonds – one vacancy
  • Indian Tribal Governments – two vacancies
  • Federal, State and Local Governments – three vacancies

Members are appointed by the Department of the Treasury and serve two-year terms, beginning in June 2011. Applications will be accepted through Dec. 1, 2010.

The ACT is an organized public forum for the IRS and representatives who deal with employee plans, exempt organizations, tax-exempt bonds, and federal, state, local and Indian tribal governments. The ACT allows the IRS to receive regular input on administrative policy and procedures of the Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division (TE/GE).

Applications can be made by letter or by completing an application form available on IRS.gov. In either case, applications should reflect the proposed member’s qualifications. Members of the ACT may not be federally registered lobbyists. A notice published in the Federal Register, dated Oct. 28, 2010, contains more details about the ACT and the application process.

Applications should be sent to Steven Pyrek, TE/GE Communications and Liaison Director, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Ave., NW– SE:T:CL Penn Bldg., Washington, DC 20224, or by fax to 202-283-9956 (not a toll-free number).

Calculator on your desktop 1-888-469-3003

Posted by : Daniel Stoica in (Articles) On: October 28th, 2010

What Are Pension Plan Limitations for 2011?

What Are Pension Plan Limitations for 2011?
IR-2010-108, Oct. 28, 2010
WASHINGTON — The Internal Revenue Service today announced cost of living adjustments affecting dollar limitations for pension plans and other retirement-related items for tax year 2011. In general, these limits will either remain unchanged, or the inflation adjustments for 2011 will be small. Highlights include:
The elective deferral (contribution) limit for employees who participate in section 401(k), 403(b), or 457(b) plans, and the federal government’s Thrift Savings Plan remains unchanged at $16,500.
The catch-up contribution limit under those plans for those aged 50 and over remains unchanged at $5,500.
The deduction for taxpayers making contributions to a traditional IRA is phased out for singles and heads of household who are active participants in  an employer-sponsored retirement plan and have modified adjusted gross incomes (AGI) between $56,000 and $66,000, unchanged from 2010. For married couples filing jointly, in which the spouse who makes the IRA contribution is an active participant in an employer-sponsored retirement plan, the income phase-out range is $90,000 to $110,000, up from $89,000 to $109,000. For an IRA contributor who is not an active participant in an employer-sponsored retirement plan and is married to someone who is an active participant, the deduction is phased out if the couple’s income is between $169,000 and $179,000, up from $167,000 and $177,000.
The AGI phase-out range for taxpayers making contributions to a Roth IRA is $169,000 to 179,000 for married couples filing jointly, up from $167,000 to $177,000 in 2010. For singles and heads of household, the income phase-out range is $107,000 to $122,000, up from $105,000 to $120,000. For a married individual filing a separate return who is an active participant in an employer-sponsored retirement plan, the phase-out range remains $0 to $10,000.
The AGI limit for the saver’s credit (also known as the retirement savings contributions credit) for low-and moderate-income workers is $56,500 for married couples filing jointly, up from $55,500 in 2010; $42,375 for heads of household, up from $41,625; and $28,250 for married individuals filing separately and for singles, up from $27,750.
Below are details on both the unchanged and adjusted limitations.
Section 415 of the Internal Revenue Code provides for dollar limitations on benefits and contributions under qualified retirement plans. Section 415(d) requires that the Commissioner annually adjust these limits for cost of living increases. Other limitations applicable to deferred compensation plans are also affected by these adjustments under Section 415. Under Section 415(d), the adjustments are to be made pursuant to adjustment procedures which are similar to those used to adjust benefit amounts under Section 215(i)(2)(A) of the Social Security Act.
The limitations that are adjusted by reference to Section 415(d) generally will remain unchanged for 2011. This is because the cost-of-living index for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2010, while greater than the cost-of-living index for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2009, is less than the cost-of-living index for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008, and, following the procedures under the Social Security Act for adjusting benefit amounts, any decline in the applicable index cannot result in a reduced limitation. For example, the limitation under Section 402(g)(1) on the exclusion for elective deferrals described in Section 402(g)(3) will be $16,500 for 2011, which is the same amount as for 2009 and 2010. This limitation affects elective deferrals to Section 401(k) plans, Section 403(b) plans, and the federal government’s Thrift Savings Plan.
Effective Jan. 1, 2011, the limitation on the annual benefit under a defined benefit plan under section 415(b)(1)(A) remains unchanged at $195,000. Pursuant to section 1.415(d)-1(a)(2)(ii) of the Income Tax Regulations, the adjustment to the limitation under a defined benefit plan under section 415(b)(1)(B) is determined using a special rule that  takes into account that the cost-of-living indexes for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2009, and for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2010, were both less than the cost-of-living index for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008, and that the cost-of-living index for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2010, is greater than the cost-of-living index for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2009. For a participant who separated from service before Jan. 1, 2010, the participant’s limitation under a defined benefit plan under section 415(b)(1)(B) is unchanged (i.e., the adjustment factor is 1.0000). For a participant who separated from service during 2010, the limitation under a defined benefit plan under Section 415(b)(1)(B) for 2011 is computed by multiplying the participant’s 2010 compensation limitation by 1.0118 in order to reflect changes in the cost-of-living index from the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2009, to the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2010.
The limitation for defined contribution plans under Section 415(c)(1)(A) remains unchanged for 2011 at $49,000.
The Code provides that various other dollar amounts are to be adjusted at the same time and in the same manner as the dollar limitation of Section 415(b)(1)(A). After taking into account the applicable rounding rules, the amounts for 2011 are as follows:
The limitation under Section 402(g)(1) on the exclusion for elective deferrals described in Section 402(g)(3) remains unchanged at $16,500.
The annual compensation limit under Sections 401(a)(17), 404(l), 408(k)(3)(C), and 408(k)(6)(D)(ii) remains unchanged at $245,000.
The dollar limitation under Section 416(i)(1)(A)(i) concerning the definition of key employee in a top-heavy plan remains unchanged at $160,000.
The dollar amount under Section 409(o)(1)(C)(ii) for determining the maximum account balance in an employee stock ownership plan subject to a 5 year distribution period remains unchanged at $985,000, while the dollar amount used to determine the lengthening of the 5 year distribution period remains unchanged at $195,000.
The limitation used in the definition of highly compensated employee under Section 414(q)(1)(B) remains unchanged at $110,000.
The dollar limitation under Section 414(v)(2)(B)(i) for catch-up contributions to an applicable employer plan other than a plan described in Section 401(k)(11) or Section 408(p) for individuals aged 50 or over remains unchanged at $5,500. The dollar limitation under Section 414(v)(2)(B)(ii) for catch-up contributions to an applicable employer plan described in Section 401(k)(11) or Section 408(p) for individuals aged 50 or over remains unchanged at $2,500.
The annual compensation limitation under Section 401(a)(17) for eligible participants in certain governmental plans that, under the plan as in effect on July 1, 1993, allowed cost of living adjustments to the compensation limitation under the plan under Section 401(a)(17) to be taken into account, remains unchanged at $360,000.
The compensation amount under Section 408(k)(2)(C) regarding simplified employee pensions (SEPs) remains unchanged at $550.
The limitation under Section 408(p)(2)(E) regarding SIMPLE retirement accounts remains unchanged at $11,500.
The limitation on deferrals under Section 457(e)(15) concerning deferred compensation plans of state and local governments and tax-exempt organizations remains unchanged at $16,500.
The compensation amounts under Section 1.61 21(f)(5)(i) of the Income Tax Regulations concerning the definition of “control employee” for fringe benefit valuation purposes remains unchanged at $95,000. The compensation amount under Section 1.61 21(f)(5)(iii) remains unchanged at $195,000.
The Code also provides that several pension-related amounts are to be adjusted using the cost-of-living adjustment under Section 1(f)(3). After taking the applicable rounding rules into account, the amounts for 2011 are as follows:
The adjusted gross income limitation under Section 25B(b)(1)(A) for determining the retirement savings contribution credit for married taxpayers filing a joint return is increased from $33,500 to $34,000; the limitation under Section 25B(b)(1)(B) is increased from $36,000 to $36,500; and the limitation under Sections 25B(b)(1)(C) and 25B(b)(1)(D), is increased from $55,500 to $56,500.
The adjusted gross income limitation under Section 25B(b)(1)(A) for determining the retirement savings contribution credit for taxpayers filing as head of household is increased from $25,125 to $25,500; the limitation under Section 25B(b)(1)(B) is increased from $27,000 to $27,375; and the limitation under Sections 25B(b)(1)(C) and 25B(b)(1)(D), is increased from $41,625 to $42,375.
The adjusted gross income limitation under Section 25B(b)(1)(A) for determining the retirement savings contribution credit for all other taxpayers is increased from $16,750 to $17,000; the limitation under Section 25B(b)(1)(B) is increased from $18,000 to $18,250; and the limitation under Sections 25B(b)(1)(C) and 25B(b)(1)(D), is increased from $27,750 to $28,250.
The deductible amount under § 219(b)(5)(A) for an individual making qualified retirement contributions remains unchanged at $5,000.
The applicable dollar amount under Section 219(g)(3)(B)(i) for determining the deductible amount of an IRA contribution for taxpayers who are active participants filing a joint return or as a qualifying widow(er) is increased from $89,000 to $90,000. The applicable dollar amount under Section 219(g)(3)(B)(ii) for all other taxpayers (other than married taxpayers filing separate returns) remains unchanged at $56,000. The applicable dollar amount under Section 219(g)(7)(A) for a taxpayer who is not an active participant but whose spouse is an active participant is increased from $167,000 to $169,000.
The adjusted gross income limitation under Section 408A(c)(3)(C)(ii)(I) for determining the maximum Roth IRA contribution for married taxpayers filing a joint return or for taxpayers filing as a qualifying widow(er) is increased from $167,000 to $169,000. The adjusted gross income limitation under Section 408A(c)(3)(C)(ii)(II) for all other taxpayers (other than married taxpayers filing separate returns) is increased from $105,000 to $107,000.
The dollar amount under Section 430(c)(7)(D)(i)(II) used to determine excess employee compensation with respect to a single-employer defined benefit pension plan for which the special election under section 430(c)(2)(D) has been made is increased from $1,000,000 to $1,014,000.

What Are Pension Plan Limitations for 2011?

IR-2010-108, Oct. 28, 2010

WASHINGTON — The Internal Revenue Service today announced cost of living adjustments affecting dollar limitations for pension plans and other retirement-related items for tax year 2011. In general, these limits will either remain unchanged, or the inflation adjustments for 2011 will be small. Highlights include:

  • The elective deferral (contribution) limit for employees who participate in section 401(k), 403(b), or 457(b) plans, and the federal government’s Thrift Savings Plan remains unchanged at $16,500.
  • The catch-up contribution limit under those plans for those aged 50 and over remains unchanged at $5,500.
  • The deduction for taxpayers making contributions to a traditional IRA is phased out for singles and heads of household who are active participants in  an employer-sponsored retirement plan and have modified adjusted gross incomes (AGI) between $56,000 and $66,000, unchanged from 2010. For married couples filing jointly, in which the spouse who makes the IRA contribution is an active participant in an employer-sponsored retirement plan, the income phase-out range is $90,000 to $110,000, up from $89,000 to $109,000. For an IRA contributor who is not an active participant in an employer-sponsored retirement plan and is married to someone who is an active participant, the deduction is phased out if the couple’s income is between $169,000 and $179,000, up from $167,000 and $177,000.
  • The AGI phase-out range for taxpayers making contributions to a Roth IRA is $169,000 to 179,000 for married couples filing jointly, up from $167,000 to $177,000 in 2010. For singles and heads of household, the income phase-out range is $107,000 to $122,000, up from $105,000 to $120,000. For a married individual filing a separate return who is an active participant in an employer-sponsored retirement plan, the phase-out range remains $0 to $10,000.
  • The AGI limit for the saver’s credit (also known as the retirement savings contributions credit) for low-and moderate-income workers is $56,500 for married couples filing jointly, up from $55,500 in 2010; $42,375 for heads of household, up from $41,625; and $28,250 for married individuals filing separately and for singles, up from $27,750.

Below are details on both the unchanged and adjusted limitations.

Section 415 of the Internal Revenue Code provides for dollar limitations on benefits and contributions under qualified retirement plans. Section 415(d) requires that the Commissioner annually adjust these limits for cost of living increases. Other limitations applicable to deferred compensation plans are also affected by these adjustments under Section 415. Under Section 415(d), the adjustments are to be made pursuant to adjustment procedures which are similar to those used to adjust benefit amounts under Section 215(i)(2)(A) of the Social Security Act.

The limitations that are adjusted by reference to Section 415(d) generally will remain unchanged for 2011. This is because the cost-of-living index for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2010, while greater than the cost-of-living index for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2009, is less than the cost-of-living index for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008, and, following the procedures under the Social Security Act for adjusting benefit amounts, any decline in the applicable index cannot result in a reduced limitation. For example, the limitation under Section 402(g)(1) on the exclusion for elective deferrals described in Section 402(g)(3) will be $16,500 for 2011, which is the same amount as for 2009 and 2010. This limitation affects elective deferrals to Section 401(k) plans, Section 403(b) plans, and the federal government’s Thrift Savings Plan.

Effective Jan. 1, 2011, the limitation on the annual benefit under a defined benefit plan under section 415(b)(1)(A) remains unchanged at $195,000. Pursuant to section 1.415(d)-1(a)(2)(ii) of the Income Tax Regulations, the adjustment to the limitation under a defined benefit plan under section 415(b)(1)(B) is determined using a special rule that  takes into account that the cost-of-living indexes for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2009, and for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2010, were both less than the cost-of-living index for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008, and that the cost-of-living index for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2010, is greater than the cost-of-living index for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2009. For a participant who separated from service before Jan. 1, 2010, the participant’s limitation under a defined benefit plan under section 415(b)(1)(B) is unchanged (i.e., the adjustment factor is 1.0000). For a participant who separated from service during 2010, the limitation under a defined benefit plan under Section 415(b)(1)(B) for 2011 is computed by multiplying the participant’s 2010 compensation limitation by 1.0118 in order to reflect changes in the cost-of-living index from the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2009, to the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2010.

The limitation for defined contribution plans under Section 415(c)(1)(A) remains unchanged for 2011 at $49,000.

The Code provides that various other dollar amounts are to be adjusted at the same time and in the same manner as the dollar limitation of Section 415(b)(1)(A). After taking into account the applicable rounding rules, the amounts for 2011 are as follows:

The limitation under Section 402(g)(1) on the exclusion for elective deferrals described in Section 402(g)(3) remains unchanged at $16,500.

The annual compensation limit under Sections 401(a)(17), 404(l), 408(k)(3)(C), and 408(k)(6)(D)(ii) remains unchanged at $245,000.

The dollar limitation under Section 416(i)(1)(A)(i) concerning the definition of key employee in a top-heavy plan remains unchanged at $160,000.

The dollar amount under Section 409(o)(1)(C)(ii) for determining the maximum account balance in an employee stock ownership plan subject to a 5 year distribution period remains unchanged at $985,000, while the dollar amount used to determine the lengthening of the 5 year distribution period remains unchanged at $195,000.

The limitation used in the definition of highly compensated employee under Section 414(q)(1)(B) remains unchanged at $110,000.

The dollar limitation under Section 414(v)(2)(B)(i) for catch-up contributions to an applicable employer plan other than a plan described in Section 401(k)(11) or Section 408(p) for individuals aged 50 or over remains unchanged at $5,500. The dollar limitation under Section 414(v)(2)(B)(ii) for catch-up contributions to an applicable employer plan described in Section 401(k)(11) or Section 408(p) for individuals aged 50 or over remains unchanged at $2,500.

The annual compensation limitation under Section 401(a)(17) for eligible participants in certain governmental plans that, under the plan as in effect on July 1, 1993, allowed cost of living adjustments to the compensation limitation under the plan under Section 401(a)(17) to be taken into account, remains unchanged at $360,000.

The compensation amount under Section 408(k)(2)(C) regarding simplified employee pensions (SEPs) remains unchanged at $550.

The limitation under Section 408(p)(2)(E) regarding SIMPLE retirement accounts remains unchanged at $11,500.

The limitation on deferrals under Section 457(e)(15) concerning deferred compensation plans of state and local governments and tax-exempt organizations remains unchanged at $16,500.

The compensation amounts under Section 1.61 21(f)(5)(i) of the Income Tax Regulations concerning the definition of “control employee” for fringe benefit valuation purposes remains unchanged at $95,000. The compensation amount under Section 1.61 21(f)(5)(iii) remains unchanged at $195,000.

The Code also provides that several pension-related amounts are to be adjusted using the cost-of-living adjustment under Section 1(f)(3). After taking the applicable rounding rules into account, the amounts for 2011 are as follows:

The adjusted gross income limitation under Section 25B(b)(1)(A) for determining the retirement savings contribution credit for married taxpayers filing a joint return is increased from $33,500 to $34,000; the limitation under Section 25B(b)(1)(B) is increased from $36,000 to $36,500; and the limitation under Sections 25B(b)(1)(C) and 25B(b)(1)(D), is increased from $55,500 to $56,500.

The adjusted gross income limitation under Section 25B(b)(1)(A) for determining the retirement savings contribution credit for taxpayers filing as head of household is increased from $25,125 to $25,500; the limitation under Section 25B(b)(1)(B) is increased from $27,000 to $27,375; and the limitation under Sections 25B(b)(1)(C) and 25B(b)(1)(D), is increased from $41,625 to $42,375.

The adjusted gross income limitation under Section 25B(b)(1)(A) for determining the retirement savings contribution credit for all other taxpayers is increased from $16,750 to $17,000; the limitation under Section 25B(b)(1)(B) is increased from $18,000 to $18,250; and the limitation under Sections 25B(b)(1)(C) and 25B(b)(1)(D), is increased from $27,750 to $28,250.

The deductible amount under § 219(b)(5)(A) for an individual making qualified retirement contributions remains unchanged at $5,000.

The applicable dollar amount under Section 219(g)(3)(B)(i) for determining the deductible amount of an IRA contribution for taxpayers who are active participants filing a joint return or as a qualifying widow(er) is increased from $89,000 to $90,000. The applicable dollar amount under Section 219(g)(3)(B)(ii) for all other taxpayers (other than married taxpayers filing separate returns) remains unchanged at $56,000. The applicable dollar amount under Section 219(g)(7)(A) for a taxpayer who is not an active participant but whose spouse is an active participant is increased from $167,000 to $169,000.

The adjusted gross income limitation under Section 408A(c)(3)(C)(ii)(I) for determining the maximum Roth IRA contribution for married taxpayers filing a joint return or for taxpayers filing as a qualifying widow(er) is increased from $167,000 to $169,000. The adjusted gross income limitation under Section 408A(c)(3)(C)(ii)(II) for all other taxpayers (other than married taxpayers filing separate returns) is increased from $105,000 to $107,000.

The dollar amount under Section 430(c)(7)(D)(i)(II) used to determine excess employee compensation with respect to a single-employer defined benefit pension plan for which the special election under section 430(c)(2)(D) has been made is increased from $1,000,000 to $1,014,000.

Calculator on your desktop 1-888-469-3003

Posted by : Daniel Stoica in (Blog) On: October 27th, 2010

Commissioner of Internal Revenue Douglas H. Shulman’s Keynote Speech Before the AICPA Fall Tax Meeting

Commissioner of Internal Revenue Douglas H. Shulman’s Keynote Speech Before the AICPA Fall Tax Meeting
IR-2010-107, Oct. 26, 2010
WASHINGTON — Good afternoon and thank you for that warm welcome and introduction and for inviting me to address AICPA’s Fall Tax Meeting.
With the leaves changing, the days shortening, and children back in school, this is a time of year that speaks of change and getting down to work after the long days of summer.
And today, I would like to spend my time with you talking about some of the changes in our tax system that we could have barely imagined 10…15…or 20 years ago … and how we are working smarter to stay on top of these changes and continually innovating to meet the challenges of tomorrow.
Our starting point is a given: our tax system is constantly changing. With its evolutions and revolutions, it’s anything but static. The dizzying pace of change continues to accelerate with no signs of slowing down. And it’s one hard stretch of road ahead full of dangerous curves, speed bumps and unexpected hazards.
For example, the sheer girth and complexity of the tax code continue to grow, in spite of efforts to simplify it. There have been an astonishing 4,400 legislative changes to the Code from 2000 to September of this year.
Our taxpayer base is also far more diverse and different than it was a mere 20 or 30 years ago, creating new needs and challenges to provide both innovative service channels and enforcement strategies.
For example, S corporations and partnerships, which are more difficult to audit, have grown rapidly. From 2000 to 2009, they increased by 55 percent and 70 percent respectively.
We are also dealing with an expanding number of Limited English Proficiency taxpayers who need to be served. To meet this need, IRS has over 1,800 bilingual employees who provide service to them. We also created a Spanish language web site and an IRS Multilingual Gateway and offer over 600 tax products translated into Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese and Russian.
And as this audience well knows, our tax system reflects an enormous and dynamic global economy and all that it has ushered in… …from complex transfer pricing issues to wealthy individuals using global capital markets to facilitate investment strategies.
Relationships and paradigms are shifting too as we break down barriers and open doors. This past year, I have spoken at length about the IRS retooling its relationship with large corporate taxpayers…how we are moving away from protracted trench warfare, which serves neither of us well, to earlier and speedier issue resolution and greater efficiency and certainty.
Congress has also expanded the IRS’ portfolio of duties as we are increasingly asked to administer the tax portion of new social and economic programs, such as the Economic Stimulus, the Recovery Act, the HIRE Act, the Small Business Act …and now, the tax provisions of the Affordable Care Act.
The simple fact is that our job is getting harder…much harder…with no let up in sight. And to make a tough job even tougher, resources are scarce and will continue to be for the foreseeable future.
My intention in describing the current state of play of our tax system is not to give you a pre-Halloween scare. Rather, I am hoping that by viewing the tax system through a wide angle lens, we can start to see how we can sort out and overcome some of the hurdles we face… improve our performance… and produce results we can all embrace, such as sound, fair and efficient tax administration…and of course, improved compliance.
Working smarter has been a theme of mine since I became Commissioner. But what does working smarter really mean? In the case of the IRS, it means evolving to keep pace with change, constantly looking ahead, and being innovative and more imaginative with available resources inside and outside the agency.
Let me dive down a little deeper into this concept. In many ways, it is all about a leveraged model.
In a classic business sense, leveraging translates to applying a relatively small amount of capital that yields a high level of impact or return for the company and its shareholders. For the IRS, it means maximizing the use of our resources, while tapping into the experience, specialized knowledge, infrastructure, technology and activities of other players in the tax system and making them an integral part of our service and compliance strategies.
By leveraging our joint resources, we can advance and support common objectives and outcomes we both desire, such as certainty, clarity and not wasting time and resources. The bottom line is that we can achieve far more working together than either of us could by working alone.
Before I get into a front-burner topic – the return preparer initiative – let me point out that we’re already applying the concept of working smarter through leverage to achieve our goals. For example, over the past year, I reached out to members of corporate boards to hopefully leverage off of good corporate governance practices that might limit some risky tax planning behavior…and assure that corporate boards and audit committees are assessing and managing tax risk just as they do other material business risks.
I brought a similar message to the Council on Foundations…namely that good governance for a non-profit is mostly the same as general good governance. Both involve oversight of the organization’s effectiveness in pursuing its mission. And both the IRS and foundations want many of the same things from tax-exempt organizations.
We want well-run institutions that deliver on their missions – or exempt purpose – in tax parlance. And we want appropriate controls in place to ensure clean books and records and adherence with legal requirements.
In this regard, we both benefit from what each of us does separately. And we both benefit by leveraging another set of eyes to look at the same issues.
Now, today, I want to speak about two key steps in this evolutionary chain of getting smarter and working smarter…and here too leverage plays a role. The first is the return preparer initiative.
I believe it is one of the most important initiatives and defining actions that the IRS has taken in recent years in improving both compliance and our ability to deliver better service to taxpayers; in this case, helping them to file accurate returns from the get-go and avoid potentially time-consuming problems later on.
As with our international strategy, it is important to see the return preparer initiative as reflecting and adapting to changing elements in and around our tax system.
Sixty years ago, when the World Wide Web was not even a twinkle in a computer expert’s eye, no one would have thought of e-File or IRS.gov. Today, no one would think of an effective and efficient tax administration system without them.  In fact, our e-file rate is one of the biggest success stories of government modernization. Last year, we had a 70 percent e-file rate for individuals as compared to a mere 10 percent fifteen years ago. And this translates into a huge savings. For FY 2009, it cost us only 19 cents to process an e-filed return – a fraction of the $3.29 it takes to process a paper return. And with e-file, taxpayers get their refund faster, with fewer data processing errors that can lead to hassles later in the process.
It was this same type of systemic change in our tax system – subtle at first and tectonic later – that would make the return preparer initiative not a “nice-to-have” but a “must have” program. Let’s see why by taking a quick look in the rear view mirror.
For many years, most taxpayers prepared their own returns with pencil and paper and an adding machine. You could also always count on the 11:00 PM news story about procrastinating taxpayers lined up at the Post Office to mail in their returns, or seeking 11th hour preparation help from the IRS. One of my predecessors even stood outside of a Metro Station on April 15th handing out extension forms.
And that’s the quaint, sleepy image that stayed the same until about 20-30 years ago. Then we had a wake up call that would irrevocably change the way people would prepare and file their taxes.
Growing tax code complexity fueled an explosive growth in tax return preparation. Once a cottage industry, today, more than 8 out of ten taxpayers use a tax preparer or tax software. And there are now an estimated 1 million individuals preparing tax returns for a fee. Barring some sort of massive tax simplification, this trend will continue.
There are a number of positives in this trend. As I noted earlier, one of the most important is that qualified return preparers can help taxpayers get it right…right from the start.
Working with the taxpayer, they can prevent inadvertent errors which can save both taxpayers and the IRS headaches and precious resources down the road.
And let’s face facts….taxpayers want to keep their interactions with the IRS to a minimum. One of the best ways to insure that minimum interaction is for taxpayers to file an accurate and timely return…once again, getting it right the first time around.
In a world of greater complexity and sometimes the temptation to push the tax planning envelope beyond acceptable bounds, qualified return preparers can also advise taxpayers on the risk associated with a possible reporting position. They can also explain taxpayer rights and responsibilities. So, we at the IRS see the professional return preparer community as a strong ally in our efforts to boost overall service and compliance.
Now, an individual’s return filing is often one of their biggest financial transactions in any given year. Yet any person can prepare a federal tax return for any other person for a fee.
The average person on the street might assume there is some sort of formal oversight or licensing for every return preparer. After all, even a barber must attend a formalized training program and obtain a license. However, that average taxpayer would be mistaken.
It might surprise taxpayers to learn that the level of oversight varies widely. There’s little oversight of paid tax return preparers, particularly for those who are not attorneys, enrolled agents, and CPAs – like you – or other individuals authorized to practice before the IRS. Again, it bears repeating that this is one of the most important annual financial transactions for taxpayers, yet many preparers do not have to meet any professionally-mandated competency requirements.
This begs the question. Are too many taxpayers rolling the dice when it comes to their paid return preparers? The Government Accountability Office, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration and our own research suggest that our tax system and a large number of taxpayers may be poorly served by some return preparers. And let no one forget that it is the taxpayer who is legally responsible for penalties and interest if their return is not accurately prepared, or they claim deductions or tax credits to which they are not entitled.
Given the critical mass of issues building around paid return preparers, the IRS launched its return preparer review in June of 2009. It meets two of our most important strategic goals and reflects our commitment to working smarter.
First, it strengthens partnerships with tax practitioners, tax return preparers, and other third parties to ensure effective tax administration. And second, it ensures all of the above and other third parties in the tax system have a minimal level of competency and adhere to professional standards… with an overarching goal of better service to taxpayers and increased compliance.
As most of you are aware, our return preparer initiative is now undergoing a staged implementation process. We took a big first step last month when we launched the new online PTIN application system. It’s now up and running and will eventually get everyone into the system.
But more than just an identification number, the PTIN registration process gives us an important and better line of sight into the return preparer community than we’ve ever had before. We can leverage that information to help us better analyze trends, spot anomalies and potentially detect fraud.
Indeed, the PTIN process will help us build, in several years, a publicly-accessible database of those registered. I view this as an extremely important tool for consumers and another example of working smarter, as consumers will be able to search the database to ensure that their preparer is registered. This ups the game for everyone. The data base will confirm for the public which return preparers are properly registered with the IRS.  It will also make it easier for everyone to find and track the bad actors out there. They won’t be able to pull up stakes and move around anonymously.
There are a number of transition issues we are also working through as we implement the return preparer initiative. One of the first out of the gate was foreign PTINs for those paid return preparers outside of the United States who lack a Social Security Number, but prepare US tax returns for their clients. We recognized the hurdles they faced, and in response, are providing them with some needed flexibility.
We are also still refining our rules for people who work in a professional firm, like an accounting firm, who prepare all, or substantially all of a return under the supervision of an accountant, enrolled agent or lawyer. While this is a tricky area, and I can’t give you definitive guidance until we publish our final guidance later this year, I will tell you that I am sympathetic to the argument that the rules should be flexible for people who have met a higher professional standard. Therefore, it is highly likely that as we implement the new rules and procedures there will be some relief for testing and continuing education requirements for people who do not sign a return and work in a professional firm under the supervision of an accountant, enrolled agent or lawyer.
We are also still working on a start date for testing, and an effective date for the 15 hours of continuing education. Some of those commenting encouraged us to slow down or delay these important parts of the program. While we are moving forward to put in place continuing education, we recognize the need for a staged transition to reduce burden and uncertainty. Therefore, during the first year of implementation, we intend to waive the requirement for continuing education. This will give us time to work through the many issues regarding CE, including working with third parties who already certify CE courses to attempt to leverage their infrastructure.
Finally, with any major initiative, I need to look at the people and structure that we will use to implement it. I am pleased to announce today that we are creating a Return Preparer Office inside of the IRS that will be led by David R. Williams, who is familiar to many of you for his work on the return preparer initiative. He will report directly to Steve Miller, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement.
This new office will have broad responsibility for the return preparer initiative.  It will manage all of our activities related to continuing education and testing of all professionals under IRS jurisdiction.  It will also manage the registration system and process, as well as coordinate resource planning for IRS efforts across the organization related to return preparers. If you have any insights, concerns and suggestions as we proceed on implementing the return preparer initiative, please feel free to contact David.
David’s leadership on the return preparer initiative will complement the excellent work Karen Hawkins is carrying out as Director of the Office of Professional Responsibility. This critical organization will remain a separate entity within the IRS, and I see its impact being enhanced in the future to ensure that tax professionals meet the high ethical standards that taxpayers expect, need and deserve.
Indeed, it is my intention to provide Karen and her able team increased resources to investigate additional cases of improper conduct, ethical violations and other disciplinary issues involving tax professionals falling under Treasury Circular 230. I think it’s fair to say that we could see an appreciable jump in the OPR case load in the foreseeable future as we work to ensure that all return preparers are serving the American people well.
I would like to turn now to how we are working smarter with some of our largest corporate taxpayers. Our new uncertain tax position reporting requirement is a key element of our larger program to retool our relationship with these taxpayers and create greater efficiency and certainty.
Let me frame this discussion by saying that I believe the concept of more transparency is consistent with our nation’s historic framework of a voluntary compliance system. Our tax system is set up in such a way that taxpayers fill out their own returns. This self-assessment system reflects the fact that it is the taxpayer, and not the IRS, who possesses all of the information relevant to tax liability. We then use information reported by the taxpayer to make judgments about issues to pursue, and returns to audit.
Inherent in this system is the basic assumption that a taxpayer will be forthcoming in dealing with the IRS with respect to the items it has reported on its tax return, including the underlying positions related to those items. But this is much more than an assumption – it is the foundation on which our tax system is built.
Guided by the fundamental principle that transparency is essential to achieving an effective and efficient self-assessment tax system, the IRS took a major step towards transparency this past January with Announcement 2010-9 to require business taxpayers to report basic information regarding their uncertain tax positions when they filed their tax returns. As many of you know, last month we released the Final Schedule UTP and Instructions effective for 2010 tax years along with a directive to the field and modifications to our Policy of Restraint to provide guidance to IRS examiners and other personnel regarding how we will implement UTP reporting.
This new requirement gets to the heart of information we need without trying to get into the taxpayer’s head. I believe that it helps achieve what most taxpayers and the IRS strive for and basically want. And that’s not the endless tug of war between the IRS and taxpayers, but certainty, consistent treatment and the efficient use of government and taxpayer resources by focusing on issues and taxpayers that pose the greatest risk of tax noncompliance.
The Final Schedule UTP fulfills these goals in a very balanced and sensible fashion and addresses important concerns expressed by affected taxpayers and the practitioner and business community. I would like to thank AICPA and its members for their very thoughtful and constructive comments which helped us craft a final product that moves us towards our shared objectives. Indeed we made some significant changes to the schedule based on the feedback we received. These include:
A five-year phase-in for filing the schedule;
Elimination of the maximum tax adjustment requirement;
Clarification of concise description of an issue; and
Clarification and strengthening of our policy of restraint
Our Schedule UTP needs also to be viewed as part of a major restructuring of the relationship with large corporate taxpayers that includes our permanent CAP program, fast-track appeals, industry issue resolution strategies, advanced pricing agreements, and other tools – all aimed at the goal of issue resolution and greater efficiency and certainty.
So here we are … an IRS that is working smarter and evolving to meet today’s and tomorrow’s changes and challenges. To do so, we must be open and welcoming of new ideas and forge new relationships with taxpayers and other stakeholders. We must look for opportunities to make the best use of resources, including leveraging the enormous reservoir of expertise and experience that is infused throughout the professional tax community. And we must be willing to innovate as we seek continuous improvement and work on some of the country’s most difficult and interesting problems.
That concludes my remarks and I thank you again for inviting me to share some thoughts with you. I would be happy to take a few questions.

Commissioner of Internal Revenue Douglas H. Shulman’s Keynote Speech Before the AICPA Fall Tax Meeting

IR-2010-107, Oct. 26, 2010

WASHINGTON — Good afternoon and thank you for that warm welcome and introduction and for inviting me to address AICPA’s Fall Tax Meeting.

With the leaves changing, the days shortening, and children back in school, this is a time of year that speaks of change and getting down to work after the long days of summer.

And today, I would like to spend my time with you talking about some of the changes in our tax system that we could have barely imagined 10…15…or 20 years ago … and how we are working smarter to stay on top of these changes and continually innovating to meet the challenges of tomorrow.

Our starting point is a given: our tax system is constantly changing. With its evolutions and revolutions, it’s anything but static. The dizzying pace of change continues to accelerate with no signs of slowing down. And it’s one hard stretch of road ahead full of dangerous curves, speed bumps and unexpected hazards.

For example, the sheer girth and complexity of the tax code continue to grow, in spite of efforts to simplify it. There have been an astonishing 4,400 legislative changes to the Code from 2000 to September of this year.

Our taxpayer base is also far more diverse and different than it was a mere 20 or 30 years ago, creating new needs and challenges to provide both innovative service channels and enforcement strategies.

For example, S corporations and partnerships, which are more difficult to audit, have grown rapidly. From 2000 to 2009, they increased by 55 percent and 70 percent respectively.

We are also dealing with an expanding number of Limited English Proficiency taxpayers who need to be served. To meet this need, IRS has over 1,800 bilingual employees who provide service to them. We also created a Spanish language web site and an IRS Multilingual Gateway and offer over 600 tax products translated into Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese and Russian.

And as this audience well knows, our tax system reflects an enormous and dynamic global economy and all that it has ushered in… …from complex transfer pricing issues to wealthy individuals using global capital markets to facilitate investment strategies.

Relationships and paradigms are shifting too as we break down barriers and open doors. This past year, I have spoken at length about the IRS retooling its relationship with large corporate taxpayers…how we are moving away from protracted trench warfare, which serves neither of us well, to earlier and speedier issue resolution and greater efficiency and certainty.

Congress has also expanded the IRS’ portfolio of duties as we are increasingly asked to administer the tax portion of new social and economic programs, such as the Economic Stimulus, the Recovery Act, the HIRE Act, the Small Business Act …and now, the tax provisions of the Affordable Care Act.

The simple fact is that our job is getting harder…much harder…with no let up in sight. And to make a tough job even tougher, resources are scarce and will continue to be for the foreseeable future.

My intention in describing the current state of play of our tax system is not to give you a pre-Halloween scare. Rather, I am hoping that by viewing the tax system through a wide angle lens, we can start to see how we can sort out and overcome some of the hurdles we face… improve our performance… and produce results we can all embrace, such as sound, fair and efficient tax administration…and of course, improved compliance.

Working smarter has been a theme of mine since I became Commissioner. But what does working smarter really mean? In the case of the IRS, it means evolving to keep pace with change, constantly looking ahead, and being innovative and more imaginative with available resources inside and outside the agency.

Let me dive down a little deeper into this concept. In many ways, it is all about a leveraged model.

In a classic business sense, leveraging translates to applying a relatively small amount of capital that yields a high level of impact or return for the company and its shareholders. For the IRS, it means maximizing the use of our resources, while tapping into the experience, specialized knowledge, infrastructure, technology and activities of other players in the tax system and making them an integral part of our service and compliance strategies.

By leveraging our joint resources, we can advance and support common objectives and outcomes we both desire, such as certainty, clarity and not wasting time and resources. The bottom line is that we can achieve far more working together than either of us could by working alone.

Before I get into a front-burner topic – the return preparer initiative – let me point out that we’re already applying the concept of working smarter through leverage to achieve our goals. For example, over the past year, I reached out to members of corporate boards to hopefully leverage off of good corporate governance practices that might limit some risky tax planning behavior…and assure that corporate boards and audit committees are assessing and managing tax risk just as they do other material business risks.

I brought a similar message to the Council on Foundations…namely that good governance for a non-profit is mostly the same as general good governance. Both involve oversight of the organization’s effectiveness in pursuing its mission. And both the IRS and foundations want many of the same things from tax-exempt organizations.

We want well-run institutions that deliver on their missions – or exempt purpose – in tax parlance. And we want appropriate controls in place to ensure clean books and records and adherence with legal requirements.

In this regard, we both benefit from what each of us does separately. And we both benefit by leveraging another set of eyes to look at the same issues.

Now, today, I want to speak about two key steps in this evolutionary chain of getting smarter and working smarter…and here too leverage plays a role. The first is the return preparer initiative.

I believe it is one of the most important initiatives and defining actions that the IRS has taken in recent years in improving both compliance and our ability to deliver better service to taxpayers; in this case, helping them to file accurate returns from the get-go and avoid potentially time-consuming problems later on.

As with our international strategy, it is important to see the return preparer initiative as reflecting and adapting to changing elements in and around our tax system.

Sixty years ago, when the World Wide Web was not even a twinkle in a computer expert’s eye, no one would have thought of e-File or IRS.gov. Today, no one would think of an effective and efficient tax administration system without them.  In fact, our e-file rate is one of the biggest success stories of government modernization. Last year, we had a 70 percent e-file rate for individuals as compared to a mere 10 percent fifteen years ago. And this translates into a huge savings. For FY 2009, it cost us only 19 cents to process an e-filed return – a fraction of the $3.29 it takes to process a paper return. And with e-file, taxpayers get their refund faster, with fewer data processing errors that can lead to hassles later in the process.

It was this same type of systemic change in our tax system – subtle at first and tectonic later – that would make the return preparer initiative not a “nice-to-have” but a “must have” program. Let’s see why by taking a quick look in the rear view mirror.

For many years, most taxpayers prepared their own returns with pencil and paper and an adding machine. You could also always count on the 11:00 PM news story about procrastinating taxpayers lined up at the Post Office to mail in their returns, or seeking 11th hour preparation help from the IRS. One of my predecessors even stood outside of a Metro Station on April 15th handing out extension forms.

And that’s the quaint, sleepy image that stayed the same until about 20-30 years ago. Then we had a wake up call that would irrevocably change the way people would prepare and file their taxes.

Growing tax code complexity fueled an explosive growth in tax return preparation. Once a cottage industry, today, more than 8 out of ten taxpayers use a tax preparer or tax software. And there are now an estimated 1 million individuals preparing tax returns for a fee. Barring some sort of massive tax simplification, this trend will continue.

There are a number of positives in this trend. As I noted earlier, one of the most important is that qualified return preparers can help taxpayers get it right…right from the start.

Working with the taxpayer, they can prevent inadvertent errors which can save both taxpayers and the IRS headaches and precious resources down the road.

And let’s face facts….taxpayers want to keep their interactions with the IRS to a minimum. One of the best ways to insure that minimum interaction is for taxpayers to file an accurate and timely return…once again, getting it right the first time around.

In a world of greater complexity and sometimes the temptation to push the tax planning envelope beyond acceptable bounds, qualified return preparers can also advise taxpayers on the risk associated with a possible reporting position. They can also explain taxpayer rights and responsibilities. So, we at the IRS see the professional return preparer community as a strong ally in our efforts to boost overall service and compliance.

Now, an individual’s return filing is often one of their biggest financial transactions in any given year. Yet any person can prepare a federal tax return for any other person for a fee.

The average person on the street might assume there is some sort of formal oversight or licensing for every return preparer. After all, even a barber must attend a formalized training program and obtain a license. However, that average taxpayer would be mistaken.

It might surprise taxpayers to learn that the level of oversight varies widely. There’s little oversight of paid tax return preparers, particularly for those who are not attorneys, enrolled agents, and CPAs – like you – or other individuals authorized to practice before the IRS. Again, it bears repeating that this is one of the most important annual financial transactions for taxpayers, yet many preparers do not have to meet any professionally-mandated competency requirements.

This begs the question. Are too many taxpayers rolling the dice when it comes to their paid return preparers? The Government Accountability Office, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration and our own research suggest that our tax system and a large number of taxpayers may be poorly served by some return preparers. And let no one forget that it is the taxpayer who is legally responsible for penalties and interest if their return is not accurately prepared, or they claim deductions or tax credits to which they are not entitled.

Given the critical mass of issues building around paid return preparers, the IRS launched its return preparer review in June of 2009. It meets two of our most important strategic goals and reflects our commitment to working smarter.

First, it strengthens partnerships with tax practitioners, tax return preparers, and other third parties to ensure effective tax administration. And second, it ensures all of the above and other third parties in the tax system have a minimal level of competency and adhere to professional standards… with an overarching goal of better service to taxpayers and increased compliance.

As most of you are aware, our return preparer initiative is now undergoing a staged implementation process. We took a big first step last month when we launched the new online PTIN application system. It’s now up and running and will eventually get everyone into the system.

But more than just an identification number, the PTIN registration process gives us an important and better line of sight into the return preparer community than we’ve ever had before. We can leverage that information to help us better analyze trends, spot anomalies and potentially detect fraud.

Indeed, the PTIN process will help us build, in several years, a publicly-accessible database of those registered. I view this as an extremely important tool for consumers and another example of working smarter, as consumers will be able to search the database to ensure that their preparer is registered. This ups the game for everyone. The data base will confirm for the public which return preparers are properly registered with the IRS.  It will also make it easier for everyone to find and track the bad actors out there. They won’t be able to pull up stakes and move around anonymously.

There are a number of transition issues we are also working through as we implement the return preparer initiative. One of the first out of the gate was foreign PTINs for those paid return preparers outside of the United States who lack a Social Security Number, but prepare US tax returns for their clients. We recognized the hurdles they faced, and in response, are providing them with some needed flexibility.

We are also still refining our rules for people who work in a professional firm, like an accounting firm, who prepare all, or substantially all of a return under the supervision of an accountant, enrolled agent or lawyer. While this is a tricky area, and I can’t give you definitive guidance until we publish our final guidance later this year, I will tell you that I am sympathetic to the argument that the rules should be flexible for people who have met a higher professional standard. Therefore, it is highly likely that as we implement the new rules and procedures there will be some relief for testing and continuing education requirements for people who do not sign a return and work in a professional firm under the supervision of an accountant, enrolled agent or lawyer.

We are also still working on a start date for testing, and an effective date for the 15 hours of continuing education. Some of those commenting encouraged us to slow down or delay these important parts of the program. While we are moving forward to put in place continuing education, we recognize the need for a staged transition to reduce burden and uncertainty. Therefore, during the first year of implementation, we intend to waive the requirement for continuing education. This will give us time to work through the many issues regarding CE, including working with third parties who already certify CE courses to attempt to leverage their infrastructure.

Finally, with any major initiative, I need to look at the people and structure that we will use to implement it. I am pleased to announce today that we are creating a Return Preparer Office inside of the IRS that will be led by David R. Williams, who is familiar to many of you for his work on the return preparer initiative. He will report directly to Steve Miller, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement.

This new office will have broad responsibility for the return preparer initiative.  It will manage all of our activities related to continuing education and testing of all professionals under IRS jurisdiction.  It will also manage the registration system and process, as well as coordinate resource planning for IRS efforts across the organization related to return preparers. If you have any insights, concerns and suggestions as we proceed on implementing the return preparer initiative, please feel free to contact David.

David’s leadership on the return preparer initiative will complement the excellent work Karen Hawkins is carrying out as Director of the Office of Professional Responsibility. This critical organization will remain a separate entity within the IRS, and I see its impact being enhanced in the future to ensure that tax professionals meet the high ethical standards that taxpayers expect, need and deserve.

Indeed, it is my intention to provide Karen and her able team increased resources to investigate additional cases of improper conduct, ethical violations and other disciplinary issues involving tax professionals falling under Treasury Circular 230. I think it’s fair to say that we could see an appreciable jump in the OPR case load in the foreseeable future as we work to ensure that all return preparers are serving the American people well.

I would like to turn now to how we are working smarter with some of our largest corporate taxpayers. Our new uncertain tax position reporting requirement is a key element of our larger program to retool our relationship with these taxpayers and create greater efficiency and certainty.

Let me frame this discussion by saying that I believe the concept of more transparency is consistent with our nation’s historic framework of a voluntary compliance system. Our tax system is set up in such a way that taxpayers fill out their own returns. This self-assessment system reflects the fact that it is the taxpayer, and not the IRS, who possesses all of the information relevant to tax liability. We then use information reported by the taxpayer to make judgments about issues to pursue, and returns to audit.

Inherent in this system is the basic assumption that a taxpayer will be forthcoming in dealing with the IRS with respect to the items it has reported on its tax return, including the underlying positions related to those items. But this is much more than an assumption – it is the foundation on which our tax system is built.

Guided by the fundamental principle that transparency is essential to achieving an effective and efficient self-assessment tax system, the IRS took a major step towards transparency this past January with Announcement 2010-9 to require business taxpayers to report basic information regarding their uncertain tax positions when they filed their tax returns. As many of you know, last month we released the Final Schedule UTP and Instructions effective for 2010 tax years along with a directive to the field and modifications to our Policy of Restraint to provide guidance to IRS examiners and other personnel regarding how we will implement UTP reporting.

This new requirement gets to the heart of information we need without trying to get into the taxpayer’s head. I believe that it helps achieve what most taxpayers and the IRS strive for and basically want. And that’s not the endless tug of war between the IRS and taxpayers, but certainty, consistent treatment and the efficient use of government and taxpayer resources by focusing on issues and taxpayers that pose the greatest risk of tax noncompliance.

The Final Schedule UTP fulfills these goals in a very balanced and sensible fashion and addresses important concerns expressed by affected taxpayers and the practitioner and business community. I would like to thank AICPA and its members for their very thoughtful and constructive comments which helped us craft a final product that moves us towards our shared objectives. Indeed we made some significant changes to the schedule based on the feedback we received. These include:

  • A five-year phase-in for filing the schedule;
  • Elimination of the maximum tax adjustment requirement;
  • Clarification of concise description of an issue; and
  • Clarification and strengthening of our policy of restraint

Our Schedule UTP needs also to be viewed as part of a major restructuring of the relationship with large corporate taxpayers that includes our permanent CAP program, fast-track appeals, industry issue resolution strategies, advanced pricing agreements, and other tools – all aimed at the goal of issue resolution and greater efficiency and certainty.

So here we are … an IRS that is working smarter and evolving to meet today’s and tomorrow’s changes and challenges. To do so, we must be open and welcoming of new ideas and forge new relationships with taxpayers and other stakeholders. We must look for opportunities to make the best use of resources, including leveraging the enormous reservoir of expertise and experience that is infused throughout the professional tax community. And we must be willing to innovate as we seek continuous improvement and work on some of the country’s most difficult and interesting problems.

That concludes my remarks and I thank you again for inviting me to share some thoughts with you. I would be happy to take a few questions.

Calculator on your desktop 1-888-469-3003

Posted by : Daniel Stoica in (Articles) On: October 27th, 2010

IRS Begins Notifying Tax Return Preparers on PTIN Renewals

IRS Begins Notifying Tax Return Preparers on PTIN Renewals
IR-2010-106, Oct. 25, 2010
WASHINGTON — The Internal Revenue Service has begun notifying about 1 million tax return preparers to remind them that they must renew their Preparer Tax Identification Numbers (PTIN) if they are still paid preparers. Use of the PTIN will be required on all federal returns prepared by paid tax return preparers starting Jan. 1.
Tax return preparers can register immediately using a new PTIN sign-up system available through www.IRS.gov/taxpros. Preparers will need to create an account, complete the PTIN application and pay a $64.25 fee before getting their PTINs.
The IRS will be sending approximately 125,000 notification letters each week for eight weeks. The notifications are based on those tax return preparers who currently have PTINs. Tax return preparers who received their PTINs prior to the new system launch on Sept. 28, 2010, must register using the new sign-up system. Existing PTIN holders who register through the new system will generally be reassigned their same numbers.
The PTIN was created several years ago as a nine-digit number that tax return preparers could obtain from the IRS to use on tax returns instead of their Social Security numbers.
The PTIN requirement is one of the main provisions in a new oversight program to help regulate the tax preparation industry. Anyone paid to prepare all or substantially all of any federal tax return or claim for refund must have a PTIN. The requirement applies to all tax return preparers, including those who are enrolled agents, certified public accountants and attorneys.

IRS Begins Notifying Tax Return Preparers on PTIN Renewals

IR-2010-106, Oct. 25, 2010

WASHINGTON — The Internal Revenue Service has begun notifying about 1 million tax return preparers to remind them that they must renew their Preparer Tax Identification Numbers (PTIN) if they are still paid preparers. Use of the PTIN will be required on all federal returns prepared by paid tax return preparers starting Jan. 1.

Tax return preparers can register immediately using a new PTIN sign-up system available through www.IRS.gov/taxpros. Preparers will need to create an account, complete the PTIN application and pay a $64.25 fee before getting their PTINs.

The IRS will be sending approximately 125,000 notification letters each week for eight weeks. The notifications are based on those tax return preparers who currently have PTINs. Tax return preparers who received their PTINs prior to the new system launch on Sept. 28, 2010, must register using the new sign-up system. Existing PTIN holders who register through the new system will generally be reassigned their same numbers.

The PTIN was created several years ago as a nine-digit number that tax return preparers could obtain from the IRS to use on tax returns instead of their Social Security numbers.

The PTIN requirement is one of the main provisions in a new oversight program to help regulate the tax preparation industry. Anyone paid to prepare all or substantially all of any federal tax return or claim for refund must have a PTIN. The requirement applies to all tax return preparers, including those who are enrolled agents, certified public accountants and attorneys.

Calculator on your desktop 1-888-469-3003

Posted by : Daniel Stoica in (Blog) On: October 24th, 2010

2010 IRPAC Report: Tax Gap Subgroup

2010 IRPAC Report: Tax Gap Subgroup
Discussion
The IRS periodically releases estimates of the tax gap – the difference between taxes owed and taxes paid in a timely manner.  The latest IRS estimates show a tax gap of about $350 billion for tax year 2001.  The tax gap consists of three components – non-filing (taxes not paid by those with a filing requirement who fail to file), underreporting (taxes underpaid by those who file but underreport what they owe), and underpayment (taxes not paid by those who fail to remit reported amounts owed when due).  IRS reports the tax gap for separate tax sources, including individual income taxes, corporate income taxes, employment taxes, and estate taxes.
The purpose of the Tax Gap Subgroup is to help the IRS improve its estimates of the tax gap.  In prior years, the subgroup reviewed and supplied comments on the IRS research methodology for estimating underreporting of corporate income taxes, individual income taxes, income reported by flow-through enterprises (partnerships and subchapter S corporations), and estate and gift taxes.  During 2010, the subgroup reviewed revised drafts of two white papers prepared by the IRS Office of Research that described improvements in the methodology used for estimating two components of the estate tax gap – the non-filing gap and the underreporting gap – and provided updated estimates.    The group met with IRS research staff on June 8, 2010 in a meeting chaired by the Director of the Office of Research, Analysis and Statistics and provided additional feedback on these papers.  Generally, the subgroup was supportive of the IRS analyses, but did offer some additional technical suggestions.  At the meeting, the group also discussed the broader strategy for updating estimates of the total tax gap and all its components to a more recent year, based on new estimates of some components of the tax gap and revised projections of older estimates.
Recommendations
A. Updating Estimates of Estate Tax Filing Noncompliance
The subgroup continued a discussion initiated in 2009 of a revised methodology used by IRS to generate estimates of the estate tax non-filing gap, providing feedback on a revised draft paper.  In response to earlier feedback, IRS staff had made several improvements in the estimating methodology.  The latest IRS paper estimates a non-filing gap for estate taxes in tax year 2004 (at the midpoint of a confidence interval) of $2.5 billion, or about 9.2 percent of tax liability.  The estimate is similar in magnitude to estimates for earlier years using a different methodology.  The subgroup raised some additional technical issues about the estimates, including taking into account the division of assets within households, the interaction between the estate tax and the gift tax, and the effects of tax planning behavior.
B. Updating the Estate Tax Underreporting Gap for TY 2004
The subgroup also reviewed a white paper on the estate tax underreporting gap.  The paper introduced a new methodology based on the use of IRS operational audit data, with statistical adjustments to remove sample selection bias.
The IRS research paper estimated a voluntary reporting rate of 92 percent (underreporting of 8 percent of tax liability), with a 95 percent confidence interval ranging from 87 to 96 percent.  In dollar terms, this represents an underreporting gap of $1.9 billion in 2004, with a confidence interval ranging from $0.7 billion to $3.0 billion).  Based on the statistical confidence intervals, IRS staff concluded that the results were not significantly different from the estimates previously released for tax year 2001.  The subgroup provided IRS staff with some additional suggestions on presentation of the results.
C. Strategy for Updating the Tax Gap Estimates
IRS is committed to providing updated estimates of the tax gap by the end of 2011.  IRS staff and the subgroup discussed how frequently the tax gap estimates should be updated in the future, taking account of public demands for updated information, the uncertainty surrounding the estimates, and issues of how the estimates might be misinterpreted.
Members of the subgroup emphasized the need to explain carefully the determinants of the tax gap estimates and the degree of confidence associated with various components.  There was concern that changes that reflect improvements in methodology or random errors could be misinterpreted as reflecting real changes in compliance rates.  The group discussed how best to communicate the results to avoid any misinterpretation.
Concluding Remarks
The subgroup has received positive feedback from IRS research staff on the value of their input to the development of improved ways of estimating the tax gap and presenting the estimates.  IRS research has offered to continue to consult with the subgroup on an ad-hoc basis as their estimates continue to evolve and new technical issues arise.

2010 IRPAC Report: Tax Gap Subgroup

Discussion

The IRS periodically releases estimates of the tax gap – the difference between taxes owed and taxes paid in a timely manner.  The latest IRS estimates show a tax gap of about $350 billion for tax year 2001.  The tax gap consists of three components – non-filing (taxes not paid by those with a filing requirement who fail to file), underreporting (taxes underpaid by those who file but underreport what they owe), and underpayment (taxes not paid by those who fail to remit reported amounts owed when due).  IRS reports the tax gap for separate tax sources, including individual income taxes, corporate income taxes, employment taxes, and estate taxes.

The purpose of the Tax Gap Subgroup is to help the IRS improve its estimates of the tax gap.  In prior years, the subgroup reviewed and supplied comments on the IRS research methodology for estimating underreporting of corporate income taxes, individual income taxes, income reported by flow-through enterprises (partnerships and subchapter S corporations), and estate and gift taxes.  During 2010, the subgroup reviewed revised drafts of two white papers prepared by the IRS Office of Research that described improvements in the methodology used for estimating two components of the estate tax gap – the non-filing gap and the underreporting gap – and provided updated estimates.    The group met with IRS research staff on June 8, 2010 in a meeting chaired by the Director of the Office of Research, Analysis and Statistics and provided additional feedback on these papers.  Generally, the subgroup was supportive of the IRS analyses, but did offer some additional technical suggestions.  At the meeting, the group also discussed the broader strategy for updating estimates of the total tax gap and all its components to a more recent year, based on new estimates of some components of the tax gap and revised projections of older estimates.

Recommendations

A. Updating Estimates of Estate Tax Filing Noncompliance

The subgroup continued a discussion initiated in 2009 of a revised methodology used by IRS to generate estimates of the estate tax non-filing gap, providing feedback on a revised draft paper.  In response to earlier feedback, IRS staff had made several improvements in the estimating methodology.  The latest IRS paper estimates a non-filing gap for estate taxes in tax year 2004 (at the midpoint of a confidence interval) of $2.5 billion, or about 9.2 percent of tax liability.  The estimate is similar in magnitude to estimates for earlier years using a different methodology.  The subgroup raised some additional technical issues about the estimates, including taking into account the division of assets within households, the interaction between the estate tax and the gift tax, and the effects of tax planning behavior.

B. Updating the Estate Tax Underreporting Gap for TY 2004

The subgroup also reviewed a white paper on the estate tax underreporting gap.  The paper introduced a new methodology based on the use of IRS operational audit data, with statistical adjustments to remove sample selection bias.

The IRS research paper estimated a voluntary reporting rate of 92 percent (underreporting of 8 percent of tax liability), with a 95 percent confidence interval ranging from 87 to 96 percent.  In dollar terms, this represents an underreporting gap of $1.9 billion in 2004, with a confidence interval ranging from $0.7 billion to $3.0 billion).  Based on the statistical confidence intervals, IRS staff concluded that the results were not significantly different from the estimates previously released for tax year 2001.  The subgroup provided IRS staff with some additional suggestions on presentation of the results.

C. Strategy for Updating the Tax Gap Estimates

IRS is committed to providing updated estimates of the tax gap by the end of 2011.  IRS staff and the subgroup discussed how frequently the tax gap estimates should be updated in the future, taking account of public demands for updated information, the uncertainty surrounding the estimates, and issues of how the estimates might be misinterpreted.

Members of the subgroup emphasized the need to explain carefully the determinants of the tax gap estimates and the degree of confidence associated with various components.  There was concern that changes that reflect improvements in methodology or random errors could be misinterpreted as reflecting real changes in compliance rates.  The group discussed how best to communicate the results to avoid any misinterpretation.

Concluding Remarks

The subgroup has received positive feedback from IRS research staff on the value of their input to the development of improved ways of estimating the tax gap and presenting the estimates.  IRS research has offered to continue to consult with the subgroup on an ad-hoc basis as their estimates continue to evolve and new technical issues arise.

Calculator on your desktop 1-888-469-3003

Posted by : Daniel Stoica in (Articles) On: October 24th, 2010

How To Avoid EFTPS Scam

How To Avoid EFTPS Scam
Aug. 20, 2010
The IRS recently became aware of a fraudulent scheme targeting Electronic Federal Tax Payment System users. The scheme uses an e-mail that claims that your tax payment was rejected and directs you to a website for additional information. The website contains malware that will attempt to infect your computer.
The IRS does not initiate taxpayer communications through e-mail.
If you receive a message claiming to be from the IRS or EFTPS, please:
Do not reply to the sender, access links on the site or submit any information to them.
Report and identify this or other phishing, e-mail scams and bogus IRS websites by forwarding the e-mail or URL information to the IRS at phishing@irs.gov.
EFTPS is a tax payment system provided free by the U.S. Department of Treasury that allows you to pay federal taxes electronically via the Internet or phone 24/7. Visit EFTPS to enroll.
Form 1099-OID Fraud
Oct. 10, 2008
The IRS cautions taxpayers to avoid getting caught up in a new tax fraud disguised as a debt payment option for credit cards or mortgage debt. The fraud is also marketed as a way to reduce taxes or pay outstanding tax liabilities. It involves the filing of Form 1099-OID, Original Issue Discount, and/or bogus financial instruments such as bonded promissory notes or sight drafts.
This fraud has evolved from an earlier frivolous argument that a “strawman” bank account has been created at the Treasury Department for each U.S. citizen, and that individuals could use such “strawman” accounts to pay debts and claim withholding credits.
The IRS addresses the “strawman” argument in Revenue Ruling 2005–21 and Revenue Ruling 2004-31, and discredits the use of this position for income tax purposes. Moreover, the courts that have reviewed the “strawman” argument and other similar arguments have found them frivolous.
For more information on frivolous schemes, see The Truth About Frivolous Arguments.
The IRS Warns of Scam e-Mails or Phone Calls
May 16, 2008
The IRS warns taxpayers to be on the alert for e-mails and phone calls they may receive which claim to come from the IRS or other federal agency and which mention their tax refund or economic stimulus payment. These are almost certainly a scam whose purpose is to obtain personal and financial information — such as name, Social Security number, bank account and credit card or even PIN numbers — from taxpayers which can be used by the scammers to commit identity theft. The e-mails and calls usually state that the IRS needs the information to process a refund or stimulus payment or deposit it into the taxpayer’s bank account. The e-mails often contain links or attachments to what appears to be the IRS Web site or an IRS “refund application form.” However genuine in appearance, these phonies are designed to elicit the information the scammers are looking for.
The IRS does not send taxpayers e-mails about their tax accounts. Additionally, the only way to get a tax refund or stimulus payment, or to arrange for a direct deposit, is to file a tax return.

How To Avoid EFTPS Scam

Aug. 20, 2010

The IRS recently became aware of a fraudulent scheme targeting Electronic Federal Tax Payment System users. The scheme uses an e-mail that claims that your tax payment was rejected and directs you to a website for additional information. The website contains malware that will attempt to infect your computer.

The IRS does not initiate taxpayer communications through e-mail.

If you receive a message claiming to be from the IRS or EFTPS, please:

  1. Do not reply to the sender, access links on the site or submit any information to them.
  2. Report and identify this or other phishing, e-mail scams and bogus IRS websites by forwarding the e-mail or URL information to the IRS at phishing@irs.gov.

EFTPS is a tax payment system provided free by the U.S. Department of Treasury that allows you to pay federal taxes electronically via the Internet or phone 24/7. Visit EFTPS to enroll.

Form 1099-OID Fraud

Oct. 10, 2008

The IRS cautions taxpayers to avoid getting caught up in a new tax fraud disguised as a debt payment option for credit cards or mortgage debt. The fraud is also marketed as a way to reduce taxes or pay outstanding tax liabilities. It involves the filing of Form 1099-OID, Original Issue Discount, and/or bogus financial instruments such as bonded promissory notes or sight drafts.

This fraud has evolved from an earlier frivolous argument that a “strawman” bank account has been created at the Treasury Department for each U.S. citizen, and that individuals could use such “strawman” accounts to pay debts and claim withholding credits.

The IRS addresses the “strawman” argument in Revenue Ruling 2005–21 and Revenue Ruling 2004-31, and discredits the use of this position for income tax purposes. Moreover, the courts that have reviewed the “strawman” argument and other similar arguments have found them frivolous.

For more information on frivolous schemes, see The Truth About Frivolous Arguments.

The IRS Warns of Scam e-Mails or Phone Calls

May 16, 2008

The IRS warns taxpayers to be on the alert for e-mails and phone calls they may receive which claim to come from the IRS or other federal agency and which mention their tax refund or economic stimulus payment. These are almost certainly a scam whose purpose is to obtain personal and financial information — such as name, Social Security number, bank account and credit card or even PIN numbers — from taxpayers which can be used by the scammers to commit identity theft. The e-mails and calls usually state that the IRS needs the information to process a refund or stimulus payment or deposit it into the taxpayer’s bank account. The e-mails often contain links or attachments to what appears to be the IRS Web site or an IRS “refund application form.” However genuine in appearance, these phonies are designed to elicit the information the scammers are looking for.

The IRS does not send taxpayers e-mails about their tax accounts. Additionally, the only way to get a tax refund or stimulus payment, or to arrange for a direct deposit, is to file a tax return.

Calculator on your desktop 1-888-469-3003

Posted by : Daniel Stoica in (Blog) On: October 22nd, 2010

2010 IRPAC Report Executive Summary of Issues

2010 IRPAC Report Executive Summary of Issues
Tax Gap Subgroup
The subgroup made recommendations concerning updating estimates of estate tax filing non-compliance and a strategy for updating the tax gap estimates. Members of the subgroup emphasized the need to explain carefully the determinants of the tax gap estimates and the degree of confidence associated with various components. There was concern that changes that reflect improvements in methodology or random errors could be misinterpreted as reflecting real changes in compliance rates. The group discussed how best to communicate the results to avoid any misinterpretation.
Employee Benefits and Payroll Subgroup
A. Health Care Valuation on Form W-2
Based on the lack of guidance and time necessary to implement system-wide W-2 changes, IRPAC recommends that the IRS make health care reporting optional for 2011 or waive penalties for failure to comply.
B. Tip Reporting Compliance and Enforcement Efforts
To facilitate tip reporting and increase compliance, IRPAC recommends a number of changes to simplify the process and help identify and conform non-filers.
C. EINs for Qualified Plans/Trusts
Based on the lack of clear guidance on the need and the proper procedure for obtaining EINs for qualified plans/trusts, IRPAC strongly recommends changes to Forms 5500 and SS-4 (and related instructions) to clarify these rules and encourage plan sponsors to obtain a trust EIN for qualified plans.
D. TIN Masking on Payee 1099s
Supported by initial comments on the temporary pilot program, IRPAC recommends that the TIN Masking pilot (which provides for optional masking) be made permanent beginning for tax year 2011, and expand the program to additional 1099 series forms, paper or electronic, and cover SSNs or EINs.
E. Transparency for Abusive Use of Multiple EINs – to Establish Multiple Tax-Favored Benefit Plans
IRPAC recommends additional certification/disclosures be made on the entity’s annual tax return for employers that improperly establish multiple tax-favored plans for its workforce through the use of multiple entities.
F. 2009 Form 5500/5330 Automatic Extension for Calendar Year Plans
IRPAC first recommended an automatic extension of the filing deadline for 2009 Form 5500s (without the need to file Form 5558) for calendar year plans to October 15, 2010 to be able to comply with EFAST2.  As that extension was not granted, IRPAC further recommend that the 2009 Form 5500/5330 deadline for all calendar plans be extended to December 31, 2010 (or otherwise waive penalties for late filers through such date).
G. Basis Allocation for Direct Rollovers
IRPAC recommends that the IRS retain the long-standing interpretation of Code section 402(c)(2) and treat a partial or split direct rollover as a single distribution for basis allocation purposes.
Ad Hoc Subgroup
A. Electronic Furnishing of Forms 1098, 1099, 5498 and W-2
IRPAC recommends the IRS publish guidance to clarify procedures by which furnishers of these information statements might standardize the process for obtaining electronic affirmative consent, such as through a global consent to conduct business electronically, and bring it in line with other electronic business practices.  IRPAC advanced this cause by gaining approval for a global electronic delivery consent FAQ for Form 1098-T, Tuition Statement.
B. Form 5498 and Fair Market Value Reporting for Deceased and Successor Beneficiaries
Effective for 2011 Form 5498 reporting, the IRS will provide instructions for IRA custodian/trustee/issuers to prepare such forms for deceased beneficiaries and their successor beneficiaries.  The IRS will bring standardization to this reporting where no guidance previously existed.
C. Information Regarding Non-Resident Alien Taxation and Tax Reporting
IRPAC initiated and has supported an ongoing effort by the IRS to publish taxpayer friendly web-based content on IRS.gov for non-resident alien taxation, withholding and reporting.  The content will be found in a section titled “Taxation of Aliens by Visa Type and Immigration Status.”  The IRS will populate IRS.gov in stages with content by visa type as it is approved by Counsel.
D. Reporting Guidelines for the Return of Mistaken HSA Contributions to an Employer
IRPAC requested 2011 reporting guidance in the Instructions for Forms 1099-SA and 5498-SA related to excess employer contributions to an HSA that are returned to an employer.  A 2008 IRS Notice created this possibility but the reporting of the transactions had not been addressed.  The request will result in an update to these instructions.
E. Form 1099-R Reporting under EPCRS Guidelines for SEP, SARSEP, and SIMPLE Excesses Returned to Employer
IRPAC requested 2011 reporting guidance in the Instructions for Form 1099-R with respect to SEP, SARSEP and SIMPLE excess employer contributions returned to the employer under an EPCRS streamlined VCP correction.  The request will result in an update to these instructions.
F.  Form 5498-SA, HSA, Archer MSA, or Medicare Advantage MSA Information Due Date Change
A proposal was made to change the due date of Form 5498-SA, HSA, Archer MSA, or Medicare Advantage MSA Information to participants from May 31 to January 31 to aid practitioners and taxpayers.  Currently, there is insufficient support to make this change.
Burden Reduction Subgroup
A. Announcement 2010-41: New Backup Withholding Procedures: Social Security Number Validation following Receipt of Second “B” Notice
IRPAC commends the IRS on their release of interim procedures for payees requiring validation of their social security number to prevent or stop backup withholding.  IRPAC will continue working with IRS as additional guidance, including revision of Rev. Proc. 93-37 and Publication 1281, is prepared.
B. Form 1099-INT, Box 10
As published for 2010, Form 1099-INT includes a new box 10 which is intended to convey the CUSIP number of each tax exempt bond from which the taxpayer derived tax exempt income.  The addition of this information to the form comes from IRS’s need to identify taxpayers that are the beneficial owners of tax exempt private activity issues which are in danger of or have lost their tax exempt status.  IRPAC’s recommendations are oriented toward consideration of alternate approaches to communication with bondholders and, if the alternatives are untenable, addressing the structural and logistical shortcomings of the addition of box 10 to the Form 1099-INT.  Since the introduction of the revised form 1099-INT there has been insufficient time for IRS to consider the issues identified by IRPAC or for payers to implement any systematic changes.  It is recommended, therefore, that the obligation to report the CUSIP numbers of tax exempt bonds be deferred for at least one year.
C. IRC §1441 and §1442 Documentation and Withholding Issues on Freight, Shipping and Other Transportation Expenses
IRPAC began discussion with IRS Chief Counsel about Chapter 3, IRC §1441 and §1442 documentation and withholding issues on freight, shipping and other transportation expenses.  Discussion topics have included: the absence of a clear withholding process for payments for transportation services made to foreign persons; the application of IRC §1441 and  §1442 withholding to transportation payments that vary depending upon whether the services are classified as ship and air transportation subject to the 4% excise tax on U.S. source gross transportation income (GTI) or classified as trucking or rail transportation; the need for a simpler sourcing method for Chapter 3 withholding such as the one now used for GTI sourcing of transportation income; and the need for regulations that exempt “freight” from withholding under IRC §1441 and §1442 rules as part of the purchase price of the goods.
D. Comments on Proposed Cost Basis Regulations and the Draft 2011 Form 1099-B
IRPAC published three comment letters in 2010 and participated in many meetings and conference calls on cost basis reporting with IRS Chief Counsel.  IRPAC notes that with the late release of cost basis regulations, the necessary guidance will not have been made available in time to guide required system development and provide time for testing of system changes.  There are many implementation details that remain ambiguous or that are impossible to implement in the remaining time frame.  IRPAC continues to recommend that serious consideration be given to delaying the implementation of these provisions to 2012, particularly as they apply to transfer statements, and to deferring enforcement of the gift and inheritance provisions to 2013.
E. K-1 Matching Program
IRPAC met with IRS SB/SE to discuss the IRS K-1 matching procedures, specifically to determine what is causing erroneous mismatch notices and what the IRS and practitioners can do to alleviate the false mismatches.  Further, IRPAC asked IRS to investigate frivolous return notice procedures based on a case where fuel tax credit from a passthrough entity resulted in a frivolous return notice even though the taxpayer’s return was not disproportionately excessive to any business income.
F. Information Reporting for Tax Credit Bonds and Stripped Tax Credits
IRPAC made many recommendations in response to provisions outlined in IRS Notice 2010-28, Stripping Transactions for Qualified Tax Credit Bonds.  IRPAC’s recommendations are intended to harmonize the statutory requirements with how the securities industry functions while ensuring the availability of the information needed for a robust system of information reporting.  All stakeholders will benefit from the recommendations because they provide the minimum disruption to existing processes.  This translates into smoother and timelier implementation once all the details of the requirements are finalized by IRS.
G. Electronic Power of Attorney (POA) Validation for Business Returns
Rather than requiring personal information related to shareholders, partners or trustees to validate an electronically filed POA for a business entity, IRS e-Services should develop alternative criteria related specifically to the entity, such as the date of incorporation, date business started or was created, and the entity’s taxable income or ordinary business income.
H. Central Withholding Agreements:  Addressing Needs of Venues and Foreign Performing Artists through a Mini-CWA Program and Problems Encountered by Foreign Artists When Applying for U.S. Social Security Numbers (SSNs)
IRPAC began discussions with IRS LMSB regarding Central Withholding Agreements (CWA).  Issues include addressing the needs of venues and foreign performing artists through the creation of a mini-CWA program and problems encountered by foreign artists when applying for U.S. social security numbers.
I. Business Master File (BMF)
IRPAC met with IRS W&I and Chief Counsel to discuss the Business Master File.  The technology employed by IRS only allows for one address per business.  IRPAC raised concerns about the current procedure of automatic change of business address with every tax filing.  IRPAC recommended the Business Master File issue for inclusion on the 2010-2011 Guidance Priority List.
J. Staggered “B” Notices
IRS responded to IRPAC’s concerns regarding randomly staggered “B” Notices with 2010 changes to the processing of CP2100, Notice of Missing or Incorrect Name/TIN Match for large volume filers.  However, this change does not address the issues with randomly staggered CP2100A Notices which are extremely burdensome for related groups of information return filers.  IRPAC recommends that IRS’s Martinsburg center use the same notice date on all CP2100A notices regardless of when they are mailed.  Alternatively, IRS should distribute CP2100A notices for related entities during the same mailing period so that they include the same notice date.
K. Form 8886, Reportable Transaction Disclosure Statement
IRPAC reiterates its 2009 recommendation that IRS should clarify that the reporting requirements under IRC Section 6011 will terminate for the corporate participants in the Lease-in/Lease-out and Sale-in/Sale-out (LILO/SILO) Settlement Initiative after the year of actual or deemed termination of the tax shelter related transactions.  IRS Office of Chief Counsel acknowledged, in an unofficial correspondence, that these taxpayers do not have a continuing obligation to file Forms 8886.  IRS indicated that they would send letters to the settlement participants explaining this position.  IRPAC, however, has not received verification of whether this has occurred.
Emerging Compliance Issues Subgroup
A. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA)
On March 18, 2010, the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (the HIRE Act) was enacted.  The Foreign Account Tax Compliance provisions of Subtitle A of Title V of the HIRE Act (commonly referred to as FATCA) enact an expansive new withholding tax and reporting regime.  IRPAC has been working closely with the IRS and Treasury regarding the implementation of FATCA.  The ECI Subgroup report summarizes a number of issues on which IRPAC has provided recommendations.
B. IRC Section 6050W, Information Reporting of Payments Made in Settlement of Payment Card and Third Party Network Transactions
IRC Section 6050W was added to the Internal Revenue Code on July 30, 2008, by section 3091 of the Housing Assistance Tax Act of 2008.  On November 24, 2009, the IRS released proposed regulations and a draft of new Form 1099-K.  On January 19, 2010, IRPAC submitted a comment letter addressing several issues.  A copy of IRPAC’s January 19, 2010 comment letter relating to the proposed regulations is included in Appendix K.  IRPAC’s ECI subgroup also met with IRS Office of Chief Counsel at its January and April meetings, and provided both written and oral information regarding several issues, including ACH transactions, the payment process, and convenience checks.  On August 16, 2010, the final regulations were published.  In the final regulations, the IRS made a number of clarifications, but did not adopt IRPAC’s principal recommendation regarding the definition of gross amount.  Unfortunately, this will create a number of processing problems and will substantially complicate reporting parties’ ability to comply with IRC Section 6050W.
C. Expansion of Information Reporting Under IRC Section 6041
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010  expanded information reporting under IRC Section 6041 by repealing two exemptions that have been in the regulations for over a half-century.  Effective 2012, payers will be required to report payments for property and payments to corporations.  These changes have been discussed for years but never before enacted due to numerous challenges to utilizing the information reported.  IRPAC met twice with IRS Office of Chief Counsel to discuss these challenges.  IRPAC also sent the IRS two letters, the first dealing with a legal analysis of the scope of the changes, and the second dealing with practical implications of the changes.  Copies of the letters are included in Appendix L and M.
D. Withholding Tax Issues
IRPAC has identified several issues concerning withholding tax imposed under Chapter 3 (section 1441 et seq.) of the Code.  These issues also will be important under the new Chapter 4 regime enacted by the HIRE Act.  IRPAC met with the IRS to discuss these issues and offer recommendations.  The ECI Subgroup Report summarizes the issues and recommendations.
E. Identity Theft and Information Reporting
The problem of identity theft has become a serious issue within the payer community.  While the circumstances in which identity theft can affect an account are quite varied, IRPAC’s focus has been on the question of whether a payer must report payments of income or proceeds on Forms 1099 when the named payee is known to be a victim of identity theft.  IRPAC met twice this year with the IRS to address possible solutions that would best protect the identity theft victim while minimizing the reporting burden of payers.  IRPAC also recently raised with the IRS the issue of whether Forms 1099 should be issued when the address of the payee is known to be a “stale” (or undeliverable) address.  IRPAC expects to have further discussions with the IRS on this issue next year.
F.  Clarification of the Information to be Reported to U.S. Investors on the Form 1099-DIV, Box 6, Foreign Tax Paid.
U.S. payers are required to report to U.S. investors on Form 1099-DIV dividend payments made in respect of foreign securities.  In addition to reporting the dividend payments, payers are also required to report any foreign tax paid on such dividends.  Prior to 2008, the Instructions for Form 1099-DIV directed payers to report in Box 6 any foreign tax withheld and paid on dividends and other distributions on stock.  However, in 2008 the language in the instructions was changed to direct payers to enter creditable foreign tax withheld and paid (within the meaning of IRC Section 901) on dividends and other distributions on stock.  IRPAC requested that the IRS reconsider this change because payers do not possess the type of information required to make a determination as to whether the foreign tax withheld may be taken as a credit by the payee.  IRPAC met with members of the IRS’s Forms and Publications Division to discuss this issue.  All agreed that reinstating the language provided on the 2007 Form 1099-DIV would be appropriate.  The IRS has published a correction to the 2010 Instructions for Form 1099-DIV in the “What’s Hot” section of IRS.gov because the form instructions had already been published for this year.  The IRS also agreed to make the language change for the 2011 Instructions for Form 1099-DIV.

2010 IRPAC Report Executive Summary of Issues

Tax Gap Subgroup

The subgroup made recommendations concerning updating estimates of estate tax filing non-compliance and a strategy for updating the tax gap estimates. Members of the subgroup emphasized the need to explain carefully the determinants of the tax gap estimates and the degree of confidence associated with various components. There was concern that changes that reflect improvements in methodology or random errors could be misinterpreted as reflecting real changes in compliance rates. The group discussed how best to communicate the results to avoid any misinterpretation.

Employee Benefits and Payroll Subgroup

A.  Health Care Valuation on Form W-2

Based on the lack of guidance and time necessary to implement system-wide W-2 changes, IRPAC recommends that the IRS make health care reporting optional for 2011 or waive penalties for failure to comply.

B.  Tip Reporting Compliance and Enforcement Efforts

To facilitate tip reporting and increase compliance, IRPAC recommends a number of changes to simplify the process and help identify and conform non-filers.

C.  EINs for Qualified Plans/Trusts

Based on the lack of clear guidance on the need and the proper procedure for obtaining EINs for qualified plans/trusts, IRPAC strongly recommends changes to Forms 5500 and SS-4 (and related instructions) to clarify these rules and encourage plan sponsors to obtain a trust EIN for qualified plans.

D.  TIN Masking on Payee 1099s

Supported by initial comments on the temporary pilot program, IRPAC recommends that the TIN Masking pilot (which provides for optional masking) be made permanent beginning for tax year 2011, and expand the program to additional 1099 series forms, paper or electronic, and cover SSNs or EINs.

E.  Transparency for Abusive Use of Multiple EINs – to Establish Multiple Tax-Favored Benefit Plans

IRPAC recommends additional certification/disclosures be made on the entity’s annual tax return for employers that improperly establish multiple tax-favored plans for its workforce through the use of multiple entities.

F.  2009 Form 5500/5330 Automatic Extension for Calendar Year Plans

IRPAC first recommended an automatic extension of the filing deadline for 2009 Form 5500s (without the need to file Form 5558) for calendar year plans to October 15, 2010 to be able to comply with EFAST2.  As that extension was not granted, IRPAC further recommend that the 2009 Form 5500/5330 deadline for all calendar plans be extended to December 31, 2010 (or otherwise waive penalties for late filers through such date).

G. Basis Allocation for Direct Rollovers

IRPAC recommends that the IRS retain the long-standing interpretation of Code section 402(c)(2) and treat a partial or split direct rollover as a single distribution for basis allocation purposes.

Ad Hoc Subgroup

A.  Electronic Furnishing of Forms 1098, 1099, 5498 and W-2

IRPAC recommends the IRS publish guidance to clarify procedures by which furnishers of these information statements might standardize the process for obtaining electronic affirmative consent, such as through a global consent to conduct business electronically, and bring it in line with other electronic business practices.  IRPAC advanced this cause by gaining approval for a global electronic delivery consent FAQ for Form 1098-T, Tuition Statement.

B.  Form 5498 and Fair Market Value Reporting for Deceased and Successor Beneficiaries

Effective for 2011 Form 5498 reporting, the IRS will provide instructions for IRA custodian/trustee/issuers to prepare such forms for deceased beneficiaries and their successor beneficiaries.  The IRS will bring standardization to this reporting where no guidance previously existed.

C.  Information Regarding Non-Resident Alien Taxation and Tax Reporting

IRPAC initiated and has supported an ongoing effort by the IRS to publish taxpayer friendly web-based content on IRS.gov for non-resident alien taxation, withholding and reporting.  The content will be found in a section titled “Taxation of Aliens by Visa Type and Immigration Status.”  The IRS will populate IRS.gov in stages with content by visa type as it is approved by Counsel.

D.  Reporting Guidelines for the Return of Mistaken HSA Contributions to an Employer

IRPAC requested 2011 reporting guidance in the Instructions for Forms 1099-SA and 5498-SA related to excess employer contributions to an HSA that are returned to an employer.  A 2008 IRS Notice created this possibility but the reporting of the transactions had not been addressed.  The request will result in an update to these instructions.

E.  Form 1099-R Reporting under EPCRS Guidelines for SEP, SARSEP, and SIMPLE Excesses Returned to Employer

IRPAC requested 2011 reporting guidance in the Instructions for Form 1099-R with respect to SEP, SARSEP and SIMPLE excess employer contributions returned to the employer under an EPCRS streamlined VCP correction.  The request will result in an update to these instructions.

F.   Form 5498-SA, HSA, Archer MSA, or Medicare Advantage MSA Information Due Date Change

A proposal was made to change the due date of Form 5498-SA, HSA, Archer MSA, or Medicare Advantage MSA Information to participants from May 31 to January 31 to aid practitioners and taxpayers.  Currently, there is insufficient support to make this change.

Burden Reduction Subgroup

A.  Announcement 2010-41: New Backup Withholding Procedures: Social Security Number Validation following Receipt of Second “B” Notice

IRPAC commends the IRS on their release of interim procedures for payees requiring validation of their social security number to prevent or stop backup withholding.  IRPAC will continue working with IRS as additional guidance, including revision of Rev. Proc. 93-37 and Publication 1281, is prepared.

B.  Form 1099-INT, Box 10

As published for 2010, Form 1099-INT includes a new box 10 which is intended to convey the CUSIP number of each tax exempt bond from which the taxpayer derived tax exempt income.  The addition of this information to the form comes from IRS’s need to identify taxpayers that are the beneficial owners of tax exempt private activity issues which are in danger of or have lost their tax exempt status.  IRPAC’s recommendations are oriented toward consideration of alternate approaches to communication with bondholders and, if the alternatives are untenable, addressing the structural and logistical shortcomings of the addition of box 10 to the Form 1099-INT.  Since the introduction of the revised form 1099-INT there has been insufficient time for IRS to consider the issues identified by IRPAC or for payers to implement any systematic changes.  It is recommended, therefore, that the obligation to report the CUSIP numbers of tax exempt bonds be deferred for at least one year.

C.  IRC §1441 and §1442 Documentation and Withholding Issues on Freight, Shipping and Other Transportation Expenses

IRPAC began discussion with IRS Chief Counsel about Chapter 3, IRC §1441 and §1442 documentation and withholding issues on freight, shipping and other transportation expenses.  Discussion topics have included: the absence of a clear withholding process for payments for transportation services made to foreign persons; the application of IRC §1441 and  §1442 withholding to transportation payments that vary depending upon whether the services are classified as ship and air transportation subject to the 4% excise tax on U.S. source gross transportation income (GTI) or classified as trucking or rail transportation; the need for a simpler sourcing method for Chapter 3 withholding such as the one now used for GTI sourcing of transportation income; and the need for regulations that exempt “freight” from withholding under IRC §1441 and §1442 rules as part of the purchase price of the goods.

D.  Comments on Proposed Cost Basis Regulations and the Draft 2011 Form 1099-B

IRPAC published three comment letters in 2010 and participated in many meetings and conference calls on cost basis reporting with IRS Chief Counsel.  IRPAC notes that with the late release of cost basis regulations, the necessary guidance will not have been made available in time to guide required system development and provide time for testing of system changes.  There are many implementation details that remain ambiguous or that are impossible to implement in the remaining time frame.  IRPAC continues to recommend that serious consideration be given to delaying the implementation of these provisions to 2012, particularly as they apply to transfer statements, and to deferring enforcement of the gift and inheritance provisions to 2013.

E.  K-1 Matching Program

IRPAC met with IRS SB/SE to discuss the IRS K-1 matching procedures, specifically to determine what is causing erroneous mismatch notices and what the IRS and practitioners can do to alleviate the false mismatches.  Further, IRPAC asked IRS to investigate frivolous return notice procedures based on a case where fuel tax credit from a passthrough entity resulted in a frivolous return notice even though the taxpayer’s return was not disproportionately excessive to any business income.

F.  Information Reporting for Tax Credit Bonds and Stripped Tax Credits

IRPAC made many recommendations in response to provisions outlined in IRS Notice 2010-28, Stripping Transactions for Qualified Tax Credit Bonds.  IRPAC’s recommendations are intended to harmonize the statutory requirements with how the securities industry functions while ensuring the availability of the information needed for a robust system of information reporting.  All stakeholders will benefit from the recommendations because they provide the minimum disruption to existing processes.  This translates into smoother and timelier implementation once all the details of the requirements are finalized by IRS.

G.  Electronic Power of Attorney (POA) Validation for Business Returns

Rather than requiring personal information related to shareholders, partners or trustees to validate an electronically filed POA for a business entity, IRS e-Services should develop alternative criteria related specifically to the entity, such as the date of incorporation, date business started or was created, and the entity’s taxable income or ordinary business income.

H.  Central Withholding Agreements:  Addressing Needs of Venues and Foreign Performing Artists through a Mini-CWA Program and Problems Encountered by Foreign Artists When Applying for U.S. Social Security Numbers (SSNs)

IRPAC began discussions with IRS LMSB regarding Central Withholding Agreements (CWA).  Issues include addressing the needs of venues and foreign performing artists through the creation of a mini-CWA program and problems encountered by foreign artists when applying for U.S. social security numbers.

I.  Business Master File (BMF)

IRPAC met with IRS W&I and Chief Counsel to discuss the Business Master File.  The technology employed by IRS only allows for one address per business.  IRPAC raised concerns about the current procedure of automatic change of business address with every tax filing.  IRPAC recommended the Business Master File issue for inclusion on the 2010-2011 Guidance Priority List.

J.  Staggered “B” Notices

IRS responded to IRPAC’s concerns regarding randomly staggered “B” Notices with 2010 changes to the processing of CP2100, Notice of Missing or Incorrect Name/TIN Match for large volume filers.  However, this change does not address the issues with randomly staggered CP2100A Notices which are extremely burdensome for related groups of information return filers.  IRPAC recommends that IRS’s Martinsburg center use the same notice date on all CP2100A notices regardless of when they are mailed.  Alternatively, IRS should distribute CP2100A notices for related entities during the same mailing period so that they include the same notice date.

K.  Form 8886, Reportable Transaction Disclosure Statement

IRPAC reiterates its 2009 recommendation that IRS should clarify that the reporting requirements under IRC Section 6011 will terminate for the corporate participants in the Lease-in/Lease-out and Sale-in/Sale-out (LILO/SILO) Settlement Initiative after the year of actual or deemed termination of the tax shelter related transactions.  IRS Office of Chief Counsel acknowledged, in an unofficial correspondence, that these taxpayers do not have a continuing obligation to file Forms 8886.  IRS indicated that they would send letters to the settlement participants explaining this position.  IRPAC, however, has not received verification of whether this has occurred.

Emerging Compliance Issues Subgroup

A.  Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA)

On March 18, 2010, the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (the HIRE Act) was enacted.  The Foreign Account Tax Compliance provisions of Subtitle A of Title V of the HIRE Act (commonly referred to as FATCA) enact an expansive new withholding tax and reporting regime.  IRPAC has been working closely with the IRS and Treasury regarding the implementation of FATCA.  The ECI Subgroup report summarizes a number of issues on which IRPAC has provided recommendations.

B.  IRC Section 6050W, Information Reporting of Payments Made in Settlement of Payment Card and Third Party Network Transactions

IRC Section 6050W was added to the Internal Revenue Code on July 30, 2008, by section 3091 of the Housing Assistance Tax Act of 2008.  On November 24, 2009, the IRS released proposed regulations and a draft of new Form 1099-K.  On January 19, 2010, IRPAC submitted a comment letter addressing several issues.  A copy of IRPAC’s January 19, 2010 comment letter relating to the proposed regulations is included in Appendix K.  IRPAC’s ECI subgroup also met with IRS Office of Chief Counsel at its January and April meetings, and provided both written and oral information regarding several issues, including ACH transactions, the payment process, and convenience checks.  On August 16, 2010, the final regulations were published.  In the final regulations, the IRS made a number of clarifications, but did not adopt IRPAC’s principal recommendation regarding the definition of gross amount.  Unfortunately, this will create a number of processing problems and will substantially complicate reporting parties’ ability to comply with IRC Section 6050W.

C.  Expansion of Information Reporting Under IRC Section 6041

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010  expanded information reporting under IRC Section 6041 by repealing two exemptions that have been in the regulations for over a half-century.  Effective 2012, payers will be required to report payments for property and payments to corporations.  These changes have been discussed for years but never before enacted due to numerous challenges to utilizing the information reported.  IRPAC met twice with IRS Office of Chief Counsel to discuss these challenges.  IRPAC also sent the IRS two letters, the first dealing with a legal analysis of the scope of the changes, and the second dealing with practical implications of the changes.  Copies of the letters are included in Appendix L and M.

D.  Withholding Tax Issues

IRPAC has identified several issues concerning withholding tax imposed under Chapter 3 (section 1441 et seq.) of the Code.  These issues also will be important under the new Chapter 4 regime enacted by the HIRE Act.  IRPAC met with the IRS to discuss these issues and offer recommendations.  The ECI Subgroup Report summarizes the issues and recommendations.

E.  Identity Theft and Information Reporting

The problem of identity theft has become a serious issue within the payer community.  While the circumstances in which identity theft can affect an account are quite varied, IRPAC’s focus has been on the question of whether a payer must report payments of income or proceeds on Forms 1099 when the named payee is known to be a victim of identity theft.  IRPAC met twice this year with the IRS to address possible solutions that would best protect the identity theft victim while minimizing the reporting burden of payers.  IRPAC also recently raised with the IRS the issue of whether Forms 1099 should be issued when the address of the payee is known to be a “stale” (or undeliverable) address.  IRPAC expects to have further discussions with the IRS on this issue next year.

F.   Clarification of the Information to be Reported to U.S. Investors on the Form 1099-DIV, Box 6, Foreign Tax Paid.

U.S. payers are required to report to U.S. investors on Form 1099-DIV dividend payments made in respect of foreign securities.  In addition to reporting the dividend payments, payers are also required to report any foreign tax paid on such dividends.  Prior to 2008, the Instructions for Form 1099-DIV directed payers to report in Box 6 any foreign tax withheld and paid on dividends and other distributions on stock.  However, in 2008 the language in the instructions was changed to direct payers to enter creditable foreign tax withheld and paid (within the meaning of IRC Section 901) on dividends and other distributions on stock.  IRPAC requested that the IRS reconsider this change because payers do not possess the type of information required to make a determination as to whether the foreign tax withheld may be taken as a credit by the payee.  IRPAC met with members of the IRS’s Forms and Publications Division to discuss this issue.  All agreed that reinstating the language provided on the 2007 Form 1099-DIV would be appropriate.  The IRS has published a correction to the 2010 Instructions for Form 1099-DIV in the “What’s Hot” section of IRS.gov because the form instructions had already been published for this year.  The IRS also agreed to make the language change for the 2011 Instructions for Form 1099-DIV.

Calculator on your desktop 1-888-469-3003

Posted by : Daniel Stoica in (Blog) On: October 21st, 2010

2010 IRPAC Report Made Available

2010 IRPAC Report Made Available
IR-2010-105, Oct. 20, 2010
WASHINGTON — The Information Reporting Program Advisory Committee (IRPAC) today released its 2010 Report, which is an annual report that includes recommendations on a wide range of tax administration issues.
IRPAC provides a public forum for the IRS and members of the information reporting community in the private sector to discuss relevant information reporting issues. The IRPAC is administered by the National Public Liaison Office of the IRS. IRPAC draws its members from the tax professional community
Based on its findings and discussions, IRPAC reviewed 30 issues and made recommendations on a broad array of issues and concerns, including the following:
Health care reporting (Form W-2) for 2011.
Information reporting (Form 1099-MISC) under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010.
Cost basis reporting by financial institutions of customer cost basis in securities transactions.
Payment reporting (Section 6050W) made in settlement of payment card and third party transactions.
Withholding and tax information reporting of payments of U.S. source income to foreign financial institutions and non-financial foreign entities, under Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA).

2010 IRPAC Report Made Available

IR-2010-105, Oct. 20, 2010

WASHINGTON — The Information Reporting Program Advisory Committee (IRPAC) today released its 2010 Report, which is an annual report that includes recommendations on a wide range of tax administration issues.

IRPAC provides a public forum for the IRS and members of the information reporting community in the private sector to discuss relevant information reporting issues. The IRPAC is administered by the National Public Liaison Office of the IRS. IRPAC draws its members from the tax professional community

Based on its findings and discussions, IRPAC reviewed 30 issues and made recommendations on a broad array of issues and concerns, including the following:

  • Health care reporting (Form W-2) for 2011.
  • Information reporting (Form 1099-MISC) under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010.
  • Cost basis reporting by financial institutions of customer cost basis in securities transactions.
  • Payment reporting (Section 6050W) made in settlement of payment card and third party transactions.
  • Withholding and tax information reporting of payments of U.S. source income to foreign financial institutions and non-financial foreign entities, under Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA).
Site is licensed under Creative Commons License Website by Michele Rempel: Simplifying Social Media for Mediavine Marketing
Daniel Stoica Consulting, Accounting and Tax Professional based in Roscoe, Illinois, U.S.A. Serving Local, National, and International Clients