The American Institute of CPAs in a March 31 letter to House of Representatives voiced its “strong support” for a series of tax administration bills passed in recent days.

The American Institute of CPAs in a March 31 letter to House of Representatives voiced its “strong support” for a series of tax administration bills passed in recent days.

The four bills highlighted in the letter include the Electronic Filing and Payment Fairness Act (H.R. 1152), the Internal Revenue Service Math and Taxpayer Help Act (H.R. 998), the Filing Relief for Natural Disasters Act (H.R. 517), and the Disaster Related Extension of Deadlines Act (H.R. 1491).

All four bills passed unanimously.

H.R. 1152 would apply the “mailbox” rule to electronically submitted tax returns and payments. Currently, a paper return or payment is counted as “received” based on the postmark of the envelope, but its electronic equivalent is counted as “received” when the electronic submission arrived or is reviewed. This bill would change all payment and tax form submissions to follow the mailbox rule, regardless of mode of delivery.

“The AICPA has previously recommended this change and thinks it would offer clarity and simplification to the payment and document submission process,” the organization said in the letter.

H.R. 998 “would require notices describing a mathematical or clerical error be made in plain language, and require the Treasury Secretary to provide additional procedures for requesting an abatement of a math or clerical adjustment, including by telephone or in person, among other provisions,” the letter states.

H.R. 517 would allow the IRS to grant federal tax relief once a state governor declares a state of emergency following a natural disaster, which is quicker than waiting for the federal government to declare a state of emergency as directed under current law, which could take weeks after the state disaster declaration. This bill “would also expand the mandatory federal filing extension under section 7508(d) from 60 days to 120 days, providing taxpayers with additional time to file tax returns following a disaster,” the letter notes, adding that increasing the period “would provide taxpayers and tax practitioners much needed relief, even before a disaster strikes.”

H.R. 1491 would extend deadlines for disaster victims to file for a tax refund or tax credit. The legislative solution “granting an automatic extension to the refund or credit lookback period would place taxpayers affected my major disasters on equal footing as taxpayers not impacted by major disasters and would afford greater clarity and certainty to taxpayers and tax practitioners regarding this lookback period,” AICPA said.

Also passed by the House was the National Taxpayer Advocate Enhancement Act (H.R. 997) which, according to a summary of the bill on Congress.gov, “authorizes the National Taxpayer Advocate to appoint legal counsel within the Taxpayer Advocate Service (TAS) to report directly to the National Taxpayer Advocate. The bill also expands the authority of the National Taxpayer Advocate to take personnel actions with respect to local taxpayer advocates (located in each state) to include actions with respect to any employee of TAS.”

Finally, the House passed H.R. 1155, the Recovery of Stolen Checks Act, which would require the Treasury to establish procedures that would allow a taxpayer to elect to receive replacement funds electronically from a physical check that was lost or stolen.

All bills passed unanimously. The passed legislation mirrors some of the provisions included in a discussion draft legislation issued by the Senate Finance Committee in January 2025. A section-by-section summary of the Senate discussion draft legislation can be found here.

AICPA’s tax policy and advocacy comment letters for 2025 can be found here.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

The Tax Court ruled that the value claimed on a taxpayer’s return exceeded the value of a conversation easement by 7,694 percent. The taxpayer was a limited liability company, classified as a TEFRA partnership. The Tax Court used the comparable sales method, as backstopped by the price actually paid to acquire the property.

The Tax Court ruled that the value claimed on a taxpayer’s return exceeded the value of a conversation easement by 7,694 percent. The taxpayer was a limited liability company, classified as a TEFRA partnership. The Tax Court used the comparable sales method, as backstopped by the price actually paid to acquire the property.

The taxpayer was entitled to a charitable contribution deduction based on its fair market value. The easement was granted upon rural land in Alabama. The property was zoned A–1 Agricultural, which permitted agricultural and light residential use only. The property transaction at occurred at arm’s length between a willing seller and a willing buyer.

Rezoning

The taxpayer failed to establish that the highest and best use of the property before the granting of the easement was limestone mining. The taxpayer failed to prove that rezoning to permit mining use was reasonably probable.

Land Value

The taxpayer’s experts erroneously equated the value of raw land with the net present value of a hypothetical limestone business conducted on the land. It would not be profitable to pay the entire projected value of the business.

Penalty Imposed

The claimed value of the easement exceeded the correct value by 7,694 percent. Therefore, the taxpayer was liable for a 40 percent penalty for a gross valuation misstatement under Code Sec. 6662(h).

Ranch Springs, LLC, 164 TC No. 6, Dec. 62,636

State and local housing credit agencies that allocate low-income housing tax credits and states and other issuers of tax-exempt private activity bonds have been provided with a listing of the proper population figures to be used when calculating the 2025:

State and local housing credit agencies that allocate low-income housing tax credits and states and other issuers of tax-exempt private activity bonds have been provided with a listing of the proper population figures to be used when calculating the 2025:

• calendar-year population-based component of the state housing credit ceiling under Code Sec. 42(h)(3)(C)(ii);
• calendar-year private activity bond volume cap under Code Sec. 146; and
• exempt facility bond volume limit under Code Sec. 142(k)(5)

These figures are derived from the estimates of the resident populations of the 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, which were released by the Bureau of the Census on December 19, 2024. The figures for the insular areas of American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands and the U.S. Virgin Islands are the midyear population figures in the U.S. Census Bureau’s International Database.

Notice 2025-18

The value of assets of a qualified terminable interest property (QTIP) trust includible in a decedent's gross estate was not reduced by the amount of a settlement intended to compensate the decedent for undistributed income.

The value of assets of a qualified terminable interest property (QTIP) trust includible in a decedent's gross estate was not reduced by the amount of a settlement intended to compensate the decedent for undistributed income.

The trust property consisted of an interest in a family limited partnership (FLP), which held title to ten rental properties, and cash and marketable securities. To resolve a claim by the decedent's estate that the trustees failed to pay the decedent the full amount of income generated by the FLP, the trust and the decedent's children's trusts agreed to be jointly and severally liable for a settlement payment to her estate. The Tax Court found an estate tax deficiency, rejecting the estate's claim that the trust assets should be reduced by the settlement amount and alternatively, that the settlement claim was deductible from the gross estate as an administration expense (P. Kalikow Est., Dec. 62,167(M), TC Memo. 2023-21).

Trust Not Property of the Estate

The estate presented no support for the argument that the liability affected the fair market value of the trust assets on the decedent's date of death. The trust, according to the court, was a legal entity that was not itself an asset of the estate. Thus, a liability that belonged to the trust but had no impact on the value of the underlying assets did not change the value of the gross estate. Furthermore, the settlement did not burden the trust assets. A hypothetical purchaser of the FLP interest, the largest asset of the trust, would not assume the liability and, therefore, would not regard the liability as affecting the price. When the parties stipulated the value of the FLP interest, the estate was aware of the undistributed income claim. Consequently, the value of the assets included in the gross estate was not diminished by the amount of the undistributed income claim.

Claim Not an Estate Expense

The claim was owed to the estate by the trust to correct the trustees' failure to distribute income from the rental properties during the decedent's lifetime. As such, the claim was property included in the gross estate, not an expense of the estate. The court explained that even though the liability was owed by an entity that held assets included within the taxable estate, the claim itself was not an estate expense. The court did not address the estate's theoretical argument that the estate would be taxed twice on the underlying assets held in the trust and the amount of the settlement because the settlement was part of the decedent's residuary estate, which was distributed to a charity. As a result, the claim was not a deductible administration expense of the estate.

P.B. Kalikow, Est., CA-2

An individual was not entitled to deduct flowthrough loss from the forfeiture of his S Corporation’s portion of funds seized by the U.S. Marshals Service for public policy reasons. The taxpayer pleaded guilty to charges of bribery, fraud and money laundering. Subsequently, the U.S. Marshals Service seized money from several bank accounts held in the taxpayer’s name or his wholly owned corporation. 

An individual was not entitled to deduct flowthrough loss from the forfeiture of his S Corporation’s portion of funds seized by the U.S. Marshals Service for public policy reasons. The taxpayer pleaded guilty to charges of bribery, fraud and money laundering. Subsequently, the U.S. Marshals Service seized money from several bank accounts held in the taxpayer’s name or his wholly owned corporation. The S corporation claimed a loss deduction related to its portion of the asset seizures on its return and the taxpayer reported a corresponding passthrough loss on his return.

However, Courts have uniformly held that loss deductions for forfeitures in connection with a criminal conviction frustrate public policy by reducing the "sting" of the penalty. The taxpayer maintained that the public policy doctrine did not apply here, primarily because the S corporation was never indicted or charged with wrongdoing. However, even if the S corporation was entitled to claim a deduction for the asset seizures, the public policy doctrine barred the taxpayer from reporting his passthrough share. The public policy doctrine was not so rigid or formulaic that it may apply only when the convicted person himself hands over a fine or penalty.

Hampton, TC Memo. 2025-32, Dec. 62,642(M)

It is never too early to begin planning for the 2016 filing season, the IRS has advised in seven new planning tips published on its website. Although the current filing season has just ended, there are steps that taxpayers can take now to avoid a tax bill when April 2016 rolls around. For example, the IRS stated that taxpayers can adjust their withholding, take stock of any changes in income or family circumstances, maintain accurate tax records, and more, in order to reduce the probability of a surprise tax bill when the next filing season arrives.

It is never too early to begin planning for the 2016 filing season, the IRS has advised in seven new planning tips published on its website. Although the current filing season has just ended, there are steps that taxpayers can take now to avoid a tax bill when April 2016 rolls around. For example, the IRS stated that taxpayers can adjust their withholding, take stock of any changes in income or family circumstances, maintain accurate tax records, and more, in order to reduce the probability of a surprise tax bill when the next filing season arrives.

IRS Recommended Action Steps

Specifically, the IRS advised the taxpayers take the following steps now to jump start a successful 2016 filing season for their 2015 tax year returns:

• Consider filing a new Form W-4, Employee's Withholding Allowance Certificate, with an employer if certain life circumstances have changed (such as a change in marital status or the birth of a child). A new child could mean an additional exemption and/or tax credits that might lower your tax liability. Therefore you might benefit from claiming an extra withholding allowance. Conversely, getting married (or divorced) could change your income, making it advantageous to readjust your withholding accordingly.
• Report any changes or projected changes in income to the Health Insurance Marketplace (if taxpayer obtained insurance through a marketplace). Income affects the calculation of subsidy payments. Recipients of the advance premium tax credit may owe tax for 2015 if their subsidy payments are too high.
• Maintain accurate and organized tax records, such as home loan documents or financial aid documents. Many deductions must be substantiated with evidence, and staying organized now could facilitate the tax return filing process in the future.
• Find a tax return preparer. Looking for a qualified tax return preparer may be easier in the off-season, when you are under no immediate pressure to select a person. This can provide taxpayers with more time to evaluate a preparer's credentials.
• Plan to increase itemized deductions. If a taxpayer plans to purchase a house, contribute to charity, or incur medical expenses that may not be reimbursed during 2015, it may be beneficial to consider whether itemizing deductions would be more beneficial than claiming the standard deduction for 2015.
• Stay informed of the latest tax law changes. Keeping on top of developments can reduce confusion in the long run.

A major repair to a business vehicle is usually deductible in the year of the repair as a "maintenance and repair" cost if your business uses the actual expense method of deducting vehicle expenses. If your business vehicle is written off under the standard mileage rate method, your repair and maintenance costs are assumed to be built into that standard rate and no further deduction is allowed.

Standard mileage rate

The standard mileage rate for business use of a vehicle is 48.5 cents per mile for 2007. The standard mileage rate replaces all actual expenses in determining the deductible operating business costs of a car, vans and/or trucks. If you want to use the standard mileage rate, you must use it in the first year that the vehicle is available for use in your business. If you use the standard mileage rate for the first year, you cannot deduct your repairs for that year. Then in the following years you can use the standard mileage rate or the actual expense method.

Actual cost

You can deduct the actual vehicle expenses for business purposes instead of using the standard mileage rate method. In order to use the actual expenses method, you must determine what it actually cost for the repairs attributable to the business. If you have fully depreciated your vehicle you can still claim your repair expenses.

Exceptions

Of course, the tax law is filled with exceptions and that includes issues relating to the deductibility of vehicle repairs and maintenance. Some ancillary points to consider:

• If you receive insurance or warranty reimbursement for a repair, you cannot "double dip" and also take a deduction;
• If you are rebuilding a vehicle virtually from the ground up, you may be considered to be adding to its capital value in a manner in which you might be required to deduct costs gradually as depreciation;
• If you use your car for both business and personal reasons, you must divide your expenses based upon the miles driven for each purpose.

You may want to calculate your deduction for both methods to determine which one will grant you the larger deduction. If you need assistance with this matter, please feel free to give our office a call and we will be glad to help.

In many cases, employees can elect to reduce their salary and contribute the amounts to a retirement plan. These plans include 401(k) cash or deferred arrangements, 403(b) tax-sheltered annuities, eligible Code Sec. 457 deferred compensation plans of state and local governments and tax-exempt entities, simple retirement accounts, and plans for self-employed persons such as a SEP individual retirement account (SEP IRA).

Each retirement plan limits the amount that can be contributed annually to the plan:

• IRAs - Contribution limits are $4,000 for 2006 and 2007; $5,000 for 2008.
• 401(k), 403(b), 457, SEP IRA - Contribution limits are $15,000 for 2006 and $15,500 for 2007. The contribution limits are indexed.
• Simple retirement accounts - The limit is $10,000 for 2006; $10,500 for 2007. The contribution limit is indexed.

Many retirement plans allow participants age 50 and older to make "catch-up" contributions. Participants can contribute an additional amount in excess of the normal limits. Making a catch-up contribution increases the amount available at retirement and is beneficial if the employee can afford it.

There is a separate limit for catch-up contributions. The limits are as follows:

• IRAs - $1,000 for 2007. This amount is not indexed.
• 401(k), 403(b), 457 and SEPs - $5,000 in 2006; indexed in $500 increments but unchanged for 2007.
• SIMPLE plans - $2,500 for 2006, indexed but unchanged for 2007.

Parents of a child under age 13 can take a tax credit for child care expenses to enable them to work. The credit can be taken for care of one or more children. Child care expenses are amounts you paid for someone to come to your home, for care at the home of a day care provider, and for care at a day care center.

The credit is a percentage of qualified child care costs. Qualified costs are limited to $3,000 for one child and $6,000 for two or more children. The credit is taken on the lowest of your earned income, your spouse's earned income, or your qualified costs. Generally, if the spouse is not working, no credit is allowed, unless the spouse is a student or is disabled.

The cost of child care includes incidental amounts for food and schooling, but not items with a separate cost. The cost of schooling does not qualify if the child is in kindergarten or above. The credit can also be claimed for the cost of taking care of a disabled spouse who cannot care for himself or herself, and for any other disabled person that you can claim as a dependent.

Married couples must file a joint return to claim the credit. You also qualify to claim the credit if you file as a single person, head of household, or qualifying widow(er).

To compute the amount of the credit, you multiply the amount determined from costs or earned income by a specified percentage. The percentage starts at 35 percent, if you have $15,000 or less of adjusted gross income. The percentage is reduced by one percentage point for every $2,000 of additional income for the next $23,000 in income above $15,000. You can use the minimum percentage of 20 percent if your income is $43,000 or more. Thus, the maximum credit is $1,050 (35 percent of $3,000) for one child and $2,100 for two or more children (35 percent of $6,000); and the minimum, no matter how much money you make, is $600 for one child and $1200 for more than one child.

The credit is taken on Form 2441. You must provide the name and address of the day care provider, the provider's taxpayer identification number, and the expenses paid to the provider. The day care provider cannot be your spouse, a parent of the child, or another person you claim as a dependent. However, payments to your child age 19 or older will qualify for the credit. You must also provide the names of your children and a social security number for each child.

If you are enrolled in a flexible spending account (FSA) with your employer, you may have elected to pay for child care expenses with funds from the FSA. These amounts are tax-free. To prevent a double benefit, you must reduce the child care credit by amounts used from the FSA to pay for child care.

In a final session, Congress approved a $45.1 billion package of tax extenders and other tax breaks during the night of December 8-9. The Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (H.R. 6111) renews many valuable - but temporary - tax breaks for individuals and businesses, including the state and local sales tax deduction, the higher education tuition deduction and employer tax incentives. The new law also extends some energy tax breaks, makes Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) more attractive and creates new tax incentives.

Temporary versus permanent tax cuts

Tax cuts come in two types: permanent and temporary. In recent years, Congress has favored temporary tax cuts over permanent ones largely because of how they are reflected in the federal budget. Temporary tax cuts appear to cost less over one, two or three years than permanent tax cuts.

The drawback is that they are temporary. They ultimately expire unless Congress extends them.

That's exactly what happened with the extenders. Nearly all of them expired at the end of 2005. The new law extends them through 2007.

Here's a rundown of the tax incentives that are extended through 2007:

--Deduction for state and local taxes;

--Higher education tuition deduction;

--Work Opportunity and Welfare-to-Work tax credits;

--Teacher's classroom expense deduction;

--Research tax credit;

--Archer Medical Savings Accounts;

--Indian employment tax credit;

--Accelerated depreciation for business property on a Native American reservation;

--15-year recovery period for some leasehold and restaurant improvements;

--Tax incentives for the District of Columbia;

--Brownfields remediation expensing;

--Cover over of tax on distilled spirits;

--Parity in application of mental health benefits; and

--Zone academy bonds.

State and local sales tax deduction

The new law allows taxpayers to deduct either state and local income taxes or state and local sales taxes as an itemized deduction. You have two options. You can calculate your deduction either by saving receipts or using the IRS' Optional State Sales Tax Tables. Be careful, the deduction phases-out for higher-income taxpayers. Even if you think the state and local income tax deduction would be larger, it's worthwhile to calculate both, especially if you may be liable for AMT. Our office can help you with all the calculations.

Teacher's classroom expense deduction

Teachers, aides and other education workers often pay for classroom expenses out of their own funds. The classroom expense deduction permits education workers to deduct some out-of-pocket classroom expenses up to $250. Many classroom purchases qualified for the deduction, such as paper and pens, books, computer software, and so on. However, you cannot take the deduction if your employer reimburses you for the classroom supplies.

Higher education tuition deduction

This deduction is often confused with the deduction for interest paid on a student loan. That's a separate tax break. The higher education tuition deduction is an above-the-line deduction for qualifying tuition and related expenses. However, you cannot deduct housing, transportation, food, insurance, and some other expenses. Taxpayers claiming the higher education tuition deduction also cannot take the HOPE and Lifetime Learning tax credits. Because this deduction has so many rules, it's important that our office carefully review your tax situation.

Welfare-to-Work and Work Opportunity tax credits

These credits are designed to encourage employers to hire economically-disadvantaged individuals. The credits are very similar and are equally complex. Only individuals in "targeted" groups qualify. Wages also cannot exceed certain thresholds. The new law extends them and consolidates them making tax planning very important.

Archer Medical Savings Accounts

If you own a small business, you know that health care costs are a huge drain on profits. Over the years, Congress has tried several "fixes." Archer Medical Savings Accounts were created to help workers save for health care expenses. They weren't very popular and today seem to be eclipsed by Health Savings Accounts. However, every employer is different. Archer Medical Savings Accounts may a good fit for you and your employees. The new law extends them through 2007.

New tax incentives

The Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 creates two new tax breaks that could be very valuable: a temporary refundable credit for certain taxpayers with long-term unused AMT credits who have AMT income from incentive stock options and a new deduction for premiums paid for qualified mortgage insurance. Both of these tax breaks have some very important limitations. Our office can help decipher them for you.

Energy tax breaks

A surprise last-minute addition to the new law was a package of energy tax extenders. The big news here is what was not extended. Congress did not extend the tax break for individuals who make energy-efficiency improvements to their homes, such as energy-efficient windows and doors. Instead, Congress extended energy tax breaks targeted mostly to businesses and authorized more tax credits for research into alternative energy production. 

Health Savings Accounts

HSAs are similar to IRAs. Your contributions are deductible and are tax-free if used for qualified health care expenditures. With proper planning, HSAs can be a great asset.

The new law makes HSAs even more attractive by allowing a one-time transfer of IRA savings to an HSA. You can also make a one-time transfer of savings in a health flexible spending account (FSA) or a health reimbursement arrangement (HRA) to an HSA. These are valuable tools if you plan correctly. Give our office a call if you have any questions about HSAs.

Important planning steps

The lateness of the new law makes tax planning very important for these last few weeks of 2006.

Give our office a call. We can schedule an appointment to sit down and discuss the new law in detail. There are a lot more tax breaks than we covered in this short article. Don't miss out on some potentially very valuable tax savings.

Only 50 percent of the cost of meals is generally deductible. A meal deduction is customarily allowed when the meal is business related and incurred in one of two instances:

(1) while traveling away from home (a circumstance in which business duties require you to be away from the general area of your tax home for longer than an ordinary day's work); and

(2) while entertaining during which a discussion directly related to business takes place.

Entertainment expenses generally do not meet the "directly related test" when the taxpayer is not present at the activity or event. Both your meal and the meal provided to your business guest(s)' is restricted to 50 percent of the cost.

Related expenses, such as taxes, tips, and parking fees must be included in the total expenses before applying the 50-percent reduction. However, allowable deductions for transportation costs to and from a business meal are not reduced.

The 50-percent deduction limitation also applies to meals and entertainment expenses that are reimbursed under an accountable plan to a taxpayer's employees. It doesn't matter if the taxpayer reimburses the employees for 100 percent of the expenses. "Supper money" paid when an employee works late similarly may be tax free to the employee but only one-half may be deducted by the employer. The same principle applies to meals provided at an employees-only business luncheon, dinner, etc.

A special exception to the 50 percent rule applies to workers who are away from home while working under Department of Transportation regulations. For these workers, meals are 75 percent deductible in 2006 and 2007.

When a per diem allowance is paid for lodging, meal, and incidental expenses, the entire amount of the federal meals and incidental expense (M&IE) rate is treated as an expense for food or beverages subject to the percentage limitation on deducting meal and entertainment expenses. When a per diem allowance for lodging, meal, and incidental expenses for a full day of travel is less than the federal per diem rate for the locality of travel, the payer may treat 40 percent of the per diem allowance as the federal M&IE rate.

"Lavish" meals out of proportion to customary business practice are generally not deductible to the extent they are lavish. Generally, meals taken alone whentraveling generally have a lower threshold for lavishness than meals considered an entertainment expense for which a client or other business contact is "wined and dined."