Newsletters

The IRS has released the 2024-2025 special per diem rates. Taxpayers use the per diem rates to substantiate certain expenses incurred while traveling away from home. These special per diem rates include:

The IRS has released the 2024-2025 special per diem rates. Taxpayers use the per diem rates to substantiate certain expenses incurred while traveling away from home. These special per diem rates include:

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

Transportation Industry Special Per Diem Rates

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

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

Incidental Expenses Only Rate

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

High-Low Substantiation Method

For purposes of the high-low substantiation method, the 2024-2025 special per diem rates are:

• $319 for travel to any high-cost locality, and
• $225 for travel to any other locality within CONUS.

The amount treated as paid for meals is:

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

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

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

Taxpayers using the high-low method must comply with Rev. Proc. 2019-48, I.R.B. 2019-51, 1392. That procedure provides the rules for using a per diem rate to substantiate the amount of ordinary and necessary business expenses paid or incurred while traveling away from home.

Notice 2023-68, I.R.B. 2023-41 is superseded.

Notice 2024-68

The U.S. Department of the Treasury announced it has recovered $172 million from 21,000 wealthy taxpayers who have not filed returns since 2017.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury announced it has recovered $172 million from 21,000 wealthy taxpayers who have not filed returns since 2017.

The Internal Revenue Service began pursuing 125,000 high-wealth, high-income taxpayers who have not filed taxes since 2017 in February 2024 based on Form W-2 and Form 1099 information showing these individuals received more than $400,000 in income but failed to file taxes.

"The IRS had not had the resources to pursue these wealthy non-filers," Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said in prepared remarks for a speech in Austin, Texas. Now it does [with the supplemental funding provided by the Inflation Reduction Act], and we’re making significant progress. … This is just the first milestone, and we look forward to more progress ahead.

This builds on a separate initiative that began in the fall of 2023 that targeted about 1,600 high-wealth, high-income individuals who failed to pay a recognized debt, with the agency reporting that nearly 80 percent of those with a delinquent tax debt have made a payment and leading to more than $1.1 billion recovered, including $100 million since July 2024.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

The Internal Revenue Service has made limited progress in developing a methodology that would help the agency meet the directive not to increase audit rates for those making less than $400,000 per year, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration reported.

National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins is working to address deficiencies highlighted by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration regarding the speed of service offered by the Taxpayer Advocate Service.

National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins is working to address deficiencies highlighted by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration regarding the speed of service offered by the Taxpayer Advocate Service.

Collins noted in a September 19, 2024, blog post that TAS, as highlighted by the TIGTA audit, is “not starting to work cases and we are not returning telephone calls as quickly as we would like.”

She noted that while overall satisfaction with TAS is high, Collins is hearing "more complaints than I would like of unreturned phone calls, delays in providing updates, and delays in resolving cases." She identified three core challenges in case advocacy:

• The increasing number of cases;

• An increase in new hires that need proper training before they can effectively assist taxpayers; and

• A case management system that is more than two decades old that causes inefficiencies and delays.

Collins noted that there has been an 18 percent increase in cases in fiscal year 2024 and advocates have inventories of more than 100 cases at a time. According to the blog post, in each of FY 2022 and 2023, there were about 220,000 cases. TAS is on track to receive nearly 260,000 in FY 2024.

"Our case advocates are doing their best to advocate for you," Collins wrote in the blog. "But when we experience a year like this in which case receipts have jumped by 18 percent, something must give. Since we don’t turn away taxpayers who are eligible for our assistance, the tradeoff is that we’re taking longer to assign new cases to be worked, longer to return telephone calls, and sometimes longer to resolve cases even after we’ve begun to work them."

Collins added that while the employment ranks continue to rise, about 30 percent of the case advocates "have less than one year of experience, and about 50 percent have less than two years of experience," meaning "nearly one-third of our case advocate workforce is still receiving training and working limited caseloads or have no caseloads yet, and half are likely to require extra support for complex cases."

She said TAS is revieing its training protocols, including focusing new hires on high volume cases so "they can begin to work those cases more quickly, while continuing to receive comprehensive training that will enable them to become effective all-around advocates over time."

TAS is also deploying a new case management system next year that will better integrate with the Internal Revenue Service’s electronic data offerings.

"My commitment is to continue to be transparent about our progress as we work toward becoming a more effective and responsive organization, and I ask for your understanding and patience as our case advocates work to resolve your issues with the IRS," Collins said.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

The IRS has highlighted important tax guidelines for taxpayers who are involved in making contributions and receiving distributions from online crowdfunding. The crowdfunding website or its payment processor may be required to report distributions of money raised, if the amount distributed meets certain reporting thresholds, by filing Form 1099-K, Payment Card and Third Party Network Transactions, with the IRS.

The IRS has highlighted important tax guidelines for taxpayers who are involved in making contributions and receiving distributions from online crowdfunding. The crowdfunding website or its payment processor may be required to report distributions of money raised, if the amount distributed meets certain reporting thresholds, by filing Form 1099-K, Payment Card and Third Party Network Transactions, with the IRS.

The reporting thresholds for a crowdfunding website or payment processor to file and furnish Form 1099-K are:

• Calendar years 2023 and prior – Form 1099-K is required if the total of all payments distributed to a person exceeded $20,000 and resulted from more than 200 transactions; and
• Calendar year 2024 – The IRS announced a plan for the threshold to be reduced to $5,000 as a phase-in for the lower threshold provided under the ARPA.

Alternatively, if non-taxable distributions are reported on Form 1099-K and the recipient does not report the transaction on their tax return, the IRS may contact the recipient for more information.

If crowdfunding contributions are made as a result of the contributor’s detached and disinterested generosity, and without the contributors receiving or expecting to receive anything in return, the amounts may be gifts and therefore may not be includible in the gross income of those for whom the campaign was organized. Additionally, contributions to crowdfunding campaigns by an employer to, or for the benefit of, an employee are generally includible in the employee’s gross income. If a crowdfunding organizer solicits contributions on behalf of others, distributions of the money raised to the organizer may not be includible in the organizer’s gross income if the organizer further distributes the money raised to those for whom the crowdfunding campaign was organized. More information is available to help taxpayers determine what their tax obligations are in connection with their Form 1099-K at Understanding Your Form 1099-K.

The IRS has significantly improved its online tools, using funding from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), to facilitate taxpayers in accessing clean energy tax credits. These modernized tools are designed to streamline processes, improve compliance, and mitigate fraud. A key development is the IRS Energy Credits Online (ECO) platform, a free, secure, and user-friendly service available to businesses of all sizes. It allows taxpayers to register, submit necessary information, and file for clean energy tax credits without requiring any specialized software. The platform also features validation checks and real-time monitoring to detect potential fraud and enhance customer service.

The IRS has significantly improved its online tools, using funding from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), to facilitate taxpayers in accessing clean energy tax credits. These modernized tools are designed to streamline processes, improve compliance, and mitigate fraud. A key development is the IRS Energy Credits Online (ECO) platform, a free, secure, and user-friendly service available to businesses of all sizes. It allows taxpayers to register, submit necessary information, and file for clean energy tax credits without requiring any specialized software. The platform also features validation checks and real-time monitoring to detect potential fraud and enhance customer service.

In November 2023, the IRS announced a significant enhancement to the ECO platform. Qualified manufacturers could submit clean vehicle identification numbers (VINs), while sellers and dealers were enabled to file time-of-sale reports completely online. Additionally, the platform facilitates advance payments to sellers and dealers within 72 hours of the clean vehicle credit transfer, significantly reducing processing time and enhancing the overall user experience.

In December 2023, the IRS expanded the ECO platform’s capabilities to accommodate qualifying businesses, tax-exempt organizations, and entities such as state, local, and tribal governments. These entities can now take advantage of elective payments or transfer their clean energy credits through the ECO system. This feature allows taxpayers who may not have sufficient tax liabilities to offset to still benefit from the available tax credits under the IRA and the Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors (CHIPS) Act.

The IRS’s move towards digital transformation also led to the creation of an online application portal for the Qualifying Advanced Energy Project Credit and Wind and Solar Low-Income Communities Bonus Credit programs in partnership with the Department of Energy. The portal, which launched in June 2023, simplifies the submission and review processes for clean energy projects, lowering barriers for taxpayers to participate in these incentives.

These advancements reflect the IRS’s commitment to modernizing taxpayer services, focusing on efficiency, and enhancing the overall user experience. Looking ahead, the IRS is poised to continue leveraging technology to further improve processes and support taxpayers in utilizing clean energy tax incentives.

Final regulations on consistent basis reporting have been issued under Code Secs. 1014 and 6035.

Final regulations on consistent basis reporting have been issued under Code Secs. 1014 and 6035.

Consistent Basis Requirement

The general rule is that a taxpayer's initial basis in certain property acquired from a decedent cannot exceed the property's final value for estate tax purposes or, if no final value has been determined, the basis is the property's reported value for federal estate tax purposes. The consistent basis requirement applies until the entire property is sold, exchanged, or otherwise disposed of in a recognition transaction for income tax purposes or the property becomes includible in another gross estate.

"Final value" is defined as: (1) the value reported on the federal estate tax return once the period of limitations on assessment has expired without that value being adjusted by the IRS; (2) the value determined by the IRS once that value can no longer be contested by the estate; (3) the value determined in an agreement binding on all parties; or (4) the value determined by a court once the court’s determination is final.

Property subject to the consistent basis requirement is property the inclusion of which in the gross estate increases the federal estate tax payable by the decedent’s estate. Property excepted from this requirement is identified in Reg. §1.1014-10(c)(2). The zero-basis rule applicable to unreported property described in the proposed regulations was not adopted. The consistent basis requirement is clarified to apply only to "included property."

Required Information Returns and Statements

An executor of an estate who is required to file an estate tax return under Code Sec. 6018, which is filed after July 31, 2015, is subject to the reporting requirements of Code Sec. 6035. Executors who file estate tax returns to make a generation-skipping transfer tax exemption or allocation, a portability election, or a protective election to avoid a penalty are not subject to the reporting requirements. An executor is required to file Form 8971 (the Information Return) and all required Statements. In general, the Information Return and Statements are due to the IRS and beneficiaries on or before the earlier of 30 days after the due date of the estate tax return or the date that is 30 days after the date on which the estate tax return is filed with the IRS. If a beneficiary acquires property after the due date of the estate tax return, the Statement must be furnished to the beneficiary by January 31 of the year following the acquisition of that property. Also, by January 31, the executor must attach a copy of the Statement to a supplement to the Information Return. An executor has the option of furnishing a Statement before the acquisition of property by a beneficiary.

Executors have a duty to supplement the Information Return or Statements upon the receipt, discovery, or acquisition of information that causes the information to be incorrect or incomplete. Reg. §1.6035-1(d)(2) provides a nonexhaustive list of changes that require supplemental reporting. The duty to supplement applies until the later of a beneficiary's acquisition of the property or the determination of the final value of the property under Reg. §1.1014-10(b)(1). With the exception of property identified for limited reporting in Reg. §1.6035-1(f), the property subject to reporting is included property and property the basis of which is determined, wholly or partially, by reference to the basis of the included property.

Penalties

Penalties may be imposed under Reg. §301.6721-1(h)(2)(xii) for filing an incorrect Information Return, and Reg. §301.6722-1(e)(2)(xxxv) for filing incorrect Statements. In addition, an accuracy-related penalty can be imposed under Reg. §1.6662-9 on the portion of the underpayment of tax relating to property subject to the consistent basis requirement that is attributable to an inconsistent basis.

Applicability Dates

Reg. §1.1014-10 applies to property described in Reg. §1.1014-10(c)(1) that is acquired from a decedent or by reason of the death of a decedent if the decedent's estate tax return is filed after September 17, 2024. Reg. §1.6035-1 applies to executors of the estate of a decedent who are required to file a federal estate tax return under Code Sec. 6018 if that return is filed after September 17, 2024, and to trustees receiving certain property included in the gross estate of such a decedent. Reg. §1.6662-9 applies to property described in Reg. §1.1014-10(c)(1) that is reported on an estate tax return required under Code Sec. 6018 if that return is filed after September 17, 2024.

Your 2011 tax return has been filed, or you have properly filed for an extension. In either case, now it’s time to start thinking about important post-filing season activities to save you tax in 2012 and beyond.  A few loose ends may pay dividends if you take care of them sooner instead of later.

Successful filing season

The IRS reported that the 2012 filing season moved along without significant problems. The IRS continued to upgrade its return processing programs and systems.  Early in the filing season, some filers experienced a short delay in receiving refunds but the delay was quickly resolved.  The IRS reported just before the end of the filing season that it had processed nearly 100 million returns and issued 75 million refunds. 

Extensions

Individuals are eligible for an automatic six-month extension until October 15 to file a return. To get the extension, taxpayers must estimate their tax liability and pay any amount due.  When a taxpayer properly files for an extension, he or she avoids the late-filing penalty, generally five percent per month based on the unpaid balance, which applies to returns filed after the April 17 deadline. Any payment made with an extension request will reduce or eliminate interest and late-payment penalties that apply to payments made after April 17. The current interest rate is three percent per year, compounded daily, and the late-payment penalty is normally 0.5 percent per month.

Installment agreements

Installment agreements generally can be set up quickly with the IRS and help to spread out payments to make them more manageable.  In 2012, the IRS increased the threshold for a streamlined installment agreement from $25,000 to $50,000. Installment agreements however, come with some costs.  The IRS charges a fee to set up an installment agreement.  If you cannot pay the full amount within 120 days, the fee for setting up an agreement is:

• $52 for a direct debit agreement;
• $105 for a standard agreement or payroll deduction agreement; or
• $43 for qualified lower income taxpayers.

It’s important to make your scheduled payments timely and in full. The IRS expects you to pay the minimum amount agreed on; you can always pay more if you are able.  If your installment agreement goes into default, the IRS can charge a reinstatement fee.

An installment agreement does not reduce the amount of the taxes, interest, or penalties owed, and penalties and interest will continue to accrue. In determining the amount of the penalty for failure to pay tax, the penalty is reduced from 0.5 percent per month to 0.25 percent per month during any month that an installment agreement for the unpaid tax is in effect.

You must specify the amount you can pay and the day of the month (1st-28th) on which you wish to make your payment each month. The IRS expects to receive your payment on the date you select. The IRS will respond to your request, usually within 30 days, to advise you as to whether your request has been approved or denied, or if more information is needed.

Amended returns

Taxpayers can file an amended return if they find an error, uncover unreported income or discover an item that will generate a deduction. Amended returns are filed on Use Form 1040X, Amended U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, to correct a previously filed Form 1040, Form 1040A, Form 1040EZ, Form 1040NR, or Form 1040NR-EZ. If you are filing to claim an additional refund, wait until you have received your original refund. If you owe additional tax for a tax year for which the filing date has not passed, file Form 1040X and pay the tax by the filing date for that year to avoid penalties and interest. 

Generally, to claim a refund, Form 1040X must be filed within 3 years from the date of your original return or within two years from the date you paid the tax, whichever is later. Returns filed before the due date (without regard to extensions) are considered filed on the due date. Taxpayers must file a separate Form 1040X for each year they are amending.

Targeted penalty relief

This year – for the first time – the IRS offered penalty relief to qualified individuals who were unable to pay their taxes by the April 17 deadline. Unemployed filers and self-employed individuals whose business income dropped substantially can apply for a six-month extension of time to pay, the IRS explained. Eligible taxpayers will not be charged a late-payment penalty if they pay any tax, penalty and interest due by October 15, 2012. Taxpayers qualify if they were unemployed for any 30-day period between January 1, 2011 and April 17, 2012. Self-employed people qualify if their business income declined 25 percent or more in 2011, due to the economy.  However, income limits apply, which excluded many taxpayers from the program.

Records

The IRS advises that taxpayers maintain tax records for three years.  In many cases, especially for individuals with complex returns, records should be kept longer. Our office maintains taxpayer records with the utmost care and confidentiality.

We encourage you to contact us if you have any questions about the end of the 2011 filing season and how your 2011 return can provide a roadmap to tax savings in 2012.

After three days of oral arguments in March, the Supreme Court is deciding the fate of the Pension Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) and its companion law, the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (HCERA).  Not only do the new laws impact health care, they contain numerous tax provisions, many of which have yet to take effect.  The Supreme Court may uphold the laws, strike them down in whole or in part, or decide that the case is premature.  The Supreme Court is expected to render its decision in June.  In the meantime, a quick checklist of the tax provisions in the two laws reveals how extensively they impact individuals, businesses and taxpayers of all types.

Challenges

Congress passed, and President Obama signed, the PPACA and HCERA in 2010.  Almost immediately, several states and taxpayers challenged the laws in court.  The lawsuits generally argued that Congress had exceeded its authority by requiring individuals to obtain health insurance.

The cases made their way from federal district courts to the various federal courts of appeal, which reached different conclusions.  One circuit court invalidated the individual mandate; two circuit courts upheld the individual mandate and another circuit court dismissed the challenge on procedural grounds.

Supreme Court grants review

On November 14, 2011, the United States Supreme Court agreed to review the Eleventh Circuit Court’s decision in Florida v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  The Supreme Court stated it would examine four issues: (1) the Constitutionality of the individual mandate; (2) whether the individual mandate is severable from the PPACA; (3) whether the challenge to the individual mandate is barred by the Anti-Injunction Act^; and (4) whether PPACA’s expansion of Medicaid exceeded Congress's authority. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case on March 26-28 in Washington, D.C. 

Individual mandate and penalty

The individual mandate generally requires individuals to maintain minimum essential coverage for themselves and their dependents after 2013. Individuals will be required to pay a penalty for each month of noncompliance, unless they are exempt (such as individuals covered by Medicaid and Medicare).  The PPACA also provides tax incentives to help individuals obtain minimum essential coverage.  Beginning in 2014, individuals with incomes within certain federal poverty thresholds may qualify for a refundable health insurance premium assistance tax credit.  The PPACA also provides for advance payment of the credit.

In Florida v. HHS, the Eleventh Circuit struck down the individual health insurance mandate but did not declare the entire PPACA unconstitutional.  In contrast, the Sixth Circuit held that the individual mandate was a valid exercise of Congress’ power to regulate commerce (Thomas More Law Center v. Obama).  The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit also upheld the individual mandate (Mead v. Holder).  The Supreme Court could find the entire PPACA unconstitutional or could find that the individual mandate is severable, thereby preserving other parts of the statute, including various tax provisions.

Tax provisions

While much attention has focused on the individual mandate, the Supreme Court may also decide the fate of many tax provisions in the PPACA and the HCERA. Among the tax provisions potentially affected by the Supreme Court’s decision are:

• Code Sec. 45R small employer health insurance tax credit;

• 3.8 percent Medicare contribution tax on unearned income for higher income taxpayers after 2012;

• Additional 0.9 percent Medicare tax on wages and self-employment income of higher income taxpayers after 2012;

• Increased itemized deduction for unreimbursed medical expenses after 2012;

• Prohibition on over-the-counter medicines being eligible for health flexible spending arrangement (FSA), health reimbursement arrangement (HRA), health savings account (HSA), and Archer Medical Savings Account (MSA) dollars.

• Additional tax on distributions from HSAs and Archer MSAs not used for qualified medical expenses;

• Excise tax on high-dollar health plans after 2017;

• Tax credit for therapeutic discovery projects;

• Annual fees on manufacturers and importers of branded prescription drugs;

• Reporting of employer-provided health coverage on Form W-2;

• Codification of the economic substance doctrine.

Anti-Injunction Act

The Supreme Court could decide that the challenge to the PPACA is premature.  Under the Anti-Injunction Act, a taxpayer must wait to oppose a tax until after it is collected.  The PPACA’s individual mandate and its related penalty do not take effect until 2014.  The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals found that the penalty amounted to a tax and taxpayers could not challenge the tax until it took effect (Liberty University v. Geithner).

If you have any questions about the tax provisions in the health care reform laws, please contact our office. We will be following developments as they ensue after the Supreme Court issues its decision in June.

Proposals to reform retirement savings plans were highlighted during an April 2012 hearing by the House Ways and Means Committee.  Lawmakers were advised by many experts to move slowly on making changes to current retirement programs that might discourage employers from sponsoring plans for their workers.  Nevertheless, it is clear that Congress wants to make some bold moves in the retirement savings area of the tax law and that likely it will do so under the broader umbrella of general “tax reform.” While tax reform is gaining momentum, it is unlikely to produce any change in the tax laws until 2013 or 2014. Considering that retirement planning necessarily looks long-term into the future, however, now is not too soon to pay some attention to the proposals being discussed.

Testimony

The Chief of Actuarial Issues and Director of Retirement Policy for the American Society of Pension Professionals and Actuaries testified that current federal tax incentives can transform taxable bonuses for business owners into retirement savings contributions that benefit both owners and employees. “This incentive for the business owner to contribute for other employees results in a distribution of tax benefit that is more progressive than the current income tax structure," she observed.

An American Benefits Council representation warned at the hearing that the wisest course for lawmakers is to not enact new laws that would disrupt the success of the current system. Short-term retirement legislation designed to boost tax revenues generally do so by eliminating the existing savings incentives and eroding the amount that workers actually save.

Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich. questioned whether the large number of retirement plans now existing with their different rules and eligibility criteria leads to confusion, reducing the effectiveness of the incentives in increasing retirement savings. Ranking member Sander Levin, D-Mich., questioned the value of making tax reform-inspired changes to retirement plans. "Tax reform should approach retirement savings incentives with an eye toward strengthening our current system and expanding participation, not as an opportunity to find revenue," Levin said.

JCT report

In advance of the hearing, the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) summarized the tax treatment of current-law retirement savings plans and described some recent reform proposals in a report, “Present Law and Background Relating to the Tax Treatment of Retirement Savings” (JCX-32-12). The report highlighted several of the recent proposals on retirement savings:

Automatic enrollment payroll deduction IRA.  President Obama has proposed mandatory automatic enrollment payroll deduction IRA programs.  An employer that does not sponsor a qualified retirement plan, SEP, or SIMPLE IRA plan for its employees (or sponsors a plan and excludes some employees) would be required to offer an automatic enrollment payroll deduction IRA program with a default contribution to a Roth IRA of three percent of compensation. An employer would not be required to offer the program if the employer has been in existence less than two years or has 10 or fewer employees.

Expand the saver's credit.  The Administration has also proposed to make the retirement savings contribution credit, known as the saver's credit, fully refundable and for the saver’s credit to be deposited automatically in an employer-sponsored retirement plan account or IRA to which the eligible individual contributes. In addition, in place of the current credit ranging from 10 percent to 50 percent for qualified retirement savings contributions up to $2,000 per individual, the proposal would provide a credit of 50 percent of such contributions up to $500 (indexed for inflation) per individual.

Consolidate plans.  The JCT also reviewed two retirement proposals from the Bush administration:  Consolidating traditional and Roth IRAs into a single type of account called Retirement Savings Accounts (RSAs) and creating Lifetime Savings Accounts (LSAs) that could be used to save for any purpose with an annual limit for contributions of $2,000. The JCT explained that the tax treatment of RSAs and LSAs would be similar to the current tax treatment of Roth IRAs (contributions would not be deductible, and earnings on contributions generally would not be taxable when distributed). Additionally, the Bush Administration had proposed to consolidate various current-law employer-sponsored retirement arrangements under which individual accounts are maintained for employees and under which employees may make contributions into a single type of arrangement called an employer retirement savings account (ERSA).

The American Society of Pension Professionals and Actuaries (ASPPA) told the Ways and Means Committee that the large number of plans with different rules and criteria does not reduce the effectiveness of the incentives in increasing retirement savings. ”Consolidating all types of defined-contribution type plans into one type of plan would not be simplification,” the ASPPA cautioned. “It would disrupt savings, and force state and local governments and nonprofits to modify their retirement savings plans and procedures.”

As an individual or business, it is your responsibility to be aware of and to meet your tax filing/reporting deadlines. This calendar summarizes important tax reporting and filing data for individuals, businesses and other taxpayers for the month of May 2012.

May 2

Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates April 25–27.

May 4

Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates April 28–May 1.

May 9

Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates May 2–4.

May 10

Employees who work for tips. Employees who received $20 or more in tips during April must report them to their employer using Form 4070.

May 11

Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates May 5–8.

May 16

Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates May 9–11.

May 18

Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates May 12–15.

May 23

Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates May 16–18.

May 25

Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates May 19–22.

May 31

Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates May 23–25.

June 1

Employers. Semi-weekly depositors must deposit employment taxes for payroll dates May 26–29.

The just-released 2011 IRS Data Book provides statistical information on IRS examinations, collections and other activities for the most recent fiscal year ended in 2011. The 2011 Data Book statistics, when compared to the 2010 version, shows, among other things, a notable increase in the odds of being audited within several high-income categories.

Individual audits

Individual taxpayers collectively were audited at a 1.1% rate over the FY 2011 period, based on 1,564,690 audited returns out of the 140,837,499 returns that were filed. While this rate is about the same as in 2010, variations occurred within the income ranges. An uptick was particularly noticeable in the upper brackets (see statistics, below).

Both correspondence and field audits were counted within the statistics. Correspondence audits accounted for 75% of all audits for FY 2011 (down from 77.1% in FY 2010), while audits conducted face-to-face by revenue agents were only 25% of the total, albeit representing an increase from the 21.7% level in FY 2010. Business returns and higher-income individuals are more likely to experience an audit by a revenue agent; while correspondence audits are generally single-issue audits, a revenue agent is likely to explore other issues "while he or she is there."

Examination coverage: individuals

The following audit statistics taken from the FY 2011 Data Book (and contrasted with FY 2010 Data Book stats) show an increase in the audit rate especially in proportion to adjusted gross income (AGI) level:

• No AGI: 3.42% (3.19% in 2010)
• Under $25K: 1.22% (1.18% in 2010)
• $25K-$50K: 0.73% (0.73% in 2010)
• $50K-$75K: 0.83% (0.78% in 2010)
• $75K-$100K: 0.82% (0.64% in 2010)
• $100K-$200K: 1.00% (0.71% in 2010)
• $200K-$500K: 2.66% (1.92% in 2010)
• $500K-$1M: 5.38% (3.37% in 2010)
• $1M-$5M: 11.80% (6.67% in 2010)
• $5M-$10M: 20.75% (11.55% in 2010)
• $10M and over: 29.93% (18.38% in 2010)

Examination coverage: business returns

For individual income tax returns that include business income (other than farm returns), the 2011 audit rate statistics based upon business income (total gross receipts) reveals the IRS's recognition that audits of small business returns yield proportionately higher deficiency amounts:

• Gross receipts under $25K: 1.3% (1.2% in 2010)
• Gross receipts $25K to $100K: 2.9% (2.5% in 2010)
• Gross receipts $100K to $200K: 4.3% (4.7% in 2010)
• Gross receipts over $200K: 3.8% (3.3% in 2010)

The difference in audit rates between returns with and without business income, as measured by total positive income of at least $200K and under $1M provide further evidence of the IRS's tendency toward auditing business returns: 3.6% for returns with business income versus 3.2% without in FY 2011 (2.9% versus 2.5% in FY 2010).

Corporate/other returns

The audit rates for corporations are consistent with the deficiency experience that the IRS has had examining corporations of varying sizes. Some selected audit rates include:

• For small corporations showing total assets of $250K to $1M, the audit rate for FY 2011 was 1.6% (1.4% in 2010); $1M to $5 million, the rate was 1.9% (1.7% in 2010), and for $5M to $10M, the rate was 2.6% (3% in 2010).
• For larger corporations showing total assets of $10M-$50M, the audit rate was 13.3% (13.4% in 2010) in contrast to those at the top end with total assets from $5B to $20B (50.5% (45.3% in 2010)).
• For S corporations and partnerships, the overall audit rate was 0.4% (same as in 2010), in contrast to an overall 1.5% rate for corporations (1.4% in 2010).

Everybody knows that tax deductions aren't allowed without proof in the form of documentation. What records are needed to "prove it" to the IRS vary depending upon the type of deduction that you may want to claim. Some documentation cannot be collected "after the fact," whether it takes place a few months after an expense is incurred or later, when you are audited by the IRS. This article reviews some of those deductions for which the IRS requires you to generate certain records either contemporaneously as the expense is being incurred, or at least no later than when you file your return. We also highlight several deductions for which contemporaneous documentation, although not strictly required, is extremely helpful in making your case before the IRS on an audit.

Everybody knows that tax deductions aren’t allowed without proof in the form of documentation.  What records are needed to “prove it” to the IRS vary depending upon the type of deduction that you may want to claim.  Some documentation cannot be collected “after the fact,” whether it takes place a few months after an expense is incurred or later, when you are audited by the IRS.  This article reviews some of those deductions for which the IRS requires you to generate certain records either contemporaneously as the expense is being incurred, or at least no later than when you file your return.  We also highlight several deductions for which contemporaneous documentation, although not strictly required, is extremely helpful in making your case before the IRS on an audit.

Charitable contributions.  For cash contributions (including checks and other monetary gifts), the donor must retain a bank record or a written acknowledgment from the charitable organization. A cash contribution of $250 or more must be substantiated with a contemporaneous written acknowledgment from the donee.  “Contemporaneous” for this purpose is defined as obtaining an acknowledgment before you file your return.  So save those letters from the charity, especially for your larger donations.

Tip records.  A taxpayer receiving tips must keep an accurate and contemporaneous record of the tip income.  Employees receiving tips must also report the correct amount to their employers.  The necessary record can be in the form of a diary, log or worksheet and should be made at or near the time the income is received.

Wagering losses.  Gamblers need to substantiate their losses. The IRS usually accepts a regularly maintained diary or similar record (such as summary records and loss schedules) as adequate substantiation, provided it is supplemented by verifiable documentation.  The diary should identify the gambling establishment and the date and type of wager, as well as amounts won and lost. Verifiable documentation can include wagering tickets, canceled checks, credit card records, and withdrawal slips from banks.

Vehicle mileage log.  A taxpayer can deduct a standard mileage rate for business, charitable or medical use of a vehicle.  If the car is also used for personal purposes, the taxpayer should keep a contemporaneous mileage log, especially for business use.  If the taxpayer wants to deduct actual expenses for business use of a car also used for personal purposes, the taxpayer has to allocate costs between the business and personal use, based on miles driven for each.

Material participation in business activity.  Taxpayers that materially participate in a business generally can deduct business losses against other income.  Otherwise, they can only deduct losses against passive income.  An individual’s participation in an activity may be established by any reasonable means.  Contemporaneous time reports, logs, or similar documents are not required but can be particularly helpful to document material participation.  To identify services performed and the hours spent on the services, records may be established using appointment books, calendars, or narrative summaries.

Hobby loss.  Taxpayers who do not engage conduct an activity with a sufficient profit motive may be considered to engage in a hobby and will not be able to deduct losses from the activity against other income.  Maintaining accurate books and records can itself be an indication of a profit motive.  Moreover, the time and activities devoted to a particular business can be essential to demonstrate that the business has a profit motive.  Contemporaneous records can be an important indicator.

Travel and entertainment.  Expenses for travel and entertainment are subject to strict substantiation requirements. Taxpayers should maintain records of the amount spent, the time and place of the activity, its business purpose, and the business relationship of the person being entertained. Contemporaneous records are particularly helpful.