The IRS has announced that, under the phased implementation of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), there will be no changes to individual information returns or federal income tax withholding tables for the tax year at issue. 

The IRS has announced that, under the phased implementation of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), there will be no changes to individual information returns or federal income tax withholding tables for the tax year at issue. Specifically, Form W-2, existing Forms 1099, Form 941 and other payroll return forms will remain unchanged for 2025. Employers and payroll providers are instructed to continue using current reporting and withholding procedures. This decision is intended to avoid disruptions during the upcoming filing season and to give the IRS, businesses and tax professionals sufficient time to implement OBBBA-related changes effectively.

In addition to this, IRS is developing new guidance and updated forms, including changes to the reporting of tips and overtime pay for TY 2026. The IRS will coordinate closely with stakeholders to ensure a smooth transition. Additional information will be issued to help individual taxpayers and reporting entities claim benefits under OBBBA when filing returns.

IR-2025-82

The IRS issued frequently asked questions (FAQs) relating to several energy credits and deductions that are expiring under the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act (OBBB) and their termination dates. The FAQs also provided clarification on the energy efficient home improvement credit, the residential clean energy credit, among others.

The IRS issued frequently asked questions (FAQs) relating to several energy credits and deductions that are expiring under the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act (OBBB) and their termination dates. The FAQs also provided clarification on the energy efficient home improvement credit, the residential clean energy credit, among others.

Energy Efficient Home Improvement Credit

The credit will not be allowed for any property placed in service after December 31, 2025.

Residential Clean Energy Credit

The credit will not be allowed for any expenditures made after December 31, 2025. Due to the accelerated termination of the Code Sec. 25C credit, periodic written reports, including reporting for property placed in service before January 1, 2026, are no longer required.

A manufacturer is still required to register with the IRS to become a qualified manufacturer for its specified property to be eligible for the credit.

Clean Vehicle Program

New user registration for the Clean Vehicle Credit program through the Energy Credits Online portal will close on September 30, 2025. The portal will remain open beyond September 30, 2025, for limited usage by previously registered users to submit time-of-sale reports and updates to such reports.

Acquiring Date

A vehicle is “acquired” as of the date a written binding contract is entered into and a payment has been made. Acquisition alone does not immediately entitle a taxpayer to a credit. If a taxpayer acquires a vehicle and makes a payment on or before September 30, 2025, the taxpayer will be entitled to claim the credit when they place the vehicle in service, even if the vehicle is placed in service after September 30, 2025.

FS-2025-5

IR-2025-86

The IRS has provided guidance regarding what is considered “beginning of constructions” for purposes of the termination of the Code Sec. 45Y clean electricity production credit and the Code Sec. 48E clean electricity investment credit. The One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB) Act (P.L. 119-21) terminated the Code Secs. 45Y and 48E credits for applicable wind and solar facilities placed in service after December 31, 2027.

The IRS has provided guidance regarding what is considered “beginning of constructions” for purposes of the termination of the Code Sec. 45Y clean electricity production credit and the Code Sec. 48E clean electricity investment credit. The One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB) Act (P.L. 119-21) terminated the Code Secs. 45Y and 48E credits for applicable wind and solar facilities placed in service after December 31, 2027. The termination applies to facilities the construction of which begins after July 4, 2026. On July 7, 2025, the president issue Executive Order 14315, Ending Market Distorting Subsidies for Unreliable, Foreign-Controlled Energy Sources, 90 F.R. 30821, which directed the Treasury Department to take actions necessary to enforce these termination provisions within 45 days of enactment of the OBBB Act.

Physical Work Test

In order to begin construction, taxpayers must satisfy a “Physical Work Test,” which requires the performance of physical work of a significant nature. This is a fact based test that focuses on the nature of the work, not the cost. The notice addresses both on-site and off-site activities. It also provides specific lists of activities that are to be considered work of a physical nature for both solar and wind facilities. Preliminary activities or work that is either in existing inventory or is normally held in inventory are not considered physical work of a significant nature.

Continuity Requirement

The Physical Work Test also requires that a taxpayer maintain a continuous program of construction on the applicable wind or solar facility, the Continuity Requirement. To satisfy the Continuity Requirement, the taxpayer must maintain a continuous program of construction, meaning continuous physical work of a significant nature. However, the notice provides a list of allowable “excusable disruptions,” including delays related to permitting, weather, and acquiring equipment, among others.

The guidance also provides a safe harbor for the Continuity Requirement. Under the safe harbor, the Continuity Requirement will be met if a taxpayer places an applicable wind or solar facility in service by the end of a calendar year that is no more than four calendar years after the calendar year during which construction of the applicable wind or solar facility began. Thus, if construction begins on an applicable wind or solar facility on October 1, 2025, the applicable wind or solar facility must be placed in service before January 1, 2030, for the safe harbor to apply.

Five Percent Safe Harbor for Low Output Solar Facilities

A safe harbor is available for a low output solar facility, which is defined as an applicable solar facility that has maximum net output of not greater than 1.5 megawatt. A low output solar facility may also establish that construction has begun before July 5, 2026, by satisfying the Five Percent Safe Harbor (as described in section 2.02(2)(ii) of Notice 2022-61).

Additional Guidance

The notice provides additional guidance regarding: construction produced for the taxpayer by another party under a binding written contract; the definition of a qualified facility; the definition of property integral to the applicable wind or solar facility; the application of the 80/20 rule to retrofitted applicable wind or solar facilities under Reg. §§ 1.45Y-4(d) and 1.48E-4(c); and the transfer of an applicable wind or solar facility.

Effective Date

Notice 2025-42 is effective for applicable wind and solar facilities for which the construction begins after September 1, 2025.

Notice 2025-42

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration suggested the way the Internal Revenue Service reports level of service (ability to reach an operator when requested) and wait times does not necessarily reflect the actual times taxpayers are waiting to reach a representative at the agency.

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration suggested the way the Internal Revenue Service reports level of service (ability to reach an operator when requested) and wait times does not necessarily reflect the actual times taxpayers are waiting to reach a representative at the agency.

"For the 2024 Filing Season, the IRS reported an LOS of 88 percent and wait times averaging 3 minutes," TIGTA stated in an August 14, 2025, report. "However, the reported LOS and average wait times only included calls made to 33 Accounts Management (AM) telephone lines during the filing season."

TIGTA stated that the agency separately tracks Enterprise LOS, a broader measure of of the taxpayer experience which includes 27 telephone lines from other IRS business units in addition to the 33 AM telephone lines.

"The IRS does not widely report an Enterprise-wide wait time- as the reported average wait time computation includes only the 33 AM telephone lines," the report states. "According to IRS data, the average wait times for the other telephone lines were much longer than 3 minutes, averaging 17 to 19 minutes during the 2024 Filing Season."

TIGTA recommended that the IRS adjust its reporting to include Enterprise LOS in addition to AM LOS and provide averages across all telephone lines.

"The IRS disagreed with both recommendations stating that the LOS metric does not provide information to determine taxpayer experience when calling, and including wait times for telephone lines outside the main helpline would be confusing to the public," the Treasury watchdog reported. "We maintain that whether a taxpayer can reach an assistor is part of the taxpayer experience and providing average wait times across all telephone lines for the entire fiscal year demonstrates transparency."

The Treasury watchdog also noted that the National Taxpayer Advocate has stated the AM LOS is "materially misleading" and should be replaced as a benchmark.

TIGTA also warned that the reduction in workforce at the IRS could hurt recent improvements to LOS and wait times, noting that the agency will lose about 23 percent of its customer service representative employees by the end of September 2025.

"The staffing impact on the remainder of Calendar Year 2025 and the 2026 Filing Season are unknown, but we will be monitoring these issues."

It also noted that the IRS is working on a new metric – First Call/Contact Resolution – to measure the percentage of calls that resolve the customer’s issue without a need to transfer, escalate, pause, or return the customer’s initial phone call. TIGTA reported that analysis of FY 2024 data revealed that 33 percent of taxpayer calls were transferred unresolved at least once.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has granted exemptive relief to covered investment advisers from the requirements the final regulations in FinCEN Final Rule RIN 1506-AB58 (also called the "IA AML Rule"), which were set to become effective January 1, 2026. This order exempts covered investment advisers from all requirements of these regulations until January 1, 2028.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has granted exemptive relief to covered investment advisers from the requirements the final regulations in FinCEN Final Rule RIN 1506-AB58 (also called the "IA AML Rule"), which were set to become effective January 1, 2026. This order exempts covered investment advisers from all requirements of these regulations until January 1, 2028.

The regulations require investment advisers (defined in 31 CFR §1010.100(nnn)) to establish minimum standards for anti-money laundering/countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) programs, report suspicious activity to FinCEN, and keep relevant records, among other requirements.

FinCEN has determined that the regulations should be reviewed to ensure that they strike an appropriate balance between cost and benefit. The review will allow FinCEN to ensure the regulations are consistent with the Trump administration's deregulatory agenda and are effectively tailored to the investment adviser sector's diverse business models and risk profiles, while still adequately protecting the U.S. financial system and guarding against money laundering, terrorist financing, and other illicit finance risks. Covered investment advisers are exempt from the obligations of the regulations while the review takes place.

FinCEN intends to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to propose a new effective date for these regulations no earlier than January 1, 2028.

This exemptive relief is effective from August 5, 2025, until January 1, 2028.

FinCEN Exemptive Relief Order

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.