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

call us toll free: 888-8TAXAID

Monthly Archives: June 2021

IRS Makes Changes to Practitioner Priority Service and Automated Collection System

In issue 2021-05e-News for Payroll Professionals (05/27/2021), the IRS announced that it has made changes to the services provided by the Practitioner Priority Service and Automated Collection System. 

The Practitioner Priority Service (PPS) is a support line staffed by IRS assistors specially trained to handle practitioners' questions about their taxpayer clients' accounts. PPS is available to all tax professionals with a valid taxpayer authorization (i.e., Form 2848, Power of Attorney and Declaration of Representative; Form 8821, Tax Information Authorization; or Form 8655, Reporting Agent Authorization). (Practitioner Priority Service)

The Automated Collection System (ACS) is a call center that was created to provide taxpayers and their representatives with the opportunity to resolve delinquent tax obligations with a single telephone contact. The ACS computer system allows ACS assistors to take a wide range of actions to resolve collection issues. (Internal Revenue Manual (IRM) 5.19.5.1(1))

Under the recently announced service changes:

  • ACS will now exclusively resolve collection issues. Taxpayer representatives working with ACS to resolve collection issues will need the taxpayer's authorization on Form 2848. Representatives without a taxpayer's authorization on Form 2848 can't act on behalf of the taxpayer to resolve collection issues.
  • PPS assistors will not handle any collection activities, including setting up installment agreements or short-term payment plans. However, PPS assistors will continue to work with representatives with taxpayer authorizations on Form 2848, Form 8821, or Form 8655 to resolve issues such as misapplied payments, correcting math error issues, account adjustments, and missing returns. 

To minimize any disruptions resulting from these service changes, the IRS has updated the PPS automated recording to say: "If your client's account is in Automated Collection System status, ACS, or you need to address balance due issues, press or say 4."

Have IRS Tax Problems?


     Contact the Tax Lawyers at

Marini & Associates, P.A. 

for a FREE Tax HELP Contact us at:
www.TaxAid.com or www.OVDPLaw.com
or 
Toll Free at 888 8TAXAID (888-882-9243) 




Read more at: Tax Times blog

All That You Wanted to Know About Form 706NA – Part I

On Tuesday, August 15, 2017 we posted Issues Concerning Filing a Form 706NA? where we discussed that deceased nonresidents who were not American citizens are subject to U.S. estate taxation with respect to their U.S.-situated assets. We also discussed that Many foreigners owning property or assets in the United States are in violation of 706-NA filing requirements because of a number of misunderstandings. The basic rule is pretty clear-if a foreign decedent has assets in the United States with a gross value in excess of $60,000, the estate is supposed to file a tax return with the Internal Revenue Service. 

Now we are supplementing this posting with a discussion regarding Form 706 NA in a 3 part series, which we have titled All That You Wanted to Know About Form 706NA. PART 1: 

In the area of estate tax compliance, many of us have prepared Form 706’s, the estate tax return for US citizens and domiciliaries.  To be sure, this form is quite voluminous and can take a while to fill out but there are very few mysteries beyond schedule E; what percentage of an asset might be includable in an estate, the value of an annuity, what debts and expenses are deductible, the calculation of the marital deduction, and the generation-skipping tax computation. 

The Form 706NA, however, preparation of the tax return for the estate of the nonresident alien owning property in the United States, can present a more daunting task.
Form 706NA is deceptively simple- two pages- how difficult could it be to prepare? For 32 years as a senior attorney at the IRS, our Estate Tax Attorney Robert S. Blumenfeld audited these tax returns, and he can tell you that they are more fraught with more potential mystery than the Sphinx. 
Let's look at line 1 where it requests  the decedent's name. Many foreign decedents come from countries where people have hyphenated names, especially the spouses. So is the correct name Maria Smith or Maria Smith- Gonzalez? It is often best to go back to the country where the decedent lived and use the name which drops the post hyphenated portion. Most of the tax returns that he has seen or prepared, are based it on this concept.
The next box asked for the decedent’s tax identification number. Virtually all American citizens born in the United States are assigned SS#’s at birth so there is no problem. In the case of a nonresident alien (N/A), there is no tax identification number so we enter “N/A-nonresident alien” inbox two. 
This creates the second problem. If the estate has to pay any transfer tax, when the return is filed, there is no module (TIN or SS#) into which the IRS can place the payments. Ergo, the IRS has a fund called “unpostables” where money paid to the IRS lacks an identification number with which to associate it. Therefore, if you file a Form 706NA which shows tax, be certain to keep a copy of the front of the check and photostat the endorsement after the check is negotiated. This is the least difficult way to associate the payment with the tax return. Absent keeping these two identification benchmarks, it could take many months for the IRS to agree that the payment in the unpostable module should be associated with a particular estate.
Decedent’s domicile and citizenship are very critical. The United States currently has circa 20 estate/gift tax treaties with foreign countries, many of which are in Europe. 
A non-resident alien from a non-treaty country receives an estate tax exemption (unified credit) of $13,000 which basically means that the first $60,000 is not taxed. The unified credit for treaty based countries can reach a figure of $5.5 million free of tax. In addition to this, in each instance where one represents a nonresident alien decedent, it is critical to find out whether this is a country which has such a treaty with the United States. 
Next, it is critical to determine the citizenship and domicile of the decedent. When one peruses the individual treaties, one will note that some treaties are based on domicile, others on citizenship.  A German citizen domiciled in say Mexico would not be able to utilize the German treaty because that particular treaty is predicated on domicile. A Mexican citizen however, domiciled in Germany, could enjoy the full benefit of the US/German treaty. Ergo, a German living in Mexico would have a $60,000 exemption from tax while a Mexican domiciled in Germany would have a $5.5 million exemption.

Have a US Estate Tax Problem?


Estate Tax Problems Require

an Experienced Estate Tax Attorney 
 
Contact the Tax Lawyers at
Marini & 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).

Robert S. Blumenfeld  - 
 Estate Tax Counsel
Mr. Blumenfeld concentrates his practice in the areas of International Tax and Estate Planning, Probate Law, and Representation of Resident and Non-Resident Aliens before the IRS.

Prior to joining Marini & Associates, P.A., he spent 32 years as the Senior Attorney with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Office of Deputy Commissioner, International.

While with the IRS, he examined approximately 2,000 Estate Tax Returns and litigated various international and tax issues associated with these returns.As a result of his experience, he has extensive knowledge of the issues associated with and the preparation of U.S. Estate Tax Returns for Resident and Non-Resident Aliens, Gift Tax Returns, Form 706QDT and Qualified Domestic Trusts.

  

 

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Montana Construction Company Owner & New York Plumbing Contractor Sentenced to15 Months & 20 Months in Prison for Employment Tax Fraud!

We previously posted IRS CONTINUES to Criminally Prosecutes Employers For Failure To Pay Withheld Payroll Taxes - As Promised! where we discussed that the IRS is stepping up criminally prosecuting business owners for failing to turn over withheld payroll taxes.

Now according to the DoJ, a Montana man was sentenced to 15 months in prison for employment tax fraud. According to court documents and statements made in court, 

Trennis Baer, of Great Falls, owned and operated Baer Construction based in Great Falls. Beginning in 2010 and continuing through 2018, Baer did not file quarterly employment tax returns, nor did he pay employment taxes withheld from his employees’ wages to the IRS. Baer did not comply with these legal requirements, even though the company’s outside accountant from at least 2013 on prepared employment tax returns to be filed and calculated the taxes due. In addition to spurning his employment tax obligations, Baer willfully did not file personal income tax returns for the years 2001 to 2006, 2008, and 2010 to 2018. The total tax loss to the IRS from Baer’s conduct is more than $1.5 million. 

In addition to the term of imprisonment, U.S. District Judge Brian Morris ordered Baer to serve two years of supervised release and to pay approximately $935,251 in restitution to the United States.

Also according to the DoJ, a New York man was also sentenced to 20 months in prison for failing to collect and pay over to the IRS $732,462 in employment taxes. 

Sergei Denko, of Queens, New York, owned and operated Denko Mechanical Inc. and Independent Mechanical Inc., both contracting businesses in Queens that specialized in plumbing. According to court documents and statements made in court, from 2010 through 2014, Denko cashed more than $5 million in checks made out to companies he owned and operated to fund an “off the books” cash payroll. 

He did not report the cash wages to the IRS, filed false employment tax returns, and did not pay to the IRS the employment taxes arising from the cash payroll. 

Denko admitted to causing a total tax loss of $732,462 . In addition to the term of imprisonment, U.S. District Judge Rachel P. Kovner ordered Denko to serve one year of supervised release. The defendant has already paid $366,231 in restitution to the United States.  

Thinking of Borrowing From Your Company's
Payroll Tax Withholdings?

You Better Thank Again, if You Like Your Freedom!


Have Payroll Tax Problems?
 
 
 Contact the Tax Lawyers at 
Marini & Associates, P.A.  

for a FREE Tax HELP Contact Us at:
or Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Queens Acupuncture Clinic Owner Uses the C-Duction (Cash) and is Now Charged with Tax Crimes

According to the DoJ, a Queens Acupuncture Clinic Owner Charged with Tax Crimes A federal grand jury in Brooklyn, New York, returned an indictment on June 4, charging a New York City woman with conspiring to defraud the United States and aiding and assisting in the preparation of a false tax return. 

According to the indictment, from 2008 to 2013, Alice Bixuan Zhang of Queens owned and operated Welling Physical Therapy and Acupuncture PLLC (Welling) and, from 2012 to 2013, co-owned Wellife Physical Therapy and Acupuncture PLLC (Wellife). 

Both businesses had locations throughout New York City. As charged, Zhang and her co-conspirator took multiple steps to reduce the income they reported and taxes they paid to the IRS. 

  • They allegedly diverted funds from Welling and Wellife to other entities that they controlled (“Related Companies”), and 
  • Zhang and her co-conspirator reported those funds as deductible business expenses, thereby reducing the taxable income of Welling and Wellife.
  • Zhang and her co-conspirator then allegedly sought to conceal from the IRS income earned by the Related Companies by cashing checks made to those firms at a check cashing business, and not disclosing that income to their tax return preparers, which resulted in the preparation of false income tax returns. 

Zhang will make her initial court appearance at a later date before a U.S. Magistrate Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. 

If convicted, she faces a maximum penalty of five (5) years in prison on the conspiracy charge and three (3) years in prison for assisting in filing a false return.

An indictment is merely an allegation and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.


Have a Criminal Tax Problem?


Value Your Freedom?

Contact the Tax Lawyers at
Marini & 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)


Read more at: Tax Times blog

Live Help