Cases, Rulings, Regulations

This podcast reviews the requirements for qualified appraisals and why, just because an appraisal exists, that won't necessarily save the taxpayers' deduction unless have specifically contracted for a tax appraisal and are sure to have the proper parties sign off on their return.The documentation rules for charitable contributions can create situations where taxpayers lose the right to claim a deduction even though they made it and, by the time they get to Tax Court, can even show the value of what was contributed.  This was a lesson learned by the taxpayers in Ney v. Commisssioner, TC Summary 2006-154.Be sure to check out the important LISI Charitable Planning Newsletters # 104 and 105 at http://www.leimbergservices.com on this topic.  They discuss the changes made by the Pension Protection Act of 2006 to substantiation requirements for cash gifts.The materials for this week's podcast are located at http://edzollars.com/2006-09-23_Charity_Appraisals.pdf . This Podcast is sponsored by Leim

This PodCast concerns a case involving the statute of limitations and the issue of reliance on IRS advice.  In the case of A. L. Katz & J. L. Miller v. United States the United States Court of Claims explains that a taxpayer cannot use the fact that an IRS employee told them a claim could be filed by a date that turned out to be after the statute had expired to reopen the statute.  The case provides an opportunity to look at the general rules that are involved with Section 6511 and the statute of limitations on claims for refund.The materials for the podcast can be downloaded from http://edzollars.com/2006-09-16_Statute.pdf . This Podcast is sponsored by Leimberg Information Services, Inc. at http://www.leimbergservices.com Please visit our software, books, and PowerPoint Presentations site at http://www.leimberg.com

This PodCast deals with the issues involved with having cars that are used by employees, and the various rules that employers need to deal with in that situation.  While arguably not as 'exciting' to tax practitioners as issues dealing with estate planning, entity selection and the like (we get excited by strange things), clients are often extremely interested in getting company autos to certain employees, far more interested than the dollars involved would suggest they should be. We look at the employment tax issues related to the company car, as well the requirements to meet the various 'simplified' rules available for this purpose.The materials can be downloaded at http://edzollars.com/2006-09-01_Employee_Cars.pdf . This Podcast is sponsored by Leimberg Information Services, Inc. at http://www.leimbergservices.com Please visit our software, books, and PowerPoint Presentations site at http://www.leimberg.com

This PodCast covers some of the things you need to consider if your children are on your payroll.Paying your children to work in your business can make sense both for the business and from a family tax planning standpoint, but you have to take care to justify that the children are truly being paid for actual business work.  This was the little item that caused the taxpayer problems in the case of Alexander v. Commissioner, TC Summary 2006-127.  While the case may mainly demonstrate the truth of the old "pigs/hogs" tax saying, the opinion also helps illustrate issues that need to be considered when a close relative is placed on the payroll.  You can download the materials for this podcast at http://edzollars.com/2006-08-26_But_My_Kids_Are_Worth_It.pdf This Podcast is sponsored by Leimberg Information Services, Inc. at http://www.leimbergservices.com Please visit our software, books, and PowerPoint Presentations site at http://www.leimberg.com

This PodCast  deals with the continuing problems of employee related options that were exercised when the stock was at a high price, but whose price collapsed before the tax was due.  The case involved was the case of Racine v. Commissioner, TC Memo 2006-162.The materials can be downloaded at http://edzollars.com/2006-08-19_Margins_and_Options.pdf . This Podcast is sponsored by Leimberg Information Services, Inc. at http://www.leimbergservices.com Please visit our software, books, and PowerPoint Presentations site at http://www.leimberg.com

This PodCast is about taxpayer advice and its reliability and its credibility in court.  Taxpayers get their advice from a lot of sources, and we often end up having to defend our own advice against other sources.  This week we have two cases that show that all advice is not created equal.  In the case of Lehrer v. Commissioner (TC Memo 2006-156) a taxpayer learned the hard way that selecting a preparer predominantly on which one computes the lowest tax is not necessarily the best way to end up well advised.And the case of Diem v. Commissioner (TC Summary 2006-121) is useful for those clients that will try and check your advice by calling the IRS for an answer and then reporting the IRS's answer to you (so, you know, you don't have to do any work on that one).  Mr. Diem was clobbered when it turned out an IRS employee's assurance that the program offered by his employer would be treated just like the workers compensation style claim he was giving up for tax purposes turned out not to be so

This PodCast is about the Section 72(t) penalty tax on premature distributions and the question, "Is a distribution made to a surviving spouse that was rolled to her IRA but can be traced to her deceased spouse's IRA account eligible for the death benefit exception to Section 72(t)?"  Considering a nearly $100,000 penalty was on the table, the taxpayer in the case of Gee v. Commissioner (127 TC No. 1) certainly hoped the Tax Court would answer "Yes".  Unfortunately for her, the Tax Court answered in the negative.  We look at the facts of her case, as well as the whole question of whether a surviving spouse should elect to treat an IRA as his/her own or take it as a beneficiary.The materials can be downloaded at http://www.edzollars.com/2006-07-29_IRA_Spouse.pdf . This Podcast is sponsored by Leimberg Information Services, Inc. at http://www.leimbergservices.com Please visit our software, books, and PowerPoint Presentations site at http://www.leimberg.com

This PodCast provides coverage of FASB's Interpretation 46 that deals with uncertain tax positions.  The new interpretation will create some real problems for CPAs, especially those who both handle tax matters and have any sort of attest relationship with the client (including compilations, reviews and audits) that deals with GAAP statements.The materials can be downloaded from http://www.edzollars.com/2006-07-22_FASB_Podcast.pdf   , though the actual FASB interpretation needs to be downloaded from their site ( http://www.fasb.org/st/#int48  ) due to copyright issues-and you will want to download it. This Podcast is sponsored by Leimberg Information Services, Inc. at http://www.leimbergservices.com Please visit our software, books, and PowerPoint Presentations site at http://www.leimberg.com

This PodCast concerns reasonable cause for late filing.  The logic of the application of the IRC to specific situations at times seems to defy common logic. Here, we look at a specific example of such.  In this case, the Tax Court decided that a reasonable cause for late filing that allowed a taxpayer to avoid the late filing penalty was that the court believed the taxpayer in reality had mailed the return on time, even if as a matter of law the return was late filed.  This is an extension of the issue discussed in the October 2005 podcast on proving timely filing.The case in question is Gregorian v. Commissioner, TC Summary 2006-99.The materials can be downloaded from http://edzollars.com/2006-07-15_Late_Filing.pdf .Apologies for some of the audio glitches.  For various reasons, this week I used my Windows laptop to record the podcast--and, as should be clear, the machine proved "suboptimal" even though it used the same tools (hardware and software) as the old Mac iBook I normally us

This PodCast is about the tax implications of a prepaid purchase discount that may need to be refunded if purchase goals are not met.  The issue has resurfaced as the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the Tax Court in the case of Westpac Pacific Foods v. Commissioner.  The Ninth Circuit's views on this topic differ both from those of the Tax Court and the IRS, each of which has it own views on this topic.In the podcast, the question to be addressed is what do we tell our clients who are faced with this issue?  The materials for this podcast can be downloaded from http://edzollars.com/2006-07-08_Westpac_Advances.pdf . This Podcast is sponsored by Leimberg Information Services, Inc. at http://www.leimbergservices.com Please visit our software, books, and PowerPoint Presentations site at http://www.leimberg.com

This Podcast is about construction costs.  We take a look at the regulations under Section 199 as they define construction found at Regulation 1.199-3(m).  These definitions are key for anyone who works with clients in construction related entities.  The materials for this podcast can be downloaded at http://edzollars.com/2006-07-01_Construction.pdf . This Podcast is sponsored by Leimberg Information Services, Inc. at http://www.leimbergservices.com Please visit our software, books, and PowerPoint Presentations site at http://www.leimberg.com

This Podcast is about the importance of following proper form in corporate debt situations.  A few weeks ago (back in April) we looked at the case of Ruckreigel where a taxpayer lost an IRS challenge on whether a debt was truly from the shareholders to the corporation due to a failure to follow the necessary formalities.  This week, the taxpayers strike back with a taxpayer victory in the case of Miller v. Commissioner (TC Memo 2006-125) where the IRS fails in its attempt to reclassify debt that followed the proper form but which the IRS attempted to claim was really debt from the bank to the corporation.The taxpayer achieved victory on this point and the issue of whether the taxpayer was truly at risk as defined in Section 465, even though when all was said and done the taxpayer got out of all liability as the debt was actually paid by other investors who had guaranteed the entire loan structure.  This is an interesting case in showing the extreme importance of following proper form because, f

This PodCast concerns FICA taxation of payments made in exchange for tenure rights as part of an early retirement package offered to teachers.  Another Circuit chimes in on the issue. In a combined appeal of two contradictory opinions of lower courts under their jurisdiction, the Sixth Circuit upheld the lower court's finding in favor of FICA taxation in Appolini and reversed the opposite lower court holding in Klender, both cases that involved early retirement payments to teachers subject to Michigan's tenure law.The Sixth Circuit, in a 2-1 split decision, specifically called into question the Eigth Circuit's holding in North Dakota State University where payments for professor's tenure rights were held not to be subject to FICA.  We look at why the majority believes the North Dakota holding was in error, as well the reasoning behind the dissenting opinion.  As well, we consider the IRS changes to Revenue Rulings in this area, as well as how the courts dealt with the prior rulings that were ap

The IRS on May 15 issued a "Headliner" on their website directed at tax professionals that attempted to explain the treatment of policies purchased by a single employee shareholder of an S corporation in the shareholder's own name.In this podcast we look at the headliner, and consider whether Revenue Ruling 61-146 offers an option that solves the problem this ruling points out.The materials can be downloaded at http://edzollars.com/2006-06-10_Medical_S_Corporation.pdf. This Podcast is sponsored by Leimberg Information Services, Inc. at http://www.leimbergservices.com Please visit our software, books, and PowerPoint Presentations site at http://www.leimberg.com

This Podcast is about extentions of time to file.  This will be of special interest to practitioners (and their clients) who bulk filed paper extensions with the Fresno Service Center.  The IRS recently admitted to a mistake in processing extensions received in Fresno.Materials for the podcast, including two IRS releases on this issue, can be downloaded from http://edzollars.com/2006-06-04_Fresno_4868.pdf. This Podcast is sponsored by Leimberg Information Services, Inc. at http://www.leimbergservices.com Please visit our software, books, and PowerPoint Presentations site at http://www.leimberg.com

This Podcast is about the tax implications of divorce and alimony.  Divorce settlements at times are frustrating for tax preparers to work with, since they often leave dangling the issue of whether payments were or were not intended to be alimony and, not surprisingly, the former spouses may have very different views on that issue.  The Tax Court was forced to settle the issue after lecturing the warring spouses in his opinion about how the issue should have been taken care of well before this point.The case in question is the case of Johanson and Melzig v. Commissioner, TC Memo 2006-105.  You can download the materials from http://edzollars.com/2006-06-02_Alimony.pdf. This Podcast is sponsored by Leimberg Information Services, Inc. at http://www.leimbergservices.com Please visit our software, books, and PowerPoint Presentations site at http://www.leimberg.com

This Podcast deals with the 'premature distributions' penalty tax and its exceptions. Taxpayers who take distributions from retirement plans prior to attaining age 59 1/2 have to deal with a confusing set of rules that makes some distributions subject to and some distributions exempt from the 10 percent addition to tax under 72(t).  Two recent cases illustrate both the traps that exist for the unwary and how a taxpayer managed to convince the Tax Court he qualified for an exception from the penalty despite IRS arguments to the contrary.The materials for the podcast can be downloaded from http://edzollars.com/2006-05-13_Premature.pdf. This Podcast is sponsored by Leimberg Information Services, Inc. at http://www.leimbergservices.com Please visit our software, books, and PowerPoint Presentations site at http://www.leimberg.com

This Podcast concerns the $3,000 Capital Loss Cap and the AMT.   The Tax Court looked at the interaction of the $3,000 capital loss limitation and the alternative minimum tax basis adjustment on the sale of shares originally obtained via the exercise of incentive stock options in a prior year.  The case in question is Merlo v. Commissioner, 126 TC No. 10.In the case at hand, a taxpayer had exercised stock options at the end of $2,000 and obtained his stock at a price that was more than $1,000,000 less than the market price at the time.  Under the rules for ISOs, that fair market value spread was not taxable for regular income tax purposes, but was taxable for AMT purposes, generating a substantial AMT liability.However, things did not go well for the stock in 2001 and, by year end, Mr. Merlo's stock was worthless.  The Tax Court considered whether, when Mr. Merlo disposed of his stock, he could take the full basis differential against alternative minimum taxable income in 2001 and gen

This Podcast is about loans, S Corporations, and reality engineering. Shareholder debt to S corporations has proven to be a minefield for shareholders and their advisers, and the taxpayer and their adviser in the case of Ruckriegel v. Commissioner managed to step on a shareholder debt/basis mine twice in two consecutive IRS exams.  In this case, the shareholders attempted to argue that loans from a partnership they controlled were actually loans to them from the partnership, followed by loans to the corporation.Or, to put it more correctly, their CPA attempted to argue that.  One of the problems in this case, beyond the simple fact that the form of the transaction (which the taxpayers had control over) did not agree with what they were arguing was the true substance, was the fact that neither the taxpayers nor their inside accountant were treating these loans as if they had traveled that indirect route.  The case points up the dangers of attempting to "after the fact" correct client missteps--a

This PodCast is a Response to Dr. Bill Frist's Request to his Colleagues to "KILL THE DEATH TAX FOREVER".  Frist stated that, "Because of Katrina, we could not act on repealing the death tax last fall".  But he then added, "NOW IS THE TIME!  HERE IS OUR MOMENT!"The first week in May, the estate tax repeal adventure will continue.  In this OPEN LETTER, we ask Dr. Frisk what's changed that made the first week in May so different than the week after Katrina.We'd like to live in a world with no estate tax - but the world we live in  -  right now  -  as we discuss in the PodCast - has many more pressing needs!  It's a question of priorities. This Podcast is sponsored by Leimberg Information Services, Inc. at http://www.leimbergservices.com Please visit our software, books, and PowerPoint Presentations site at http://www.leimberg.com