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

call us toll free: 888-8TAXAID

Yearly Archives: 2018

IRS Cost-Sharing Regulations Revived By Appeals Court

According to Law360, the Ninth Circuit on Tuesday reversed a decision by the U.S. Tax Court that invalidated an Internal Revenue Service cost-sharing regulation in a dispute with an Intel Corp. subsidiary, saying the revenue agency did not exceed its authority in promulgating the rule.

In a 2-1 decision, the appeals court said the IRS is entitled to deference and was justified in issuing the rule under the Administrative Procedure Act, despite comments from the public that opposed the regulation.

The Tax Court had sided with Altera Corp., an Intel subsidiary, in the case in July 2015 after finding that the IRS had ignored significant evidence and public comments while issuing its rule requiring cost-sharing agreements between related parties to include the costs of stock-based compensation.

“Treasury’s refusal to credit oppositional comments is not fatal to a holding that it complied with the APA,” Chief Judge Sidney R. Thomas wrote on behalf of the panel. “Treasury gave sufficient notice of what it intended to do and why; it considered the comments, but it rejected them.”

 The case is Altera Corp. and Subsidiaries v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, case numbers 16-70496 and 16-70497, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Have a IRS Tax Problem? 
 

  
Contact the Tax Lawyers at 
Marini& Associates, P.A. 
 
 
for a FREE Tax HELP Contact Us at:

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


 

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Understanding IRS Tax Audits – Part I

Careful advance preparation can help reduce the scope of a tax audit or examination and can lead to a more favorable outcome. Although a thorough understanding of the underlying facts and applicable law is a must, understanding IRS procedures is critical to preserving a taxpayer’s rights.

We summarize below and in Parts II & III, to follow later, some of the more important IRS procedural rules and guidelines governing civil IRS examinations and audits, including: how returns are selected for examination; a brief description of the types of civil examinations; an explanation of the tools available to IRS examining agents and revenue agents; dispositions in IRS audits or examinations and, if necessary, where to seek relief from an unfavorable result in an examination or audit.

Selecting Tax Returns for Examination

It is helpful to understand how tax returns are selected for examination. The IRS selects returns for examinations in several ways, some based upon objective criteria coded into a carefully protected computer program and others based upon old fashioned detective work.

The main computer program that the Service uses to identify returns for examination is the Discriminate Function System. The Discriminate Function (DIF) score is the product of a mathematical formula for identifying and selecting returns for examination. The program scores tax returns using a formula based on historic information obtained from specific examination programs. A high DIF score indicates a high potential for adjustment. The Service periodically conducts compliance studies to update and reformulate its basis for audit selection formulas.

Different types of taxpayers and returns are subject to different DIF formulas. While the specifics of the program are not public, certain items appear to cause a return to be selected for examination, such as participation in a tax shelter, large charitable contributions, home office deductions, large travel and entertainment expense or large automobile expense. Returns selected under the DIF program are then manually screened so that attachments to the return and other data that a computer cannot detect can be properly considered.

The Service also relies on information provided by third parties, such as banks, brokers and employers. Much of this information is required to be reported by payers of certain types of income on Forms W-2 or 1099. Referrals may also be made by other examining agents. For example, the return of a party related to another taxpayer being audited, such as the partners of a partnership being audited may also be selected for audit. The Service also may investigate tips regarding potential noncompliance, and select those returns for audit as a result. Examinations may also be triggered a variety of other ways, such as, by mathematical errors or missing information. Also, a claim for refund can trigger an examination.

Types of IRS Examinations

IRS civil examinations can take a variety of forms, depending upon the type of taxpayer, the complexity of the tax return and the initially determined scope of the exam. The simplest examinations conducted by the IRS are Campus Examinations. Campus Examinations are correspondence exams addressing simple problems like substantiation that can be resolved easily by correspondence and/or telephone. Area Office Examinations may be conducted for slightly more complicated issues such as small business returns and more complex non-business returns. Area Office Examinations may be conducted by correspondence, office interview or even by a field examination, depending on type and complexity of the return. In all cases, the taxpayer is asked to provide supporting documentation of questionable items. Business returns will always be examined in an office or field interview rather than a correspondence examination.

Examiners at the correspondence and office levels are much less invasive. The examining agents are required to process many cases and often have little time to completely familiarize themselves with the return. Indeed, the examiner may not have reviewed the taxpayer’s file and return until after the taxpayer has replied to all correspondence regarding the examination, and often not until the day of the interview. The scope of office examinations is generally limited to items on a checklist of issues contained in the Internal Revenue Manual. The examiners have little discretion and basically, are charged with verifying income and deductions based upon records provided. A taxpayer’s inability to produce adequate records may lead not only to disallowance of the disputed items for the year at issue, but also to audits of other years’ returns.

Field Examinations involve more complex issues. The examining agent will be a revenue agent, as opposed to an office auditor. He or she will be better trained and will have had more experience. A Field Examination consists of examination of a taxpayer’s books and records at the taxpayer’s place of business or where the books, records or source documents are maintained. The agent will review the taxpayer’s entire return and all documentation related to that return. The agent may be assisted by a technical specialist such as an “engineer agent” if the return presents a special issue such as valuation. Unlike, office auditors, revenue agents spend considerable time preparing for the examination. Prior to the examination, the revenue agent will review any prior examination reports from the same taxpayer. This may lead to scrutiny of recurring issues or inclusion of other years’ returns in the examination. Of course, the revenue agent will also look at the return for unusual or questionable items.

Taxpayer Rights During an IRS Audit

Taxpayers are guaranteed certain important rights during audits and examinations. Among these rights is the right to be provided certain information describing the examination process and other rights at the commencement of the examination. Examinations must be conducted at a reasonable time and place and taxpayers have the right to bring representation to any interview. Taxpayers have the right to record any interviews with the agent. Taxpayers also have the right not to be interviewed, except through the summons process, and must be notified of any summons to a third party and of their right to quash any such summons. Importantly, taxpayers have the right to have their tax information kept confidential.

Burden of Proof

Under prior law, there was a rebuttable presumption that IRS’s determination of tax liability is correct, and therefore (with some exceptions such as fraud), the burden of proof was on the taxpayer to show that the IRS’s determination was wrong. Under new law, the IRS has the burden of proof in any court proceeding with respect to a factual issue related to income, estate, gift, and generation-skipping transfer taxes if the taxpayer introduces credible evidence relevant to the determination of the taxpayer’s tax liability. To be eligible, the taxpayer must prove that he or she complied with required statutory and regulatory substantiation and recordkeeping requirements; cooperated with reasonable IRS requests for meetings, interviews, witnesses, documents, and information; and (if not an individual) met certain net worth limitations. Cooperation generally involves: providing reasonable assistance to the IRS in accessing witnesses, information, and documents not within the taxpayer’s control; exhausting administrative remedies, including IRS appeal rights; and establishing the applicability of a privilege. Cooperation does not require that the taxpayer agree to an extension of the limitations period. The IRS continues to have the burden of proving fraud, irrespective of the new law.

To be continued... Understanding IRS Tax Audits - Part II

Have a IRS Tax Problem? 


  
Contact the Tax Lawyers at 
Marini& Associates, P.A. 
 
 
for a FREE Tax HELP Contact Us at:

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

Read more at: Tax Times blog

IRS Added 6 New Compliance Campaigns Audit Strategies for LB&I

On May 24, 2018 we posted IRS Has 6 New Compliance Campaigns Audit Strategies for LB&I where we discussed that on may 21, 2018 the irs announced the identification of 6 large business and international compliance campaigns.

Now on July 2, 2018, the IRS announced that it has identified and selected the following five additional issues: 

  1. Restoration of sequestered AMT credit carryforward. This campaign targets taxpayers who improperly restore the sequestered alternative minimum tax (AMT) credit to a subsequent tax year. Refunds issued or applied to a subsequent year's tax, under Former Code Section 168(k)(4) ((which provided the election to trade depreciation benefits for a refund of otherwise-deferred AMT credits), are subject to sequestration and are a permanent loss of refundable credits. Taxpayers may not restore the sequestered amounts to their AMT credit carryforward. Initially, soft letters will be mailed to taxpayers who are identified as making improper restorations of sequestered amounts, and taxpayers will be monitored for subsequent compliance.
  2. S corporation distributions. S corporations and their shareholders are required to properly report the tax consequences of distributions. This campaign focuses on three issues: (1) when an S corporation fails to report gain upon the distribution of appreciated property to a shareholder; (2) when an S corporation fails to determine that a distribution (in either cash or property) is properly taxable as a dividend; and (3) when a shareholder fails to report non-dividend distributions in excess of their stock basis that are subject to taxation. This campaign includes issue-based examinations, tax form change suggestions, and stakeholder outreach.
  3. Virtual currency. U.S. persons are subject to tax on worldwide income from all sources including transactions involving virtual currency. IRS Notice 2014-21, 2014-16 IRB 938, states that virtual currency is property for federal tax purposes and provides information on the U.S. federal tax implications of convertible virtual currency transactions. This campaign addresses noncompliance related to the use of virtual currency through multiple approaches, including outreach and examinations. The compliance activities will follow the general tax principles applicable to all transactions in property, as outlined in Notice 2014-21. IRS will continue to consider and solicit taxpayer and practitioner feedback in education efforts, future guidance, and development of Practice Units. Taxpayers with unreported virtual currency transactions are urged to correct their returns as soon as practical. IRS is not contemplating a voluntary disclosure program specifically to address tax non-compliance involving virtual currency.
  4. Repatriation via foreign triangular reorganizations. In December 2016, IRS issued Notice 2016-73, 2016-52 IRB 908, which curtails the claimed "tax-free" repatriation of basis and untaxed controlled foreign corporation (CFC) earnings following the use of certain foreign triangular reorganization transactions. This campaign will identify and challenge these transactions by educating and assisting examination teams in audits of these repatriations. and
  5. Code Sec. 965 transition tax. Code Sec. 965 requires U.S. shareholders to pay a transition tax on the untaxed foreign earnings of certain specified foreign corporations as if those earnings had been repatriated to the U.S. Taxpayers may elect to pay the transition tax in installments over an eight-year period. For some taxpayers, some or all of the tax will be due on their 2017 income tax return. The tax is payable as of the due date of the return (without extensions). LB&I has engaged in an outreach campaign to leverage the reach of trade groups, advisors and other outside stakeholders to raise awareness of the filing and payment obligations under this provision. 
    Want To Avoid An International Tax Audit by IRS LB&I ?
     
     
    Contact the Tax Lawyers atMarini & Associates, P.A.
     
     
     for a FREE Tax Consultation Contact us at:
    www.TaxAid.com or www.OVDPLaw.com
    or Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888 882-9243).
     

     

New compliance campaigns
Continuing a process that it began in January 2017, IRS Large Business and International division (LB&I) has announced the approval of five additional compliance campaigns.
Background. In January of 2017, IRS announced a new audit strategy for its LB&I division known as "campaigns" essentially, shifting its strategy toward issue-based examinations based on compliance issues that LB&I determines present greater levels of compliance risk and thereby improving return selection. IRS initially selected 13 compliance issues when it rolled out this strategy (see "IRS rolls out Large Business and International campaign audit strategy" (2/2/2017).
In November, 2017 (see "IRS adds new issues to LB&I's campaign audit strategy"); March, 2018 (see "IRS adds new issues to LB&I's campaign audit strategy"); and May, 2018 (see "IRS again adds issues to LB&I's campaign audit strategy"), IRS added to the initial January 2017 list.

New issues identified. On July 2, 2018, IRS announced that it has identified and selected the following five additional issues:
Restoration of sequestered AMT credit carryforward. This campaign targets taxpayers who improperly restore the sequestered alternative minimum tax (AMT) credit to a subsequent tax year. Refunds issued or applied to a subsequent year's tax, under Former Code Section 168(k)(4) ((which provided the election to trade depreciation benefits for a refund of otherwise-deferred AMT credits), are subject to sequestration and are a permanent loss of refundable credits. Taxpayers may not restore the sequestered amounts to their AMT credit carryforward. Initially, soft letters will be mailed to taxpayers who are identified as making improper restorations of sequestered amounts, and taxpayers will be monitored for subsequent compliance.
S corporation distributions. S corporations and their shareholders are required to properly report the tax consequences of distributions. This campaign focuses on three issues: (1) when an S corporation fails to report gain upon the distribution of appreciated property to a shareholder; (2) when an S corporation fails to determine that a distribution (in either cash or property) is properly taxable as a dividend; and (3) when a shareholder fails to report non-dividend distributions in excess of their stock basis that are subject to taxation. This campaign includes issue-based examinations, tax form change suggestions, and stakeholder outreach.
Virtual currency. U.S. persons are subject to tax on worldwide income from all sources including transactions involving virtual currency. IRS Notice 2014-21, 2014-16 IRB 938, states that virtual currency is property for federal tax purposes and provides information on the U.S. federal tax implications of convertible virtual currency transactions. This campaign addresses noncompliance related to the use of virtual currency through multiple approaches, including outreach and examinations. The compliance activities will follow the general tax principles applicable to all transactions in property, as outlined in Notice 2014-21. IRS will continue to consider and solicit taxpayer and practitioner feedback in education efforts, future guidance, and development of Practice Units. Taxpayers with unreported virtual currency transactions are urged to correct their returns as soon as practical. IRS is not contemplating a voluntary disclosure program specifically to address tax non-compliance involving virtual currency.
Repatriation via foreign triangular reorganizations. In December 2016, IRS issued Notice 2016-73, 2016-52 IRB 908, which curtails the claimed "tax-free" repatriation of basis and untaxed controlled foreign corporation (CFC) earnings following the use of certain foreign triangular reorganization transactions. This campaign will identify and challenge these transactions by educating and assisting examination teams in audits of these repatriations.
Code Sec. 965 transition tax.Code Sec. 965 requires U.S. shareholders to pay a transition tax on the untaxed foreign earnings of certain specified foreign corporations as if those earnings had been repatriated to the U.S. Taxpayers may elect to pay the transition tax in installments over an eight-year period. For some taxpayers, some or all of the tax will be due on their 2017 income tax return. The tax is payable as of the due date of the return (without extensions). LB&I has engaged in an outreach campaign to leverage the reach of trade groups, advisors and other outside stakeholders to raise awareness of the filing and payment obligations under this provision.

Read more at: Tax Times blog

IRS Spent $380 Million on FATCA but took NO Action Against Offshore Tax Dodgers?

 What Happened To The FATCA  Wrecking Ball?
 

Despite pouring nearly $380 million into a new tax enforcement initiative, the U.S. government took “limited or no action’’ in its campaign to battle secretive offshore holdings used to dodge taxes, according to a new report by a federal watchdog.

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) report paints a bleak picture of the agency’s ability to enforce a landmark Obama-era law meant to reign in shady offshore holdings by collecting information on foreign accounts directly from banks and other financial institutions.

Instead of ushering in a new era of tough scrutiny on offshore hideaways, the report says the new law produced a mountain of error-laden paperwork that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is struggling to validate, while some of the most important aspects of the agency’s responsibilities under the law have languished.

Known as the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, or FATCA, the offshore tax law was passed by Congress in 2010 in response to the proliferation of secret offshore activity. The law requires foreign financial institutions to identify their American clients and turn information regarding those clients over to the IRS. The IRS hoped U.S. taxpayers hiding money abroad would declare their assets for fear of being ratted out by their agents.

And, after the law’s original passage, the rate of Americans renouncing their citizenship, and thus no longer subject to FATCA’s tax provisions, accelerated after the law’s passage, according to Bloomberg News. But such extremes measures may have been unnecessary.

The TIGTA Determined the IRS Had Taken “Limited or No Action on a Majority” of Measures to Enforce the Offshore Tax Law Included in a So-Called “Compliance Roadmap.”

Responding to the TIGTA’s report, the IRS said that the roadmap was “not intended to be a comprehensive compliance plan” and that the planning document “could not envision future policy changes.” The IRS said the “report leaves the reader with the incorrect impression that FATCA is not being enforced.”

The law’s proper implementation rests on the IRS receiving accurate information from the financial institutions that provide details on foreign accounts. Yet, the report states that the related paperwork the IRS has received is rife with faulty taxpayer identification numbers. Among TIGTA’s recommendations that the IRS agreed to adopt is a pledge to address errors in paperwork.

In recent years, large staffing cuts have plagued the IRS’s efforts to collect taxes it is owed. In an interview with ICIJ in December, John Koskinen, the recently-departed commissioner of the IRS said:  

“The Cuts in the IRS Budget Have Ramifications... I’m Concerned That the Resource Constraints Make Us Less Effective and Ultimately People Are Going to Worry about Whether the Tax System Is Fair.”

--------------------------

Have a IRS Tax Problem? 

Contact the Tax Lawyers at 
Marini& Associates, P.A. 
 
 
for FREE Tax HELP ... Contact Us at:

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

 

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Live Help