Congress recently passed—and the President signed into law—the SECURE Act, landmark legislation that may affect how you plan for your retirement. Many of the provisions go into effect in 2020, which means now is the time to consider how these new rules may affect your tax and retirement-planning situation.

Congress recently passed—and the President signed into law—the SECURE Act, landmark legislation that may affect how you plan for your retirement. Many of the provisions go into effect in 2020, which means now is the time to consider how these new rules may affect your tax and retirement-planning situation.

Here is a look at some of the more important elements of the SECURE Act that have an impact on individuals. The changes in the law might provide you and your family with tax-savings opportunities. However, not all of the changes are favorable, and there may be steps you could take to minimize their impact. Please give me a call if you would like to discuss these matters.

Sincerely,

Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement Act (SECURE Act)

Key provisions affecting individuals:

Repeal of the maximum age for traditional IRA contributions.

Before 2020, traditional IRA contributions were not allowed once the individual attained age 70½. Starting in 2020, the new rules allow an individual of any age to make contributions to a traditional IRA, as long as the individual has compensation, which generally means earned income from wages or self-employment.

Required minimum distribution age raised from 70½ to 72.

Before 2020, retirement plan participants and IRA owners were generally required to begin taking required minimum distributions, or RMDs, from their plan by April 1 of the year following the year they reached age 70½. The age 70½ requirement was first applied in the retirement plan context in the early 1960s and, until recently, had not been adjusted to account for increases in life expectancy.

For distributions required to be made after Dec. 31, 2019, for individuals who attain age 70½ after that date, the age at which individuals must begin taking distributions from their retirement plan or IRA is increased from 70½ to 72.

Partial elimination of stretch IRAs.

For deaths of plan participants or IRA owners occurring before 2020, beneficiaries (both spousal and nonspousal) were generally allowed to stretch out the tax-deferral advantages of the plan or IRA by taking distributions over the beneficiary s life or life expectancy (in the IRA context, this is sometimes referred to as a “stretch IRA”).

However, for deaths of plan participants or IRA owners beginning in 2020 (later for some participants in collectively bargained plans and governmental plans), distributions to most nonspouse beneficiaries are generally required to be distributed within ten years following the plan participant s or IRA owner s death. So, for those beneficiaries, the “stretching” strategy is no longer allowed.

Exceptions to the 10-year rule are allowed for distributions to (1) the surviving spouse of the plan participant or IRA owner; (2) a child of the plan participant or IRA owner who has not reached majority; (3) a chronically ill individual; and (4) any other individual who is not more than ten years younger than the plan participant or IRA owner. Those beneficiaries who qualify under this exception may generally still take their distributions over their life expectancy (as allowed under the rules in effect for deaths occurring before 2020).

Expansion of Section 529 education savings plans to cover registered apprenticeships and distributions to repay certain student loans.

A Section 529 education savings plan (a 529 plan, also known as a qualified tuition program) is a tax-exempt program established and maintained by a state, or one or more eligible educational institutions (public or private). Any person can make nondeductible cash contributions to a 529 plan on behalf of a designated beneficiary. The earnings on the contributions accumulate tax-free. Distributions from a 529 plan are excludable up to the amount of the designated beneficiary's qualified higher education expenses.

Before 2019, qualified higher education expenses didn't include the expenses of registered apprenticeships or student loan repayments.

But for distributions made after Dec. 31, 2018 (the effective date is retroactive), tax-free distributions from 529 plans can be used to pay for fees, books, supplies, and equipment required for the designated beneficiary s participation in an apprenticeship program. In addition, tax-free distributions (up to $10,000) are allowed to pay the principal or interest on a qualified education loan of the designated beneficiary, or a sibling of the designated beneficiary.

Kiddie tax changes for gold star children and others.

In 2017, Congress passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA, P.L. 115-97), which made changes to the so-called “kiddie tax,” which is a tax on the unearned income of certain children. Before enactment of the TCJA, the net unearned income of a child was taxed at the parents' tax rates if the parents' tax rates were higher than the tax rates of the child.

Under the TCJA, for tax years beginning after Dec. 31, 2017, the taxable income of a child attributable to net unearned income is taxed according to the brackets applicable to trusts and estates. Children to whom the kiddie tax rules apply and who have net unearned income also have a reduced exemption amount under the alternative minimum tax (AMT) rules.

There had been concern that the TCJA changes unfairly increased the tax on certain children, including those who were receiving government payments (i.e., unearned income) because they were survivors of deceased military personnel (“gold star children”), first responders, and emergency medical workers.

The new rules enacted on Dec. 20, 2019, repeal the kiddie tax measures that were added by the TCJA. So, starting in 2020 (with the option to start retroactively in 2018 and/or 2019), the unearned income of children is taxed under the pre-TCJA rules, and not at trust/estate rates. And starting retroactively in 2018, the new rules also eliminate the reduced AMT exemption amount for children to whom the kiddie tax rules apply and who have net unearned income.

Penalty-free retirement plan withdrawals for expenses related to the birth or adoption of a child.

Generally, a distribution from a retirement plan must be included in income. And, unless an exception applies (for example, distributions in case of financial hardship), a distribution before the age of 59-1/2 is subject to a 10% early withdrawal penalty on the amount includible in income.

Starting in 2020, plan distributions (up to $5,000) that are used to pay for expenses related to the birth or adoption of a child are penalty-free. That $5,000 amount applies on an individual basis, so for a married couple, each spouse may receive a penalty-free distribution up to $5,000 for a qualified birth or adoption.

Taxable non-tuition fellowship and stipend payments are treated as compensation for IRA purposes.

Before 2020, stipends and non-tuition fellowship payments received by graduate and postdoctoral students were not treated as compensation for IRA contribution purposes, and so could not be used as the basis for making IRA contributions.

Starting in 2020, the new rules remove that obstacle by permitting taxable non-tuition fellowship and stipend payments to be treated as compensation for IRA contribution purposes. This change will enable these students to begin saving for retirement without delay.

Tax-exempt difficulty-of-care payments are treated as compensation for determining retirement contribution limits.

Many home healthcare workers do not have taxable income because their only compensation comes from “difficulty-of-care” payments that are exempt from taxation. Because those workers do not have taxable income, they were not able to save for retirement in a qualified retirement plan or IRA.

For IRA contributions made after Dec. 20, 2019 (and retroactively starting in 2016 for contributions made to certain qualified retirement plans), the new rules allow home healthcare workers to contribute to a retirement plan or IRA by providing that tax-exempt difficulty-of-care payments are treated as compensation for purposes of calculating the contribution limits to certain qualified plans and IRAs.

Reference: Thomson Reuters\Checkpoint

Avoid the Surprise!  In the world of Income tax, 2018 and 2019 saw many changes as a result of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) that was passed in 2017.  To that end, what follows in this memo is a highlight of the most relevant changes and some recurring “standard” advice around which meaningful year-end planning can occur.

December 2019 Tax Planning Letter

Clients & Friends:

Yes it is that time again. Black Friday sales way before "Black Friday", holiday décor at stores, holiday songs redone for political correctness, holiday party invites and the time for some TAX PLANNING AND YEAR END FINANCIAL REVIEWS. 

Our purpose in this communication is to encourage you to give a little attention to your tax and economic situations. Action taken after New Year's Eve may be too late to impact 2019. 

The 2017 tax reform, which mostly became effective for 2018 tax return filing, gave us some new perspectives on tax filings and the related planning. We are sure a lot of you were surprised when your 2018 individual returns reflected the new increased standard deduction amounts rather than the itemized deductions to which we had all become accustomed. For 2019, those standard deduction amounts are $12,200 for single filers, $18,350 for head of household status and $24,400 for married joint filers. If you are over 65, the standard amounts are increased by $1,650 in the single or head of household status and by $1,300 per person over 65 on a joint return (e.g. the standard deduction for a joint return with both over age 65 is $27,000). 

With the increased standard deduction in place, it gives you the opportunity/incentive to time and manage your deductions including mostly "elective" medical expenses (starting in 2019 medical expenses must exceed 10% of your adjusted gross income (AGI) to be deductible) and charitable contributions. A popular strategy is to bunch these deductions every other year and take advantage of the high standard deductions in the intervening years. A way to "manage" your charitable contributions is to use a donor advised fund (DAF) to make and deduct a large contribution amount in 2019 and pay amounts to your favorite charities in succeeding years from the fund. If the DAF strategy is cumbersome or will not work for you, make two years' worth of donations in 2019 and skip the payments to the charities of your choice in 2020. 

If your itemized deductions still will not meet the standard deduction amount and you are over 70½, consider sending your required minimum distribution (RMD) amount from your IRA account directly to the charity of your choice. You will not have to pay tax on the distribution and "in effect" get the qualified charitable deduction for the payment. This contribution distribution is limited to payments of $100,000 or less. 

Remember, itemized deductions from tax reform limited the TOTAL amount of all personal tax deductions (income and real estate tax) to $10,000, so there is very limited tax planning available in this area and usually no benefit in accelerating the final state estimated tax payments due 1/15/2020. 

Mortgage rates are favorable again. If you are purchasing a home or considering refinancing, remember the new mortgage limit for tax deduction is $750,000. You can, however, refi your old mortgage and apply the $1M limit as long as you do not receive "proceeds" from the refi. 

Last year at this time we warned of surprises because of changes in the federal income tax withholding tables that occurred early in 2018 and left many taxpayers short on their 2018 tax returns. If you were one that owed tax with the 2018 federal return because of this AND did not adjust your tax withholding in 2019, we encourage you to revisit the withholding NOW to avoid or at least be prepared for that unpleasant conversation with us in early 2020 about tax due. We will be happy to assist you in this assessment if needed. We dislike these surprise moments as much as you do! 

A few other tax adjustments we became more knowledgeable and familiar with in the 2018 returns include the new Qualified Business Income (or QBI) deduction under Sec. 199(A) which resulted in a deduction from your taxable income of 20% of your QBI. This deduction which is subject to various complex limitations was beneficial to many with business income on schedule "C" or business income passed through from partnerships or "S" corporations. We also dealt with limitations on business interest deductions under new section 163(j) and the overall limitations on business losses. These changes among others made for a challenging filing season! 

We are a bit "thankful" at this time that Congress has other "issues" to consider and it appears that no further tax "simplification" will occur in 2019! 

As of this writing, the stock market is on a bit of a roll. That means this is a good time to review your portfolio and balance any 2019 gains by selling positions that will result in capital losses. Remember when considering the 2019 gains to factor-in any capital gain distributions from mutual funds that will be reported to you and taxable in 2019. Most mutual funds will post on their websites the approximate amounts of capital gain distributions late in November or early December. 

Recent tax law allows for tax on certain qualified long-term gains to be deferred if they are reinvested in a qualified opportunity fund. If you have significant gains and are interested in this concept, please contact us. 

Do not be reluctant to realize net capital losses in 2019. The losses will offset 2019 gains including mutual fund distributions and the balance can be carried over to offset gains in 2020 and succeeding years! You may also find that 2019 is not a bad year to realize capital gains. Again the market is at an all-time high and you know the maximum capital gain rate is 20% or 23.8% if the net investment income tax applies. One should never feel bad about taking some gains off the table! As always in this area, be sure the economic considerations in any decision outweigh the possible tax benefits or costs. 

While we are talking of your portfolio and if you are charitably inclined, or want to fund the DAF mentioned earlier, giving appreciated securities to a charity is a very effective method of donation. You get a full fair market value deduction for the donated stock or fund held over one year, and do not pay capital gain tax on the gain in the position. 

If you are making gifts to family members it may also be efficient to give long-term appreciated positions. It is possible the donee could sell the stock or fund and take advantage of the ZERO% tax rate on the gain. That rate exists if taxable income is below $39,385 for singles and $52,750 and $78,750 for head of household or joint filers, respectively. If the donee is under age 24, Kiddie tax rules could impact the tax calculation. One last note here, if you have loser positions, DO NOT give them away. Sell the position and take the loss on your return where it is probably more valuable. 

If for some reason you find yourself in a low income tax bracket in 2019 AND have funds in an IRA account, one option to consider is converting all or a portion of that account to a ROTH IRA to take advantage of a low rate in 2019. The future distributions from the ROTH will not be subject to tax as long as it is in place for 5 years. 

While this letter is aimed primarily at our individual filers, those who have or own business entities should consider taking advantage of the very generous depreciation tax breaks and Section 179 deductions for the purchase of equipment and other business property. Some of these deduction limits decrease or phase-out in the future. As a result, investing now may be a wise choice. 

Also consider implementing or enhancing your retirement plans. For example, a solo 401(k) is a particularly popular plan design for a sole proprietor with no employees to take advantage of higher deduction limits. 

This is also a good time to review the designated beneficiaries on your retirement plans and life insurance policies as well as who you may have named as an executor of your will, power of attorney or trustee. Changes due to death or divorce sometimes occur in our lives and these designations go unchanged. These are relatively easy to change when you are in charge and often very difficult or impossible to alter after a disability or death. 

The year end is also a good time to revisit your estate planning and the related documents. Consider taking advantage NOW of the annual gift tax exclusion which is $15,000 per year per donee. As an example, dad and mom can gift as much as $60,000 to son and spouse by December 31 with no gift tax issue or filing requirement. These annual exclusion gifts DO NOT reduce your current lifetime gift/estate tax exemption of $11.4 million for each spouse and is portable. A married couple NOW enjoys a total exclusion of $22.8 million. With these exclusions in place we are not filing very many "taxable" gift or estate tax returns at this time. It is important to remember that these enhanced exclusion amounts are scheduled to sunset in 2026. While that may or may not happen, you may want to take advantage while we know they are available. 

Please keep our firm in mind as you gather with friends and family over the next few months. Our best referrals often come from existing clients who are able to speak highly on our behalf. We greatly appreciate the opportunity to do business with new individuals and businesses each year. 

Reminder: our firm continues to be very involved in estate administration including the preparation and filing of PA Inheritance tax returns and federal estate and gift tax returns. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you unfortunately have a need in these areas. 

One Final Reminder: do not hesitate to contact us to discuss and/or help implement any tax or economic planning or any other matter if you feel we can be of assistance. We are a more valuable asset to you when we have the opportunity in advance to consider and comment on the economic transactions which impact your tax matters. 

Finally, we hope you have a joyous and peaceful Holiday Season and find plentiful reasons to give thanks for 2019 and wish you all the best for a Happy and Healthy 2020!!! 

Thank you for being our clients and friends and allowing our firm to provide your tax and accounting needs. 

Siana Carr O'Connor & Lynam, LLP

Please read about the various changes in payroll withholding and related tax filing requirments for 2020.

The following is a summary of the various changes in payroll withholding and related filing requirements for 2020. As always, if you have any questions on these matters please contact us.

 The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), passed in December 2017, impacted individuals through the introduction of new tax rates and brackets, increased standard deduction, changes to allowable itemized deductions, elimination of personal exemptions, among many other changes.

 Under TCJA, various deductions and certain tax-favored fringe benefits were eliminated or modified. These changes included the suspension of the deductions for moving expenses and certain qualified transportation expenses. The tax-free reimbursement of employment-related moving expenses was suspended. The Act also suspended an employee's deduction for unreimbursed business expenses (previously deductible as a miscellaneous itemized deduction).

 The Act reduced the federal corporate (C-Corp) tax rate to 21%, while also providing a new deduction from pass-through income generated by most S-Corps, Partnerships, Sole Proprietors, etc. These provisions have many business owners reconsidering their current entity structure and evaluating the methods for paying themselves and their employees. Please note that the issues of reasonable compensation to owners, and the classification of workers as employees vs. independent contractors remain the focus of Internal Revenue Service scrutiny. Numerous other provisions exist which may impact your employees, you and/or your business, but a more in-depth analysis of the complete Act is beyond the scope of this newsletter focusing on employment taxes. Please contact our office should you desire a more in-depth explanation of this legislation.

 FEDERAL TAX DEPOSITS

 Most taxpayers are required to make federal tax deposits for payroll taxes, corporate income tax, and back-up withholding electronically through use of the electronic federal tax payment system (EFTPS). Paper coupons are discontinued as the paper coupon system is no longer maintained by the Treasury Department. The primary exception is for employers that have $2,500 or less in quarterly payroll tax liability who may pay this liability when filing the quarterly employment tax return.

 Officers and/or employees of a corporation or partnership can become personally liable for failure to withhold and remit federal employment taxes. If you are using a payroll service to make your deposits, you should ensure that the payments are made timely. Penalties can equal the amount of the tax due (100% penalty). If you are having difficulty paying your employment taxes timely, please call us.

 The net FUTA rate for most Pennsylvania and New Jersey employers is 0.6% for 2019. The 2020 net FUTA tax rates are likely to approximate the same. FUTA tax continues to be assessed on the first $7,000 of wages paid to each worker during a calendar year.

 The Internal Revenue Service’s deadline for submitting government copies of the 2019 Form W-2 to the Social Security Administration is January 31, 2020. This is the same as the deadline to furnish employees with their forms.

 SOCIAL SECURITY & MEDICARE TAXES

 For 2020, the taxable social security wage base limit is $137,700. The employee and employer tax rate for social security is 6.2%. In 2020, all wages are taxable for the Medicare portion of the tax which is 1.45% for both employees and employers. The self-employment tax rate will be 15.3% on the first $137,700 of net earnings.  

 The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) imposes an additional 0.9% Medicare tax on wages, compensation, or self-employment income exceeding the threshold amount $250,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly, $125,000 for married taxpayers filing separately, and $200,000 for other taxpayers. There is no corresponding amount owed by the employer. Employers must withhold Additional Medicare tax from wages it pays to an individual in excess of $200,000 in a calendar year. If individuals anticipate owing more Additional Medicare tax than the amount withheld, they should request additional income tax withholding using Form W-4 and/or should make estimated tax payments. Taxpayers will calculate Additional Medicare tax liabilities on their individual income tax returns (Form 1040), and will apply any Additional Medicare tax withheld against all taxes shown on this return.

 PENNSYLVANIA PERSONAL INCOME TAXES

 The withholding rate remains at 3.07%. The PA Dept. of Revenue no longer provides paper coupon booklets. Instead, employer returns and payments should be filed using three electronic options: Internet, Tele file or third-party software. If you have not yet registered under one of these methods, we encourage you to do so. If you want our help in using these filing methods, please call us. More information can be obtained via the internet at www.revenue.pa.gov and www.etides.state.pa.us. Employers may still file using paper returns and checks, however, we recommend that you switch to the D.O.R. mandated methods.

 PENNSYLVANIA UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION

The first $10,000 of wages paid to each worker in calendar year 2020 is taxed at the employer’s standard rate, as provided by the State. In addition, employers are required to withhold unemployment taxes from employees’ gross wages at a rate of 0.06%. The amount of compensation subject to employee withholding is not limited. Pennsylvania employers are required to electronically file quarterly UC tax and wage reports through the Unemployment Compensation Management System (UCMS). The Department of Labor is no longer mailing paper UC-2 forms to employers. Additional information is available at www.dli.state.pa.us.

 PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRONIC FILING REQUIREMENT

             Employers who file 10 or more W-2 forms with the Department are now required to file those forms electronically. Employers should visit e-TIDES, the Department’s online system for business taxes, at www.etides.state.pa.us to file their Annual Withholding Reconciliation Statement (REV-1667). The REV-1667 must be filed by January 31, 2020. Copies of the Individual Wage Statement (W-2) must also be filed electronically with the form REV-1667.

             The PA Department of Revenue has expanded the EFW2 and CSV format specifications to include corrections for filing the W-2/1099 information for tax year 2019. Corrected W-2/1099 information can only be submitted for original filings done through e-TIDES.

             Additional information regarding the electronic filing requirement is available through the Department’s Business Taxes e-Services Center by accessing its website www.revenue.pa.gov or calling 717-787-8326.

 PHILADELPHIA CITY WAGE TAX

 Employers must withhold city wage taxes for residents at the rate of 3.8712% (.038712) and nonresidents who work in the city at the rate of 3.4481% (.034481). Every Pennsylvania employer who employs a Philadelphia resident must register with the Philadelphia City Revenue Commissioner and withhold the city wage tax. Please note that Philadelphia commonly changes these rates in July each year.

 LOCAL PAYROLL TAXES

PA Act 32 - Local Earned Income Tax Law

 The Pennsylvania law known as “Act 32” requires every business that employs individuals who work within Pennsylvania, either at a worksite or from their homes to withhold the applicable local earned income tax amount from employees’ wages and to remit this timely to the appropriate tax collection agency. The employer must withhold the greater of the employee’s resident tax rate for where they live or nonresident tax rate for where they work. Each employee must complete a Residency Certification Form, to identify the proper subdivision where they live and work. Additional information regarding Act 32 is available through the PA Department of Community and Economic Development by accessing its website www.dced.PA.gov or calling 1-866-466-3972.

Philadelphia is not regulated by Act 32, so the present system administered by the Philadelphia Department of Revenue remains in effect.

 Local Services Tax (LST)                                                          

 The Local Services Tax (LST) allows local governments to levy a tax of $10 to $52 per employee per year. If the locality levies a tax of $10, then the employer should withhold the tax from the first paycheck of the employee unless the employee qualifies for an exemption. The LST exempts employees who make less than $12,000 annually from the tax. The LST also exempts disabled veterans and reservists who are called to active duty at any time during the year from the tax. The employer must obtain and retain exemption certificates from such employees to document the non-withholding exemption. The LST (if more than $10) is not collected at one time, but must be withheld pro rata during the year with each payroll.

 NEW HIRE REPORTING

Federal regulation mandates all employers to report information about any new employee within 20 days of their hire date. Penalties for noncompliance can be up to $500 per employee. Mandatory information to report for all Pennsylvania employers includes: employee’s name, address, social security number, date of birth and hire date, also employer’s name, address, federal identification number, contact and phone number. Employers may report their new hire information by either manual or electronic means. Multi-state employers must report employees either by magnetic tape or electronically. Additional information can be obtained at www.cwds.pa.gov or call 1-888-PAHIRES.

 RETIREMENT PLANS

 *     The limitation on the exclusion for elective deferrals under 401(k) and other plans is increased from $19,000 in 2019 to $19,500 in 2020. Taxpayers who are age 50 and older (during 2020) can make an additional catch-up contribution in the amount of $6,500 in 2020.

 *     401(k) and 403(b) plans may offer qualified Roth contributions that allow employees to elect to make all or a portion of their 401(k) contributions on an after-tax basis. Similar to Roth IRA’s, earnings grow tax free and, in most circumstances, distributions are free from tax when withdrawn. Your plan documents must explicitly allow designated Roth contributions.

 *     The annual compensation limit taken into account for qualified plan purposes is increased from $280,000 in 2019 to $285,000 in 2020.

 *     The maximum annual amount of salary reduction contributions to a SIMPLE retirement plan is increased from $13,000 in 2019 to $13,500 in 2020. Taxpayers who are age 50 and older (during 2020) can make an additional contribution of $3,000 in 2020.

 *     The limitation on the annual benefit under a defined benefit plan is increased from $225,000 in 2019 to $230,000 in 2020. The limitation for defined contribution plans is increased from $56,000 in 2019 to $57,000 in 2020.

 *     The amount used to identify highly compensated employees for non-discrimination testing purposes is increased from $125,000 in 2019 to $130,000 in 2020.

 MINIMUM WAGE RATE

            The minimum wage rate for Pennsylvania is currently set at $7.25 per hour. A proposal to raise the minimum wage by $2.25 over the next three years is advancing in the state legislature.

 STANDARD MILEAGE RATES

 The standard mileage rate for business automobile usage is 57½ cents per mile in 2020, down from 58 cents per mile in 2019. The optional mileage allowance deduction may be used for both leased and purchased autos. If you elect the standard mileage rate for a leased auto, that method must be used for the entire lease period of that auto.

 NON-CASH FRINGE BENEFITS

 As noted above, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act modifies or eliminates the tax-favored treatment of certain fringe benefits such as moving expenses. The rules regarding the taxation and reporting of other fringe benefits still apply. Taxable fringe benefits include the following: the cost of nondiscriminatory group-term life insurance provided to employees in excess of $50,000; personal use of an employer provided vehicle; the cost of life insurance (other than group-term) provided to employees where the employee may determine the beneficiary; and discriminatory payments to key employees under educational assistance plans, self-insured medical reimbursement plans, dependent care assistance programs and group legal service plans.

 1099 REPORTING

             Report on Form 1099-MISC payments made in the course of your business. Personal payments are not reportable. Form 1099-MISC must be issued to persons and unincorporated entities (including partnerships and LLCs not taxed as corporations) receiving at least $600 for: 1) services rendered other than as an employee; 2) rent; 3) prizes; 4) medical and health care payments; or 5) other payments. Form 1099-MISC is not required to be filed for payments for merchandise, payments made via credit card, nor most payments to corporations, subject to some exceptions. You must also file Form 1099-MISC for each person from whom you have withheld any federal income tax under the backup withholding rules regardless of the amount of payment. In addition, use Form 1099-MISC to report that you made direct sales of at least $5,000 of consumer products to a buyer for resale anywhere other than a permanent retail establishment. Form 1099-INT should be filed to report interest payments of at least $10.

 The filing deadline for Form 1099-MISC to report non-employee compensation in Box 7 and the related Form 1096 is January 31, 2020. For all other reported payments, file Form 1099 by February 28, 2020. The forms generally should be provided to recipients by January 31, 2020. Penalties for late filing, non-filing, or filing incorrect information range from $50 per information return to the greater of $550 or 10% of the aggregate dollar amount of the items required to be reported correctly. In certain instances, these penalties may be higher. Should you require our assistance in preparing these forms, please submit all information to us as soon as possible to allow for timely filing and to avoid the assessment of significant penalties. We recommend that you collect names, addresses and taxpayer identification numbers for every payee and vendor with whom you transact business. Forms W-9 should be used for this purpose and may be obtained via the internet at www.irs.gov or from our website.

             Companies paying non-employee compensation for Pennsylvania based work must submit copies of federal forms 1099-MISC to the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue at the same time they are due to the Internal Revenue Service. Payors of $5,000 or more for Pennsylvania-sourced work to nonresident individuals or to disregarded entities owned by nonresident individuals are required to withhold Pennsylvania personal income tax from such payments at a rate of 3.07%. Similarly, a business making rent or royalty payments exceeding $5,000 to nonresidents with regard to Pennsylvania property is required to withhold Pennsylvania personal income tax on such payments. These new withholding rules require electronically filed copies of IRS Form 1099-MISC with the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue, as well as quarterly withholding returns and annual reconciliations.

             Rental property owners may benefit from the Qualified Business Income (QBI) Deduction under Sec. 199A of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The 20% QBI deduction is available only for activities that qualify as a trade or business. The regulations are complex in determining whether a rental real estate activity qualifies as a trade or business for purposes of this deduction. The issuance of Forms 1099-MISC, where applicable, may be helpful in establishing this trade or business motive.

 The issue of whether workers should be classified as employees or as independent contractors remains the focus of Internal Revenue Service scrutiny. In determining appropriate worker classification, businesses must weigh a variety of factors. Some will dictate in favor of employee status while others will be indicative of independent contractor status. No single factor establishes the outcome, and all must be carefully considered within the context of the relationship. Improper reporting of workers can result in a requirement to pay back taxes plus interest and punitive penalties. Additional guidance with regard to this complex and important determination may be found at www.irs.gov (search “worker classification”). Should you have any questions, please call us.

 HEALTH FLEXIBLE SPENDING ARRANGEMENT

 The maximum salary reduction contribution to a health flexible spending arrangement (health FSA) is $2,750 for 2020. Any salary reductions in excess of this amount will be subject to tax on distributions from the health FSA.

 THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT (ACA)

Beginning in 2019, the TCJA eliminates the individual mandate imposing a penalty on those individuals failing to have health insurance coverage required under ACA; however, other provisions of the ACA are still in effect. Generally, ACA requires employers with at least 50 full-time equivalent employees (FTE) to provide health coverage, or risk paying a penalty. ACA also requires employers and insurers to report certain information to the Internal Revenue Service.

 In addition, ACA requires certain employers to report on Form W-2 the aggregate cost of applicable employer sponsored health coverage paid during the calendar year. The aggregate reportable cost is reported on Form W-2 in Box 12, using Code DD. Pending further guidance from the IRS, transition relief of this disclosure requirement may apply to certain small employers who issue less than 250 W-2 Forms each year. A detailed analysis for implementing these provisions is beyond the scope of this newsletter, but please contact us if further guidance is needed in regard to the Affordable Care Act.

 EMPLOYEE BUSINESS EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENTS

 If an employee is reimbursed for business expenses under an “accountable plan”, the reimbursements are not treated as taxable income to the employee. An accountable plan must require the employee to: 1) substantiate the nature and amount of the expenses, and 2) repay to the employer any reimbursements in excess of the business expenses incurred. Please contact us if you need assistance in designing an accountable plan.

 ANNUAL LEASE VALUE AMOUNTS FOR PERSONAL USE OF COMPANY CARS

 The “Annual Lease Value” (ALV) table, as issued by the Internal Revenue Service (www.irs.gov), shows the annual value to employees for the personal use of a company car. This ALV amount of the auto is includible in the employee’s income, unless the car is used exclusively for business purposes. If the car is used partly for personal driving, a percentage of the ALV (based on the percentage of personal use) is reported on the employee’s W-2. Note that the ALV does not change each year. Instead, it is treated as constant for each of the first four years of use. If the company car is still in use after four years, it is revalued at the beginning of the fifth year, and the ALV based on this new fair market value is used for the next four years of employee use. The ALV includes the value of auto insurance, registration fees and repairs paid by the company. It does not include the cost of fuel. If the company pays for fuel, the cost consumed in personal driving is additional W-2 income to the employee. A standard rate of 5½ cents per mile (based on 2019 rates) may be used in computing income attributable to personal fuel costs paid by the employer.

 OVERTIME UPDATE

             The U.S. Department of Labor has finalized a rule expanding overtime pay eligibility for certain American workers. This rule increases the minimum salary requirement to be considered exempt from overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act and is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2020. Please contact us for the specifics of these regulations.

DISCLOSURE

 The above synopses are brief reviews of general payroll tax issues. They are not intended to be complete explanations or to provide tax advice for specific fact patterns. Please discuss any decision concerning specific situations with a tax advisor qualified on such issues.

On July 4, President Donald Trump signed into law a Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) application extension bill that Congress had quickly passed just before the Independence Day holiday. According to several senators, the measure was "surprisingly" introduced and approved by unanimous consent in the Senate late on June 30. It cleared the House the evening of July 1.

On July 4, President Donald Trump signed into law a Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) application extension bill that Congress had quickly passed just before the Independence Day holiday. According to several senators, the measure was "surprisingly" introduced and approved by unanimous consent in the Senate late on June 30. It cleared the House the evening of July 1.

Most notably, the bill pushes out the PPP application window deadline five weeks from June 30 to August 8. "The resources are there. The need is there. We just need to change the date," Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., said. Prior to the extension, the small business loan program was set to expire at midnight on July 1 with over $130 billion left in funding.

Mnuchin, Rettig Testify
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and IRS Commissioner Charles "Chuck" Rettig testified before House and Senate committees on June 30, just hours before the PPP application period was set to close.

"There appears to be bipartisan support to repurpose the [remaining] $134 billion for PPP," Mnuchin told lawmakers during a House Financial Services Committee hearing on June 30. Mnuchin stated that "it should be done," and that the administration is looking toward targeted industry-specific relief.

Additionally, Mnuchin told lawmakers that he has been having discussions about more PPP-related relief with the House and Senate Small Business Committees. Reportedly, lawmakers are currently considering an extension or a second round of the PPP.

As for "phase four" of Congress’s next economic relief package, Mnuchin again alluded to a narrower approach. "We would anticipate that any additional relief would be targeted to certain industries that have been especially hard-hit by the pandemic, with a focus on jobs and putting all American workers who lost their jobs, through no fault of their own, back to work."

Meanwhile, several PPP-related bills have been introduced in the Senate over the last few weeks, and most recently a bipartisan PPP Forgiveness bill introduced on June 30. The Paycheck Protection Small Business Forgiveness Bill, authored by bipartisan members of the Senate Banking Committee, would streamline the forgiveness of certain PPP loans.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-NY, also called for an extension of the small business loan program. "It is the last day small business can apply for PPP, but the economic crisis is not over. Senators Cardin, Shaheen, Coons and I will take to the Senate floor and demand we pass a bill to extend it," Schumer said in a June 30 tweet.

IRS 2020 Filing Season, Agency Redesign
In other news, Rettig testified on June 30 before the Senate Finance Committee (SFC) on IRS operations during the 2020 tax filing season. Notably, Rettig told senators that the decision not to further extend the 2019 tax year filing and payment deadline beyond July 15 was made in consultation with professional services organizations, adding that too many due dates can be confusing for taxpayers.

To that end, Treasury first signaled in a June 29 press release that it would not further extend the 2020 filing season. "Treasury and IRS encourage taxpayers to file their taxes by July 15, or file for an automatic extension of time to file to October 15," the press release stated.

"The IRS understands that those affected by the coronavirus may not be able to pay their balances in full by July 15, but we have many payment options to help taxpayers," Rettig said in the press release. "These easy-to-use payment options are available on IRS.gov, and most can be done automatically without reaching out to an IRS representative."

Additionally, Rettig told SFC members that the IRS is well underway in its redesign of the agency for the first time in over 20 years. As noted in Rettig’s testimony, the foundational components of a new holistic taxpayer experience will include the following:

• Expanded Digital Services. An improved experience through self-service digital channels by building upon existing online accounts and introducing online accounts for tax professionals and business taxpayers.
• Seamless Experience. Taxpayers should be guided to the resources and communication channels that will resolve their issues most effectively and efficiently.
• Proactive Outreach and Education. Educate the taxpayer community by proactively providing information in the language, timing, and method taxpayers need or prefer.
• Focused Strategies for Reaching Underserved Communities. Establish a consolidated program to engage with historically underserved communities to address issues of communication, education, transparency and trust, as well as access to quality products and services.
• Ecosystem of Partnerships. Establish, shepherd, and facilitate a collaborative and interactive network of partnerships across the entire tax ecosystem and bring together existing efforts.
• Enterprise Data Management and Advanced Analytics. An enterprise data management strategy that includes a cross-enterprise understanding of the customer experience, emerging needs and expectations, and operational data.

"If you can look into the seeds of time, and say which grain will grow and which will not, speak then unto me." — William Shakespeare

"If you can look into the seeds of time, and say which grain will grow and which will not, speak then unto me." — William Shakespeare

The Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) was enacted under the bipartisan Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act ( P.L. 116-136) on March 27, 2020. The PPP, a seemingly ever-evolving small business loan program, was derived from an unprecedented partnership between certain private lending institutions and the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA). After its enactment in late March, the program quickly went from concept to implementation when it launched on April 3, 2020.

Fast forward to a somewhat rocky roll-out with several speed bumps and shake-ups, akin to a Shakespearean plotline, President Donald Trump on June 5, 2020, signed into law the bipartisan Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act (PPPFA) of 2020 ( P.L. 116-142). The PPPFA makes several enhancements to the swiftly implemented loan program, including providing for an extension of the expense forgiveness period from 8-to-24 weeks. The legislation also reduces the 75 percent payroll ratio requirement to 60 percent, extends the two-year loan repayment requirement to five years for future borrowers (existing PPP loans can be extended up to five years if lender/borrower agree), allows payroll tax deferment for PPP recipients, and extends the June 30, 2020, rehiring deadline to December 31, 2020.

Accordingly, the SBA, in consultation with Treasury, officially published in the Federal Register updated interim final rules (effective immediately upon publication, as opposed to the "regular order" of first issuing a proposed rule with a preliminary comment period) on June 16 and June 18, and issued new and revised forgiveness applications forms on June 17. Additional guidance is expected. The SBA is accepting comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov.

Wolters Kluwer recently spoke with Daniel G. Strickland, an associate with Eversheds Sutherland, about some of the underlying tax policy issues and lingering complexities with the PPP, and subsequent legislation and guidance. Strickland, who regularly works with the IRS on behalf of taxpayers to obtain benefits offered by the IRS, and with taxpayers to resolve tax controversy disputes with the IRS, currently serves as co-chair of the Federal Bar Association’s Tax Practice and Procedure Committee, as well as chair of the D.C. Bar Association’s New Tax Practitioner Subcommittee. Prior to tax practice, Strickland clerked for several years at the U.S. Tax Court.

To Double-Dip, or not to Double-Dip: That is the Question…(Well, One of Them)
Wolters Kluwer: Can you expand upon the preventive double-benefit tax policy position behind the IRS’s controversial Notice 2020-32, I.R.B. 2020-21, 837, which states that business expenses paid with tax-exempt income, i.e. a forgivable PPP loan, are not deductible under Code Sec. 265? Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said recently, "if the money that is coming is not taxable, you can't double dip."

Daniel Strickland: Good question. As you correctly state, the IRS published Notice 2020-32 to address the tax treatment of expenses that would otherwise be deductible but that were paid using PPP loan proceeds that are forgiven.

From the IRS’s perspective, Congress only exempted the amount of forgiveness from taxation; it did not allow deductions for the expenses paid with forgiven proceeds. Notice 2020-32 points to section 265 as providing legal support for the proposition that otherwise-deductible expenses are not allowable for deduction to the extent that the income is wholly exempt from taxation.

My take is that the IRS is drawing a line at government-sponsored business expenses. In other words, for the taxpayers to receive forgiveness, the loan proceeds must be spent in a certain way. If they are, then it is as if the government paid those expenses directly in a valiant effort to prop up the COVID-affected small businesses. But there is an issue with the IRS’s position: a borrower cannot know the extent to which it will even be eligible for forgiveness—let alone whether its substantiation will be sufficient. And given the deadline for application for forgiveness, borrowers might not even know in the same tax year.

Wolters Kluwer: Sen. John Cornyn, R-Tex., recently introduced the bipartisan Small Business Expense Protection Act ( S. 3612), which moves to essentially nullify Notice 2020-32, clarifying congressional intent that the receipt and forgiveness of a PPP loan would not affect the deductibility of ordinary business expenses. What is your take on the underlying policy of this bill, and do you see the IRS reversing Notice 2020-32 before the measure moves through Congress?

Daniel Strickland: Senator Cornyn has the right idea. In my mind, a few simple examples show the logic: If I borrowed money from a bank and spent the proceeds on deductible expenses, I could deduct those expenses from my income when I file my taxes. If the bank forgave my debt, I would need to recognize the forgiven amount as income. If, on the other hand, I received a gift, I could also use that gift to pay for deductible expenses and then deduct those expenses from my income. I would not generally include the gift in my income – setting aside the differences between corporate taxes and individual taxes—since many small businesses are sole proprietorships or disregarded entities. When the CARES Act provided that the forgiven PPP loan amounts were not subject to tax, conceptually, the loans are turned into gifts. The deductibility should be no different. And the tax treatment should be the same irrespective of the type of corporate entity involved.

That is where the Senator is coming from. Unfortunately, the existence of a bill in Congress isn’t going to be enough to convince the IRS to about-face. The fact that there are still holds on Senator Cornyn’s bill is concerning to me.

"Know You of This Taxation?"
Wolters Kluwer: Are there other tax-related implications taxpayers and practitioners should keep in mind specific to PPP loan forgiveness?

Daniel Strickland: There are always tax implications. In the absence of congressional action on the deductibility question, another arises regarding timing. As detailed in the SBA’s interim final rule, SBA-2020-0035:

If you do not submit to your lender a loan forgiveness application within 10 months after the end of your loan forgiveness covered period, you must begin paying principal and interest after that period. For example, if a borrower’s PPP loan is disbursed on June 25, 2020, the 24-week period ends on December 10, 2020. If the borrower does not submit a loan forgiveness application to its lender by October 10, 2021, the borrower must begin making payments on or after October 10, 2021.

Taxpayers may not know whether—or to what extent—their PPP loans are forgiven until 2021, and some may not know until after they file their 2020 income tax returns. How should the deductions be reported?

In addition, we don’t know how the state and local taxing authorities will react.

Wolters Kluwer: Although the SBA, in consultation with Treasury, has addressed the PPPFA’s 60 percent "cliff" to allow for partial forgiveness if the 60 percent threshold is not reached, an added variable to the equation now exists. According to a June 8 joint Treasury/SBA statement and now updated guidance, partial forgiveness will be subject to at least 60 percent of the loan forgiveness amount having been used for payroll costs. What is your interpretation of this new variable, and is the solution to the 60 percent "cliff," as termed by Sen. Susan Collins, R-Me., who was recently drafting a bill to address the issue, correctly addressed through regulatory guidance? Do you foresee any pushback?

Daniel Strickland: If I am honest, this one took me a couple times to read to understand that it isn’t internally inconsistent:

If a borrower uses less than 60 percent of the loan amount for payroll costs during the forgiveness covered period, the borrower will continue to be eligible for partial loan forgiveness, subject to at least 60 percent of the loan forgiveness amount having been used for payroll costs.

I certainly understand what the SBA is trying to do here, but I think the better explanation is in the SBA’s updated interim final rule, Docket No. SBA-2020-0035. The SBA does a great job explaining the math behind the partial forgiveness.

But to your question, I am not sure that this falls within the realm of regulatory guidance. The hurdle is going to be with the language of the PPPFA:

LIMITATION ON FORGIVENESS.—To receive loan forgiveness under this section, an eligible recipient shall use at least 60 percent of the covered loan amount for payroll costs, and may use up to 40 percent of such amount for any payment of interest on any covered mortgage obligation (which shall not include any prepayment of or payment of principal on a covered mortgage obligation), any payment on any covered rent obligation, or any covered utility payment.

That being said, the SBA is creating a taxpayer-favorable solution to the PPPFA’s 60 percent "cliff." I am not sure who in their right mind will object, but given the pressure put onto the SBA’s rules in courts across the country, it will be interesting to see what happens next and how the agencies show reasoned decision-making in their rules that diverge from the statutory text.

"All’s Well That Ends Well?"
Wolters Kluwer: The PPP application process is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2020. Notably, prior to Senate approval of the PPPFA, the congressional record was updated with a letter from the bipartisan, bicameral PPPFA authors and policy architects to state that the PPPFA’s "extension of the covered period does not authorize the [SBA] to issue any new PPP loans after June 30, 2020, as this date remains fixed by section 1102(b) of the CARES Act." Furthermore, Treasury and the SBA, too, recently reaffirmed the June 30 cutoff date.

However, Mnuchin told lawmakers recently that another round of loans is on the discussion table, following Sen. Tim Scott’s, R-S.C., inquiry as to whether there is an appetite for further enhancing and extending the PPP. Moreover, fellow Senate Small Business Committee members Chris Coons, D-Del., and Ben Cardin, D-Md., have introduced the Prioritized Paycheck Protection Program (P4) Bill, which would authorize new lending under the PPP to borrowers with 100 employees or less who have or will soon exhaust the original PPP loan. A Democratic companion bill was introduced in the House on June 18.

Are you aware of any calls among taxpayers or practitioners to extend PPP loan applications beyond June?

Daniel Strickland: The SBA has been processing loans fast, processing more than 14 years’ worth of loans in 14 days in the initial round of funding. Since then, however, things have slowed down. I haven’t heard any calls for extension recently. But at the same time, the most recent numbers I saw suggested that there is still more than $125 billion available. The next round of published data will give us some indication of what happens. If there is still a significant amount of money left over, and if there is a need, I can certainly see Congress extending the loan application deadline without expanding the available funds. It would be additional taxpayer relief at no additional cost to the government. But with the PPPFA’s changes, we might see the remaining funds mostly or completely extended. In that case, I think we wouldn’t see an extension without another tranche of available funding.

"Confusion Now Hath Made His Masterpiece"
Wolters Kluwer: As for when pension expenses are paid and incurred, current guidance does not indicate whether the amount that is "paid by Borrower" can include retirement contributions attributable to all of 2019, 2020, or even the two years combined. Absent any further guidance, how would you advise taxpayers and practitioners on the matter?

Daniel Strickland: That is a tough question. The short answer is that there are a lot of unanswered questions like this one. The SBA and IRS are publishing guidance as quickly as they can, but it isn’t possible to give the requisite considered decision-making and answer all of the outstanding questions at the same time. What that means for taxpayers and practitioners is that each situation needs to be carefully considered. Without specific guidance, there is a risk that certain expenses don’t qualify for forgiveness or that a portion of the loan could be called for repayment.

The first thing that I advise is to work with an attorney to evaluate the specific facts of each situation and to look at the tax and business consequences of each option. In general, where there is no clear answer, having advice in writing from your attorney that the answer you choose is the right answer can help protect businesses from some of the negative consequences of being wrong.

Wolters Kluwer: Outside the most recently published interim final rules, are there other unanswered questions for which you think Treasury and the SBA could issue additional PPP guidance?

Daniel Strickland: There are a number of unanswered questions with respect to definitions. As you reference above, the one that makes most practitioners’ lists is this issue of paid versus incurred. The loan amount is determined using "monthly payments by the applicant for payroll costs incurred." And forgiveness is determined based on "the sum of the following costs incurred and payments made during the covered period." Another outstanding question is how the forgiveness reduction exemptions will work with the cure date being shifted to December 31 and how the "option to use an eight-week covered period" for those taxpayers who have already received their loan proceeds will work if the June 30 cure date falls within the 8-week covered period.

These are just the tip of the iceberg of unanswered questions.

Wolters Kluwer: Executive agencies, including the IRS and SBA, have been increasingly reliant on sub-regulatory FAQs as a means for issuing guidance lately. What are some potential consequences or drawbacks to this method?

Daniel Strickland: Receiving guidance by FAQ is certainly an efficient way to push information out to taxpayers and practitioners. But as you allude, there are some potential issues—both legal and practical. The first for me is in the second introductory paragraph:

Borrowers and lenders may rely on the guidance provided in this document as SBA’s interpretation of the Paycheck Protection Program Interim Final Rules . . . . The U.S. government will not challenge lender PPP actions that conform to this guidance 1[.]

Footnote 1 provides:

This document does not carry the force and effect of law independent of the statute and regulations on which it is based.

Although "borrowers . . . may rely on the guidance," it is only the SBA’s interpretation of its own interim final rules. There is certainly an open question as to the level of deference to which the FAQs are entitled.

Second to that is the issue of whether the government will challenge taxpayer actions that conform to the guidance. Although the guidance provides some comfort to lenders, and the lenders will be the ones approving loan forgiveness applications, there are still a slew of potential consequences in the fine print that could be asserted against borrowers.

Third is the complexity in advising clients. If you are paying daily attention to the guidance, the tempo of guidance isn’t a big deal, but what I am noticing is that the guidance is changing—think about the initial PPP interest rate of 0.50 percent fixed rate announced by Treasury that was later changed to 1.00 percent fixed rate—and few of the published thought guidance pieces are being updated. For practitioners who are trying to play catchup after receiving a client question, this can be complicated and a great deal of time can be lost spinning their wheels trying to figure out why two seemingly well-reasoned articles have divergent facts or conclusions.

Last, but not least, for taxpayers who are looking for answers online, this could be devastating when it comes to applications for forgiveness. If practitioners are having to sift through the outdated legal analysis by comparison to the newest FAQ iteration, how can taxpayers be confident that they are only relying on the correct version. And when the next round of guidance comes out, those taxpayers must rinse and repeat.

"Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow…"
Wolters Kluwer: Looking ahead, any closing thoughts or advice for practitioners related to the PPP moving forward?

Daniel Strickland: We all want to get to the right answer. For taxpayers and practitioners alike, it is important to ask questions. The SBA, for example, is receptive to discussing concerns and comments. And given the frequency of guidance, it is more important than ever to be involved in the process. For taxpayers specifically, asking questions of their advisers can protect small businesses against the "penny-wise, pound-foolish" adage. I know I want to protect my clients from missteps and help them take fullest advantage of these benefits.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Trump Administration’s rule under the Affordable Care Act (P.L. 111-148) that any nongovernment, nonpublicly traded employer can refuse to offer contraceptive coverage for moral or religious reasons, and that publicly traded employers can refuse to do so for religious reasons. Application of this rule had been halted by litigation, but the Administration is now free to apply it.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Trump Administration’s rule under the Affordable Care Act (P.L. 111-148) that any nongovernment, nonpublicly traded employer can refuse to offer contraceptive coverage for moral or religious reasons, and that publicly traded employers can refuse to do so for religious reasons. Application of this rule had been halted by litigation, but the Administration is now free to apply it.

The issues in the case were: (1) whether the ACA actually requires contraceptive coverage or was that just a creature of regulations that any administration may change, and (2) whether the administration complied with Administrative Procedures Act (APA) in light of the surprising breadth of the regulation going well beyond religious objections to include any moral objection.

Contraceptive Regulation
The prior version of this regulation included an exception for religious employers and small businesses with a religious objection. They had to self-certify that they qualified. Some objected. Shortly after the Administration changed hands, it issued a new version as an interim final regulation.

The Treasury, Health and Human Services (HHS), and Labor Departments have nearly identical versions of these rules. The Treasury version is Reg. §54.9815-2713(a)(1)(iv), but it references HHS regulations (45 CFR 147.131–147.133), and that is where much of the change was made.

The new rule provides that a nongovernment employer that has religious or moral objections to providing coverage for some or all forms of birth control can simply not provide the coverage. These rules also apply to colleges and universities providing student health insurance coverage. The religious exemption is open to any nongovernment employer, including both nonprofit and for-profit entities. The same holds true for the moral exemption, except only the religious exemption is available for publicly traded employers. An objecting employer need not file anything with the government, though affected plan participants need to be notified of mid-plan year coverage changes. Employers are free to pick and choose among contraceptives if they do decide to offer contraceptive coverage.

These regulations extend the exemption for objecting employers to objecting health insurance issuers, and to objecting individuals under which a health insurance issuer may offer a separate benefit package option to any individual who objects to coverage or payments for some or all contraceptive services based on the individual’s sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions.

Authority Under ACA
The majority opinion by Justice Thomas viewed the ACA as blank slate on what it required for women’s preventive health. The relevant ACA provision provides that, with respect to women, a group health plan and a health insurance issuer shall, at a minimum provide additional preventive care and screenings "as provided for" in comprehensive guidelines supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). At the time of the ACA’s enactment, these guidelines were not yet written.

The HRSA Guidelines were based on recommendations compiled by the Institute of Medicine (now called the National Academy of Medicine). The Guidelines included the contraceptive mandate, which required health plans to provide coverage for all contraceptive methods and sterilization procedures approved by the Food and Drug Administration, as well as related education and counseling.

The same day the Guidelines were issued in 2011, the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and the Treasury (the Departments) issued interim final regulations requiring contraceptive coverage, with exceptions for churches. The Departments determined that it was appropriate that HRSA take into account the mandate’s effect on certain religious employers, and concluded that HRSA had the discretion to do so through the creation of an exemption. Ever since, the HRSA has been tasked (according to the majority opinion) with devising religious exemptions. The majority opinion concluded that ACA granted the HRSA broad authority to define preventive care and screenings, which implies that the HRSA also has broad power to create any religious and moral exemptions. Thus, if the HRSA changes its mind, there is nothing in the ACA to prevent it.

Justice Ginsburg’s dissent (joined by Justice Sotomayor) argued the legislative language HRSA in fact only delegates to the HRSA the task of compiling a list of services that should be provided. The ACA did not delegate the authority to determine who must provide the coverage for these services. Justice Kagan’s concurrence (joined by Justice Breyer) disagreed with the majority and dissent about the clarity of the ACA’s language on this, but from the beginning the Departments acted as if it were up to the HRSA to make this call. Under the Chevron doctrine, the interpretation of unclear legislation by the agency tasked with enforcement is owed due deference by the courts.

No “Open-Mindedness” Test
The majority opinion found no violation of the Administrative Procedures Act. The fact that the final rules made only minor alterations to the interim final regulations did not render the final rules procedurally invalid, because nothing in the record suggested that the Departments maintained an open mind during the post-promulgation process. The “open-mindedness” test has no basis in the APA, according to Justice Thomas.

The majority opinion also addressed the issue of calling the document containing the interim final rules "Interim Final Rules with Request for Comments" instead of "General Notice of Proposed Rulemaking." The request for comments readily satisfied the APA notice requirements, Justice Thomas ruled. Even assuming that the APA requires an agency to publish a document entitled "notice of proposed rulemaking," there was no prejudicial error here.

Justice Kagan’s opinion questioned whether the rule was not arbitrary and capricious. The rule went beyond what the Departments’ justification supported, raising doubts about whether the solution lacks a "rational connection" to the problem described. Few employers have expressed reservations about self-certification, and in any case the new exemption includes any employer (except publicly traded employers) with a moral objection whether it is religious or not.

Where’s RFRA?
The majority opinion stopped its authority analysis at holding that the ACA authorized the regulation, and stated that it did not need go into the requirements of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA). Justice Alito (joined by Justice Gorsuch) filed a concurrence taking the position that RFRA compels an exemption for the Little Sisters and any other employer with a similar objection to what has been called the accommodation to the contraceptive mandate.

The IRS has issued guidance to employers on the requirement to report the amount of qualified sick and family leave wages paid to employees under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (Families First Act) ( P.L. 116-127). This reporting provides employees who are also self-employed with information necessary for properly claiming qualified sick leave equivalent or qualified family leave equivalent credits under the Families First Act.

The IRS has issued guidance to employers on the requirement to report the amount of qualified sick and family leave wages paid to employees under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (Families First Act) ( P.L. 116-127). This reporting provides employees who are also self-employed with information necessary for properly claiming qualified sick leave equivalent or qualified family leave equivalent credits under the Families First Act.

Background
Under the Families First Act, many employers with fewer than 500 employees must provide paid leave to employees due to circumstances related to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Certain employers must provide an employee with up to 80 hours of paid sick leave if the employee cannot work or telework because he or she:

1. is subject to a federal, state or local quarantine or isolation order related to COVID-19;
2. has been advised by a health care provider to self-quarantine due to concerns related to COVID-19;
3. is experiencing symptoms of COVID-19 and seeking a medical diagnosis;
4. is caring for an individual who is subject to a federal, state, or local quarantine or isolation order related to COVID-19, or has been advised by a health care provider to self-quarantine due to concerns related to COVID-19;
5. is caring for a son or daughter if the child’s school or place of care has been closed, or the child’s care provider is unavailable, due to COVID-19 precautions; or
6. is experiencing any other substantially similar condition specified by the Secretary of Health and Human Services in consultation with the Secretaries of the Treasury and Labor.

The employee is entitled to paid sick leave at his or her regular pay rate (or if higher, the applicable federal, state, or local minimum wage), up to:

• $511 per day ($5,110 in the aggregate) if the employee cannot work for reasons listed in (1), (2), or (3), above;
• $200 per day ($2,000 in the aggregate) if the employee cannot work for reasons listed in (4), (5), or (6) above.

The Families First Act also amends the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 to require employers to provide expanded paid family and medical leave to employees who cannot work or telework for reasons related to COVID-19. An employee can receive up to 10 weeks of paid family and medical leave at two-thirds the employee’s regular rate of pay, up to $200 per day ($10,000 in the aggregate) if the employee cannot work because he or she is caring for a son or daughter whose school or place of care is closed, or whose child care provider is unavailable, for reasons related to COVID-19.

Eligible employers may receive a refundable payroll credit for required qualified sick leave wages or qualified family leave wages paid to an employee, plus allocable qualified health plan expenses. An equivalent credit is available to self-employed individuals carrying on a trade or business, if the self-employed individual would be entitled to receive paid leave if he or she were an employee of an employer (other than himself or herself). The refundable credits apply to qualified leave wages paid with respect to the period beginning on April 1, 2020, and ending on December 31, 2020.

Reporting Qualified Leave Wages
In addition to reporting qualified sick leave wages paid and qualified family leave wages paid in Boxes 1, 3 (up to the social security wage base), and 5 of Form W-2 (or, in the case of compensation subject to the Railroad Retirement Tax Act (RRTA), in Boxes 1 and 14 of Form W-2), employers must report to the employee the following types and amounts of the wages that were paid, with each amount separately reported either in Box 14 of Form W-2 or on a separate statement:

• the total amount of qualified sick leave wages paid for reasons (1), (2), or (3) above, labelled as "sick leave wages subject to the $511 per day limit" or in similar language;
• the total amount of qualified sick leave wages paid for reasons (4), (5), or (6) above, labelled as "sick leave wages subject to the $200 per day limit" or in similar language; and
• the total amount of qualified family leave wages paid, labelled as "emergency family leave wages" or in similar language.

If a separate statement is provided and the employee receives a paper Form W-2, the statement must be included with the Form W-2 provided to the employee. If the employee receives an electronic Form W-2, the statement must be provided in the same manner and at the same time as the Form W-2.

Self-Employed Individuals
Self-employed individuals who are claiming qualified sick leave equivalent or qualified family leave equivalent credits, and who are also eligible for qualified sick leave and qualified family leave wages as employees, must report the qualified leave wage amounts described above on Form 7202, Credits for Sick Leave and Family Leave for Certain Self-Employed Individuals, included with their income tax returns. They also must reduce (but not below zero) any qualified sick leave or qualified family leave equivalent credits by the amount of these qualified leave wages.

The IRS has issued guidance and temporary relief for required minimum distribution (RMD) changes in 2020. Distributions that would have been RMDs under old law are treated as eligible rollover distributions. The 60-day rollover period deadline for any 2020 RMDs already taken has been extended to August 31, 2020. Notice 2007-7, I.R.B. 2007-5, 395 is modified.

The IRS has issued guidance and temporary relief for required minimum distribution (RMD) changes in 2020. Distributions that would have been RMDs under old law are treated as eligible rollover distributions. The 60-day rollover period deadline for any 2020 RMDs already taken has been extended to August 31, 2020. Notice 2007-7, I.R.B. 2007-5, 395 is modified.

SECURE and CARES Acts
The new guidance addresses RMD issues arising from recent unexpected changes in the rules. The Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement Act of 2019 (SECURE Act) ( P.L. 116-94), enacted at the end of 2019, changed the required beginning date for RMDs for individuals turning age 70-1/2 in 2020. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act ( P.L. 116-136), enacted in March 2020, waived the RMD requirements for 2020.

Plans, administrators, and individuals were taken by surprise. Some plans and participants treated distributions as RMDs even though they were not under new rules then in effect. The SECURE Act provided no relief. However, the CARES Act allowed plans and participants to treat would-be RMDs as eligible rollover distributions. Still, under the rules, individuals have 60 days to recontribute distributions, and can only do that once in a 12-month period. That left individuals who took early distributions twisting in the wind, not to mention people taking monthly RMD installments.

60-Day Deadline Extended
Under the new relief, any distribution already taken in 2020 that would have been an RMD under the old rules has a 60-day recontribution deadline of no earlier than August 31. For example, if someone took a distribution in January 2020 that would have been an RMD under the old rules (either sets of old rules), they have until August 31 to recontribute it to an eligible plan or IRA.

For an IRA owner or beneficiary who has already received a distribution that would have been an RMD in 2020 but for the 2020 RMD waiver under the CARES Act or the change in the required beginning date under the SECURE Act, the recipient may repay the distribution to the distributing IRA, even if the repayment is made more than 60 days after the distribution, provided the repayment is made no later than August 31, 2020. The repayment will be treated as a rollover, but will be subject to the one rollover per 12-month period limitation or the restriction on nonspousal beneficiary rollovers.

SECURE Act Relief
Distributions that were intended as RMDs but in fact are not due to the SECURE Act change in required beginning date are treated as eligible rollover distributions. RMDs do not have to satisfy rules regarding mandatory withholding, the option of a direct rollover, and notice of that right. Under this relief, individuals and plans can still treat these as eligible rollover distributions.

2020 Waiver Guidance
The IRS has clarified that the CARES Act relief applies for 2020 distributions that would have been RMDs, had it not been for the 2020 RMD waiver. These include distributions to a plan participant paid in 2020 (or paid in 2021 for the 2020 calendar year in the case of an employee who has a required beginning date of April 1, 2021) if the payments equal the amounts that would have been RMDs in (or for) 2020 had it not been for 2020 RMD waiver. They also include distributions that are one or more payments (that include the 2020 RMDs) in a series of substantially equal periodic payments made at least annually and expected to last for the participant’s life or life expectancy, the joint lives (or joint life expectancies) of the participant and the participant’s designated beneficiary, or for a period of at least 10 years.

For a plan participant with a required beginning date of April 1, 2021, distributions paid in 2021 that would have been an RMD for 2021 had it not been for the CARES Act are treated as eligible rollover distributions. However, a plan participant with a required beginning date of April 1, 2021, must still receive RMD for the 2021 calendar year by December 31, 2021. If the employee receives a distribution during 2021, that distribution is an RMD for the 2021 calendar year to the extent the total RMD for 2021 has not been satisfied even if the distribution is made on or before April 1, 2021, and accordingly, is not an eligible rollover distribution. However, to the extent the RMD for 2021 has been satisfied, subsequent amounts distributed in 2021 that would otherwise not be eligible rollover distributions may be rolled over.

Extended Deadlines Due to 2020 Waiver
If a plan permits an employee or beneficiary to elect whether the 5-year rule or the life expectancy rule applies in determining RMDs, then the deadline for making that election typically would be the end of calendar year following the calendar year of the employee’s death. For example, if a 50-year-old employee in a plan providing the election died in 2019 with his sister as his designated beneficiary, the plan provision would require the election by the end of 2020. However, that type of plan may be amended to permit the extension of the election deadline to the end of 2021.

The RMD waiver extends the time for making a direct rollover for a nonspouse designated beneficiary if the participant died in 2019. A special rule provides that if the 5-year rule applies to a benefit under a plan, the nonspouse designated beneficiary may determine the amount that is not eligible for rollover because it is an RMD using the life expectancy rule in the case of a distribution made prior to the end of the year following the year of death. This special rule is modified so that if the employee’s death occurred in 2019, the nonspouse designated beneficiary has until the end of 2021 to make the direct rollover and use the life expectancy rule.

Plan Amendments
The guidance provides a sample plan amendment for defined contribution plans that plan sponsors may adopt to implement waiver rules. Any plan amendment must be adopted no later than the last day of the first plan year beginning on or after January 1, 2022 (January 1, 2024, for governmental plans), and must reflect operation of the plan beginning with the effective date of the plan amendment. Timely adoption of the amendment must be shown by a written document signed and dated by the employer (including an adopting employer of a pre-approved plan). IRAs do not need to be amended.

The IRS has clarified and provided relief for mid-year amendments reducing safe harbor contributions. An updated safe harbor notice and an election opportunity must be provided even if the change is only for highly compensated employees. Coronavirus (COVID-19) relief applies if a plan amendment is adopted between March 13, 2020, and August 31, 2020. For nonelective contribution plans, the supplemental notice requirement is satisfied if provided no later than August 31, 2020, and the amendment that reduces or suspends contributions is adopted no later than the effective date of the reduction or suspension. Notice 2016-16, I.R.B., 2016-7, 318, is clarified.

The IRS has clarified and provided relief for mid-year amendments reducing safe harbor contributions. An updated safe harbor notice and an election opportunity must be provided even if the change is only for highly compensated employees. Coronavirus (COVID-19) relief applies if a plan amendment is adopted between March 13, 2020, and August 31, 2020. For nonelective contribution plans, the supplemental notice requirement is satisfied if provided no later than August 31, 2020, and the amendment that reduces or suspends contributions is adopted no later than the effective date of the reduction or suspension. Notice 2016-16, I.R.B., 2016-7, 318, is clarified.

Mid-Year Amendments
Safe harbor contributions for a plan year may be amended during the plan year to reduce or suspend future matching or nonelective contributions only under certain conditions. Among them are that the employer must either (1) be operating at an economic loss for the plan year, or (2) have included in the plan’s safe harbor notice for the plan year a statement that the plan may be amended during the plan year to reduce or suspend safe harbor contributions, and that the reduction or suspension will not apply earlier than 30 days after all eligible employees are provided notice of the reduction or suspension.

The reduction or suspension of safe harbor contributions may be effective no earlier than the later of the date the amendment is adopted or 30 days after eligible employees are provided in a supplemental notice. Eligible employees must be given a reasonable opportunity (including a reasonable period after receipt of the supplemental notice) prior to the reduction or suspension of safe harbor contributions to change their cash or deferred elections and, if applicable, their employee contribution elections.

Safe Harbor Contributions
Reductions or suspensions of contributions. If a plan amendment that reduces or suspends safe harbor matching or nonelective contributions during a plan year is adopted between March 13, 2020, and August 31, 2020, then the plan will not be treated as failing to satisfy the requirement that the employer either (1) is operating at an economic loss; or (2) has included in the plan’s safe harbor notice for the plan year a statement that (a) the plan may be amended during the plan year to reduce or suspend the safe harbor contributions and (b) the reduction or suspension will not apply until at least 30 days after all eligible employees are provided notice of the reduction or suspension.

Supplemental notice requirement. If a plan amendment that reduces or suspends safe harbor nonelective contributions during a plan year is adopted between March 13, 2020, and August 31, 2020, then the plan will not be treated as failing to satisfy the supplemental notice requirements merely because it is not provided to eligible employees at least 30 days before the reduction or suspension of safe harbor nonelective contributions is effective, provided that (1) the supplemental notice is provided to eligible employees no later than August 31, 2020, and (2) the plan amendment that reduces or suspends safe harbor nonelective contributions is adopted no later than the effective date of the reduction or suspension of safe harbor nonelective contributions.

There is no relief with respect to the timing of supplemental notices for a mid-year reduction or suspension of safe harbor matching contributions because matching contribution levels communicated to employees directly affect employee decisions regarding elective contributions (and, if applicable, employee contributions).

HCE Contributions
The new notice clarifies that an updated safe harbor notice and an election opportunity (as required by Notice 2016-16, I.R.B. 2016-7, 318) must be provided to highly compensated employees (HCEs) to whom the mid-year change applies, determined as of the date of issuance of the updated safe harbor notice. This rule applies even if the change only applies to HCEs.

The IRS amended final regulations with guidance on the Code Sec. 199A deduction for suspended losses and shareholders of regulated investment companies (RICs). The amendments address the treatment of suspended losses included in qualified business income (QBI), the deduction allowed to a shareholder in a regulated investment company (RIC), and additional rules related to trusts and estates. The IRS had previously issued final and proposed regulations addressing these issues (NPRM REG-134652-18)

The IRS amended final regulations with guidance on the Code Sec. 199A deduction for suspended losses and shareholders of regulated investment companies (RICs). The amendments address the treatment of suspended losses included in qualified business income (QBI), the deduction allowed to a shareholder in a regulated investment company (RIC), and additional rules related to trusts and estates. The IRS had previously issued final and proposed regulations addressing these issues ( NPRM REG-134652-18)

Background
Code Sec. 199A provides a deduction of up to 20 percent of qualified business income (QBI) from a U.S. trade or business operated as a sole proprietorship, or through a partnership, S corporation, trust, or estate. If the taxpayer’s taxable income exceeds the threshold amount in Code Sec. 199A(e)(2), the deduction may be limited. Statutory limitations are subject to phase-in rules. Code Sec. 199A also provides individuals and some trusts and estates a deduction of up to 20 percent of their combined qualified real estate investment trust (REIT) dividends and qualified publicly traded partnership (PTP) income.

461(l) Losses
Under Reg. §1.199A-3(b)(1)(iv), previously disallowed losses or deductions allowed in the tax year are generally taken into account for computing QBI, except to the extent the losses or deductions were disallowed, suspended, limited, or carried over from tax years ending before January 1, 2018. The final regulations amend Reg. §1.199A-3(b)(1)(iv)(A) to specifically reference excess business losses disallowed by Code Sec. 461(l) and treated as a net operating loss (NOL) carryover for the tax year for purposes of determining any NOL carryover in subsequent tax years. The IRS notes that the list of statutes in the regulation is not exhaustive

Phase-in Rules for SSTB Losses
The amendments also clarify how the phase-in rules apply when a taxpayer has a suspended or disallowed loss or deduction from a specified service trade or business (SSTB). If the individual’s taxable income is at or below the threshold amount in the year the loss or deduction is incurred, the entire disallowed loss or deduction is treated as QBI from a separate trade or business in the later tax year in which the loss is allowed. If the individual’s taxable income is within the phase-in range, only a percentage of the disallowed loss or deduction is taken into account in the later tax year. If the individual’s taxable income exceeds the phase-in range, the loss or deduction is not included in QBI.

Conduit Treatment
The final regulations provide conduit treatment for qualified REIT dividends earned by a RIC. Conduit treatment happens when a RIC treats dividends paid to a shareholder in the same or similar manner as the shareholder would treat the underlying item of income or gain if the shareholder realized it directly. The Treasury Department and IRS continue to consider comments on whether to provide conduit treatment for qualified PTP income, and for RIC income from an activity that would generate QBI if conducted by a partnership or an S corporation.

Separate Share Rule
The separate share applies for a trust or estate described in Code Sec. 663(c) with substantially separate and independent shares for multiple beneficiaries. Under the final regulations, the trust or estate will be treated as a single trust or estate for determining taxable income, net capital gain, net QBI, W-2 wages, unadjusted basis immediately after acquisition (UBIA) of qualified property, qualified REIT dividends, and qualified PTP income for each trade or business of the trust or estate, and for computing the W-2 wage and UBIA of qualified property limitations.

Applicability
The amended regulations apply to tax years beginning 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. However, taxpayers may choose to apply the amendments before that date. Taxpayers who chose to rely on the proposed regulations issued in February 2019 may continue to do so until the date these amendments are published.

The Treasury Department and the IRS have released drafts of proposed partnership forms for tax year 2021 (the 2022 filing season). The proposed forms are intended to provide greater clarity for partners on how to compute their U.S. income tax liability for relevant international tax items, including claiming deductions and credits. The redesigned forms and instructions will also give useful guidance to partnerships on how to provide international tax information to their partners in a standardized format.

The Treasury Department and the IRS have released drafts of proposed partnership forms for tax year 2021 (the 2022 filing season). The proposed forms are intended to provide greater clarity for partners on how to compute their U.S. income tax liability for relevant international tax items, including claiming deductions and credits. The redesigned forms and instructions will also give useful guidance to partnerships on how to provide international tax information to their partners in a standardized format.

The draft forms are:

• Schedule K-2 (Form 1065), Partners’ Distributive Share Items—International, and Instructions for Schedule K-2.
• Schedule K-3 (Form 1065), Partner’s Share of Income, Deductions, Credits, etc.—International ; and Instructions for Schedule K-3.

These proposed forms would apply to a partnership required to file Form 1065 only if it has "items of international tax relevance" (i.e., generally, foreign activities or foreign partners). The changes would not affect domestic partnerships with no international tax items to report.

Partner Reporting of International Items
Partners must report international tax information on their tax returns on several tax forms and schedules. They generally obtain this information from their partnerships, usually through narrative statements attached to one or more Schedules K-1 (Form 1065), Partner’s Share of Income, Deductions, Credits, etc. Since partnerships compile these statements in a variety of formats, partners might have difficulties translating the statements onto their own returns.

To ease this burden, the Treasury and IRS state that the proposed changes would provide a standard format that offers greater clarity to both partnerships and their partners. This standard format is designed to better align the information that partnerships provide on the schedules with the tax forms used by partners, so that partners can more easily prepare their tax returns, and the IRS can more efficiently verify taxpayer compliance. It is intended that all information to be reported on the new schedules is already necessary for the partnership to provide to partners or is available to the partnership.

Draft Schedules K-2 and K-3
Any partnership that is required to file Form 1065, U.S. Return of Partnership Income, and has items relevant to the determination of the U.S. tax or certain withholding tax or reporting obligations of its partners under the international provisions of the Code, will be required to complete the relevant parts of Schedule K-2 and Schedule K-3.

The proposed parts included in new Schedule K-2 (Form 1065) replace portions of existing Form 1065, Schedule K, lines 16(a) through 16(r). The proposed schedule provides for international tax information to be reported in a standardized manner. The partnership will attach Schedule K-2 to its Form 1065.

The proposed parts included in new Schedule K-3 (Form 1065) replace portions of Schedule K-1 (Form 1065), Part III, Boxes 16 and 20. The proposed schedule provides information to the partner generally in the format of the following forms that the partner might need to complete:

• Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return;
• Form 1040-NR, U.S. Nonresident Alien Income Tax Return;
• Form 1116, Foreign Tax Credit (Individual, Estate, or Trust;
• Form 1118, Foreign Tax Credit—Corporations;
• Form 1120, U.S. Corporation Income Tax Return;
• Form 1120-F, U.S. Income Tax Return of a Foreign Corporation;
• Form 4797, Sales of Business Property;
• Form 8949, Sales and Other Dispositions of Capital Assets;
• Form 8991, Tax on Base Erosion Payments of Taxpayers With Substantial Gross Receipts;
• Form 8992, U.S. Shareholder Calculation of Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income (GILTI); and
• Form 8993, Section 250 Deduction for Foreign Derived Intangible Income (FDII) and Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income (GILTI).

The partnership will provide Schedule K-3 to its partners according to the timeline for providing Schedule K-1.

Comments Requested
The draft schedules and instructions have been released to allow partnerships and other stakeholders time to consider the proposed changes and provide comments that can be taken into account in finalizing the schedules and instructions. The Treasury and IRS will be actively engaged with stakeholders to solicit input on these proposed changes before the forms are finalized later in 2020.

Affected stakeholders can submit comments through September 14, 2020. Written comments should be sent to the following email address: lbi.passthrough.international.form.changes@irs.gov with the subject line: "International Form Changes."

For additional information and updates, see https://www.irs.gov/businesses/1065-form-changes.

Other Revisions
The Treasury and IRS plan similar revisions, as applicable, to Form 1120-S, U.S. Income Tax Return for an S Corporation, and Form 8865, Return of U.S. Persons With Respect to Certain Foreign Partnerships. They welcome comments on similar changes to be made to these forms for the 2021 tax year.

The Treasury and IRS have issued final regulations covering the Code Sec. 250 deduction for foreign-derived intangible income (FDII) and global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI). Proposed regulations were issued on March 6, 2019 (NPRM REG-104464-18). The final regulations maintain the basic approach and structure of the proposed regulations and provide guidance on computation of the deduction and the determination of FDII, including in the consolidated return context. Additionally, rules requiring the filing of Form 8993, Section 250 Deduction for Foreign-Derived Intangible Income and Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income, are finalized.

The Treasury and IRS have issued final regulations covering the Code Sec. 250 deduction for foreign-derived intangible income (FDII) and global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI). Proposed regulations were issued on March 6, 2019 (NPRM REG-104464-18). The final regulations maintain the basic approach and structure of the proposed regulations and provide guidance on computation of the deduction and the determination of FDII, including in the consolidated return context. Additionally, rules requiring the filing of Form 8993, Section 250 Deduction for Foreign-Derived Intangible Income and Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income, are finalized.

Section 250 Deduction
The Code Sec. 250 deduction is available to domestic corporations for:

• a portion of profits attributable U.S. activities that serve foreign markets, and
• a portion of profits of controlled foreign corporations (CFCs).

The deduction is available with respect to a domestic corporation’s "excess return" or return in excess of fixed return on tangible assets, derived from serving foreign markets. FDII is the portion of the excess return derived from serving foreign markets directly from the United States. GILTI is the portion of the excess return derived through foreign affiliates. The deduction results in a lower effective U.S. tax rate on a U.S. corporation’s FDII and GILTI.

Documentation Requirements
The proposed regulations defined terms and provide specific documents that were required to establish that income was derived from serving foreign markets. Commentators found that the proposed regulations could present compliance burdens. Accordingly, the final regulations provide a more flexible approach than the specific documentation requirements.

For many types of sales and services, eligibility for the Code Sec. 250 deduction is subject to the general requirement under the Code that deductions must be supported by sufficient substantiation, including the use of available business records.

More specific substantiation requirements are required for:

• intangible property;
• sales of general property to resellers and manufacturers; and
• the provision of general services to recipients.

The requirements include either:

• a specific document;
• information from the recipient obtained or created in the ordinary course of a trade or business; or
• a taxpayer statement with corroborating evidence.

Taxpayers may choose a method of substantiation among the methods. The specific substantiation requirements do not apply to businesses with less than $25 million in gross receipts. The final regulations also eliminate references to the use of market research to establish foreign use.

The final regulations clarify how to establish foreign use for sales of digital content and how to establish a recipient’s location outside of the United States with respect to electronically supplied services and advertising services. The final regulations:

• evaluate the sale of a copyrighted article under the general property rules, rather than under the rules for foreign use of intangible property;
• provide new rules for establishing whether a sale of digital content is for foreign use;
• define "digital content" as a computer program or any other content in digital format; and
• provide that a sale of general property that primarily includes digital content is a foreign-derived deduction eligible income (FDDEI) sale if the end user downloads or accesses the content on a device located outside of the United States.

The final regulations add two subcategories of general services:

• a subcategory of general services for electronically supplied services; and
• a subcategory for advertising services.

In these cases, the location of the recipient is where the content is accessed or viewed.

Foreign Military Sales and Services
The proposed regulations provided special rules to cover U.S. Defense Contractors’ military sales of equipment and provision of services to the U.S. government that are subsequently sold or provided to a foreign government.

The final regulations adopt the proposed regulations, which treat sales and services provided to the U.S. government under the Arms Export Control Act as a sale or provision of services to the foreign government that is eligible for the deduction. The final regulations relax the substantiation requirements, so that the general substantiation requirements apply.

Ratio of FDDEI to DEI
A corporation’s FDII is defined as its deemed intangible income (DII) multiplied by the corporation’s foreign-derived ratio. This is the ratio of the corporation’s foreign-derived deduction eligible income (FDDEI) to its deduction eligible income (DEI).

The final regulations retain the rule that the domestic corporation must allocate expenses to its gross FDDEI to determine the numerator of the foreign-derived ratio.

Deduction for Individuals
The final regulations extend the Code Sec. 250 deduction with respect to GILTI, to individuals—including individual partners and individual S corporation shareholders—making the Code Sec. 962 election to be treated as a domestic corporation.

Additional Changes
Additional changes in the final regulations generally expand situations in which a transaction will be an FDDEI transaction, including:

• a property service may be a FDDEI service if it is provided with respect to property temporarily located in the United States;
• the definition of transportation services is revised to include freight forwarding services;
• the sale of a manufacturing method or process intangible to a foreign unrelated party is for foreign use based on the location of the manufacture rather that the end user;
• elimination of the rule that allowed the deduction for sales of international property only if certain time and use thresholds were met and the replacement of foreign use based on place of registration;
• clarification that general property includes physical commodities sold pursuant to derivative contracts, and that hedging sales impact a taxpayer’s income; and
• removal of the rule that the sale of an interest in a foreign branch is treated as giving rise to foreign branch income preventing the deduction.

Taxpayers can also use any reasonable method to determine the ordering of rules that limit deductions based on taxable income until additional rules are issued.

The IRS is calling on any taxpayers involved in syndicated conservation easement transactions who receives a settlement offer from the agency to accept it soon. The Service made this request in the wake of the Tax Court’s recent strike down of four additional abusive syndicated conservation easement transactions.

Settlement Offers
Time-limited settlement offers, which the IRS announced on June 25 ( IR-2020-130), are only being made to certain taxpayers with pending docketed Tax Court cases involving this type of abusive transaction. The IRS declared that these and other recent Tax Court decisions support the abusive nature of the underlying syndicated conservation easement deduction.

The four recent Tax Court decisions in question disallowed conservation easement deductions totaling nearly $21 million ( Village at Effingham, LLC, TC Memo. 2020-102, Dec. 61,715(M); Riverside Place, LLC, TC Memo. 2020-103, Dec. 61,716(M); Maple Landing, LLC, TC Memo. 2020-104, Dec. 61,717(M); Englewood Place, LLC, TC Memo. 2020-105, Dec. 61,718(M)).

Abusive Transactions
While recognizing the important role of legitimate conservation easement deductions in incentivizing land preservation for future generations, the IRS pointed out that abusive syndicated conservation easement transactions have been of concern for several years.

In listed syndicated conservation easement structures, promoters syndicate ownership interests in real property through partnerships, using promotional materials to suggest that prospective investors may be entitled to a share of a conservation easement contribution deduction that equals or exceeds two and one-half times the investment amount. The promoters obtain an appraisal that greatly inflates the value of the conservation easement, based on a fictional and unrealistic highest and best use of the property before it was encumbered with the easement. After the investors invest in the partnership, the partnership donates a conservation easement to a land trust. Investors in the partnership then claim a deduction based on an inflated value. According to the IRS, the investors typically claim charitable contribution deductions that grossly multiply their actual investment in the transaction and defy common sense.

The IRS is aware that some promoters of these abusive transactions have downplayed the significance of the string of recent court decisions holding in the government’s favor, arguing that their cases are somehow different or that those decisions might be reversed on appeal. These promoters ignore common sense and argue that the real dispute is about value, neglecting to explain how the reporting of short-term appreciation, often exceeding many multiples of reality, could possibly withstand judicial scrutiny. "Taxpayers should ignore this nonsense, take an objective look at their cases, and cut their losses," said IRS Chief Counsel Mike Desmond; "abusive transactions, like settlement offers, do not get better with time, and this is a good opportunity to get out," he added.