NEW YORK—The Internal Revenue Service needs to find ways to better communicate how it is handling technology modernization and transformation, including in areas such as the use of artificial intelligence in its processes, agency Office of Internal Consulting Chief Joseph Zeigler said.

NEW YORK—The Internal Revenue Service needs to find ways to better communicate how it is handling technology modernization and transformation, including in areas such as the use of artificial intelligence in its processes, agency Office of Internal Consulting Chief Joseph Zeigler said.

Speaking during a plenary session August 18, 2026, at the IRS Nationwide Tax Forum, Zeigler said it is his “hope that the IRS is going to a better job of telling this story” about how the agency is using technology to help improve its operations and make lives easier for taxpayers and the tax professionals who assist them.

As an example, Zeigler specifically highlighted some of the work the agency is doing with AI.

“When we talk about AI, AI is not meant to replace bodies or people and computers doing the work and there is no human input,” he said. Rather it is about how the IRS “can give our employees tools and resources [and] technology to make them better, more efficient” and improve the quality of their work. “All of those things is what I believe that AI and technology were meant for.”

He continued: “It’s taking our world-class employees and putting them on steroids, giving them the ability to come to the right answer sooner.”

And at the end is the ultimate goal of making the taxpayer experience that much better and more in line with what they expect from their customer interactions with the private sector.

“If we can come to an answer that right the first time, and we can come to it quick, and we can report it to the taxpayer [and say] here’s what’s going on,” he said. “All those things are at our fingertips.”

The IRS issued guidance in the form of sample forms and proposed rollover procedures to simplify, standardize, and expedite the completion of direct rollovers to or from a retirement plan. The guidance is designed to comply with Section 324 of the SECURE 2.0 Act (P.L. 117-328). Use of the sample forms and proposed rollover procedures is optional.

The IRS issued guidance in the form of sample forms and proposed rollover procedures to simplify, standardize, and expedite the completion of direct rollovers to or from a retirement plan. The guidance is designed to comply with Section 324 of the SECURE 2.0 Act (P.L. 117-328). Use of the sample forms and proposed rollover procedures is optional.

The IRS indicates that these sample forms are not inftended to be used for rollovers and transfers between IRAs. According to reports made by the Government Accountability Office and the IRS's conversations with IRA stakeholders, IRA-to-IRA transfers are already completed through an electronic transfer system that is considered uniform and efficient.

The guidance includes:

• (1) a proposed rollover procedure;
• (2) the participant's rollover request form;
• (3) the receiving plan's request to the distributing plan;
• (4) the distributing plan's rollover certification; and
• (5) the receiving plan's rollover acceptance.

The IRS is considering additional guidance to facilitate rollovers. Guidance under consideration includes: (1) eliminating the safe harbor that allows plans to send paper checks to participants to complete a direct rollover; (2) requiring administrators and trustees to complete rollovers via electronic transfers or paper checks sent directly to the receiving plan; and (3) providing for new safe harbors based on the use of sample forms.

Notice 2026-49

IR 2026-91

The IRS and Treasury have announced their intension to propose regulations relevant to Code Sec. 6433 and the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 (P.L. 117-328). For tax years beginning after December 31, 2026, Code Sec. 6433 allows certain low- and moderate-income individual taxpayers who have made qualified retirement savings contributions to receive matching contributions of up to $1,000 as saver’s match contributions.

The IRS and Treasury have announced their intension to propose regulations relevant to Code Sec. 6433 and the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 (P.L. 117-328). For tax years beginning after December 31, 2026, Code Sec. 6433 allows certain low- and moderate-income individual taxpayers who have made qualified retirement savings contributions to receive matching contributions of up to $1,000 as saver’s match contributions.

Background

On April 30, 2026, President Trump issued an executive order to (1) increase public awareness of saver’s match contributions; (2) facilitate participation in eligible retirement savings vehicles; and (3) establish a website that informs about high-quality, low-cost IRAs and taxpayers without an employer-sponsored retirement plan. These taxpayers include independent contractors.

Saver’s Match Contributions vs Saver’s Credit

For tax years beginning after December 31, 2026, Saver’s Match contributions would replace the Saver’s Credit under Code Sec. 25B. This would apply to elective contributions, qualifying retirement plans and IRAs.

However, the Saver’s Credit would continue to be available after December 31, 2026, with respect to contributions made to ABLE accounts under Code Sec. 529A. Saver’s match contributions would be claimed on a new (unpublished) Form 8880-A, Saver’s Match for Qualified Retirement Savings Contributions.

Eligibility

Individual taxpayers who make qualified retirement savings contributions could be eligible for a Saver's Match contribution based on those contributions. The contributions to a new or already-existing IRA after the end of a tax year could be made until the tax filing deadline. The contributions should be designated as being made for the prior tax year.

Tax Status

An eligible individual taxpayer’s saver’s match contribution directly paid by the Treasury to a retirement plan is generally treated as an elective deferral made by the individual taxpayer. The contribution is not taken into account for any elective deferral and catch-up limitations that apply to Code Secs. 401(k), 403(b), or governmental 457(b) plans.

Comments Requested

The Treasury Department and the IRS request comments on the issues addressed on or before October 5, 2026. Comments can be submitted electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov.

Notice 2026-48

IR 2026-89

The Treasury Department and IRS have issued initial guidance on the employer credit under Code Sec. 45S for premiums paid on family and medical leave insurance as provided by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (P.L. 119-21). Beginning in 2026, an employer may elect to determine the credit based on premiums paid or incurred during the tax year with respect to an insurance policy that provide such leave instead of based on wages paid to a qualifying employee during paid family and medical leave. The Treasury intends to issue proposed regulations that include this guidance.

The Treasury Department and IRS have issued initial guidance on the employer credit under Code Sec. 45S for premiums paid on family and medical leave insurance as provided by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (P.L. 119-21). Beginning in 2026, an employer may elect to determine the credit based on premiums paid or incurred during the tax year with respect to an insurance policy that provide such leave instead of based on wages paid to a qualifying employee during paid family and medical leave. The Treasury intends to issue proposed regulations that include this guidance.

Premium Method for Credit

The credit may be claimed under the premium method beginning in 2026 only to the extent the insurance premium funds a benefit that would be creditable under the wage method. Thus, the premium must be for insurance coverage with respect to leave that is:

• paid family and medical leave as defined under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), or required by state local law or paid for by a state or local government,
• payable to an individual who is a qualifying employee of the employer at the time the premium is paid or incurred, and
• provides a benefit that would constitute wages to the employee.

In the case of a premium paid or incurred for an insurance policy that provides both creditable coverage and noncreditable coverage, the employer must allocate the premium between the creditable coverage and the noncreditable coverage using any reasonable method. For example, a blended premium would be a premium for coverage that provides both qualifying paid family and medical leave and other types of leave, or coverage for qualifying employees and nonqualifying employees.

An employer may calculate the tax credit using both the wage method with respect to certain leave and the premium method with respect to other leave. However, an employer may not use the wage method to claim a credit for wages paid to the extent that the employer claims a credit using the premium method for creditable coverage that funds such benefits (or vice versa).

Notice 2026-28

IR 2026-86

The IRS updated frequently asked questions (FAQs) for qualified overtime compensation. The FAQs update guidance on (1) the qualified overtime compensation deduction; (2) coverage and exemptions under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA); (3) Form W-2, Form 1099-MISC, and Form 1099-NEC requirements; and more.

The IRS updated frequently asked questions (FAQs) for qualified overtime compensation. The FAQs update guidance on (1) the qualified overtime compensation deduction; (2) coverage and exemptions under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA); (3) Form W-2, Form 1099-MISC, and Form 1099-NEC requirements; and more.

Qualified Overtime Compensation Deduction

The deduction is up to $12,500 of qualified overtime compensation earned for the year per individual tax return. It is $25,000 for joint return. The deduction is reduced if a taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) for the tax year exceeds $150,000, and $300,000 for joint filers.

Coverage and Exemptions Under FLSA

The IRS noted that overtime under the FLSA must be paid to individual taxpayers who are (1) covered by the FLSA; and (2) not exempt from the FLSA’s overtime requirement. Ineligible taxpayers would not receive qualified overtime compensation regardless of other laws or circumstances. Employees who are exempt from the FLSA’s overtime requirement include teachers, academic administration personnel, employees of certain seasonal amusement or recreational establishments and more.

Employee-owners of businesses are not FLSA overtime-eligible employees. An employee who owns at least a bona fide 20-percent equity interest in the enterprise in which they are employed is ineligible.

Reporting Requirements

Starting in tax year 2026, payors and employers are required to separately report qualified overtime compensation on a Form 1099-MISC, Form 1099-NEC or Form W-2. Independent contractors would only report qualified overtime compensation on a Form 1099- MISC or Form 1099-NEC.

FS-2026-13

IR 2026-88

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the original public meaning of "limited partner" in Code Sec. 1402(a)(13) is a partner who plays no significant role in managing or running a business. The court rejected the "passive investor" rule followed by the IRS and the Tax Court in Soroban Capital Partners LP (Dec. 62,310). The Fifth Circuit also withdrew its prior opinion in Sirius Solutions, L.L.L.P. (this was the prior name of the limited liability limited partnership in this litigation).

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the original public meaning of "limited partner" in Code Sec. 1402(a)(13) is a partner who plays no significant role in managing or running a business. The court rejected the "passive investor" rule followed by the IRS and the Tax Court in Soroban Capital Partners LP (Dec. 62,310). The Fifth Circuit also withdrew its prior opinion in Sirius Solutions, L.L.L.P. (this was the prior name of the limited liability limited partnership in this litigation).

Background

A limited liability limited partnership operated a business consulting firm, and was owned by several limited partners and one general partner. For the tax years at issue, the limited partnership allocated all of its ordinary business income to its limited partners. Based on the limited partnership tax exception in Code Sec. 1402(a)(13), the limited partnership excluded the limited partners’ distributive shares of partnership income or loss from its calculation of net earnings from self-employment during those years, and reported zero net earnings from self-employment.

The IRS adjusted the limited partnership's net earnings from self-employment, and determined that the distributive share exception in Code Sec. 1402(a)(13) did not apply because none of the limited partnership’s limited partners counted as "limited partners" for purposes of the statutory exception. The Tax Court upheld the adjustments, stating it was bound by Soroban.

Limited Partners and Self Employment Tax

Code Sec. 1402(a)(13) excludes from a partnership's calculation of net earnings from self-employment the distributive share of any item of income or loss of a limited partner, as such, other than guaranteed payments in Code Sec. 707(c) to that partner for services actually rendered to or on behalf of the partnership to the extent that those payments are established to be in the nature of remuneration for those services.

In Soroban, the Tax Court determined that Congress had enacted Code Sec. 1402(a)(13) to exclude earnings from a mere investment, and intended for the phrase "limited partners, as such" to refer to passive investors. Thus, the Tax Court there held that the limited partner exception of Code Sec. 1402(a)(13) did not apply to a partner who is limited in name only, and that determining whether a partner is a limited partner in name only required an inquiry into the limited partner's functions and roles.

No Significant Role in Management

The Fifth Circuit stated that the backdrop against which Congress enacted Code Sec. 1402(a)(13) in 1977 suggested that some participation is allowed, so long as the partners do not exercise control over the business, and that the plain text of the statute points towards this conclusion. The court observed that all relevant sources suggested that when the statute was enacted, the ordinary public meaning of"limited partner" included a partner who did not play a significant role in managing or running the business.

The Fifth Circuit rejected the Tax Court’s Soroban decision, which held that that the term "limited partner" could refer only to passive investors. The court stated that the Tax Court had selected a rule that was divorced from statutory text and that appeared to prohibit even the most minor involvement in corporate affairs. In the Fifth Circuit's view, it would have been understood at the time Congress enacted Code Sec. 1402(a)(13) that a limited partner could not manage the partnership, but perhaps could participate in certain nonmanagerial aspects of the business.

The court also stated that the Soroban decision could not be squared with decades of IRS-approved guidance insisting that what mattered was limited liability alone. The court characterized the IRS's position to be that it could change the meaning of "limited partner" from "limited liability alone" to the "passive investor" standard with no action from Congress to amend the text of Code Sec. 1402(a)(13). Even assuming that the IRS could unilaterally effectuate such changes through tax instructions, the court stated that the IRS's instructions must comport with the original public meaning of the text enacted by Congress.

Withdrawing Sirius Solutions, L.L.L.P., CA-5, 2026-1 ustc ¶50,109, and vacating and remanding an unreported Tax Court opinion.

K Alain, L.L.L.P., CA-5

The IRS has issued final regulations that clarify when backup withholding applies to payments made in settlement of third party network transactions. The final rules reflect amendments to Code Secs. 6050W and 3406 made by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (P.L. 119-21), and apply to payments made in calendar years beginning after December 31, 2024.

The IRS has issued final regulations that clarify when backup withholding applies to payments made in settlement of third party network transactions. The final rules reflect amendments to Code Secs. 6050W and 3406 made by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (P.L. 119-21), and apply to payments made in calendar years beginning after December 31, 2024.

Under the de minimis payment rule of Code Sec. 6050W(e) for information reporting purposes, a third party settlement organization (TPSO) must report payments made in settlement of third party network transactions to a payee only if the payments exceed $20,000 and 200 transactions in a calendar year. The final regulations align the backup withholding obligations under Code Sec. 3406 with this reporting threshold.

A payment will be considered a reportable payment subject to backup withholding only if both the $20,000 and 200 transaction thresholds are exceeded during the calendar year. The amount subject to backup withholding includes the entire amount of the transaction that causes either threshold to be breached, whichever occurs later, and the amount of any subsequent transactions made to the payee during the same calendar year. Further, if the TPSO made payments in settlement of third party network transactions to the payee in the previous calendar year that were reportable payments under the backup withholding rules, the de minimis exception to backup withholding would not to payments made to that payee in the current calendar year.

Participating Payees

In the preamble to the Treasury Decision, the Treasury Department and the IRS used the opportunity to clarify that de minimis TPSO reporting and the backup withholding thresholds apply with respect to each participating payee, as defined by Code Sec. 6050W(d)(1).

T.D. 10053

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has issued a final rule that permanently removes the requirement that U.S. companies and U.S. persons must report beneficial ownership information (BOI) to FinCEN under the Corporate Transparency Act. The final rule adopts, with limited changes, an interim final rule issued on March 26, 2025, that narrowed the BOI reporting requirements.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has issued a final rule that permanently removes the requirement that U.S. companies and U.S. persons must report beneficial ownership information (BOI) to FinCEN under the Corporate Transparency Act. The final rule adopts, with limited changes, an interim final rule issued on March 26, 2025, that narrowed the BOI reporting requirements.

The Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) was enacted in 2021 as part of the broader Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020. Its reporting requirement had been characterized as an important step in the fight against money laundering, financing of terrorism, proliferation financing, serious tax fraud, human and drug trafficking, counterfeiting, piracy, securities fraud, financial fraud, and acts of foreign corruption.

In late 2024 and early 2025, however, several federal district courts preliminarily enjoined FinCEN from implementing and enforcing the reporting rule. The Treasury Department announced in March 2025 that it was suspending enforcement of the CTA and its reporting requirements against U.S. citizens, domestic reporting companies, and their beneficial owners, and issued the interim final rule.

BOI Reporting Exemptions

The final rule:

• adopts exemptions that make the rollback of beneficial ownership reporting by U.S. companies permanent,
• exempts foreign pooled investment vehicles registered in the United States from reporting the BOI of a U.S person in control of the investment vehicle, and
• confirms that FinCEN will delete information about any individual that it reasonably believes is a U.S. person (for example, information that is linked to a U.S. passport or U.S. driver's license).

The final rule also makes substantive changes that expand on the relief in the interim final rule, by:

• exempting foreign companies from the requirement to report U.S. person “company applicants” (i.e., the individuals who helped those foreign companies register to do business in the United States), and
• exempting U.S. persons who have applied for FinCEN Identifiers (FinCEN IDs) from having to update or correct the information they provided to FinCEN when they applied.

Foreign entities that are reporting companies are still required under the final rule to report BOI for foreign individuals.

FinCEN has also issued answers to frequently asked questions on the final rule.

FinCEN Final Rule RIN-1506-AB67

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.