The IRS has provided interim guidance on the deductions for qualified tips and qualified overtime compensation under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (P.L. 119-21). For tax year 2025, employers and other payors are not required to separately account for cash tips or qualified overtime compensation on Forms W-2, 1099-NEC, or 1099-MISC furnished to individual taxpayers.

The IRS provided guidance on changes relating to health savings accounts (HSAs) under the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (P.L. 119-21). These changes generally expand the availability of HSAs under Code Sec. 223.

The IRS provided guidance on changes relating to health savings accounts (HSAs) under the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (P.L. 119-21). These changes generally expand the availability of HSAs under Code Sec. 223.

Background

To access HSAs, individual taxpayers (1) need to be covered under a high-deductible health plan (HDHP) and (2) should not have other disqualifying health coverage. The minimum annual deductible for an HDHP in 2025 is $1,650 for self-only coverage and $3,300 for family coverage. The out-of-pocket maximum for TY 2025 is $8,300 for self-only coverage and $16,600 for family coverage.

OBBBA Changes

The OBBA made a few key changes to HDHPs and, by extension, HSAs. First, it made permanent a safe harbor for HDHPs that have no deductible for telehealth and other remote care services. The OBBBA permanent extension applies retroactively after December 31, 2024.

Second, the term HDHP now includes any plan under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) (P.L. 111-148) that is available as individual coverage through an exchange, including bronze and catastrophic plans. Before the OBBBA was enacted, many bronze plans did not qualify as HDHPs because the plans’ out-of-pocket maximum exceeded the statutory limits for HDHPs or because they provided benefits that were not preventive care without a deductible. Similarly, catastrophic plans could not be HDHPs because they were required to provide three primary care visits before the minimum deductible was satisfied and to have an out-of-pocket maximum that exceeded the statutory limits for HDHPs. This provision amending the definition of an HDHP applies for months after December 31, 2025.

Finally, direct primary care service arrangements (DPCSA) under Code Sec. 223(c)(1)(E)(ii) are no longer treated as a health plan for purposes of determining HSA eligibility and enrollment, and enrolling in a DPCSA will not cause a taxpayer to fail eligibility to contribute to an HSA. These DPCSAs changes would apply after December 31, 2025.

Q&As

The IRS answered several common questions from the public regarding these three provisions with regards to administration and eligibility.

Notice 2026-5

IR 2025-119

The IRS has answered initial questions regarding Trump accounts, which it intends to address in forthcoming proposed regulations. The guidance addresses general questions relating to the establishment of the accounts, contributions to the accounts, and distributions from the accounts under Code Secs. 128, 530A, and 6434. Comments, specifically on issues identified in the notice, should be submitted in writing on or before February 20, 2026, by mail or electronically.

The IRS has answered initial questions regarding Trump accounts, which it intends to address in forthcoming proposed regulations. The guidance addresses general questions relating to the establishment of the accounts, contributions to the accounts, and distributions from the accounts under Code Secs. 128, 530A, and 6434. Comments, specifically on issues identified in the notice, should be submitted in writing on or before February 20, 2026, by mail or electronically.

Establishment of the Accounts

An account may be established for the benefit of an eligible individual by making an election on Form 4547, Trump Account Election(s), or through an online tool or application on trumpaccounts.gov. A Trump account may be created at the same time that an election is made to receive a pilot program contribution. A Trump account is a traditional IRA under Code Sec. 408(a).

A rollover Trump account can only be established after the initial Trump account is created and during the growth period of the account, which is the period that ends before January 1 of the calendar year in which the account beneficiary attains age 18. A rollover account must first be funded by a qualified rollover contribution before receiving any other contribution. Additional rules regarding the choice of trustee, rollover accounts, and the written government instrument requirements are discussed in section III.A of the notice.

Pilot Program and Contributions

The election to receive a pilot program contribution is made on Form 4547 or through the online tool, once available. Pilot program contributions will be deposited into the Trump account of an eligible child no earlier than July 4, 2026.

Trustees of Trump accounts must maintain procedures to prevent contributions from exceeding the annual limit of Code Sec. 530A(c)(2)(A). Trustees are required to collect and report the amount and sources of contributions. Contributions may be made to a Trump account and to an individual retirement arrangement for the same individual during the growth period in accordance with the rules of Code Secs. 408 and 530A(c)(2).

Qualified general contributions will be transferred by the Treasury Department or its agent to the trustee of a Trump account pursuant to a general funding contribution. More information on how and where permitted entities will make an application to make a general funding contribution will be provided before the application process opens.

An employer can exclude up to $2,500 from the gross income of an employee for a contribution made by the employer to a Trump account contribution program. The annual limit is per employee, not per dependent. A Trump account contribution may be made by salary reduction under a Code Sec. 125 cafeteria plan if the contribution is made to the Trump account of the employee's dependent and not if the contribution is made to the Trump account of the employee.

Eligible Investments

The terms "mutual fund" and "exchange traded fund" are explained, with additional comments requested on their definitions. The tracking of returns of an index and leverage for purposes of Trump accounts are also described. A mutual fund or exchange traded fund will meet the requirements of having annual fees and expenses of no more than 0.1% of the balance of the investment fund if the sum of its annual fees and expenses is less than 0.1% of the value of the fund's net assets. Additional questions regarding eligible investments are discussed in section III.D of the notice.

Distributions

Only permitted distributions, which are qualified rollover contributions or qualified ABLE rollover contributions, excess contributions, or distributions upon the death of an account beneficiary, are allowed during the growth period. Hardship distributions during the growth period are not allowed. If an account beneficiary dies after the growth period, the rules that apply to other individual retirement accounts after the death of the account owner apply. If the Trump account beneficiary dies during the growth period, the account ceases to be a Trump account and an IRA as of the date of death.

Reporting and Coordination with IRA Rules

Annual reporting by the Trump account trustee is required. Forms and instructions will be issued in the future. After the growth period, distributions from Trump accounts are governed by the IRA distribution rules of Code Sec. 408(d).

Notice 2025-68

IR 2025-117

The IRS intends to issue proposed regulations to implement Code Sec. 25F, as added by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (P.L. 119-21). Code Sec. 25F allows a credit for an individual taxpayer's qualified contribution to a scholarship granting organization (SGO) providing qualified elementary and secondary scholarships.

The IRS intends to issue proposed regulations to implement Code Sec. 25F, as added by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (P.L. 119-21). Code Sec. 25F allows a credit for an individual taxpayer's qualified contribution to a scholarship granting organization (SGO) providing qualified elementary and secondary scholarships.

Tax Credit

Beginning January 1, 2027, individual taxpayers may claim a nonrefundable federal tax credit for cash contributions to SGOs. Taxpayers must be citizens or residents of the United States. The credit allowed to any taxpayer is limited to $1,700. The credit is reduced by the amount allowed as a credit on any state tax return. Additionally, to prevent a double benefit, no deduction is allowed under Code Sec. 170 for any amount taken into account as a qualified contribution for purposes of the Code Sec. 25F credit.

SGO Requirements

An organization can qualify as an SGO after satisfying conditions that include (1) being a Code Sec. 501(c)(3) organization that is exempt from tax under Code Sec. 501(a) and not a private foundation; (2) maintaining one or more separate accounts exclusively for qualified contributions; (3) appearing on the list submitted for the applicable covered state under Code Sec. 25F(g); and (4) providing scholarships to 10 or more students who do not all attend the same school, as well as meeting certain other requirements.

Request for Comments

The forthcoming proposed regulations describe the certification process currently envisioned by the Treasury Department and the IRS for covered states to elect to participate under Code Sec. 25F . The IRS requests comments on these matters before December 26, 2025, through the Federal e-Rulemaking portal (indicate “IRS-2025-0466”). Paper submissions should be sent to: Internal Revenue Service, CC:PA:01:PR (Notice 2025-70), Room 5503, P.O. Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044.

Notice 2025-70

IR-2025-115

The IRS has disclosed the first set of certifications for the qualifying advanced energy project credit under Code Sec. 48C(e).

The IRS has disclosed the first set of certifications for the qualifying advanced energy project credit under Code Sec. 48C(e) for the period beginning:

• March 29, 2024, through September 30, 2025, resulting from the Round 1 allocation; and
• January 10, 2025, through September 30, 2025, resulting from the Round 2 allocation.

The Service also disclosed the identities of taxpayers and amounts of the Code Sec. 48C credits allocated to said taxpayers.

Background

Notice 2023-18, I.R.B. 2023-10, established a program to allocate $10 billion of credits for qualified investments in eligible qualifying advanced energy projects under Code Sec. 48C(e)(1). Code Sec. 48C(e)(4)(A) provides a base credit rate of 6 percent of the qualified investment. In cases where projects satisfy Code Secs. 48C(e)(5)(A) and (6), the Service would provide an alternative rate of 30 percent of the qualified investment.

Certification

Each applicant for certification has two years from the date of acceptance of the Code Sec. 48C(e) application. During this time, the applicant needs to submit evidence that the requirements of the certification have been met. The IRS will publish additional notices annually for certifications issued during each successive 12-month period beginning on October 1, 2025 for both Round 1 and 2.

Announcement 2025-22

Announcement 2025-23

The IRS and Treasury Department have provided procedures for a state to elect to be a “covered state” to participate with the Code Sec. 25F credit program for calendar year 2027 prior to identifying any scholarship granting organizations (SGOs) in the state. Form 15714 is used by a state to make the advanced election.

The IRS and Treasury Department have provided procedures for a state to elect to be a “covered state” to participate with the Code Sec. 25F credit program for calendar year 2027 prior to identifying any scholarship granting organizations (SGOs) in the state. Form 15714 is used by a state to make the advanced election.

Background

For tax years beginning after 2026, a U.S. citizen or resident alien may claim a nonrefundable personal tax credit of up to $1,700 for qualified contributions made to a scholarship granting organization (SGO). A qualified contribution is a charitable contribution of cash to an SGO that uses the contribution to fund scholarship for eligible K-12 students.

In order for a contribution made by a taxpayer to an SGO in a state (or the District of Columbia) to be a qualified contribution eligible for the credit, the state must elect participate in the credit program and must identify by January 1 of each calendar year a list of qualified SGOs in the state.

Advanced Election for 2027

A state may make an advanced election using Form 15714 to be a covered state for the Code Sec. 25F credit for the 2027. The form may be submitted any time after December 31, 2026, and before the day before the final date on which the State is permitted to submit the State SGO list (as will be specified in future guidance).

The advance election will allow a state to inform potential SGOs of the state’s participation in the credit before submitting a full SGO limit to the IRS. Any SGO list submitted with Form 15714 will not be processed by the IRS and the state will need to resubmit the list as specified in future guidance. Once a state’s advance election has been made on Form 15714 for calendar year 2027, the only subsequent submission the IRS will accept is the official submission of the state’s SGO list for the calendar year.

Rev. Proc. 2026-6

IR 2025-121

The IRS has formally withdrawn two proposed regulations that would have clarified how married individuals may obtain relief from joint and several tax liability. The withdrawal affects taxpayers seeking protection under Code Sec. 6015 and relief from federal income tax obligations tied to State community property laws under Code Sec. 66.

The IRS has formally withdrawn two proposed regulations that would have clarified how married individuals may obtain relief from joint and several tax liability. The withdrawal affects taxpayers seeking protection under Code Sec. 6015 and relief from federal income tax obligations tied to State community property laws under Code Sec. 66.

The two notices of proposed rulemaking—originally issued on August 13, 2013 (78 FR 49242), and November 20, 2015 (80 FR 72649)—offered procedural guidance for requesting equitable, innocent spouse, or separation of liability relief. These proposals also reflected statutory amendments introduced by the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 and evolving jurisprudence. The Treasury Department and the IRS decided to halt progress on these rules due to the passage of time, the scope of public comments, and resource prioritization.

While the agency acknowledged the regulatory need in this area, it cited the volume and breadth of feedback as grounds for reassessment. The IRS clarified that any future rules addressing these issues would require new proposals and another round of public comment, in line with current statutory frameworks and legal developments.

Importantly, this withdrawal does not prevent the issuance of new regulations on joint and several liability relief. Nor does it alter existing statutory or regulatory obligations in place under current law. The IRS retains authority under 26 U.S.C. 7805 to revisit and re-propose rules as necessary.

The withdrawal was announced by the IRS and Treasury on December 15, 2025, and was signed by Frank J. Bisignano, Chief Executive Officer. Tax professionals and affected individuals should continue to rely on existing law and procedures when seeking relief under Code Secs. 6015 and 66.

Proposed Regulations, NPRM REG-132251-11; REG-134219-08

The American Institute of CPAs has voiced its opposition to the Internal Revenue Service’s proposal to combine the Office of Personal Responsibility and the Return Preparer Office

The American Institute of CPAs has voiced its opposition to the Internal Revenue Service’s proposal to combine the Office of Personal Responsibility and the Return Preparer Office.

“The AICPA has an extensive and resolute history of steadfastly supporting initiatives that would enhance compliance, elevate ethical conduct, and protect taxpayer confidence in our tax system,” the organization said in a November 14, 2025, letter to the directors of the two offices. “The proposed combination of OPR and RPO contravenes those principles.” A copy of this and other AICPA 2025 tax policy and advocacy comment letters can be found here.

AICPA said it “strongly opposes any efforts to combine OPR and RPO because it would inappropriately consolidate credentialed and uncredentialed return preparers under OPR, create potential conflicts of interest, and divert resources from the primary role of OPR.”

It added that the merger “would sow confusion among taxpayers trying to understand the differing qualifications and practice rights of preparers, which would harm taxpayers and erode taxpayer confidence in our tax system.”

AICPA noted that OPR “has the exclusive delegated authority to interpret and enforce the regulations in Treasury Department Circular 230 (Circular 230), which governs tax practitioners interacting with the tax administration system,” while RPO “administers the Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN) program, manages the enrolled agent practitioner program, encourages enrollment in the Annual Filing Season Program (AFSP), and processes some complaints against return preparers.”

“These two offices perform dissimilar government functions, oversee different types of preparers, and, therefore, should remain separate to avoid potential conflicts of interest,” AICPA said in the letter.

AICPA argued that the combination would divert resources away from the primary role of OPR and could undermine the credibility of OPR’s enforcement objective.

“Under a combined OPR unit, unscrupulous and incompetent preparers could readily misrepresent that they are subject to ethical obligations overseen by the ‘Office of Professional Responsibility,’ which would give such preparers a foothold to abuse taxpayers and undermine public trust and accountability in the tax profession,” AICPA stated in the letter.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.