Income Tax

Limited Partner Exclusion

Last week, the federal Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that the U.S. Tax Court had misinterpreted the Code’s self-employment tax rules as they apply to individuals who hold limited partnership interests in a state law limited partnership notwithstanding that such individuals also render services to the partnership of a nature that is integral to the limited partnership’s business.[i]

In doing so, the Court relied upon a narrow and dated reading of the Code that disregarded the current “practice” of many businesses in the financial sector, including investment firms, that organize as limited partnerships for the purpose of avoiding the imposition of the self-employment tax upon the entire limited partner distributive share of those individual limited partners who are actively engaged in the operation and management of the partnership’s business.Continue Reading “Limited Partner”? The Exclusion of Net Earnings from Self-Employment

Suspect Transactions (?)

It is axiomatic that a transaction between related businesses – i.e., businesses that are owned or controlled directly or indirectly by the same interests (a “controlled group”) – will generally be subject to heightened scrutiny by the IRS to ensure the transaction was not undertaken or structured for the purpose of gaining an improper tax advantage.

For example, when the IRS determines that related businesses have engaged in a transaction that lacked economic substance or a bona fide business purpose, but which generated a tax benefit, the IRS may, depending upon the facts and circumstances, void the transaction as a sham, collapse into one integrated transaction the ostensibly separate steps implemented by the related businesses, or ignore the form of the transaction to focus on its economic result, for the purposes of establishing the correct tax treatment of the transaction and ascertaining each business’s proper tax liability.[i]Continue Reading Reallocating the Payment of Income Between Controlled Taxpayers – What if the Payment is Prohibited?

Abusive Arrangements

As part of its enforcement efforts, the IRS annually identifies what it describes as potentially abusive transactions that taxpayers should avoid.[i] According to the agency, some of these transactions are focused on more complex arrangements that promoters market to higher-income individuals. The IRS has stated that such arrangements will likely attract additional agency compliance efforts in the future; in other words, they are on the IRS’s “enforcement radar screen.”

Among these suspect tax-motivated transactions, the IRS has included so-called “monetized installment sales” (“MIS”),[ii] which the agency claims involve the inappropriate use of the installment sale rules[iii] by a seller who, in the year of a sale of property, effectively receives the sales proceeds through purported loans.Continue Reading Another Setback for Monetized Installment Sales?

C Corp
Imagine a closely held and growing start-up business (“Corp”) that was recently incorporated under state law and, so, is treated as a regular C corporation for purposes of the federal income tax.[i]

Thus, Corp will pay income tax on its taxable income,[ii] and the losses generated in Corp’s first few years of operation – not uncommon with a start-up – will be trapped within Corp and cannot be passed out to Corp’s shareholders for their own use.[iii]Continue Reading Gifting Qualified Small Business Stock – Can You “Stack” the Section 1202 Odds In Your Favor?

Conformity

New York’s personal income tax law, like that of other states, conforms with the federal system of income taxation.[i] The reason typically given for such conformity is to simplify tax return preparation, improve compliance and enforcement, and aid in the interpretation of tax law provisions.[ii]

The most significant example of New York’s conformity to the Code[iii] is found in the state’s computation of a resident taxpayer’s state income tax liability, which begins with the taxpayer’s federal adjusted gross income, and is then modified by certain additions and subtractions which reflect New York’s unique tax treatment of certain items.[iv]

A corollary to the conformity principle requires that any changes to the taxpayer’s federal adjusted gross income[v] be accounted for in re-determining the taxpayer’s New York income tax liability.Continue Reading Drop & Swap Like-Kind Exchange Passes Muster in New York

Independence & Taxes

Last week the United States celebrated the 249th anniversary of its declaration of independence from Great Britain.[i] In celebration of the occasion, President Trump signed into law the One Big Beautiful Act which, among other things, extended the tax cuts enacted during the first year of his first term in the White House.[ii]

As most of us are aware, the debates preceding the enactment of this legislation – whether they occurred in a House or Senate committee, on the floor of either Chamber, in public assemblies, with members of the media, or on city streets – often devolved into what may fairly be described as exercises in divining economic collapse, promoting class warfare, accusing others of demagoguery, etc.[iii]Continue Reading Taxes: An American Obsession?

An Agency Under Siege

The mission statement of the IRS reminds taxpayers that it is their responsibility to understand and meet their tax obligations, while it is the role of the IRS to “enforce the [tax] law with integrity and fairness to all” to ensure that those obligations are satisfied.

The IRA

In 2023, following the $80 billion of funding authorized for the agency by the Inflation Reduction Act (the “IRA”),[i] the IRS announced it was going to increase its enforcement efforts with regard to wealthy and high-earning taxpayers, and the complex partnerships they employ,[ii] to ensure these taxpayers were held accountable for the full amount of taxes they owed.Continue Reading The Limited Partner Exclusion From Self-Employment Tax – But Who Is A Limited Partner?

Two Camps

Last month, Bloomberg carried an article about a “small but growing trend” of states that are either cutting their individual income taxes or phasing them out entirely.[i]

According to the article, the states adopting these measures have determined that, by reducing income taxes, they will enhance their ability to attract and retain people and businesses.[ii]Continue Reading State Taxation of a Nonresident’s Gain from the Sale of Stock –The Shot Heard Round the Country?

Back to the Office

You are probably aware that many employers are discarding the fully flexible, remote work policies that were forced upon them – as “nonessential” businesses – during the COVID-19 pandemic[i] and which they retained as an accommodation to employees after the pandemic ended. Indeed, there is now a steadily increasing percentage of employers that are requiring their employees to return to the office or place of business.

Some employers are mandating that employees work in the office full-time.[ii] Many other businesses expect employees to be physically present at least three days per week.[iii] Often, employers are “taking attendance” to ensure compliance with their in-office policies.Continue Reading Employer to Nonresident Employee: “You Cannot Work in New York”; New York to Employee: “We Will Tax You Anyway”

August is Like Sunday

As far back as I can remember, the end of August has always elicited a sense of dread comparable to what many schoolchildren, and a fair number of adults, experience every Sunday afternoon.

In retrospect, I cannot say that this feeling of doom was ever fully warranted.[i] Still, its presence has been undeniable, and it is especially palpable this year, and for good reason.  Continue Reading New York’s Tax Treatment of Compensatory Restricted Stock and Dividends in the Hands of a Nonresident Executive