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

call us toll free: 888-8TAXAID

Monthly Archives: November 2022

Notice 2017-10 Conservation Easement Penalty Notice Struck Down By Tax Court

According the Law360The IRS violated administrative law in issuing a notice requiring the disclosure of potentially abusive conservation easement transactions under threat of penalty, the U.S. Tax Court ruled on November 9, 2022, striking down the guidance and rejecting penalties the agency sought to impose on four North Carolina partnerships.

In a 15-2 opinion, the Tax Court found that the Internal Revenue Service violated the public feedback requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act in issuing Notice 2017-10 , which flagged so-called syndicated conservation easements as "listed transactions" that are potentially abusive and required them to be disclosed to the agency. Contrary to arguments made by the IRS, Congress didn't permit the agency to skirt the APA's notice-and-comment requirements when issuing such listed transaction notices, the Tax Court said.

"We remain unconvinced that Congress expressly authorized the IRS to identify a syndicated conservation easement transaction as a listed transaction without the APA's notice-and-comment procedures, as it did in Notice 2017-10," the opinion said.

The Court Also Said It "Intends To Apply This Decision
Setting Aside Notice 2017-10 To The Benefit Of
All Similarly Situated Taxpayers Who Come Before Us."

In the case, the IRS disallowed conservation easement deductions, each exceeding $22 million, claimed by Green Valley Investors LLC, Vista Hill Investments LLC, Big Hill Partners LLC and Tick Creek Holdings LLC, saying they didn't meet statutory requirements. The agency also sought to assess penalties under Internal Revenue Code Section 6662A for their failure to properly disclose the transactions as required by Notice 2017-10. 

The agency has contended it didn't have to comply with the APA's comment requirements because the guidance is an interpretive rule that distills an agency's understanding of the law, rather than a legislative rule that essentially builds on existing law and creates new requirements.

But even if the guidance is more akin to a legislative rule, the IRS has argued that Congress exempted the agency from complying with the APA requirements in issuing the notice by adopting the IRS' disclosure framework, according to the opinion. The agency pointed to the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004, which enacted Section 6662A after the IRS already had been identifying listed transactions with the potential for tax abuse, the Tax Court said.

The Tax Court Rejected Those Arguments, Finding That The Notice Is A Legislative Rule Because It Imposes Substantive Reporting Obligations On Taxpayers And Their Advisors,
With The Threat Of Penalties If They Don't Comply,
According To The Opinion.

And Congress didn't provide any exemption from the APA for the IRS when issuing Notice 2017-10, the Tax Court found. It specifically noted that IRC 6707A, which outlines penalties for listed transactions,  doesn't contain an explicit exemption from the APA's rules for the IRS, according to the opinion.

Moreover, the Tax Court rejected the IRS' arguments that Congress adopted the agency's procedures for identifying listed transactions, thereby exempting it from the notice-and-comment requirements, in enacting a subsection of Section 6707A. It said it was likewise unconvinced that Congress essentially approved the process for identifying listed transactions when it later heightened the penalties for reporting failures.

"We cannot accept the enactment of the AJCA as Congress' blanket approval of the IRS's method of identifying a syndicated conservation easement as a listed transaction in Notice 2017-10 without notice and comment," the opinion said.

U.S. Tax Court Judges Joseph W. Nega and Joseph H. Gale dissented, with Judge Gale writing that he believed Congress meant to exempt the IRS from complying with the APA's requirements. Judge Nega agreed, saying in a separate dissent that the legislative history and other factors lead him "to the conclusion that Congress did not intend to enact the AJCA penalty regime subject to the time-consuming notice-and-comment procedures of the APA."

The Tax Court's opinion is the latest development in the IRS' legal battles over its administrative law compliance, with a Tennessee federal court in March setting aside a similar notice for microcaptive insurance arrangements and the Sixth Circuit likewise voiding a different notice for potentially abusive benefit trust arrangements.


Have an IRS Tax Problem?

     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

Digital Nomads Create Cross-Border Tax Complications and Possible PE Exposure.

According to Law360The normalization of remote work has prompted companies to embrace geographic mobility, but for businesses seeking to accommodate digital nomads, those untethered to specific locations, the associated tax headaches of global teleworking may narrow what employers can offer in practice.


Nearly 17 million U.S. workers describe themselves as digital nomads, an increase of 131% from 2019, the year before the coronavirus pandemic forced the closure of offices worldwide, according to a recent study from payroll company MBO Partners. Most digital nomads are full-time employees, rather than independent workers, reflecting the overall shift in workplace culture that has caused many companies to tout flexible teleworking policies.

But the bounds of remote work may ultimately be limited by long-standing international tax rules and treaties, which could create new compliance obligations for employers and employees alike depending on what mobile workers do and how long they stay somewhere. The circumstances that trigger tax liabilities can also vary by country, leaving companies to grapple with new teleworking policies under an old system, potentially making it challenging to determine how much mobility they can allow without causing disproportionate tax complications.

Employers are working within the parameters of tax laws and bilateral agreements that don't reflect the way people are working anymore, according to Richard Tonge, a principal with Grant Thornton LLP and leader of the firm's global mobility services practice in the U.S. From an income tax perspective, that can be a real challenge, he said.


The term "digital nomad" first appeared in 1997, when high-speed internet and other online tools allowed for a "location-independent, technology-enabled lifestyle," according to the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. The concept skyrocketed in popularity during the pandemic, which forced many people to telecommute indefinitely.

According To MBO Study, The Number Of Digital Nomads
With Traditional Jobs, Full-Time Employment With An Organization, Doubled In 2020 Before Increasing By 42% In 2021 And By 9% In 2022, Amounting To 11.1 Million This Year.

Remote work policies often come with tax obligations that generally stem from the requirement that employees must pay income tax in the countries where they're working. Employers, accordingly, have to report that income and remit the appropriate taxes, a process that requires registering with tax authorities and managing payroll in the host country, according to Chris Pollard, an international tax services senior manager at Crowe LLP.

These international compliance requirements can be similar to those in the U.S., where workers crossed state borders during the pandemic without always knowing about the related tax obligations, he said.

"What The Employees And The Employers Didn't Fully
Realize Is That When They Are ...Bouncing Around,
They're Creating For The Organization Filing
Obligations In All Of Those Locations," Pollard Said.


Beyond individual tax obligations, remote work may also trigger employer tax liabilities if the employee's job activities create a permanent establishment, or PE, which represents a taxable corporate presence in a jurisdiction.

According to the OECD's model tax convention, which most countries use as a basis for their treaties, a company will be deemed to have a PE in a country where an employee concludes contracts on behalf of the business. Some tax treaties, including the U.S.-Canada accord, also consider employees to create a PE when they perform certain services.

A services PE could be created when an individual is providing services to the company that help it generate revenue in the host location, Pollard said. Concerns about PE creation and other tax issues have limited how far companies are willing to go to accommodate remote workers.


Companies that want to facilitate remote work in different countries have a few options to help with compliance, from third-party employment organizations to so-called digital nomad visas, that could be weighed against varying tax risks and administrative requirements.

Businesses with workers who are operating in a foreign country can turn to a third-party professional employer organization, or PEO, which operates as a so-called employer of record in a jurisdiction, where it manages payroll and other compliance services. However, while PEOs can take care of administrative issues, the company could still owe tax in that jurisdiction, according to Tonge, who noted PEOs "could be transparent from a corporate tax perspective."

Employers could also establish their own global employment company to manage payroll and other local compliance issues for employees working remotely.

Have Digital Nomads Tax Problem?

     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

Tax Havens, Including Puerto Rico, Profits Increased From 2% of 37% in 2019


According to Law360Multinational companies moved an estimated 37% of profits, nearly $1 trillion, to so-called tax havens in 2019, according to a United Nations study.


The study, published Tuesday, called it a "remarkable" increase since 1975, when multinationals booked just 2% of profits in low-tax jurisdictions they were not headquartered in. The study was published by United Nations University, a U.N. think tank and postgraduate organization.

The study's authors defined tax havens as having "excessive profitability of foreign firms" and effective corporate tax rates of less than 15%. They said the growth of corporate profit shifting dovetailed with the increasing profitability of multinational enterprises.


These tax jurisdictions are Andorra, Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, The Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, Cyprus, Gibraltar, Grenada, Guernsey, Hong Kong, Ireland, the Isle of Man, Jersey, Lebanon, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Macau, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Monaco, Netherlands, the Netherlands Antilles, Panama, Puerto Rico, Samoa, Seychelles, Singapore, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent &

Grenadines, Switzerland, Turks and Caicos, Vanuatu.
Among tax havens, Puerto Rico still stands out with an exceptionally high profits-to-wage ratio of about 1,600 per cent for foreign firms. In Ireland, the profits-to-wage ratio of foreign firms dropped from about 800 per cent to less than 500 per cent over the 2015–19 period.




One of the authors, Ludvig Wier, said in a news release that the findings of the study point to "a dire need for additional policy initiatives to significantly reduce global profit shifting," and called on countries to implement the globally agreed-upon deal for a 15% minimum corporate tax.


Need International Tax Advice?
 
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

They're Back! Automated Collection Notices to Phase Back In Soon.

On  we posted IRS Suspends Mailing Of Additional Letters & Notices, where we discussed that according to IR-2022-31 issued on February 9, 2022, the IRS announced the suspension of more than a dozen additional letters, including the mailing of automated collection notices normally issued when a taxpayer owes additional tax, and the IRS has no record of a taxpayer filing a tax return.

Now according Thompson Reuters, these temporarily suspended mailings of automated collection notices will resume on a staggered basis to spare IRS customer service representatives and tax practitioners from a deluge of taxpayer correspondence, though it is unclear when this process will or should begin.

National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins explained as much to the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants’ (AICPA) Tax Executive Committee in a closed-door meeting November 2 in Washington, D.C. According to Collins, the IRS “has a plan” for how it will restart the mailing of collection notices that were halted in February, which is to “spread it over a period of time.”

“When they make the decision, they’re not just going to flip the switch and 50 million notices go out on the same day,” Collins said to the AICPA committee comprised of tax professionals across several firms. 

“Their Goal Is To Spread It Out Every Three,
Four Weeks, And To Try And Keep The Levels Down
So That The Phones Aren’t Inundated The Minute
The Letters Go Out And You All Aren’t Inundated.”


At Wednesday’s meeting, a member asked if taxpayers would be receiving the next subsequent notice (such as a second warning after the initial letter) or if the passage of time would automatically trigger levies.

“My understanding is it’ll go in order. That is the intent,” Collins answered. She followed up, though, that some IRS agents may still wish to pursue larger amounts, but for now the marching orders are to hold off.

Edward Karl, vice president of taxation at the AICPA, voiced concern that even if notices were staggered weeks apart, it would not ultimately matter if the process begins at a time when practitioners have their plates full, like when “people are already in the throes of second tax season,” as he described.

Have an IRS Tax Problem?

     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

Live Help