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

call us toll free: 888-8TAXAID

Monthly Archives: May 2017

OECD Adds 7 More Countries To Its CbC Automatic Exchange Agreement

On 27 January 2017, 7 additional countries signed the Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement (MCAA) for the automatic exchange of Countryby-Country (CbC) reports.  The signing took place at a ceremony held during the second meeting of the inclusive framework on BEPS on 26-27 January 2017.

Those countries are:
  1. Gabon,
  2. Hungary,
  3. Indonesia,
  4. Lithuania,
  5. Malta,
  6. Mauritius and
  7. the Russian Federation.
This brings the number of signatories up to 57.

First automatic exchanges of information will start in 2017-2018 on 2016 information.

    Have an International Tax Problem?  
     
    Contact the Tax Lawyers at

    Marini & Associates, P.A.

     

     for a FREE Tax Consultation Contact US at
    or Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888 882-9243).

     

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Is it Time to Expatriate? Your Neighbors Are.

The Treasury Department published the names of individuals who renounced their U.S. citizenship or terminated their long-term U.S. residency “Expatriated” during the fourth quarter of 2016.
 
  • The number of published expatriates for the quarter was 2,365, bringing the total number of published expatriates in 2016 to 5,411.   
  • The number of expatriates for 2016 is a 26% increase over 2015 and a 58% increase over 2014 (3,415).  

 On April 8, 2015, we posted Is it Time to Expatriate, where we discussed that the 2014 list of US expatriates’ shows an increase in the number of Americans who are renouncing their US citizenship or turning in their green card. We also discussed that the escalation of offshore penalties over the last 20 years is likely contributing to the increased incidence of expatriation.

2016 q4 annualThe graph to the left is based solely on IRS data and shows the number of published expatriates per year since 1998.

The connection between the list of expatriates and the IRS implies a link to tax policy.

The U.S. is one of a very small number of countries that tax based on nationality, not residency, leaving Americans living abroad to face double taxation.

The escalation of offshore penalties over the last 20 years is likely contributing to the increased incidence of expatriation.

 Should I Stay or Should I Go?
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gpZUZK6-jMY/UgVUIPb77LI/AAAAAAAACHk/jJDlvL_8SSk/s400/Tax+Problems.jpg

Need Advise on Expatriation ... 
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-KyLqQN2UM7k/U-UWwgfXK_I/AAAAAAAADgo/iukRiYWCndc/s200/Expatriation.jpg 

Contact the Tax Lawyers of
Marini & Associates, P.A.
 
for a FREE Tax Consultation

Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid ((888) 882-9243)

 

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Former Marine Denied Foreign Earned Income Exclusion for Failure to Make Election Timely


The Tax Court has concluded that a taxpayer wasn't entitled to a foreign earned income exclusion under Code Sec. 911(a) for the tax year at issue, because he failed to make a timely election under Reg. § 1.911-7(a)(2)(i), which provides that if the taxpayer is filing a late return and owes income tax after taking the exclusion into account, the taxpayer must attach the election to a Form 1040 filed before IRS discovers that the taxpayer has failed to elect the exclusion.
Redfield, TC Memo 2017-71

In general, an individual must include in gross income “all income whatever source derived” (Code Sec. 61(a)), including income earned outside of the U.S. “unless it is expressly excepted by another provision in the Tax Code.” (Comm. v. Schleier, (Sup Ct 1995) 75 AFTR 2d 95-2675) One such exception is Code Sec. 911(a), under which a qualified individual may exclude from gross income his foreign earned income up to the inflation-adjusted exclusion amount and subject to certain limitations. (Code Sec. 911(a)) A qualified individual must affirmatively elect the foreign earned income exclusion. (Code Sec. 911(a)). 
 
A valid election can be made on:

  1. A return that is timely filed (including any extension of time to file). (Reg. § 1.911-7(a)(2)(i)(A))
  2. A return amending a timely return, where the amended return is filed within the time prescribed for filing a claim for refund, generally three years from the return's due date. (Reg. § 1.911-7(a)(2)(i)(B))
  3. An original return that is filed within one year after the due date of the return (determined without regard to any extension of time to file). This one year period isn't an extension of time for any purpose—it's merely a period during which a valid election may be made on a late return. (Reg. § 1.911-7(a)(2)(i)(C))
  4.  A return filed after the periods described in (1) through (3), above, but only if
    • (a) the taxpayer owes no federal income tax after taking into account the exclusion (Reg. § 1.911-7(a)(2)(i)(D)(1)), or
    • (b) the election is attached to a return filed before IRS discovers that the taxpayer failed to elect the exclusion. (Reg. § 1.911-7(a)(2)(i)(D)(2))
    • (c) In either case, the taxpayer must type or legibly print at the top of the first page of the Form 1040 to which the election is attached, “Filed pursuant to Section 1.911-7(a)(2)(i)(D).” (Reg. § 1.911-7(a)(2)(i)(D)(3)). 

On Oct. 7, 2014, Mr. Redfield submitted to IRS a delinquent return for 2010 on which he reported wages of $240,211 and total income of $241,140. He included with the return Form 2555 on which he sought to exclude $49,136 of earnings from his work in Afghanistan. After giving effect to that exclusion, he reported $28,622 of tax, $22,510 of payments made, and $6,189 tax due.

IRS sent Mr. Redfield a second notice of deficiency, disallowing his claim for a foreign earned income exclusion because he had not elected to exclude foreign earned income on a prior return and had failed to make a valid election for 2010. That disallowance, along with certain computational adjustments, produced a deficiency of $15,982. IRS also determined late-filing and late-payment additions to tax under Code Sec. 6651(a)(1) and Code Sec. 6651(a)(2) and an accuracy-related penalty under Code Sec. 6662(a).

The taxpayer sought relief in the Tax Court.

While acknowledging the taxpayer's military service, and recognizing that the procedural requirements for making a timely foreign earned income exclusion weren't exactly intuitive and that the scars the taxpayer incurred during his military service may have contributed to the tax delinquency at issue, the Tax Court found that it had no alternative but to hold that Mr. Redfield did not make a timely and valid election for 2010. Accordingly, he was not entitled to exclude from gross income any foreign earnings under Code Sec. 911.

The Court noted that, Mr. Redfield did not follow the instruction set out in Reg. § 1.911-7(a)(2)(i)(D)(3) by typing or printing the specified statement at the top of the first page of the Form 1040.

The Court based then determined that the Reg. § 1.911-7(a)(2)(i)(D)(2) requirements had not been met and concluded that it did not need to decide whether this omission, standing alone, was sufficient to invalidate an otherwise timely foreign earned income exclusion election.

The Court also indicated that the facts of Mr.Redfield's situation (i.e., military service and injury) might be relevant to the penalty and additions to tax that IRS had determined, but they did not alter the requirement for a timely election under the regs. 

The Court left for further proceedings IRS's determinations that the taxpayer was liable for late-filing and late-payment additions to tax under Code Sec. 6651(a)(1) and Code Sec. 6651(a)(2) and an accuracy-related penalty under Code Sec. 6662(a).

Have a Tax Problem? 
 
Want To Know If You Can Exclude Your
Foreign Earned Income?
 
 Contact the Tax Lawyers at
Marini & Associates, P.A.
 
 for a FREE Tax Consultation Contact US at 
or Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888 882-9243).
 
 
 



 

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Third-Party Summons Rules Applies To Data on Taxpayer's Marijuana Business

The district court has made several rulings regarding Code Sec. 280E, the Code section that disallows deductions in carrying on a trade or business that consists of trafficking in controlled substances.

One such ruling was that Code Sec. 7609(c)(2)(E)(i), which provides an exception to the Code's third-party summons rules where the summons is issued by an IRS criminal investigator, doesn't apply when the summons is issued by a regular IRS agent to obtain information pertinent to enforcement of Code Sec. 280E. (High Desert Relief Inc., (DC NM 3/31/2017) 119 AFTR 2d ¶ 2017-621).

The Tenth Circuit declined to revive a Colorado marijuana dispensary’s efforts to keep the IRS from investigating its business records, finding that such a suit is barred by a law preventing courts from interfering with tax collection efforts.


The Green Solution Retail Inc. had sued to block the Internal Revenue Service from investigating its business records after the agency initially found, as part of an audit, that the dispensary had trafficked a controlled substance, which would disqualify it for federal tax deductions and credits. But a Colorado federal district court in June dismissed the company’s suit, citing in part the Anti-Injunction Act, which prohibits federal courts from taking actions that would restrict the collection of taxes.

In asking the circuit court to vacate and remand the dismissal order, Green Solution had argued that although the Tenth Circuit had ruled in Lowrie v. United States that the AIA applies to activities leading up to the collection of taxes, a subsequent U.S. Supreme Court ruling undermined that decision.

In that ruling, issued in March 2015 in Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl, the Supreme Court held that businesses weren't barred under the Tax Injunction Act from challenging the reporting requirements in Colorado’s “Amazon tax” law.

But in a published decision affirming the district court’s dismissal, a three-judge panel on  found that there were significant differences in those two opinions. Direct Marketing involved the TIA, while Lowrie considered the AIA, the panel said, noting that those acts serve different purposes. The panel also ruled that the Declaratory Judgment Act, which prohibits declaratory judgments in certain federal tax matters, bars Green Solution’s suit.

Despite its legalization in 28 states and Washington, D.C., for medical use and in eight states and Washington, D.C., for recreational use, marijuana is still classified as a federal “controlled substance” under the CSA, the panel noted.

Have a Tax Problem? 
 
Don't Get High!
 
 Contact the Tax Lawyers at
Marini & Associates, P.A.
 
 for a FREE Tax Consultation Contact US at 
or Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888 882-9243).
 
 
 
 

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Live Help