Newsletters

The IRS has outlined key provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (P.L. 119-21), signed into law on July 4, 2025, that introduce new deductions beginning in tax year 2025. The deductions apply through 2028 and cover qualified tips, overtime pay, car loan interest, and a special allowance for seniors.

The IRS has outlined key provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (P.L. 119-21), signed into law on July 4, 2025, that introduce new deductions beginning in tax year 2025. The deductions apply through 2028 and cover qualified tips, overtime pay, car loan interest, and a special allowance for seniors.

Under the “No Tax on Tips” provision, employees and self-employed individuals may deduct up to $25,000 in voluntary cash or charged tips received in IRS-designated tip-based occupations. Tips must be reported on Form W-2, Form 1099 or directly on Form 4137. The deduction phases out above $150,000 in modified adjusted gross income ($300,000 for joint filers). Self-employed individuals engaged in a Specified Service Trade or Business under Code Sec. 199A and employees of SSTBs are ineligible.

The “No Tax on Overtime” provision permits workers to deduct the premium portion of overtime pay required under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The deduction is capped at $12,500 ($25,000 for joint filers), with a similar income-based phaseout.

The “No Tax on Car Loan Interest” rule allows individuals to deduct up to $10,000 in interest on loans used to purchase new, personal-use vehicles assembled in the U.S. Qualifying loans must originate after December 31, 2024, and be secured by the vehicle. Used and leased vehicles do not qualify. The deduction phases out for income above $100,000 ($200,000 for joint filers).

Finally, taxpayers aged 65 or older can claim a new $6,000 deduction per person in addition to the current senior standard deduction. The deduction phases out above $75,000 ($150,000 for joint filers).

All deductions are available to itemizing and non-itemizing taxpayers. Transition relief for tax year 2025 will be provided.

FS-2025-3

Funding uncertainty and a constantly changing tax law environment are presenting challenges to the Internal Revenue Service as it works to meet legislative and executive mandates to improve the taxpayer experience.

Funding uncertainty and a constantly changing tax law environment are presenting challenges to the Internal Revenue Service as it works to meet legislative and executive mandates to improve the taxpayer experience.

A July Government Accountability Office report highlighted three specific challenges that the agency is facing as it works to improve the taxpayer experience.

GAO noted that "uncertainty about stable multiyear funding hinders efforts to modernize IRS computer systems and offer digital services to quickly resolve taxpayer issues. "

IRS had been using the supplemental funding provided by the Inflation Reduction Act to help address these issues, but those fundings have been a constant target for Republicans in Congress as well as the current Trump Administration, despite regular calls for stable and adequate funding.

The second challenge GAO reported was that "complicated and changing tax laws limit IRS’s ability to offer timely guidance to taxpayers," the report states, though agency officials said it had plans in place to ensure the guidance flowing from the IRS is provided in a manner that is accurate, up-to-date, and available in a user-friendly format.

Staffing was highlighted as the third challenge.

GAO reported that "being unable to hire enough staff trained to help taxpayers can undercut the ability to optimally improve taxpayer experiences. IRS officials said IRS had efforts to boost hiring and training as well as improved systems to enable staff to improve taxpayer experiences."

However, in March 2025, "IRS officials said it was unclear how reductions to the IRA funding and to its staffing will affect these efforts to address the challenges," GAO reported.

The government watchdog also noted that IRS has not established key practices to:

• Define taxpayer experience goals related to service improvements;

• Generate new evidence from measures, analytical tools, and dashboards to track progress with the taxpayer experience goals;

• Involve external stakeholders to help assess the affects of its service improvements on the taxpayer experience; and

• Promote accountability for achieving the taxpayer experience goals.

"IRS officials said establishing an evidence-based approach using these and other key practices has been delayed," GAO reports. "The IRS offices that had been coordinating IRA and taxpayer experience initiatives were disbanded in March 2025 and April 2025, respectively, according to IRS officials."

GAO recommends that the agency "fully establish an evidence-based approach to determine the effects of service improvements on the taxpayer experience."

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

Audits on high-income individuals and partnerships have increased in recent years as audits on large corporations have decreased in response to the Internal Revenue Service’s focus on the former group, the Treasury Inspector General For Tax Administration found.

Audits on high-income individuals and partnerships have increased in recent years as audits on large corporations have decreased in response to the Internal Revenue Service’s focus on the former group, the Treasury Inspector General For Tax Administration found.

In a report on trends in compliance activities through fiscal year 2023 dated July 10, 2025, examination starts for partnerships increased 63 percent from FY 2020 (4,106 starts) to FY 2023 (6,709 starts), while examination starts decreased 18 percent in the same time frame from 1,700 to 1,400.

For individuals, the overall combined number of examinations open and closed from FY 2020 through 2023 decreased from 466,921 to 400,446. For individuals with income tax returns of $400,000 or less, the percentage of examinations opened and closed dropped from 94.8 percent to 91.2 percent (442,856 to 365,229) while the percentage of examinations opened and closed for individual income tax returns more than $400,000 increased from 5.2 percent to 8.8 percent (24,065 to 35,217).

"The IRS planned to increase enforcement activities to help ensure tax compliance among high-income and high-wealth individuals," TIGTA reported, adding that it planned to use the supplemental funding provided by the Inflation Reduction Act and that the IRS as of May 2024, the agency plans to audit twice the number of individual returns with more than $400,000 in FY 2024 compared to FY 2023.

However, whether the IRS will be able to meet any compliance goals for both individuals as well as partnerships and corporations is questionable, with agency’s "ability to move forward with hiring efforts in these complex audit areas of corporations, partnerships and high-income individuals is uncertain considering the decreased enforcement funding and recent government staffing cuts."

To that end, the agency’s Field Collection, Campus Collection, and Examination staff is already on a downward trend.

TIGTA reported that the staff decreased from 18,472 employees in FY 2020 to 17,475 in 2023 due to attrition. The Collection staff slightly increased from 7,246 to 7,371 and the Examination staff decreased from 11,226 to 10,104.

"The status of the IRS’s IRA plan, other IRA transformational initiatives, along with the IRS’s hiring plans is uncertain, at best," TIGTA reported. "Although the IRS made substantial progress with hiring 4,048 revenue officers and revenue agents in FY 2024, the recissions of IRA funding, the hiring freeze, early retirement incentives, and future reductions in force present a challenge to improving taxpayer service and enforcing the nation’s tax laws."

The report also noted that in FY 2023, $10.1 billion in enforcement revenue was collected by the Automated Collection System. Field Collection collected a total of $5.9 billion.

In a separate report dated July 10, 2025, TIGTA reported the IRS planned to increase examinations across individuals, partnerships and businesses reporting total positive income of more than $400,000 in FY 2024. The average starts from FY 2019-2023 was 29,466 and the IRS planned to increase that to 70,812. At the same time, the number of returns with a total positive income reported of less and $400,000 is planned to decrease from an average of 452,051 from FY 2019-2023 to 354,792 in FY 2024. But it is not clear whether the agency will be able to meet these targets even though it was on track to meet these goals.

The agency "has not defined key terminology or aspects of its methodology for compliance to meet with these goals as outlined in the 2022 Treasury Directive that higher income earners would be targeted for audit," TIGTA reported. "The IRS stated that the FY 2024 plan was created with the assumptions available at the time. Any subsequent decisions about these issues could affect the effectiveness of future examination plans in meeting compliance requirements."

TIGTA did not make any recommendations in either report and the IRS did not make any comments on them.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

The IRS has released guidance clarifying the withholding and reporting obligations for employers and plan administrators when a retirement plan distribution check is uncashed and later reissued.

The IRS has released guidance clarifying the withholding and reporting obligations for employers and plan administrators when a retirement plan distribution check is uncashed and later reissued.

In the scenario addressed, a plan administrator issued an $800 designated distribution to a former employee, withheld the correct amount of federal income tax under Code Sec. 3405, and sent the remaining balance by check. When that check went uncashed and was subsequently voided, a second check was mailed. Because the original withholding amount was correct and fully remitted, the IRS has concluded that no refund or adjustment is available under Code Secs. 6413 or 6414, as there was no overpayment involved.

For the second check, the IRS has stated that no further withholding is required if the amount reissued is equal to or less than the original distribution. However, if the new amount exceeds the prior distribution—due, for example, to accumulated earnings—the excess portion is treated as a separate designated distribution subject to new withholding under Code Sec. 3405.

With respect to reporting obligations, the IRS noted that Code Sec. 6047(d) requires a Form 1099-R to be filed for designated distributions of $10 or more. For the first check, the $800 distribution must be reported for the applicable year, with the full amount listed in Boxes 1 and 2a, and the tax withheld in Box 4. No additional reporting is required for the second check if the amount is equal to or less than the original. However, if the second check includes an excess of $10 or more, that additional amount must be reported on a separate Form 1099-R for the year in which the second distribution occurs.

Rev. Rul. 2025-15

The Treasury Department and the IRS have withdrawn proposed rules addressing the treatment of built-in income, gain, deduction, and loss taken into account by a loss corporation after an ownership change under Code Sec. 382(h). The withdrawal, effective July 2, 2025, follows public criticism on the proposed regulations’ approach.

The Treasury Department and the IRS have withdrawn proposed rules addressing the treatment of built-in income, gain, deduction, and loss taken into account by a loss corporation after an ownership change under Code Sec. 382(h). The withdrawal, effective July 2, 2025, follows public criticism on the proposed regulations’ approach.

The proposed rules were Reg. §1.382-1, proposed on September 10, 2019 (84 FR 47455), and Reg. §§1.382-1, 1.382-2 and 1.382-7, proposed on January 14, 2020 (85 FR 2061). The proposed regulations would have adopted as mandatory, with certain modifications, (a) the safe harbor net unrealized built-in gain (NUBIG) and net unrealized built-in loss (NUBIL) computation provided in Notice 2003-65, 2003-40 I.R.B. 747, based on the principles of Code Sec. 1374, and (b) the “1374 approach,” (as described in Notice 2003-65) for the identification of recognized built-in gain and recognized built-in loss. The IRS considered that the 1374 approach would make it easier for taxpayers to calculate built-in gains and built-in losses and comply with Code Sec. 382(h).

The IRS received critical comments from practitioners on the proposed rules, leading the agency to conclude that further study is needed before issuing any new proposed regulations.

The proposed regulations are withdrawn. Taxpayers may continue to rely on Notice 2003-65 for applying Code Sec. 382(h) to an ownership change before the effective date of any temporary or final regulations under Code Sec. 382(h).

Proposed Regulations, NPRM REG-125710-18

The Treasury and IRS removed this final rule from the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) that involved gross proceeds reporting by brokers for effectuating digital asset sales.

The Treasury and IRS removed this final rule from the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) that involved gross proceeds reporting by brokers for effectuating digital asset sales. The agencies reverted the relevant text of the CFR back to the text that was in effect immediately prior to the effective date of this final rule.

Congress passed a joint resolution disapproving the final rule titled “Gross Proceeds Reporting by Brokers that Regularly Provide Services Effectuating Digital Asset Sales.” The Treasury Department and the IRS were not soliciting comments on this action, nor delaying the effective date.

Effective Date

This final rule is effective on July 11, 2025.

T.D. 10021

A more then 25 percent reduction in the Internal Revenue Service workforce will likely present some significant challenges on the heels of a 2025 tax season described as a "measured success," according to the Office of the National Taxpayer Advocate.

A more then 25 percent reduction in the Internal Revenue Service workforce will likely present some significant challenges on the heels of a 2025 tax season described as a "measured success," according to the Office of the National Taxpayer Advocate.

In the "Fiscal Year 2026 Objectives Report to Congress," National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins noted that the 2025 filing season marked the IRS’ "third consecutive year of delivering a generally successful filing season, and by some measures, it was the smoothest yet. Most taxpayers filed their returns and paid their taxes or received their refunds without any delays or intervention from the IRS."

The report highlights that more than 95 percent of individual returns were filed electronically and more than 60 percent of taxpayers received refunds, "the majority within standard processing timeframes."

Despite having a successful season, the agency has reduced its workforce by more than 25 percent since the federal government under President Trump began cutting the federal workforce.

In analyzing what agency functions are affected by this workforce reduction, the report states that "many functions are more visible to taxpayers and directly impact service delivery, while other functions play vital supporting roles in providing taxpayer service and delivering on the IRS’s mission."

Collins in the report when on to encourage Congress ignore requests to cut the IRS budget and ensure the agency is properly staffed and financed.

"The Administration’s budget proposal envisions a 20 percent reduction in appropriated IRS funding next year and an overall reduction of 37 percent after taking into account after taking into account the decrease in supplemental funding from the Inflation Reduction Act. A reduction of that magnitude is likely to impact taxpayers and potentially the revenue collected."

The issues of the workforce reduction could be compounded by the expected permanent extension of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

Collins stated that most of the changes related to the extension won’t take effect until January 1, 2026, "but several provisions impacting tens of millions of taxpayers will likely be effective during the 2025. This suggests additional complexity with taxpayers file their 2025 tax returns during the 2026 filing season and more complexity the following year. In addition, the reduction of more than 25 percent in the IRS workforce has the potential to reduce taxpayer services."

The report also echoed ongoing calls it has made in the past, as well as calls by other stakeholders, to continue to improve its information technology modernization strategy. Collins notes that in recent years, "the agency has made notable strides in modernizing its systems. … If this momentum continues, the IRS will be well positioned to deliver high quality service, enhance the taxpayer experience, and perhaps improve tax compliance at a reduced cost."

She highlighted the improvements that were made possible through the supplemental funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, but added that the Trump Administration has paused indefinitely or cancelled projects and replaced them with nine distinct modernization "’vertical,’ which are technology projects designed to meet specified technology demands."

"While these initiatives are promising, the IRS must provide clear and detailed communication to Congress and the public regarding the objectives, scope, business value, milestones, projected timelines, costs, and anticipated impacts of these nine vertical projects on taxpayer service," the report stated. "Without such transparency, there is a real risk these initiatives could stall or deviate from their intended outcomes."

Collins also made a case for sustained funding for IT improvements, recalling a 2023 blog post where she highlighted that large U.S. banks "spend between $10 billion and $14 billion a year on technology, often more than half on new technology systems. Yet in fiscal year (FY) 2022, Congress appropriated just $275 million for the IRS’s Business Systems Modernization (BSM) account. That’s less than five percent of what the largest banks are spending on new technology each year, and the IRS services far more people and entities than any bank."

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

IR-2025-71

The Internal Revenue Service Electronic Tax Administration Advisory Committee (ETAAC) released its 2025 annual report during a public meeting in Washington, D.C., outlining 14 recommendations—ten directed to the IRS and four to Congress. 

The Internal Revenue Service Electronic Tax Administration Advisory Committee (ETAAC) released its 2025 annual report during a public meeting in Washington, D.C., outlining 14 recommendations—ten directed to the IRS and four to Congress. ETAAC operates under the Federal Advisory Committee Act and collaborates with the Security Summit, a joint initiative established in 2015 by the IRS, state tax agencies and the tax industry to address identity theft and cybercrime.

ETAAC recommended that the IRS update tax return forms to strengthen security and reduce fraud and identity theft. It also advised the agency to revise Modernized e-File reject codes and explanations, expand information sharing with state and industry partners, and continue transitioning taxpayers toward fully digital interactions.

Congress was urged to support tax simplification aligned with policy objectives, grant the IRS authority to regulate non-credentialed tax return preparers, ensure stable funding for taxpayer services and operations, and prioritize sustained technology modernization. For more information, visit the Electronic Tax Administration Advisory Committee (ETAAC) page.

IR-2025-72

Q:  One of my children received a full scholarship for all expenses to attend college this year.  I had heard that this amount may not be required to be reported on his tax return if certain conditions were met and the funds were used specifically for certain types of her expenses.  Is this true and what amounts spent on my child's education will be treated as qualified expenses?

Q: One of my children received a full scholarship for all expenses to attend college this year. I had heard that this amount may not be required to be reported on his tax return if certain conditions were met and the funds were used specifically for certain types of her expenses. Is this true and what amounts spent on my child's education will be treated as qualified expenses?

A: Any amount received as a "qualified scholarship" or fellowship is not required to be reported as income if your child is a candidate for a degree at an educational institution. For the college that your child attends to be treated as an educational organization, it must (1) be an institution that has as its primary function the presentation of formal instruction, (2) normally maintain a regular faculty and curriculum, and (3) have a regularly enrolled body of students in attendance at the place where the educational activities are regularly carried on. Your child has received a qualified scholarship if he or she can establish, that in accordance with the conditions of the scholarship, the funds received were used for qualified tuition and related expenses.

Qualified tuition and related expenses include tuition and fees required for enrollment or attendance at the educational institution, as well as any fees, books, supplies, and equipment required for courses of instruction at the educational institution. To be treated as related expenses, the fees, books supplies, and equipment must be required of all students in the particular course of instruction. Incidental expenses, such as expenses for room and board, travel, research, equipment, and other expenses that are not required for either enrollment or attendance at the educational institution are not treated as related expenses. Any amounts that are used for room, board and other incidental expenses are not excluded from income.

Example: Assume this year your son received a scholarship in the amount of $20,000 to pay for expenses at a qualified educational institution. His expenses included $12,000 for tuition; $1,100 for books; $900 for lab supplies and fees; and $6,000 for food, housing, clothing, laundry, and other living expenses.

The $14,000 that your son paid for tuition, books and lab supplies and fees are considered to be qualified educational expenses and therefore would not have to be reported as income. The $6,000 that he spent on housing and the other living expenses is considered to be incidental expenses and would have to be reported in his income.

Note: This tax exclusion for qualified scholarships should not be confused with the Hope Scholarship Tax Credit, which has been temporarily renamed the American Opportunity Tax Credit and enhanced for 2009 and 2010 by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The American Opportunity Tax Credit can reach as high as $2,500 for 2009 and 2010 for tuition expenses paid by you for yourself, a spouse or a dependent. Scholarship money that is excluded from income cannot be used in computing your costs for the American Opportunity Tax Credit (i.e. Hope Scholarship Tax Credit). "Financial aid" in the form of student loans, however, is not counted as a scholarship and any money applied to pay tuition can qualify for the Hope Scholarship Tax Credit.

There can be all sorts of complicating factors in assessing whether a particular scholarship will be taxed, such as the treatment of work-study scholarships, educational sabbaticals, scholarships paid by an employer, and stipends to cover the tax on the non-tuition portion of attending a university. If you need additional assistance in determining the taxability of scholarships funds, please contact the office.

Q:The holidays are approaching and I would like to consider giving gifts of appreciation to my employees. What kinds of gifts can I give my employees that they would not have to declare as income on their tax returns? I also would like to make sure my company would be able to deduct the costs of these gifts.

A:First of all, anything given in the business setting is presumed, until proven otherwise, not to be a gift (e.g., is taxable income) -- that is, you are either rewarding an employee for work done or providing an incentive in which he or she will be inclined to do more work in the future. However, the Tax Code and related IRS regulations still allow many gifts to remain tax-free to the employee while being tax deductible to the business. Here is a short list of the rules:

$25 gift rule

A business may deduct up to $25 in gifts given to each recipient during any given year. However, you can't get around this limit by giving to each family member of the intended recipient: they all share in one $25 limit. Items clearly of an advertising nature such as promotional items do not count as long as the item costs $4 or less.

No dollar limit exists on a deduction if the gift is given to a corporation or a partnership. The cost of gifts such as baseball tickets that will be used by an unidentified group of employees also qualifies for the unlimited deduction. However, once again, if the gift is intended eventually to go to a particular individual shareholder or partner, the deduction is limited to $25.

Separate "de minimis" rules

A "de minimis" fringe benefit from employer to employee is considered to be made tax-free to the employee. "De minimis" fringe benefits are not restricted by the $25 per recipient limit otherwise applicable outside of the employer-employee context. However, de minimis fringe benefits must be small "within reason." Typical de minimis gifts include holiday gifts such as a turkey or ham, the occasional company picnic, occasional use of the photocopy machine, occasional supper money, or flowers sent to a sick employee.

The general guidelines for de minimis fringe benefits are:

• the value of the gift must be nominal,
• accounting for all such gifts would be administratively nitpicking,
• the gifts are only occasional, and
• they are given "to promote health, good will, contentment, or efficiency" of employees.

Unfortunately, "gifts of nominal value" exclude such perks as use of a company lodge, season theater tickets, or country club dues. These cannot be given tax-free to an employee. But they do include occasional theater or sports tickets or group meals.

What's more, fringe benefits such as the use of an on-premise athletic facility or subsidized cafeteria are specifically included under IRS rules as de minimis fringe benefits. The traditional gold retirement watch -- or similar gift-- to commemorate a long period of employment is also treated as de minimis. However, cash or items readily convertible into cash, such as gift certificates, are taxable, no matter what the amount.

Dual-income families are commonplace these days, however, some couples are discovering that their second income may not be worth the added aggravation and effort. After taking into consideration daycare expenses, commuting expenses, the countless take-out meals, and additional clothing costs, many are surprised at how much (or how little) of that second income is actually hitting their bank account.

Dual-income families are commonplace these days, however, some couples are discovering that their second income may not be worth the added aggravation and effort. After taking into consideration daycare expenses, commuting expenses, the countless take-out meals, and additional clothing costs, many are surprised at how much (or how little) of that second income is actually hitting their bank account.

Before you and your spouse head off for yet another hectic workweek, it may be worth your time to take a few moments to do a few simple calculations. After assessing what expenditures are necessary in order for both parents to work outside of the home, many couples quickly realize that their second income is essentially paying for the second person to be working.

Crunch the numbers. To determine whether your second income is worth the energy, you will need to calculate the estimated value of the second income. First determine how much the second income brings in after taxes. Then subtract expenses incurred due to the second person working, such as dry cleaning expenses, childcare bills, transportation costs, housecleaning services, landscaping services, and outside dining expenses. The result will be the estimated value of the second person working.

Consider the long-term. Even if your result turns out to be small, you may find that having the second person working will be beneficial to the household in the long run. However, don't forget to consider that, by losing the second income, you may also be losing future retirement benefits and social security earnings.

Take a "dry run". Before reducing down to one income, try living on the person's income you intend to keep for six months, stashing the other income into an emergency savings account. If you are able to do this, chances are you will be able to endure for the long haul.

Many different factors can affect a family's decision to have both parents work - including the fulfillment each parent may get from working regardless of whether their income is adding significantly to the household. However, if trying to make ends meet is the major reason, it may pay off to spend some time analyzing the real net benefit from that second income. If you need any assistance while determining if both spouses should work or not, please feel free to contact the office.

Employers are required by the Internal Revenue Code to calculate, withhold, and deposit with the IRS all federal employment taxes related to wages paid to employees. Failure to comply with these requirements can find certain "responsible persons" held personally liable. Who is a responsible person for purposes of employment tax obligations? The broad interpretation defined by the courts and the IRS may surprise you.

Employers are required by the Internal Revenue Code to calculate, withhold, and deposit with the IRS all federal employment taxes related to wages paid to employees. Failure to comply with these requirements can find certain "responsible persons" held personally liable. Who is a responsible person for purposes of employment tax obligations? The broad interpretation defined by the courts and the IRS may surprise you.

Employer's responsibility regarding employment taxes

Employment taxes such as federal income tax, social security (FICA) tax, unemployment (FUTA) tax and various state taxes (note that state issues are not addressed in this article) are all required to be withheld from an employee's wages. Wages are defined in the Code and the accompanying IRS regulations as all remuneration for services performed by an employee for an employer, including the value of remuneration, such as benefits, paid in any form other than cash. The employer is responsible for depositing withheld taxes (along with related employer taxes) with the IRS in a timely manner.

100% penalty for non-compliance

Although the employer entity is required by law to withhold and pay over employment taxes, the penalty provisions of the Code are enforceable against any responsible person who willfully fails to withhold, account for, or pay over withholding tax to the government. The trust fund recovery penalty -- equal to 100% of the tax not withheld and/or paid over -- is a collection device that is normally assessed only if the tax can't be collected from the employer entity itself. Once assessed, however, this steep penalty becomes a personal liability of the responsible person(s) that can wreak havoc on their personal financial situation -- even personal bankruptcy is not an "out" as this penalty is not dischargeable in bankruptcy.

A corporation, partnership, limited liability or other form of doing business won't insulate a "responsible person" from this obligation. But who is a responsible person for purposes of withholding and paying over employment taxes, and ultimately the possible resulting penalty for noncompliance? Also, what constitutes "willful failure to pay and/or withhold"? To give you a better understanding of your potential liability as an employer or employee, these questions are addressed below.

Who are "responsible persons"?

Typically, the types of individuals who are deemed "responsible persons" for purposes of the employment tax withholding and payment are corporate officers or employees whose job description includes managing and paying employment taxes on behalf of the employer entity.

However, the type of responsibility targeted by the Code and regulations includes familiarity with and/or control over functions that are involved in the collection and deposit of employment taxes. Unfortunately for potential targets, Internal Revenue Code Section 6672 doesn't define the term, and the courts and the IRS have not formulated a specific rule that can be applied to determine who is or is not a "responsible person." Recent cases have found the courts ruling both ways, with the IRS generally applying a broad, comprehensive standard.

A Texas district court, for example, looked at the duties performed by an executive -- and rejected her argument that responsibility should only be assigned to the person with the greatest control over the taxes. Responsibility was not limited to the person with the most authority -- it could be assigned to any number of people so long as they all had sufficient knowledge and capability.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has delineated six nonexclusive factors to determine responsibility for purposes of the penalty: whether the person: (1) is an officer or member of the board of directors; (2) owns a substantial amount of stock in the company; (3) manages the day-to-day operations of the business; (4) has the authority to hire or fire employees; (5) makes decisions as to the disbursement of funds and payment of creditors; and (6) possesses the authority to sign company checks. No one factor is dispositive, according to the court, but it is clear that the court looks to the individual's authority; what he or she could do, not what he or she actually did -- or knew.

The Ninth Circuit recently cited similar factors, holding that whether an individual had knowledge that the taxes were unpaid was irrelevant; instead, said the court, responsibility is a matter of status, duty, and authority, not knowledge. Agreeing with the Texas district court, above, the court held that the penalty provision of Code section 6672 doesn't confine liability for unpaid taxes to the single officer with the greatest control or authority over corporate affairs.

Suffice it to say that, under the various courts' interpretations -- or that of the IRS -- many corporate managers and officers who are neither assigned nor assume any actual responsibility for the regular withholding, collection or deposit of federal employment taxes would be surprised to find that they could be responsible for taxes that should have been paid over by the employer entity but weren't.

What constitutes "willful failure" to comply?

Once it has been established that an individual qualifies as a responsible person, he must also be found to have acted willfully in failing to withhold and pay the taxes. Although it may be easier to establish the ingredients for "responsibility," some courts have focused on the requirement that the individual's failure be willful, relying on various means to divine his or her intent.

An Arizona district court, for example, found that a retired company owner who had turned over the operation of his business to his children while maintaining only consultant status was indeed a responsible person -- but concluded that his past actions indicated that he did not willfully cause the nonpayment of the company's employment taxes. Since he had loaned money to the company in the past when necessary, his inaction with respect to the taxes suggested that he believed the company was meeting its obligations and the taxes were being paid.

A Texas district court found willfulness where an officer of a bankrupt company knew that the taxes were due but paid other creditors instead.

The Fifth Circuit has determined that the willfulness inquiry is the critical factor in most penalty cases, and that it requires only a voluntary, conscious, and intentional act, not a bad motive or evil intent. "A responsible person acts willfully if [s]he knows the taxes are due but uses corporate funds to pay other creditors, or if [s]he recklessly disregards the risk that the taxes may not be remitted to the government, or if, learning of the underpayment of taxes fails to use later-acquired available funds to pay the obligation.

Planning ahead

Is there any way for those with access to the inner workings of an employer's finances or tax responsibilities -- but without actual responsibility or knowledge of employment tax matters -- to protect themselves from the "responsible person" penalty? It may depend on which jurisdiction you're in -- although a survey of the courts suggests most are more willing than not to find liability. Otherwise, the wisest course may be to enter into an employment contract that carefully delineates and separates the duties and responsibilities -- and the expected scope of knowledge -- of an individual who might find himself with the dubious distinction of being responsible for a distinctly unexpected and undesirable drain on his finances.

The laws and requirements related to employment taxes can be complex and confusing with steep penalties for non-compliance. For additional assistance with your employment related tax issues, please contact the office for additional guidance.

How quickly could you convert your assets to cash if necessary? Do you have a quantitative way to evaluate management's effectiveness? Knowing your business' key financial ratios can provide valuable insight into the effectiveness of your operations and your ability to meet your financial obligations as well as help you chart your company's future.

How quickly could you convert your assets to cash if necessary? Do you have a quantitative way to evaluate management's effectiveness? Knowing your business' key financial ratios can provide valuable insight into the effectiveness of your operations and your ability to meet your financial obligations as well as help you chart your company's future.

Step 1: Calculate your ratios.

Acid Test: determines your company's ability to convert assets to cash to pay current obligations.

Cash & near cash

Current liabilities

Current Ratio measures your company's liquidity and ability to pay short-term debts.

Current assets

Current liabilities

Debt to Assets Ratio determines the extent to which your company is financed by debt.

Total debt

Total assets

Gross Profit Margin Rate: measures how much of each sales dollar can go for operating expenses and profit.

Gross Profit

Net Sales

Return on Assets (ROA): measures how much income is generated from your company's assets.

Net profit

Total assets

Step 2: Evaluate results.

Once you have calculated the ratios, you will need to be able to translate the numbers into results that relate to your business. Below are some examples of how you can use these ratios in your business:

Acid Test: A result of 2:0:1 means you have a two dollars' worth of easily convertible assets for each dollar of current liabilities.

Current Ratio A ratio of 2.0:1 means that the value of your current assets are twice that of what your current obligations are, a good indicator to a potential lender that your company is in sound financial condition.

Debt to Assets Ratio This ratio shows how many cents per dollar of assets are financed. An 82% ratio would indicate that your company's assets are heavily financed and may be a troubling sign to a potential lender.

Gross Profit Margin Ratio A ratio of .45:1 indicates that for every dollar of sales, your company has 45 cents to cover operating expenses and profit. This information can be used when setting pricing for your company's products and services.

Return on Assets Ratio (ROA): A ratio of .08:1 would mean that the company is bringing in 8 cents for every dollar of assets. These results can be used to determine the effectiveness of management's efforts to utilize assets.

Step 3: Compare to previous periods' results.

Take the results from the current period (e.g., this month) and deduct from the results of the previous period (e.g., last month). The result will be the net change in the ratio from one period to another. Because increases from period to period are good for one ratio (e.g., acid test) but maybe not so good for another (e.g., debt to assets ratio) it's important to analyze each ratio separately.

While changes in ratios don't always mean your company is getting off track, analyzing the cause of the changes can help uncover potential problem areas that need your attention.

There are many applications for key financial ratios to help you and your management team identify your company's strengths and weaknesses. If you would like any additional assistance with the calculation or analysis of your company's ratios, please contact the office.

Q. I have a professional services firm and am considering hiring my wife to help out with some of the administrative tasks in the office. I don't think we'll have a problem working together but I would like to have more information about the tax aspects of such an arrangement before I make the leap. What are some of the tax advantages of hiring my spouse?

Q. I have a professional services firm and am considering hiring my wife to help out with some of the administrative tasks in the office. I don't think we'll have a problem working together but I would like to have more information about the tax aspects of such an arrangement before I make the leap. What are some of the tax advantages of hiring my spouse?

A. Small business owners have long adhered to the practice of hiring family members to help them run their businesses -- results have ranged from very rewarding to absolutely disastrous. From a purely financial aspect, however, it is very important for you as a business owner to consider the tax advantages and potential pitfalls of hiring -- or continuing to employ -- family members in your small business.

Keeping it all in the family

Pay your family -- not Uncle Sam. Hiring family members can be a way of keeping more of your business income available for you and your family. The business gets a deduction for the wages paid -- as long as the family members are performing actual services in exchange for the compensation that they are receiving. This is true even though the family member will have to include the compensation received in income.

Some of the major tax advantages that often can be achieved through hiring a family member -- in this case, your spouse -- include:

Health insurance deduction. If you are self-employed and hire your spouse as a bona fide employee, your spouse -- as one of your employees -- can be given full health insurance coverage for all family members, including you as the business owner. This will convert the family health insurance premiums into a 100% deductible expense.

Company retirement plan participation. You may be able to deduct contributions made on behalf of your spouse to a company sponsored retirement plan if they are employees. The tax rules involved to put family members into your businesses retirement plan are quite complex, however, and generally require you to give equal treatment to all employees, whether or not related.

Travel expenses. If your spouse is an employee, you may be able to deduct the costs attributable to her or him accompanying you on business travel if both of you perform a legitimate business function while travelling.

IRA contributions. Paying your spouse a salary may enable them to make deductible IRA contributions based on the earned income that they receive, or Roth contributions that will accumulate tax-free for eventual tax-free distribution.

"Reasonable compensation"

In order for a business owner to realize any of the advantages connected with the hiring family members as discussed above, it is imperative for the family member to have engaged in bona fide work that merits the compensation being paid. Because this area has such a high potential for abuse, it's definitely a hot issue with the IRS. If compensation paid to a family member is deemed excessive, payments may be reclassified as gifts or as a means of equalizing payments to shareholders.

As you decide on how much to pay your spouse working in your business, keep in mind the reasonable compensation issue. Consider the going market rate for the work that is being done and pay accordingly. This conservative approach could save you money and headaches in the event of an audit by the IRS.

Hiring your spouse can be a rewarding and cost effective solution for your small business. However, in order to get the maximum benefit from such an arrangement, proper planning should be done. For additional guidance, please feel free to contact the office.

Stock options have become a common part of many compensation and benefits packages. Even small businesses have jumped on the bandwagon and now provide a perk previously confined to the executive suites of large publicly held companies. If you are an employee who has received stock options, you need to be aware of the complicated tax rules that govern certain stock options -- several potential "gotchas" exist and failing to spot them can cause major tax headaches.

Stock options have become a common part of many compensation and benefits packages. Even small businesses have jumped on the bandwagon and now provide a perk previously confined to the executive suites of large publicly held companies. If you are an employee who has received stock options, you need to be aware of the complicated tax rules that govern certain stock options -- several potential "gotchas" exist and failing to spot them can cause major tax headaches.

Over the past few years, the rules governing stock options have become increasingly complicated. More than ever, it is important that employees who receive stock options have a good understanding about how they are taxed -- on receipt of the option, at its exercise, or pursuant to the sale of the underlying stock -- as well as the potential consequences of their decisions regarding the timing of the taxation of those options.

NSOs vs ISOs

The most common type of stock option that employees receive is called a nonstatutory stock option (NSO). The other, less common type of stock option is generically referred to as an incentive stock option (ISO). ISOs are governed by very specific rules and are subjected to strict statutory requirements; NSOs, on the other hand, are subject to more general rules and guidelines.

Incentive stock options (ISOs) give the employee the right to purchase stock from the employer at a specified price. The employee is not taxed on the ISO at the time of its grant or at the time of the exercise of the option. Instead, he or she is taxed only at the time of the disposition of the stock acquired through exercise of the option. Note, however, the exercise of an ISO does give rise to an alternative minimum tax item in the amount of the difference between the option price and the market price of the stock.

Note. The IRS temporarily suspended the collection of ISO alternative minimum tax (AMT) liabilities through September 30, 2008.

NSOs also give the employee the right to purchase stock from the employer at a specified price. When and how an NSO is taxed depends on several factors including whether the underlying stock is substantially vested, and whether or not the fair market value of the stock is readily ascertainable.

Vesting. If an employee receives options from his employer, the tax consequences depend on whether the stock is vested. Stock you receive from your employer is "substantially vested" if it is either "transferable" by the employee or it is no longer subject to a "substantial risk of forfeiture". Property is "transferable" if you can sell, assign or pledge your interest in the option without the risk of losing it. A "substantial risk of forfeiture" exists if the rights in the property transferred depend on the future performance (or refraining from performance) of substantial services by any person, or the occurrence of a certain condition related to the transfer.

Readily ascertainable fair market value. An NSO always has a readily ascertainable fair market value when the option is publicly traded. When an option is not publicly traded, it can have a readily ascertainable fair market value if its value can be measured with reasonable accuracy. IRS rules spell out when fair market value can be measured with reasonable accuracy.

Generally, an employee who receives an NSO that has a readily ascertainable fair market value is subject to special tax rules under the Internal Revenue Code that apply to property received by a taxpayer in exchange for services when the option is granted. Under these rules, the option must be included in the employee's income as ordinary income in the amount of the fair market value in the year the option becomes substantially vested. If the employee paid for the option, he recognizes the value of the option minus its cost. The employee is not taxed again when he exercises the option and buys the corporate stock; he is taxed when the stock is sold. The gain or loss recognized when the employee sells the stock is capital in nature.

No readily ascertainable fair market value. Employees who receive NSOs from privately held companies are most likely to receive an NSO without a readily ascertainable fair market value. In general, when an NSO does not have a readily ascertainable fair market value, taxation occurs at the time when the option is exercised or transferred. The employee will recognize ordinary income in the amount of the value of the stock when it becomes substantially vested minus any amounts paid for the option or stock. The gain or loss recognized when the employee sells the stock is capital in nature. However, employees who have NSOs without a readily ascertainable fair market value also have the ability to elect to have the transaction taxed differently,

Section 83(b) election: Elector beware

Employees who exercise options that did not have a readily ascertainable fair market value when they were granted may elect to report income from the stock underlying the option at the time of the exercise rather than waiting until the stock is substantially vested. This election is referred to as a "Section 83(b) election" and is non-revocable. Once the election is made, any later subsequent appreciation when the stock becomes substantially vested would not be includible in income.

As you can see, the rules and tax laws related to stock options are indeed complicated and require some advance planning in order to avoid a big tax "gotcha". If you are contemplating entering into any transactions that involve stock options, please contact the office for additional guidance.

All of us will, at one time or another, incur financial losses - whether insubstantial or quite significant -- in our business and personal lives. When business fortunes head South -- either temporarily or in a more prolonged slide, it is important to be aware of how the tax law can limit the actual amount of your losses and your ability to deduct them. Here are some of the types of losses your business may experience and the related tax considerations to keep in mind in the event of a business downturn.

All of us will, at one time or another, incur financial losses - whether insubstantial or quite significant -- in our business and personal lives. When business fortunes head South -- either temporarily or in a more prolonged slide, it is important to be aware of how the tax law can limit the actual amount of your losses and your ability to deduct them. Here are some of the types of losses your business may experience and the related tax considerations to keep in mind in the event of a business downturn.

Bad debts

One loss that occurs frequently when business slows down is bad debt. A bad debt is simply a technical term used to describe a debt that has become totally or partially worthless. Different strategies apply depending upon whether you are the borrower or the lender.

As borrower. If you are the borrower, the "forgiveness" of all or part of the debt by the lender will generally trigger taxable income on that amount, unless the business is insolvent (debts exceed liabilities).

Note. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (2009 Recovery Act) allows some business to elect to recognize cancellation of indebtedness income over five years, beginning in 2014. The temporary benefit applies to specific types of business debt repurchased by the business after December 31, 2008 and before January 1, 2011. Under this provision, an applicable debt instrument includes a bond, note, certificate, debenture, or other instrument that constitutes indebtedness issued by a C corporation or any other "person" in connection with the conduct of trade or business by that person. This election is irrevocable. Moreover, the liquidation or sale of substantially all the taxpayer's assets can result in acceleration of deferred items.

Although recognizing income may not be an immediate problem for a business that has plenty of losses to net against current income, additional income may wash out a net operating loss carryover that can either provide an immediate refund for a past tax year or shelter from income in the future. As a result, some businesses re-define debt "forgiveness" into a non-taxable event, such as a refinancing or a business-generated settlement.

As lender. If you are the lender, your major tax concern will be proving that a real debt exists, and then determining how fast you can deduct the bad debt and whether the deduction can offset ordinary income, as opposed to just capital gains.

Loans between corporations and their shareholders are scrutinized to make sure that they are really debts rather than disguised dividends or contributions to the corporation's capital. You can protect yourself by taking the steps that an arm's-length lender would take, such as putting it in writing and charging a reasonable rate of interest.

The IRS sometimes requires taxpayers to play a guessing game about which tax year a debt becomes sufficiently worthless to support the deduction. Because of potential statute of limitations problems, tax experts generally recommend that you claim the loss in the earliest possible year that it can reasonably be argued to be worthless.

Finally, you must determine whether a business or nonbusiness bad debt exists. A business bad debt must be created or acquired, or become worthless, in the course of your trade or business. If you conduct a business in the form of a corporation, generally any debt held by the corporation is a business debt. Any debt not falling into the business category is a nonbusiness debt.

As guarantor. If you take out a loan on behalf of your corporation or you personally guarantee the loan and then must make good on it, you are usually considered to have either made a contribution to capital or created a nonbusiness bad debt to protect your position as an investor. A nonbusiness debt must be completely worthless before a loss can be taken. Furthermore, nonbusiness bad debts are subject to limits on capital losses. Business bad debts, on the other hand, are deductible as ordinary losses in full against your other income.

Net operating losses

If you show a net operating loss for the year, it normally may be carried back two years or carried forward up to 20 years until it can be netted against current taxable income. A net operating loss (NOL) for this purpose has some complexity built in to strip it of most personal tax characteristics. An individual's NOL, for example, does not include any offset for personal or dependency exemptions, for net nonbusiness capital losses, or for nonbusiness itemized deductions that exceed nonbusiness income. Another choice in dealing with an NOL is to elect to immediately carryforward the loss. This can be advantageous when high rate-bracket income is anticipated in the following year.

Note. The 2009 Recovery Act provides a five-year carryback of 2008 NOLs for qualified small businesses only. These are small businesses with average gross receipts of $15 million or less. Businesses can choose to carryback NOLs three, four or five years. This treatment applies only to NOLs for any tax year beginning or ending in 2008. The normal NOL carryback period returns in for NOLs incurred in 2009.

Pass-through losses

One of the advantages of investing in a business as a partner or a subchapter S shareholder is that losses on the business level get passed-through to your individual tax return. Regular corporations, on the other hand, file separate returns and the shareholder cannot "realize" a tax loss until he or she actually sells stock.

For both partners and S shareholders, however, the ability to deduct pass-through losses is determined by the amount of tax basis the partner has in his partnership interest or the S shareholder has in his shares. This, in turn, depends upon a variety of factors, including the original price paid, the amount of losses already passed through, cash or property distributed, and any later contributions.

If you have such a stake in a business, a tax strategy for both adding to basis and preventing its diminution is critical to your ability to be able to deduct business losses as a partner or S shareholder.

Section 1244 Stock

If you sell stock at a loss and that stock had been designated on its issuance to be "Section 1244 stock," you are more fortunate than most investors who bail out during a business downturn. Reason: you are entitled to an ordinary loss deduction rather than a capital loss. This special loss treatment is limited to $50,000 for any one year ($100,000 for joint returns). Other requirements are that the stock was issued for no more than $1 million, less than 50% of corporate receipts were from passive sources for the first five years of operation, and the shareholder claiming the treatment must be an individual.

Dealing with and making the most of losses related to a business downturn can get complicated. Because the preceding discussion is meant to be general, is limited in nature and does not cover all the tax rules involved, you are encourage to contact the office for additional guidance with this issue.