|

Prohibited Transaction With IRA Unintentionally Saves Taxpayer from Large Tax Bill

The issue before the court was whether the taxpayer received a taxable, deemed distribution in 2014 from an account that was treated and consistently reported by the Taxpayer as an IRA even though the account entered into a number of prohibited transactions beginning in 2011. In a designated order on January 31, 2019 , Judge…

| |

Maryland District Court Holds the IRS Tax Lien Does Not Attach After Fraudulent Conveyance Set Aside under MUFCA

In a recent case,[1] the Federal District Court for the District of Maryland held that the U.S.’s federal IRS tax lien did not attach to a piece real property after the transfer to the taxpayer was voided under the Maryland Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act (“MUFCA”).[2] Facts Transfer from Insolvent Estate Plaintiff, BG, is a nursing…

|

Basis in Partnership Interest: Is your word good enough to support a loss deduction?

In Namen v. Commissioner[1], the taxpayer was a podiatrist in private practice. He was one of 6 members of an LLC that operated a surgical center, which closed in 2009. For federal income tax purposes, the LLC was treated as a partnership. The taxpayer claimed a loss on his personal 2009 income tax return from…

|

Form is Critical: IRS Cuts Down Broker’s FICA S Corp Planning

Takeaway: While S corporations can be an effective means to reduce FICA taxes, the form of the arrangement must be consistent with the taxpayer’s intended reporting position(s). The S corporation, not the S corporation’s employee-shareholder, must be in control of the receipt of income in order shift income from the shareholder’s personal income tax return…

Counting Travel Time for Real Estate Professional Test? Leyh v. Commissioner
|

Counting Travel Time for Real Estate Professional Test? Leyh v. Commissioner

Overview In Leyh v. Commissioner[1], the Tax Court held that the taxpayer’s time incurred while traveling from her home to rental properties to perform a variety of tasks with respect to 12 rental activities counted towards the test of whether the taxpayer was a real estate professional.[2] As a result, the taxpayer was considered a…

Bacon v. Commissioner: Beware, Forms 1099-C Are Not Always Accurate
|

Bacon v. Commissioner: Beware, Forms 1099-C Are Not Always Accurate

Overview The Tax Court determined that the extinguishment of the taxpayer’s debt took place in a closed tax year, even though FEMA issued a 1099-C[1] in an open tax year. As a result, the Tax Court held that the IRS was barred by the statute of limitations from assessing the taxpayer for the federal income…

DMA v. Brohl: US Supreme Court Holds In Favor of DMA
|

DMA v. Brohl: US Supreme Court Holds In Favor of DMA

Overview On Tuesday March 3, 2015, the Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision in favor of the Direct Marketing Association, (“DMA”) in DMA v. Brohl (575 U.S. ____ )(March 3, 2015) and remanded the case back to the Tenth Circuit for further consideration. Although the decision did not come as a surprise, dicta in…

When is a Building Placed in Service: Stine LLC v. USA
|

When is a Building Placed in Service: Stine LLC v. USA

Is it possible to begin depreciating a building before the building opens its doors to customers? Although it seems unintuitive, the answer is yes. In the case of Stine LLC v. USA[1], a Louisiana federal district court held that the taxpayer’s retail building had been “placed in service” despite the fact that the retail stores…

Tax Court Analyzes How to Count Travel Days for Purposes of Section 280A

Tax Court Analyzes How to Count Travel Days for Purposes of Section 280A

Takeaway from Van Malssen v. Commissioner: In Van Malssen v. Commissioner, the Tax Court concluded that, for purposes of section 280A, travel days will only escape classification as personal use days if the principal purpose of the trip as a whole is to perform repairs and maintenance.[1] Overview of Facts in Van Malssen The taxpayers purchased a…

8th Circuit Reverses Tax Court and Holds CRP Payments Not Subject to SECA

On Friday October 10, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit overturned the Tax Court’s decision in Morehouse v. Commissioner and held, in a two-to-one decision, that CRP payments made to non-farmers constitute rentals from real estate for purposes of § 1402(a)(1) and are excluded from the self-employment tax (“SECA”).[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column…