Tax Cut and Jobs Act of 2017
On December 22, 2017, the Tax Cut and Jobs Act was signed into law, the first major tax reform in 31 years.
The IRS encouraged taxpayers to make essential preparations and be aware of significant changes that may affect their 2024 tax returns. The deadline for submitting Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Ta...
The IRS reminded taxpayers to choose the right tax professional to help them avoid tax-related identity theft and financial harm. Following are key tips for choosing a tax preparer:Look for a preparer...
The IRS provided six tips to help taxpayers file their 2024 tax returns more easily. Taxpayers should follow these steps for a smoother filing process:Gather all necessary tax paperwork and records to...
The IRS released the optional standard mileage rates for 2025. Most taxpayers may use these rates to compute deductible costs of operating vehicles for:business,medical, andcharitable purposesSome mem...
The IRS, in partnership with the Coalition Against Scam and Scheme Threats (CASST), has unveiled new initiatives for the 2025 tax filing season to counter scams targeting taxpayers and tax professio...
The IRS reminded disaster-area taxpayers that they have until February 3, 2025, to file their 2023 returns, in the entire states of Louisiana and Vermont, all of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands and...
The IRS has announced plans to issue automatic payments to eligible individuals who failed to claim the Recovery Rebate Credit on their 2021 tax returns. The credit, a refundable benefit for individ...
Nevada has amended its regulation on the deduction of obsolescence from the taxable value of property. In determining the amount of obsolescence to be deducted, the State Board and the county boards o...
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has announced that the mandatory beneficial ownership information (BOI) reporting requirement under the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) is back in effect. Because reporting companies may need additional time to comply with their BOI reporting obligations, FinCEN is generally extending the deadline 30 calendar days from February 19, 2025, for most companies.
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has announced that the mandatory beneficial ownership information (BOI) reporting requirement under the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) is back in effect. Because reporting companies may need additional time to comply with their BOI reporting obligations, FinCEN is generally extending the deadline 30 calendar days from February 19, 2025, for most companies.
FinCEN's announcement is based on the decision by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Tyler Division) to stay its prior nationwide injunction order against the reporting requirement (Smith v. U.S. Department of the Treasury, DC Tex., 6:24-cv-00336, Feb. 17, 2025). This district court stayed its prior order, pending appeal, in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent order to stay the nationwide injunction against the reporting requirement that had been ordered by a different federal district court in Texas (McHenry v. Texas Top Cop Shop, Inc., SCt, No. 24A653, Jan. 23, 2025).
Given this latest district court decision, the regulations implementing the BOI reporting requirements of the CTA are no longer stayed.
Updated Reporting Deadlines
Subject to any applicable court orders, BOI reporting is now mandatory, but FinCEN is providing additional time for companies to report:
- For most reporting companies, the extended deadline to file an initial, updated, and/or corrected BOI report is now March 21, 2025. FinCEN expects to provide an update before that date of any further modification of the deadline, recognizing that reporting companies may need additional time to comply.
- Reporting companies that were previously given a reporting deadline later than March 21, 2025, must file their initial BOI report by that later deadline. For example, if a company’s reporting deadline is in April 2025 because it qualifies for certain disaster relief extensions, it should follow the April deadline, not the March deadline.
Plaintiffs in National Small Business United v. Yellen, DC Ala., No. 5:22-cv-01448, are not required to report their beneficial ownership information to FinCEN at this time.
The IRS has issued Notice 2025-15, providing guidance on an alternative method for furnishing health coverage statements under Code Secs. 6055 and 6056. This method allows insurers and applicable large employers (ALEs) to comply with their reporting obligations by posting an online notice rather than automatically furnishing statements to individuals.
The IRS has issued Notice 2025-15, providing guidance on an alternative method for furnishing health coverage statements under Code Secs. 6055 and 6056. This method allows insurers and applicable large employers (ALEs) to comply with their reporting obligations by posting an online notice rather than automatically furnishing statements to individuals.
Under Code Sec. 6055, entities providing minimum essential coverage must report coverage details to the IRS and furnish statements to responsible individuals. Similarly, Code Sec. 6056 requires ALEs, generally those with 50 or more full-time employees, to report health insurance information for those employees. The Paperwork Burden Reduction Act amended these sections to introduce an alternative furnishing method, effective for statements related to returns for calendar years after 2023.
Instead of automatically providing statements, reporting entities may post a clear and conspicuous notice on their websites, informing individuals that they may request a copy of their statement. The notice must be posted by the original furnishing deadline, including any automatic 30-day extension, and must remain accessible through October 15 of the following year. If a responsible individual or full-time employee requests a statement, the reporting entity must furnish it within 30 days of the request or by January 31 of the following year, whichever is later.
For statements related to the 2024 calendar year, the notice must be posted by March 3, 2025. Statements may be furnished electronically if permitted under Reg. § 1.6055-2 for minimum essential coverage providers and Reg. § 301.6056-2 for ALEs.
This alternative method applies regardless of whether the individual shared responsibility payment under Code Sec. 5000A is zero. The guidance clarifies that this method applies to statements required under both Code Sec. 6055 and Code Sec. 6056. Reg. § 1.6055-1(g)(4)(ii)(B) sets forth the requirements for the alternative manner of furnishing statements under Code Sec. 6055, while the same framework applies to Code Sec. 6056 with relevant terminology adjustments. Form 1095-B, used for reporting minimum essential coverage, and Form 1095-C, used by ALEs to report health insurance offers, may be provided under this alternative method.
The IRS has issued the luxury car depreciation limits for business vehicles placed in service in 2025 and the lease inclusion amounts for business vehicles first leased in 2025.
The IRS has issued the luxury car depreciation limits for business vehicles placed in service in 2025 and the lease inclusion amounts for business vehicles first leased in 2025.
Luxury Passenger Car Depreciation Caps
The luxury car depreciation caps for a passenger car placed in service in 2025 limit annual depreciation deductions to:
- $12,200 for the first year without bonus depreciation
- $20,200 for the first year with bonus depreciation
- $19,600 for the second year
- $11,800 for the third year
- $7,060 for the fourth through sixth year
Depreciation Caps for SUVs, Trucks and Vans
The luxury car depreciation caps for a sport utility vehicle, truck, or van placed in service in 2025 are:
- $12,200 for the first year without bonus depreciation
- $20,200 for the first year with bonus depreciation
- $19,600 for the second year
- $11,800 for the third year
- $7,060 for the fourth through sixth year
Excess Depreciation on Luxury Vehicles
If depreciation exceeds the annual cap, the excess depreciation is deducted beginning in the year after the vehicle’s regular depreciation period ends.
The annual cap for this excess depreciation is:
- $7,060 for passenger cars and
- $7,060 for SUVS, trucks, and vans.
Lease Inclusion Amounts for Cars, SUVs, Trucks and Vans
If a vehicle is first leased in 2025, a taxpayer must add a lease inclusion amount to gross income in each year of the lease if its fair market value at the time of the lease is more than:
- $62,000 for a passenger car, or
- $62,000 for an SUV, truck or van.
The 2025 lease inclusion tables provide the lease inclusion amounts for each year of the lease.
The lease inclusion amount results in a permanent reduction in the taxpayer’s deduction for the lease payments.
The leadership of the Senate Finance Committee have issued a discussion draft of bipartisan legislative proposals to make administrative and procedural improvements to the Internal Revenue Service.
The leadership of the Senate Finance Committee have issued a discussion draft of bipartisan legislative proposals to make administrative and procedural improvements to the Internal Revenue Service.
These fixes were described as "common sense" in a joint press release issued by committee Chairman Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) and Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)
"As the tax filing season gets underway, this draft legislation suggests practical ways to improve the taxpayer experience," the two said in the joint statement. "These adjustments to the laws governing IRS procedure and administration are designed to facilitate communication between the agency and taxpayers, streamline processes for tax compliance, and ensure taxpayers have access to timely expert assistance."
The draft legislation, currently named the Taxpayer Assistance and Services Act, covers a range of subject areas, including:
- Tax administration and customer service;
- American citizens abroad;
- Judicial review;
- Improvements to the Office of the Taxpayer Advocate;
- Tax Return Preparers;
- Improvements to the Independent Office of Appeals;
- Whistleblowers;
- Stopping tax penalties on American hostages;
- Small business; and
- Other miscellaneous issues.
A summary of the legislative provisions can be found here.
Some of the policies include streamlining the review of offers-in-compromise to help taxpayers resolve tax debts; clarifying and expanding Tax Court jurisdiction to help taxpayers pursue claims in the appropriate venue; expand the independent of the National Taxpayer Advocate; increase civil and criminal penalties on tax professionals that do deliberate harm; and extend the so-called "mailbox rule" to electronic submissions to provide more certainty that submissions to the IRS are done in a timely manner.
National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins said in a statement that the legislation "would significantly strengthen taxpayer rights in nearly every facet of tax administration."
Likewise, the American Institute of CPAs voiced their support for the legislative proposal.
Melaine Lauridsen, vice president of Tax Policy and Advocacy at AICPA, said in a statement that the proposal "will be instrumental in establishing a foundation that helps simplify some of the laborious tax filing processes and allows taxpayers to better meet their tax obligation. We look forward to working with Senators Wyden and Crapo as this discussion draft moves forward."
By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor
A limited liability company (LLC) classified as a TEFRA partnership could not claim a charitable contribution deduction for a conservation easement because the easement deed failed to comply with the perpetuity requirements under Code Sec. 170(h)(5)(A) and Reg. § 1.170A-14(g)(6). The Tax Court determined that the language of the deed did not satisfy statutory requirements, rendering the claimed deduction invalid.
A limited liability company (LLC) classified as a TEFRA partnership could not claim a charitable contribution deduction for a conservation easement because the easement deed failed to comply with the perpetuity requirements under Code Sec. 170(h)(5)(A) and Reg. § 1.170A-14(g)(6). The Tax Court determined that the language of the deed did not satisfy statutory requirements, rendering the claimed deduction invalid.
Easement Valuation
The taxpayer asserted that the highest and best use of the property was as a commercial mining site, supporting a valuation significantly higher than its purchase price. However, the Court concluded that the record did not support this assertion. The Court found that the proposed mining use was not financially feasible or maximally productive. The IRS’s expert relied on comparable sales data, while the taxpayer’s valuation method was based on a discounted cash-flow analysis, which the Court found speculative and not supported by market data.
Penalties
The taxpayer contended that the IRS did not comply with supervisory approval process under Code Sec. 6751(b) prior to imposing penalties. However, the Court found that the concerned IRS revenue agent duly obtained prior supervisory approval and the IRS satisfied the procedural requirements under Code Sec. 6751(b). Because the valuation of the easement reported on the taxpayer’s return exceeded 200 percent of the Court-determined value, the misstatement was deemed "gross" under Code Sec. 6662(h)(2)(A)(i). Accordingly, the Court upheld accuracy-related penalties under Code Sec. 6662 for gross valuation misstatement, substantial understatement, and negligence.
Green Valley Investors, LLC, TC Memo. 2025-15, Dec. 62,617(M)
The Tax Court ruled that IRS Appeals Officers and Team Managers were not "Officers of the United States." Therefore, they did not need to be appointed under the Appointments Clause.
The Tax Court ruled that IRS Appeals Officers and Team Managers were not "Officers of the United States." Therefore, they did not need to be appointed under the Appointments Clause.
The taxpayer filed income taxes for tax years 2012 (TY) through TY 2017, but he did not pay tax. During a Collection Due Process (CDP) hearing, the taxpayer raised constitutional arguments that IRS Appeals and associated employees serve in violation of the Appointments Clause and the constitutional separation of powers.
No Significant Authority
The court noted that IRS Appeals officers do not wield significant authority. For instance, the officers do not have authority to examine witnesses, unlike Tax Court Special Trial Judges (STJs) and SEC Administrative Law Judges (ALJs). The Appeals officers also lack the power to issue, serve, and enforce summonses through the IRS’s general power to examine books and witnesses.
The court found no reason to deviate from earlier judgments in Tucker v. Commissioner (Tucker I), 135 T.C. 114, Dec. 58,279); and Tucker v. Commissioner (Tucker II), CA-DC, 676 F.3d 1129, 2012-1 ustc ¶50,312). Both judgments emphasized the court’s observations in the current case. In Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (per curiam), the Supreme Court similarly held that Federal Election Commission (FEC) commissioners were not appointed in accordance with the Appointments Clause, and thus none of them were permitted to exercise "significant authority."
The taxpayer lacked standing to challenge the appointment of the IRS Appeals Chief, and said officers under the Appointments Clause, and the removal of the Chief under the separation of powers doctrine.
IRC Chief of Appeals
The taxpayer failed to prove that the Chief’s tenure affected his hearing and prejudiced him in some way, under standards in United States v. Smith, 962 F.3d 755 (4th Cir. 2020) and United States v. Castillo, 772 F. App’x 11 (3d Cir. 2019). The Chief did not participate in the taxpayer's CDP hearing, and so the Chief did not injure the taxpayer. The taxpayer's injury was not fairly traceable to the appointment (or lack thereof) of the Chief, and the Chief was too distant from the case for any court order pointed to him to redress the taxpayer's harm.
C.C. Tooke III, 164 TC No. 2, Dec. 62,610
The IRS encouraged taxpayers to use its online tools and resources to find the information they need to be ready to file their 2021 federal tax returns, including important special steps related to Economic Impact Payments (EIP) and advance Child Tax Credit (CTC) payments. This is the third in a series of reminders to help taxpayers get ready for the upcoming tax filing season. Additionally, a special page is available on the IRS website that outlines steps taxpayers can take to make tax filing easier.
The IRS encouraged taxpayers to use its online tools and resources to find the information they need to be ready to file their 2021 federal tax returns, including important special steps related to Economic Impact Payments (EIP) and advance Child Tax Credit (CTC) payments. This is the third in a series of reminders to help taxpayers get ready for the upcoming tax filing season. Additionally, a special page is available on the IRS website that outlines steps taxpayers can take to make tax filing easier.
Individuals, especially those who do not usually file tax returns, were urged to file their 2021 tax return electronically beginning January 24, 2022. Further, the IRS advised taxpayers to use a tax preparation software or a trusted tax professional to help guide them through the process and avoid making errors. Filing an incomplete or inaccurate return may mean a processing delay that slows the resulting tax refund.
Recovery Rebate Credit and Economic Impact Payments
Individuals who did not qualify for a third Economic Impact Payment or got less than the full amount may be eligible to claim the Recovery Rebate Credit. However, they will need to know the total amount of their third Economic Impact Payments received to calculate their correct 2021 Recovery Rebate Credit amount when they file their 2021 tax return. The IRS announced that it would send Letter 6475 with the total amount of the third Economic Impact Payment received beginning in late January.
Advance Child Tax Credit Payments
People will need to know the total amount of advance payments they received in 2021 to compare them with the full amount of the Child Tax Credit that they can properly claim when they file their 2021 tax return. Those who received the advance payments can access their online account to check the total amount of their payments. The IRS will also send Letter 6419 to provide the total amount of advance Child Tax Credit payments received in 2021. Accordingly, eligible families who did not get monthly advance payments in 2021 can still get a lump-sum payment by claiming the Child Tax Credit when they file a 2021 federal income tax return this year. This includes families who do not normally need to file a return.
IRS Online Tools and Resources
The IRS drew attention to its various online tools and resources, such as:
-
The Interactive Tax Assistant: The Interactive Tax Assistant answers general tax law questions, including helping to determine if a type of income is taxable or if someone is eligible to claim certain credits and deductions. With changes to income and other life events for many in 2021, tax credits and deductions can mean more money in a taxpayer's pocket.
-
Online Account: Taxpayers can use their Online Account to securely see important information when preparing to file their tax return or following up on balances or notices. Moreover, taxpayers can view the amount they owe, make and track payments and view payment plan details. Taxpayers can also manage their communication preferences to go paperless for certain notices from the IRS, or to receive email notifications when the IRS sends them a new digital notice.
-
Where's My Refund?: Taxpayers can check the status of their refund using the Where's My Refund? tool. The status is available within 24 hours after the IRS accepts their e-filed tax return or up to four weeks after they mailed a paper return.
-
IRS Free File: Starting January 14, the IRS Free File program, available only through the IRS website or the IRS2Go app, will offer brand-name tax preparation software packages. Those who earned $73,000 or less in 2021 may qualify for Free File guided tax software. The software does all the work of finding deductions, credits and exemptions. Some of the Free File offers may include a free state tax return. Taxpayers comfortable filling out tax forms, can use Free File Fillable Forms, the electronic federal tax forms paper version to file their tax returns online, regardless of income.
-
Direct Deposit: Direct deposit gives taxpayers access to their refund faster than a paper check. Individuals can use a bank account, prepaid debit card or mobile app to use direct deposit and will need to provide routing and account numbers.
The IRS released the optional standard mileage rates for 2022. Most taxpayers may use these rates to compute deductible costs of operating vehicles for:
-
business,
-
medical, and
-
charitable purposes
Some members of the military may also use these rates to compute their moving expense deductions.
The IRS released the optional standard mileage rates for 2022. Most taxpayers may use these rates to compute deductible costs of operating vehicles for:
-
business,
-
medical, and
-
charitable purposes
Some members of the military may also use these rates to compute their moving expense deductions.
2022 Standard Mileage Rates
The standard mileage rates for 2022 are:
-
58.5 cents per mile for business uses;
-
18 cents per mile for medical uses; and
-
14 cents per mile for charitable uses.
Taxpayers may use these rates, instead of their actual expenses, to calculate their deductions for business, medical or charitable use of their own vehicles.
FAVR Allowance for 2022
For purposes of the fixed and variable rate (FAVR) allowance, the maximum standard automobile cost for vehicles places in service after 2021 is:
-
$56,100 for passenger automobiles, and
-
$56,100 for trucks and vans.
Employers can use a FAVR allowance to reimburse employees who use their own vehicles for the employer’s business.
2022 Mileage Rate for Moving Expenses
The standard mileage rate for the moving expense deduction is 18 cents per mile. To claim this deduction, the taxpayer must be:
-
a member of the Armed Forces of the United States,
-
on active military duty, and
-
moving under a military order and incident to a permanent change of station
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 suspended the moving expense deduction for all other taxpayers until 2026.
Unreimbursed Employee Travel Expenses
For most taxpayers, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act suspended the miscellaneous itemized deduction for unreimbursed employee travel expenses. However, certain taxpayers may still claim an above-the-line deduction for these expenses. These taxpayers include:
-
members of a reserve component of the U.S. Armed Forces,
-
state or local government officials paid on a fee basis, and
-
performing artists with relatively low incomes.
Notice 2021-2, I.R.B. 2021-2, 478, is superseded.
The IRS has issued a revenue procedure with a safe harbor that allows certain interests in rental real estate to be treated as a trade or business for purposes of the Code Sec. 199A qualified business income (QBI) deduction. The safe harbor is intended to lessen taxpayer uncertainty on whether a rental real estate interest qualifies as a trade or business for the QBI deduction, including the application of the aggregation rules in Reg. §1.199A-4.
The IRS has issued a revenue procedure with a safe harbor that allows certain interests in rental real estate to be treated as a trade or business for purposes of the Code Sec. 199A qualified business income (QBI) deduction. The safe harbor is intended to lessen taxpayer uncertainty on whether a rental real estate interest qualifies as a trade or business for the QBI deduction, including the application of the aggregation rules in Reg. §1.199A-4.
QBI Deduction and Rental Real Estate
Under Code Sec. 199A, certain noncorporate taxpayers can deduct up to 20 percent of the taxpayer’s QBI from each of the taxpayer's qualified trades or businesses, including those operated through a partnership, S corporation, or sole proprietorship. Certain relevant passthrough entities (RPEs) (partnerships, S corporations, trust funds) calculate the deduction and pass it along to their owners or beneficiaries. A qualified trade or business is generally any trade or business under Code Sec. 162, but not a specified service trade or business (SSTB) or a trade or business of performing services as an employee.
Rental or licensing of tangible or intangible property (i.e., rental activity) that is not a Code Sec. 162 trade or business is still treated as a trade or business for the QBI deduction if the property is rented or licensed to a trade or business conducted by the individual or a RPE which is commonly controlled under Reg. §1.199A-4 ( Reg. §1.199A-1(b)(14)).
Earlier this year, the IRS released a proposed revenue procedure with a safe harbor for treating a rental real estate enterprise as a trade or business under Code Sec. 199A ( Notice 2019-7, I.R.B. 2019-9, 740). The IRS has issued the new revenue procedure after considering public comments on Notice 2019-7.
Rental Real Estate Enterprise
The new safe harbor applies to a "rental real estate enterprise." This is an interest in real property held for the production of rents, and may consist of an interest in a single property or interests in multiple properties. The taxpayer or RPE must hold each interest directly or through a disregarded entity, and may either:
- treat each interest in similar property held for the production of rents as a separate rental real estate enterprise; or
- treat interests in all similar properties held for the production of rents as a single rental real estate enterprise.
Properties are similar if they are part of the same rental real estate category: either residential or commercial. Commercial real estate held for the production of rents can only be part of the same enterprise with other commercial real estate. Residential properties can only be part of the same enterprise with other residential properties.
A taxpayer or RPE that treats interests in similar properties as a single rental real estate enterprise must continue to treat interests in all similar properties, including newly acquired properties, as a single rental real estate enterprise if it continues to rely on the safe harbor. However, a taxpayer or RPE that chooses to treat its interest in each residential or commercial property as a separate rental real estate enterprise can choose to treat its interests in all similar commercial or all similar residential properties as a single rental real estate enterprise in a future year.
An interest in mixed-use property—a single building that combines residential and commercial units—can be treated as a single rental real estate enterprise, or bifurcated into separate residential and commercial interests. A mixed-use property interest that is treated as a single rental real estate enterprise cannot be treated as part of the same enterprise as other residential, commercial, or mixed-use property.
Safe Harbor Requirements
The safe harbor determination must be made annually. For a rental real estate enterprise to qualify for the safe harbor, all of the following requirements must be met during the tax year:
- Separate books and records are maintained to reflect income and expenses for each rental real estate enterprise. If an enterprise has more than one property, the requirement can be met if income and expense information statements for each property are maintained and then consolidated.
- For rental real estate enterprises in existence for less than four years, 250 or more hours of rental services are performed per year. For rental real estate enterprises in existence for at least four years, 250 or more hours of rental services are performed per year in any three of the five consecutive tax years that end with the tax year.
- The taxpayer maintains contemporaneous records (including time reports, logs, or similar documents) on the hours of all services performed, a description of all services performed, the dates when the services were performed, and who performed the services. For services performed by employees or independent contractors, the taxpayer may provide a description of the rental services, the amount of time generally spent performing the services, and the time, wage, or payment records for the employee or independent contractor. Records must be made available for inspection at the IRS's request. (The contemporaneous records requirement does not apply to tax years that begin before January 1, 2020.)
- For each tax year for which it relies on the safe harbor, the taxpayer or RPE must attach a statement to a timely filed original return (or an amended return for the 2018 tax year only) that includes: (i) a description (including the address and rental category) of all rental real estate properties in each rental real estate enterprise; (ii) a description (including the address and rental category) of rental real estate properties acquired and disposed of during the tax year; and (iii) a representation that the requirements of Rev. Proc. 2019-38 have been satisfied.
"Rental services" include, but are not limited to:
- advertising to rent or lease the real estate;
- negotiating and executing leases;
- verifying information contained in prospective tenant applications;
- collecting rent;
- daily operation, maintenance, and repair of the property, including purchasing materials and
- supplies;
- managing the real estate; and
- supervising employees and independent contractors.
Rental services does not include:
- financial or investment management activities, such as arranging financing;
- procuring property;
- studying and reviewing financial statements or reports on operations;
- improving property under Reg. §1.263(a)-3(d); or
- time spent traveling to and from the real estate.
If an enterprise fails to satisfy the safe harbor requirements, it can still be treated as a trade or business for the QBI deduction if it otherwise meets the trade or business definition in Reg. §1.199A-1(b)(14).
Property Excluded From Safe Harbor
The safe harbor does not apply to:
- real estate used by the taxpayer (including an owner or beneficiary of an RPE) as a residence under Code Sec. 280A(d);
- real estate rented or leased under a triple net lease, which includes a lease agreement that requires the tenant or lessee to pay taxes, fees, and insurance, and to pay for maintenance activities for a property in addition to rent and utilities;
- real estate rented to a trade or business conducted by a taxpayer or an RPE that is commonly controlled under Reg. §1.199A-4(b)(1)(i); or
- the entire rental real estate interest, if any portion of it is treated as an SSTB under Reg. §1.199A-5(c)(2).
Effective Date
The safe harbor applies to tax years ending after December 31, 2017. However, taxpayers and RPEs can rely on the prior safe harbor in Notice 2019-7 for the 2018 tax year.
New final regulations that address the allocation of partnership liabilities for disguised sale purposes revert back to prior regulations. Under the final regulations:
New final regulations that address the allocation of partnership liabilities for disguised sale purposes revert back to prior regulations. Under the final regulations:
- a partner’s share of a recourse liability of the partnership equals the partner’s share of the liability under the rules of Code Sec. 752 and the related regulations; and
- a partner’s share of a nonrecourse liability of the partnership is determined by applying the same percentage used to determine the partner’s share of the excess nonrecourse liability under Reg. §1.752-3(a)(3) ( Reg. §1.707-5(a)(2)).
Executive Order Triggers Reversion Back to Prior Disguised Sale Rules
In October 2016, the IRS issued final and temporary regulations (707 Temporary Regulations) under which a partnership would determine all partnership liabilities for disguised sales purposes—both recourse and nonrecourse—by applying the same percentage used to determine a partner’s share of excess nonrecourse liability under Reg. §1.752-3(a)(3) ( T.D. 9788).
In April 2017, the President issued Executive Order 13789 (E.O. 13789) on reducing tax regulatory burdens. In response, the IRS identified the final and temporary regulations in T.D. 9788 as implicating some of those regulatory burdens. In turn, in 2018 Proposed Regulations, the IRS proposed to withdraw the 707 Temporary Regulations and reinstate the regulations under Reg. §1.707-5(a)(2) described above. Now, the IRS has adopted the 2018 Proposed Regulations, thereby reinstating the Prior 707 rules.
Treasury and the IRS will continue to study the merits of the approach in the 707 Temporary Regulations and other approaches, including the final regulations, to determine which results in the most appropriate treatment of liabilities in the context of disguised sales.
Effective Dates
The final regulations apply to any transaction with respect to which all transfers occur on or after October 4, 2019, the date that the 707 Temporary Regulations expire. However, partnerships and their partners may apply the final regulations to any transaction where all transfers occur on or after January 3, 2017, the applicable date of the 707 Temporary Regulations.
Proposed regulations increase a vehicle’s maximum value for eligibility to use the fleet-average valuation rule or the vehicle cents-per-mile valuation rule. The increase to $50,000 is effective for the 2018 calendar year. The maximum value is adjusted annually for inflation after 2018. The proposed regulations provide transition rules for certain employers.
Proposed regulations increase a vehicle’s maximum value for eligibility to use the fleet-average valuation rule or the vehicle cents-per-mile valuation rule. The increase to $50,000 is effective for the 2018 calendar year. The maximum value is adjusted annually for inflation after 2018. The proposed regulations provide transition rules for certain employers.
Taxpayers may rely on the proposed regulations until final regulation amendments are published in the Federal Register.
Depreciation Limits Increased, Inflation Calculation Changed
The Tax Cuts and Job Act ( P.L. 115-97) substantially increased the maximum annual dollar limitations on the depreciation deductions for passenger automobiles. The new dollar limitations are based on the depreciation, over a five-year recovery period, of a passenger automobile with a cost of $50,000. As a result, the IRS issued Notice 2019-8, I.R.B. 2019-3, 354, providing that it intends to amend Reg. §1.61-21(d) and (e) to:
- incorporate a higher base value of $50,000 as the maximum value for use of the vehicle cents-per-mile and fleet-average valuation rules, effective for the 2018 calendar year; and
- adjust the $50,000 base value annually for inflation in 2019 and subsequent years.
Additionally, the Notice provides that the IRS will not publish separate maximum values for trucks and vans for use with the fleet-average and vehicle cents-per-mile valuation rules. For tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, inflation adjustments for these purposes are calculated using both the consumer price index (CPI) automobile component and the Chained Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (C-CPI-U) automobile component ( Code Sec. 280F(d)(7)(B)). The C-CPI-U automobile component does not currently have separate components for new cars and new trucks.
The IRS later issued Notice 2019-34, I.R.B. 2019-22, 1257, to:
- provide a 2019 inflation increase to $50,400 for these amounts; and
- announce it would revise Reg. §1.61-21(d) to provide a transition rule for certain employers.
Transition Rules
The proposed regulations include the following transition rules.
Fleet-average valuation rule. If an employer did not qualify to use the fleet-average valuation rule prior to January 1, 2018, because the automobile’s fair market value exceeded the inflation-adjusted maximum value requirement for the year the automobile was first made available to the employee for personal use, the employer may adopt the fleet-average valuation rule for 2018 or 2019, provided the fair market value of the automobile does not exceed $50,000 on January 1, 2018, or $50,400 on January 1, 2019.
Vehicle cents-per-mile valuation rule. An employer that did not qualify to adopt the vehicle cents-per-mile valuation rule for a vehicle first made available to an employee for personal use before calendar year 2018 may first adopt the vehicle cents-per-mile valuation rule for the 2018 or 2019 tax year for the vehicle if:
- the employer did not qualify to adopt the vehicle cents-per-mile valuation rule because the vehicle’s fair market value exceeded the inflation-adjusted limitation for the year the vehicle was first used by the employee for personal use; and
- the vehicle’s fair market value does not exceed $50,000 on January 1, 2018, or $50,400 on January 1, 2019.
Similarly, if the employer first used the commuting valuation rule, the employer may adopt the vehicle cents-per-mile valuation rule for the 2018 or 2019 tax year if:
- the employer did not qualify to switch to the vehicle cents-per-mile valuation rule on the first day on which the commuting valuation rule was not used because the vehicle’s fair market value exceeded the inflation-adjusted limitation for the year the commuting valuation rule was first not used; and
- the fair market value of the vehicle does not exceed $50,000 on January 1, 2018, or $50,400 on January 1, 2019.
COMMENT
An employer that adopts the vehicle cents-per-mile valuation rule generally must continue to use the rule for all subsequent years in which the vehicle qualifies for it. However, the employer may use the commuting valuation rule for any year during which use of the vehicle qualifies for the commuting valuation rule.