Fluent in English, Spanish & Italian | 888-882-9243

call us toll free: 888-8TAXAID

Monthly Archives: April 2012

Software Has Enabled The Tax Code's Slide Into Madness

Ecerpts from Forbes

It occurs to me that our current insanely complex tax rules are made possible by technology. Yes, computer software makes filing easier (both for professionals and civilians). But that may be the problem.

The relative ease of filing, made possible by programs such as Intuit’s TurboTax, also makes it easier for Congress to write incomprehensible tax law.

Have you ever read, for example, Form 6251, the paperwork millions of middle-class households must complete just to figure out whether or not they owe the dreaded Alternative Minimum Tax? The IRS instructions for the form are 12 pages long.

In truth, if voters actually had to navigate this gibberish, we’d have a revolution that would make the tea party look like the League of Women Voters. But we don’t. In 2009, 92 percent of us got help, either from a third-party preparer or tax software, the IRS estimates.

In this way, technology both inoculates us from much of the complexity of tax filing and reduces compliance costs. But, more importantly, it immunizes the politicians from the consequences of their decisions that lead to this madness.

Tax complexity isn’t just about the number of forms and their incomprehensible instructions, no criticism intended towards the folks at the IRS who write them. They do the best they can, given the loony law Congress hands them.

The real price of complexity is the very opaqueness of the Tax Code itself. Because we don’t understand the law, we are convinced we are paying more than we owe and that everyone else is paying less.

Yet, tax software allows politicians to add ever more complexity, which we accept with little complaint. Think about the Buffett Rule endorsed by President Obama. The version debated in the Senate this week would create yet another minimum tax that would result in even more complex forms. But, of course, the households making $1 million or more who’d owe this tax would likely never see the forms. They’d just pay the accountant.

Happy tax day.

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Best International Tax Structure for a U.S. Business

Most foreign countries require a local corporation to run a business.

But there is a problem. The IRS denies the foreign tax credit and a deduction of a business loss to the privately owned businesses. Without the foreign tax credit, you will pay tax twice on the same profit. First in the foreign country and again in the USA.

England, Scotland, most of Europe, China and Mexico are restrictive in letting a foreign business into their country. America is not this way because states’ rights. These countries require you to incorporate in their country.

Back in 1996, the IRS issued the “check the box’ regulations which allow some foreign entities to elect to be treated like a domestic LLC. If the election is made, then the entities are disregarded if there is only one owner. With more than one owner they are partnerships. If elected before business begins, this is a good tax structure, but not the best legal structure for asset protection (in the United States).

However, most foreign corporation used in Europe, Asia and Latin America are often not eligible of the check the box election. These are known as “Per Se” corporations. Here is the cause of the double taxation, loss of tax losses and loss of the foreign tax credit.

The American business must file the complex Form 5471 reporting the controlled foreign corporation subpart F income. Few CPA’s are experts in this field. So, you may need a consultant, like me. The solution is to find a method to allow the foreign corporation to elect Sub Chapter S and file a simple Form 1120S and not the Form 5471.

These foreign corporations cannot elect Sub Chapter S. Thus, the foreign tax credit is trapped inside the corporate shell.

The Department of the Treasury now allows a dual resident corporation. Your foreign corporation can also be a domestic sub chapter S corporation. The complex Form 5471 is replaced by the simplifier Form 1120-S (the return for a subchapter S corporation).

Read more at: Tax Times blog

IRS Extends Timeline for Streamlined Installment Agreements

Examiners are now authorized to prepare streamlined installment agreements for taxpayers having a tax deficiency of $25,000 or less that can be paid within 72 months, according to the Internal Revenue Service Small Business/Self-Employed Division.

Tax deficiencies include tax, penalties, and interest, according to the memorandum (SBSE-04-0412-021). The time frame to pay under a streamlined installment agreement was previously 60 months.

Examiners must continue to refer to Collection any taxpayer seeking an installment agreement who has a deficiency exceeding the $25,000 limit, IRS said. The dollar limit has been raised to $50,000 for Collection to secure a streamlined installment agreement, the memorandum said.

Read more at: Tax Times blog

A Federal Tax Case Brought in Virgin Islands May Be Transferred

The District Court of the Virgin Islands has “exclusive jurisdiction” over Virgin Island tax cases only vis-a-vis Virgin Island local courts and therefore it could transfer a case to another federal district court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held April 12 (Birdman v. Office of the Governor,3rd Cir., No. 10-4189, 4/12/12).

Judge Thomas Ambro held the appellants/petitioners stated no cause of action against the Virgin Islands in the district court and in the alternative the Virgin Islands had taken no administrative action against the appellants/petitioners regarding the 2006 tax year and so a claim was not ripe.

The appellants/petitioners, Harvey and Diane Birdman and Herbert and Bonita Hirsch, formed Virgin Island corporations that were among the limited partners in a Virgin Islands limited liability partnership. Both couples asserted they were not bona fide residents of the Virgin Islands in 2006 but claimed part of their income was derived from sources within the Virgin Islands under Internal Revenue Code Section 932. Both couples filed two tax returns: one with the United States and one with the Virgin Islands. But the couples each only made one payment.

The lawsuit asked the Virgin Islands to declare whether the income in question was derived from sources within the Virgin Islands. Against the U.S., the couples requested refunds of the amounts they claimed should be paid to the Virgin Islands.

OPINION OF THE COURT

These consolidated cases stem from a single lawsuit by two married couples and their affiliated entities. They sued the Virgin Islands and its tax agency seeking a determination of the source of certain income, and the United States seeking tax refunds. The United States District Court of the Virgin Islands (the “V. I. District Court” or simply the “District Court”) dismissed their claim against the Virgin Islands and transferred their claims against the United States to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The plaintiffs have directly appealed the District Court's dismissal of their claim against the Virgin Islands, and they have filed a petition for a writ of mandamus concerning their claims against the United States.1 For the reasons that follow, we affirm the holding of the District Court and deny the mandamus petition.

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Live Help