The IRS has provided guidance on two exceptions to the 10 percent additional tax under Code Sec. 72(t)(1) for emergency personal expense distributions and domestic abuse victim distributions. These exceptions were added by the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022, P.L. 117-328, and became effective January 1, 2024. The Treasury Department and the IRS anticipate issuing regulations under Code Sec. 72(t) and request comments to be submitted on or before October 7, 2024.

The IRS has provided guidance on two exceptions to the 10 percent additional tax under Code Sec. 72(t)(1) for emergency personal expense distributions and domestic abuse victim distributions. These exceptions were added by the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022, P.L. 117-328, and became effective January 1, 2024. The Treasury Department and the IRS anticipate issuing regulations under Code Sec. 72(t) and request comments to be submitted on or before October 7, 2024.

Distributions for Emergency Personal Expenses

Code Sec. 72(t)(2)(I) provides an exception to the 10 percent additional tax for a distribution from an applicable eligible retirement plan to an individual for emergency personal expenses. The term "emergency personal expense distribution" means any distribution made from an applicable eligible retirement plan to an individual for purposes of meeting unforeseeable or immediate financial needs relating to necessary personal or family emergency expenses. The IRS specifically noted that emergency expenses could be related to: medical care; accident or loss of property due to casualty; imminent foreclosure or eviction from a primary residence; the need to pay for burial or funeral expenses; auto repairs; or any other necessary emergency personal expenses.

The IRS provides that a plan administrator or IRA custodian may rely on a written certification from the employee or IRA owner that they are eligible for an emergency personal expense distribution. Furthermore, the IRS provides that an emergency personal expense distribution is not treated as a rollover distribution and thus is not subject to mandatory 20% withholding. However, the distribution is subject to withholding, the IRS said. If the emergency personal expense distribution is repaid, it is treated as if the individual received the distribution and transferred it to an eligible retirement plan within 60 days of distribution.

If an otherwise eligible retirement plan does not offer emergency personal expense distributions, the IRS indicated that an individual may still take an otherwise permissible distribution and treat it as such on their federal income tax return. The individual claims on Form 5329 that the distribution is an emergency personal expense distribution, in accordance with the form’s instructions. The individual has the option to repay the distribution to an IRA within 3 years.

Distributions to Domestic Abuse Victims

Code Sec. 72(t)(2)(K) provides an exception to the 10 percent additional tax for an eligible distribution to a domestic abuse victim (domestic abuse victim distribution). The guidance defines a"domesticabusevictimdistribution" as any distribution from an applicable eligible retirement plan to a domestic abuse victim if made during the 1-year period beginning on any date on which the individual is a victim of domestic abuse by a spouse or domestic partner. "Domesticabuse" is defined as physical, psychological, sexual, emotional, or economic abuse, including efforts to control, isolate, humiliate, or intimidate the victim, or to undermine the victim’s ability to reason independently, including by means of abuse of the victim’s child or another family member living in the household.

As with distributions for emergency personal expenses, a retirement plan may rely on an employee’s written certification that they qualify for a domestic abuse victim distribution. Similarly, if an otherwise eligible retirement plan does not offer domestic abuse victim distributions, the IRS indicated that an individual may still take an otherwise permissible distribution and treat it as such on their federal income tax return. The individual claims on Form 5329 that the distribution is a domestic abuse victim distribution, in accordance with the form’s instructions. The individual has the option to repay the distribution to an IRA within 3 years.

Request for Comments

The Treasury Department and the IRS invite comments on the guidance, and specifically on whether the Secretary should adopt regulations providing exceptions to the rule that a plan administrator may rely on an employee’s certification relating to emergency personal expense distributions and procedures to address cases of employee misrepresentation. Comments should be submitted in writing on or before October 7, 2024, and should include a reference to Notice 2024-55.

On June 17, 2024, the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service announced a new regulatory initiative focused on closing tax loopholes and stopping abusive partnership transactions used by wealthy taxpayers to avoid paying taxes.

On June 17, 2024, the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service announced a new regulatory initiative focused on closing tax loopholes and stopping abusive partnership transactions used by wealthy taxpayers to avoid paying taxes.

Specifically targeted by this new tax compliance effort are partnership basis shifting transactions. In these transactions, a single business that operates through many different legal entities (related parties) enters into a set of transactions that manipulate partnership tax rules to maximize tax deductions and minimize tax liability. These basis shifting transactions allow closely related parties to avoid taxes.

The use of these abusive transactions grew during a period of severe underfunding for the IRS. As such, the audit rates for these increasingly complex structures fell significantly. It is estimated that these abusive transactions, which cut across a wide variety of industries and individuals, could potentially cost taxpayers more than $50 billion over a 10-year period, according to an IRS News Release.

"Using Inflation Reduction Act funding, we are working to reverse more than a decade of declining audits among the highest income taxpayers, as well as complex partnerships and corporations," IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel said during a press call discussing the new effort on June 14, 2024.

"This announcement signals the IRS is accelerating our work in the partnership arena, which has been overlooked for more than a decade and allowed tax abuse to go on for far too long," said IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel. "We are building teams and adding expertise inside the agency so we can reverse long-term compliance declines that have allowed high-income taxpayers and corporations to hide behind complexity to avoid paying taxes. Billions are at stake here".

This multi-stage regulatory effort announced by the Treasury and IRS includes the following guidance designed to stop the use of basis shifting transactions that use related-party partnerships to avoid taxes:

• proposed regulations under existing regulatory authority to stop related parties in complex partnership structures from shifting the tax basis of their assets amongst each other to take abusive deductions or reduce gains when the asset is sold;

• proposed regulation to require taxpayers and their material advisers to report if they and their clients are participating in abusive partnership basis shifting transactions; and

• a Revenue Rulingproviding that certain related-party partnership transactions involving basis shifting lack economic substance.

"Treasury and the IRS are focused on addressing high-end tax abuse from all angles, and the proposed rules released today will increase tax fairness and reduce the deficit," said U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Janet L. Yellen.

In the June 14, 2024, press call, Commissioner Danny Werfel also noted that there will be an increase in audits of large partnerships with average assets over $10 billion dollars and larger organizational changes taking place to support compliance efforts, including the creation of a new associate office that will focus exclusively on partnerships, S corporations, trusts, and estates.

By Catherine S. Agdeppa, Content Management Analyst

A savings account with the tax benefits of a health savings account or an educations savings account but without the singular restricted focus could be something that gains traction as Congress addresses the tax provision of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that expire in 2025.

A savings account with the tax benefits of a health savings account or an educations savings account but without the singular restricted focus could be something that gains traction as Congress addresses the tax provision of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that expire in 2025.

The concept was promoted by multiple witnesses testifying during a recent Senate Finance Committee hearing on the subject of child savings accounts and other tax advantaged accounts that would benefit children. It also is the subject of a recently released report from The Tax Foundation.

Rather than push new limited-use savings accounts, "policymakers may want to consider enacting a more comprehensive savings program such as a universalsavingsaccount," Veronique de Rugy, a research fellow at George Mason University, testified before the committee during the May 21, 2024, hearing. "Universalsavingsaccounts will allow workers to save in one simple account from which they would withdraw without penalty for any expected or unexpected events throughout their lifetime."

She noted that, like other more focused savings accounts, like health savings accounts, it would have "the benefit of sheltering some income from the punishing double taxation that our code imposes."

De Rugy added that universal savings accounts "have a benefit that they do not discourage savings for those who are concerned that the conditions for withdrawals would stop them from addressing an emergency in their family."

Adam Michel, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute, who also promoted the idea of universal savings accounts. He said these accounts "would allow families to save for their kids or any of life’s other priorities. The flexibility of these accounts make them best suited for lower and middle income Americans."

He also noted that they are promoting savings in countries that have implemented them, including Canada and United Kingdom.

"For example, almost 60 percent of Canadians own tax-free savingsaccounts," Michel said. "And more than half of those account holders earned the equivalent of about $37,000 a year. These accounts have helped increase savings and support the rest of the Canadian savings ecosystem."

De Rugy noted that in countries that have implemented it, they function like a Roth account in that money that has already been taxed can be put into it and not penalized or taxed upon withdrawal.

Michel also noted that the if the tax benefits extend to corporations as they do with deposits to employee health savings accounts, "to the extent that you lower the corporate income tax, you’re going to encourage a different additional investment into savings by those entities."

Simulating The Universal Savings Account Impact

The Tax Foundation in its report simulated how a universal savings account could work, based on how they are implemented in Canada. The simulation assumed the accounts could go active in 2025 for adults aged 18 years or older.

On a post-tax basis, individuals would be allowed to contribute up to $9,100 on a post-tax basis annually, with that cap indexed for inflation. Any unused "contribution room" would be allowed to be carried forward. Earnings would be allowed to grow tax-free and withdrawals would be allowed for any purpose without penalty or further taxation. Any withdrawal would be added back to that year’s contribution room and that would be eligible for carryover as well.

"The fiscal cost of this USA policy would be offset by ending the tax advantage of contributions to HSAs beginning in 2025," the report states. "As such, future contributions to HSAs would be given normal tax treatment, i.e. included in taxable income and subject to payroll tax with subsequent returns on contributions also included in taxable income."

In this scenario, the Tax Foundation report estimates that "this policy change would on net raise tax revenue by about $110 billion over the 10-year budget window."

As for the impact on taxpayers, the "after-tax income would fall by about 0.1 percent in 2025 and by a smaller amount in 2034, reflecting the net tax increase in those years," the report states. "Over the long run, and accounting for economic impacts, taxpayers across every quintile would see a small increase in after-tax income on average, but the top 5 percent of earners would continue to see a small decrease in after-tax income on average."

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

The Internal Revenue Service’s use of artificial intelligence in selecting tax returns for National Research Program audits that areused to estimate the tax gap needs more documentation and transparency, the U.S. Government Accountability Office stated.

The Internal Revenue Service’s use of artificial intelligence in selecting tax returns for National Research Program audits that areused to estimate the tax gap needs more documentation and transparency, the U.S. Government Accountability Office stated.

In a report issued June 5, 2024, the federal government watchdog noted that while the agency uses AI to improve the efficiency and selection of audit cases to help identify noncompliance, "IRS has not completed its documentation of several elements of its AI sample selection models, such as key components and technical specifications."

GAO noted that the IRS began using AI in a pilot in tax year 2019 for sampling tax returns for NRP audits. The current plan is to use AI to create a sample size of 4,000 returns to measure compliance and help inform tax gap estimates, although GAO expressed concerns about the accuracy of the estimates with that sample size.

"For example, NRP historically included more than 2,500 returns that claimed the Earned Income Tax Credit, but the redesigned sample has included less than 500 of these returns annually," the report stated.

IRS told GAO that it "is exploring ways to combine operational audit data with NRP audit data when developing its taxgapestimates. IRS officials also told us that if IRS can reliably combine these data for taxgap analysis, IRS might be better positioned to identify emerging trends in noncompliance and reduce the uncertainty of the estimates due to the small sample size."

The report also highlighted the fact that the agency "has multiple documents that collectively provide technical details and justifications for the design of the AI models. However, no set of documents contains complete information and IRS analyst could use to run or update the models, and several key documents are in draft form."

"Completing documentation would help IRS retain organizational knowledge, ensure the models are implemented consistently, and make the process more transparent to future users," the report stated.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

Incentive stock options (ISOs) give employees a "piece of the action" while allowing employers to attract workers at relatively inexpensive costs. However, before you accept that job offer, there are some intricate rules regarding the taxation of ISOs that you should understand.

ISOs give employees a "piece of the action" while allowing employers to attract workers at relatively inexpensive costs. However, before you accept that job offer, there are some intricate rules regarding the taxation of ISOs that you should understand.

How are ISOs taxed?

An incentive stock option is an option granted to you as an employee which gives you the right to purchase the stock of your employer without realizing income either when the option is granted or when it is exercised. You are first taxed when you sell or otherwise dispose of the option stock. You then have capital gain equal to the sale proceeds minus the option price, provided that the holding period requirement is met.

Note. The IRS has temporarily suspended collection of ISO alternative minimum tax (AMT) liabilities through September 30, 2008.

How long do I need to hold ISOs to get capital gain treatment?

To obtain favorable tax treatment, the stock acquired under an incentive stock option qualifies for favorable long-term capital gain tax treatment only if it is not disposed of before the later of two years from the date of the grant of the option, or one year from the date of the exercise of the option. If this holding period is not satisfied, the portion of the gain equal to the difference between the fair market value (FMV) of the stock at the time of exercise and the option price is taxed as compensation income rather than capital gain. In this case, you may be subject to the higher rate of income imposed on ordinary income.

For example, your employer granted you an incentive stock option on April 1, 2006, and you exercised the option on October 1, 2006, you must not sell the stock until April 1, 2008, to obtain favorable tax treatment (the later of two years from the date of the grant or one year from the date of exercise).

What key dates should I remember?

Because of the importance of receiving capital gain treatment, it is important that you keep in mind key dates such as the date of grant of the ISO and its date of exercise. These periods are measured from the date on which all acts necessary to grant the option or exercise the option have been completed. Therefore, the date of grant is treated as the date on which the board of directors or the stock option committee completes the corporate action which constitutes an offer of stock, rather than the date on which the option agreement is prepared. The date of exercise is the date on which the corporation receives notice of the exercise of the option and payment for the stock, rather than the date the shares of stock are actually transferred.

Will I be subject to alternative minimum tax?

The effect of the alternative minimum tax (AMT) on ISOs can amount to a potential trap for the unwary. This is because under the regular tax there is no tax until the stock is sold or otherwise disposed of. Under the AMT, however, the trap takes place when the ISO is exercised, since alternative minimum taxable income includes the difference between the FMV of the stock on the date the ISO is exercised and the price paid for the stock (the "ISO spread").

If you pay AMT, you are given a credit against regular income tax for the portion of the AMT attributable to ISOs and other tax preference items that result in deferral of income tax. The credit is taken in later years when no AMT is due, and may be taken to the extent that regular tax liability exceeds tentative minimum tax liability. The effect of this is that the AMT is a prepayment of tax, rather than an additional tax.

Since the AMT only applies if it is higher than your regular income tax, one strategy is to time the exercise of ISOs each year to come under the AMT exemption levels. Purely from a tax standpoint, the ideal situation is to exercise ISOs each year that would result in AMT equal to your regular tax. Of course, other factors, such as market conditions, financial needs, etc. may play a greater role in deciding when to exercise an option. If you pay high property tax or state income tax, you may find it more challenging to calculate the optimum exercise of ISOs in relation to the AMT, since both of these deductions are counted against their annual AMT exemption.

ISOs can be a nice additional employee benefit when considering a job offer. However, because the tax implications surrounding certain key trigger events related to ISOs can have a significant impact on your tax liability, we suggest that you contact the office for additional guidance.

For homeowners, the exclusion of all or a portion of the gain on the sale of their principal residence is an important tax break.

For homeowners, the exclusion of all or a portion of the gain on the sale of their principal residence is an important tax break. The maximum amount of gain from the sale or exchange of a principal residence that may be excluded from income is generally $250,000 ($500,000 for joint filers).

Unfortunately, the $500,000/$250,000 exclusion has a few traps, including a "loophole" closer that reduces the homesale exclusion for periods of "nonqualifying use." Careful planning, however, can alleviate many of them. Here is a review of the more prominent problems that homeowners may experience with the homesale exclusion and some suggestions on how you might avoid them:

Reduced homesale exclusion. The Housing Assistance Tax Act of 2008 modifies the exclusion of gain from the sale of a principal residence, providing that gain from the sale of principal residence will no longer be excluded from income for periods that the home was not used as a principal residence. For example, if you used the residence as a vacation home prior to using it as a principal residence. These periods are referred to as "nonqualifying use." This income inclusion rule applies to home sales after December 31, 2008 and is based on nonqualified use periods beginning on or after January 1, 2009, under a generous transition rule. A specific formula is used to determine the amount of gain allocated to nonqualifying use periods.

Use and ownership. Moreover, in order to qualify for the $250,000/$500,000 exclusion, your home must be used and owned by you as your principal residence for at least 2 out of the last 5 years of ownership before sale. Moving into a new house early, or delaying the move, may cost you the right to exclude any and all gain on the home sale from tax.

Incapacitated taxpayers. If you become physically or mentally incapable of self-care, the rules provide that you are deemed to use a residence as a principal residence during the time in which you own the residence and reside in a licensed care facility (e.g., a nursing home), as long as at least a one-year period of use (under the regular rules) is already met. Moving in with an adult child, even if professional health care workers are hired, will not lower the use time period to one year since care is not in a "licensed care facility." In addition, some "assisted-living" arrangements may not qualify as well.

Pro-rata sales. Under an exception, a sale of a residence more frequently than once every two years is allowed, with a pro-rata allocation of the $500,000/$250,000 exclusion based on time, if the sale is by reason of a change in place of employment, health, or other unforeseen circumstances to be specified under pending IRS rules. Needless to say, it is very important that you make certain that you take steps to make sure that you qualify for this exception, because no tax break is otherwise allowed. For example, health in this circumstance does not require moving into a licensed care facility, but the extent of the health reason for moving must be substantiated.

Tax basis. Under the old rules, you were advised to keep receipts of any capital improvements made to your house so that the cost basis of your residence, for purposes of determining the amount of gain, may be computed properly. In a rapidly appreciating real estate market, you should continue to keep these receipts. Death or divorce may unexpectedly reduce the $500,000 exclusion of gain for joint returns to the $250,000 level reserved for single filers. Even if the $500,000 level is obtained, if you have held your home for years, you may find that the exclusion may fall short of covering all the gain realized unless receipts for improvements are added to provide for an increased basis when making this computation.

Some gain may be taxed. Even if you move into a new house that costs more than the selling price of the old home, a tax on gain will be due (usually 20%) to the extent the gain exceeds the $500,000/$250,000 exclusion. Under the old rules, no gain would have been due.

Home office deduction. The home office deduction may have a significant impact on your home sale exclusion. The gain on the portion of the home that has been written off for depreciation, utilities and other costs as an office at home may not be excluded upon the sale of the residence. One way around this trap is to cease home office use of the residence sufficiently before the sale to comply with the rule that all gain (except attributable to recaptured home office depreciation) is excluded to the extent the taxpayer has not used a home office for two out of the five years prior to sale.

Vacation homes. As mentioned, in order to qualify for the $250,000/$500,000 exclusion, the home must be used and owned by you or your spouse (in the case of a joint return) as your principal residence for at least 2 out of the last 5 years of ownership before sale. Because of this rule, some vacation homeowners who have seen their resort properties increase in value over the years are moving into these homes when they retire and living in them for the 2 years necessary before selling in order to take full advantage of the gain exclusion. For example, doing this on a vacation home that has increased $200,000 in value over the years can save you $40,000 in capital gains tax. However, keep in mind the reduced homesale exclusion for periods of nonqualifying use.

As you can see, there is more to the sale of residence gain exclusion than meets the eye. Before you make any decisions regarding buying or selling any real property, please consider contacting the office for additional information and guidance.

Q. A large portion of my portfolio is invested in Internet stocks and with the recent market downturn, I've accumulated some substantial losses on certain stocks. Although I think these stocks will eventually turn around, I'd love to use some of those losses to offset gains from other stocks I'd like to sell. From a tax standpoint, can I sell stock at a loss and then turn around and immediately buy it back?

Q. A large portion of my portfolio is invested in Internet stocks and with the recent market downturn, I've accumulated some substantial losses on certain stocks. Although I think these stocks will eventually turn around, I'd love to use some of those losses to offset gains from other stocks I'd like to sell. From a tax standpoint, can I sell stock at a loss and then turn around and immediately buy it back?

A. If only it were that simple. The transaction you are proposing is considered a "wash sale" in the eyes of the IRS. A wash sale is the sale of a security (e.g., stock or bond) at a loss where the taxpayer turns around and buys back substantially the same security within 30 days. With the wash sale rules, the IRS seeks to eliminate the ability to deduct current losses on these types of transactions, and instead allows a basis adjustment to the new security purchased, in effect deferring the recognition of the earlier loss.

Example: You sell 1,000 shares of Dotcom Co. stock at a loss of $2,000. Next week, you buy another 1,000 shares of the same company's stock for $5,000. Instead of allowing the deduction of the $2,000 on your return, the wash sale rules say you must instead adjust the basis of your newest purchase to $7,000. When you go to sell the stock later at say $10,000, instead of having a $5,000 gain ($10,000 sales price minus $5,000 purchase price), your gain would only be $3,000 ($10,000 sales price minus $7,000 adjusted basis).

So how do you avoid the wash sale rules? Keep good track of the purchase and sale dates of your securities. If you do feel the need to reinvest in a similar investment vehicle, make sure that some element of the new security is different enough to avoid the "substantially similar" rule (e.g., if you sell a stock mutual fund, you can purchase another type of stock mutual fund.) As always, please contact the office if you need further clarification of the wash sale rules.

Q. The recent upturn in home values has left me with quite a bit of equity in my home. I would like to tap into this equity to pay off my credit cards and make some major home improvements. If I get a home equity loan, will the interest I pay be fully deductible on my tax return?

Q. The recent upturn in home values has left me with quite a bit of equity in my home. I would like to tap into this equity to pay off my credit cards and make some major home improvements. If I get a home equity loan, will the interest I pay be fully deductible on my tax return?

A. For most people, all interest paid on a home equity loan would be fully deductible as an itemized deduction on their personal tax returns. However, due to changes made to tax laws governing home mortgage interest deduction in 1987, there are limitations and special circumstances that must be considered when determining how much of your home mortgage interest expense is deductible.

Mortgages secured by your qualified home generally fall under one of three classifications for purposes of determining the home mortgage interest deduction: grandfathered debt, home acquisition debt, and home equity debt. Grandfathered debt is simply home mortgage debt taken out prior to October 14, 1987 (including subsequent refinancing of that debt). The other two types of mortgage debt are discussed below. A "qualified home" is your main or second home and, in addition to a house or condominium, can include any property with sleeping, cooking and toilet facilities (e.g., boat, trailer).

Home Acquisition Debt

Home acquisition debt is a mortgage (including a refinanced loan) taken out after October 13, 1987 that is secured by a qualified home and where the proceeds were used to buy, build, or substantially improve that qualified home. "Substantial improvements" are home improvements that add to the value of your home, prolong the useful life of your home, or adapt your home to new uses.

In general, interest expense on home acquisition debt of up to $1 million ($500,000 if married filing separately) is fully deductible. Keep in mind, though, that to the extent that the mortgage debt exceeds the cost of the home plus any substantial improvements, your mortgage interest will be limited. Mortgage interest expense on this excess debt may be deductible as home equity debt (see below).

Example: You have a home worth $400,000 with a first mortgage of $200,000. If you get a home equity loan of $125,000 to build a new addition to your home, your mortgage interest would be fully deductible.

Home Equity Debt

Home equity debt is debt that is secured by your qualified home and that does not qualify as home acquisition debt. There are generally no limits on the use of the proceeds of this type of loan to retain interest deductibility.

The amount of mortgage debt that can be treated as home equity debt for purposes of the mortgage interest deduction is the smaller of a) $100,000 ($50,000 if married filing separately) or b) the total of each qualified home's fair market value (FMV) reduced by home acquisition debt & debt secured prior to October 14, 1987. Mortgage debt in excess of these limits would be treated as non-deductible personal interest.

Example: You have a home worth $400,000 with a first mortgage of $200,000. If you get a home equity loan of $125,000 to pay off your credit cards (you really like to shop!), your mortgage interest deduction would be limited to the amount paid on only $100,000 of the home equity debt.

In addition to the above limitations, there are other circumstances that, if present, can affect your home equity debt interest expense deduction. Here are a few examples:

As illustrated above, determining your deduction for mortgage interest paid can be more complex than it appears. Before you obtain a home equity loan, please feel free to contact the office for advice on how it may affect your potential home mortgage interest deduction.

As a new business owner, you probably expect to incur many expenses before you even open the doors. What you might not know is how these starting up costs are handled for tax purposes. A little knowledge about how these costs will affect your (or your business') tax return can reduce any unexpected surprises when tax time comes around.

As a new business owner, you probably expect to incur many expenses before you even open the doors. What you might not know is how these starting up costs are handled for tax purposes. A little knowledge about how these costs will affect your (or your business') tax return can reduce any unexpected surprises when tax time comes around.

Starting a new business can be an exciting, although expensive, event that finds you, the small business owner, with a constantly open wallet. In most cases, all costs that you incur on behalf of your new company before you open the doors are capital expenses that increase the basis of your business. However, some of these pre-opening expenditures may be amortizable over a period of time if you choose. Pre-opening expenditures that are eligible for amortization will fall into one of two categories: start-up costs or organizational costs.

Start-up Costs

Start-up costs are certain costs associated with creating an active trade or business, investigating the creation or acquisition of an active trade or business, or purchasing an existing trade or business. If, before your business commences, you incur any cost that would normally be deductible as a business expense during the normal course of business, this would qualify as a start-up cost. Examples of typical start-up costs include attorney's fees, pre-opening advertising, fees paid for consultants, and travel costs. However, deductible interest taxes, and research and development (R&D) expenses are treated differently.

Start-up costs are amortized as a group on the business' tax return (or your own return on Schedule C, if you are a sole proprietor) over a period of no less than 60 months. The amortization period would begin in the month that your business began operations. In order to be able to claim the deduction for amortization related to start-up costs, a statement must be filed with the return for the first tax year you are in business by the due date for that return (plus extensions). However, both early (pre-opening) and late (not more than 6 months) submissions of the statement will be accepted by the IRS.

Organizational Costs

Organizational costs are those costs incurred associated with the organization of a corporation or partnership. If a cost is incurred before the commencement of business that is related to the creation of the entity, is chargeable to a capital account, and could be amortized over the life of the entity (if the entity had a fixed life), it would qualify as an organizational cost. Examples of organizational costs include attorney's fees, state incorporation fees, and accounting fees.

Organizational costs are amortized using the same method as start-up costs (see above), although it is not necessary to use the same amortization period for both. A similar statement must be completed and filed with the company's business tax return for the business' first tax year.

Before you decide which, if any, pre-opening expenditures related to your new business you'd like to treat as start-up or organizational costs, please contact our office for additional guidance.

Q. My wife and I are both retired and are what you might call "social gamblers". We like to play bingo and buy lottery tickets, and take an occasional trip to Las Vegas to play the slot machines. Are we required to report all of our winnings on our tax return? Can we deduct our losses?

Q. My wife and I are both retired and are what you might call "social gamblers." We like to play bingo and buy lottery tickets, and take an occasional trip to Las Vegas to play the slot machines. Are we required to report all of our winnings on our tax return? Can we deduct our losses?

A. The technical answers to your questions are "yes" and "maybe," respectively. However, does it make much practical sense to report your $50 jackpot from the Sunday afternoon bingo game at the church? Probably not. In most circumstances, the taxpayer's cumulative gambling losses far exceed any winnings he may have had.

Here are the technical rules regarding reporting gambling winnings and losses:

Gambling winnings are taxable income and should be reported on your income tax return. In addition to cash winnings, you are required to report the fair market value (FMV) of all non-cash prizes you receive. For the most part, you are on the honor system when it comes to reporting small winnings to the IRS. Large payouts, on the other hand, will most likely be accompanied by IRS Form W-2G and a substantial amount will be deducted for withholding. Gambling winnings should be reported as "Other income" on the front page of Form 1040.

Gambling losses may only be included on your tax return if you itemize your deductions and then they are only deductible up to the amount of your gambling winnings. If you do itemize, those losses would be included as a miscellaneous itemized deduction not subject to the 2% of adjusted gross income (AGI) limit on Form 1040, Schedule A. However, keep in mind that if your AGI exceeds a certain amount, your total itemized deductions may be limited, reducing the likelihood of a direct offset of gambling income and losses.

Once you've tallied up your winnings and losses and reported them on your tax return, how do you substantiate your gambling income and deductions to the IRS? Here are some guidelines offered by the IRS that will help you in the event that your gambling claims are ever questioned:

Keep a log or a journal. The IRS suggests entering all of your gambling activities in a small diary or journal - you may want to consider one that can be carried with you when you frequent gambling establishments. Here is the information you should keep track of:

Retain documentation. As with any item of income or deduction claimed on your return, the IRS requires adequate documentation be kept to substantiate the amount claimed. Acceptable documentation to substantiate gambling winnings and losses can come in many different forms, depending on what type of activity you are engaging in. Examples include lottery tickets, canceled checks, wagering tickets, credit records, bank withdrawals and statements of actual winnings or payment slips provided by the gaming establishment.

Although it may seem difficult to keep track of your gambling activity at the time, it is obvious that keeping good records can benefit you if you ever "hit the jackpot". If you have any further questions on this matter, please contact the office for assistance.

Probably one of the more difficult decisions you will have to make as a consumer is whether to buy or lease your auto. Knowing the advantages and disadvantages of buying vs. leasing a new car or truck before you get to the car dealership can ease the decision-making process and may alleviate unpleasant surprises later.

Probably one of the more difficult decisions you will have to make as a consumer is whether to buy or lease your auto. Knowing the advantages and disadvantages of buying vs. leasing a new car or truck before you get to the car dealership can ease the decision-making process and may alleviate unpleasant surprises later.

Nearly one-third of all new vehicles (and up to 75% of all new luxury cars) are leased rather than purchased. But the decision to lease or buy must ultimately be made on an individual level, taking into consideration each person's facts and circumstances.

Buying

Advantages.

• You own the car at the end of the loan term.
• Lower insurance premiums.
• No mileage limitations.

Disadvantages.

• Higher upfront costs.
• Higher monthly payments.
• Buyer bears risk of future value decrease.

Leasing

Advantages.

• Lower upfront costs.
• Lower monthly payments.
• Lessor assumes risk of future value decrease.
• Greater purchasing power.
• Potential additional income tax benefits.
• Ease of disposition.

Disadvantages.

• You do not own the car at the end of the lease term, although you may have the option to purchase at that time.
• Higher insurance premiums.
• Potential early lease termination charges.
• Possible additional costs for abnormal wear & tear (determined by lessor).
• Extra charges for mileage in excess of mileage specified in your lease contract.

Before you make the decision whether to lease or buy your next vehicle, it makes sense to ask yourself the following questions:

How long do I plan to keep the vehicle? If you want to keep the car or truck longer than the term of the lease, you may be better off purchasing the vehicle as purchase contracts usually result in a lower overall cost of ownership.

How much am I going to drive the vehicle? If you are an outside salesperson and you drive 30,000 miles per year, any benefits you may have gained upfront by leasing will surely be lost in the end to excess mileage charges. Most lease contracts include mileage of between 12,000-15,000 per year - any miles driven in excess of the limit are subject to some pretty hefty charges.

How expensive of a vehicle do I want? If you can really only afford monthly payments on a Honda Civic but you've got your eye on a Lexus, you may want to consider leasing. Leasing usually results in lower upfront fees in the form of lower down payments and deferred sales tax, in addition to lower monthly payments. This combination can make it easier for you to get into the car of your dreams.

If you have any questions about the tax ramifications regarding buying vs. leasing an automobile or would like some additional information when making your decision, please contact the office.