For 2022, the Social Security wage cap will be $147,000, and Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits will increase by 5.9 percent. These changes reflect cost-of-living adjustments to account for inflation.

For 2022, the Social Security wage cap will be $147,000, and Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits will increase by 5.9 percent. These changes reflect cost-of-living adjustments to account for inflation.

Wage Cap for Social Security Tax
The Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax on wages is 7.65 percent each for the employee and the employer. FICA tax has two components:

• a 6.2 percent social security tax, also known as old age, survivors, and disability insurance (OASDI); and
• a 1.45 percent Medicare tax, also known as hospital insurance (HI).

For self-employed workers, the Self-Employment tax is 15.3 percent, consisting of:

• a 12.4 percent OASDI tax; and
• a 2.9 percent HI tax.

OASDI tax applies only up to a wage base, which includes most wages and self-employment income up to the annual wage cap.

For 2022, the wage base is $147,000. Thus, OASDI tax applies only to the taxpayer’s first $147,000 in wages or net earnings from self-employment. Taxpayers do not pay any OASDI tax on earnings that exceed $147,000.

There is no wage cap for HI tax.

Maximum Social Security Tax for 2022
For workers who earn $147,000 or more in 2022:

• an employee will pay a total of $9,114 in social security tax ($147,000 x 6.2 percent);
• the employer will pay the same amount; and
• a self-employed worker will pay a total of $18,228 in social security tax ($147,000 x 12.4 percent).

Additional Medicare Tax
Higher-income workers may have to pay an additional Medicare tax of 0.9 percent. This tax applies to wages and self-employment income that exceed:

• $250,000 for married taxpayers who file a joint return;
• $125,000 for married taxpayers who file separate returns; and
• $200,000 for other taxpayers.

The annual wage cap does not affect the additional Medicare tax.

Benefit Increase for 2022
Finally, a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) will increase social security and SSI benefits for 2022 by 5.9 percent. The COLA is intended to ensure that inflation does not erode the purchasing power of these benefits.

The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment that the cap on the federal income tax deduction for money paid in state and local taxes (SALT) is constitutional.

The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment that the cap on the federal income tax deduction for money paid in state and local taxes (SALT) is constitutional. Four states brought a claim against the government alleging that the $10,000 cap on the federal income tax deduction for money paid in state and local taxes, enacted as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act ( P.L. 115-97) (TCJA), violated the Constitution. The states argued that the state and local tax deduction was constitutionally mandated, or alternatively that the cap violated the Tenth Amendment because it coerced them to abandon their preferred fiscal policies. The district court held that the states had standing and that their claims were not barred by the Anti-Injunction Act (AIA). However, the district court concluded that the claims lacked merit. The states' allegations that the cap decreases the frequency and price at which taxable real estate transactions occur by measurably increasing the cost of those transactions reflect specific lost tax revenues and suffice to support standing. Moreover, the exception in South Carolina v. Regan, 84-1 USTC ¶9241, 465 U.S. 367, 373 (1984), applied to the facts of this case, therefore, the court held that the AIA did not foreclose its review of the states' claim.

Background
The federal tax code’s state and local tax (SALT) deduction permitted taxpayers to deduct from their taxable income all the money they paid in state and local income and property taxes. However, in 2017, Congress passed the TCJA which imposed a cap on the SALT deduction. The immediate impact of this cap was felt most acutely in states where the state and local tax liability of residents often exceeded the $10,000 maximum. Four of the most affected states, namely, New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Maryland, sued the government asserting that the cap on the SALT deduction was unconstitutional on its face and unconstitutionally coerced them to abandon their preferred fiscal policies. The government responded by stating that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to consider the states' claims and also defended the cap on the merits. The district court rejected the government's jurisdictional defense but dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim. On appeal, the states argued that the district court erred on the merits.

Affirming an unpublished District Court opinion.

The IRS has reminded employers to check the Work Opportunity Tax Credit available for hiring long-term unemployment recipients and other groups of workers facing significant barriers to employment.

The IRS has reminded employers to check the Work Opportunity Tax Credit available for hiring long-term unemployment recipients and other groups of workers facing significant barriers to employment.

Cash contributions made either to supporting organizations or to establish or maintain a donor advised fund do not qualify. Also, cash contributions carried forward from prior years do not qualify, nor do cash contributions to most private foundations and most cash contributions to charitable remainder trusts.

Subject to certain limits, taxpayers who itemize could generally claim a deduction for charitable contributions made to qualifying charitable organizations. These range from 20 percent to 60 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI) and vary by the type of contribution and type of charitable organization. The law now permits electing individuals to apply an increased limit of up to 100 percent of their AGI, for qualified contributions made during 2021. More information can be found at https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-publication-526.

The Work Opportunity Tax Credit encourages employers to hire workers certified as members of any of the following targeted groups facing barriers to employment:

• temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients;
• unemployed veterans, including disabled veterans;
• formerly incarcerated individuals;
• designated community residents living in Empowerment Zones or Rural Renewal Counties;
• vocational rehabilitation referrals;
• supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients;
• supplemental Security Income (SSI) recipients;
• long-term family assistance recipients; and
• long-term unemployment recipients.

An employer must first request certification by submitting IRS Form 8850, Pre-screening Notice and Certification Request for the Work Opportunity Credit to their state workforce agency (SWA) to qualify for the credit within 28 days after the eligible worker commences work. However, under a special relief provision, a submission deadline on November 8, 2021, applies to qualified summer youth employees residing in Empowerment Zones and designated community residents residing in Empowerment Zones.

Eligible employees must commence work on or after January 1, 2021, and before October 9, 2021, to qualify for the submission deadline. The Work Opportunity Tax Credit is claimed on eligible businesses' federal income tax returns and is usually based on wages paid to qualified workers during the first year of employment. The credit is first figured on Form 5884, Work Opportunity Credit, and then is claimed on Form 3800, General Business Credit.

Under a special rule, employers are permitted to claim the Work Opportunity Tax Credit for hiring qualified veterans, although the credit is not available to tax-exempt organizations for most groups of new hires. Such organizations claim the credit against payroll taxes on Form 5884-C, Work Opportunity Credit for Qualified Tax Exempt Organizations.

The IRS highlighted how expanded tax benefits help both individuals and businesses give to charity before the end of this year.

The IRS highlighted how expanded tax benefits help both individuals and businesses give to charity before the end of this year. The law now permits these taxpayers to claim a limited deduction on their 2021 federal income tax returns for cash contributions made to certain qualifying charitable organizations. These taxpayers, including married individuals filing separate returns, can claim a deduction of up to $300 for cash contributions made to qualifying charities during 2021. The maximum deduction is increased to $600 for married taxpayers filing joint returns. Nearly nine in 10 taxpayers now take the standard deduction and could potentially qualify to claim a limited deduction for cash contributions.

Cash contributions made either to supporting organizations or to establish or maintain a donor advised fund do not qualify. Also, cash contributions carried forward from prior years do not qualify, nor do cash contributions to most private foundations and most cash contributions to charitable remainder trusts.

Subject to certain limits, taxpayers who itemize could generally claim a deduction for charitable contributions made to qualifying charitable organizations. These range from 20 percent to 60 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI) and vary by the type of contribution and type of charitable organization. The law now permits electing individuals to apply an increased limit (Increased Individual Limit), up to 100 percent of their AGI, for qualified contributions made during 2021. More information can be found at https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-publication-526.

The IRS issued a notice clarifying the application of certain extensions granted under the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA) for the election of COBRA coverage and payment of COBRA premiums due to the COVID-19 emergency.

The IRS issued a notice clarifying the application of certain extensions granted under the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA) for the election of COBRA coverage and payment of COBRA premiums due to the COVID-19 emergency. The IRS also addressed the interaction of COBRA continuation coverage under the Emergency Relief Notices with the COBRA premium assistance available for certain individuals under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (the ARP).

Guidance and Application of Extensions
COBRA permits qualified beneficiaries who lose coverage under a group health plan to elect continuation health coverage for a 60-day period after receipt of a COBRA election notice. The initial premium can not be due earlier than 45 days after that election.

Certain extensions were granted due to the COVID-19 (Coronavirus) emergency, and issued in the Joint Notification of Extensions of Certain Timeframes for Employee Benefit Plans, Participants, and Beneficiaries Affected by the COVID-19 Outbreak. Additional guidance was provided by Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) Disaster Relief Notice 2021-01. Under the Emergency Relief Notices, up to one year must be disregarded in determining the due dates for individuals to elect COBRA continuation coverage and pay COBRA premiums during the Outbreak Period. This notice clarifies that the disregarded period for an individual to elect COBRA continuation coverage and the disregarded period for the individual to make initial and subsequent COBRA premium payments generally run concurrently.

For example, if an individual elected COBRA continuation coverage outside of the initial 60-day COBRA election timeframe, that individual generally will have one year and 105 days (60 days plus 45 days) after the date the COBRA notice was provided to make the initial COBRA premium payment. If an individual elected COBRA continuation coverage within the initial 60-day COBRA election timeframe, that individual will only have one year and 45 days after the date of the COBRA election to make the initial COBRA premium payment.

Applying the disregarded periods in this way means that individuals who delay electing COBRA may not have more than one year of total disregarded time for the COBRA election and initial COBRA payment. For example, a taxpayer cannot delay electing COBRA continuation coverage for 6 months and then add another full year to the disregarded period for purposes of determining the deadline for making the initial COBRA premium payment (resulting in a total of 18 months of disregarded time for both the COBRA election and initial COBRA payment).

Transition Relief
To avoid inequitable outcomes, in no event will an individual be required to make the initial premium payment before November 1, 2021, even if November 1, 2021 is more than one year and 105 days after the date the election notice was received, provided that the individual makes the initial premium payment within one year and 45 days after the date of the election.

ARP COBRA Premium Assistance
On March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARP) was enacted, providing for temporary COBRA premium assistance for certain “Assistance Eligible Individuals” for periods of coverage beginning on or after April 1, 2021, through periods of coverage beginning on or before September 30, 2021. The extensions of the timeframes under the Emergency Relief Notices do not apply to the periods for providing the required notice of the ARP extended election period or for electing COBRA continuation coverage with COBRA premium assistance under the ARP.

The IRS identified drought-stricken areas where tax relief is available to taxpayers that sold or exchanged livestock because of drought.

The IRS identified drought-stricken areas where tax relief is available to taxpayers that sold or exchanged livestock because of drought. The relief extends the deadlines for taxpayers to replace the livestock and avoid reporting gain on the sales. These extensions apply until the drought-stricken area has a drought-free year.

When Sales of Livestock are Involuntary Conversions
Sales of livestock due to drought are involuntary conversions of property. Taxpayers can postpone gain on involuntary conversions if they buy qualified replacement property during the replacement period. Qualified replacement property must be similar or related in service or use to the converted property.

Usually, the replacement period ends two years after the tax year in which the involuntary conversion occurs. However, a longer replacement period applies in several situations, such as when sales occur in a drought-stricken area.

Livestock Sold Because of Weather
Taxpayers have four years to replace livestock they sold or exchanged solely because of drought, flood, or other weather condition. Three conditions apply.

First, the livestock cannot be poultry.

Second, the taxpayer must have held the converted livestock for:

• draft;
• breeding; or
• dairy purposes.

Third, the weather condition must make the area eligible for federal assistance.

Persistent Drought
The IRS extends the four-year replacement period when a taxpayer sells or exchanges livestock due to persistent drought. The extension continues until the taxpayer’s region experiences a drought-free year.

The first drought-free year is the first 12-month period that:

• ends on August 31 in or after the last year of the four-year replacement period; and
• does not include any weekly period of drought.

What Areas are Suffering from Drought
The National Drought Mitigation Center produces weekly Drought Monitor maps that report drought-stricken areas. Taxpayers can view these maps at

https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/

However, the IRS also provided a list of areas where the year ending on August 31, 2021, was not a drought-free year. The replacement period in these areas will continue until the area has a drought-free year.

An individual was allowed to deduct the amount of premiums paid to provide health insurance coverage for his ex-spouse as alimony.

An individual was allowed to deduct the amount of premiums paid to provide health insurance coverage for his ex-spouse as alimony. The taxpayer had agreed to pay his then spouse’s health insurance premiums, incident to a separation agreement pending divorce, through a cafeteria plan provided by the taxpayer’s employer. Subsequently, the taxpayer had excluded the amount equal to the health insurance premiums pursuant to Code Secs. 106 and 125 from his gross income and also claimed an alimony deduction pursuant to Code Secs. 62 and 215 for the portion of the premiums covering his then spouse.

Double Deduction
There was no dispute that the taxpayer was entitled to exclude the health insurance compensation from his gross income. However, the IRS had challenged the taxpayer’s attempt to also deduct the alimony payments and argued that permitting the alimony deduction would create a windfall to the taxpayer by granting him the practical equivalent of multiple deductions for the same economic outlay. The tax court held that disallowing the alimony deduction would leave the taxpayer with a greater tax burden that would counter the intended purpose and operation of the general alimony regime. Therefore, the taxpayer undisputably qualified for both the exclusion and the alimony deduction, and no double tax benefit outcome could arise when considering the alimony regime as a whole. By asking to disallow the alimony deduction where the law plainly permits the taxpayer this right, the IRS attempted to disrupt the uniformity of the general alimony regime under the guise of the double deduction rules when no such threat was present.

Deduction for Wholly Tax-Exempt Income
In addition, the IRS contended that Code Sec. 265(a) disallowed the taxpayer’s alimony deduction because it provides that an amount may not be deducted if it is allocable to wholly tax-exempt income (other than interest). The tax court, however, had never applied Code Sec. 265(a)(1) to disallow an alimony deduction, or, in any instance where the supposed exempt item of income at issue was actually included in gross income by a different taxpayer. Moreover, the alimony payments were not considered allocable to wholly tax-exempt income for Code Sec. 265 purposes as the taxpayer was required to include it in her income.

The IRS has reminded taxpayers that the last quarter of 2021 is a good time to check withholding.

The IRS has reminded taxpayers that the last quarter of 2021 is a good time to check withholding. The IRS’s convenient Tax Withholding Estimator (https://www.irs.gov/individuals/tax-withholding-estimator), will help taxpayers determine if they have too much withheld and how to make an adjustment to put more cash into their own pocket now. About 70 percent of taxpayers over withhold their taxes every year, which typically results in a refund. Alternatively, it will help taxpayers see that they should withhold more or make an estimated tax payment to avoid a tax bill when they file their tax return next year.

The following things need to be considered when adjusting withholding for 2021:

• Coronavirus tax relief - Tax help for taxpayers, businesses, tax-exempt organizations, and others, including health plans, affected by coronavirus (COVID-19).
• Disasters such as wildfires and hurricanes – Special tax law provisions may help taxpayers and businesses recover financially from the impact of a disaster, especially when the federal government declares their location to be a major disaster area.
• Job loss – 4128, Tax Impact of Job Loss, explained how this unfortunate circumstance can create new tax issues.
• Workers moving into the gig economy due to the pandemic – The IRS advised people earning income in the gig economy to consider estimated tax payments to avoid a balance or penalties when they file.
• Life changes such as marriage or childbirth – Getting married or having a child are just a couple of life events that can affect your refund or how much you owe.

Taxes are generally paid throughout the year whether from salary withholding, quarterly estimated tax payments, or a combination of both. Taxpayers can pay online, by phone, or from the IRS2Go app. Finally, taxpayers can schedule payments for future dates, which can be useful during filing season, for payment plan payments or for estimated tax payments.

The IRS released standards that a limited liability company (LLC) must satisfy to receive a determination letter recognizing it as tax-exempt under Code Secs. 501(a)(1) and 501(c)(3). This does not affect the status of organizations currently recognized under Code Sec. 501(c)(3).

The IRS released standards that a limited liability company (LLC) must satisfy to receive a determination letter recognizing it as tax-exempt under Code Secs. 501(a)(1) and 501(c)(3). This does not affect the status of organizations currently recognized under Code Sec. 501(c)(3).

Required Provisions
The IRS would issue said letter only if an LLC’s articles of organization and its operating agreement each include:

• provisions requiring that each member of the LLC be either (1) recognized as aforementioned; (2) a governmental unit under Code Sec. 170(c)(1); or (3) wholly-owned instrumentality of such, a governmental unit;
• express charitable purposes and charitable dissolution provisions;
• express chapter 42 compliance provisions under Code Sec. 508(e)(1), if the LLC is a private foundation; and
• an acceptable contingency plan (such as suspension of membership rights) in the event that one or more members cease to be except organizations or governmental units or wholly-owned instrumentalities.

Finally, comments could be made electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov (type IRS-2020-0042 in the search field on regulations.gov to find this Notice and submit comments). Alternatively, send comments by mail: Internal Revenue Service, CC:PA:LPD:PR (Notice 2021-56), Room 5203, P.O. Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044.

Final regulations under Code Sec. 301 update the existing regulations under this provision to reflect statutory changes made by the Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988 ( P.L. 100-647) (the 1988 Act).

Final regulations under Code Sec. 301 update the existing regulations under this provision to reflect statutory changes made by the Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988 ( P.L. 100-647) (the 1988 Act). These changes generally provide that the amount of a Section 301 distribution of property made by a corporation to its shareholder is the fair market value of the distributed property. The final Section 301 regulations adopt prior proposed regulations ( NPRM REG-121694-16), without substantive changes, and apply generally to distributions made after September 22, 2021.

Code Sec. 301 and Amendments by the Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988
Code Sec. 301 provides rules for the treatment of a distribution of property, including money, made by a corporation to its shareholder with respect to that shareholder’s stock ownership in that corporation (a Section 301 distribution).

The 1988 Act amended Code Sec. 301(b)(1) to provide that the amount of any Section 301 distribution is the amount of money received plus the fair market value of the other property received. The 1988 Act also amended Code Sec. 301(d) to provide that the basis of property received in a Section 301 distribution is the fair market value of such property (both amendments, collectively, are referred to as the 1988 amendments).

The current Section 301 regulations reflect the rules of these two provisions as they existed prior to the 1988 amendments. Accordingly, to the extent preempted by statute, the current regulations have no application.

2019 Proposed Regulations
In 2019, the IRS issued proposed regulations under Code Sec. 301 ( NPRM REG-121694-16) to reflect the 1988 amendments (2019 proposed regulations). The scope of the 2019 proposed regulations was limited to:

• deleting provisions made obsolete by statutory changes;
• making minor additions and revisions to reflect current statutory text;
• making certain non-substantive changes for purposes of clarity and readability, including reordering and redesignating paragraphs; and
• amending cross-references in regulations under other provisions to reflect the proposed reordering and redesignating of paragraphs in the Section 301 regulations.

Final Regulations
The final Section 301 regulations adopt the 2019 proposed regulations with no substantive changes and with certain non-substantive changes for purposes of clarity and readability. The final regulations apply to Section 301 distributions made after September 22, 2021. However, these regulations update the previous regulations under Code Sec. 301 to reflect the statutory changes made by the 1988 Act, which apply to distributions made in tax years beginning after December 31, 1986.

The Treasury and IRS have issued final regulations addressing the calculation of qualified business asset investment for qualified improvement property, under the alternative depreciation system (ADS), for purposes of the Code Sec. 250 deduction (for foreign-derived intangible income and Code Sec. 951A global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI)) and for purposes of determining GILTI.

The Treasury and IRS have issued final regulations addressing the calculation of qualified business asset investment for qualified improvement property, under the alternative depreciation system (ADS), for purposes of the Code Sec. 250 deduction (for foreign-derived intangible income and Code Sec. 951A global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI)) and for purposes of determining GILTI.

The regulations also contain transition rules relating to the impact of loss accounts on net operating loss carrybacks allowed under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (P.L. 116-136) (the "CARES Act”").

Treatment of Qualified Improvement Property Under Code Secs. 250 and 951A
The regulations clarify that the technical amendments to Code Sec. 168 made by section 2307(a) of the CARES Act apply to determine the adjusted basis of property under Code Sec. 250 and Code Sec. 951A. The CARES Act classified qualified improvement property as 15-year property with a 20-year recovery period, for purposes of ADS. The rule is treated as effective December 22, 2017. The ADS rules used for determining qualified business asset investments are the rules in effect on December 22, 2017.

NOL Carrybacks
The CARES Act allowed taxpayers to carryback for five years, NOLs incurred in 2018 through 2020. The regulations provide rules analogous to the existing transition rules in Reg. §1.904(f)-12(j) to situations involving an NOL arising in a post-2017 tax year that is carried back to a pre-2018 tax year. The rules of Reg. §1.904(g)-3(b) apply to the NOL carryback, and income in a pre-2018 separate category in the tax year to which the NOL is carried back is generally treated as if it included only income that would be assigned to the same separate category in post-2017 tax years.

Therefore, any separate limitation loss created by reason of a passive category component of a post-2017 NOL that is carried back to offset pre-2018 general category income will be recaptured in post-2017 tax years as general category income, and not as a combination of post-2017 general, foreign branch, or Code Sec. 951A category income. Losses will first ratably offset a taxpayer’s general category income in the carryback year, to the extent thereof, and that no separate limitation loss account will be created as a result of that offset. The amount of income in the general category available to be offset under this rule is determined after first offsetting the general category income in the carryback year by a post-2017 NOL component in the general category that is carried back to the same year.

PFIC Rules
Proposed regulations under Code Sec. 1297 and Code Sec. 1298, for determining whether a foreign corporation is treated as a passive foreign investment company (PFIC) and the treatment of income and assets of a qualifying insurance corporation that is engaged in the active conduct of an insurance business, were not finalized.

The Treasury and IRS intends to finalize the regulations separately.

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.