Newsletters

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has removed the requirement that U.S. companies and U.S. persons must report beneficial ownership information (BOI) to FinCEN under the Corporate Transparency Act.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has removed the requirement that U.S. companies and U.S. persons must report beneficial ownership information (BOI) to FinCEN under the Corporate Transparency Act. This interim final rule is consistent with the Treasury Department's recent announcement that it was suspending enforcement of the CTA against U.S. citizens, domestic reporting companies, and their beneficial owners, and that it would be narrowing the scope of the BOI reporting rule so that it applies only to foreign reporting companies.

The interim final rule amends the BOI regulations by:

• changing the definition of "reporting company" to mean only those entities that are formed under the law of a foreign country and that have registered to do business in any U.S. State or Tribal jurisdiction by filing of a document with a secretary of state or similar office (these entities had formerly been called "foreign reporting companies"), and
• exempting entities previously known as "domestic reporting companies" from BOI reporting requirements.

Under the revised rules, all entities created in the United States (including those previously called "domestic reporting companies") and their beneficial owners are exempt from the BOI reporting requirement, including the requirement to update or correct BOI previously reported to FinCEN. Foreign entities that meet the new definition of "reporting company" and do not qualify for a reporting exemption must report their BOI to FinCEN, but are not required to report any U.S. persons as beneficial owners. U.S. persons are not required to report BOI with respect to any such foreign entity for which they are a beneficial owner.

Reducing Regulatory Burden

On January 31, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14192, which announced an administration policy "to significantly reduce the private expenditures required to comply with Federal regulations to secure America’s economic prosperity and national security and the highest possible quality of life for each citizen" and "to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens" on the American people.

Consistent with the executive order and with exemptive authority provided in the CTA, the Treasury Secretary (in concurrence with the Attorney General and the Homeland Security Secretary) determined that BOI reporting by domestic reporting companies and their beneficial owners "would not serve the public interest" and "would not be highly useful in national security, intelligence, and law enforcement agency efforts to detect, prevent, or prosecute money laundering, the financing of terrorism, proliferation finance, serious tax fraud, or other crimes."The preamble to the interim final rule notes that the Treasury Secretary has considered existing alternative information sources to mitigate risks. For example, under the U.S. anti-money laundering/countering the financing of terrorism regime, covered financial institutions still have a continuing requirement to collect a legal entity customer's BOI at the time of account opening (see 31 CFR 1010.230). This will serve to mitigate certain illicit finance risks associated with exempting domestic reporting companies from BOI reporting.

BOI reporting by foreign reporting companies is still required, because such companies present heightened national security and illicit finance risks and different concerns about regulatory burdens. Further, the preamble points out that the policy direction to minimize regulatory burdens on the American people can still be achieved by exempting foreign reporting companies from having to report the BOI of any U.S. persons who are beneficial owners of such companies.

Deadlines Extended for Foreign Companies

When the interim final rule is published in the Federal Register, the following reporting deadlines apply:

• Foreign entities that are registered to do business in the United States before the publication date of the interim final rule must file BOI reports no later than 30 days from that date.
• Foreign entities that are registered to do business in the United States on or after the publication date of the interim final rule have 30 calendar days to file an initial BOI report after receiving notice that their registration is effective.

Effective Date; Comments Requested

The interim final rule is effective on the date of its publication in the Federal Register.

FinCEN has requested comments on the interim final rule. In light of those comments, FinCEN intends to issue a final rule later in 2025.

Written comments must be received on or before the date that is 60 days after publication of the interim final rule in the Federal Register.

Interested parties can submit comments electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Alternatively, comments may be mailed to Policy Division, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, P.O. Box 39, Vienna, VA 22183. For both methods, refer to Docket Number FINCEN-2025-0001, OMB control number 1506-0076 and RIN 1506-AB49.

FinCEN Interim Final Rule RIN 1506-AB49

FinCEN News Release

Melanie Krause, the IRS’s Chief Operating Officer, has been named acting IRS Commissioner following the retirement of Doug O’Donnell. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent acknowledged O’Donnell’s 38 years of service, commending his leadership and dedication to taxpayers.

Melanie Krause, the IRS’s Chief Operating Officer, has been named acting IRS Commissioner following the retirement of Doug O’Donnell. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent acknowledged O’Donnell’s 38 years of service, commending his leadership and dedication to taxpayers. O’Donnell, who had been acting Commissioner since January, will retire on Friday, expressing confidence in Krause’s ability to guide the agency through tax season. Krause, who joined the IRS in 2021 as Chief Data & Analytics Officer, has since played a key role in modernizing operations and overseeing core agency functions. With experience in federal oversight and operational strategy, Krause previously worked at the Government Accountability Office and the Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General. She became Chief Operating Officer in 2024, managing finance, security, and procurement. Holding advanced degrees from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Krause will lead the IRS until a permanent Commissioner is appointed.

A grant disbursement to a corporation to be used for rent payments following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center was not excluded from the corporation's gross income. Grants were made to affected businesses with funding provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The corporation's grant agreement required the corporation to employ a certain number of people in New York City, with a portion of those people employed in lower Manhattan for a period of time. Pursuant to this agreement, the corporation requested a disbursement as reimbursement for rent expenses.

A grant disbursement to a corporation to be used for rent payments following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center was not excluded from the corporation's gross income. Grants were made to affected businesses with funding provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The corporation's grant agreement required the corporation to employ a certain number of people in New York City, with a portion of those people employed in lower Manhattan for a period of time. Pursuant to this agreement, the corporation requested a disbursement as reimbursement for rent expenses.

Exclusions from Gross Income

Under the expansive definition of gross income, the grant proceeds were income unless specifically excluded. Payments are only excluded under Code Sec. 118(a) when a transferor intends to make a contribution to the permanent working capital of a corporation. The grant amount was not connected to capital improvements nor restricted for use in the acquisition of capital assets. The transferor intended to reimburse the corporation for rent expenses and not to make a capital contribution. As a result, the grant was intended to supplement income and defray current operating costs, and not to build up the corporation's working capital.

The grant proceeds were also not a gift under Code Sec. 102(a). The motive for providing the grant was not detached and disinterested generosity, but rather a long-term commitment from the company to create and maintain jobs. In addition, a review of the funding legislation and associated legislative history did not show that Congress possessed the requisite donative intent to consider the grant a gift. The program was intended to support the redevelopment of the area after the terrorist attacks. Finally, the grant was not excluded as a qualified disaster relief payment under Code Sec. 139(a) because that provision is only applicable to individuals.

Accuracy-Related Penalty

Because the corporation relied on Supreme Court decisions, statutory language, and regulations, there was substantial authority for its position that the grant proceeds were excluded from income. As a result, the accuracy-related penalty was not imposed.

CF Headquarters Corporation, 164 TC No. 5, Dec. 62,627

The parent corporation of two tiers of controlled foreign corporations (CFCs) with a domestic partnership interposed between the two tiers was not entitled to deemed paid foreign tax credits under Code Sec. 902 or Code Sec. 960 for taxes paid or accrued by the lower-tier CFCs owned by the domestic partnership. Code Sec. 902 did not apply because there was no dividend distribution. Code Sec. 960 did not apply because the Code Sec. 951(a) inclusions with respect to the lower-tier CFCs were not taken into account by the domestic corporation.

The parent corporation of two tiers of controlled foreign corporations (CFCs) with a domestic partnership interposed between the two tiers was not entitled to deemed paid foreign tax credits under Code Sec. 902 or Code Sec. 960 for taxes paid or accrued by the lower-tier CFCs owned by the domestic partnership. Code Sec. 902 did not apply because there was no dividend distribution. Code Sec. 960 did not apply because the Code Sec. 951(a) inclusions with respect to the lower-tier CFCs were not taken into account by the domestic corporation.

Background

The parent corporation owned three CFCs, which were upper-tier CFC partners in a domestic partnership. The domestic partnership was the sole U.S. shareholder of several lower-tier CFCs.

The parent corporation claimed that it was entitled to deemed paid foreign tax credits on taxes paid by the lower-tier CFCs on earnings and profits, which generated Code Sec. 951 inclusions for subpart F income and Code Sec. 956 amounts. The amounts increased the earnings and profits of the upper-tier CFC partners.

Deemed Paid Foreign Tax Credits Did Not Apply

Before 2018, Code Sec. 902 allowed deemed paid foreign tax credit for domestic corporations that owned 10 percent or more of the voting stock of a foreign corporation from which it received dividends, and for taxes paid by another group member, provided certain requirements were met.

The IRS argued that no dividends were paid and so the foreign income taxes paid by the lower-tier CFCs could not be deemed paid by the entities in the higher tiers.

The taxpayer agreed that Code Sec. 902 alone would not provide a credit, but argued that through Code Sec. 960, Code Sec. 951 inclusions carried deemed dividends up through a chain of ownership. Under Code Sec. 960(a), if a domestic corporation has a Code Sec. 951(a) inclusion with respect to the earnings and profits of a member of its qualified group, Code Sec. 902 applied as if the amount were included as a dividend paid by the foreign corporation.

In this case, the domestic corporation had no Code Sec. 951 inclusions with respect to the amounts generated by the lower-tier CFCs. Rather, the domestic partnerships had the inclusions. The upper- tier CFC partners, which were foreign corporations, included their share of the inclusions in gross income. Therefore, the hopscotch provision in which a domestic corporation with a Code Sec. 951 inclusion attributable to earnings and profits of an indirectly held CFC may claim deemed paid foreign tax credits based on a hypothetical dividend from the indirectly held CFC to the domestic corporation did not apply.

Eaton Corporation and Subsidiaries, 164 TC No. 4, Dec. 62,622

Other Reference:

• Code Sec. 960

An appeals court affirmed that payments made by an individual taxpayer to his ex-wife did not meet the statutory criteria for deductible alimony. The taxpayer claimed said payments were deductible alimony on his federal tax returns.

An appeals court affirmed that payments made by an individual taxpayer to his ex-wife did not meet the statutory criteria for deductible alimony. The taxpayer claimed said payments were deductible alimony on his federal tax returns.

The taxpayer’s payments were not deductible alimony because the governing divorce instruments contained multiple clear, explicit and express directions to that effect. The former couple’s settlement agreement stated an equitable division of marital property that was non-taxable to either party. The agreement had a separate clause obligating the taxpayer to pay a taxable sum as periodic alimony each month. The term “divorce or separation instrument” included both divorce and the written instruments incident to such decree.

Unpublished opinion affirming, per curiam, the Tax Court, Dec. 62,420(M), T.C. Memo. 2024-18.

J.A. Martino, CA-11

In many parts of the country, residential property has seen steady and strong appreciation for some time now. In an estate planning context, however, increasing property values could mean a potential increase in federal estate tax liability for the property owner's estate. Many homeowners, who desire to pass their appreciating residential property on to their children and save federal estate and gift taxes at the same time, have utilized qualified personal residence trusts.

In many parts of the country, residential property has seen steady and strong appreciation for some time now. In an estate planning context, however, increasing property values could mean a potential increase in federal estate tax liability for the property owner's estate. Many homeowners, who desire to pass their appreciating residential property on to their children and save federal estate and gift taxes at the same time, have utilized qualified personal residence trusts.

What is a QPRT?

The qualified personal residence trust, referred to as a "QPRT," is an estate planning technique used to transfer a personal residence from one generation to the next without incurring federal estate tax on the trust property. This type of irrevocable trust allows a homeowner to make a future gift of the family home or a vacation property to his or her children, while retaining the right to continue living in the home for a term of years that the homeowner selects.

Creating a QPRT

The homeowner transfers title to his or her residence into trust for a set time period (for example, 10 years), but retains the right to live in the house during the trust term. At the end of the term, the trust property is distributed to the donor's children without passing through the donor's estate, thereby avoiding federal estate tax on the trust assets. However, if the donor wishes to continue living in the residence after the end of the trust term, the donor must pay fair market rent to his or her children, the new owners of the residence.

Gift tax advantage

Through the use of a QPRT, the full value of your residence can be transferred to your children. However, for federal gift tax purposes, the property is valued at a discount. The actual value of the gift (and the gift tax savings) depends upon your age, the length of the QPRT term, and the federal interest rates in effect at the time you transfer the house to the trust. For example, the longer the trust term, the lower the gift value for gift tax purposes and the greater the gift tax savings. Also, the higher the applicable federal interest rate, the greater the potential gift tax savings.

If you would like to discuss how a QPRT might work for you as part of your overall estate plan, or if you currently have an established QPRT and you wish to review its effect in light of current interest rates and other factors, please do not hesitate to contact this office.

Possible changes on the tax front including Estate Taxes, 1031 Exchange limitations, and a SALT workaround for some Californians

September 1, 2021

We are pleased to bring you the next edition of Praetorian Advisors’ every so often tax musings direct from our national office in Corona del Mar; ok, our only office.  It is our hope that this edition finds you both happy and healthy.

So, what is the latest on the tax front?  Well, there has been a lot of talk but no action on the federal level (that is not a bad thing), and a recent welcome surprise for some of those impacted by California income taxes.  Here is the rundown:

Federal Income, Estate & Gift Changes

Since before the Biden administration took over in January, a wish list of income tax increases, and estate and gift exemption decreases has been much discussed.  We fielded questions from some of you in the spring about moves to make given this wish list.  Having been in this business for almost 20 years at Praetorian Advisors (anniversary gifts accepted in October), and in the tax business for another 7 (Patti) and 12 years (Paul, because it’s always fun to remind him he is older) prior to Praetorian’s inception, we have seen many proposals come and go over the years.  As a result, we typically do not advise drastic actions be taken based on the prospect of tax law changes and have felt the same way so far in 2021...although we continue to keep an eye on the landscape.  Our view on the Biden proposed tax increases is one of extreme positions in so many tax areas that the end game is to get a few of the proposals passed, allowing the administration to claim the “Great Compromise of 2021”.

Given the very narrow majorities in both the House and Senate, the differing goals of the moderate and extreme wings of the Democrats, and mid-terms being a mere 15 months away, less change is more likely than a lot of change.  When Afghanistan, inflation, rising gas prices, immigration and border issues, and Covid are considered, tax increases presumably will or at least should be a lower priority.  Here are some of the more impactful proposals:

Ordinary and capital gains tax rates – the Biden administration wants to restore the top ordinary tax rate to 39.6% and increase the top long term capital gains rate from 20% to the same 39.6% for those with over $1 million of income.  Add the Obamacare/net investment income tax of 3.8% on top of that and 43.4% is the new proposed top rate.  This would impact far too much of our client base.  Add another 13.3% for our California clients and 56.4% is your number.  That hardly inspires one to recognize any gains or motivate to build a business and provide jobs to many.

Perhaps our bias as your tax advisors that you should get to keep more of your money than the government is shining through.  When politicians and talking heads mention that the top tax rate was 70% decades ago, they dishonestly fail to mention that taxpayers could deduct just about anything they spent money on back then.  Today, the most impactful individual deductions are down to: $10,000 of state and local taxes (SALT) that includes real property taxes, mortgage and investment interest, and charitable contributions.

Section 1031 Exchanges – Also called the like-kind exchange, this provision of tax law dates back almost 100 years and allows the taxpayer to defer gain on the sale of trade or business assets (limited to real estate only by President Trump as of 2018) if the proceeds are reinvested into another piece of property.  President Biden wants to eliminate the Section 1031 exchange for those with income over $400,000.

Corporate Tax Rates – Proposed increase from 21% to 28% (was 35% in 2017).  Many, including us, feel this has a better chance to pass than the other proposals because it is still 7% lower than the rate before Trump cut them a few years ago.  What many fail to realize is that corporations pass along price increases, whether it be for product or taxes, onto the consumer which has an inflationary effect.  In our opinion it makes little sense to be pushing for a corporate tax increase at home while pushing for a global minimum tax rate of 15% abroad.  We will let the economists handle the rest of that one.

Estate and Gift Tax (Part 1) – The current estate and gift tax exemption is $11.7 million per person, meaning someone can gift up to this amount without having to pay a gift tax to the government.  To the extent the gift exemption is not fully utilized, each person can use the estate exemption against his or her assets before having to pay an estate or death tax at the end of life.  The current proposal is to reduce the estate exemption to $3.5 million and the gift exemption to $1 million.  Even Obama was good with a $5 million estate and gift exemption.

Planning Tip: Note that the current estate exemption (adjusted for inflation each year) is set to expire and return to approximately $6 million at the end of 2025.  Therefore, if you might otherwise be making substantial gifts by the end of 2025, DO IT NOW.  We advise this for those who can live at their accustomed lifestyle with remaining assets after the gifting, and those who are much closer to the end than the beginning (was that gentle enough?) who have enough assets to live out the remainder of their lives.  If you will be implementing a gifting plan, you need to consult with us or your estate attorney (or both) as some assets are better to gift than others.

Estate and Gift Tax (Part 2) – For many decades (Paul was 10 and Patti 4 at the time), people’s estates have received a “basis step up” upon death, adjusting the tax basis of assets left for a surviving spouse or heirs to the date of death value.  For example, you bought a home on Balboa Island in 1983 for $300,000 and today it is worth $6 million.  Assuming the home is part of your estate (not shifted/gifted to an irrevocable trust), there will be a step up in basis to $6 million at your death, meaning your surviving spouse or heirs can sell that home and not recognize a capital gain on sale.  How can this be you ask?  The idea is that because an estate tax exists that assesses a tax based on the value of your assets, an income tax on sale of the same asset should not apply.

The Biden administration has proposed not only an elimination on the basis step up rules, but also an immediate capital gains tax at death for someone not subject to the estate tax!  Assume you die before the end of 2025.  Your Balboa home combined with your investments total $9 million.  Under this proposal, your heirs would have to pay capital gains tax on the $5.7 million “gain” even though the home isn’t sold…yet…plus whatever gains exist in your investment portfolio.  At 43.4%, that’s almost $2.5 million of capital gains tax!  It sounds like the kids will have to sell the house after the funeral reception there.

Estate and Gift Tax (Part 3) – Biden wants to eliminate use of effective estate and gift planning trusts called Grantor Retained Annuity Trusts (GRATs) and dynasty (multi-generational) trusts, and has also proposed capital gains tax upon transfer of assets to a trust.  Yikes!

Retroactive Application - The administration also floated retroactive application to January 1, 2021 of any new tax law changes.  Isn’t that unconstitutional you ask?  We all thought so until the Clinton tax increases of 1993 which were retroactive, and it held up in court.  While retroactivity is a possibility, with each passing day it is less and less probable.  Given that we are already into the 8^th month of the year and so much is still up in the air, we expect any (if any) changes will be effective January 1, 2022. 

Another factor is the IRS still being months behind processing returns and correspondence due to what we call their Covid vacation.  It turns out the good people working at the IRS do not take kindly to the vacation comment, but the fact remains they are months behind where they should be.  Retroactive application of tax law changes at this juncture might be the end of them.  Now there is an idea!

Crystal Ball Predictions

If we had to guess, our prediction is the corporate tax rate hike is most likely to pass, the estate and gift tax provisions the least likely to pass, the income tax rate changes less likely to pass, and elimination of the 1031 exchange – your guess is as good as ours.

The SALT Workaround – Relief for some Californians

Are you tired of hearing about the rich and how they need to pay their fair share?  We sure are because we see how much you pay.  Not just the numbers, but the percentage of income paid in taxes by some of you is astounding.

Have you also been trained to think that you got completely hosed by the $10,000 state and local tax (SALT) limitation?  As we have shown to many of you that has not been the case…for some.  Significant changes to the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) structure and a lower tax rates have resulted in lower overall tax liability even though the SALT limit has created higher taxable income.  Now for those over $1 million of ordinary income (you know who you are), the sting of the SALT limitation is real. 

Relief is on the way due to a recent California law enacted, but only for those with income from partnership and S Corp K-1s, and even that is not as straightforward as it sounds.  Given that there are a multitude of questions to be answered by the state government given the newness of the law, here we provide a top-level overview here of how it is designed to work.

S Corporations and partnerships doing business in California may make an election on March 15, 2022 to remit California taxes at 9.3% of flow through income on behalf of its shareholders/partners, and get a federal tax deduction for the taxes remitted.  A quick example: you own a S Corp that reports $1,000,000 of income on your K-1.  Rather than you remitting quarterly individual estimated taxes to California on the expected K-1 income, the S Corp instead elects to remit $93,000 in March 2022 on your behalf.  Your K-1 from the S Corp will now reflect federal taxable income of $907,000 instead of $1,000,000.  State taxes have never been deductible for state purposes, so your California K-1 will still show $1,000,000 plus or minus other federal/California tax differences.  At the 37% tax rate, the $93,000 deduction saves $34,410 in federal taxes. That’s the concept in a nutshell.  Here is what else we know:

• If the S Corp or partnership fails to make the election and remit the tax by March 15, 2022 then it is an opportunity missed. However, to get the deduction on your 2021 federal K-1, the tax must be remitted before December 31, 2021 on a yet to be published estimate form.  You can already see that this is going to get confusing!
  
  
• To be eligible for the 2022 tax year, the greater of $1,000 or 50% of what was paid by March 15, 2022 for the 2021 tax year must be remitted by June 15, 2022. The balance owed for 2022 will be due March 15, 2023.  For each subsequent year, it is rinse, lather, repeat but only through 2025 when the SALT limitation is set to expire, or until (if) the SALT limitation is repealed by Congress.  If the proper June 15^th payment is not remitted, it’s an opportunity missed for that year.
  
  However, if you want the deduction to be reflected on your 2021 K-1 the entity will need to remit the tax before December 31, 2021 on a yet to be published tax form.
  
  
• The workaround applies to all types of income on a K-1, including ordinary income, rental income, and investment income (interest, dividends, capital gains, etc).
  
  
• If a partnership has another partnership as even one of its partners, the entire partnership, and hence all individual partners, are disqualified from participating in the SALT workaround. This will likely eliminate participation if you are in a large investment partnership with hundreds of partners.
  
  
• Each eligible partner or shareholder must make the election with the partnership or S Corporation.
  
  
• For those of you who earn your income solely from W-2 wages, this whole concept is not applicable. We have said before that we prefer tax law that avoids choosing winners and losers, but this idea only passes muster with the IRS when a flow through entity is involved, trusts excluded.
  
  
• Planning Alert! (emoji with red sirens here if I knew how to do that): many of you have single member LLCs (SMLLC) for operating businesses, rental properties, etc that provide legal liability protection without the hassle of filing a separate federal entity return. While they are great vehicles for simplification and protection, the SALT workaround does not apply to SMLLCs.  Depending on the amount of income generated by your SMLLC, converting to a multi-member LLC has the potential to save significant tax dollars even after paying for preparation of additional tax returns.  For 2021, whether the full year’s LLC activity or only the multi-member period can be counted for the SALT workaround is not known at this time.
  
  
• If you are in a higher California tax bracket (up to 13.3%) and/or have other sources of income from wages, investment income, etc, there likely will still be a need to remit quarterly estimated tax payments that are subject to the SALT limitation.
  
  
• Unrelated to the California law, many other states to date have SALT workaround laws in varying formats. The current list of states that have passed or have pending SALT workaround legislation are: Arizona, Connecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin (no doubt with more to come).  For those of you in these states, we can review your situation to ensure maximum tax savings are achieved as well.

There is the quick rundown on what we do know, but there is much to still be clarified.  As we learn more about application of the new law, we will contact you about your next planning move, but do expect that this could impact the third and fourth quarter estimated tax payments for some of you.

Five pages of updates is enough for now.  Stay tuned for more in the future, and we look forward to continuing to serve your tax and financial needs.

Tax preparation during a global pandemic

Latest Praetorian Advisors Tax Season Update – Please Read! 

Well, much has changed in the past several days.  We are on lockdown and can no longer work from our office.  While not a huge deal because we can get work done from our home offices, it is still disruptive to our normal tax season life.  There is an oxymoron: “normal tax season life” as there is nothing normal about the way we live during tax season!  In addition, the internet and the news is all virus, all the time. 

One minute it feels like this may all be a severe overreaction when the numbers are put into perspective.  The California governor predicts 22 million of the 40 million Golden State’s residents will get the virus (56%), while China claims (insert chuckle here) 81,000 cases with 1.6 billion people (billion with a B – less than 1/100^th of 1%), and Italy has 41,000 cases with 60 million people, well less than 1/10^th of 1%).  Virus deaths globally now total over 10,000, while the flu typically kills about 35,000 Americans annually.  Imagine if we got an e-mail or phone call from building management or a restaurant every time it was determined someone had been there with the flu; it would make us nuts.  The governor’s math seems quite fuzzy, and it sure feels like an overreaction…

…Until the next minute we hear of doctors in ICU, few test kits available, well respected Dr. Fauci sounding alarm bells, cases spiking, people rushing stores to potentially hunker down for months, the most populous state in the country on lockdown, while this ultimate Black Swan event crushes a thriving economy as we come to a grinding halt.  Unless you are a U.S. Senator, your stock portfolio has also been crushed.

Time will tell if the spring breakers in Florida or the toilet paper hoarders/preppers were correct. The truth most likely lies somewhere in the middle.

While we have additional thoughts, the Op-Ed is over; now to the tax season update:

• Finally, the federal tax deadline to file and pay remaining 2019 taxes was extended this morning to July 15^th. California is conforming as well, like many other states.  Some states have yet to extend deadlines, and we are keeping an eye on those states for you, if applicable to your filings.
  
  Note that for federal purposes, if you owe more than $1 million for 2019 you can only defer payment on the first $1 million, while the remainder must be paid by April 15^th.
  
  
• The extension of time to file and pay applies to all entities, including trusts.
  
  
• Federal first quarter 2020 estimated tax payments are now due June 15^th. The second quarter estimate is also due June 15^th.  The $1 million cap on deferral also applies to estimated tax payments.
  
  
• California has made everything simpler. Any payments, including balances due, the $800 minimum tax for entities, 2020 estimated taxes, etc, are due July 15^th.  This includes first and second quarter 2020 estimates.  For those of you filing in other states, we will be in touch to discuss your filing and payment deadlines.

Our approach to the lengthened tax season is to continue working hard but get a little more sleep than we normally do this time of year to try to stay healthy, while dealing with the challenges to our lives that we all face right now.  We are prioritizing completion of returns as follows, being mindful of the disruption in cash flow this has all caused for many people:

• Partnership and S Corporation returns with K-1s that are to be distributed to investors in the entities, so we are not delaying someone’s ability to claim a refund.
  
  
• Individual and trust returns expecting a refund that will not be applied to 2020.
  
  
• Returns for which we had all information in early.
  
  
• Returns for which we have all information that came in later. This includes returns that may have been extended at April 15^th in the past, but we will be able to complete before the extended deadline this year.
  
  
• For those of you who file in the Fall because you are waiting on K-1s well into the Summer, we will work on your extension calculations after April 15^th, except for those who may owe over $1 million who need to know the figures sooner.

Given all that is going on, as a firm we welcome the extension this year.  However, we have no desire to be in busy season mode for the next four months.  As hectic as the April 15^th deadline is, we also look forward to tax season being over every year so we can get back to our lives and families, and take a little time off.  To that end, we ask you to continue getting us information so we can continue working diligently on your behalf.  If you normally get us information right about now, stick with it rather than thinking you can show up on July 1^st with a stack of information and expect that we will get it done by the July 15^th deadline.  That would be misguided thinking on your part.  There are only so many closets you can clean or movies you can watch while in lockdown, so spend some time getting that tax information together, too.

Once we get more clarity on this lockdown, hopefully we can get back into the office for at least a limited time and have some drop off hours.  Stay tuned.

Lastly, we encourage you to consider that this is not the end of the world; many of us may have already had the virus and not even known it; don’t beat your spouse or kick the dog while having all of this together time; watch some old classic movies or newer ones you have been meaning to get to; do a puzzle or play a board game with your family; drink that special bottle of wine you have been saving, just live your life while taking prudent precautions to be safe.  In the meantime, we will be doing taxes.

Tax change possibilities following the election

Great News! Only one more month to go and 2020 will finally be behind us! Turning back the clock one hour in November wasn’t worth the extra sleep, and 2020 even managed to slip in an extra day on us back in February – cruel, cruel, cruel.

Although there is much to say about 2020 with liberal use of four letter  words a big part of it, our purpose here is to look forward at some thoughts and ideas as we look forward to turning the page on 2020. Here we focus on your wealth matters… because your wealth matters. See what we did there? Not bad for CPAs, huh?

Over the past 10 or so years, there have been several significant tax law changes signed into law in mid to late December creating year end planning chaos crammed into a few short days, during the holidays. Lumps of coal for all our “friends” in D.C. This year we won’t have that, it’s worse! The never-ending election still hasn’t ended, and we won’t know the color of the Senate majority until January. Why does this matter?

As it relates to your taxes and wealth, we aren’t 100% certain. There seem to be a few schools of thought, both of which assume President Trump’s multiple legal appeals fall short and Joe Biden becomes President. Note that if President Trump miraculously was successful in the appeals, then most of this letter was mostly a waste of time because nothing will change on the tax front.

School One – The Senate is blue, along with the House and Presidency. Bring on the Green New Deal and more regulations, back in the Iran nuclear deal and Paris accord, higher income taxes, and lower gift and estate tax exemptions, just to name a few.

School Two – The Senate, House, and Presidency are all blue but the moderate Democrats, sleeping with one eye open and knowing the 2022 midterms are just around the  corner, push back against the far left of the party and vote Republicans on major legislation in the name of their own political survival. Don’t even forget it’s not about you, but about politician’s political survival. A case in point: Joe Manchin, Democrat Senator from West Virginia, has already announced he won’t have any part in a Supreme Court packing scheme (his words, not ours). If the Dems do get control of Congress and the White House, it will be by the slimiest of majorities, and not the mandate Nancy Pelosi likes to claim. In fact, if both Georgia Senate seats go blue, it will be a 50-50 tie, with Kamala Harris as the tiebreaking vote.

School Three – At least one of the Georgia Senate seats goes red, Mitch McConnell maintains his leadership position, and he advances to the Senate floor what he wants, albeit with a tad more pressure to compromise than he has faced the past four years. This is what we call gridlock, a dirty word when trying to get home on the 405 on a Friday afternoon. In politics however (and down on Wall St.), gridlock is viewed as a positive by the 70% or so in the middle (center-left to center-right).

So what does all this uncertainty mean to you? With your thumb holding your pinky, hold up your other three fingers on your right hand together – try again, not just the one finger but all three – that’s better, and do as the Boy Scouts do – Be Prepared!

Wagering on Schools Two or Three may very well be a solid bet, which we think are more likely then School One… but be prepared for School One just in case.

Income Taxes

Assuming School One wins out, advice here is trickier than you might think depending on your income. We have a secret shared with some of you over the past two years. The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) was the biggest federal tax overhaul since 1986. That’s not the secret though. The secret is that most of the tax benefits were in fact for the “middle” class (middle in quotes as we have seen taxes go down for those earners up to roughly $800,000, not your classic definition of middle class). Yes, this is true even with the limitations on state tax and property tax deductions. (SALT). Lower tax rates, an overhaul to the good of Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), and a deduction for certain Qualified Business income have all contributed to these lower taxes.

            Although the media and certain politicians have been saying otherwise, the people paying more taxes under the TCJA are those with ordinary income in the seven figure and up range. Why? Without getting into great detail here, those of you in this income neighborhood were previously getting SALT benefit from the deduction. Those below $800,000 weren’t reaping full benefit due to the dreaded AMT. The million plus earners are now capped b y SALT and paying higher total federal income taxes.

Our advice is not one size fits all, but here are general guidelines. We can work with you specifically on your situation.

• If income acceleration or deferral is possible, maximize taxes paid at the 24% income tax bracket (and maybe higher).
• For the seven figure earners, do not pay your fourth quarter 2020 estimate until it is due in January 2021. This is president in the event Biden and company restore the SALT deduction, something Pelosi and Schumer have both been wanting for their high state income tax constituents.

Capital Gains

            Joe Biden has talked about increasing the long term capital gains rate from 20% to a person’s marginal tax rate which is currently as high as 37% (and going higher?? BE PREPARED!) Slap the 3.8% Obamacare tax on there and you are looking at a long term rate of almost 41% (or higher – BE PREPARED!)

            You already have the easy answer to that, right? Sell your long term gains before year end and take “advantage” of the lower rates. Not so fast my friend. Other factors need to be considered:

• Cost opportunity. Assuming California residency and a 11% income tax at the state level, you will pay roughly 35% tax on those gains (24% fed including Obamacare tax and 11% Cal). Paying tax on a $100,000, or $35,000 less working for you.

2020 Filing deadline extended and lingering questions about estimated tax due dates...

Praetorian Advisors Brief Tax Update
Spring 2021

Greetings from Praetorian Advisors!

As you may have heard, the individual tax deadline has been extended for the second straight year, this time to May 17^th (the 15^th is a Saturday so it bumps to Monday).  This means that no remaining tax payments are due for the 2020 tax year until that date as well.  All states except Arizona and New Hampshire have complied with the extended due date.  Given the sheer volume of information and ever-expanding disclosure requirements of the government, we would welcome a permanent due date change to May, but they haven’t asked us yet.

The IRS left the April 15^th due date unchanged for corporations and trusts.  That’s simple enough and reasonable.  What isn’t simple and is unreasonable is the IRS did not change the first quarter due date for estimated taxes, which was kept at April 15^th. 

Originally, the IRS commissioner resisted changing any due dates in spite of the IRS’ 6 month backlog, claiming that extending any due dates would be confusing.  So he agreed to extend some due dates but not others, which is…what’s the word…oh yes, confusing!

We held off sending this update, awaiting further guidance from the IRS on one key issue.  The so-called guidance came out a few days ago and only reiterated what was originally announced, leaving out the answer to the following question:

What if a taxpayer includes Q1 2021 payments in an extension payment not remitted until May 17^th?  Will the overpayment be applied as if made on April 15^th or May 17^th?

This is an obvious question to be answered yet we wait.

As those of you who extend every year know, building a Q1 payment into your extension is standard operating procedure here, as it serves two purposes: 1) it allows you to remit one payment rather than two, and 2) it provides cushion if the extension amount is short of what was needed, and we can make up for it in a subsequent quarter’s payment.

Because of the IRS’ lack of clarity, we will go the “safe” route and provide a Q1 2021 estimate for payment on April 15^th, with the 2020 extension payments happening by May 17^th unless better guidance is announced.  Those of you who do not typically remit estimates can ignore all of this!

In the meantime, we continue to grind away at a busy season pace even with the individual extended due date.  We appreciate you and appreciate your patience as we work through another tax season.

Patti, Paul, and your team at Praetorian Advisors.