Final regulations clarify the definition of "real property" that qualifies for a like-kind exchange, including incidental personal property. Under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA, P.L. 115-97), like-kind exchanges occurring after 2017 are limited to real property used in a trade or business or for investment.

Final regulations clarify the definition of "real property" that qualifies for a like-kind exchange, including incidental personal property. Under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA, P.L. 115-97), like-kind exchanges occurring after 2017 are limited to real property used in a trade or business or for investment.

The final regulations largely adopt regulations that were proposed in June ( NPRM REG-117589-18). However, they also:

• add a " state or local law" test to define real property; and
• reject the “purpose and use” test in the proposed regulations.

In addition, the final regulations classify cooperative housing corporation stock and land development rights as real property. The final regulations also provide that a license, permit, or other similar right is generally real property if it is (i) solely for the use, enjoyment, or occupation of land or an inherently permanent structure; and (ii) in the nature of a leasehold, an easement, or a similar right.

General Definition
Under the final regulations, property is classified as "real property" for like-kind exchange purposes if, on the date it is transferred in the exchange, the property is real property under the law of the state or local jurisdiction in which it is located. The proposed regulations had limited this “state or local law” test to shares in a mutual ditch, reservoir, or irrigation company.

However, the final regulations also clarify that real property that was ineligible for a like-kind exchange before the TCJA remains ineligible. For example, intangible assets that could not be like-kind property before the TCJA (such as stocks, securities, and partnership interests) remain ineligible regardless of how they are characterized under state or local law.

Accordingly, under the final regulations, property is real property if it is:

• classified as real property under state or local law;
• specifically listed as real property in the final regulations; or
• considered real property based on all of the facts and circumstances, under factors provided in the regulations.

These tests mean that property that is not real property under state or local law might still be real property for like-kind exchange purposes if it satisfies the second or third test.

Types of Real Property
Under both the proposed and final regulations, real property for a like-kind exchange is:

• land and improvements to land;
• unsevered crops and other natural products of land; and
• water and air space superjacent to land.

Under both the proposed and final regulations, improvements to land include inherently permanent structures, and the structural components of inherently permanent structures. Each distinct asset must be analyzed separately to determine if it is land, an inherently permanent structure, or a structural component of an inherently permanent structure. The regulations identify several specific items, assets and systems as distinct assets, and provide factors for identifying other distinct assets.

The final regulations also:

• incorporate the language provided in Reg. §1.856-10(d)(2)(i) to provide additional clarity regarding the meaning of "permanently affixed;"
• modify the example in the proposed regulations concerning offshore drilling platforms; and
• clarify that the distinct asset rule applies only to determine whether property is real property, but does not affect the application of the three-property rule for identifying properties in a deferred exchange.

"Purpose or Use" Test
The proposed regulations would have imposed a "purpose or use" test on both tangible and intangible property. Under this test, neither tangible nor intangible property was real property if it contributed to the production of income unrelated to the use or occupancy of space.

The final regulations eliminate the purpose and use test for both tangible and intangible property. Consequently, tangible property is generally an inherently permanent structure—and, thus, real property—if it is permanently affixed to real property and will ordinarily remain affixed for an indefinite period of time. A structural component likewise is real property if it is integrated into an inherently permanent structure. Accordingly, items of machinery and equipment are real property if they comprise an inherently permanent structure or a structural component, or if they are real property under the state or local law test—irrespective of the purpose or use of the items or whether they contribute to the production of income.

Similarly, whether intangible property produces or contributes to the production of income is not considered in determining whether intangible property is real property for like-kind exchange purposes. However, the purpose of the intangible property remains relevant to the determination of whether the property is real property.

Incidental Personal Property
The incidental property rule in the proposed regulations provided that, for exchanges involving a qualified intermediary, personal property that is incidental to replacement real property (incidental personal property) is disregarded in determining whether a taxpayer’s rights to receive, pledge, borrow, or otherwise obtain the benefits of money or non-like-kind property held by the qualified intermediary are expressly limited as provided in Reg. §1.1031(k)-1(g)(6).

Personal property is incidental to real property acquired in an exchange if (i) in standard commercial transactions, the personal property is typically transferred together with the real property, and (ii) the aggregate fair market value of the incidental personal property transferred with the real property does not exceed 15 percent of the aggregate fair market value of the replacement real property (15-percent limitation).

This final regulations adopt these rules with some minor modifications to improve clarity and readability. For example, the final regulations clarify that the receipt of incidental personal property results in taxable gain; and the 15-percent limitation compares the value of all of the incidental properties to the value of all of the replacement real properties acquired in the same exchange.

Effective Dates
The final regulations apply to exchanges beginning after the date they are published as final in the Federal Register. However, a taxpayer may also rely on the proposed regulations published in the Federal Register on June 12, 2020, if followed consistently and in their entirety, for exchanges of real property beginning after December 31, 2017, and before the publication date of the final regulations. In addition, conforming changes to the bonus depreciation rules apply to tax years beginning after the final regulations are published.

The IRS has released rulings concerning deductions for eligible Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan expenses.

The IRS has released rulings concerning deductions for eligible Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan expenses. The rulings:

• deny a deduction if the taxpayer has not yet applied for PPP loan forgiveness, but expects the loan to be forgiven; and
• provide a safe harbor for deducting expenses if PPP loan forgiveness is denied or the taxpayer does not apply for forgiveness.

Background
In response to the COVID-19 (coronavirus) crisis, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) expanded Section 7(a) of the Small Business Act for certain loans made from February 15, 2020, through August 8, 2020 (PPP loans). An eligible PPP loan recipient may have the debt on a covered loan forgiven, and the cancelled debt will be excluded from gross income. To prevent double tax benefits, under Reg. §1.265-1, taxpayers cannot deduct expenses allocable to income that is either wholly excluded from gross income or wholly exempt from tax.

The IRS previously determined that businesses whose PPP loans are forgiven cannot deduct business expenses paid for by the loan ( Notice 2020-32, I.R.B. 2020-21, 837). The new guidance expands on the previous guidance, but provides a safe harbor for taxpayers whose loans are not forgiven.

No Business Deduction
In Rev. Rul. 2020-27, the IRS amplifies guidance in Notice 2020-32. A taxpayer that received a covered PPP loan and paid or incurred certain otherwise deductible expenses may not deduct those expenses in the tax year in which the expenses were paid or incurred if, at the end of the tax year, the taxpayer reasonably expects to receive forgiveness of the covered loan on the basis of the expenses it paid or accrued during the covered period. This is the case even if the taxpayer has not applied for forgiveness by the end of the tax year.

Safe Harbor
In Rev. Proc. 2020-51, the IRS provides a safe harbor allowing taxpayers to claim a deduction in the tax year beginning or ending in 2020 for certain otherwise deductible eligible expenses if:

• the eligible expenses are paid or incurred during the taxpayer’s 2020 tax year;
• the taxpayer receives a PPP covered loan that, at the end of the taxpayer’s 2020 tax year, the taxpayer expects to be forgiven in a subsequent tax year; and
• in a subsequent tax year, the taxpayer’s request for forgiveness of the covered loan is denied, in whole or in part, or the taxpayer decides never to request forgiveness of the covered loan.

A taxpayer may be able to deduct some or all of the eligible expenses on, as applicable:

• a timely (including extensions) original income tax return or information return for the 2020 tax year;
• an amended return or an administrative adjustment request (AAR) under Code Sec. 6227 for the 2020 tax year; or
• a timely (including extensions) original income tax return or information return for the subsequent tax year.

Applying Safe Harbor
To apply the safe harbor, a taxpayer attaches a statement titled "Revenue Procedure 2020-51 Statement" to the return on which the taxpayer deducts the expenses. The statement must include:

• the taxpayer’s name, address, and social security number or employer identification number;
• a statement specifying whether the taxpayer is an eligible taxpayer under either section 3.01 or section 3.02 of Revenue Procedure 2020-51;
• a statement that the taxpayer is applying section 4.01 or section 4.02 of Revenue Procedure 2020-51;
• the amount and date of disbursement of the taxpayer’s covered PPP loan;
• the total amount of covered loan forgiveness that the taxpayer was denied or decided to no longer seek;
• the date the taxpayer was denied or decided to no longer seek covered loan forgiveness; and
• the total amount of eligible expenses and non-deducted eligible expenses that are reported on the return.

The IRS has issued final regulations under Code Sec. 274 relating to the elimination of the employer deduction of for transportation and commuting fringe benefits by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act ( P.L. 115-97), effective for amounts paid or incurred after December 31, 2017. The final regulations address the disallowance of a deduction for the expense of any qualified transportation fringe (QTF) provided to an employee of the taxpayer. Guidance and methodologies are provided to determine the amount of QTF parking expenses that is nondeductible. The final regulations also address the disallowance of the deduction for expenses of transportation and commuting between an employee’s residence and place of employment.

The IRS has issued final regulations under Code Sec. 274 relating to the elimination of the employer deduction of for transportation and commuting fringe benefits by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act ( P.L. 115-97), effective for amounts paid or incurred after December 31, 2017. The final regulations address the disallowance of a deduction for the expense of any qualified transportation fringe (QTF) provided to an employee of the taxpayer. Guidance and methodologies are provided to determine the amount of QTF parking expenses that is nondeductible. The final regulations also address the disallowance of the deduction for expenses of transportation and commuting between an employee’s residence and place of employment.

The final regulations adopt earlier proposed regulations with a few minor modifications in response to public comments ( REG-119307-19). Pending issuance of these final regulations, taxpayers had been allowed to apply to proposed regulations or guidance issued in Notice 2018-99, I.R.B. 2018-52, 1067. Notice 2018-99 is obsoleted on the publication date of the final regulations.

The final regulations clarify an exception for parking spaces made available to the general public to provide that parking spaces used to park vehicles owned by members of the general public while the vehicle awaits repair or service are treated as provided to the general public.

The category of parking spaces for inventory or which are otherwise unusable by employees is clarified to provide that such spaces may also not be usable by the general public. In addition, taxpayers will be allowed to use any reasonable method to determine the number of inventory/unusable spaces in a parking facility.

The definition of "peak demand period" for purposes of determining the primary use of a parking facility is modified to cover situations where a taxpayer is affected by a federally declared disaster.

The final regulations also provide that taxpayers using the cost per parking space methodology for determining the disallowance for parking facilities may calculate the cost per space on a monthly basis.

Effective Date
The final regulations apply to tax years beginning on or after the date of publication in the Federal Register. However, taxpayers can choose to apply the regulations to tax years ending after December 31, 2019.

As part of a series of reminders, the IRS has urged taxpayers get ready for the upcoming tax filing season. A special page ( https://www.irs.gov/individuals/steps-to-take-now-to-get-a-jump-on-next-years-taxes), updated and available on the IRS website, outlines steps taxpayers can take now to make tax filing easier in 2021.

As part of a series of reminders, the IRS has urged taxpayers get ready for the upcoming tax filing season. A special page ( https://www.irs.gov/individuals/steps-to-take-now-to-get-a-jump-on-next-years-taxes), updated and available on the IRS website, outlines steps taxpayers can take now to make tax filing easier in 2021.

Taxpayers receiving substantial amounts of non-wage income like self-employment income, investment income, taxable Social Security benefits and, in some instances, pension and annuity income, should make quarterly estimated tax payments. The last payment for 2020 is due on January 15, 2021. Payment options can be found at IRS.gov/payments. For more information, the IRS encourages taxpayers to review Pub. 5348, Get Ready to File, and Pub. 5349, Year-Round Tax Planning is for Everyone.

Income
Most income is taxable, so taxpayers should gather income documents such as Forms W-2 from employers, Forms 1099 from banks and other payers, and records of virtual currencies or other income. Other income includes unemployment income, refund interest and income from the gig economy.

Forms and Notices
Beginning in 2020, individuals may receive Form 1099-NEC, Nonemployee Compensation, rather than Form 1099-MISC, Miscellaneous Income, if they performed certain services for and received payments from a business. The IRS recommends reviewing the Instructions for Form 1099-MISC and Form 1099-NEC to ensure clients are filing the appropriate form and are aware of this change.

Taxpayers may also need Notice 1444, Economic Impact Payment, which shows how much of a payment they received in 2020. This amount is needed to calculate any Recovery Rebate Credit they may be eligible for when they file their federal income tax return in 2021. People who did not receive an Economic Impact Payment in 2020 may qualify for the Recovery Rebate Credit when they file their 2020 taxes in 2021.

Additional Information
To see information from the most recently filed tax return and recent payments, taxpayers can sign up to view account information online. Taxpayers should notify the IRS of address changes and notify the Social Security Administration of a legal name change to avoid delays in tax return processing.

This year marks the 5th Annual National Tax Security Awareness Week-a collaboration by the IRS, state tax agencies and the tax industry. The IRS and the Security Summit partners have issued warnings to all taxpayers and tax professionals to beware of scams and identity theft schemes by criminals taking advantage of the combination of holiday shopping, the approaching tax season and coronavirus concerns. The 5th Annual National Tax Security Awareness Week coincided with Cyber Monday, the traditional start of the online holiday shopping season.

This year marks the 5th Annual National Tax Security Awareness Week-a collaboration by the IRS, state tax agencies and the tax industry. The IRS and the Security Summit partners have issued warnings to all taxpayers and tax professionals to beware of scams and identity theft schemes by criminals taking advantage of the combination of holiday shopping, the approaching tax season and coronavirus concerns. The 5th Annual National Tax Security Awareness Week coincided with Cyber Monday, the traditional start of the online holiday shopping season.

The following are a few basic steps which taxpayers and tax professionals should remember during the holidays and as the 2021 tax season approaches:

• use an updated security software for computers and mobile phones;
• the purchased anti-virus software must have a feature to stop malware and a firewall that can prevent intrusions;
• don't open links or attachments on suspicious emails because this year, fraud scams related to COVID-19 and the Economic Impact Payment are common;
• use strong and unique passwords for online accounts;
• use multi-factor authentication whenever possible which prevents thieves from easily hacking accounts;
• shop at sites where the web address begins with "https" and look for the "padlock" icon in the browser window;
• don't shop on unsecured public Wi-Fi in places like a mall;
• secure home Wi-Fis with a password;
• back up files on computers and mobile phones; and
• consider creating a virtual private network to securely connect to your workplace if working from home.

In addition, taxpayers can check out security recommendations for their specific mobile phone by reviewing the Federal Communications Commission's Smartphone Security Checker. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has issued warnings about fraud and scams related to COVID-19 schemes, anti-body testing, healthcare fraud, cryptocurrency fraud and others. COVID-related fraud complaints can be filed at the National Center for Disaster Fraud. Moreover, the Federal Trade Commission also has issued alerts about fraudulent emails claiming to be from the Centers for Disease Control or the World Health Organization. Taxpayers can keep atop the latest scam information and report COVID-related scams at www.FTC.gov/coronavirus.

The IRS has issued proposed regulations for the centralized partnership audit regime...

NPRM REG-123652-18

The IRS has issued proposed regulations for the centralized partnership audit regime that:

• clarify that a partnership with a QSub partner is not eligible to elect out of the centralized audit regime;
• add three new types of “special enforcement matters” and modify existing rules;
• modify existing guidance and regulations on push out elections and imputed adjustments; and
• clarify rules on partnerships that cease to exist.

The regulations are generally proposed to apply to partnership tax years ending after November 20, 2020, and to examinations and investigations beginning after the date the regs are finalized. However, the new special enforcement matters category for partnership-related items underlying non-partnership-related items is proposed to apply to partnership tax years beginning after December 20, 2018. In addition, the IRS and a partner could agree to apply any part of the proposed regulations governing special enforcement matters to any tax year of the partner that corresponds to a partnership tax year that is subject to the centralized partnership audit regime.

Centralized Audit Regime
The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 ( P.L. 114-74) replaced the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) ( P.L. 97-248) partnership procedures with a centralized partnership audit regime for making partnership adjustments and tax determinations, assessments and collections at the partnership level. These changes were further amended by the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (PATH Act) ( P.L. 114-113), and the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 2018 (TTCA) ( P.L. 115-141). The centralized audit regime, as amended, generally applies to returns filed for partnership tax years beginning after December 31, 2017.

Election Out
A partnership with no more than 100 partners may generally elect out of the centralized audit regime if all of the partners are eligible partners. As predicted in Notice 2019-06, I.R.B. 2019-03, 353, the proposed regulations would provide that a qualified subchapter S subsidiary (QSub) is not an eligible partner; thus, a partnership with a QSub partner could not elect out of the centralized audit regime.

Special Enforcement Matters
The IRS may exempt “special enforcement matters” from the centralized audit regime. There are currently six categories of special enforcement matters:

• failures to comply with the requirements for a partnership-partner or S corporation partner to furnish statements or compute and pay an imputed underpayment;
• assessments relating to termination assessments of income tax or jeopardy assessments of income, estate, gift, and certain excise taxes;
• criminal investigations;
• indirect methods of proof of income;
• foreign partners or partnerships;
• other matters identified in IRS regulations.

The proposed regs would add three new types of special enforcement matters:

• partnership-related items underlying non-partnership-related items;
• controlled partnerships and extensions of the partner’s period of limitations; and
• penalties and taxes imposed on the partnership under chapter 1.

The proposed regs would also require the IRS to provide written notice of most special enforcement matters to taxpayers to whom the adjustments are being made.

The proposed regs would clarify that the IRS could adjust partnership-level items for a partner or indirect partner without regard to the centralized audit regime if the adjustment relates to termination and jeopardy assessments, if the partner is under criminal investigation, or if the adjustment is based on an indirect method of proof of income.

However, the proposed regs would also provide that the special enforcement matter rules would not apply to the extent the partner could demonstrate that adjustments to partnership-related items in the deficiency or an adjustment by the IRS were:

• previously taken into account under the centralized audit regime by the person being examined; or
• included in an imputed underpayment paid by a partnership (or pass-through partner) for any tax year in which the partner was a reviewed year partner or indirect partner, but only if the amount included in the deficiency or adjustment exceeds the amount reported by the partnership to the partner that was either reported by the partner or indirect partner or is otherwise included in the deficiency or adjustment determined by the IRS.

Push Out Election, Imputed Underpayments
The partnership adjustment rules generally do not apply to a partnership that makes a "push out" election to push the adjustment out to the partners. However, the partnership must pay any chapter 1 taxes, penalties, additions to tax, and additional amounts or the amount of any adjustment to an imputed underpayment. Thus, there must be a mechanism for including these amounts in the imputed underpayment and accounting for these amounts.

In calculating an imputed underpayment, the proposed regs would generally include any adjustments to the partnership’s chapter 1 liabilities in the credit grouping and treat them similarly to credit adjustments. Adjustments that do not result in an imputed underpayment generally could increase or decrease non-separately stated income or loss, as appropriate, depending on whether the adjustment is to an item of income or loss. The proposed regs would also treat a decrease in a chapter 1 liability as a negative adjustment that normally does not result in an imputed underpayment if: (1) the net negative adjustment is to a credit, unless the IRS determines to have it offset the imputed underpayment; or (2) the imputed underpayment is zero or less than zero.

Under existing regs for calculating an imputed underpayment, an adjustment to a non-income item that is related to, or results from, an adjustment to an item of income, gain, loss, deduction, or credit is generally treated as zero, unless the IRS determines that the adjustment should be included in the imputed underpayment. The proposed regs would clarify this rule and extend it to persons other than the IRS. Thus, a partnership that files an administrative adjustment request (AAR) could treat an adjustment to a non-income item as zero if the adjustment is related to, and the effect is reflected in, an adjustment to an item of income, gain, loss, deduction, or credit (unless the IRS subsequently determines in an AAR examination that both adjustments should be included in the calculation of the imputed underpayment).

A partnership would take into account adjustments to non-income items in the adjustment year by adjusting the item on its adjustment year return to be consistent with the adjustment. This would apply only to the extent the item would appear on the adjustment year return without regard to the adjustment. If the item already appeared on the partnership’s adjustment year return as a non-income item, or appeared as a non-income item on any return of the partnership for a tax year between the reviewed year and the adjustment year, the partnership does not create a new item on the partnership’s adjustment year return.

A passthrough partner that is paying an amount as part of an amended return submitted as part of a request to modify an imputed underpayment would take into account any adjustments that do not result in an imputed underpayment in the partners’ tax year that includes the date the payment is made. This provision, however, would not apply if no payment is made by the partnership because no payment is required.

Partnership Ceases to Exist
If a partnership ceases to exist before the partnership adjustments take effect, the adjustments are taken into account by the former partners of the partnership. The IRS may assess a former partner for that partner’s proportionate share of any amounts owed by the partnership under the centralized partnership audit regime. The proposed regs would clarify that a partnership adjustment takes effect when the adjustments become finally determined; that is, when the partnership and IRS enter into a settlement agreement regarding the adjustment; or, for adjustments reflected in an AAR, when the AAR is filed. The proposed regs would also make conforming changes to existing regs:

• A partnership ceases to exist if the IRS determines that the partnership does not have the ability to pay in full any amount that the partnership may become liable for under the centralized partnership audit regime.
• Existing regs that describe when the IRS will not determine that a partnership ceases to exist would be removed.
• Statements must be furnished to the former partners and filed with the IRS no later than 60 days after the later of the date the IRS notifies the partnership that it has ceased to exist or the date the adjustments take effect.

The proposed regs would also modify the definition of "former partners" to be partners of the partnership during the last tax year for which a partnership return or AAR was filed, or the most recent persons determined to be the partners in a final determination, such as a final court decision, defaulted notice of final partnership adjustment (FPA), or settlement agreement.

Comments Requested
Comments are requested on all aspects of the proposed regulations by January 22, 2021. The IRS strongly encourages commenters to submit comments electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov (indicate IRS and REG-123652-18). Comments submitted on paper will be considered to the extent practicable.

The IRS has issued final regulations with guidance on how a tax-exempt organization can determine whether it has more than one unrelated trade or business, how it should identify its separate trades and businesses, and how to separately calculate unrelated business taxable income (UBTI) for each trade or business – often referred to as "silo" rules. Since 2018, under provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), the loss from one unrelated trade or business may not offset the income from another, separate trade or business. Congress did not provide detailed methods of determining when unrelated businesses are "separate" for purposes of calculating UBTI.

The IRS has issued final regulations with guidance on how a tax-exempt organization can determine whether it has more than one unrelated trade or business, how it should identify its separate trades and businesses, and how to separately calculate unrelated business taxable income (UBTI) for each trade or business – often referred to as "silo" rules. Since 2018, under provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), the loss from one unrelated trade or business may not offset the income from another, separate trade or business. Congress did not provide detailed methods of determining when unrelated businesses are "separate" for purposes of calculating UBTI.

On April 24, 2020, the IRS published a notice of proposed rulemaking ( REG-106864-18) that proposed guidance on how an exempt organization determines if it has more than one unrelated trade or business and, if so, how the exempt organization calculates UBTI under Code Sec. 512(a)(6). The final regulations substantially adopt the proposed regulations issued earlier this year, with modifications.

Separate Trades or Businesses
The proposed regulations suggested using the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) six-digit codes for determining what constitutes separate trades or businesses. Notice 2018-67, I.R.B. 2018-36, 409, permitted tax-exempt organizations to rely on these codes. The first two digits of the code designate the economic sector of the business. The proposed guidance provided that organizations could make that determination using just the first two digits of the code, which divides businesses into 20 categories, for this purpose.

The proposed regulations provided that, once an organization has identified a separate unrelated trade or business using a particular NAICS two-digit code, the it could only change the two-digit code describing that separate unrelated trade or business if two specific requirements were met. The final regulations remove the restriction on changing NAICS two-digit codes, and instead require an exempt organization that changes the identification of a separate unrelated trade or business to report the change in the tax year of the change in accordance with forms and instructions.

QPIs
For exempt organizations, the activities of a partnership are generally considered the activities of the exempt organization partners. Code Sec. 512(c) provides that if a trade or business regularly carried on by a partnership of which an exempt organization is a member is an unrelated trade or business with respect to such organization, that organization must include its share of the gross income of the partnership in UBTI.

The proposed regulations provided that an exempt organization’s partnership interest is a "qualifying partnership interest" (QPI) if it meets the requirements of the de minimis test by directly or indirectly holding no more than two percent of the profits interest and no more than two percent of the capital interest. For administrative convenience, the de minimis test allows certain partnership investments to be treated as an investment activity and aggregated with other investment activities. Additionally, the proposed regulations permitted the aggregation of any QPI with all other QPIs, resulting in an aggregate group of QPIs.

Once an organization designates a partnership interest as a QPI (in accordance with forms and instructions), it cannot thereafter identify the trades or businesses conducted by the partnership that are unrelated trades or businesses with respect to the exempt organization using NAICS two-digit codes unless and until the partnership interest is no longer a QPI.

A change in an exempt organization’s percentage interest in a partnership that is due entirely to the actions of other partners may present significant difficulties for the exempt organization. Requiring the interest to be removed from the exempt organization’s investment activities in one year but potentially included as a QPI in the next would create further administrative difficulty. Therefore, the final regulations adopt a grace period that permits a partnership interest to be treated as meeting the requirements of the de minimis test or the participation test, respectively, in the exempt organization’s prior tax year if certain requirements are met. This grace period will allow an exempt organization to treat such interest as a QPI in the tax year that such change occurs, but the organization will need to reduce its percentage interest before the end of the following tax year to meet the requirements of either the de minimis test or the participation test in that succeeding tax year for the partnership interest to remain a QPI.

The IRS has modified Rev. Proc. 2007-32, I.R.B. 2007-22, 1322, to provide that the term of a Gaming Industry Tip Compliance Agreement (GITCA) is generally five years, and the renewal term of a GITCA is extended from three years to a term of up to five years. A GITCA executed under Rev. Proc. 2003-35, 2003-1 CB 919 and Rev. Proc. 2007-32 will remain in effect until the expiration date set forth in that agreement, unless modified by the renewal of a GITCA under section 4.04 of Rev. Proc. 2007-32 (as modified by section 3 of this revenue procedure).

The IRS has modified Rev. Proc. 2007-32, I.R.B. 2007-22, 1322, to provide that the term of a Gaming Industry Tip Compliance Agreement (GITCA) is generally five years, and the renewal term of a GITCA is extended from three years to a term of up to five years. A GITCA executed under Rev. Proc. 2003-35, 2003-1 CB 919 and Rev. Proc. 2007-32 will remain in effect until the expiration date set forth in that agreement, unless modified by the renewal of a GITCA under section 4.04 of Rev. Proc. 2007-32 (as modified by section 3 of this revenue procedure).

The modified provisions generally provide as follows:

• In general, a GITCA shall be for a term of five years. For new properties and properties that do not have a prior agreement with the IRS, however, the initial term of the agreement may be for a shorter period.
• A GITCA may be renewed for additional terms of up to five years, in accordance with Section IX of the model GITCA. Beginning not later than six months before the termination date of a GITCA, the IRS and the employer must begin discussions as to any appropriate revisions to the agreement, including any appropriate revisions to the tip rates described in Section VIII of the model GITCA. If the IRS and the employer have not reached final agreement on the terms and conditions of a renewal agreement, the parties may mutually agree to extend the existing agreement for an appropriate time to finalize and execute a renewal agreement.

Effective Date
This revenue procedure is effective November 23, 2020.

Final regulations issued by the Treasury and IRS coordinate the extraordinary disposition rule that applies with respect to the Code Sec. 245A dividends received deduction and the disqualified basis rule under the Code Sec. 951A global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI) regime. Information reporting rules are also finalized.

Final regulations issued by the Treasury and IRS coordinate the extraordinary disposition rule that applies with respect to the Code Sec. 245A dividends received deduction and the disqualified basis rule under the Code Sec. 951A global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI) regime. Information reporting rules are also finalized.

Extraordinary Disposition Rule and GILTI Disqualified Basis Rule
The extraordinary disposition rule (EDR) in Reg. §1.245A-5 and the GILTI disqualified basis rule (DBR) in Reg. §1.951A-2(c)(5) both address the disqualified period that results from the differences between dates for which the transition tax under Code Sec. 965 and the GILTI rules apply. GILTI applies to calendar year controlled foreign corporations (CFCs) on January 1, 2018. A fiscal year CFC may have a period from January 1, 2018, until the beginning of its first tax year in 2018 (the disqualified period) in which it can generate income subject to neither the transition tax under Code Sec. 965 nor GILTI.

The extraordinary disposition rule limits the ability to claim the Code Sec. 245A deduction for certain earnings and profits generated during the disqualified period. Specifically, Reg. §1.245A-5 provides that the deduction is limited for dividends paid out of an extraordinary disposition account. Final regulations issued under GILTI address fair market basis generated as a result of assets transferred to related CFCs during the disqualified period (disqualified basis). Reg. §1.951A-2(c)(5) allocates deductions or losses attributable to disqualified basis to residual CFC income, such as income other than tested income, subpart F income, or effectively connected taxable income. As a result, the deductions or losses will not reduce the CFC’s income subject to U.S. tax.

Coordination Rules
The coordination rules are necessary to prevent excess taxation of a Code Sec. 245A shareholder. Excess taxation can occur because the earnings and profits subject to the extraordinary disposition rule and the basis to which the disqualified basis rule applies are generally a function of a single amount of gain.

Under the coordination rules, to the extent that the Code Sec. 245A deduction is limited with respect to distributions out of an extraordinary disposition account, a corresponding amount of disqualified basis attributable to the property that generated that extraordinary disposition account through an extraordinary disposition is converted to basis that is not subject to the disqualified basis rule. The rule is referred to as the disqualified basis (DQB) reduction rule.

A prior extraordinary disposition amount is also covered under this rule. A prior extraordinary disposition amount generally represents the extraordinary disposition of earnings and profits that have become subject to U.S. tax as to a Code Sec. 245A shareholder other than by direct application of the extraordinary disposition rule (e.g., inclusions as a result of investment in U.S. property under Code Sec. 956).

Separate coordination rules are provided, depending upon whether the application of the rule is in a simple or complex case.

Reporting Requirements
Every U.S. shareholder of a CFC that holds an item of property that has disqualified basis during an annual accounting period and files Form 5471 for that period must report information about the items of property with disqualified basis held by the CFC during the CFC’s accounting period, as required by Form 5471 and its instructions.

Additionally, information must be reported about the reduction to an extraordinary disposition account made pursuant to the regulations and reductions made to an item of specified property’s disqualified basis pursuant to the regulations during the corporation’s accounting period, as required by Form 5471 and its instructions.

Applicability Dates
The regulations apply to tax years of foreign corporations beginning on or after the date the regulations are published in the Federal Register, and to tax years of Code Sec. 245A shareholders in which or with which such tax years end. Taxpayers may choose to apply the regulations to years before the regulations apply.

Eleventh-hour votes in Congress in December renewed a package of tax extenders for 2014, created new savings accounts for individuals with disabilities, cut the IRS’ budget, and more. At the same time, the votes helped to set the stage for the 114th Congress that convenes this month. Republicans have majorities in the House and Senate and have indicated that taxes are one of the top items on their agenda for 2015.

Eleventh-hour votes in Congress in December renewed a package of tax extenders for 2014, created new savings accounts for individuals with disabilities, cut the IRS’ budget, and more. At the same time, the votes helped to set the stage for the 114th Congress that convenes this month. Republicans have majorities in the House and Senate and have indicated that taxes are one of the top items on their agenda for 2015.

Extenders

The Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014, signed into law by President Obama in December extends more than 50 individual, business and energy tax incentives retroactively to January 1, 2014. As a result, taxpayers can claim these incentives on their 2014 returns filed in 2015. The Act includes all of the popular incentives for individuals, such as the state and local sales tax deduction and higher education tuition deduction, as well as many business incentives, including the research tax credit, bonus depreciation and enhanced Code Sec. 179 expensing. A handful of extenders were not renewed, mostly targeted to energy efficiency. If you have any questions about the renewal of the extenders for 2014, please contact our office.

ABLE Act

As part of the extenders package, Congress approved the Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) Act of 2014. The Act establishes ABLE accounts for individuals with disabilities. Funds in ABLE accounts may be used for qualified expenses of persons with disabilities. To fund these accounts, the Act:

• Adjusts for inflation some civil tax penalties
• Authorizes the IRS to certify qualifying professional employer organizations
• Excludes dividends from controlled foreign corporations from the definition of personal holding company income
• Increases the IRS’ levy authority on payments to Medicare providers
• Raises the Inland Waterways Trust Fund financing rate

IRS budget

The IRS goes into the 2015 filing season with a reduced budget. The omnibus spending agreement, signed into law by President Obama on December 16, cuts the IRS’ fiscal year (FY) 2015 budget by some $345 million. The omnibus spending agreement also instructs the IRS to improve its response times in helping victims of identity theft and reduce refund fraud. In response to the budget cuts, IRS Commissioner John Koskinen said the agency will freeze hiring and take other steps to reduce expenses. Koskinen also cautioned that revenue collection and tax enforcement could be impaired by the budget cuts as the agency will have to make do with less. Taxpayer audits were singled out by Koskinen as one area where cutbacks could have a negative effect.

Affordable Care Act

Congress also clarified the status of so-called expatriate health plans under the Affordable Care Act. These plans cover very specific groups of people, including participants in a group health plan who are aliens residing outside the United States and U.S. nationals about whom there is a good faith expectation of being abroad, in connection with his or her employment, for at least 180 days in a 12-month period.

The omnibus spending agreement exempts expatriate health plans, employer sponsors of these plans, and insurance issuers providing coverage under these plans from the health care coverage requirements of the Affordable Care Act. Additionally, the omnibus spending agreement treats these plans as providing minimum essential coverage for purposes of the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate.

Multi-employer pension plans

The extenders package and the omnibus spending agreement amend the rules governing multi-employer pension plans. The provisions, supporters argued, are intended to shore-up many struggling plans. Opponents countered that the changes weaken protections for beneficiaries. The amendments to the multi-employer pension rules are very technical. Please contact our office for more details

114th Congress

The Tax Increase Prevention Act did not extend the extenders beyond 2014. As of January 1, 2015, they all expired again. During 2014, proposals to extend the incentives for two years or make them permanent were floated in Congress. The GOP-controlled House vote to make permanent bonus depreciation, enhanced Code Sec. 179 expensing and some charitable giving breaks, but these bills were not taken up by the Democratic-controlled Senate. This could change in the 114th Congress. The new leaders of the tax-writing committees, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, chair of the Senate Finance Committee, have both indicated their interest in addressing the extenders as part of comprehensive tax reform.

Any movement toward comprehensive tax reform will require cooperation between the White House and the Republican-controlled Congress. In December, President Obama said that he would be willing to work with Republicans on corporate tax reform but any decrease in the corporate tax rate would need to be paid for by revenue raisers elsewhere. The President also said that he wants to preserve and make permanent some temporary enhancements to individual tax breaks, such as the earned income credit. New Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., also said in December that he could work with the White House.

Please contact our office if you have any questions about the 2014 year-end legislation or the new Congress.

2014 was a notable year for tax developments on a number of fronts. Selecting the "top ten" tax developments for 2014 necessarily requires judgment calls based upon uniqueness, taxpayers affected, and forward-looking impact on 2015 and beyond. The following "top ten" list of 2014 tax developments is such a prioritization. Nevertheless, other 2014 developments may prove more significant to any particular client, depending upon circumstances. Please feel free to contact this office for a more customized look at the impact of 2014 developments upon your unique tax situation.

2014 was a notable year for tax developments on a number of fronts. Selecting the "top ten" tax developments for 2014 necessarily requires judgment calls based upon uniqueness, taxpayers affected, and forward-looking impact on 2015 and beyond. The following "top ten" list of 2014 tax developments is such a prioritization. Nevertheless, other 2014 developments may prove more significant to any particular client, depending upon circumstances. Please feel free to contact this office for a more customized look at the impact of 2014 developments upon your unique tax situation.

Passage of the Extenders Package

2014 was not a year for major tax legislation in Congress. In fact, Congress even failed to pass its usual two-year Extenders package, instead settling on a one-year retroactive extension to January 1, 2014. As one Senator put it, "This tax bill doesn't have the shelf life of a carton of eggs," referring to the fact that the 50-plus extenders provisions, signed by the President on December 19, 2014, expired again on January 1, 2015. Instead, it has been left to the 114^th Congress to debate the extension of these tax breaks in 2015 and beyond, and for taxpayers to guess what expenses in 2015 will again be entitled to a tax break. 

Affordable Care Act

In many ways, 2014 was a transition year for the Affordable Care Act. One of the most far-reaching requirements, the individual shared responsibility provision, took effect on January 1, 2014. Another key provision, the employer shared responsibility, was delayed (in 2013) to 2015. However, employer reporting under Code Sec. 6605 was not delayed. The IRS also issued guidance on the Code Sec. 36B premium assistance tax credit and other provisions of the Affordable Care Act. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court announced it would review a decision by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upholding IRS regulations on the Code Sec. 36B premium assistance tax credit, a critical component to making the Affordable Care Act viable nationwide.

International Compliance

The IRS and Treasury increased their focus on requirements that U.S. taxpayers report foreign income and assets. The government took the final steps to implement the requirements for U.S. taxpayers and foreign financial institutions to report foreign assets under the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). The government also tweaked its programs to induce U.S. taxpayers to report undisclosed income and assets from prior past years. At the same time, the IRS and the Department of Justice went to court to seek civil and criminal penalties, including jail time, against willful tax evaders.

Repair Regulations

In 2014, the IRS finished issuing the necessary guidance on the treatment of costs for tangible property under the sweeping so-called “repair” regulations, which impact most businesses. The most important development was the issuance of final regulations on the treatment of dispositions of tangible property under MACRS and under Code Sec. 168, including the identification of assets, the treatment of dispositions, and the computation of gain and loss, particularly in the context of general asset accounts (TD 9689). The IRS also issued several revenue procedures that granted automatic consent for taxpayers to change to the accounting methods allowed by the final regulations (including Rev. Proc. 2014-16 & 54).

IRS Operations

IRS Commissioner John Koskinen predicted a complex and challenging filing season due to cuts in the Service’s funding. Koskinen highlighted the Service’s having to do more with less because of reduced funding. In addition, the IRS is funded at $10.9 billion for FY 2015, which is $1.5 billion below the amount requested by the White House. The FY 2015 budget reduction "undercuts our ability to enforce the Tax Code," Koskinen said. "We will do everything we can to protect the integrity of the filing season." More budget cuts could cause "the wheels to start to fall off," he noted.

Net Investment Income (NII) Tax

Many higher-income individuals were surprised to learn the full impact of the net investment income (NII) tax on their overall tax liability only during the 2014 filing season when their 2013 returns were filed. Starting in 2013, taxpayers with qualifying income have been liable for the 3.8 percent net investment income (NII) tax. The threshold amounts for the NII tax are: $250,000 in the case of joint returns or a surviving spouse, $125,000 in the case of a married taxpayer filing a separate return, and $200,000 in any other case. Recent run ups in the financial markets, and the fact that the NII thresholds are not adjusted for inflation, have increased the need to implement strategies that can avoid or minimize the NII tax. Issues persist that reduce certainty surrounding NII tax liability, in particular determining how a taxpayer "materially participates" in an activity to the extent it is exempt from the NII tax.

Retirement Planning

A number of changes have been made during 2014 affecting IRAs and other qualified plans which, cumulatively, rise to the level of a “top tax development” for 2014:

• Notice 2014-54 now permits a distribution from a 401(k), 403(b) or 457(b) account to have the taxable and non-taxable portions of the distribution directed to separate accounts.  
• TD 9673 now permits IRA holders and defined contribution plan participants to obtain a “longevity” annuity to help insure that they will not outlive their required minimum distributions (RMDs).
• Notice 2014-66 now permits 401(k) plans to offer deferred annuities through target date funds (TDFs).
• Bobrow, TC Memo. 2014-21, held that, in contrast to the IRS guidance in Publication 590, a taxpayer is limited to one 60-day rollover per year for all IRA accounts under the tax code rather than one 60-day rollover per year for each IRA account. The IRS in Announcement 2014-32 stated that the new interpretation of the rollover rules would be applied to rollover distributions received on or after January 1, 2015.
• Clark v. Rameker, a 2014 Supreme Court decision, found that inherited IRA accounts were not retirement assets and therefore not subject to creditor protection under the Bankruptcy Code.

Identity Theft

Although clearly not confined to the area of federal tax, identity theft has been a major issue for both the IRS and taxpayers. In 2014, the IRS put new filters in place and took other measures to curb tax-related identity theft. The agency also worked with software developers, financial institutions and the prepaid debit card industry to combat identity theft. "We rejected 5.7 million suspicious returns last year that may have been tied to identity theft," IRS Commissioner Koskinen said. Nevertheless, few believe that the IRS has yet turned the tide.

Same-sex Marriage

After the Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act in Windsor, the IRS issued guidance in 2013 adopting a place of celebration approach to recognizing same-sex marriage. The IRS followed-up with additional guidance in 2014 that required employers to take note of Windsor with regard to workplace tax benefits. Notably, the IRS focused on what changes needed to be made to retirement plan benefits in light of Windsor.

Tax Reform

Although 2014 was clearly not the year for tax reform (despite some 2013 forecasts that it would be), the foundations for serious tax reform discussions were laid in 2013 and 2014, when Congressional hearings and studies took place. Looking ahead to 2015 and beyond, there is optimism that Congress will complete some form of tax reform in 2015 or 2016.

The major difference of opinion, however, surrounds whether or not the reform would only address corporate tax provisions or also include individual provisions. Corporate reform has been pushed into the spotlight lately both by the controversy surrounding corporate inversions in changing foreign headquarters and by the general concern that American international business competitiveness is lessened by high U.S. corporate tax rates. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., on the other hand has called for tackling comprehensive tax reform on both the business and individual side. His Tax Reform Bill of 2014 (HR 1) would make the Code "more effective and efficient," according to Camp, by getting rid of narrowly targeted provisions to lower tax rates across the board. "This will enable small and large businesses alike to expand operations, hire new workers, and increase benefits and take-home pay," he said.