Wealth & Risk Management Blog

William Byrnes (Texas A&M) tax & compliance articles

Byrnes & Bloink’s TaxFacts Intelligence Weekly – Actionable Analysis for Financial Advisors

Posted by William Byrnes on November 9, 2019


2020’s Tax Facts Offers a Complete Web, App-Based, and Print Experience

Reducing complicated tax questions to understandable answers that can be immediately put into real-life practice, Tax Facts works when and where you need it….on your desktop, at home on your laptop, and on the go through your tablet or smartphone.  Questions? Contact customer service: TaxFactsHelp@alm.com800-543-0874

Texas A&M University School of Law has launched its International Tax online curriculum for graduate degree candidates. Admissions is open for Spring (January) semester for the transfer pricing courses.  Texas A&M University is a public university of the state of Texas and is ranked 1st among public universities for its superior education at an affordable cost (Fiske, 2018) and ranked 1st of Texas public universities for best value (Money, 2018). 

199A Rental Real Estate Safe Harbor Excludes Certain Businesses

Not all taxpayers will be able to take advantage of the Section 199A safe harbor for rental real estate. While the safe harbor does apply to residential rental real estate, taxpayers are not entitled to rely upon the safe harbor if the taxpayer uses the property as a residence during the tax year. Notably, if the real estate is rented or leased under a triple net lease, the safe harbor remains unavailable under the final rule. When satisfying the “hours of rental real estate services” criteria, only certain activities are counted toward the 250-hour threshold. Activities such as rent collection, advertising the rental, property maintenance, negotiating leases and managing the real property generally count toward the threshold. However, the taxpayer’s activities as an “investor” are not counted. Similarly, if any property within the rental real estate enterprise is classified as a specified service trade or business, the safe harbor is unavailable for the entire business. For more information on the final safe harbor rule, visit Tax Facts Online. Read More

DOL Proposes New Electronic Disclosure Rules for Pension Plans

In response to the Trump administration’s executive order, the DOL has proposed a safe harbor rule that would allow pension plans to satisfy disclosure obligations electronically. As currently proposed, the rule only applies to pension plans. It would allow plan sponsors to email required documents to participants, beneficiaries and any other individuals entitled to receive disclosures–so long as the individual has provided an email address (which can be a work email address). Any documents required under Title I of ERISA could be furnished electronically, including notices of material modification or blackout notices, except for documents that must be furnished upon request. While employers are not yet entitled to rely upon this rule until it is finalized, it provides important insight into potential future developments surrounding pension disclosure obligations. For more information on the requirements that apply to pension plans, visit Tax Facts Online. Read More

District Court Rules Small Business Qualified Retirement Plan Not Exempt in Bankruptcy

While 401(k) funds are generally exempt from a bankruptcy debtor’s estate, a recent district court ruling highlights a situation where a small business owner may lose the exemption. In this case, the taxpayer maintained a pension plan pursuant to a prototype plan document offered by his financial institution that had been approved via an IRS opinion letter, as is commonly the case. The court, however, found that amendments to the prototype plan document rendered the opinion invalid. Further, it found that the plan inappropriately benefitted the taxpayer and his spouse, rather than providing benefits to employees, in violation of IRS nondiscrimination rules. Because of this, the plan was deemed to be disqualified despite the fact that the taxpayer relied upon advisors to manage the plan. Because the taxpayer was owner of the small business responsible for the plan, he was deemed to be materially responsible for the qualification failure, therefore causing the plan assets to lose the typically available bankruptcy exemption. The court noted that this probably wouldn’t have been the case if the taxpayer had been an employee participating in a non-qualified plan. For more information on the treatment of 401(k) assets in bankruptcy, visit Tax Facts Online. Read More

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: