Two Days Away

The deadline for filing tax returns on extension is this Wednesday, October 15th. That’s also the deadline for funding your SEP IRAs. If you procrastinate beyond this date you will be hit with the failure to file penalty (if you owe any tax) of 5% of the tax due per month.

Your paper-filed returns must be postmarked by the 15th. Electronically filed returns must be transmitted by the 15th.

Joe Kristan put it very well:

If you haven’t gotten your tax information to your preparer yet, it is definitely time to panic. And if your preparer charges then you an arm and a leg for the doing the return because you brought your information in three days before the extended return deadline, well, don’t do that next time.

Posted in Tax Preparation | Comments Off on Two Days Away

A Bit More Evasion

The tax evaders were out in force this week. I could have filled several posts with their escapades. Here are the lowlights.

Let’s start with a Bozo tax preparer. First, from Upper Darby, Pennsylvania comes the story of Nyon Geleh-Saylee. Mr. Geleh-Saylee truly wanted to help his tax preparation clients. He did this by inflating the deductions on their returns costing the federal government over $89,000. He was convicted back in June for filing false tax returns. He avoided ClubFed and will spend six months in home confinement.

Todd Newman is a CPA in Yonkers, New York. Mr. Newman was arraigned on Friday on charges of grand larceny and failure to file a state income tax return. Mr. Newman allegedly stole $1.6 million from one of his clients. He was supposed to send the money to New York state for payroll taxes withheld; instead, he allegedly wrote checks to himself. He’s looking at a lengthy term in state prison if convicted.

Here’s a scheme that sounds intriguing. Let’s start a banking system to cater to the tax protester movement. We’ll hide their money, give them access so they can print money orders when the need to, and we’ll ignore those pesky banking and tax laws. Other than violating a few federal statutes (and possibly some state laws) it’s sounds kosher, right? Well, the man who thought up this idea will likely get some time to consider it at ClubFed. Wayne Hicks, Sr. of Berryville, Arkansas pleaded guilty to one count of tax fraud conspiracy this past week. Mr. Hicks also admitted that he’s neglected to file his own tax return for the last sixteen years.

Finally, a follow-up on the story of Kevin Morse of Austin, Minnesota. Mr. Morse was sentenced this past week to 30 months at ClubFed. Mr. Morse was told by his accountant that he owed about $100,000 in back taxes but chose to use a tax protester argument to avoid the taxes. The good news is that the promoters of the scheme that Mr. Morse used are awaiting trial in Oregon.

Remember, if it sounds too good to be true it probably is.

Posted in Tax Evasion | Comments Off on A Bit More Evasion

Escort to Evasion

Christina Warthen appeared to have everything. She’s a graduate of Stanford Law School. She’s married to the founder of Ask Jeeves (now Ask.com). She’s also allegedly a tax evader who ran a high priced escort service called TouchofBrazil.net.

Back in 2004 IRS agents raided her apartment and other locations seized over $61,000. That was just some of the funds that she allegedly earned from her business; the IRS alleges she cleared over $133,000 but didn’t file a tax return. Whether her business was an escort service or an older profession isn’t relevant—all income, legal or illegal, is generally taxable.

Mrs. Warthen will be arraigned later this week; she faces one count of tax evasion. So if you have an escort business try to remember to file your tax returns. If you don’t you may find yourself escorted to ClubFed.

Posted in Tax Evasion | 1 Comment

We Get Questions on Gambling Income

Over the past few weeks we received a couple of questions. Here they are with answers.

Timing of Online Gambling Income
Question—What if you are gambling on an online site over the course of a year and you win some money, however you don’t make a withdrawal from the account that year? Say you save up what you win for two years then withdrawal some do you have to report it the year you win or when you actually withdraw it ad have in your hand?

The year your income is earned is the year that it is taxable. If an individual has online gambling income earned in 2008 but doesn’t make a withdrawal in 2008 he still has 2008 income that must be reported on his 2008 tax returns.

Ohio and Gambling Losses
Question—I’m a resident of Ohio. I think it’s ridiculous that even though I’ve been a net loser in gambling this year I must pay state income tax on my “wins.” How can this be constitutional?

In several states, mostly in the Midwest, the state income tax is based on gross income (Federal Adjusted Gross Income with a few changes); no itemized deductions are allowed. Under the US Tax Code gambling income is considered Other Income included in Federal AGI; gambling losses are an itemized deduction allowed up to the amount of wins on Schedule A.

The situation you describe—being taxed on phantom gambling income—is quite possible. There is a Wisconsin case (Wisconsin also doesn’t allow gambling loss deductions) which explains the philosophy. As I quoted in March 2007:

“Effective January 1, 2000, gambling losses were no longer offset against gambling winnings under the Wisconsin tax code because, effective on that date, Wisconsin no longer permitted as a deduction from Wisconsin taxable income “[m]iscellaneous itemized deductions under the Internal Revenue Code,” see Wis. Stat. § 71.07(5)(a)7 (2003–04), one of which, the Department contends and Dettwiler does not dispute, was the deduction for “wagering losses,” under section 165(d) of the Internal Revenue Code…His contention that he should nevertheless be permitted to subtract from his Wisconsin taxable income the offset permitted by section 165(d) of the Internal Revenue Code is not only circular and without merit, but is wholly contrary to the legislature’s decision to eliminate such offsets effective January 1, 2000.

“The Tax Appeals Commission decision is perfectly logical, appropriate, and correct. Accordingly, we affirm.”

It’s actually worse in Ohio. This will not only impact your Ohio income tax but your city income tax. Ohio is truly not a good location to be an amateur gambler. I suggest you contact your state legislators and request that the law be changed.

Posted in Gambling | 1 Comment

A Gotcha in Minnesota

One form of business entity that is coming into increasing use is the Limited Liability Company (LLC). But that may change in Minnesota based on a ruling from an administrative law judge in that state.

Generally an LLC is a disregarded entity for federal tax purposes. Most states follow the federal guidelines though a couple of state require reporting. An LLC in California must file Form 568 and pay a minimum tax and possibly a gross receipts tax.

Minnesota, though, is about to take this one step further. The Gopher State will soon charge sales tax on transactions between single member LLC owners and the LLC. Joe Kristan calls this “an awful idea.” He’s right—Minnesota is effectively imposing sales tax for LLC owners when they move an object from their left hand to their right hand.

Hopefully the Minnesota Department of Revenue or the Minnesota legislature will reconsider this. Otherwise single member LLCs may become dinosaurs in the Land of 10,000 Lakes.

Hat Tip: Roth Tax Updates

Posted in Minnesota | Comments Off on A Gotcha in Minnesota

We’re #3!

And that’s not good news for Sacramento.

The Tax Foundation came out today with their annual report of state tax climates. No surprise, California is the third worst climate, surpassed only by New Jersey and New York. First, here are the ten best state climates for business taxation:

1. Wyoming
2. South Dakota
3. Nevada
4. Alaska
5. Florida
6. Montana
7. Texas
8. New Hampshire
9. Oregon
10. Delaware

And now the ten worst state tax climates:

41. Minnesota
42. Nebraska
43. Vermont
44. Iowa
45. Maryland
46. Rhode Island
47. Ohio
48. California
49. New York
50. New Jersey

There is some good news for California. The Tax Foundation no longer believes that the Bronze Golden State has the worst individual income tax in the country. It’s not that California has improved; rather, Maryland now has a worse system.

Maryland managed a remarkable drop—from 24th in last year’s index to 45th in this year’s—by raising its individual income tax, corporate income tax, sales tax and cigarette tax all in the same year. Maryland added four new brackets to the individual income tax, increasing the top rate by 1.5%, adding new complexity, and introducing a big marriage penalty. In fact, we now rate Maryland’s as by far the worst individual income tax in America, displacing California for that dubious distinction.

California ranks poorly in almost every category: 45th for corporate tax, 49th for individual income tax, and 43rd for sales tax. The lone bright spots are being ranked 16th for unemployment insurance and 15th for property tax.

There’s bad news on the horizon for California. The recently enacted budget restricted using net operating loss carryforwards. That will lower California’s score in future years. But our legislators appear to have one goal—making sure California goes to the top. Nevada, Oregon, and other nearby states aren’t complaining in the least.

Posted in California | Comments Off on We’re #3!

California and the Bailout

Governor Schwarzenegger warned that California might need a $7 billion loan because the state is currently unable to float a short-term bond. It’s not that a bond issue couldn’t be sold; rather, the interest rate would be quite high.

Bluntly, California will soon be forced to cut spending. The budget this year is filled with smoke and mirrors; next year’s situation will be worse. Revenues have been increasing but spending has increased faster. Discipline will be enforced on the Bronze Golden State one way or another. This year’s budget postponed the day of reckoning. I thought that postponement was until next summer but it might not last that long.

Posted in California | Comments Off on California and the Bailout

Taxes Under a President Obama

This is the first of a three part series looking at what taxes might be under our new President. This series starts by looking at what might happen under a President Obama. Next week I’ll examine John McCain’s plans. In the final part I’ll compare and contrast the two plans.


Let’s start with what the Obama campaign says they’ll do. This is taken from the Barack Obama website:

  • Cut taxes for 95 percent of workers and their families with a tax cut of $500 for workers or $1,000 for working couples.
  • Provide generous tax cuts for low- and middle-income seniors, homeowners, the uninsured, and families sending a child to college or looking to save and accumulate wealth.
  • Eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses, cut corporate taxes for firms that invest and create jobs in the United States, and provide tax credits to reduce the cost of healthcare and to reward investments in innovation.
  • Dramatically simplify taxes by consolidating existing tax credits, eliminating the need for millions of senior citizens to file tax forms, and enabling as many as 40 million middle-class Americans to do their own taxes in less than five minutes without an accountant.

These seem like great goals, and a wonderful plan. Let’s check this out to see if it’s borne out by facts.

Here are the nuts and bolts of the plan:
1. A $500 (single)/$1000 (MFJ) refundable tax credit for those who work.
2. A $4,000 refundable tax credit for college education.
3. A 10% refundable tax credit to offset mortgage interest payments. It’s unclear from the fact sheet whether this credit would be available to those who itemize or is limited to those who do not itemize.
4. No income tax for senior citizens who make less than $50,000.
5. An automatic pension account will be created.
6. The Savers Credit will be expanded so that it will match 50% of the first $1000 for families earning under $75,000.
7. Health care tax credits will be increased.
8. Expand the Earned Income Tax Credit to more working parents.
9. The child care credit would be refundable and allow low-income families to receive up to 50% of $6,000 of child care expenses.
10. Add a $7,000 tax credit for purchase of “advanced technology vehicles.”
11. Simplify the system; some taxpayers would receive pre-printed forms with numbers already filled-in.
12. Eliminate capital gains taxes on investments in small and start-up firms.
13. Increase corporate tax on companies that “retain their earnings overseas.” Use that money to lower corporate tax rates for companies that expand operations within the U.S.
14. Add a refundable corporate tax credit for small businesses that offer healthcare.
15. Make the Research and Development tax credit permanent.
16. Increase the top tax bracket to 39.6% on families making $250,000 or more.
17. Estate tax begins at $7 million per couple ($3.5 million/person).

How would all of these be paid for? Obama wants to reform international tax loopholes, close domestic tax loopholes, eliminate tax breaks for oil and gas companies, and close other loopholes.

But there’s more on other areas of the website that impact taxes. Obama wants to “…ask those making over $250,000 to pay in the range of 2 to 4 percent more in total (combined employer and employee).” Originally, Obama wanted to completely uncap the social security tax above $250,000. What’s not said here is would this kick in based on individuals at $125,000 or families at $250,000?


Let’s assume that Obama is elected President. Let’s also assume that Congress continues to be controlled by Democrats. What would the tax impact be for you and I?

1. The wealthy already pay most of the taxes in the U.S. Under a President Obama they’d pay even more. In high tax states such as California the marginal tax rate would end up at 58.8% for those making above $125,000 if employed and 68.7% for those who are self-employed. That’s if Obama gets his way. Given the leanings among the Democrats in Congress, that’s likely the best we could hope for under Obama.

2. Obama’s tax plan would result in the redistribution of income away from entrepreneurs. Though Obama wants his plan to help entrepreneurs (through elimination of capital gains on investments in small companies), his income tax plan says the opposite. Additionally, there’s nothing in Obama’s plan about the AMT. Assuming the AMT lives on, those capital gains tax cuts would be imaginary; entrepreneurs wouldn’t pay capital gains taxes but they’d pay the same amount as AMT.

3. Obama has proposed a wealth of new programs. Those new programs would have to be funded with money from somewhere. Obama mentions health care, but that’s not the only program he proposes. Obama’s reliance on “closing loopholes” is misplaced (see #4 below).

4. Obama’s primary funding for his tax plan comes from closing various loopholes. Good luck. The IRS has been trying to close various loopholes for years, and increase enforcement activities. Congress writes the Tax Code to benefit lobbyists and others–in the bailout legislation that just passed numerous loopholes were added. As far as international loopholes the IRS has been successful in closing some. The reality is that only incremental progress will occur no matter who is President. There is no way that Obama will be able to fund his programs and tax cuts solely from closing loopholes.

5. A much more realistic scenario is that under a President Obama only a couple of his programs would be implemented but the tax increases and redistribution plan would occur. This would likely lead have a major negative economic impact (see #6 below).

6. Many large companies are organized as S-Corporations and are taxed on individuals tax returns rather than at the corporate level. (As a reminder, corporate taxes are always passed on to individuals.) When taxes increase to S-Corporation owners they will likely cut their hiring.

7. It is possible that Congress would go much further with social security taxes than the Obama campaign currently wants. There is sentiment among Democrats in Congress to tax high-income self-employed individuals fully at 15.3% (that is, uncapped social security). If this were to occur many high-income individuals would stop working when their income reached a certain level as the tax would be confiscatory. This occurred in the 1940s and 1950s when marginal tax rates reached 90%. This would have a negative impact on the economy in the United States.

8. The current economic climate is uncertain. Increasing taxes when the economy is not doing well would cause major economic problems. Obama has mentioned this in an interview with Bill O’Reilly.

9. Obama has publicly said he’s for the elimination of the Bush Tax Cuts. All of them. The elimination of a tax cut is a tax increase–forget the semantics.

10. The goal of Obama’s that makes the most sense–simplification of the tax system–is impossible under President Obama. His programs would tremendously increase the complexity of the Tax Code.


Obama likes to talk in broad terms and doesn’t like to be forced to mention specifics. That’s true of his stance on taxes. I’ll be very specific: If Obama is elected President you will pay more. This may be in taxes, or in the increased cost of goods and services as tax increases on some are passed on. There is no free lunch.


Next weekend I’ll report on what taxes might be like under a President McCain. It should be clear that I’m not a fan of Obama’s tax plans. For very different reasons I have concerns over McCain’s tax plans.

Posted in Legislation | Comments Off on Taxes Under a President Obama

Bail Out

The bailout bill passed Congress today and was signed into law by President Bush this afternoon. I’m of mixed opinion on the bailout portion of the bill. But I’m thrilled about one part of the bill—this year’s AMT (Alternative Minimum Tax) patch was included in the bailout legislation.

Every year Congress goes through the effort to raise the AMT exemption so that millions more individuals don’t get impacted by AMT. Last year Congress waited until December to pass an AMT patch and it impacted the filing season.

Also included in the bill were “extenders.” The extenders extended popular deductions that would have been eliminated.

Here is a list of some of the major tax items in the bill:

– AMT exemption increased to $46,200 for single and $69,950 for married filing jointly;
– Sales tax deduction extended through 2009;
– The Tuition and Fees deduction extended through 2009;
– Educator expense deduction of up to $250 extended through 2009;
– The real estate taxes deduction (for those taking the standard deduction) of $500 single/$1000 married filing jointly was extended through 2009; and
– Major tax benefits for those who live and/or work in major disaster areas.

There’s probably a lot more in the legislation (it runs 300 pages) but let me add a caveat: California will not be in compliance with any of these changes for 2008.

Posted in Legislation | Comments Off on Bail Out

Minnesota Calling

Apparently this blog has a wider circulation than I thought. Today I received an email from Tom Teale, the Assistant Director, Criminal Investigations of the Minnesota Department of Revenue (the state tax agency in Minnesota). While I generally focus (when I report on tax evaders) on IRS/Department of Justice prosecutions and California I’m happy to highlight the lowlights from other states.

And I do wish to point out that many states are suffering revenue shortfalls. If you file your federal tax return and skip your state tax return your state will find out. Every state but Nevada has an information sharing agreement with the IRS. Given that state income tax payments are generally deductible on your federal tax returns and are usually for far smaller amounts than your federal income tax doesn’t it make sense to ensure your compliance with state law?

In any case, Mr. Teale highlighted four cases in Minnesota. I’ve already covered Robert Beale, the tax evader who attempted to arrest the judge. He received eleven years of nonconsensual incarceration.

There were two cases I wasn’t aware of. In one, an attorney, John Hatling of Fergus, Falls, claimed that he could deduct his own wages using the “claim of right” deduction. If you’ve never heard of the deduction you’re not alone. It’s yet another tax protester argument and it doesn’t hold water. Mr. Hatling will plead guilty to one felony count and will be sentenced in state court next Friday.

In the other case, a judge didn’t file his Minnesota income tax returns. Donald Venne of Anoka County faces four gross misdemeanor charges. While the total unpaid tax is relatively small (about $3,200) a judge, of all people, should understand about compliance with the law. His attorney said that the problem was caused by a “traumatic family event that occurred over a period of years.”

Again, remember that you do need to pay your state income taxes. And my thanks to Mr. Teale for bringing these cases to my attention.

Posted in Minnesota | Comments Off on Minnesota Calling