Posts Tagged ‘United States’
Posted by William Byrnes on April 12, 2011
Now more than ever, clients and potential clients are concerned about how they’re going to continue to enjoy the lifestyle they’ve grown accustomed to pre-retirement. Most clients are still looking for the same basic retirement advice from their advisors—advice on how to define and meet their retirement goals.
Following the recent financial crisis, your affluent clients are more likely to gravitate to conservative investment strategies that will preserve their hard-earned principle. But many of them are not clear on the risks of that strategy—they aren’t aware of the opportunities they’re missing.
You can help them reach the retirement they want and find the level of risk appropriate to their long-term goals. Here’s a breakdown of their values and priorities and how you can appeal to them. Read this complete analysis of the impact at AdvisorFX (sign up for a free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
For previous coverage of high net worth investors in Advisor’s Journal, see High Net Worth Clients: How to Find Them, How to Service Them (CC 10-07).
For in-depth analysis of investment planning for affluent clients, see Advisor’s Main Library: Investment Planning.
Posted in Wealth Management | Tagged: Business, Certified Financial Planner, Financial adviser, Financial services, Investing, Investment Advisor, Retirement, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on April 11, 2011
The Obama administration’s 2012 budget includes an attack on corporate owned life insurance that could further erode its tax advantages and put a ding in carriers’ balance sheets. Washington’s repeated assaults on corporate-owned life insurance seem to be motivated by its view of corporate owned life insurance as simply a tax arbitrage opportunity for big corporations, ignoring its importance for smaller businesses that rely on a few key people to keep them afloat. Read this complete analysis of the impact at AdvisorFX (sign up for a free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
For in-depth analysis of corporate-owned life insurance, see Advisor’s Main Library: D—Deductibility Of Business Insurance Premiums, E—Premiums As Taxable Income To The Insured & F—Taxability Of Corporate Owned Life Insurance Proceeds At Death.
Posted in Insurance, Tax Policy | Tagged: Agents and Marketers, Business, Corporate-owned life insurance, Financial services, insurance, life insurance, United States, Washington | 1 Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on April 10, 2011
Why is this Topic Important to Wealth Managers? This topic discusses the Recovery Act spending and its effects on the national economy. It provides wealth managers with indicators and information to help clients better understand the use of government (taxpayer) funds and their allocation as a result of the financial crisis and ensuing financial recovery.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, enacted February 2009,[1] was designed to put Americans back to work and combat the largest downturn in the economy since the Great Depression. Through the Recovery Act, Congress allocated funds in three ways. The single largest part of the Act —more than one-third of it, or $288 billion— was tax cuts. Ninety-five percent of taxpayers have seen taxes go down as a result of the Act. [2]
The second-largest part or $244 billion — just under a third — was direct relief to state governments and individuals. This funding helped state governments avoid laying off teachers, firefighters and police officers and prevented states’ budget gaps from growing wider. On an individual level, the Act ensured those hardest hit by the recession received extended unemployment insurance, health coverage, and food assistance.
The remaining third or $275 billion of the Recovery Act financed the largest investment in roads since the creation of the Interstate Highway system; construction projects at military bases, ports, bridges and tunnels; overdue Superfund cleanups; clean energy projects; improvements in outdated rural water systems; upgrades to overburdened mass transit and rail systems; and much more.
The $787 billion (in total) economic Recovery plan included provisions, in sum, designed to (1) create and save jobs, (2) spur economic activity and invest in long-term economic growth, and (3) foster unprecedented levels of accountability and transparency in government spending.
The Recovery Act was intended to provide a short-term jump start to the economy, but many of the projects funded by Recovery money, especially infrastructure improvements, are expected to benefit economic growth for many years. Thus, the Recovery Act’s longer-term economic investment goals include:
- Initiating a process to computerize health records to reduce medical errors and save on health-care costs
- Investing in the domestic renewable energy industry
- Weatherizing 75 percent of federal buildings and more than one million homes
- Increasing college affordability for seven million students by funding a shortfall in Pell Grants, raising the maximum grant level by $500, and providing a higher education tax cut to nearly four million students
- Cutting taxes for 129 million working households by providing an $800 “Making Work Pay” tax credit
- Expanding the Child Tax Credit [3]
Has the Recovery Act worked? Read the analysis at AdvisorFYI
Posted in Tax Policy | Tagged: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Economic, economic growth, Great Depression, Investment, Pell Grant, Private sector, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on April 7, 2011
Why is this Topic Important to Wealth Managers? This topic discusses proposed legislation that would change defined contribution retirement reporting for plan sponsors. The new legislation would require additional information to be disclosed to consumers. Thus, wealth managers that are prepared with the most recent and relevant information with regards to retirement planning are better prepared to work with clients in defined contribution situations.
Senior members of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, including U.S. House of Representatives Rush Holt (NJ) and Tom Petri (WI), recently introduced legislation which is designed to help ensure that Americans have saved enough for their full retirement.
The introducers of the bill note that many American workers have become increasingly responsible for saving for and managing their retirement investments through 401(k) plans. However, the contention is that many Americans are not saving enough, and they are unsure how quickly to draw down their savings in their retirement years.
To that end, the Lifetime Income Disclosure Act [1] would require 401(k) plan sponsors to inform participating workers of the projected monthly income they could expect at retirement based on their current account balance. The measure is patterned on the Social Security Administration’s annual statements, which are mailed annually to working Americans to inform them of estimated monthly benefits based on their current earnings. Congress mandated annual Social Security statements in 1989, and the government claims they have proven to be very useful to workers in preparing for retirement.
“We should do everything we can to help Americans save for retirement. Our bipartisan bill is a common sense approach to providing Americans with the tools and information they need to plan for a secure retirement future,” Rep. Holt said. The idea behind the legislation is that by providing similar information for 401(k) plans, the Lifetime Income Disclosure Act would give American workers a more complete snapshot of their projected income in retirement.
Specifically, under the legislation, defined contribution plans subject to ERISA – including 401(k) plans – would be required annually to inform participants of how the account balance would translate into a monthly income stream based on age at retirement and other factors. “As retirement plans shift increasingly toward a defined contribution basis, individuals have a greater responsibility to ensure that they are providing adequately for their retirement,” Rep. Petri said. “The information called for in the Lifetime Income Disclosure Act will serve as a scorecard showing savers their progress toward reaching this critical financial goal.”
To help ensure there is no material burden or potential liability on employers who voluntarily sponsor 401(k) plans, the legislation directs the Department of Labor to issue tables that employers may use in calculating an annuity equivalent, as well as a model disclosure. Employers and service providers using the model disclosure and following the prescribed assumptions and DOL rules would be insulated from liability.
“Half of American households will lack sufficient retirement income to maintain their pre-retirement standard of living, but many are unaware of their vulnerability. Our bill will empower Americans to determine whether they are on a path to a secure retirement,” said Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM). “This is the kind of common-sense, employer-friendly bill that deserves priority consideration.”
Such information in the hand of the consumer may lead to more retirement planning opportunities for wealth managers as the consumer seeks to “top up” for retirement. If enacted, this bill may lead to a big boost for such retirement savings as Individual Retirement Accounts, and for the corresponding asset management for institutions.
Senators Bingaman, Johnny Isakson (R-GA), and Herb Kohl (D-WI) previously introduced the legislation in the Senate, and Rep. Ron Kind (WI) and David Reichert (WA) are cosponsors of the bill.
Tomorrow’s blogticle will continue to discuss new and exciting planning aspects of 2011.
We invite your opinions and comments by posting them below, or by calling the Panel of Experts
Posted in Retirement Planning | Tagged: 401(k), Herb Kohl, Individual Retirement Account, Johnny Isakson, Pension, Tom Petri, United States, United States House Committee on Education and the Workforce | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on April 6, 2011
Taxpayers with assets hidden in offshore accounts will get a second chance to voluntarily declare their assets to the IRS in return for reduced penalties under the new Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative (“OVDI”).
This newest offshore amnesty program offers a reduced, 25% penalty which will be calculated based on the highest aggregate amount in the taxpayer’s offshore account between 2003 and 2010. In addition to penalties, program participants will be required to pay eight years of back taxes plus interest, accuracy related penalties, and delinquency penalties. Read this complete analysis of the impact at AdvisorFX (sign up for a free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
For previous coverage of offshore issues in Advisor’s Journal, see IRS Planning New Voluntary Disclosure Program for Offshore Assets (CC 10-118), Offshore’s Limited Shelf Life (CC 10-47) & IRS Proposed FATCA Guidance Expands Offshore Compliance Initiatives (CC 10-52)
Posted in Compliance, Tax Policy | Tagged: Douglas Shulman, Internal Revenue Service, IRS, Offshore bank, Switzerland, tax, UBS, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on April 5, 2011
Why is this Topic Important to Wealth Managers? This topic discusses the evaluation report of the financial crisis issued by a Congressionally appointed body. The report presents discussion of events and causes leading up to the ordeal, as well as indications and factors which presented its forthcoming. The discussion is aimed to allow wealth managers to intelligently discuss some causes of the financial crisis with clients and colleagues.
There was a new report issued earlier this year by the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, which was created to “examine the causes of the current financial and economic crisis in the United States.” [1] In this report, the Commission presents to the President, the Congress, and the general public the results of its examination and its conclusions as to the causes of the crisis.
The Commission was established as part of the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act passed by Congress and signed by the President in May 2009. [2] The independent panel was selected by Congress and composed of private citizens with experience in areas such as housing, economics, insurance, market regulation, banking, and consumer protection.
The report is intended to provide a historical accounting of what brought our financial system and economy to a precipice and to help policy makers and the public better understand how this calamity came to be.
Below are some of the findings issued in the report: Read the analysis at AdvisorFYI
Posted in Compliance | Tagged: Finance, Financial crisis, Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, Government, Policy, United States, United States Congress, Wall Street | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on April 4, 2011
Last month, we discussed the obvious relevance of pricing competitiveness to overall life insurance product suitability. This month, we discuss the stability of pricing representations which is also a factor of suitability. After all, pricing that appears competitive at the time of sale/purchase but which cannot be maintained can be worse than a less-competitive product with more stable pricing representations.
For instance, while premiums are often considered the price/cost of a life insurance policy, the premium is not the price/cost of a life insurance policy (unless contractually guaranteed like in term life insurance or guaranteed universal life insurance) any more than the $2,000 contributed to an Individual Retirement Account (IRA) is the cost of the IRA. In both cases, the cost is the sum of what is deducted from the premium/contribution. Read this complete analysis of the impact at AdvisorFX (sign up for a free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
For previous coverage of suitability in Advisor’s Journal, see Life Insurance Product Suitability (CC 10-90), Financial Strength and Claims-Paying Ability (CC 10-115) & Cost Competitiveness of Life Insurance (CC 11-11).
Posted in Insurance | Tagged: Business, Financial services, insurance, Insurance policy, life insurance, Pricing, term life insurance, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on April 3, 2011
Why is this Topic Important to Wealth Managers? This topic discusses the new regulatory agency that will have an effect on most life insurance companies doing business in New York. Because the new regulatory agency will oversee insurance and banking, it is likely that changes in the insurance compliance law are just around the corner. After the financial crisis of 2008, it appears New York is taking action to prevent future disruptions in the market. Wealth managers should be aware of the new agency as changes to insurance regulation and compliance are sure to result from the creation of this organization.
New York State is in the process of creating a new Department of Financial Regulation (DFR) which is designed to harnesses the regulatory powers and expertise of the Banking and Insurance Departments, as well as the Consumer Protection Board, by combining the functions of each, to make the State’s oversight of financial services responsive to the 21st century needs of the industry and its consumers.
This new State agency, created pursuant to legislation submitted as part of the 2011-2012 State Executive Budget, consolidates the functions, operations and staff of the Banking and Insurance Departments, along with related segments of the Consumer Protection Board, into a single State agency.
Consolidation of these agencies and activities within a single agency platform is intended to afford the State the ability to unify the State’s regulation of financial services and to more rapidly and capably respond to changing market practices and consumer preferences, thereby ensuring the industry’s continued integrity while shielding consumers from abuses.
In addition to enhancing and refining the State’s regulatory oversight of the industry, the consolidation will provide the State with the opportunity to reduce overall spending with the use of shared services.
The Superintendent of the Department of Financial Regulation will be appointed by the Governor, with the consent of the Senate. The Department’s main offices will be located in Albany and New York City.
The Department’s main responsibilities will be carried out through two major programs: regulation and consumer protection. Read the analysis at AdvisorFYI
Posted in Compliance, Insurance | Tagged: Consumer protection, Financial services, Government agency, insurance, New York, New York State, Regulation, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on April 1, 2011
Why is this Topic Important to Wealth Managers? This topic discusses the potential consequences of not playing by the rules; it is important to constantly keep in mind the balance between providing the most efficient and effective services to clients and crossing the line into illegal territory. Clients may not realize the harsh penalties associated with offshore activity, and although when performed by expert planners under the proper circumstances, that some offshore transactions may be legal and beneficial, it is the job of informed wealth managers to keep clients abreast of information that is useful in making long-term financial decisions.
Four bankers at an international bank incorporated and with its headquarters in Zurich, Switzerland, with offices worldwide, including New York City and Miami, were indicted by a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia and charged with conspiring with other Swiss bankers to defraud the United States, the Justice Department and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) announced Wednesday.
According to the indictment, the international bank’s managers and bankers engaged in illegal cross-border banking that was designed to assist U.S. customers evade their income taxes by opening and maintaining secret bank accounts at the bank and other Swiss banks. As of the fall of 2008, the international bank maintained thousands of secret accounts for customers in the United States with as much as $3 billion in total assets under management in those accounts.
The Justice Department announced the scheme dates back to 1953 and involved two generations of U.S. tax evaders including U.S. customers who inherited secret accounts at the international bank.
The indictment asserts that four foreign individuals, members of senior management, bankers and others assisted U.S. taxpayers in evading their U.S. taxes through the use of secret bank accounts in Switzerland.
According to the indictment, the defendants and their co-conspirators solicited U.S. customers to open secret accounts because Swiss bank secrecy would permit them to conceal from the IRS their ownership of accounts at the bank and other Swiss banks. It is further alleged that they provided unlicensed and unregistered banking services and investment advice to customers in the United States in person while on travel to here, including at the international bank’s representative office in New York City and by mailings, e-mail and telephone calls to and from the United States.
Read the analysis at AdvisorFYI
Posted in Compliance, Money Laundering | Tagged: Banking in Switzerland, Internal Revenue Service, New York City, Switzerland, UBS, United States, United States Department of Justice, Zurich | 2 Comments »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 30, 2011
Why is this Topic Important to Wealth Managers? This topic presents discussion on the individual and nonbusiness deductions offered under the Internal Revenue Code. Since April 15th is fast approaching, it is important to review common tax positions with regards to client planning.
In addition this blogticle presents a excerpted preview of new, updated material from Advanced Markets which will be available soon (see www.advisorfx.com). Over the coming 9 months, the entire AUS service is being revised and will be rolling out monthly. The updating will include many new areas and a sharper focus with practical explanations and client presentation aides for current areas. We look forward to helping you secure your next sale.
An expense of an individual may be business, nonbusiness, or personal, depending upon which of the individual’s spheres of activity gave rise to the expense. This Blogticle discusses personal and nonbusiness expenses generally.
Personal Expenses
Personal expenses are all expenses incurred by an individual that are not business or nonbusiness expenses. These would include, for example, food and clothing for the individual and his family, repairs on the family home, and premiums paid on the individual’s personal life insurance. Generally, no deduction is permitted for personal expenses.[1] By specific statutory provision, however, deductions are allowed for some personal expenses, such as certain personal taxes, a limited amount of charitable contributions, medical expenses, certain interest on a principal residence, and alimony.
Most deductible personal expenses are “itemized deductions” and thus may be taken only if the taxpayer chooses to itemize his deductions instead of claiming the standard deduction.
Nonbusiness Expenses
A nonbusiness expense is generally an investment expense incurred in connection with the production of income, other than a trade, business or profession. Expenses of this type would include, for example, fees for tax or investment advice, and the cost of a safe deposit box used to store taxable securities. The deduction of nonbusiness expenses is governed by Code section 212. Specifically, Section 212 allows a deduction for expenses incurred in connection with: (1) the production or collection of income; (2) the management, conservation, or maintenance of property held for production of income; or (3) the determination, collection or refund of any tax.
The deductibility of nonbusiness expenses may be limited or deferred if they arise in connection with a “passive activity” or are interest expenses. Very generally, a “passive activity” is any activity which involves the conduct of a trade or business in which the taxpayer does not “materially participate.” [2] A passive activity also includes any rental activity, without regard to whether the taxpayer materially participates in the activity. Special rules apply to rental real estate activities. Aggregate losses from “passive activities” may generally be deducted in a year only to the extent they do not exceed aggregate income from passive activities in that year; credits from passive activities may be taken only against tax liability allocated to passive activities. Disallowed losses and credits may be carried over to offset passive income in later years. [3]
Once other limitations have been applied to the deductibility of nonbusiness expenses (e.g., the passive loss rule), they are generally deductible only to the extent that the aggregate of these and other “miscellaneous itemized deductions” exceeds 2% of adjusted gross income. “Miscellaneous itemized deductions” are deductions from adjusted gross income other than deductions for (1) interest, (2) taxes, (3) non-business casualty losses and gambling losses, (4) charitable contributions (including charitable remainder interests), (5) medical and dental expenses, (6) impairment-related work expenses for handicapped employees, (7) estate taxes on income in respect of a decedent, (8) certain short sale expenses, (9) certain adjustments under the Code’s claim of right provisions, (10) unrecovered investment in an annuity contract, (11) amortizable bond premium, and (12) certain expenses of cooperative housing corporations. [4]
A nonbusiness expense must also be “ordinary and necessary” to be deductible. [5] It must, therefore, be reasonable in amount and must bear a reasonable and proximate relation to (a) the production or collection of taxable income, or (b) the management, conservation, or maintenance of property held for the production of income. [6]
Tomorrow’s blogticle will discuss important planning aspects of 2011.
We invite your opinions and comments by posting them below, or by calling the Panel of Experts
Posted in Taxation | Tagged: accounting, Adjusted Gross Income, Business, Expense, Itemized deduction, tax, Tax deduction, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 29, 2011
Why is this Topic Important to Wealth Managers? This topic presents a discussion on information reporting regarding nonresident aliens and domestic interest income. Because some wealth managers work with international clients, or a family in which at least one family member like a spouse or child is foreign, it is helpful to discuss the new proposed reporting requirements as issued by the Department of the Treasury. Having a better understanding of the reported information that will end up in the hands of the IRS will hopefully help wealth managers focus on compliance, as well as wealth preservation and growth.
The Internal Revenue Service recently released new proposed regulations regarding reporting interest payments made to nonresident aliens. A nonresident alien is an individual who is neither a citizen of the United States nor a resident of the United States.[1] We will discuss in a later blogticle this week about how to determine if someone is either a US taxpayer or instead is a non-resident alien (not a US taxpayer).
The new proposed rules require the payor to make an information return on Form 1042-S, “Foreign Person’s U.S. Source Income Subject to Withholding” on interest payments aggregating $10 or more each year paid to a nonresident alien, that is otherwise reportable on a Form 1099 (interest income). [2]
The payor shall generally prepare and file Form 1042-S at the time and in the manner prescribed by the code and the regulations, for the calendar year in which the interest is paid. [3]
The IRS and Treasury Department first published, in 2001, a notice of proposed rulemaking which provided that U.S. bank deposit interest paid to any nonresident alien individual must be reported annually to the IRS. [4] Then in 2002, the Treasury Department and the IRS withdrew these regulations and proposed narrower regulations that would require reporting only on interest payments to nonresident alien individuals that are residents of certain designated countries or, at the option of the payor, on interest payments to all nonresident alien recipients of bank deposit interest. [5]
Under regulations currently in effect, reporting of U.S. bank deposit interest is required only if the interest is paid to a U.S. person or a nonresident alien individual who is a resident of Canada. [6]
The newest proposed regulations published this month withdraw previous regulations and provide proposed regulations that extend the information reporting requirement to include bank deposit interest paid to nonresident alien individuals who are residents of any foreign country.
The Treasury Department notes this extension is appropriate for several reasons: Read the analysis at AdvisorFYI
Posted in Tax Policy | Tagged: Alien (law), Deposit account, Internal Revenue Service, IRS tax forms, Regulation, Report, Treasury Department, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 27, 2011
Why is this Topic Important to Wealth Managers? A wealth manager should be able to present Advanced Market Intelligence on the long-term economic impact of government spending and its ability to raise revenues with clients.
The United States faces daunting economic and budgetary challenges. The economy has struggled to recover from the recent recession, which was triggered by a large decline in house prices and a financial crisis—events unlike anything this country has seen since the Great Depression.
For the federal government, the sharply lower revenues and elevated spending deriving from the financial turmoil and severe drop in economic activity—combined with the costs of various policies implemented in response to those conditions and an imbalance between revenues and spending that predated the recession—have caused budget deficits to surge in the past two years. The deficits of $1.4 trillion in 2009 and $1.3 trillion in 2010 are, when measured as a share of gross domestic product (GDP), the largest since 1945—representing 10.0 percent and 8.9 percent of the nation’s output, respectively. [1]
Also, the recovery in employment has been slowed not only by the moderate growth in output in the past year and a half but also by structural changes in the labor market, such as a mismatch between the requirements of available jobs and the skills of job seekers, that have hindered the employment of workers who have lost their job. Payroll employment, which declined by 7.3 million during the recent recession, gained a mere 70,000 jobs (or 0.06 percent), on net, between June 2009 and December 2010. [2]
However, under current law, CBO projects, budget deficits will drop markedly over the next few years—to $1.1 trillion in 2012, $704 billion in 2013, and $533 billion in 2014. Relative to the size of the economy, those deficits represent 7.0 percent of GDP in 2012, 4.3 percent in 2013, and 3.1 percent in 2014. From 2015 through 2021, the deficits in the baseline projections range from 2.9 percent to 3.4 percent of GDP. [3]
Nevertheless, the deficits that will accumulate under current law will push federal debt held by the public to significantly higher levels. Just two years ago, debt held by the public was less than $6 trillion, or about 40 percent of GDP; at the end of fiscal year 2010, such debt was roughly $9 trillion, or 62 percent of GDP, and by the end of 2021, it is projected to climb to $18 trillion, or 77 percent of GDP. [4] Read the analysis at AdvisorFYI
Posted in Tax Policy | Tagged: China, Congressional Budget Office, Deficit, Employment, Government spending, Great Depression, Gross domestic product, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 24, 2011
In a recent case, the IRS denied an estate a fractional interest discount on the family ranch, resulting in a seven digit tax bill and the likely liquidation of the family homestead. The father had numerous options for securing a valuation discount on, or excluding the value of, a significant tract of property from his gross estate, but hadn’t done any planning since 1965, resulting in total denial of a discount. When he died in 2004, the property was worth $6,390,000. Don’t let this be your client.
The dispute between the IRS and the father’s estate centered on whether the property’s value in the gross estate was: (1) the undiscounted value of a fee simple interest in the property or (2) the aggregated value of the children’s fractional interests in the property—valued separately with fractional interest discounts. Read this complete analysis of the impact at AdvisorFX (sign up for a free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
For previous coverage of valuation discounts in Advisor’s Journal, see IRS Rebuffed by Federal Court of Appeals in Valuation Discount Case (CC 11-21) and Valuation Discounts: Only for a Bona Fide Business (CC 10-60).
For in-depth analysis of valuation discounts, see Advisor’s Main Library: A—Family Limited Partnerships and Estate & Gift Tax Valuation Discounting.
Posted in Estate Tax | Tagged: Business, Internal Revenue Service, IRS, law, Property, TurboTax, United States, Valuation (finance) | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 22, 2011
Tax and insurance advisors looking for answers on how the new Tax Relief Act of 2010 will impact their clients are finding them in The National Underwriter Company’s just-published Selected Provisions and Analysis of the Tax Relief Act of 2010. The proprietary analysis is the only practitioners’ guide in Q&A format that answers the most critical questions asked by clients on insurance, estate and gift tax law changes.
Copies of the 64-page report are available for only $12.95 plus shipping and handling here. Producers and their companies can also license use of their logos and contact information directly on the cover of the guide for a marketing and client-management tool.
National Underwriter’s wealth management experts and report authors, Professor William H. Byrnes, Esq., LL.M, CWM and Robert Bloink, Esq., LL.M., noted, “While most media attention has focused on the Act’s retention of existing tax rates on the highest-earning Americans, tax, insurance and investment advisors are finding that the most important changes, from their perspective, are likely to be found in insurance, estate and gift tax provisions that will drive client decisions on investment strategy and wealth management priorities in 2011 and beyond.”
Rick Kravitz, Vice President & Managing Director of Summit Business Media’s Reference Division, said, “This proprietary analysis – compiled by leading experts in the field – demonstrates National Underwriter’s commitment to bringing timely and critical updates to advisors and financial planners so that they can successfully build their practices and better serve their clients.”
Prof. Byrnes, a former Coopers & Lybrand associate director in international tax and now Dean of the wealth management graduate program at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, noted that the 64-page analysis has answers to more than 100 important questions in these areas:
- Income Tax
- Estate and Gift Tax
- Generation Skipping Transfer Tax
- Deduction for State and Local Sales Taxes
- Alternative Minimum Tax
- Tax Credits
- Payroll Tax Holiday
- Wage Credit for Employees Who Are Active Duty Members of the Military
- Charitable Distributions from Retirement Accounts
- Bonus Depreciation and Section 179 Expensing
- Basis Reporting Requirements for Brokers and Mutual Funds
- Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010
- Health Care Act
- Form 1099 Reporting Requirement for Businesses
- American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010
- Requirements for Tax Return Preparers
“This is the only guide available on the market today that gives financial planners and producers issue-specific, time-critical information in Q&A format that addresses their most important technical questions with content that can also be used directly in client presentations,” Prof. Byrnes added. “The unique combination of The National Underwriter Company’s editorial staff and the resources and professional experience of the wealth management faculty at Thomas Jefferson School of Law provides assurance that these are answers that can be counted on.”
About The National Underwriter Company
For over 110 years, The National Underwriter Company has been the first in line with the targeted tax, insurance, and financial planning information you need to make critical business decisions. With respected resources available in print, on CD, and online, National Underwriter remains at the forefront of the evolving insurance industry, delivering the thorough and easy-to-use resources you rely on for success. National Underwriter is a Summit Business Media company.
About Summit Business Media
Summit Business Media is the leading B2B media and information company serving the insurance, investment advisory, professional services and mining investment markets through a variety of channels, including print, online and live events. Summit provides breaking news and analysis, in-depth practice management strategies, business-building techniques and actionable data to the markets it serves. Through its Media and Reference Divisions, Summit publishes 16 magazines, 20 websites and 150 reference titles. Summit’s Event Division hosts a dozen conferences across the spectrum of markets the company services. Summit’s Data Division is the leading data provider of financial, marketing and benefits information on corporations, insurance companies and life, benefits and property-casualty agents.
Summit employs nearly 400 employees in ten offices across the United States. For more information, please visitsummitbusinessmedia.com.
Posted in Taxation | Tagged: Employment, income tax, insurance, Summit Business Media, Tax credit, Tax law, Thomas Jefferson School of Law, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 22, 2011
Why is this Topic Important to Wealth Managers? Clients will often ask for your “take” on the annual federal budget. It is important to show the client a command of the the facts and figures before addressing the political perspective of spending and revenue. Any producer can “mime” someone else’s perspective. Distinguish yourself with a command of the underlying numbers. Thus, this week Advanced Market Intelligence presents the facts and figures of the proposed federal budget for fiscal year 2012.
The new 2012 Federal Budget was released by the President. Below is a summary of the inflows and outflows concerning next year’s proposed budget (in billions of dollars).
Outlays:
Appropriated (“discretionary”) programs: Security $ 884/Non-security 456; Subtotal—appropriated programs: 1,340
Mandatory programs: Social Security $ 761, Medicare 485, Medicaid 269, Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) 13, Other mandatory programs 612; Subtotal, mandatory programs 2,140, Net interest 242, Disaster costs 8
Total outlays 3,819
Receipts:
Individual income taxes $ 1,141, Corporation income taxes 329
Social insurance and retirement receipts: Social Security payroll taxes 659,Medicare payroll taxes 201, Unemployment insurance 57, Other retirement 8, Excise taxes 103, Estate and gift taxes 14, Customs duties 30, Deposits of earnings, Federal Reserve System 66, Other miscellaneous receipts 20
Total receipts 2,627
2012 Deficit $ 1,101
Here are some noted observations of the current budget: Read the analysis at AdvisorFYI
Posted in Tax Policy | Tagged: Barack Obama, Congressional Budget Office, Federal Reserve System, Medicare, Social Security, United States, United States Congress, United States federal budget | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 19, 2011
You’d better think twice before agreeing to act as trustee for your clients’ trusts, since doing so can cost you far more than the goodwill and fees it generates.
We all know that, depending on the circumstances, a trust, its grantor, or its beneficiaries can be held responsible for tax liability stemming from trust income.
What about its trustee?
Although trustees are not usually personally responsible for a trust’s taxes, a trustee can be stuck with the tax bill if the trustee breaches his or her fiduciary duty to the beneficiaries. A U.S. District Court recently considered a trustee’s liability for GST taxes when the trust’s beneficiaries claimed that the trustee failed to keep them informed of their potential liability for taxes stemming from trust distributions.
The trustees’ mistake in this case could cost them over $1 million. Read the full analysis by linking to AdvisorFX!
Posted in Trusts | Tagged: accounting, Beneficiary, Fiduciary, tax, Taxation, Trust law, Trustee, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 18, 2011
Dates: Video-conference course starting March 28 ending 10 weeks later in late May
Medium – Wimba live lectured webcam video-conference and LexisNexis blackboard course-ware
Enrollment Contact: Associate Dean William H. Byrnes – wbyrnes@tjsl.edu
or call +1 (619) 961-4211
includes access to full online international tax library of databases such as IBFD, CCH, Checkpoint, RoyaltyStat, EdgarStat, LexisNexis, Westlaw, amongst many others.
Lead Professor: Dr. Daan Ribbens (see professors link)
Posted in Courses | Tagged: Above the Law (blog), Advertising, American Express, LexisNexis, United States, Videoconferencing, Westlaw, WIMBA | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 17, 2011
The Internal Revenue Service announced earlier this week a special voluntary disclosure initiative (the second one of its kind in the past few years). The Internal Revenue Service states the program is designed to bring offshore money back into the U.S. tax system and assist individuals that may have undisclosed income from hidden offshore accounts to pay taxes owed. The new voluntary disclosure initiative will be available through Aug. 31, 2011.
The IRS decision to open a second special disclosure initiative follows continuing interest from taxpayers with foreign accounts. According to the IRS, the first special voluntary disclosure program finished with 15,000 voluntary disclosures on Oct. 15, 2009. Since that time, the Service notes, more than 3,000 taxpayers have come forward to the IRS with bank accounts from around the world.
The new initiative is being called the 2011 Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative, which includes several changes from the 2009 Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program. The overall penalty structure for 2011 is higher, meaning that people who did not come in through the 2009 voluntary disclosure program will not be rewarded for waiting. However, the 2011 initiative does have additional features.
For the 2011 initiative, there is a new penalty framework that requires individuals to pay a penalty of 25 percent of the amount in the foreign bank accounts in the year with the highest aggregate account balance covering the 2003 to 2010 time period. However, some taxpayers will be eligible for lower 5 or 12.5 percent penalties. Participants also must pay back-taxes and interest for up to eight years as well as paying accuracy-related and/or delinquency penalties.
Read the analysis at AdvisorFYI
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Bank, Bank account, Douglas Shulman, Internal Revenue Service, Offshore bank, tax, UBS, United States | 1 Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 17, 2011
Dates: Video-conference course starting March 28 ending 10 weeks later in late May
Medium – Wimba live lectured webcam video-conference and LexisNexis blackboard course-ware
Enrollment Contact: Associate Dean William H. Byrnes – wbyrnes@tjsl.edu
or call +1 (619) 961-4211
includes access to full online international tax library of databases such as IBFD, CCH, Checkpoint, RoyaltyStat, EdgarStat, LexisNexis, Westlaw, amongst many others.
Lead Professor: Dr. Robert J. Munro with guest instructor Joel DiCiccio (see professors link)
Posted in Courses | Tagged: Business, LexisNexis, Library, Thomson Reuters, United States, Videoconferencing, Westlaw, WIMBA | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 16, 2011
Dates: Video-conference course starting March 28 ending 10 weeks later in late May
Medium – Wimba live lectured webcam video-conference and LexisNexis blackboard course-ware
Enrollment Contact: Associate Dean William H. Byrnes – wbyrnes@tjsl.edu
or call +1 (619) 961-4211
includes access to full online international tax library of databases such as IBFD, CCH, Checkpoint, RoyaltyStat, EdgarStat, LexisNexis, Westlaw, amongst many others.
Lead Professor: Stephen Polak with guest instructor Joel DiCiccio (see professors link)
Posted in Courses | Tagged: Certified Fraud Examiner, Erik Engstrom, LexisNexis, Reed Elsevier, United States, Videoconferencing, Westlaw, WIMBA | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 15, 2011
Dates: Video-conference course starting March 28 ending 10 weeks later in late May
Medium – Wimba live lectured webcam video-conference and LexisNexis blackboard course-ware
Enrollment Contact: Associate Dean William H. Byrnes – wbyrnes@tjsl.edu
or call +1 (619) 961-4211
includes access to full online international tax library of databases such as IBFD, CCH, Checkpoint, RoyaltyStat, EdgarStat, LexisNexis, Westlaw, amongst many others.
Approved for Certified Fraud Examiner (CFE) – Lead Professor: Stephen Polak (see professors link)
Posted in Courses | Tagged: Advertising, Business, LexisNexis, risk management, United States, University of Valencia, Westlaw, WIMBA | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 14, 2011
Is a state law trust that is established as an investment trust to hold interests in an LLC, which has the power to vary its investments, classified as an investment trust?
Example:
LLC is organized under the laws of State as a limited liability company and is treated as a partnership for federal tax purposes. LLC will acquire, hold and manage a portfolio of investments. The governing document of LLC permits the managers of LLC to sell assets in the portfolio and acquire new assets.
LLC will issue two classes of interests: common interests and manager interests. Holders of common interests and holders of manager interests have different rights to the income, deductions, credits, losses, and distributions of LLC. Manager interests will be held by a select group of investors who are also responsible for managing LLC. The common interests of LLC will be held by Trust.
Trust is organized under the laws of State as a trust. The governing documents for Trust provide that Trust is only permitted to hold common interests in LLC. Trust will issue trust certificates and each certificate will entitle the holder to all the income, gain, profit, deductions, credits, losses, and distributions associated with one common interest in LLC. The governing documents for Trust indicate that Trust is a trust for federal tax purposes.
First, the Treasury Regulations provide that a “business entity” is an entity recognized for federal tax purposes that is not properly classified as a trust under or otherwise subject to special treatment under the Code. [1]
In addition, an arrangement will be treated as a trust if it can be shown that the purpose of the arrangement is to vest in trustees responsibility for the protection and conservation of property for beneficiaries who cannot share in the discharge of this responsibility and, therefore, are not associates in a joint enterprise for the conduct of business for profit. [2]
There are arrangements that are known as trusts because legal title to property is conveyed to trustees for the benefit of beneficiaries, but which are not classified as trusts for purposes of the Code because they are not simply arrangements to protect or conserve the property for the beneficiaries. These trusts, which are often known as business or commercial trusts, generally are created by the beneficiaries simply as a device to carry on a profit making business which normally would have been carried on through business organizations that are classified as corporations or partnerships (business entities) under the Code. [3]
Moreover, an “investment” trust will not be classified as a trust if there is a power under the trust agreement to vary the investments of the certificate holders. [4] An investment trust with a single class of ownership interests, representing undivided beneficial interests in the assets of the trust, will be classified as a trust if there is no power to vary the investments of the certificate holders.
The essential nature of an arrangement, whatever its form, as shown by the objects attained and the manner of their attainment, is what controls the classification of the arrangement as a trust.[5] In determining the character of an arrangement, the managerial powers of all parties to an arrangement will be combined in order to arrive at the full amount of permitted managerial activity and its object. [6]
Going back to our example, to determine whether Trust is an investment trust for tax purposes, it is appropriate to consider the nature and purpose of Trust. Trust is holding the interests in LLC for the purpose of providing investors with the benefits of the managed investments of LLC. These investment activities would result in Trust failing to be classified as a trust if Trust were permitted to engage in those activities directly. Because the nature and purpose of Trust under this arrangement is to vary the investments of the certificate holders, Trust is likely a business entity for federal tax purposes and not an investment trust.
Restated, a state law trust that is established as an investment trust to hold interests in an LLC partnership, that has the power to vary its investments, is generally not classified as a trust for federal tax purposes.
Tomorrow’s blogticle will discuss relevant topics to wealth managers in 2011.
We invite your opinions and comments by posting them below, or by calling the Panel of Experts.
[1] Treasury Regulations § 301.7701-2(a).
[2] Treasury Regulations § 301.7701-4(a).
[3] Treasury Regulations § 301.7701-4(b).
[4] Treasury Regulations § 301.7701-4(c); See also Comm’r v. North American Bond Trust, 122 F.2d 545 (2d Cir. 1941), cert. denied, 314 U.S. 701 (1942).
[5] Morrissey v. Comm’r, 296 U.S. 344 (1935).
[6] See Comm’r v. Chase Nat’l Bank, 122 F. 2d 540 (2d Cir. 1941).
Posted in Wealth Management | Tagged: Business, Investment, Investment trust, law, Limited liability company, Morrissey, Treasury Regulations, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 14, 2011
Tax and insurance advisors looking for answers on how the new Tax Relief Act of 2010 will impact their clients are finding them in The National Underwriter Company’s just-published Selected Provisions and Analysis of the Tax Relief Act of 2010. The proprietary analysis is the only practitioners’ guide in Q&A format that answers the most critical questions asked by clients on insurance, estate and gift tax law changes.
Copies of the 64-page book are available for only $12.95 plus shipping and handling here. Producers and their companies can also license use of their logos and contact information directly on the cover of the guide for a marketing and client-management tool.
National Underwriter’s wealth management experts and report authors, Professor William H. Byrnes, Esq., LL.M, CWM and Robert Bloink, Esq., LL.M., noted, “While most media attention has focused on the Act’s retention of existing tax rates on the highest-earning Americans, tax, insurance and investment advisors are finding that the most important changes, from their perspective, are likely to be found in insurance, estate and gift tax provisions that will drive client decisions on investment strategy and wealth management priorities in 2011 and beyond.”
Rick Kravitz, Vice President & Managing Director of Summit Business Media’s Reference Division, said, “This proprietary analysis – compiled by leading experts in the field – demonstrates National Underwriter’s commitment to bringing timely and critical updates to advisors and financial planners so that they can successfully build their practices and better serve their clients.”
Prof. Byrnes, a former Coopers & Lybrand associate director in international tax and now Dean of the wealth management graduate program at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, noted that the 64-page analysis has answers to more than 100 important questions in these areas:
- Income Tax
- Estate and Gift Tax
- Generation Skipping Transfer Tax
- Deduction for State and Local Sales Taxes
- Alternative Minimum Tax
- Tax Credits
- Payroll Tax Holiday
- Wage Credit for Employees Who Are Active Duty Members of the Military
- Charitable Distributions from Retirement Accounts
- Bonus Depreciation and Section 179 Expensing
- Basis Reporting Requirements for Brokers and Mutual Funds
- Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010
- Health Care Act
- Form 1099 Reporting Requirement for Businesses
- American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010
- Requirements for Tax Return Preparers
“This is the only guide available on the market today that gives financial planners and producers issue-specific, time-critical information in Q&A format that addresses their most important technical questions with content that can also be used directly in client presentations,” Prof. Byrnes added. “The unique combination of The National Underwriter Company’s editorial staff and the resources and professional experience of the wealth management faculty at Thomas Jefferson School of Law provides assurance that these are answers that can be counted on.”
About The National Underwriter Company
For over 110 years, The National Underwriter Company has been the first in line with the targeted tax, insurance, and financial planning information you need to make critical business decisions. With respected resources available in print, on CD, and online, National Underwriter remains at the forefront of the evolving insurance industry, delivering the thorough and easy-to-use resources you rely on for success. National Underwriter is a Summit Business Media company.
About Summit Business Media
Summit Business Media is the leading B2B media and information company serving the insurance, investment advisory, professional services and mining investment markets through a variety of channels, including print, online and live events. Summit provides breaking news and analysis, in-depth practice management strategies, business-building techniques and actionable data to the markets it serves. Through its Media and Reference Divisions, Summit publishes 16 magazines, 20 websites and 150 reference titles. Summit’s Event Division hosts a dozen conferences across the spectrum of markets the company services. Summit’s Data Division is the leading data provider of financial, marketing and benefits information on corporations, insurance companies and life, benefits and property-casualty agents.
Summit employs nearly 400 employees in ten offices across the United States. For more information, please visitsummitbusinessmedia.com.
Posted in Taxation | Tagged: Employment, income tax, insurance, Summit Business Media, Tax credit, Tax law, Thomas Jefferson School of Law, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 14, 2011
Dates: Video-conference course starting March 28 ending 10 weeks later in late May
Medium – Wimba live lectured webcam video-conference and LexisNexis blackboard course-ware
Enrollment Contact: Associate Dean William H. Byrnes – wbyrnes@tjsl.edu
or call +1 (619) 961-4211
includes access to full online international tax library of databases such as IBFD, CCH, Checkpoint, RoyaltyStat, EdgarStat, LexisNexis, Westlaw, amongst many others.
Lead Professor Dr. Alfredo Garcia-Prats (University of Valencia, formerly IMF), Lecturers include Knut Olsen on EU Tax Risk Management – Head of Global Tax & Legal for a Nordic-based multinational corporation with responsibility for 80 countries of operation, overseeing over 100 subsidiaries.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Above the Law (blog), Advertising, American Express, LexisNexis, United States, Videoconferencing, Westlaw, WIMBA | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 9, 2011
Last month the National Taxpayer Advocate Nina E. Olson released her annual report to Congress, identifying the need for tax reform as the number one priority in tax administration. The report also examines challenges the IRS is facing in implementing the new health care law. Below is a highlight of some points made in the report: [1]
Tax Reform
“There has been near universal agreement for years that the tax code is broken and needs to be fixed,” Olson said in releasing the report. “Yet no broad-based attempt to reform the tax code has been made. This report documents the burdens the tax code imposes on taxpayers and explores why many taxpayers may nevertheless feel wedded to key aspects of the current system, undermining efforts at reform.”
Analysis of IRS data shows that taxpayers and businesses spend 6.1 billion hours a year complying with tax-filing requirements. “If tax compliance were an industry, it would be one of the largest in the United States,” the report says. “To consume 6.1 billion hours, the ‘tax industry’ requires the equivalent of more than three million full-time workers.”
Read the analysis at AdvisorFYI
Posted in Tax Policy | Tagged: Health law, Internal Revenue Service, Nina E. Olson, tax, Tax law, Tax reform, United States, United States Congress | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 8, 2011
A Limited Liability Company (LLC) is a business structure allowed by state statute. LLCs are popular because, similar to a corporation, owners have limited personal liability for the debts and actions of the LLC. Other features of LLCs are more like a partnership, providing management flexibility and the benefit of pass-through taxation.
Owners of an LLC are called members. Since most states do not restrict ownership, members may include individuals, corporations, other LLCs and foreign entities. There is no maximum number of members. Most states also permit “single member” LLCs, those having only one owner.
A few types of businesses generally cannot be LLCs, such as banks and insurance companies. Check your state’s requirements and the federal tax regulations for further information. There are special rules for foreign LLCs.
Read the analysis at AdvisorFYI
Posted in Taxation | Tagged: Business, Business Formation, Corporation, insurance, Limited liability company, Small business, Start Up, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 7, 2011
Although supervising the cost of insurance embedded in life insurance premiums has historically been the domain of state insurance commissioners, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California has intervened in one recent case, ruling on January 19 that Conseco Life Insurance Co. cannot increase the premiums it charges 50,000 of its existing policyholders.
The premium increase was part of a plan by Conseco to reduce its long-term losses. Rather than post reserves, Conseco looked for a way to reduce its future liabilities by $173 million. They targeted two blocks of universal life policies that had lower than expected lapse rates, using a pricing formula that would explode the cost of insurance charged in the policies’ 21st year after issuance. Customers who’d held the affected policies longest would have seen their premiums increase in 2010 or 2011. Read this complete analysis of the impact at AdvisorFX (sign up for a free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
For previous coverage of another carrier lawsuit in Advisor’s Journal, see Carriers Targeted by Suit Over Losses on Madoff Investments (CC 11-06).
For in-depth analysis of the income taxation of life insurance, see Advisor’s Main Library: A—Definition of “Life Insurance” For Income Tax Purposes.
Posted in Insurance | Tagged: Business, Conseco, Financial services, income tax, insurance, life insurance, United States, Universal life insurance | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 6, 2011
Valuation discounts will always be a disputed issue between taxpayers and the IRS, but as illustrated by the recently published Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals case, a properly timed gift can still qualify for a discount. The parents contributed cash, securities, and real property to an LLC and then transferred LLC interests to a trust (“the children’s trust”) naming their children as beneficiaries.
The IRS rejected the valuation discount, claiming that the parents did not make a gift of the LLC interests to the trusts as they claimed, but instead made an indirect gift of the assets owned by the LLC. The IRS also argued that, even if the LLC were funded prior to the gifting of the LLC interests to the children, the transaction’s two steps—transfer of assets to the LLC and the gift of the LLC interest to the children’s trust—were really a single transaction, an indirect gift of the assets, under the step transaction doctrine. Read this complete analysis of the impact at AdvisorFX (sign up for a free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
Posted in Estate Tax | Tagged: Internal Revenue Service, IRS, Limited liability company, tax, Trust law, United States, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Valuation (finance) | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 5, 2011
President Obama recently targeted corporate tax rates in his State of the Union address. “It makes no sense, and it has to change”. “Get rid of the loopholes. Level the playing field. And use the savings to lower the corporate tax rate for the first time in 25 years — without adding to our deficit. It can be done.”
Here’s why some politicians in Washington are calling for reform:
Although America has one of the highest maximum corporate tax rates throughout industrialized nations, many large corporations pay only a fraction of the maximum rate. In a study by a New York University Professor, the data shows that a great number of public companies are paying around half, or even less, than the maximum corporate rate.
Read the analysis at AdvisorFYI
Posted in Tax Policy | Tagged: Barack Obama, Business Roundtable, Corporate tax, New York University, State of the Union address, tax, United States, Washington | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 4, 2011
The Congressional Research Service last week released a publication describing the employer healthcare mandate and penalties for large employers under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. Although penalties under the Health Care Act will not be applicable until 2014, the Act brings about a sea of change in the employer’ role in employee health insurance that requires significant present preparation.
Contrary to popular miscomprehensions about the Act, it does not mandate that employers provide their employees with health insurance; however, the Act does incentivize large employers to do so by penalizing them if their employees are not covered to a minimum level by employer-provided health insurance. Read this complete analysis of the impact at AdvisorFX (sign up for a free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Congressional Research Service, Employment, Health care, Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, healthinsurance, insurance, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on March 3, 2011
Late last year the IRS published proposed regulations regarding the classification for Federal tax purposes a domestic series limited liability company (LLC), a domestic cell company, or a foreign series or cell that conducts an insurance business.
A number of States, such as Delaware, have enacted statutes providing for the creation of entities that may establish series, including limited liability companies (series LLCs). In general, most series LLC statutes provide that a limited liability company may establish separate series.
Although the series LLC generally are not treated as separate entities for State law purposes, the treatment of rights and obligations is similar to separate entities, creating in essence “associated members”. Members’ association with one or more particular series is comparable to direct ownership by the members in such series, in that their rights, duties, and powers with respect to the series are direct and specifically identified. If the conditions enumerated in the relevant statute are satisfied, the debts, liabilities, and obligations of one series generally are enforceable only against the assets of that series and not against assets of other series or of the series LLC.
Read the analysis at AdvisorFYI
Posted in Taxation | Tagged: Business, Delaware, insurance, Internal Revenue Service, IRS, Limited liability company, Small business, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on February 24, 2011
The topic Self-Employment Tax on wages versus distributions has reared its head again – as shown by the recent Federal District Court case involving David E. Watson.
The C.P.A. recently disputed and lost to the Government’s position which recharacterized dividend and loan payments from David E. Watson, P.C. (a Subchapter S corporation) to its sole shareholder and employee, David E. Watson. The IRS assessed additional employment taxes, interest and penalties against Watson for each of tax years in which Watson’s salary was significantly lower than his total distributions.
Read the analysis at AdvisorFYI (sign up for a 2 week online free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
Posted in Tax Policy | Tagged: Corporation, Internal Revenue Service, IRS tax forms, Self-employment, tax, Taxation, United States, Withholding tax | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on February 18, 2011
Administrative Director of Graduate Programs
JOB DESCRIPTION
JOB TITLE: Administrative Director of Graduate Programs (previously LLM)
REPORTS TO: Associate Dean for Distance Education Programs
POSITION STATUS: Full-time, Exempt
GENERAL SUMMARY: Responsible for the coordination and support of the graduate distance education and continuing professional education programs with the departments of the central administration, including admissions, financial aid, business office, student services, information technology, and library. The Administrative Director is chiefly responsible for providing high level support to Associate Dean for Distance Education Programs and activities related to program development, relationship building with professional organizations, legal and financial institutions and individual students, and to the entrepreneurial activities related to the delivery of continuing education programming to a wide array of professionals globally.
ESSENTIAL JOB FUNCTIONS:
• Coordinate the student registration process four times per year for new and current LLM and JSD candidates with the Registrar and within each course.
• Serve as one of three key point persons to handle the questions and needs of current and incoming graduate students, as well as those of working professionals seeking continuing education opportunities.
• Support adult learners through the processes and structures of engaging with financial aid, online learning systems such as blackboard and WIMBA, and online publisher databases via proxy access such as CCH.
• Serve as main point of contact for Embanet regarding operations: admissions, student registration and reconciliation.
• Developing quarterly contact list for leads and applicants and refreshing alumni contact list.
• Develop training materials for new students on technology and systems used in the program.
• Serve as main point of contact for faculty of the program in terms of their contracts and payment, scheduling of their classes and training on Wimba.
• Coordinate graduation for the LL.M. and JSD students, process their graduation forms, order their diplomas and certificates.
• Participate in supporting the collaborative entrepreneurial process of new program development and implementation via developing processes and protocols.
• Provide direct supervision to student workers, federal work study students and international interns who work for the Program to support above functions.
• Responsible for all administrative activities, working closely with other departments to ensure proper and timely processing and reporting related to programs.
• Provide support and organization for travel and entertainment.
• Other duties as assigned.
KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS AND ABILITIES
• Bachelor degree required, preferred graduate level or professional degree, in law, business or related area.
• Preferred 5 years working in the financial services with international experience.
• Must be comfortable working with senior partners and high level officials within the banking, finance, law, accounting, private business, and government arenas.
• Must have an understanding of asynchronous and synchronous distance technology education at the graduate level.
• Must have the ability to understand administrative and technical structures to ease adult learners through such processes and structures of financial aid, online learning systems such as blackboard and WIMBA, and online publisher databases via proxy access such as CCH.
• Multiple languages are a plus.
WORK SCHEDULE
Full time, Monday through Friday, 40 hours per week. Nights and weekends as needed.
CONTACT
All contact must be with Lisa Chigos (lchigos@tjsl.edu). Send CV and cover letter.
Posted in Courses | Tagged: Colleges and Universities, Dean (education), Distance education, education, Graduate school, Master of Laws, United States, WIMBA | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on February 18, 2011
A recent Tax Court case demonstrates the severe tax consequences for an employee when a welfare-benefit plan ceases to qualify under section 419A of the Tax Code. Section 419A governs “qualified asset accounts,” which are employer provided welfare-benefits plans that set aside funds for (1) disability benefits, (2) medical benefits, (3) severance benefits, or (4) life insurance benefits. In general, contributions by an employer to a welfare-benefit plan are tax deductible by the employer if they are ordinary and necessary business expenses. In the case, part of the funds contributed to the plan were used to buy life insurance coverage for the principal and other employees, with the rest of the funds constituting excess contributions.
Read this complete analysis of the impact at AdvisorFX (sign up for a free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
Posted in Retirement Planning | Tagged: Employee benefit, Employment, insurance, life insurance, tax, Tax deduction, United States, Welfare | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on February 17, 2011
A recent Delaware Court of Chancery decision illustrates the severe consequences that can befall an insurance agent trustee who violates his or her duties to the trust’s beneficiaries. The agent in the case agreed to serve as trustee of a client’s life insurance trust.
The client, a Father, had a falling out with his son over the Father’s marriage to a woman 17 years his junior. Nevertheless, the Father and his second wife formed a trust for the benefit of the son. The couple asked their family insurance agent to serve as trustee of the trust. The trust purchased a second-to-die life insurance policy on their lives. Although the trust was irrevocable, the Father ad young wife asked the trustee to revoke the trust only three years after it was formed. The trustee intelligently refused to revoke the trust, but did agree to loan the policy’s cash value to the couple.
Read this complete analysis of the impact at AdvisorFX (sign up for a free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
Posted in Trusts | Tagged: Business, Delaware Court of Chancery, Financial services, Fred Wilpon, insurance, Lawsuit, Trustee, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on February 14, 2011
Cost competitiveness of life insurance policies is an obvious determinant of suitability. Keeping costs low is critical because every dollar spent on expenses is one less dollar available to purchase more death benefit. In fact, a recent study by Morningstar revealed that “Low fees are likely to be the best predictor of a mutual fund’s future success,” and the same certainly holds true for life insurance products.
While different insurers refer to different policy expenses in different ways, all policy expenses in all life insurance policies fall into the following four categories: 1) cost of insurance charges (COIs), 2) fixed administration expenses (FAEs), 3) cash-value-based “wrap fees” (e.g., M&Es), and 4) premium loads. Each type of policy expense and its role and relevance in pricing and suitability is discussed in the complete analysis at AdvisorFX (sign up for a free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
For previous coverage of life insurance product suitability in Advisor’s Journal, see Life Insurance Product Suitability (CC 10-90) and Financial Strength and Claims-Paying Ability (CC 10-115).
We invite your questions and comments by posting them or by calling the Panel of Experts.
Posted in Insurance | Tagged: Business, Financial services, insurance, Insurance policy, life insurance, Morningstar, Policy, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on February 12, 2011
The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 (Tax Relief Act) extended the income tax deduction for state and local sales taxes through December 31, 2011. The deduction expired on January 1, 2009, but Congress amended the provision retroactively, which will allow taxpayers to take the deduction on their 2010 taxes. The deduction, which has been slated to expire a number of times, has been revived by Congress repeatedly since it was introduced but has not yet been made a permanent part of the Code. Read this complete analysis of the impact at AdvisorFX (sign up for a free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
For previous coverage of the Tax Relief Act of 2010 in Advisor’s Journal, see Obama Tax Compromise Provides 100 Percent Bonus Depreciation of Business Assets Through 2011 (CC 11-01), Obama’s Social Security Tax Holiday: Penny Wise and Pound Foolish? (CC 10-119), Does the New Estate Tax Make the Bypass Trust Obsolete? (CC-10-122), & 2010 Estates: To Elect or Not to Elect (CC 10-124).
For in-depth analysis of income tax deductions, see Advisor’s Main Library: B4—Business Income and Deductions.
We invite your questions and comments by posting them or by calling the Panel of Experts.
Posted in Taxation | Tagged: accounting, Internal Revenue Service, Itemized deduction, January 1 2009, tax, Tax deduction, Unemployment benefits, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on February 11, 2011
Recently, in a series of Announcements the Internal Revenue Service stated that it was developing a schedule requiring certain business taxpayers to report uncertain tax positions on their tax returns.
Now the new requirements have been finalized, businesses and wealth managers have a better idea of the direction of Uncertain Tax Position reporting.
Reported under Schedule UTP for Form 1120 series, the Uncertain Tax Position reporting currently applies to a select number of corporations (however phase-in provisions will change this by 2012 and 2014).
Who must file a Schedule UTP?
The class of organizations that must file is limited (for now). Generally, for 2010 tax year returns most small businesses will not be included in the reporting, but that will probably change. Nevertheless, a corporation must file Schedule UTP with its 2010 income tax return if: To read this article excerpted above, please access AdvisorFYI
Posted in Tax Policy | Tagged: Business, Corporation, Internal Revenue Service, IRS tax forms, tax, Tax return (United States), TurboTax, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on February 10, 2011
A member of the U.S. military who takes a leave of absence from his private sector job in order to go on active duty will often face a pay cut—the differential between his military and private sector pay. Some employers make up this differential by paying employees who are on active duty a partial salary. Read this complete analysis of the impact at AdvisorFX (sign up for a free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
For previous coverage of the Tax Relief Act of 2010 in Advisor�s Journal, see Obama Tax Compromise Provides 100 Percent Bonus Depreciation of Business Assets Through 2011 (CC 11-01), Obama’s Social Security Tax Holiday: Penny Wise and Pound Foolish? (CC 10-119), Does the New Estate Tax Make the Bypass Trust Obsolete? (CC-10-122), and 2010 Estates: To Elect or Not to Elect (CC 10-124).
Posted in Tax Policy | Tagged: Active duty, Barack Obama, Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax, South Carolina, tax, TurboTax, United States, United States armed forces | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on February 9, 2011
Although trusts can be taxpayers, Sections 671 to 679 of the Internal Revenue Code contain the so-called ‘grantor trust rules’, which treat certain trust settlors (and sometimes persons other than the settlor) as the owner of a portion or all of a trust’s income, deductions and credits for US tax purposes. A trust where the settlor (or other person) is treated as the owner of the trust assets for US tax purposes is referred to as a ‘grantor trust’. The grantor trust rules apply to both foreign and domestic trusts, but in different ways.
Under the grantor trust rules, a US person who transfers property to a foreign trust is generally treated for income tax purposes as the owner of that portion of the trust attributable to the transferred property, even if the trust would not have been a grantor trust had it been domestic.
This is the result for any tax year in which any portion of the foreign trust has a US beneficiary. A foreign trust is treated as having a US beneficiary for a tax year unless (i) under the terms of the trust, no part of the trust’s income or corpus may be paid or accumulated during the tax year to or for the benefit of a US person, and (ii) if the trust is terminated at any time during the tax year, no part of the income or corpus could be paid to or for the benefit of a US person. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations under Section 679 of the Internal Revenue Code generally treat a foreign trust as having a US beneficiary if any current, future or contingent beneficiary of the trust is a US person. To read this article excerpted above, please access AdvisorFYI.
Posted in Taxation | Tagged: Fiscal year, income tax, Internal Revenue Code, Internal Revenue Service, IRS tax forms, tax, Taxation, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on February 8, 2011
Written by the foremost experts in the field – Professor William H. Byrnes, Esq., LL.M, and Robert Bloink, Esq., LL.M
Understand the Act’s Implications for You and Your Clients
- Analyzes important insurance, estate, gift, and other elements of the Act
- Provides pertinent information on other important 2010 tax developments
- Convenient Q&A format speeds you to the information you need – with answers to over 100 important questions
Summary Table of Contents
- Analysis of the Tax Relief Act of 2010
- Income Tax Provisions
- Estate Tax Provisions
- Generation Skipping Transfer Tax
- Deduction for State and Local Sales Taxes
- Alternative Minimum Tax
- Tax Credits
- Payroll Tax Holiday
- Wage Credit for Employees who are Active Duty Members of the Military
- Charitable Distributions from Retirement Accounts
- Bonus Depreciation and Section 179 Expensing
- Basis Reporting Requirements for Brokers and Mutual Funds
- Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010
- Health Care Act
- Form 1099 Reporting Requirement for Businesses
- American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010
- Requirements for Tax Return Preparers
Price: $12.95 + shipping & handling and applicable sales tax
To order:
With our Custom Imprint program, you can place your company’s logo on the cover of this analysis and you’ll leave a lasting impression. Call 1-800-543-0874 for additional information.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: accounting, Alternative Minimum Tax, IRS tax forms, Section 179 depreciation deduction, Small business, tax, Tax credit, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on February 8, 2011
Recently some wealth managers have established trustee services with regards to retirement accounts. It’s a good fit, generally, when the wealth manager can offer clients information regarding deductible contributions to a retirement account, and further act as a fiduciary vis-à-vis trustee of those funds.
What are the basic requirements in order to act in the capacity as a trustee for IRA and other retirement account purposes?
First, an Individual Retirement Account (IRA) must be a trust created or organized in the United States for the exclusive benefit of an individual or his beneficiaries. Such trust must be maintained at all times as a domestic trust in the United States. The instrument creating the trust must be in writing.
Secondly, the trustee of an IRA trust may be a person other than a bank if the person demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service that the manner in which the person will administer trusts will be consistent with the requirements of the tax code. The person must submit a written application including the information discussed below. Read further at AdvisorFYI
Posted in Pensions, Trusts | Tagged: Individual Retirement Account, Internal Revenue Service, Retirement, Roth IRA, tax, Trust law, Trustee, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on February 5, 2011
Some taxpayers are going to have to wait until mid-to-late February to file their 2010 income tax returns, delaying much needed refunds and potentially clogging up the system for other taxpayers. The IRS is blaming the filing delay on Congress waiting until the end of December to pass the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization and Job Creation Act of 2010, H.R. 4853 (Tax Relief Act), which includes a bevy of tax provision extensions, a new two-year estate tax, and a one-year, 2 percent Social Security tax holiday. Read this complete analysis of the impact at AdvisorFX (sign up for a free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
For previous coverage of the Tax Relief Act of 2010 in Advisor’s Journal, see Obama Tax Compromise Provides 100 Percent Bonus Depreciation of Business Assets Through 2011 (CC 11-01), Obama’s Social Security Tax Holiday: Penny Wise and Pound Foolish? (CC 10-119), Does the New Estate Tax Make the Bypass Trust Obsolete? (CC-10-122), and 2010 Estates: To Elect or Not to Elect (CC 10-124).
Posted in Taxation | Tagged: Congress, Internal Revenue Service, IRS, tax, Tax return (United States), Unemployment benefits, United States, United States Congress | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on February 4, 2011
What are the tax procedures for requesting exempt status recognition?
Generally, an organization seeking recognition of an exempt status is required to submit the appropriate application. Specifically, an organization seeking recognition of exemption under § 501(c)(3) \ must submit a completed Form 1023.
What fees are required by those requesting an exempt status?
Generally, an application for exemption under § 501(c)(3) includes a $400 fee for organizations that have had annual gross receipts averaging not more than $10,000 during the preceding four years, or new organizations that anticipate gross receipts averaging not more than $10,000 during the first four years.
Application for exemption under § 501(c)(3) includes an $850 fee for organizations whose actual or anticipated gross receipts exceed $10,000 averaged annually. For those seeking the $400 fee, the Service also requires the organization to sign a certification with their application that the receipts are or will be not more than the indicated amounts.
Read the full analysis and on similar issues – http://www.advisorfyi.com
Posted in Tax Exempt Orgs | Tagged: 501(c), Fee, Internal Revenue Service, Non-profit organization, Organization, Receipt, Tax exemption, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on February 2, 2011
Child Tax Credit—for taxable years beginning in 2011, the value used in 24(d)(1)(B)(i) to determine the amount of credit under § 24 that may be refundable is $3,000.
Hope Scholarship, American Opportunity, and Lifetime Learning Credits—for taxable years beginning in 2011, the Hope Scholarship Credit under § 25A(b)(1), as increased under § 25A(i) (the American Opportunity Tax Credit), is an amount equal to 100 percent of qualified tuition and related expenses not in excess of $2,000 plus 25 percent of those expenses in excess of $2,000, but not in excess of $4,000. Accordingly, the maximum Hope Scholarship Credit allowable under § 25A(b)(1) for taxable years beginning in 2011 is $2,500.
In addition, for taxable years beginning in 2011, a taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income in excess of $80,000 ($160,000 for a joint return) is used to determine the reduction under § 25A(d)(2) in the amount of the Hope Scholarship Credit otherwise allowable under § 25A(a)(1). For taxable years beginning in 2011, a taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income in excess of $51,000 ($102,000 for a joint return) is used to determine the reduction under § 25A(d)(2) in the amount of the Lifetime Learning Credit otherwise allowable under § 25A(a)(2).
Standard Deduction—In general, for taxable years beginning in 2011, the standard deduction amounts under § 63(c)(2) are as follows: To read this article excerpted above, please access AdvisorFYI
Posted in Taxation | Tagged: Adjusted Gross Income, American Opportunity Tax Credit, Hope credit, Hope Scholarship Credit, Lifetime Learning Credit, tax, Tax credit, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on January 31, 2011
Image via Wikipedia
Prior to January 1, 2011, any individual could prepare a tax return or claim for refund for compensation. An individual who prepared and signed a taxpayer’s return or claim for refund as the preparer generally could also represent that taxpayer during an examination of the taxable period covered by that return or claim for refund.
All that has changed ever since the IRS issued regulations which state that after December 31, 2010, in order to prepare a tax return for a fee, or to otherwise represent a taxpayer before the IRS, an individual must obtain a preparer tax identification number (PTIN). …
The Treasury Department and the IRS have decided to adopt the proposed regulations that establish a $50 user fee to apply for or renew a PTIN, which are estimated to recover the full cost to the IRS for administering the PTIN application and renewal program.
Read the full analysis at AdvisorFYI
Posted in Tax Policy | Tagged: Internal Revenue Service, IRS, Social Security number, tax, Tax preparation, Tax refund, Tax returns, United States | 1 Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on January 28, 2011
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 are generally known as the national health care legislation. The new laws created a number of changes in the health care insurance system, in general. These changes will be discussed throughout the week, as presented below.
Under the new law, each individual is required to have “minimum essential coverage” for each month of the year starting in 2014. “Minimum essential coverage” means whichever; a government sponsored program such as Medicare, Medicaid, and TRICARE; an employer sponsored plan; plans in the individual market; and grandfathered health care plans.
For those individuals who choose not to obtain minimum essential coverage, imposed is a penalty to be included in the taxpayer’s annual return. The penalty applies to each month where the individual is not covered equal to an amount of either 1/12 of the average cost of “bronze” level coverage or the greater of an annual set dollar amount, which is pegged at $695 for taxable years 2016 and beyond, or a set percentage of the taxpayer’s household income, currently 2.5 percent beginning after 2016. (The Legislation includes a phase in schedule for both the flat dollar amount and the percentage of income. The flat dollar amount is $95 for 2014, $325 for 2015. The percentage of household income is 1 percent for 2014 and 2 percent for 2015.) To read this article excerpted above, please access AdvisorFYI
Posted in Reporting | Tagged: Health care, Health care reform, insurance, Medicaid, Medicare, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Republican, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on January 27, 2011
Although some items purchased by a business can be written off 100% for income tax purposes in the year of purchase, many types of property are not eligible to be deducted fully in the year they are purchased. The tax deduction for purchase of a piece of depreciable property is spread out over the life of the property.
Each year during the depreciation period the business is allowed to take a tax deduction for some portion of the purchase price of the property. The Tax Relief Act includes a provision allowing 100% bonus depreciation for some business assets. It also extends for an additional year the 50% bonus depreciation provisions previously scheduled to expire at the end of 2011. Read this complete analysis of the impact at AdvisorFX (sign up for a free trial subscription with full access to all of the planning libraries and client presentations if you are not already a subscriber).
Posted in Taxation | Tagged: accounting, Business, Depreciation, Section 179 depreciation deduction, tax, Tax deduction, United States, Write-off | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on January 26, 2011
Dates: Lectures starting Tuesday February 1st, ending 10 weeks later by Friday April 8th
Course access begins upon payment
Time – 5:30pm Eastern (New York time) Tuesdays
Medium – Wimba live lectured webcam video-conference and TWEN (Westlaw) course-ware
Course Description – This course will concentrate on the Brazilian corporate structures, tax & financial systems, regulations and compliance, focusing on the practical aspects of doing business in Brazil. We will also discuss the impact of the recent changes in tax/corporate laws and regulations.
Tuition – continuing education audit student – only US$997
Enrollment Contact: Associate Dean William H. Byrnes – wbyrnes@tjsl.edu
or call +1 (619) 961-4211
LexisNexis will make available to all students at a 76% discount the international tax treatise Foreign Tax & Trade Briefs covering 110 countries !
Posted in Courses | Tagged: BG Group, Brazil, Business, LexisNexis, New York, South America, United States, Westlaw | Leave a Comment »
Posted by William Byrnes on January 26, 2011
During 2010, President Obama realized his goal of providing health care coverage to all Americans when Congress passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.
Under the new health care legislation many new changes will affect taxpayers beginning last year. This week’s blogticles are dedicated to the discussion of the health care legislation and the impact it is projected to have. We begin with a discussion of the Small Business Tax Credit.
Under the new law, the Small Business Tax Credit allows qualified small employers to elect, beginning in 2010 a tax credit for some percentage of their employee health care coverage expenses. Generally, a “qualified small employer” is an employer who has the equivalent of 25 full-time workers or less (e.g., a firm with fewer than 50 half-time workers would be eligible), pay average annual wages below $50,000, and cover at least 50 percent of the cost of health care coverage for their workers.
Further, the tax credit will cover up to 35 percent of the premiums a small business pays to cover its workers until 2014, when the rate will increase to 50 percent. Nevertheless, the credit has phase out provisions which gradually reduce the credit amount for businesses with average wages between $25,000 and $50,000 and for businesses with the equivalent of between 10 and 25 full-time workers. To read this article excerpted above, please access AdvisorFYI.
Posted in Taxation | Tagged: Employment, Health care, Health insurance, Laborer, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Small business, Tax credit, United States | Leave a Comment »
William Byrnes' Tax, Wealth, and Risk Intelligence 