- Newsletters

The IRS has issued proposed and temporary regulations under Code Sec. 530A, regarding general requirements for Trump accounts, the establishment of an initial account, including automatic enrollment by the Secretary of the Treasury, and qualified general contributions. Proposed regulations issued in March 2026 (NPRM REG-117270-25) that provided guidance on establishing Trump accounts, but did not establish automatic enrollment due to time constraints in resolving legal and administrative issues, are withdrawn. The temporary regulations apply to tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2026, and expire on September 30, 2029.

General Requirements and Establishment of an Account

A Trump account is either (1) an initial Trump account, created or organized by the Treasury Secretary for an eligible individual or (2) a rollover Trump account, which is an account created during the growth period and funded by a qualified rollover contribution from the account beneficiary's existing Trump account. The written governing instrument of a Trump account must generally meet the rules of Code Sec. 408(a)(1) through (6) and Code Sec. 530A(b)(1)(C)(i) through (iii). Any person approved by the IRS as of December 31, 2025, to be a nonbank trustee of an IRA would have automatic approval to act as a trustee of a Trump account. The written instrument must clearly identify the account as a Trump account at the time of creation.

The Secretary may make an election to establish an auto account for a qualifying individual. Another person may elect to establish a Trump account for an eligible individual by filing Form 4547 or via the electronic application or webpage made available by the Secretary. A person may claim an auto account pursuant to Temp. Reg. §1.530A-1T(d)(1)(iv) by establishing a claimed initial Trump account and having the funds in the auto account transferred to the claimed initial Trump account. On or about October 1, 2026, the Secretary shall establish an auto account for each person whom the Secretary has determined to meet the requirements of Temp. Reg. §1.530-A-1T(b)(2) to be an eligible individual, and from whom no prior election has been made. Periodic elections to establish accounts for eligible individuals will be made after that date.

Administration of an auto account is the Secretary's responsibility. During the growth period, an account may only accept qualified general contributions under Code Sec. 530A(f) and a $1,000 pilot program contribution. An auto account's only investment must be its equitable interest in the master group trust, which is a trust established for the exclusive benefit of account beneficiaries of auto accounts for purposes of holding investments of those auto accounts and meets the applicable requirements of Rev. Rul. 81-100, as modified, and is exempt from tax under Code Sec. 408(e).

Qualified General Contributions and Qualified Stock Contributions

Temp. Reg. §1.530A-7T establishes the framework for qualified general contributions to Trump accounts. A qualified general contribution must originate from an eligible donor, be accepted by the Secretary through a Treasury acceptance agreement, be made to beneficiaries within an approved class, and be allocated equally among all beneficiaries in that class. An approved class must include at least 5,000 account beneficiaries and include all account beneficiaries who are still in their growth period, reside in the specified geographic location, and born in one or more years identified in the Treasury acceptance agreement.

The regulations also create rules for qualified stock contributions, allowing eligible donors to contribute certain publicly traded stock issued by domestic corporations directly to Trump accounts. Such stock is generally subject to a minimum holding period ending on the earlier of five years after contribution or the beneficiary’s growth period ending.

Contributions made to qualifying Code Sec. 501(c)(3) organizations to fund general funding contributions are deductible under applicable charitable deduction rules, and gifts to eligible donor organizations are treated as qualifying charitable transfers. A Code Sec. 501(c)(3) organization furthers its exempt purposes by making a qualifying general funding contribution, whether directly or through a donor-advised fund. In addition, such contributions are treated as expenditures for charitable purposes and generally are not considered grants or distributions to individuals for purposes of the private foundation and donor-advised fund expenditure responsibility rules.

T.D. 10056

CC-00226466-26

Close

The IRS has released the 2026-2027 special per diem rates. Taxpayers use the per diem rates to substantiate certain expenses incurred while traveling away from home. These special per diem rates include:

1. the special transportation industry meal and incidental expenses (M&IE) rates,
2. the rate for the incidental expenses only deduction,
3. and the rates and list of high-cost localities for purposes of the high-low substantiation method.

The IRS has released the 2026-2027 special per diem rates. Taxpayers use the per diem rates to substantiate certain expenses incurred while traveling away from home. These special per diem rates include:

1. the special transportation industry meal and incidental expenses (M&IE) rates,
2. the rate for the incidental expenses only deduction,
3. and the rates and list of high-cost localities for purposes of the high-low substantiation method.

Transportation Industry Special Per Diem Rates

The special M&IE rates for taxpayers in the transportation industry are:

$80 for any locality of travel in the continental United States (CONUS), and
$86 for any locality of travel outside the continental United States (OCONUS).

Incidental Expenses Only Rate

The rate is $5 per day for any CONUS or OCONUS travel for the incidental expenses only deduction.

High-Low Substantiation Method

For purposes of the high-low substantiation method, the 2026-2027 special per diem rates are:

$329 for travel to any high-cost locality, and
$230 for travel to any other locality within CONUS.

The amount treated as paid for meals is:

$86 for travel to any high-cost locality, and
$74 for travel to any other locality within CONUS

Instead of the meal and incidental expenses only substantiation method, taxpayers may use:

$86 for travel to any high-cost locality, and
$74 for travel to any other locality within CONUS.

Taxpayers using the high-low method must comply with Rev. Proc. 2019-48, I.R.B. 2019-51, 1390. That procedure provides the rules for using a per diem rate to substantiate the amount of ordinary and necessary business expenses paid or incurred while traveling away from home.

Notice 2025-54, I.R.B. 2025-41, 479 is superseded.

Notice 2026-60

Close

For 2027, the Social Security wage cap will be $192,300, and Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits will increase by 3.6 percent. These changes reflect cost-of-living adjustments to account for inflation.

Wage Cap for Social Security Tax

The Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax on wages is 7.65 percent each for the employee and the employer. FICA tax has two components:

a 6.2 percent social security tax, also known as old age, survivors, and disability insurance (OASDI); and
a 1.45 percent Medicare tax, also known as hospital insurance (HI).

For self-employed workers, the Self-Employment tax is 15.3 percent, consisting of:

a 12.4 percent OASDI tax; and
a 2.9 percent HI tax.

OASDI tax applies only up to a wage base, which includes most wages and self-employment income up to the annual wage cap.

For 2027, the wage base is $192,300. Thus, OASDI tax applies only to the taxpayer’s first $192,300 in wages or net earnings from self-employment. Taxpayers do not pay OASDI tax on earnings that exceed $192,300.

There is no wage cap for HI tax.

Maximum Social Security Tax for 2027

For workers who earn $192,300 or more in 2027:

an employee will pay a total of $11,922.60 in social security tax ($192,300 x 6.2 percent);
the employer will pay the same amount; and
a self-employed worker will pay a total of $23,845.20 in social security tax ($192,300 x 12.4 percent).

Additional Medicare Tax

Higher-income workers may have to pay an Additional Medicare tax of 0.9 percent. This tax applies to wages and self-employment income that exceed:

$250,000 for married taxpayers who file a joint return;
$125,000 for married taxpayers who file separate returns; and
$200,000 for other taxpayers.

The annual wage cap does not affect the Additional Medicare tax.

Benefit Increase for 2027

Finally, a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) will increase social security and SSI benefits for 2027 by 3.6 percent. The COLA is intended to ensure that inflation does not erode the purchasing power of these benefits.

Social Security Fact Sheet: 2027 Social Security Changes

SSA Press Release: Social Security Announces 3.6 Percent Benefit Increase for 2027

Close

The IRS established the IRA Compliance Resolution System (ICRS) to permit IRA owners and custodians to correct failures related to individual retirement arrangements by submitting a request to the IRS. Failures eligible for ICRS include required minimum distribution failures and nonspouse beneficiary rollover failures. The revenue procedure will also govern requests for waivers from the 60-day rollover requirement from IRAs as well as qualified employer-sponsored plans. The revenue procedure is effective May 1, 2027.

Self-Correction Not Available

The new system implements provisions of the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022, P.L. 117-328, requiring expansion of the Employee Plans Compliance Resolution System (EPCRS) for qualified retirement plans to allow IRA custodians to address eligible inadvertent failures involving IRAs. The new ICRS consists of the IRA Voluntary Correction Program (IVCP), although additional correction programs may be introduced later. Self-correction of IRA failures is not currently available under ICRS. Instead, the IRA custodian or owner must make a submission to the IRS using the provided procedures and pay a fee on the Pay.gov website.

60-Day Rollover Waiver Requests

The procedure also establishes a process for requesting waivers of the 60-day rollover requirement under Code Secs. 402 and 408 through ICRS. During 2027, eligible applicants may request waivers through either ICRS or the existing private letter ruling process. Beginning in 2028, the IRS anticipates that such requests will be permitted only under ICRS.

Waiver requests may involve eligible rollover distributions from IRAs, qualified retirement plans, annuity plans, tax-sheltered annuities and governmental deferred compensation plans. Automatic waivers and waiver relief under previous guidance remains available.

Rev. Proc. 2026-33

Close

The IRS updated the Employee Plans Compliance Resolution System (EPCRS), its comprehensive system of corrections programs for employer-sponsored qualified retirement plans. The updates reflect significant changes to EPCRS made by the SECURE 2.0 Act (P.L. 117-328) and subsequent guidance. Former procedures under Rev. Proc. 2021-30 are modified and superseded. The revised procedures are effective October 22, 2026.

The bulk of the changes in the revised procedures reflect the SECURE 2.0 Act’s expansion of EPCRS’s Self Correction Program component to permit self-correction of eligible inadvertent failures, including plan loan failures. Other changes made by SECURE 2.0 and incorporated into the revised EPCRS include safe harbor corrections under Code Sec. 414(cc) and the recovery of retirement plan overpayments under Code Sec. 414(aa).

Other changes made in the revised revenue procedure include:

References to the availability of a separate compliance resolution system for IRA failures.
Updates reflecting changes to the determination letter and opinion letter programs.
Revisions to correction methods for SEPs and SIMPLE IRA plans.
Revisions to procedures for locating lost participants.
Revisions to the correction principle for failure to obtain spousal consent.
Changes to the Voluntary Correction Program (VCP) and the Audit Closing Agreement Program (Audit CAP), such as revised procedures for a group submission under VCP.

Rev. Proc. 2026-34

Close

The IRS has issued final regulations under Code Sec. 6311 implementing changes made by the Taxpayer First Act. The regulations permit the IRS to pay fees under contracts for processing tax payments by credit or debit card, provided the fees are fully recouped from taxpayers making those payments. The regulations remove restrictions on the IRS’s payment of fees under such contracts and on the imposition of reimbursement fees on persons paying taxes by credit or debit card.

Payment Processing Fees

The regulations authorize the IRS to enter into contracts for receiving tax payments by credit or debit card if the contracts are cost beneficial to the government. Under certain contracts, the IRS may pay fees, charges, or other monetary consideration to payment processors. If the IRS pays fees under these contracts, it must recoup the full amount from taxpayers making payments by credit or debit card. The reimbursement fees are payable at the time of, and in addition to, the tax payment and are limited to the amounts paid by the IRS under the contracts. The IRS must seek to minimize the fees paid under these arrangements.

Under other contracts, the IRS may elect not to pay fees to payment processors. Such arrangements do not prohibit card issuers, financial institutions, or other persons participating in the transactions from imposing their own fees or charges. The IRS may not receive any portion of those fees.

Error Resolution Procedures

Payments of taxes by credit or debit card, including reimbursement fees paid under the regulations, are subject to applicable error-resolution procedures under the Truth in Lending Act, the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, or similar state or local laws. These procedures apply to errors relating to the credit or debit card account but do not apply to disputes, errors, or adjustments concerning the underlying tax liability. Reimbursement fees paid under the regulations are not taxes imposed by the Internal Revenue Code and are not eligible for refund or credit under Code Sec. 6402.

Applicability

The final regulations amend existing regulations under Code Sec. 6311 to implement changes made by the Taxpayer First Act. The rules apply to tax payments and reimbursement fees made on or after the date of publication in the Federal Register.

T.D. 10060

Close

The IRS has issued proposed and temporary regulations providing guidance on the new federal scholarship tax credit under Code Sec. 25F. Beginning after 2026, an individual may claim a nonrefundable federal income tax credit for contributions to certified scholarship granting organizations (SGOs) issuing scholarships to students in K-12 schools. The regulations clarify how the credit is calculated, including the treatment of state tax credits, credit carryforwards, and substantiation requirements. They also establish immediate administrative rules for SGOs and states that opt into the program and identify SGOs.

Credit Eligibility and Calculation

An individual may claim a credit for qualified cash contributions made directly to eligible SGOs. The annual credit is generally limited to $1,700 per taxpayer or $3,400 for married individuals filing jointly. Contributions made through pass-through entities, including partnerships and S corporations, are not eligible for the credit. The taxpayer must reduce the federal tax credit by the amount of any state tax credit attributable to the same contribution before applying the federal limitation. Unused credit amounts may be carried forward for up to five years.

A taxpayer claiming the credit may not claim a charitable contribution deduction for the same contribution and must satisfy specified substantiation and reporting requirements. This includes use of a unique donor identification number on new Form 8525. The taxpayer donor must designate contributions as eligible for the credit at the time they are made. Once made, the designation is irrevocable.

A taxpayer may contribute to an eligible SGO regardless of their state of residence, allowing them to support qualifying SGOs across participating states.

Scholarship Granting Organizations

To qualify as an SGO, an organization must be recognized as a tax-exempt public charity, maintain separate accounts for qualified contributions and scholarship funds, and devote at least 90 percent of required expenditures to scholarships. SGOs must verify student eligibility, ensure scholarship funds are used solely for qualified elementary and secondary education expenses, and adopt procedures to prevent scholarships from benefiting disqualified persons. The regulations also require SGOs to register with the IRS, furnish acknowledgments to contributors, file annual reports, and maintain records demonstrating compliance with federal requirements.

State Participation

A state may elect to participate the federal scholarship tax program either through an advanced election or through the submission of a state SGO list. A state seeking to participate must annually certify eligible SGOs and provide the IRS with information demonstrating that the organizations satisfy federal requirements. The IRS will maintain and publish a nationwide list of eligible SGOs upon which taxpayers may generally rely when making contributions and claiming credits.

Applicability

Taxpayers, SGOs, and states may rely on the proposed regulations for qualified contributions beginning on or after January 1, 2027. The temporary regulations apply on or after September 1, 2026, and expire on October 1, 2029.

T.D. 10057

Proposed Regulations, NPRM REG-117199-25

IR 2026-117

Close

The Treasury Department and IRS have issued proposed regulations under Code Sec. 1062 governing the election to pay tax attributable to gain from qualified sales or exchanges of qualified farmland property in four annual installments. The proposed regulations define qualified farmland property and qualified farmers, provide rules for making the election, and address pass-through entities and acceleration events.

Qualified Farmland Property

Qualified farmland property generally is U.S. real property that was used by the taxpayer as a farm for farming purposes, or leased to a qualified farmer for farming purposes, during substantially all of the 10 years preceding the sale or exchange. The property also must be subject to a covenant prohibiting nonfarm use for 10 years following the sale or exchange. A copy of the covenant must be attached to the taxpayer's return for the taxable year of the sale or exchange.

The proposed regulations provide that certain periods of nonuse will be disregarded in applying the 10-year farming use requirement. These include periods during which property is removed from production under a government program, pursuant to recognized farming practices, or because of unforeseen events outside the taxpayer's control, provided the property continues to be maintained for farming purposes.

Election and Installment Payments

Taxpayers would make the election by filing Form 1062, Deferral of Tax on Gain from the Sale or Exchange of Qualified Farmland Property to Qualified Farmers, and Schedule A (Form 1062). Once made, the election generally may be revoked only by paying the remaining unpaid applicable net tax liability. Each installment payment equals 25 percent of the taxpayer's applicable net tax liability. The first installment generally must be paid by the return due date, determined without regard to the extensions, for the taxable year of the sale or exchange.

Pass-Through Entities and Acceleration Events

Under the proposed regulations, partners, S corporation shareholders, beneficiaries, and other owners generally may make the election with respect to applicable net tax liability arising from a qualified sale or exchange by a pass-through entity. Pass-through entities must furnish Schedule A information and the covenant to owners and beneficiaries and report each owner's allocable share of gain.

The proposed regulations also provide rules accelerating unpaid installment payments following certain events. Acceleration events include failure to timely pay an installment, the death of an individual taxpayer, and certain liquidations, dispositions of substantially all assets, and other specified events involving corporations, trusts, and estates. The proposed regulations also provide procedures under which an eligible transferee may assume the remaining installment obligations in certain transactions.

The proposed regulations would apply to qualified sales and exchanges occurring in taxable years ending after publication of final regulations in the Federal Register. Taxpayers may rely on the proposed regulations for qualified sales and exchanges occurring in taxable years beginning after July 4, 2025, provided they apply the rules consistently and in their entirety. Treasury and the IRS requested comments on the proposed regulations and requests for a public hearing within 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.

Proposed Regulations, NPRM REG-117095-25

IR 2026-115

Close

As the excitement of understanding what artificial intelligence can do for the tax profession starts to subside, the conversation is beginning to shift to risk management and risk assessment. To that end, the American Institute of CPAs has launched a new initiative – the Council on AI Risk in Tax (CART) – to help tax professionals manage risk.

CART was born out of a risk assessment framework recently developed by former IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel that was published by AICPA after asking representatives of state tax authorities what he could do for them following his departure from the IRS.

“They said, ‘you know Danny, we are seeing so many interesting, exciting demos of AI products that really have paradigm-shifting productivity … but we don’t know what the risks are. We don’t know what questions we should ask ourselves to make sure that, as a tax authority, we are ready to deploy these powerful AI tools responsibly,” Werfel, senior fellow at Johns Hopkins University School of Government & Policy, said in an interview, adding that they also inquired about questions they should be asking vendors about safety features and other risks they should be looking out for.

“I did some immediate research and learned that there wasn’t an AI risk framework or risk register specific to tax,” he added, leading him develop version one of the recently published risk framework.”

From there, he approached AICPA as the place to publish the framework and through those conversations, created CART as a place for tax professionals and state tax administrators to collaborate on AI risk and further refine the framework.

“With AI, it’s obviously new,” Melanie Lauridsen, AICPA vice president of tax policy and advocacy, added. It’s ever evolving. There’s a huge interest. There’s a lot of unknowns, and there’s nothing really out there right now beyond what I have seen what Danny put forward to help guide people in this area.”

The Framework

The published framework states that it is more than a simple list of “relevant risks. The formulation and activation of the list means the organization has learned to:

Define how risks show up in practice;
Assign controls;
Establish indicators; and
Make course corrections as the environment evolves.

In this way the register is part of a broader risk governance framework to help organizations chart a sensible path forward from strategy to implementation.”

The publication includes distinct frameworks for both tax authorities and tax preparers. For tax authorities, the publication highlights 20 risk areas across four categories:

Information integrity – The wrong information reaching taxpayers at scale.
Fairness and legitimacy – Disparate or unfair treatment across groups.
Security and data – Compromised systems, corrupted data, or the exploitation of sensitive taxpayer information at AI systems aggregate, surface, or make newly accessible to band actors.
Institutional capacity – Loss of the knowledge and capacity by the institution needed to govern AI responsibility over time.

For tax preparers, there are 15 risk areas across 5 categories:

Technical – Incorrect or unreliable AI outputs that establish the conditions for downstream errors.
Practice – Failures of professional judgement, documentation, or oversight.
Legal and regulatory – Increased exposure to legal liability (e.g., malpractice claims, regulatory sanctions).
Business – Erosion of client trust and firm relationships.
Workforce and Strategic – Loss of the expertise and institutional knowledge needed to practice responsibly.

The framework “establishes a notional risk register for tax authorities and presents that side-by-side with a distinct register for tax preparers,” the framework document states. “It also identifies important areas of overlap across the two.”

A Living Framework

Werfel noted that this is not intended to be a one-and-done framework, but rather a living document that he anticipates will be updated on a regular basis.

“I wanted to give myself six months of feedback and iteration,” he said. “I told CART at our kickoA meeting [that] once we issue version two after six months, then I think it’s an annual [update] from there. But in this form, version one to version two, I wanted to put a little bit more accelerated because that’s the highest risk point for it missing something big in the risk register itself.”

Lauridsen add that convening CART regularly and discussing risks and best practices associated with those risks and updating the framework “is the right approach” as opposed to trying to build a firm set of standards for risk assessment and risk management of AI.

“We don’t know what it’ll be in a month, two months, much less six months or a year,” Lauridsen said, noting the fast evolution AI is currently experiencing. “I think it would be a disservice to come forward with a standard right now.”

She continued: “Right now, it’s more best practices. Everybody’s trying to get their minds and arms around it and how to implement it.”

Werfel added that the feedback will be very important when the framework goes through future iterations, as the CART members will be able to report back when the framework works and more importantly, when it “missed the bullseye” by the cross section of accounting, law firms, government associations and AI vendors.

“My hope is that if it’s oA bullseye, we’ll hear about it and update it,” Werfel said.

He did not rule out seeing the framework converted into an industry standard somewhere down the line, but for now, the focus is to just keep this a framework that users can use as a best practices guide to assessing risks of AI tools that states and practitioners are considering for implementation.

In the near term, Werfel said that an idea was floated to CART to make a voluntary pledge to follow the framework that CART produces. It would be completely voluntary, but a pledge to follow it would be “hopefully helpful to rally attention to AI risk.”

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

Close

A new, 10 percent middle-income tax cut is conditionally expected to be advanced in 2019, according to the House’s top tax writer. This timeline, although largely already expected on Capitol Hill, departs sharply from President Donald Trump’s original prediction that the measure would surface by November.

Middle-Income Tax Cut

President Donald Trump announced on October 22 that a new 10 percent tax cut would soon be unveiled that will focus specifically on middle-income taxpayers. "President Trump is determined to provide further tax relief for middle-class families," House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady, R-Tex., said in an October 23 statement. "We will continue to work with the White House and Treasury over the coming weeks to develop an additional 10 percent tax cut focused specifically on middle-class families and workers, to be advanced as Republicans retain the House and Senate," Brady added.

Comment. Notably, Brady is essentially highlighting in his statement that any such additional tax cut measure would require a Republican majority for congressional approval. As November midterm elections near, there is "talk" on Capitol Hill that Republicans may lose control of the House.

The additional 10 percent tax cut for middle-income taxpayers would aim to build upon the individual tax cuts enacted last December under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97). To that end, the House passed a "Tax Reform 2.0"package last month, which would make permanent the TCJA’s individual and small business tax credits. The TCJA’s individual tax cut provisions were enacted temporarily through 2025 in accordance with certain Senate budget rules. Although the TCJA did not receive one Democratic vote, the Tax Reform 2.0 package did clear the House with some bipartisan support.

New Congress, New Tax Cut

"We expect to advance this in the new session of Congress if Republicans maintain control of the House and Senate," Brady, said of the tax cut in an October 26 televised interview. However, President Trump said a couple of days before that a " resolution" would be introduced for the tax cut by the week of October 29.

Democratic lawmakers have been criticizing Trump’s announcement as nothing more than politically-driven rhetoric ahead of the November 6 midterm elections. Several top congressional Democrats have voiced intent to repeal, at least in part, the TCJA enacted last December. While Republicans, on the other hand, want to continue building upon the TCJA’s tax cuts.

"What President Trump is looking at is a 10 percent cut focused on middle-class workers and families…he still believes middle-class families are the ones always in the squeeze," Brady said on October 26. "We’ve been working with the White House and the Treasury on some ideas about how best to do it," he added.

Net Neutral

Trump has predicted that the tax cut will be net neutral. A chief complaint of last year’s tax reform among Democrats is the TCJA estimated $1.4 trillion price tag over a 10-year budget window.

"If you speak to Brady and a group of people, we're putting in a tax reduction of 10 percent, which I think will be a net neutral because we're doing other things, which I don't have to explain now," Trump said. A spokesperson for Brady has reportedly said that cost measures for the tax cut will be addressed once the proposal has been scored.

Looking Ahead

At this time, it is considered likely on Capitol Hill that Republicans will retain control of the Senate, but several predictions continue to float that the GOP will lose its House majority. Republicans would likely need to retain control of both chambers for any chance of approving further individual tax cuts or making permanent those enacted under the TCJA.

Although, the House approved its "Tax Reform 2.0" package last month, which includes measures to make permanent the TCJA’s individual tax cuts and enhance various savings accounts and business innovation, the Senate has showed little interest in taking up the package as a whole before the end of the year. However, consideration of the retirement and savings measure in the lame-duck session remains a possibility.

Close

The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) and the American Bar Association (ABA) Section of Taxation are urging the IRS to make extensive changes to proposed "transition tax" rules.

Transition Tax

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97), enacted last December, revived and amended Code Sec. 965. The new Code Sec. 965 generally requires U.S. shareholders pay a mandatory one-time repatriation "transition" tax on untaxed foreign earnings of certain foreign corporations.

"The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act treats these foreign earnings as repatriated and places a 15.5 percent tax on cash or cash equivalents, and an 8 percent tax on the remaining earnings. Generally, the transition tax can be paid in installments over an eight-year period when a taxpayer files a timely election under section 965(h),"Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said in a statement.

The IRS held an October 22 public hearing on NPRM REG-104226-18, which provides rules for implementing the transition tax created under last year’s tax reform. IRS officials did not provide any feedback at the hearing.

AICPA Recommendations

In an October 31 comment letter to the IRS, the AICPA offered 15 recommendations to provide taxpayers further clarity and guidance on tax reform’s transition tax requirements. The AICPA’s recommendations include the following:

Clarify that previously taxed earnings (PTI) under Code Sec. 965(b)(4)(A) are deemed included in Code Sec. 951 for purposes of applying Code Sec. 1248(d).
Clarify that the portion of a Code Sec. 965 inclusion liability attributable to Code Sec. 956 is eligible for the appropriate reduced rate of tax as a consequence of the deduction provided for in Code Sec. 965(c).
Provide taxpayers with additional flexibility when making the basis adjustment election under Proposed Reg. §1.965-2(f) by including the ability to make partial basis adjustments, elect adjustments on an entity-by-entity basis, and modify the proposed consistency provision on related persons.
Provide guidance as to the ordering of distributions of PTI between Code Sec. 965(a) PTI and Code Sec. 965(b) PTI for purposes of applying Code Sec. 959(c) and Code Sec. 986(c).
Provide relief to taxpayers that make or have made late elections under the proposed regulations and clarify the procedure for obtaining such relief.
Provide that U.S. shareholders that are members of the same consolidated group are treated as a single U.S. shareholder for all purposes with respect to Code Sec. 965.
Clarify that the PTI amount created under Code Sec. 965(b)(4)(A) is not taken into account under Code Sec. 864(e)(4)(D) for purposes of allocating and apportioning interest expense.
Exercise the authority under Code Sec. 965(o) to provide relief from the income inclusion to certain affected taxpayers. Specifically, provide guidance excluding a foreign corporation that is considered a controlled foreign corporation (CFC) solely as a result of the "downward attribution" rules of Code Sec. 318(a)(3) from the definition of an specified foreign corporation (SFC) for any U.S. shareholder not considered a related party (within the meaning of Code Sec. 954(d)(3)) with respect to the domestic corporation to which ownership was attributed.
Provide a carve-out for certain "triggering events" of an S corporation Code Sec. 965(i), such as where the S corporation and relevant shareholders maintain direct or indirect ownership of the transferred assets (e.g., tax-free transfers).
Provide guidance on the interaction between a Code Sec. 962 election and a Code Sec. 965(i) election, including clarifying that an eligible taxpayer may make a Code Sec. 962 election for a Code Sec. 965 tax liability for which they intend to defer inclusion under Code Sec. 965(i).

ABA Recommendations

Likewise, the ABA made similar recommendations on the proposed regulations and related guidance in an October 29 letter sent to IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig. The ABA’s 80-page letter grouped its principal recommendations into the three categories:

the application of Code Sec. 965 to passthrough entities (other than S corporations) and individuals;
the application of the netting of accumulated post-1986 deferred foreign income with deficits in other related entities; and
issues in applying the foreign tax credit.

Close

Last year’s Tax Reform created a new 20-percent deduction of qualified business income for passthrough entities, subject to certain limitations. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97) created the new Code Sec. 199A passthrough deduction for noncorporate taxpayers, effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017. However, the provision was enacted only temporarily through 2025. The controversial deduction has remained a buzzing topic of debate among lawmakers, tax policy experts, and stakeholders. In addition to its impermanence, the new passthrough deduction’s ambiguous statutory language has created many questions for taxpayers and practitioners.

The IRS released the much-anticipated proposed regulations on the new passthrough deduction, REG-107892-18, on August 8. The guidance has generated a mixed reaction on Capitol Hill, and while significant questions may have been answered, it appears that many remain. Indeed, an IRS spokesperson told Wolters Kluwer Tax & Accounting before the regulations were released that the IRS’s goal was to issue complete regulations but that the guidance "would not cover every question that taxpayers have."

Wolters Kluwer recently spoke with Joshua Wu, member, Clark Hill PLC, about the tax implications of the new passthrough deduction and proposed regulations. That exchange included a discussion of the impact that the new law and IRS guidance, both present and future, may have on taxpayers and tax practitioners.

I. Qualified Business Income and Activities

Wolters Kluwer: What is the effect of the proposed regulations requiring that qualified business activities meet the Code Sec. 162 trade or business standard? And for what industries might this be problematic?

Joshua Wu: The positive aspect of incorporating the Section 162 trade or business standard is that there is an established body of case law and administrative guidance with respect to what activities qualify as a trade or business. However, the test under Section 162 is factually-specific and requires an analysis of each situation. Sometimes courts reach different results with respect to activities constituting a trade or business. For example, gamblers have been denied trade or business status in numerous cases. In Groetzinger, 87-1 ustc ¶9191, 480 U.S. 23 (1987), the Court held that whether professional gambling is a trade or business depends on whether the taxpayer can show he pursued gambling full-time, in good faith, regularly and continuously, and possessed a sincere profit motive. Some courts have held that the gambling activity must be full-time, from 60 to 80 hours per week, while others have questioned whether the full-time inquiry is a mandatory prerequisite or permissive factor to determine whether the taxpayer’s gambling activity is a trade or business. See e.g., Tschetschot , 93 TCM 914, Dec. 56,840(M)(2007). Although Section 162 provides a built-in body of law, plenty of questions remain.

Aside from the gambling industry, the real estate industry will continue to face some uncertainty over what constitutes a trade or business under Code Secs. 162 and 199A. The proposed regulations provide a helpful rule, where the rental or licensing of tangible or intangible property to a related trade or business is treated as a trade or business if the rental or licensing and the other trade or business are commonly controlled. But, that rule does not help taxpayers in the rental industry with no ties to another trade or business. The question remains whether a taxpayer renting out a single-family home or a small group of apartments is engaged in a trade or business for purposes of Code Secs. 162 and 199A. Some case law indicates that just receiving rent with nothing more may not constitute a trade or business. On the other hand, numerous cases have found that managing property and collecting rent can constitute a trade or business. Given the potential tax savings at issue, I suspect there will be additional cases in the real estate industry regarding the level of activity required for the leasing of property to be considered a trade or business.

Qualified Business Income

Wolters Kluwer: How does the IRS define qualified business income (QBI)?

Joshua Wu: QBI is the net amount of effectively connected qualified items of income, gain, deduction, and loss from any qualified trade or business. Certain items are excluded from QBI, such as capital gains/losses, certain dividends, and interest income. Proposed Reg. §1.199A-3(b) provides further clarity on QBI. Most importantly, they provide that a passthrough with multiple trades or businesses must allocate items of QBI to such trades or businesses based on a reasonable and consistent method that clearly reflects income and expenses. The passthrough may use a different reasonable method for different items of income, gain, deduction, and loss, but the overall combination of methods must also be reasonable based on all facts and circumstances. Further, the books and records must be consistent with allocations under the method chosen. The proposed regulations provide no specific guidance or examples of what a reasonable allocation looks like. Thus, taxpayers are left to determine what constitutes a reasonable allocation.

Unadjusted Basis Immediately after Acquisition

Wolters Kluwer: What effect does the unadjusted basis immediately after acquisition (UBIA) of qualified property attributable to a trade or business have on determining QBI?

Joshua Wu: For taxpayers above the taxable income threshold amounts, $157,500 (single or married filing separate) or $315,000 (married filing jointly), the Code limits the taxpayer’s 199A deduction based on (i) the amount of W-2 wages paid with respect to the trade or business, and/or (ii) the unadjusted basis immediately after acquisition (UBIA) of qualified property held for use in the trade or business.

Where a business pays little or no wages, and the taxpayer is above the income thresholds, the best way to maximize the deduction is to look to the UBIA of qualified property. Rather than the 50 percent of W-2 wages limitation, Section 199A provides an alternative limit based on 25 percent of W-2 wages and 2.5 percent of UBIA qualified property. The Code and proposed regulations define UBIA qualified property as tangible, depreciable property which is held by and available for use in the qualified trade or business at the close of the tax year, which is used at any point during the tax year in the production of qualified business income, and the depreciable period for which has not ended before the close of the tax year. The proposed regulations helpfully clarify that UBIA is not reduced for taxpayers who take advantage of the expanded bonus depreciation allowance or any Section 179expensing.

De Minimis Exception

Wolters Kluwer: How is the specified service trade or business (SSTB) limitation clarified under the proposed regulations? And how does the de minimis exception apply?

Joshua Wu: The proposed regulations provide helpful guidance on the definition of a SSTB and avoid what some practitioners feared would be an expansive and amorphous area of section 199A. Under the statute, if a trade or business is an SSTB, its items are not taken into account for the 199A computation. Thus, the performance of services in the fields of health, law, accounting, actuarial science, performing arts, consulting, athletics, financial and brokerage services, investment management, trading, dealing in securities, and any trade or business where the principal asset of such is the reputation or skill of one or more of its employees or owners, do not result in a 199A deduction.

There is a de minimis exception to the general rule for taxpayers with taxable income of less than $157,500 (single or married filing separate) or $315,000 (married filing jointly). Once those thresholds are hit, the 199A deduction phases-out until it is fully eliminated at $207,500 (single) or $415,000 (joint).

The proposed regulations provide guidance for each of the SSTB fields. Importantly, they also limit the "reputation or skill" category. The proposed regulations state that the "reputation or skill" clause was intended to describe a "narrow set of trades or businesses, not otherwise covered by the enumerated specified services." Thus, the proposed regulations limit this definition to cases where the business receives income from endorsing products or services, licensing or receiving income for use of an individual’s image, likeness, name, signature, voice, trademark, etc., or receiving appearance fees. This narrow definition is unlikely to impact most taxpayers.

Close