Archive for the ‘Legislation’ Category

Another Thing to Try at the Next Audit or Appeal

Monday, February 2nd, 2009

I’m learning a whole bunch of new strategies to use in my representation work, all courtesy of President Obama’s Cabinet appointees. I already have the “I Forgot” defense from Treasury Secretary Geithner. Next is the “Forget ClubFed and Penalties” defense from Tom Daschle.

Former Senator Daschle (D-South Dakota) is the nominee to become Secretary of Health and Human Services. Bill at April15.com has a great post where he notes:

1. he failed to report $80,000 in consulting income

2. he failed to consider that receiving a car and driver from his employer would be income

3. he claimed charitable deductions to organizations that were not qualified charities and

4. all totaled he had to pay over $140,000 in taxes and interest yet didn’t have pay a dime in penalties (when in fact other taxpayer’s have gone to prison for less)

Unfortunately, us middle-class Americans are the ones stuck paying taxes. Perhaps Leona Helmsley was right: “Only the little people pay taxes.”

A Cow Tax?

Tuesday, January 6th, 2009

My mother wrote a book called Cindy Lou about a cow that gave chocolate milk. It’s now out of print but it’s a wonderful book for children. I will admit my bias.

The book is set on a family farm. That’s something that may be in danger from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA is really contemplating a cow tax. The family farm with a few cows may become a thing of the past.

The Business & Mediate Institute is reporting that the EPA is considering regulating emissions of greenhouse gases, including businesses that emit 100 tons. That could easily include a family farm with 25 cows.

It’s all in the formative stages at this point, and it’s likely that farmers would raise bloody hell on Capitol Hill should the EPA propose such a measure. But dismissing the idea of such regulations is, bluntly, wrong. Already, California’s Air Resources Board announced that they will implement CO2 regulations (though not for a couple of years).

I personally believe the only thing that money should be spent on in this area is further research into whether anthropogenic global warming is real. It’s still a theory. Killing the economy by regulation while the country is an economic downturn is foolish. We’ll have to see if that’s the direction the Obama Administration will take. If it is, that might spell the end of Cindy Lou.

2009 Required Distribution Relief

Saturday, December 13th, 2008

Congress yesterday passed a law (and President Bush is expected to soon sign the law) which will give relief for Required Minimum Distributions (RMDs) in 2009. As Joe Kristan noted, this isn’t much relief.

RMDs are required for tax deferred retirement accounts such as 401(k)s and traditional IRAs. Once a participant turns age 70½ they are required to take an RMD from their retirement account. A participant can take more than the RMD, but must make a withdrawal of at least the RMD. Once an RMD is required it must be taken annually.

The problem is that during 2008 most individuals’ retirement accounts fell in value. However, the RMD is based on the amount in the account as of December 31st of the prior year. Thus, the RMDs for 2008 are based on account values that may no longer represent what’s really in the account.

Relief in 2009 doesn’t really help matters because the problem is in 2008. While the Department of the Treasury could issue a regulation allowing relief for this year it doesn’t appear that’s going to happen.

China Goes Where No Man Has Gone Before

Thursday, December 11th, 2008

Two years ago I wrote about the idea of taxing virtual transactions. As I mentioned then the IRS’ view on this is, “That’s so weird.”

However, one country looked at this and decided that while it might be weird it’s too big of a pie not to tax. So China is implementing a tax on virtual transactions. The Shanghai Daily, quoted in the Guardian, states:

Once income is generated through the sale of virtual goods, individuals “should go to the tax department to pay personal income tax within seven days of the day after the transactions,” according to Shanghai Daily. Those who can provide proof of the value of the original property will see a 20 percent tax on their profits, while those lacking solid evidence will face charges equal to 3 percent of the total transaction.

The BBC notes that Sweden and South Korea are also looking into this. I do believe that one day the IRS, too, will attempt to tax that sale of 100 gold pieces.


Hat Tip: TaxProf Blog

Rangel’s Troubles Worsen

Tuesday, December 9th, 2008

The tax troubles of Congressman Charles Rangel (D-NY), the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee (the committee that writes tax legislation), have worsened. The House Ethics Committee had already been looking into his property tax troubles; the committee voted to extend the probe and look into whether Congressman Rangel protected an oil drilling company from a large tax bite after that company (Nabors Industries, Ltd.) donated $1 million to start the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at the City College of New York.

This news comes out on the day that Governor Rod Blagojevich (D-IL) is arrested on corruption charges; it sure is an interesting coincidence.

Rangel’s Tax Troubles Mount

Sunday, November 23rd, 2008

Charles Rangel (D-NY) is the chairman of the powerful House Ways & Means Committee. All tax legislation is supposed to start in that committee. Congressman Rangel has been battling tax troubles over the past year.

His troubles have apparently worsened. Congressman Rangel owns a home in the District of Columbia. That’s not a surprise; many Congressmen and Senators buy homes in or near the District as they spend a lot of time in Washington. Congressman Rangel has taken the Homestead exemption on his DC property tax bill. This break cuts his DC property tax bill.

Congressman Rangel also owns a home in New York. That, too, isn’t a surprise; after all he represents the Empire State in Congress. His New York home is in Harlem (the area he represents) and he has taken the Homestead exemption on that property, too.

There’s a problem here: You can only take the Homestead exemption on your principle residence. You cannot, by definition, have two principle residences. Presumably his New York home is his principle residence and he shouldn’t have been taking the exemption on his DC property. Congressman Rangel likely owes back property taxes, interest, and penalties.

The New York Post writes about this today. As I mentioned it’s only the latest in a string of tax-related problems for the number one tax writer in Congress. Somehow this seems apropros….

It’s Time to Watch Your Wallets

Tuesday, November 4th, 2008

It now appears certain that Barack Obama will become the next President of the United States. Congratulations to him. It’s an historic occasion when race really doesn’t matter in electing a president. That said, it’s now time to ponder what this will mean for you and I vis-a-vis taxes.

First, I wrote a piece on what taxes would be like if Barack Obama were elected president. You may also want to read my overview on the two candidates, and the likely impact of Congress on your taxes.

Obama has said he would bring people together. However, his actions are very, very liberal. We will have a Congress where both the House and Senate are controlled by the Democrats (though it appears that Republicans will have enough votes to filibuster in the Senate). In the past, when this has occurred taxes have gone up.

The only saving grace is a bad economy. In the past, Democrats usually try to spend their way out of bad economies. When I was in school we were taught that Franklin Roosevelt’s policies—the New Deal—helped end the Great Depression. Economists now believe that they actually extended the Great Depression by seven years.

Perhaps President-Elect Obama will live up to what he said during the third presidential debate:

…what I’ve done throughout this campaign is to propose a net spending cut…. What I want to emphasize … is that I have been a strong proponent of pay-as- you-go. Every dollar that I’ve proposed, I’ve proposed an additional cut so that it matches. (Hat Tip: Volokh Conspiracy)

I’m not hopeful of this happening. He may want to, but I expect that the Democratic Congressional leaders want to spend, spend, spend. I hope I’m wrong. If I am I’ll happily post that.

Democrats may state that they have received “a mandate.” When I last checked the vote is 51% to 48% which is hardly a mandate. Indeed, the country remains nearly divided in half. I’m not going to point out the random factors that could have changed this race (I’ll leave that to political pundits). But when you hear the mandate meme, throw it away.

I suggest you start paying attention to the legislation very carefully. You can read the actual bills on the Library of Congress’ Thomas Site. Follow the legislation. It’s time to become the squeaky wheel.

So what should concerned taxpayers do? Let’s say that some particularly (in your view) onerous piece of legislation is introduced. The best way to combat bad legislation is to let your voice be heard. Call, write, or email your Congressman. If it’s an industry issue, have others in your industry do the same. Contact your trade association. Trust me, if a Congressman gets 2,000 phone calls or pieces of mail on what he thinks is routine legislation he will notice.

Forbes just ran an article stating that no matter who is elected president taxes will be going up. I think that’s definitely true. What I think may be worse is the additional regulatory burden placed on businesses.

This is yet another area where business owners need to become proactive. You may want to subscribe to the Federal Register’s daily email table of contents (the link is to the Federal Register; you can click on “sign up” to head to that page). Americans tend not to act until things become bad. Well, it’s far better to act before that occurs. Again, you and others impacted by proposed regulations need to be that squeaky wheel. If (or perhaps I should say when) you see a particularly onerous regulation being promulgated comment on the regulations. Let your Congressmen and Senators know of the problem.


Some of my friends have asked me what this will do for my business. Perversely, it will be a very good thing. Most professional preparers I know want a simple Tax Code. We’re not likely to see anything like that in the next four years. I’ll earn lots of fees utilizing methods that will save my clients taxes. That’s good for me (and other professional preparers) but bad overall for the economy. Basic economics teaches that a business will want to make a normal profit. If that business must spend more money on my services it will have less money for other things such as expansion, hiring additional employees, increasing salaries, etc. The next four years figure to be good for professional preparers.

Unfortunately, you will have to watch your wallets. Taxes are going up. The only question is how much.

Remember to Vote

Tuesday, November 4th, 2008

Today is Election Day, and that means you should exercise your privilege and vote. In California, you can go to the Secretary of State’s website to find your polling place.

Irvine Measure S

Saturday, November 1st, 2008

Measure S is titled the City of Irvine Personal Information Privacy Act. The City Attorney’s analysis states that measure S will comply with state and federal privacy regulations. Proponents believe this measure will aid in privacy for Irvine residents. Opponents argue that the measure is a secrecy ordinance that is unconstitutional under the California constitution.

Remember to Vote on Tuesday.

Irvine Measure R

Saturday, November 1st, 2008

There are lots of advertisements on local television for Measure R…but they’re for Los Angeles County Measure R. In Irvine there is also a Measure R that’s far different than the Los Angeles County R.

Irvine Measure R would adopt the City Council’s recommendations for the Great Park. According to the city attorney’s analysis, the measure should keep separate funds for the Great Park.

Proponents of the measure state that the measure will protect Irvine taxpayers. Opponents argue that the proponents have already spent $115 million of the $200 million allocated for the project and if the measure is approved other taxpayer funds could be tapped.

[Note: Because the Orange County Sample Ballot is interactive, I cannot link to it. If you are an Orange County voter, go to this site to read it.]