Archive for the ‘Tax Current Events and News’ Category

Massachusetts Enacts 2012 Budget Act

Wednesday, July 13th, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin

On July 11, 2011, Governor Deval Patrick signed the 2012 budget act, which postpones the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards 109 (FAS 109) deduction allowed certain corporations by a year, shortens the tax audit process, allows a deduction related to human organ donation, provides for recalculation of the dairy tax credit or trigger price in certain circumstances, and establishes a life sciences tax incentive program. It also provides certain sales tax exemption and revises certain administrative provisions.

Income tax. Life sciences tax incentive program: Effective as of January 1, 2009, a life sciences tax incentive program is established. The Life Sciences Center, in consultation with the Department of Revenue may authorize incentives not exceeding $25 million annually. Effective for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2012, a taxpayer who commits to the creation of a minimum of 50 net new permanent full-time positions in Massachusetts is allowed, to the extent authorized by the life sciences tax incentive program, a refundable jobs credit against personal and corporate income taxes.

FAS 109 deduction: The implementation of the deduction allowed to limit the impact of combined reporting on the financial statements of some publicly traded corporation is delayed to 2013. The deduction was to be prorated over the 7-year period beginning with the combined group’s taxable year that begins 2012.

Organ donation related expenses: Effective for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2012, a resident individual who donates an organ to another person for human organ transplantation may claim a deduction in an amount equal to the travel expenses, lodging expenses and lost wages not to exceed $10,000 that the individual incurred in donating his or her organ. Human organ means all or part of human bone marrow, liver, pancreas, kidney, intestine or lung.

Daily farmer tax credit program: Effective July 1, 2011, the law requires that the regulations for the implementation, administration, and enforcement of the daily farmer tax credit program must provide that when the board of food and agriculture determines that an error has been made in calculating the trigger price or in reporting or collecting data used in the calculation of the trigger price or the tax credit, the Commissioner must recalculate said trigger price or tax credit.

Sales tax. Effective July 1, 2011, a sales tax exemption is provided for sales of physician-prescribed, medically necessary breast pumps.

Property tax. A person required to file a true list of taxable personal property may not be prevented from inspecting or receiving a copy of his or her submission.

Cigarette tax. Applicable to stamps purchased on or after January 1, 2012, a higher amount that a stamper may withhold as compensation in case of encrypted stamps purchased is provided. A stamper who has complied with cigarette tax law may withhold from each payment to be made by that stamper for such stamps as compensation the following amounts: (1) for encrypted stamps purchased and not returned for an abatement, $12 per roll of 1,200 stamps; and (2) in each fiscal year, $600 per roll of 30,000 encrypted stamps for the first 50 rolls purchased and $200 per each additional roll of 30,000 encrypted stamps purchased. Current law only provides for non-encrypted stamps purchases, which is $1.85 for each 600 stamps purchased.

Administrative provisions. Interests on deficiency assessments: Applicable to interest accruing on deficiency assessments where the audit resulting in the deficiency assessment commences after July 1, 2011, the tax audit cycle is shortened by reducing some interest penalties charged businesses if the Department takes more than 18 months to perform an audit provided the taxpayer meets certain conditions.

Abatement and assessment periods: Applicable to requests for refund or applications for abatement filed with the Commissioner on or after July 1, 2011, the statutes of limitations for assessment and abatements are revised. However, the change will not apply with respect to tax periods where the statute of limitations for refund or abatement, as applicable, had expired prior to July 1, 2011.

A request for a refund or credit of an overpayment of any tax where a required return has not been timely filed must be made by filing the overdue return within three years from the due date of the return, taking into account any extension of time for filing the return, or within two years of the date that the tax was paid, whichever is later. A request for a refund or credit of an overpayment of any tax where no return is required must be made by the taxpayer within two years from the time the tax was paid. A request for a refund or credit of an overpayment of tax where the required return was timely filed must be made within the period permitted for abatement for that return. Where a refund or credit results from an abatement, the amount of the refund or credit must be limited to the amount paid or deemed paid within three years of the date that the application for abatement is filed, taking into account any extension of time for filing the return. Previously, a request for a refund or credit of an overpayment of any tax where a required return has not been timely filed must be made by filing the overdue return within three years from the due date of the return, without regard to extension of time for filing the return, or within two years of the date that the tax was paid, whichever is later.

Any person aggrieved by the assessment of a tax, other than taxes assessed under the laws on taxation of legacies and successions or on taxation or transfers of certain estates, may apply in writing to the Commissioner for an abatement at any time within three years from the date of filing the return, within two years from the date the tax was assessed or deemed to be assessed or within one year from the date that the tax was paid, whichever is later.

Rhode Island Budget Bill Expands Sales Tax Base, Imposes Various Filing Fees Among Other Changes

Wednesday, July 6th, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin

On June 30, 2011, Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chafee signed the budget for fiscal year 2012. The budget bill broadens the sales tax base, lowers the sales tax rate to 6.5% if a change in federal law requires all remote sellers to collect and remit sales tax, and limits certain sales tax incentives. In addition, the budget bill requires corporations to file a pro forma Rhode Island corporate income tax return as if the state had adopted combined reporting for two successive years starting with the 2011 tax year, and requires recipients of certain tax incentives to comply with new or expanded reporting, accountability and transparency requirements. Further, limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are subject to an annual charge and the annual charge for limited liability companies (LLCs) is modified. Further the legislation provides for lottery winnings offset, estate filing fees, letter of good standing fees, and a surcharge on compassion centers.

Income taxes. Combined reporting study: As part of its tax return for a taxable year beginning after December 31, 2010 but before January 1, 2013, each corporation which is part of a unitary business must file a report, in a manner prescribed by the Tax Administrator, for the combined group containing the combined net income of the combined group. The use of a combined report does not disregard the separate identities for the members of the combined group. The combined report must include, at minimum, for each taxable year the following: the difference in tax owed as a result of filing a combined report compared to the tax owed under the current filing requirement; the difference in tax owed as a result of using the single sale factor apportionment method as compared to the tax owed using the current 3-factor apportionment method; volume of sales in the state and worldwide; and taxable income in the state and worldwide. Any corporation that fails to file a timely report or files a false report will be assessed a penalty not exceeding $10,000. The penalty may be waived for good cause shown for failure to timely file. Based on the information provided in the income tax returns and the data submitted, the Tax Administrator must submit a report on or before March 15, 2014, to the chairpersons of the house finance committee and senate finance committee, and the house fiscal advisor and the senate fiscal advisor analyzing the policy and fiscal ramifications of changing the business corporation tax statute to a combined method of reporting.

Taxpayer accountability: On or before September 1, 2011, and every September 1 thereafter, the project lessee of the following tax incentives must file an annual report with the Tax Administrator containing the name, Social Security number, date of hire, and hourly wage of each full-time equivalent, part-time or seasonal employee: project status through the Rhode Island Economic Development Corporation; the incentives for innovation and growth credit; enterprise zone tax credits; and motion picture production tax credits.

Lottery setoff for unpaid taxes: Effective June 30, 2011, if a taxpayer wins a lottery prize valued at more than $600 and is delinquent on state taxes owed to the Tax Administrator, the Lottery Director is authorized to setoff against the amount due to that person, after state and federal tax withholding, an amount up to the balance of the unpaid taxes owed. The Lottery Director will make payment of such amount directly to the Tax Administrator. Offsets are made based on a schedule of priorities.

Letter of good standing fee. Effective June 30, 2011, the fee for obtaining a letter of good standing from the Division of Taxation is increased from $25 to $50.

LLC annual charge. Effective June 30, 2011, any LLC that is not taxed as a corporation for federal tax purposes must pay a fee equal to the corporate minimum tax, which is currently $500; and the due date is the 15th day of the fourth month following the close of the fiscal year. Previously, a LLC that was not treated as a partnership for federal tax purposes had to pay a fee equal to the corporate minimum tax.

LLP annual charge. For tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2012, LLPs must pay an annual charge equal to the corporate minimum tax, which is currently $500. The charge is due upon the filing of the LLP’s return: on or before the April 15 for calendar year filers or the 15th day of the fourth month following the close of the fiscal year for fiscal year filers. If the annual charge is not paid by the due date, a delinquency charge of $100 is added to the annual charge.

Sales tax. Rate and base: If federal law is enacted that requires remote sellers to collect and remit taxes, the sales tax rate is decreased from 7% to 6.5%, the 1% local meals and beverage tax would increase to 1.5%, and the 1% local hotel tax would increase to 1.5%. Such rate changes would be effective the first day of the first state fiscal quarter following the change. In addition, effective October 1, 2011, the 7% sales and use tax is broadened to include the following: nonprescription drugs, also known as over-the-counter drugs; prewritten computer software delivered electronically or by “load and leave,” including applications for smartphones and similar devices; furnishing package tour and scenic and sightseeing transportation services as set forth in the 2007 North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes 56120 and 487; and marijuana for medical use.

Rhode Island Economic Development Corporation: The sales tax exemption applicable to firms that use bond financing programs offered through the Rhode Island Economic Development Corporation or which are given project status by the Rhode Island Economic Development Corporation will no longer be allowed after June 30, 2011. The incentives will only apply to projects approved before July 1, 2011.

Rhode Island Industrial Facilities Corporation. Sales tax incentives related to projects involving the Rhode Island Industrial Facilities Corporation will no longer be allowed after June 30, 2011. The incentives will only apply to projects approved prior to July 1, 2011.

Hospital licensing fee. Applicable to hospitals that are duly licensed on July 1, 2011, the amount of the hospital licensing fee imposed on the net patient services revenue of every hospital for the hospital’s first fiscal year ending on or after January 1, 2010 is 5.43%. Every hospital must file a return and pay the licensing fee by electronic transfer to the Tax Administrator on or before July 16, 2012. Each hospital must file a return with the Tax Administrator on or before June 18, 2012, containing the correct computation of net patient services revenue for the hospital fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and the licensing fee due on that amount.

Compassion Center Surcharge. Effective June 30, 2011, a 4% monthly surcharge is imposed on the net patient revenue received each month by every compassion center. Each center must file a return to the Tax Administrator and make payment by electronic transfer to the General Treasurer no later than the 20th day of the month following the month that the net patient revenue was received. Such surcharge is in addition to any other authorized fees that have been assessed on a compassion center. A “compassion center” means a registered not-for-profit entity that acquires, possesses, cultivates, manufactures, delivers, transfers, transports, supplies, or dispenses marijuana, or related supplies and educational materials, to registered qualifying patients and their registered primary caregivers who have designated it as one of their primary caregivers.

Estate tax filing fees. Effective June 30, 2011, the estate filing fee is increased from $25 to $50. The filing fee applies to the statement that executors, administrators and heirs-at-law must file with the Tax Administrator within nine months of a decedent’s death showing the value of the decedent’s estate and certain other items.

Tax Tips from the IRS on Capital Gains

Wednesday, June 8th, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin
Ten Important Facts About Capital Gains and Losses
 
IRS Tax Tip 2011-35

Did you know that almost everything you own and use for personal or investment purposes is a capital asset? Capital assets include a home, household furnishings and stocks and bonds held in a personal account. When a capital asset is sold, the difference between the amount you paid for the asset and the amount you sold it for is a capital gain or capital loss.

Here are ten facts from the IRS about gains and losses and how they can affect your Federal income tax return.

1. Almost everything you own and use for personal purposes, pleasure or investment is a capital asset.

2. When you sell a capital asset, the difference between the amount you sell it for and your basis – which is usually what you paid for it – is a capital gain or a capital loss.

3. You must report all capital gains.

4. You may deduct capital losses only on investment property, not on property held for personal use.

5. Capital gains and losses are classified as long-term or short-term, depending on how long you hold the property before you sell it. If you hold it more than one year, your capital gain or loss is long-term. If you hold it one year or less, your capital gain or loss is short-term.

6. If you have long-term gains in excess of your long-term losses, you have a net capital gain to the extent your net long-term capital gain is more than your net short-term capital loss, if any.

7. The tax rates that apply to net capital gain are generally lower than the tax rates that apply to other income. For 2010, the maximum capital gains rate for most people is 15%. For lower-income individuals, the rate may be 0% on some or all of the net capital gain. Special types of net capital gain can be taxed at 25% or 28%.

8. If your capital losses exceed your capital gains, the excess can be deducted on your tax return and used to reduce other income, such as wages, up to an annual limit of $3,000, or $1,500 if you are married filing separately.

9. If your total net capital loss is more than the yearly limit on capital loss deductions, you can carry over the unused part to the next year and treat it as if you incurred it in that next year.

10. Capital gains and losses are reported on Schedule D, Capital Gains and Losses, and then transferred to line 13 of Form 1040.

For more information about reporting capital gains and losses, see the Schedule D instructions, Publication 550, Investment Income and Expenses or Publication 17, Your Federal Income Tax. All forms and publications are available at http://www.irs.gov or by calling 800-TAX-FORM (800-829-3676).

Congress passes bill repealing expanded 1099 information reporting requirements

Wednesday, April 6th, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin

On April 5, the Senate by a vote of 87-12 approved H.R. 4, the “Comprehensive 1099 Taxpayer Protection and Repayment of Exchange Subsidy Overpayments Act of 2011.” The measure, which retroactively repeals expanded Form 1099 information reporting rules added by recent legislation, was passed by the House on March 3 by a vote of 314-112. Thus, H.R. 4 (the Act) is cleared for the President’s expected signature.

Here are highlights of the tax changes in the Act.

Original information reporting rules. Before amendment by the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-240) and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA, P.L. 111-148), Code Sec. 6041 generally required payments totaling at least $600 in a single calendar year to a single recipient to be reported to IRS. Reporting on Form 1099 was required only when the payor was considered to be engaged in a trade or business and has made the payment in connection with that trade or business. The type of payment that most commonly triggered the reporting requirement was payment for services.

There were a number of exemptions from Code Sec. 6041 ‘s reporting requirements under prior law, notably including payments to corporations (which were exempt under Reg. § 1.6041-3(p)(1)).

Pre-Act law—changes made by 2010 legislation. Beginning in 2012, Sec. 9006 of PPACA added payments of amounts in consideration for any type of property and gross proceeds—i.e., it added payments for goods or other property—to the list of payments subject to information reporting.

Sec. 9006 of PPACA further provided that, beginning in 2012, payments to non-tax-exempt corporations—which had previously been exempt from the reporting requirement—would be subject to information reporting.

Additionally, for payments made after 2010, the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 provided that, subject to limited exceptions, a person receiving rental income from real estate would be treated as engaged in the trade or business of renting property for information reporting purposes. In particular, rental income recipients making payments of $600 or more to a service provider (for example, a painter or plumber) in the course of earning rental income would have to provide an information return to the service provider and IRS.

New law. For payments made after December 31, 2011, the Act repeals the provisions in Sec. 9006 that impose a reporting requirement for payments to corporations and payments for goods or other property. (Code Sec. 6041(a), Code Sec. 6041(i), and Code Sec. 6041(j), as amended by Act Sec. 2) And for payments made after December 31, 2010, the Act also repeals application of the information reporting requirements to recipients of rental income from real estate who are not otherwise considered to be engaged in the trade or business of renting property. (Code Sec. 6041(h), as repealed by Act Sec. 3)

In other words, under the Act, the information reporting rules effectively revert to the way they read before enactment of PPACA and the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010.

Revenue offset. The Act provides an offset for the lost revenue from repealing the new information reporting provisions, estimated at $21.9 billion. It increases the amount of “excess advance payments” of the premium assistance credit (enacted as part of the 2010 health care reform legislation to help lower-income individuals acquire affordable health insurance coverage) that a taxpayer must repay under Code Sec. 36B(f)(2) for tax years ending after December 31, 2013. The credit is available for a taxpayer who does not receive health insurance through his employer (or his spouse’s employer) and whose income falls between 100% and 400% of the federal poverty line (FPL), based on the most recently filed tax return.

Under pre-Act law, if the taxpayer’s income increases such that the credit exceeds that to which his current income level actually entitles him to, but his income is still under 500% of FPL, he had to repay some credit amounts. The limit on amounts he had to repay were capped and ranged from $600 to $3,500.

New law. Under the Act, for tax years ending after December 31, 2013, the repayment caps are increased for taxpayers with household income of at least 200% but less than 400% of FPL, and full repayment is required for taxpayers whose incomes exceed 400% of FPL. (Code Sec. 36B(f)(2)(B)(i), as amended by Act Sec. 4)

Statutory glitch reduces portable estate tax exclusion for some surviving spouses

Thursday, March 31st, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin

Effective for estates of decedents dying after 2010 and before 2013, the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 (2010 Tax Relief Act) allows a deceased spouse’s unused estate tax exclusion to be shifted to the surviving spouse. The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) has released an errata sheet pointing out an error in the statutory language defining “deceased spousal unused exclusion amount.” As explained below, the current statutory language may result in a lower-than-intended exclusion for the surviving spouse of an individual who was previously married and received a portable estate tax exclusion from his or her former spouse. The JCT says a technical correction may be needed to fix the defect.

Background. A credit (the “unified credit”) is allowed against the estate tax imposed on U.S. citizens and residents. The credit is equal to the tentative tax on the “applicable exclusion amount,” determined under the estate tax rate schedule.

Pre-2010 Tax Relief Act law did not allow for any unused portion of a decedent’s applicable exclusion amount to be used by the estate of the decedent’s surviving spouse.

Portable exclusion. Under the 2010 Tax Relief Act, for estates of decedents dying after 2010 and before 2013, the applicable exclusion amount is the sum of (1) the “basic exclusion amount” and (2) in the case of a surviving spouse, the “deceased spousal unused exclusion amount.”

The basic exclusion amount is $5 million with an adjustment for inflation after 2011.

The “deceased spousal unused exclusion amount” is the lesser of:

(1) the basic exclusion amount, or

(2) the excess of the basic exclusion amount of the last deceased spouse dying after December 31, 2010, of the surviving spouse, over the amount on which the tentative tax on the estate of the deceased spouse is determined.

A deceased spousal unused exclusion amount may not be taken into account by a surviving spouse unless the executor of the estate of the deceased spouse files an estate tax return on which the amount is computed, and makes an election on the return that the amount may be taken into account by the surviving spouse. The election, once made, is irrevocable. No election may be made if the estate tax return of the deceased spouse is filed after the due date (including extensions) for filing the return.

A surviving spouse may use the deceased spousal unused exclusion amount in addition to his or her own $5 million exclusion for taxable transfers made during life or at death.

Illustration 1: Husband 1 dies in 2011, having made taxable transfers of $3 million and having no taxable estate. An election is made on his estate tax return to permit Wife to use his deceased spousal unused exclusion amount. As of his death, Wife has made no taxable gifts. Thereafter, Wife’s applicable exclusion amount is $7 million (her $5 million basic exclusion amount plus $2 million deceased spousal unused exclusion amount from Husband 1), which she may use for lifetime gifts or for transfers at death. (Committee Report)

If a surviving spouse is predeceased by more than one spouse, the amount of unused exclusion that is available for use by the surviving spouse is limited to the lesser of $5 million or the unused exclusion of the last deceased spouse.  This so-called “last deceased spouse” limitation applies whether or not the last deceased spouse has any unused exclusion, and whether or the estate of the last deceased spouse makes a timely election to allow the surviving spouse to use the deceased spousal unused exclusion amount.

Illustration 2: Assume the same facts as in illustration (1), except that Wife subsequently marries Husband 2. He predeceases Wife, having made $4 million in taxable transfers and having no taxable estate. An election is made on his estate tax return to permit Wife to use his deceased spousal unused exclusion amount. Although the combined amount of unused exclusion of Husband 1 and Husband 2 is $3 million ($2 million for Husband 1 and $1 million for Husband 2), only Husband 2′s $1 million unused exclusion is available for use by Wife because the deceased spousal unused exclusion amount is limited to the lesser of the basic exclusion amount ($5 million) or the unused exclusion of the last deceased spouse of the surviving spouse. Thereafter, Wife’s applicable exclusion amount is $6 million (her $5 million basic exclusion amount plus $1 million deceased spousal unused exclusion amount from Husband 2), which she may use for lifetime gifts or for transfers at death. (Committee Report)

Remarried surviving spouses who predecease new spouse. The following illustration, based on an example in the Committee Report, says that if a surviving spouse remarries, and then dies survived by a new spouse, the deceased spousal unused exclusion amount included for the surviving spouse’s estate is determined by taking into account the deceased spouse’s applicable exclusion amount and not just the basic exclusion amount.

Illustration 3: Assume the same facts as in Illustrations 1 and 2, except that Wife predeceases Husband 2. Following Husband 1′s death, Wife’s applicable exclusion amount is $7 million (her $5 million basic exclusion amount plus $2 million deceased spousal unused exclusion amount from Husband 1). Wife made no taxable transfers and has a taxable estate of $3 million. An election is made on Wife’s estate tax return to permit Husband 2 to use Wife’s deceased spousal unused exclusion amount, which is $4 million (Wife’s $7 million applicable exclusion amount less her $3 million taxable estate). Under the provision, Husband 2′s applicable exclusion amount is increased by $4 million, i.e., the amount of Wife’s deceased spousal unused exclusion amount. (Committee Report)

This view does not seem to reflect Code Sec. 2010(c)(4), which states that the deceased spousal unused exclusion amount equals the lesser of the basic exclusion amount (i.e., $5 million), or the excess of the basic exclusion amount of the last deceased spouse of such surviving spouse over the amount on which the tentative estate tax is determined under Code Sec. 2001(b)(1) on the estate of such deceased spouse. Rather, under the current statutory language, Husband 2′s applicable exclusion amount would seem to be increased by only $2 million.

The JCT Errata sheet confirms that the current statutory language does not support the conclusion in Illustration 3. It does so by adding a footnote to the example in the Committee Report on the 2010 Tax Relief Act. The footnote states that a technical correction may be necessary to replace the reference to the basic exclusion amount of the last deceased spouse of the surviving spouse with a reference to the applicable exclusion amount of such last deceased spouse, so that the statute reflects Congressional intent.

Under the technical correction, Husband 2′s applicable exclusion amount would be increased by $4 million.

Under the technical correction, it would be possible for the new spouse’s applicable exclusion amount to exceed $10 million, the combined amount of the basic exclusion amount of the surviving spouse and the new spouse. For example, if, in Illustration 3, the Wife’s taxable estate were only $1 million, then Husband 2′s applicable exclusion amount would be increased by $6 million (Wife’s applicable exclusion amount of $7 million less $1 million of taxable transfers). Thus, Husband 2′s applicable exclusion amount would be $11 million (Wife’s spousal unused exclusion amount of $6 million, plus Husband 2′s basic exclusion amount of $5 million).

Allowing a surviving spouse to wind up with a more than $10 million applicable exclusion amount is somewhat inconsistent with the last spouse limitation. That’s because the last spouse limitation prevents a spouse who survived two or more deceased spouses from getting an applicable exclusion amount that exceeds the combined basic exclusion amounts of a husband and wife. This combined figure presently is $10 million, but could exceed $10 million with inflation adjustments after 2011.

There is no word on when this or any other technical corrections may be forthcoming. Hopefully, IRS will address the matter when it provides guidance on the new portable exclusion.

IRS explains how DC’s Emancipation Day can affect filing and payment deadlines

Monday, February 21st, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin

The IRS had earlier announced that because of the Emancipation Day holiday in the District of Columbia (DC), the due date of Form 1040 for 2010 is April 18, 2011, instead of April 15, 2011. Now, in Notice 2011-17, the IRS has explained the mechanics of this deferral, and how it may apply in other years.

Background. Under Code Sec. 6072(a), income tax returns must be filed on April 15. When April 15 falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, a return is considered timely filed if filed on the next succeeding day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, defined as legal holiday in DC.

Under DC law, Emancipation Day, April 16, is a legal holiday. The twists and turns in DC law regarding this holiday produce the following results for filing deadlines for all tax forms and payments that must be filed or completed on or before April 15, including the Form 1040 series tax returns:

  • When April 16 falls on Saturday, then Friday, April 15, is the observed date for Emancipation Day and the filing deadline for all tax forms and payments required to be filed or completed on or before April 15, is Monday, April 18.

That’s the situation this year, when April 16 falls on a Saturday, which means Emancipation Day will be observed on Friday, Apr. 15, 2011. Thus, the filing deadline for all tax forms and payments required to be filed or completed on or before April 15 will be Monday, April 18, 2011.

  • When April 16 falls on Sunday, then Monday, April 17, is the observed date for Emancipation Day, and the filing deadline for all tax forms and payments required to be filed or completed on or before April 15 is Tuesday, April 18.
  • When April 16 falls on Monday, then that day is the observed date for Emancipation Day, and the filing deadline for all forms and payments required to be filed or completed on or before April 15 is Tuesday, April 17.

The last time this happened was in 2007.

IRS said it will widely publicize the Emancipation Day rules in affected years to remind the public that the filing deadline is extended.

In all likelihood, the new Notice was issued in response to a flood of questions about why the filing deadline was deferred to April 18, even though April 15 will fall on a Friday this year.

The deadline deferral to April 18, 2011, applies to a host of deadlines for filing and paying, including:

… Requests for an automatic six-month tax-filing extension on an individual return for calendar-year 2010.

… Tax-year 2010 balance-due payments.

… For calendar-year taxpayers, individual estimated tax payments for the first quarter of 2011.

… For calendar-year taxpayers, tax-year 2010 contributions to a Roth or traditional IRA.

… Corporation income tax returns, including S corporations, for a fiscal year ending on January 31, 2011, and any balance due.

… For calendar-year corporations, the estimated tax payment for the first quarter of 2011.

… Calendar-year estate and trust income tax returns (Form 1041) and any balance due.

… Calendar-year 2010 partnership returns (Form 1065).

Ways and Means OKs two competing bills to repeal new 1099 requirements

Monday, February 21st, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin

On February 17, the House Ways and Means Committee by a vote of 21-15 approved. H.R. 705, the Comprehensive 1099 Taxpayer Protection and Repayment of Exchange Subsidy Overpayment Act of 2011. Upon passage of H.R. 705, the text of a competing bill (H.R. 4, the Small Business Paperwork Mandate Elimination Act of 2011), which was approved by voice vote earlier in the day, was incorporated into H.R. 705. There were no other amendments adopted to H.R.705.

Both bills seek to modify or repeal the new requirements imposed by Sec. 9006 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), which provides that payments for goods and payments made to corporations (that are not tax-exempt) will be subject to information reporting beginning in 2012. H.R. 705 also seeks to repeal Code Sec. 6041(h), which was added by the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 and which treats recipients of rental income from real estate as engaged in the trade or business of renting property for information reporting purposes beginning in 2011. However, H.R. 705 provides an offset for the estimated $21.9 billion cost of repeal, whereas H.R. 4 does not.

Also on February 17, the Senate by a vote of 92-2 invoked cloture (i.e. voted to cut off debate) on S. 223, the FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act, which includes a provision to repeal the Sec. 9006 reporting requirements.  Unless time is yielded back, there remains 30 hours of debate on the bill before a vote on final passage of the measure.

IRS Set To Launch New Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program

Thursday, February 3rd, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin

The IRS is putting the finishing touches on a new offshore voluntary disclosure program, according to several agency officials quoted in news reports. The new program will have some similarity to the previous voluntary disclosure program that ended in October 2010, but is expected to offer different terms regarding possible penalties. Many observers foresee the new initiative offering terms less generous than those in the previous program. At an American Bar Association gathering on Janury 21, Steven Miller, IRS deputy commissioner for services and enforcement, put the tax professional community on notice that another initiative was in the works. Other agency officials have since indicated that the details of the program would soon be forthcoming.

Stay tuned to our Blog, or contact Partner Moore McLaughlin, Esq. for more information at mmclaughlin@mclaughlinquinn.com or by phone at 401-421-5115 ext 212.