Thursday, December 31, 2009

The IRS has issued further guidance on issues related to Code Sec. 7216. The IRS had previously issued final, temporary and proposed regulations that provide updated guidance concerning the disclosure and use of tax return information by tax return preparers under Code Sec. 7216 T.D. 9478.

Notice 2010-4

In Notice 2010-4, the IRS addressed three issues with respect to the use of taxpayer information to solicit new business from previous or existing clients.
Changes in law that could result in amended returns. A tax return preparer may use tax return information to contact taxpayers to inform them of changes in tax law that could affect the income tax liability on the taxpayers’ returns that were previously prepared or processed by this tax preparer. Code Sec. 7216 does not prohibit the use of tax return information to prepare a "tax return," and, under Reg. §301.7216-1(b)(1), a tax return includes an amended return. Accordingly, the preparer could use client tax return information to identify affected taxpayers, inform them regarding the change in tax law, advise whether it would be appropriate for them to file amended income tax returns, and assist in the preparation and filing of any amended returns.

Accountant or lawyer seeking to give compliance advice. A tax return preparer who is also an accountant may use tax return information to determine who might be affected by a prospective tax rule change in order to contact potentially affected taxpayers for whom the accountant/preparer reasonably expected to provide accounting services in the next year. The contact would notify these taxpayers of the change, explain how the change may affect them, and advise them with regard to actions they may take in response to the change. Reg. §301.7216-2(h)(1)(i) allows a preparer who is lawfully engaged in the practice of law or accountancy to use tax return information to provide other legal or accounting services to the taxpayer, and such services could include advice related to current and future income tax compliance.
Disclosure of taxpayer list to auxiliary service provider. Finally, tax return preparers may disclose their taxpayer lists kept under Reg. §301.7216-2(n) to a third party service provider holding itself out as providing services that include creation, publication, and distribution of newsletters, bulletins, or similar communications to taxpayers whose tax returns the tax return preparers have prepared or processed containing tax information and general business and economic information or analysis for educational purposes or for purposes of soliciting additional tax return preparation services for the tax return preparer. Although restrictions apply to transfers of taxpayer lists under Reg. §301.7216-2(n), a preparer is allowed under Reg. §301.7216-2(d)(1) to disclose, without taxpayer consent, tax return information to another tax return preparer located in the United States for the purpose of obtaining auxiliary services in connection with the preparation of any tax return, so long as the services provided are not substantive determinations or advice affecting the tax liability reported by taxpayers. The service provider, is prohibited from the further use or disclosure of the tax return information for purposes other than those related to the provision of the auxiliary services or as otherwise expressly permitted under Code Secs. 6713 and Code Sec. 7216.
Rev. Rul. 2010-5

In Notice 2010-5, the IRS discussed disclosure of information to tax return preparer insurance carriers. The IRS held that tax return preparers will not be liable for criminal penalties under Code Sec. 7216 and civil penalties under Code Sec. 6713 with respect to certain disclosures of tax return information made to the preparer's professional liability insurance carrier. Under Reg. §301.7216-2(a)(1), a tax return preparer may dislcose, without taxpayer consent, tax return information to another tax return preparer located in the United States in order to obtain auxillary services, not involving substantive determinations or tax advice. Disclosures, without taxpayer consent, may also be made to an attorney for the purpose of obtaining legal advice under Reg. §301.7216-2(g).

A professional liability insurance policy purchased by a return preparer is an auxiliary service provided in connection with the preparation of tax returns; thus, the insurance carrier is a tax return preparer. Accordingly, disclosures necessary for price quotes or to otherwise obtain or maintain professional liability insurance coverage will not result in penalties. This could include a list of client names and description of the services provided, Similarly, disclosures made to the insurance carrier as required for purposes of reporting and investigating claims or for the carrier's selection of an attorney to represent the return preparer will not result in penalties. This could include client names, a description of the services provided, a description of the claim or potential claim, and if necessary, copies of returns relevant to the claims. In both cases, disclosures beyond those that are necessary for the provision of the auxiliary services are prohibited. Finally, a return preparer may make disclosures to the selected attorney related to the claim or potential claim or in seeking legal advice from an attorney who is not a representative of the carrier, without taxpayer consent.

Labels:

Wednesday, December 30, 2009

section 7216 disclosure regulations

Proposed Regulations, NPRM REG-131028-09,Internal Revenue Service, (Dec. 30, 2010)
Code Sec. 7216




DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 301

REG-131028-09

RIN 1545-BI85

Amendments to the Section 7216 Regulations—Disclosure or Use of Information by Preparers of Returns.

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations.

SUMMARY: In the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the Federal Register , the IRS is issuing temporary regulations that provide updated guidance affecting tax return preparers regarding the use of information related to lists for solicitation of tax return business; the disclosure or use of statistical compilations of data under section 7216 of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) by a tax return preparer in connection with, or in support of, a tax return preparer's tax return preparation business, including identification of additional limited circumstances when a tax return preparer who compiles statistical information may disclose the compilation without taxpayer consent, and the placement of additional restrictions on the content of the compilation that may be disclosed under those circumstances without taxpayer consent; and the disclosure or use of information for the purpose of performing conflict reviews. The text of those temporary regulations also serves as the text of these proposed regulations. This document invites comments from the public on these regulations.

DATES: Written or electronic comments and requests for a public hearing must be received by [ INSERT DATE 60 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF THIS DOCUMENT IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER ].

ADDRESSES: Send submissions to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-131028-09), room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, PO Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, D.C. 20044. Submissions may be hand delivered Monday through Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-131028-09), Courier's Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C., or sent electronically, via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov (IRS REG-131028-09).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Concerning the proposed regulations, Molly K. Donnelly, (202) 622-4940; concerning the submissions of comments and requests for hearing, Richard Hurst, (202) 622-7180 (not toll-free numbers). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background and Explanation of Provisions
This document contains proposed amendments to 26 CFR part 301 under section 7216 to provide modified rules relating to the ability of a tax return preparer to use tax return information, without taxpayer consent, for the purposes of compiling, maintaining, and using lists for solicitation of tax return business under §301.7216-2(n); disclose and use statistical compilations of data described in §301.7216-1(b)(3)(i)(B) under §301.7216-2(o), and disclose and use tax return information for the purpose of performing conflict reviews under §301.7216-2(p). Temporary regulations in the Procedure and Administration section of this issue of the Federal Register amend 26 CFR part 301. The text of those regulations also serves as the text of these regulations. The preamble to the temporary regulations explains the temporary regulations and these proposed regulations.

Special Analyses
It has been determined that this notice of proposed rulemaking is not a significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866. Therefore, a regulatory assessment is not required. It has also been determined that section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply to these regulations, and because the regulation does not impose a collection of information on small entities, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) does not apply. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Code, this regulation has been submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on its impact on small business.

Comments and Requests for a Public Hearing
Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations, consideration will be given to any written (a signed original and eight (8) copies) or electronic comments that are submitted timely to the IRS. The IRS and the Treasury Department request comments on the clarity of the proposed rules, how they can be made easier to understand, and the administrability of the rules in the proposed regulations. All comments will be made available for public inspection and copying. A public hearing will be scheduled if requested in writing by any person that timely submits written comments. If a public hearing is scheduled, notice of the date, time and place for the public hearing will be published in the Federal Register .

Drafting Information
The principal author of these regulations is Molly K. Donnelly, Office of the Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration).

List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 301
Employment taxes, Estate taxes, Excise taxes, Gift taxes, Income taxes, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Proposed Amendments to the Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR part 301 is proposed to be amended as follows: PART 301—PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTRATION

Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 301 continues to read in part as follows:

Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

Par. 2. Section 301.7216-2 is amended by revising paragraphs (n), (o), and (p) to read as follows:

§301.7216-2 Permissible disclosures or uses without consent of the taxpayer .
* * * * *

(n) [The text of proposed amendments to §301.7216-2(n) is the same as the text for §301.7216-2T(n) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register ].

(o) [The text of proposed amendments to §301.7216-2(o) is the same as the text for §301.7216-2T(o) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register ].

(p) [The text of proposed amendments to §301.7216-2(p) is the same as the text for §301.7216-2T(p) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register ].

* * * * *

Steven T. Miller

Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement.

[FR Doc. 2009-31114 Filed 12/29/2009 at 4:15 pm; Publication Date: 01/04/2010]

Computing gambling income

A married couple had unreported gambling income in an amount equal to their winnings from one day of playing a slot machine, less the money they began with and money they lost before cashing out. The couple, who were not professional gamblers, could not, however, net all wagering gains or losses they sustained throughout the year. Gambling losses incurred other than in the trade or business of gambling are allowable only as itemized deductions when calculating taxable income. Because the taxpayers elected to use the standard the deduction, they were not entitled to itemize their deductions.


George D. and Lillian M. Shollenberger v. Commissioner.
U.S. Tax Court, Dkt. No. 5504-08, TC Memo. 2009-306, December 28, 2009.

OPINION
Gross income includes all income from whatever source derived, including gambling. Sec. 61(a); McClanahan v. United States, 292 F.2d 630, 631-632 (5th Cir. 1961). In the case of a taxpayer not engaged in the trade or business of gambling, gambling losses from “wagering transactions” are allowable as an itemized deduction but “only to the extent of the gains from such transactions.” Sec. 165(d); see McClanahan v. United States, supra; Winkler v. United States, 230 F.2d 766 (1st Cir. 1956).
Respondent asserts that for purposes of applying section 165(d) to casual gamblers like petitioners, the correct analysis and methodology is set forth in Chief Counsel Advice 2008-011 (Dec. 5, 2008) (the Chief Counsel Advice), which states in part:
A key question in interpreting §165(d) is the significance of the term “transactions.” The statute refers to gains and losses in terms of wagering transactions. Some would contend that transaction means every single play in a game of chance or every wager made. Under that reading, a taxpayer would have to calculate the gain or loss on every transaction separately and treat every play or wager as a taxable event. The gambler would also have to trace and recompute the basis through all transactions to calculate the result of each play or wager. Courts considering that reading have found it unduly burdensome and unreasonable. See Green v. Commissioner, 66 T.C. 538 (1976); Szkirscak [sic] v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1980-129. Moreover, the statute uses the plural term “transactions” implying that gain or loss may be calculated over a series of separate plays or wagers.
The better view is that a casual gambler, such as the taxpayer who plays the slot machines, recognizes a wagering gain or loss at the time she redeems her tokens. We think that the fluctuating wins and losses left in play are not accessions to wealth until the taxpayer redeems her tokens and can definitively calculate the amount above or below basis (the wager) realized. See Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co., 348 U.S. 426 (1955). For example, a casual gambler who enters a casino with $100 and redeems his or her tokens for $300 after playing the slot machines has a wagering gain of $200 ($300-$100). This is true even though the taxpayer may have had $1,000 in winning spins and $700 in losing spins during the course of play. Likewise, a casual gambler who enters a casino with $100 and loses the entire amount after playing the slot machines has a wagering loss of $100, even though the casual gambler may have had winning spins of $1,000 and losing spins of $1,100 during the course of play. [Fn. ref. omitted.]
Applying this methodology, respondent concedes that if we find, as we have found, that on March 29, 2005, petitioners entered the casino with $500 and took home $1,600 of winnings, the amount of gambling income which petitioners should have reported on their 2005 return was $1,100 ($2,000 jackpot winnings less $500 brought to the casino for gambling and less $400 taken from the jackpot for additional gambling) rather than $2,000 as determined in the notice of deficiency.
Although petitioners have stated that they “agree with” the Chief Counsel Advice, they nevertheless maintain, contrary to the Chief Counsel Advice, that they should be allowed to offset their March 29, 2005, net winnings with $2,264 of gambling losses they claim to have incurred throughout 2005. They contend that this result is necessary to treat “regular and casual gamblers equally”. 2


The Code mandates, however, that casual gamblers be treated differently from taxpayers who are in the trade or business of gambling. In particular, gambling losses incurred in a trade or business of gambling are allowable in computing adjusted gross income pursuant to section 62(a)(1). Gambling losses incurred other than in the trade or business of gambling are allowable, if at all, as itemized deductions in calculating taxable income. See sec. 63(a), (d); Johnston v. Commissioner, 25 T.C. 106, 108 (1955); Cromley v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2008-176; Heidelberg v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1977-133.


Because petitioners were not engaged in the trade or business of gambling, their gambling losses are allowable only as itemized deductions. But because petitioners have elected the standard deduction, they are not entitled to itemize their deductions. 3 Sec. 63(b), (e); see Johnston v. Commissioner, supra; Heidelberg v. Commissioner, supra. We reject as without merit petitioners' contention that this statutory arrangement is unconstitutional. See Tschetschot v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-38 (upholding constitutionality of section 165(d)); Valenti v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-483 (same); cf. Gajewski v. Commissioner, 84 T.C. 980 (1985) (holding that for purposes of computing the minimum tax the 16th Amendment does not require that a casual gambler's gambling losses be netted against gambling gains).
Drawing an analogy to the recovery of a capital investment, this Court has held that a casual gambler's gross income from a wagering transaction should be calculated by subtracting the bets placed to produce the winnings, not as a deduction in calculating adjusted gross income or taxable income but as a preliminary computation in determining gross income. See Lutz v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-89 (slot machine winnings); Hochman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1986-24 (horse race winnings). This Court has also recognized the practical difficulties of tracking the basis of each wager individually in a session of like play. See Green v. Commissioner, 66 T.C. 538, 548 (1976) (stating that a “tabulation of the amounts paid for chips less the amount paid to redeem chips would have served to verify the net win or loss figures”); Szkircsak v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1980-129 (stating that “it is impractical to record each separate roll of the dice or spin of the wheel”). The methodology put forward by respondent is consistent with these principles.
Insofar as petitioners mean to suggest that section 165(d) permits their gross income from slot machine play to be calculated by netting all their 2005 slot machine gains and losses, we disagree. Section 165(d) does not define gross income but instead limits the deductibility of losses on wagering “transactions” to the amount of gains from wagering “transactions”. Consistent with general principles treating each wager as a separate taxable event under Federal tax law, see Abeid v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 404, 411 (2004), section 165(d) clearly contemplates that gross income from wagering is determined in the first instance by reference to individual wagering “transactions.” To permit a casual gambler to net all wagering gains or losses throughout the year would intrude upon, if not defeat or render superfluous, the careful statutory arrangement that allows deduction of casual gambling losses, if at all, only as itemized deductions, subject to the limitations of section 165(d).
Respondent has effectively conceded that petitioners' gross income from their March 29, 2005, slot machine play was $1,100. Cf. LaPlante v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2009-226 (holding that taxpayers failed to substantiate claims of net gambling gains and losses). Giving effect to this concession, we hold that petitioners had $1,100 of unreported gross income from gambling in 2005 and are entitled to no deduction for gambling losses.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered under Rule 155.

Footnotes


1
Certain computational adjustments that follow from the resolution of this issue are not in controversy, and we do not address them.
2
By “regular” gamblers, we understand petitioners to mean gamblers who are in the trade or business of gambling.
3
A taxpayer may change an election to claim the standard deduction at any time before the period of limitations has expired. Sec. 63(e). Insofar as the record shows, petitioners have not sought to change their election to claim the standard deduction. In any event, on the record before us it would not appear advantageous for petitioners to do so.

Labels:

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Payments made by an individual to his former wife were not deductible as alimony under Code Sec. 215. The payments were not required by the couple's divorce agreement, which specifically stated that neither party was obligated to pay maintenance to the other party. An untitled single-page document that ordered the taxpayer to pay his ex-wife amounts related to his pension plan was incomplete and not explained at trial; therefore, the document was not probative. The Tax Court did, however, comment that its holding only referred to the year at issue, and that the taxpayer could ask a local court for a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) with respect to the monthly payments of a portion of his pension.


Donald A. Benzin v. Commissioner.
Docket No. 7811-09S. Filed December 28, 2009.


.
Discussion
A. Evidentiary Matters
In general, the Court conducts trials in accordance with the rules of evidence for trials without a jury in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and accordingly follows the Federal Rules of Evidence. Sec. 7453; Rule 143(a); Clough v. Commissioner, 119 T.C. 183, 188 (2002). However, Rule 174(b) and section 7453 carve out an exception for trials of small tax cases. Under this exception, the Court conducts small tax cases as informally as possible consistent with orderly procedure and “any evidence deemed by the Court to have probative value shall be admissible.” Rule 174(b); Schwartz v. Commissioner, 128 T.C. 6, 7 (2007).
The untitled single-page document stipulated by the parties and to which respondent reserved an objection is incomplete and was not explained by petitioner at trial. The document raises more questions than it provides answers. Therefore, respondent's objection is sustained on the basis that the document is not probative. See Rule 174(b).
B. Burden of Proof
Generally, the Commissioner's determinations are presumed correct, and the taxpayer bears the burden of proving that those determinations are erroneous. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). Deductions are a matter of legislative grace, and the taxpayer bears the burden of proving that he or she is entitled to any deduction claimed. Rule 142(a); Deputy v. du Pont, 308 U.S. 488, 493 (1940); New Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering, 292 U.S. 435, 440 (1934). Under section 7491(a)(1), the burden of proof may shift from the taxpayer to the Commissioner if the taxpayer produces credible evidence with respect to any factual issue relevant to ascertaining the taxpayer's liability. Petitioner has not alleged that section 7491 applies nor otherwise satisfied the requirements of that section; therefore, the burden of proof remains on petitioner.
C. Alimony Deduction
Generally, property settlements or equitable divisions of marital property incident to a divorce are not taxable events and do not give rise to a deduction. Sec. 1041; Estate of Goldman v. Commissioner, 112 T.C. 317, 322 (1999), affd. without published opinion sub nom. Schutter v. Commissioner, 242 F.3d 390 (10th Cir. 2000). On the other hand, payments made or received as alimony or separate maintenance generally are deductible by the payor spouse under section 215(a) and includable in the gross income of the payee spouse under sections 61(a)(8) and 71.
Section 215(b) defines an alimony or separate maintenance payment as a payment which is includable in the gross income of the recipient under section 71. Section 71(b)(1) provides a four-step inquiry for determining whether a payment is alimony or separate maintenance. Section 71(b)(1) provides:
SEC. 71(b)(1). Alimony or Separate Maintenance Payments Defined.—For purposes of this section—
(1) In general.—The term “alimony or separate maintenance payment” means any payment in cash if—
(A) such payment is received by (or on behalf of) a spouse under a divorce or separation instrument,
(B) the divorce or separation instrument does not designate such payment as a payment which is not includible in gross income * * * and not allowable as a deduction under section 215,
(C) in the case of an individual legally separated from his spouse under a decree of divorce or of separate maintenance, the payee spouse and the payor spouse are not members of the same household at the time such payment is made, and
(D) there is no liability to make any such payment for any period after the death of the payee spouse and there is no liability to make any payment (in cash or property) as a substitute for such payments after the death of the payee spouse.
Payments are deductible as alimony only if all four requirements of section 71(b)(1) are met.
Under subparagraph (A) of section 71(b)(1), alimony or separate maintenance must be received pursuant to a divorce or separation instrument. According to section 71(b)(2), a “divorce or separation instrument” means:
(A) a decree of divorce or separate maintenance or a written instrument incident to such a decree,
(B) a written separation agreement, or
(C) a decree (not described in subparagraph (A))requiring a spouse to make payments for the support or maintenance of the other spouse.
Further, subparagraph (B) of section 71(b)(1) requires that the divorce or separation instrument not designate the payment as not alimony or separate maintenance. A divorce or separation instrument “contains a nonalimony designation if the substance of such a designation is reflected in the instrument.” Estate of Goldman v. Commissioner, supra at 323. In other words, a divorce or separation agreement must provide a “clear, explicit and express direction” that the payments are not to be treated as alimony, but the designation need not mimic the language of sections 71 and 215. Richardson v. Commissioner, 125 F.3d 551, 556 (7th Cir. 1997), affg. T.C. Memo. 1995-554; Estate of Goldman v. Commissioner, supra at 323.
In the present case, neither the Judgment nor the incorporated Agreement makes any mention of alimony or separate maintenance. Petitioner's pension plan with the USPS and the $475 per month payment therefrom were also not established by the Judgment or the Agreement. Indeed, the Agreement specifically states that “neither party shall be obligated to pay maintenance to the other party.” In addition, petitioner testified: “I didn't have to pay alimony, and she didn't have to pay it to me either.”
We conclude, therefore, that the Judgment of Divorce and the Oral Stipulation Agreement incorporated therein do not provide for payments to petitioner's former wife and clearly, explicitly, and expressly contain a nonalimony provision. Accordingly, we must hold that petitioner's payments made to his former wife in 2007 did not satisfy the conditions set forth in section 71 and are thus not properly deductible as alimony for the taxable year in issue.
Finally, we observe that the only year before us is 2007 and that our holding relates only to that year. Thus, our holding does not preclude petitioner from asking a local court of competent jurisdiction for a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) with respect to the monthly payment to his former wife of a portion of his USPS pension. See secs. 402(e)(1)(A), 414(p); Amarasinghe v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-333, affd. 282 Fed. Appx. 228 (4th Cir. 2008).
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered for respondent.

Labels:

Monday, December 28, 2009

Heath Care Reform Bill HR 3590

Senate Approves Health Care Reform Bill; Difficult Conference Expected, (Dec. 28, 2009)
The Senate on December 24 passed its sweeping health care reform legislation, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Bill (HR 3590) by a vote of 60 to 39. The vote set the stage for a contentious conference with the House to merge the two chambers' respective versions of the bill.
Calling Senate passage of the health care reform bill "a historic vote," President Obama said that Congress is "finally poised to deliver on the promise of real, meaningful health insurance reform that will bring additional security and stability to the American people." The president noted that, if a final bill is enacted, it will be "the most important piece of social policy since the Social Security Act in the 1930s, and the most important reform of our health care system since Medicare passed in the 1960s."
Conference Issues
Liberal House Democrats are unhappy that the Senate jettisoned a public insurance option. They are also opposed to language in the Senate bill that prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for abortions, a key concession necessary to win the vote of Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb. The moderate lawmaker has warned that significant changes to the Senate version could cause him to vote against the final bill, leaving Senate Democratic leaders short of the necessary 60 votes required for passing the measure.
The House and the Senate also differ on how to pay for the reform package. The Senate bill raises most of the revenue for health care reform by imposing a 40-percent surtax on high-cost employer-sponsored health plans. House members from states with strong union supporters oppose the tax on so-called "Cadillac" plans and they have threatened to withhold their support of a final bill if the provision is included.
The House bill would raise revenue through a 5.4-percent surtax on high-income earners and the Senate has openly rejected that plan. Democratic aides believe, however, that both sides will eventually compromise on revenue provisions and have suggested that conferees will likely consider raising the income threshold for high-end insurance plans.
Democratic staff members will begin laying the framework for negotiations during the week starting on December 28 and conferees are expected to return to Washington the first week of January 2010. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has indicated that she would like to complete work on the health care reform package in time for President Obama’s State of the Union address, traditionally delivered at the end of January. The White House has set no deadline for when it expects to see the final bill.

Friday, December 25, 2009

Tax Extenders Act of 2009 JCX-60-09

http://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=3640

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Jakson Hewitt problems

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2009-12-24/jackson-hewitt-plunges-as-partner-halts-tax-loans-update2-.html

Innocent Spouse case - section 6015

The IRS denied innocent spouse relief to a wife for a tax deficiency arising from the married couple's failure to report on their joint income tax return income derived from the couple's business. The wife was not entitled to relief under Code Sec. 6015(b)(1)(B) or Code Sec. 6015(b)(1)(C) because she did not prove that the income was her husband's alone, and she did not offer any evidence of how the revenue could be allocated between the two spouses. Furthermore, testimony showed that the wife had reason to know that the return she signed understated the couple's income. The wife was also not entitled to relief under Code Sec. 6015(c) because the couple was married in the year in issue and continue to be married. Additionally, the wife did not prove that it was inequitable to hold her jointly liable under Code Sec. 6015(b)(1)(D) and Code Sec. 6015(f) because she did not satisfy several factors considered for equitable relief as set forth in Rev. Proc. 2003-61, 2003-2 C.B. 296.


Callie Sue Olson v. Commissioner., U.S. Tax Court, CCH Dec. 58,031(M), T.C. Memo. 2009-294, (Dec. 21, 2009)
Callie Sue Olson v. Commissioner.
U.S. Tax Court, Dkt. No. 20384-07, TC Memo. 2009-294, December 21, 2009.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION
GUSTAFSON, Judge: This case arises from petitioner Callie Sue Olson's request for “innocent spouse” relief from joint liability under section 6015 1 for 2003 taxes—i.e., an income tax deficiency of $13,600, an addition to tax of $3,400 under section 6651(a)(1) for failure to file the return on time, and an accuracy-related penalty of $2,720 under section 6662. In a statutory notice of deficiency issued to Ms. Olson and her husband on June 12, 2007, 2 the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) denied Ms. Olson's request for relief from joint liability; and in response, Ms. Olson timely filed a petition with the Court on September 10, 2007. The issue for decision is whether Ms. Olson is entitled under section 6015 to relief from joint liability. We find that Ms. Olson is not entitled to such relief.
ed.
OPINION
I. Standard and Scope of Review
When determining whether a taxpayer is entitled to relief under section 6015 (whether under subsection (b), (c), or (f)), we conduct a trial de novo, in which we may consider evidence introduced at trial which was not included in the administrative record. Porter v. Commissioner, 130 T.C. 115, 117 (2008). For all claims under section 6015 (including claims for equitable relief under section 6015(f)), we do not review for abuse of discretion but instead employ a de novo standard of review. Porter v. Commissioner, 132 T.C. ___ (2009). Respondent contends, however, that when the Court reviews a denial of relief under section 6015 (f), it must apply an abuse-of-discretion standard of review and must limit the scope of its review to the administrative record. We have held otherwise in the two Porter opinions cited above, and we do not repeat in this opinion the reasons for those holdings.
An appeal in this case would lie to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. That court held in Robinette v. Commissioner, 439 F.3d 455, 460 (8th Cir. 2006), revg. 123 T.C. 85 (2004), that the Tax Court's scope of review in a collection due process (CDP) proceeding under sections 6320 and 6330 should be limited to the administrative record. 4 However, the CDP provisions of sections 6320 and 6330 are different from the “innocent spouse” provisions of section 6015, and those differences include the following:
The CDP petitioner's agency-level remedies are described at some length in section 6330(a), (b), and (c), and section 6330(d)(2) requires the CDP petitioner to “exhaust[] all administrative remedies”; but section 6015 makes no explicit provision of agency-level remedies for “innocent spouse” relief and says nothing about exhausting them. The agency's CDP action is repeatedly characterized in section 6330 as a “hearing”, but no agency hearing is explicitly provided for the “innocent spouse” in section 6015. 5 The taxpayer's CDP submission to the Tax Court under section 6330(d) is called an “appeal” and is not referred to as a “petition” anywhere in the statute, while section 6015(e) provides that the innocent spouse files a “petition” that is nowhere called an “appeal”. The Tax Court “determine[s]” innocent spouse relief, sec. 6015(e)(1)(A), but has “jurisdiction with respect to such matter” in the case of an appeal from the agency's CDP determination, sec. 6330(d)(1). 6
All these differences in statutory vocabulary suggest that even if a CDP case under sections 6320 and 6330 is held to be governed by a “record rule”, as the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit holds, the same rule is not warranted for an “innocent spouse” case under section 6015. We therefore follow our Porter decisions and apply a de novo standard of review and scope of review in deciding this case under section 6015.
II. Joint and Several Liability and Section 6015 Relief
Section 6013(d)(3) provides that if a joint return is filed, the tax is computed on the taxpayers' aggregate income, and liability for the resulting tax is joint and several. See also sec. 1.6013-4(b), Income Tax Regs. (26 C.F.R.). That is, each spouse is responsible for the entire joint tax liability. However, section 6015 provides for relief from joint liability for spouses who meet the conditions of subsection (b) and for divorced and separated persons under subsection (c), and provides equitable relief in subsection (f) when the relief provided in subsections (b) and (c) is not available. Except as otherwise provided in section 6015, the taxpayer bears the burden of proof. See sec. 6015(c)(2); Rule 142(a); Alt v. Commissioner, 119 T.C. 306, 311 (2002), affd. 101 Fed. Appx. 34 (6th Cir. 2004). Because Ms. Olson generally requests relief under section 6015, we analyze her eligibility under all three subsections.
A. Subsection (b) Relief
Section 6015 provides as follows in subsections (a) and (b)(1):
SEC. 6015. RELIEF FROM JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY ON JOINT RETURN.
(a) In General.—Notwithstanding section 6013(d)(3)—
(1) an individual who has made a joint return may elect to seek relief under the procedures prescribed under subsection (b); and
(2) if such individual is eligible to elect the application of subsection (c), such individual may, in addition to any election under paragraph (1), elect to limit such individual's liability for any deficiency with respect to such joint return in the manner prescribed under subsection (c).
Any determination under this section shall be made without regard to community property laws.
(b) Procedures for Relief from Liability Applicable to All Joint Filers.—
(1) In general.—Under procedures prescribed by the Secretary, if—
(A) a joint return has been made for a taxable year;
(B) on such return there is an understatement of tax attributable to erroneous items of one individual filing the joint return;
(C) the other individual filing the joint return establishes that in signing the return he or she did not know, and had no reason to know, that there was such understatement;
(D) taking into account all the facts and circumstances, it is inequitable to hold the other individual liable for the deficiency in tax for such taxable year attributable to such understatement; and
(E) the other individual elects (in such form as the Secretary may prescribe) the benefits of this subsection not later than the date which is 2 years after the date the Secretary has begun collection activities with respect to the individual making the election,
then the other individual shall be relieved of liability for tax (including interest, penalties, and other amounts) for such taxable year to the extent such liability is attributable to such understatement.
Section 6015(b)(1) thus authorizes “innocent spouse” relief if a taxpayer satisfies all five of the requirements set out in subparagraphs (A) through (E). Respondent does not dispute that Ms. Olson meets the requirements of subparagraphs (A) (joint return) and (E) (timely election), but he denies that she meets the other three requirements in subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D). We therefore discuss those three.
1. Erroneous Item of Non-requesting Spouse ( Section 6015(b)(1)(B)
Ms. Olson has the burden to prove that the understatement of tax on the joint return was attributable to erroneous items of Mr. Olson and not of Ms. Olson. See Jonson v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 106, 113 (2002), affd. 353 F.3d 1181 (10th Cir. 2003). However, the erroneous item on the return was the business income of Fun Stuff Rental, 7 which was the family business. The business is identified on the company checks as “Greg & Callie's” (emphasis added), and Ms. Olson was active in the business—answering the phone, sending out mail, paying the help, handling the equipment, and working some of the jobs. Mr. and Ms. Olson's work was collaborative and mutual. Ms. Olson did not prove that the Fun Stuff Rental income was an item of Mr. Olson alone, and she did not offer any evidence of how the revenue could be allocated between the two spouses. See Ishizaki v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-318, 82 T.C.M. (CCH) 995, 1000-1001 (2001) (income is not an item of one spouse when the other “actively and substantially participated”). We hold that Ms. Olson did not prove that she meets the requirement of section 6015(b)(1)(B).
2. Requesting Spouse's Knowledge ( Section 6015(b)(1)(C))
As for the requirement of section 6015(b)(1)(C), Ms. Olson did make a credible showing that “in signing the return * * * she did not know * * * that there was such understatement”, but she did not prove that she “had no reason to know”. 8 On the contrary, her testimony showed that she did have reason to know that the return she signed understated the liability. She had quit her hospital job the prior year, so that in 2003 the family's only income source was Fun Stuff Rental; she saw that family expenses were being paid from the revenues of the business; she had access to all the records of the business; yet she signed a joint return on which Fun Stuff Rental reported a loss of $10,376. From the facts immediately available to her, she had reason to know that Fun Stuff Rental had not really experienced a loss of $10,376.
The loss reported on the return that Ms. Olson signed simply cannot be reconciled with her knowledge of the business and the family activities. If she did not know that the return she signed understated the income of Fun Stuff Rental, it is because she chose to pay no attention to the matter. But as the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has observed:
a taxpayer cannot satisfy the lack of knowledge requirement by claiming that he or she failed to review the joint return before signing it. “ Section 6013(e) is designed to protect the innocent, not the intentionally ignorant.” Cohen v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1987-537 (Oct. 20, 1987). * * *
Erdahl v. Commissioner, 930 F.2d 585, 589 (8th Cir. 1991), revg. T.C. Memo. 1990-101. We hold that Ms. Olson did not prove that she had no reason to know that the loss reported on the joint return that she signed was erroneous. Rather, she could and should have known that the reported loss was erroneous.
3. Inequitable To Hold Liable ( Section 6015(b)(1)(D))
As for the requirement of section 6015(b)(1)(D), Ms. Olson did not show that “it is inequitable to hold * * * [her] liable for the deficiency in tax”. The statute provides that this judgment on the equities is to be made “taking into account all the facts and circumstances”. 9 Since this “inequitable” requirement under section 6015(b)(1)(D) is equivalent to the “inequitable” requirement under section 6015(f)(1), which is discussed below in part II.C, we relegate our analysis to that part of this opinion. In sum, Ms. Olson did not prove that it is inequitable to hold her jointly liable.
Thus, Ms. Olson fails to satisfy the requirements of subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D) of section 6015(b)(1) and does not qualify for relief under section 6015(b).
B. Subsection (c) Relief.
Section 6015(c) is entitled “Procedures to Limit Liability for Taxpayers No Longer Married or Taxpayers Legally Separated or Not Living Together.” Because Mr. and Ms. Olson were married in the year in issue and continue to be married, Ms. Olson is not entitled to relief under subsection (c).
C. Equitable Relief Under Subsection (f)
1. Standards Applicable Under Section 6015(f)
Subsection (f) of section 6015 provides as follows:
SEC. 6015(f). Equitable Relief.—Under procedures prescribed by the Secretary, if—
(1) taking into account all the facts and circumstances, it is inequitable to hold the individual liable for any unpaid tax or any deficiency (or any portion of either); and
(2) relief is not available to such individual under subsection (b) or (c),
the Secretary may relieve such individual of such liability.
Thus, a taxpayer may be relieved from joint and several liability under section 6015(f) if, taking into account all the facts and circumstances, it is inequitable to hold the taxpayer liable.
In accord with the statutory provision that section 6015(f) relief is to be granted “[u]nder procedures prescribed by the Secretary,” the Commissioner has issued revenue procedures to guide IRS employees in determining whether a requesting spouse is entitled to relief from joint and several liability. See Rev. Proc. 2003-61, supra, 2003-2 C.B. 296, modifying and superseding Rev. Proc. 2000-15, 2000-1 C.B. 447. Revenue Procedure 2003-61 provides a three-step analysis for IRS employees to use in deciding whether to grant relief: Section 4.01 (discussed below) lists seven threshold conditions that must be met for any relief to be granted; section 4.02, not applicable here, lists circumstances in which relief will ordinarily be granted as to liabilities (unlike those at issue here) that were reported on a return; and section 4.03 (discussed below) sets out eight non exclusive factors to be considered in determining whether equitable relief should be granted.
The Tax Court has been given express authority to review the IRS's denial of equitable relief under section 6015(f). Section 6015(e)(1) provides:
[I]n the case of an individual who requests equitable relief under subsection (f) * * * [i]n addition to any other remedy provided by law, the individual may petition the Tax Court (and the Tax Court shall have jurisdiction) to determine the appropriate relief available to the individual under this section * * *.
In “determin[ing] the appropriate relief”, the Court reviews the IRS's three-step analysis prescribed in its revenue procedure, see Washington v. Commissioner, 120 T.C. 137, 147-152 (2003), but our review is not circumscribed by that matrix. Rather, we consider “all the facts and circumstances” in determining whether the taxpayer is entitled to “innocent spouse” relief. Sec.6015(f)(1); see Porter v. Commissioner, 132 T.C. at ___ (slip op. at 12-13); Lantz v. Commissioner, 132 T.C. ___ (2009).
2. Evaluation of Ms. Olson's Entitlement to Relief Under Section 6015(f)
As we now show, the IRS correctly employed the analysis prescribed in Revenue Procedure 2003-61, supra, to determine that Ms. Olson is not entitled to equitable relief under section 6015(f). We find that that the IRS's analysis did not exclude any relevant fact or circumstance that ought to be taken into account, and that relief from joint liability is not appropriate in this case.
a. Threshold Eligibility Under Rev. Proc. 2003-61, Sec. 4.01
Revenue Procedure 2003-61 sets out, in section 4.01, seven threshold conditions that all requesting spouses must meet in order for the IRS to grant relief pursuant to section 6015(f). 10 In his pretrial memorandum respondent asserts generally that Ms. Olson “fails to meet the threshold eligibility requirements” but does not specify which one or ones she fails to meet. It appears that she satisfies the first six but that she fails to satisfy the seventh—i.e., “The income tax liability from which the requesting spouse seeks relief is attributable to an item of the individual with whom the requesting spouse filed the joint return”. As we explained above in part II.A.1, Ms. Olson failed to show that the underreported income of Fun Stuff Rental was an item attributable to Mr. Olson alone. Rather, Ms. Olson was also active in the business, so that its income is properly attributable not only to Mr. Olson but also to her. Ms. Olson therefore fails to meet the threshold conditions for the IRS to grant equitable relief.
We nonetheless proceed to consider “[i]n the alternative”, see O'Meara v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2009-71, whether there are any additional facts and circumstances that would justify relief for Ms. Olson. We find that there are not.
b. Facts-and-Circumstances Test of Rev. Proc. 2003-61, Sec. 4.03
Where the requesting spouse satisfies the threshold conditions of section 4.01 of Revenue Procedure 2003-61 (not the case here), the IRS may grant relief under the facts-and-circumstances test of section 4.03. Under that test the IRS considers a “nonexclusive list of factors” in section 4.03(2)(a) to determine whether “taking into account all the facts and circumstances, it is inequitable to hold the requesting spouse liable”: (i) whether the requesting spouse is separated or divorced from the nonrequesting spouse; (ii) whether the requesting spouse would suffer economic hardship if not granted relief; (iii) whether the requesting spouse knew or had reason to know that the other spouse would not pay the liability; (iv) whether the nonrequesting spouse has a legal obligation to pay the outstanding tax liability pursuant to a divorce decree or agreement; (v) whether the requesting spouse received a significant benefit from the item giving rise to the deficiency; and (vi) whether the requesting spouse has made a good faith effort to comply with the tax laws for the taxable years following the taxable year to which the request for such relief relates. Other factors that the IRS considers under section 4.03(2)(b) are (i) whether the nonrequesting spouse abused the requesting spouse and (ii) whether the requesting spouse was in poor mental or physical health at the time he or she signed the tax return or at the time he or she requested relief.
We consider these factors and any other relevant facts and circumstances in determining whether the taxpayer is entitled to “innocent spouse” relief. No single factor is determinative, and all factors are to be considered and weighted appropriately. Haigh v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2009-140. In this case the IRS's factors provide a sufficient basis for evaluating Ms. Olson's claim for equitable relief, and the record suggests no additional facts and circumstances that should be considered. We therefore address the factors listed in section 4.03 of Revenue Procedure 2003-61.
i. Marital Status
Ms. Olson was not divorced, separated, or living apart from Mr. Olson when she filed her request for “innocent spouse” relief. This factor weighs against granting relief. See McKnight v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-155.
ii. Economic Hardship
Generally, economic hardship exists if collection of the tax liability will cause the taxpayer to be unable to pay reasonable basic living expenses. Butner v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-136. Ms. Olson made no showing of economic hardship, so this factor weighs against granting relief.
iii. Knowledge or Reason To Know
As is discussed above in part II.A.2, Ms. Olson has failed to establish that she did not have reason to know of the item giving rise to the deficiency (i.e., the income of Fun Stuff Rental). This factor weighs against granting relief. See Beatty v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-167.
iv. Nonrequesting Spouse's Legal Obligation
Where a divorce decree or other court order gives the nonrequesting spouse a legal obligation to pay the liability, this fact can weigh in favor of granting relief to the requesting spouse. No divorce decree or separation order imposes such a liability on Mr. Olson, and this factor therefore weighs against granting relief to Ms. Olson.
v. Significant Benefit
While Ms. Olson did share in the benefit of the Fun Stuff Rental income in 2003 and did share with Mr. Olson the benefit of the money that they did not use to pay their tax liability, there is nothing in the record that indicates that Ms. Olson “received significant benefit (beyond normal support) from the unpaid income tax liability or item giving rise to the liability”, and respondent does not contend that she did. Therefore, this factor weighs moderately in favor of relief. See Magee v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-263.
vi. Compliance With Federal Tax Laws
As of the time the IRS issued the notice of deficiency that denied Ms. Olson's request for relief for 2003, the Olsons had not filed returns for 2004 and 2005, so respondent contends that Ms. Olson had not (for purposes of Rev. Proc. 2003-61, sec. 4.03(2)(a)(vi)) “made a good faith effort to comply with income tax laws in the taxable years following the taxable year or years to which the request for relief relates.” We have found that in 2003 the income of Fun Stuff Rental was an item of both Mr. and Ms. Olson. However, the record is not clear on this point as to 2004 and 2005; and when the IRS determined deficiencies for 2004 and 2005, it issued the notice of deficiency to Mr. Olson only. Since this factor, even if found in Ms. Olson's favor, would not sufficiently tip the scales to justify relief, we do not decide this issue and instead assume arguendo that this factor weighs in favor of relief. See Fox v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-22.
vii. Abuse
There is no evidence or allegation of abuse by Mr. Olson. Therefore, this factor is neutral. See Magee v. Commissioner, supra.
viii. Mental or Physical Health
Ms. Olson has not alleged, nor does the record show, that her mental or physical health was poor at the relevant times. Therefore, this factor is neutral. See id.
When we weigh the facts and circumstances implicated in these eight factors, we find that Ms. Olson is not entitled to relief. Two factors are neutral, no more than two factors weigh in favor of relief, and at least four factors weigh against relief. We find that the two favorable factors (subsequent compliance and lack of significant benefit) are easily outweighed by the four unfavorable factors: Ms. Olson lived with and continues to live with Mr. Olson; she showed no economic hardship that would result if relief were not granted; she should have known of the understatement reflected on the return; and Mr. Olson is not under any order or decree to pay the liability. As a result, when the facts and circumstances are weighed, Ms. Olson is not entitled to “innocent spouse” relief under section 6015(f) with respect to the Olsons' joint Federal income tax liability for 2003.
In sum, we find that Ms. Olson is not entitled to relief from joint liability under section 6015(b), (c), or (f).
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered for respondent.

Footnotes


1
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations of sections refer to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C.), as amended, and all citations of Rules refer to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
2
The 2003 deficiency itself was disputed in Gregory John Olson v. Commissioner, docket No. 20383-07, in which case Ms. Olson was not a petitioner. Mr. Olson conceded the case, and decision was entered on November 17, 2009, sustaining against him the IRS's deficiency determination.
3
In the “Filing Status” block on the first page of the return, neither the block for “Married filing jointly” nor any other block is checked. However, the names of both Mr. and Ms. Olson appear on the appropriate lines (with Ms. Olson's name on the line marked “If a joint return, spouse's first name and initial”); and Ms. Olson signed in the signature block on the second page, under “Spouse's signature. If a joint return, both must sign.” The IRS treated the return as a joint return, and Ms. Olson's request for innocent spouse relief characterized the return as a joint return.
4
This Court held to the contrary in Robinette v. Commissioner, 123 T.C. 85 (2004), revd. 439 F.3d 455, 460 (8th Cir. 2006), and in CDP cases we generally do not follow the record rule. However, in cases appealable to Courts of Appeals that follow the record rule, we do follow those precedents pursuant to our “ Golsen rule”. See Golsen v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 742, 757 (1970), affd. 445 F.2d 985 (10th Cir. 1971). However, as we noted in Porter v. Commissioner, 130 T.C. 115, 120 (2008), the Court of Appeals' decision in Robinette interpreting section 6330 does not govern the interpretation of section 6015.

5
See Porter v. Commissioner, supra, 130 T.C. at 135 (Thornton, J., concurring); Friday v. Commissioner, 124 T.C. 220, 222 (2005) (“There is in section 6015 no analog to section 6330 granting the Court jurisdiction after a hearing at the Commissioner's Appeals Office”).
6
See Porter v. Commissioner, supra at 120; id. at 134-135 (Thornton, J., concurring).
7
Ms. Olson did not argue that the understatement was attributable to the erroneous exclusion of one or more specific revenue items of which she could not have been aware or that it was attributable to the erroneous deduction of one or more specific items of expense whose legitimacy she could not have known. Since she did not show what particular items contributing to the income of Fun Stuff Rental gave rise to the understatement, and since in any event the bank statements and other records were all accessible to her, this argument could not have prevailed.
8
See also sec. 6015-2(c), Income Tax Regs. (26 C.F.R.) (“A requesting spouse has * * * reason to know of an understatement * * * if a reasonable person in similar circumstances would have known of the understatement. * * * All of the facts and circumstances are considered in determining whether a requesting spouse had reason to know of an understatement. The facts and circumstances that are considered include, but are not limited to, the nature of the erroneous item and the amount of the erroneous item relative to other items; the couple's financial situation; the requesting spouse's educational background and business experience; the extent of the requesting spouse's participation in the activity that resulted in the erroneous item; whether the requesting spouse failed to inquire, at or before the time the return was signed, about items on the return or omitted from the return that a reasonable person would question; and whether the erroneous item represented a departure from a recurring pattern reflected in prior years' returns (e.g., omitted income from an investment regularly reported on prior years' returns)”).
9
See also sec. 1.6015-2(d), Income Tax Regs. (26 C.F.R.) (“All of the facts and circumstances are considered in determining whether it is inequitable to hold a requesting spouse jointly and severally liable for an understatement. One relevant factor for this purpose is whether the requesting spouse significantly benefitted, directly or indirectly, from the understatement. A significant benefit is any benefit in excess of normal support. Evidence of direct or indirect benefit may consist of transfers of property or rights to property, including transfers that may be received several years after the year of the understatement. Thus, for example, if a requesting spouse receives property (including life insurance proceeds) from the nonrequesting spouse that is beyond normal support and traceable to items omitted from gross income that are attributable to the nonrequesting spouse, the requesting spouse will be considered to have received significant benefit from those items. Other factors that may also be taken into account, if the situation warrants, include the fact that the requesting spouse has been deserted by the nonrequesting spouse, the fact that the spouses have been divorced or separated, or that the requesting spouse received benefit on the return from the understatement. For guidance concerning the criteria to be used in determining whether it is inequitable to hold a requesting spouse jointly and severally liable under this section, see Rev. Proc. 2000-15 (2000-1 C.B. 447), or other guidance published by the Treasury and IRS (see § 601.601(d)(2) of this chapter)”). The revenue procedure cited in the regulation has been superseded by Revenue Procedure 2003-61, 2003-2 C.B. 296.

10
See Rev. Proc. 2003-61, sec. 4.01, 2003-2 C.B. at 297 (all requesting spouses must meet seven threshold conditions: (i) The requesting spouse filed a joint return for the taxable year for which he or she seeks relief; (ii) relief is not available to the requesting spouse under section 6015(b) or (c); (iii) the requesting spouse applies for relief no later than 2 years after the date of the Service's first collection activity after July 22, 1998, with respect to the requesting spouse; (iv) no assets were transferred between the spouses as part of a fraudulent scheme by the spouses; (v) the nonrequesting spouse did not transfer disqualified assets to the requesting spouse; (vi) the requesting spouse did not file or fail to file the return with fraudulent intent; and (vii) absent enumerated exceptions, the income tax liability from which the requesting spouse seeks relief is attributable to an item of the individual with whom the requesting spouse filed the joint return). As to requirement (iii) above, we have held that the two-year rule is invalid. See Lantz v. Commissioner, 132 T.C. ___ (2009).

Labels:

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

6343 levy prohbited in a hardship case

Save this case. The Tax Court has finally been able to hold the IRS to a strict reading of the levy prohibition in section 6343. I take my hat off to Judge Dawson who knows how to read a statute.
The IRS's determination to proceed with a levy was an abuse of discretion. Although the settlement officer determined that a levy on the taxpayer's car and wages would create an economic hardship, the officer determined to proceed with the levy because the taxpayer was not in compliance with filing and payment requirements. However, neither case law nor the Internal Revenue Code or regulations under Code Sec. 6343 condition the release of a levy upon compliance with filing and payment requirements when there is an economic hardship. Rather, the regulations require the release of a levy that creates an economic hardship; therefore, the settlement officer's determination to proceed with the levy was contrary to law and an abuse of discretion.—

Kathleen A. Vinatieri v. Commissioner.
U.S. Tax Court, Dkt. No. 15895-08L, 133 TC —, No. 16, December 22, 2009.
.
R issued P a notice of intent to levy to collect P's unpaid Federal income taxes for 2002..P timely requested a hearing under sec. 6330, I.R.C.
P submitted to the settlement officer Form 433-A, Collection Information Statement for Wage Earners and Self-Employed Individuals, indicating she had monthly income of *800 and expenses of *800, had *14 cash on hand, and owned a 1996 Toyota Corolla four-door sedan with 243,000 miles and a value of *300..If P's wages are levied on she will be unable to pay her reasonable basic living expenses..If her car is levied on, she will be unable to work.
The settlement officer stated in her log that P meets the criteria to have her account reported as currently not collectible because of hardship in accordance with the Internal Revenue Manual (IRM). However, R's Appeals Office issued a notice of determination to proceed with levy, stating that P was not entitled to collection alternatives because she had not filed her 2005 and 2007 Federal income tax returns. P timely petitioned for review of that determination under sec. 6330(d), I.R.C..R filed a motion for summary judgment..P, proceeding pro se, did not file a cross-motion for summary judgment.
Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, the Secretary must release a levy upon all, or part of, a taxpayer's property or rights to property if, inter alia, the Secretary has determined that the levy is creating an economic hardship due to the financial condition of the taxpayer.. Sec. 6343(a)(1)(D), I.R.C. The regulations provide that a levy is creating an economic hardship due to the financial condition of an individual taxpayer and must be released “if satisfaction of the levy in whole or in part will cause an individual taxpayer to be unable to pay his or her reasonable basic living expenses.”.Sec. 301.6343-1(b)(4), Proced. & Admin. Regs.
1. Held:. Sec. 6343(a)(1)(D), I.R.C., and sec. 301.6343-1(b)(4), Proced. & Admin. Regs., require release of a levy that creates an economic hardship regardless of the taxpayer's noncompliance with filing required returns.
2. Held, further, a levy on P's wages or car would cause P to be unable to pay her reasonable basic living expenses, creating an economic hardship that would require release of the levy pursuant to sec. 6343(a)(1)(D), I.R.C., and sec. 301.6343-1(b)(4), Proced. & Admin. Regs.
3. Held, further, R's motion for summary judgment is denied because R's determination to proceed with the levy was wrong as a matter of law and, therefore, was an abuse of discretion.
OPINION
DAWSON, Judge:.This matter is before the Court on respondent's motion for summary judgment filed pursuant to Rule 121. 1 Petitioner timely filed a petition pursuant to section 6330(d) appealing respondent's determination to proceed with collection by levy of petitioner's 2002 income tax liability. The issue to be decided is whether respondent's determination was an abuse of discretion.
Background
Petitioner resided in Tennessee when she filed the petition. Her residence is an apartment that she rents for *600 per month.
On September 13, 2007, respondent sent petitioner a Final Notice of Intent to Levy and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing (levy notice)..The underlying tax liability was attributable to unpaid self-assessed tax reported on her 2002 return..Petitioner timely requested a hearing on September 24, 2007, and the hearing was conducted through correspondence and by telephone with the settlement officer.
Petitioner first learned of the collection activity when her employer notified her about the proposed levy on her wages. When the settlement officer asked petitioner whether she wanted to enter into an installment agreement, petitioner said “she has nothing.” 2 Petitioner told the settlement officer that she has pulmonary fibrosis and is dying..Because of her health she can only find part-time employment.
The settlement officer could not find a record that petitioner had filed a return for 2005..Petitioner explained to the settlement officer that the payroll company responsible for completing her 2005 Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement, was no longer in business..She had attempted to get the tax information from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), but the IRS had no information regarding her income for 2005.
The settlement officer told petitioner that she might be able to have her account placed in currently not collectible status..The settlement officer asked petitioner to submit a Form 433-A, Collection Information Statement for Wage Earners and Self-Employed Individuals, and a diagnosis regarding her current health condition.
Petitioner sent a completed Form 433-A, indicating she had monthly income of *800 and expenses of *800, had *14 cash on hand, and owned a 1996 Toyota Corolla four-door sedan with 243,000 miles and a value of *300..The Form 433-A reported that petitioner did not own any other assets..Verification received by the settlement officer was consistent with the information petitioner provided in the Form 433-A..Petitioner was unable to obtain a written diagnosis of her medical condition from her physician because her physician would provide a diagnosis only ina claim for worker's compensation.
The settlement officer's log entry dated May 15, 2008, states:
TP [petitioner] meets the criteria to have account placed in CNC [currently not collectible] status per IRM 5.16.[1.]2.9 Hardship..The balance due is less than 10K and the TP has stated she has a terminal illness..CIS verification is not required..The TP has stated she has nothing and is not able to full pay or make payments..However, the TP is not in compliance. The TP has not filed a 2005 return and there is no record of the 2007 tax return being filed..The TP stated she does not have income information for 2005 and company that did payroll is no longer in business. TP stated she contacted IRS and they advised her they have no income information..There is no information per IRTRL..S/O [the settlement officer] contacted TP regarding filing of the 2007 return..The TP stated the return was filed late..The S/O requested the TP fax a copy of the return with the W-2..TP to fax information by 5-19-08..S/O asked TP if she obtained health diagnosis and the TP stated the doctor would only give her something if she is applying for diability..S/O requested income information for 2005 per IRPTRE.
The settlement officer's log entry dated May 20, 2008, states:
TP did not provide a copy of 2007 return and there is no record that the return has been filed per IDRS research..The TP was employed in 2007 and is currently employed..The 2005 return has not been filed..Since the TP is not in compliance, collection alternative cannot be considered..S/O will issue determination letter..If the 2005 income information is received, the S/O will forward it to the TP.
Respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) dated June 2, 2008, sustaining the proposed levy action and stating that, because petitioner was not in compliance with filing the required tax returns, a collection alternative could not be considered..The notice of determination was reviewed and signed by the Appeals team manager..The attachment to the notice of determination stated:
The settlement officer inquired about a collection alternative and you stated you could not make payments. You stated you had pulmonary fibrosis and can only work part-time hours due to your heath condition..The Settlement officer [who] advised you of the collection alternative however explained a collection alternative could not be considered because you were not in compliance with filing required tax returns. * * *
The attachment explained the balancing of efficient tax collection with concern regarding intrusiveness as follows:
Appeals has verified, or received verification, that applicable laws and administrative procedures have been met; has considered the issues raised; and has balanced the proposed collection with the legitimate concern that such action be no more intrusive than necessary by IRC Section 6330(c)(3).
Collection alternatives include full payment, installment agreement, offer in compromise and currently-not-collectible..However, since unfiled tax returns exist, the only alternative at present is to take enforced action by levying your assets..It is Appeals decision that the proposed levy action is appropriate..The proposed levy action balances the need for the efficient collection of the taxes with the legitimate concern that any collection action be no more intrusive than necessary.
Neither the notice of determination nor the attachment reflect any consideration of the fact that the levy would create an economic hardship as stated by the settlement officer in her.daily log and supported by the Form 433-A petitioner submitted.
Petitioner timely filed a petition in this Court challenging respondent's determination..Respondent filed the motion for summary judgment, and the Court ordered petitioner to file a response. 3 Petitioner filed a response to respondent's motion for summary judgment but did not file a cross-motion for summaryjudgment. 4 In her response petitioner describes her situation as follows:
To Whom It May Concern,
I don't know what you want to know cause I don't understand all the legal stuff you sent me..I can't afford a lawyer..And the closest legal aid is in Knoxville 30 miles away..My poor car will not go that far..So I will start at the beginning of my story and see if you can help me.
I was in an unhealthy relationship for many years. During a great deal of that time my husband was doing alcohol and drugs..I had 2 children plus his 3 to take care of..I had been doing janitorial work at a strip mall * * *..It was the only place that I could work that I could take my [then] 3 year old daughter with me..I could not support my family and pay day care. * * * My husband took care of bills and such cause he demanded that I turn over my money..We even got a divorce during that time cause I was not obeying him. * * *
Now I am not looking for sympathy just understanding..Do you know how hard it is to be a single parent?.* * * I have a high school education and nothing else.
It was nearly five years before I was notified of a problem by the I.R.S..Danny [petitioner's former spouse] was suppose to be doing taxes..He even made me sign a form that because he made more money he could claim my kids on his taxes cause we were no longer legally married.
I got all the W-2's from the I.R.S. except 2005 that they still have not sent me..That is why they are not done..I did all those taxes and forfeited the refunds..I do not remember what that total came to. But it was enough to pay I would say most of back taxes..The 2007 taxes were late and I don't know why they didn't arrive..I sent a second copy in as soon as my son gave me my copy..He had my copy for college financial aid and he lost them for a bit of time.
I am not a rich person..I work in a job so I can be home with my daughter..I left my husband in July after he threatened to beat my daughter with a baseball bat..Beating me is one thing but I could not have him beating my girl..So I am a single parent again..Right now we have not had much work in nearly a year..I have rent of 600 a mo..Utilities of 150 and get food stamps or I wouldn't eat..I make about 700-800 [per] month. There are no better jobs in our town..My daughter is only 11 so its not like I can leave her alone at night or on weekends..D.H.S. says it's not even legal..She is too young..There is no child care and I have no family here..I have pulmonary fibrosis that makes me sick all the time and the diagnosis says I have about 10 yrs to live..Right now I can work thank God.
I did my taxes this year [for 2008] and you are getting a little over *4,700..I'm not asking for much just a break..You can have my tax returns [refunds ?] I don't care..Well I do that is a tremendous loss but oh well..I don't have any money to send you on a monthly basis..Can we stop all the penalties..They are killing me..I will never be able to pay it off. * * * I let a relationship screw me up..I am truly sorry for that and am begging for a lifeline here..You can come to my home and see for yourself..I don't have fancy t.v.'s or even cable except for internet..I can't afford a phone..My clothes have holes in them. I even cut my own hair..If I could pay this off faster I would just to stop the nightmares it gives me.
Discussion
A. Summary Judgment
Summary judgment is used to expedite litigation and avoid unnecessary and expensive trials..The Court will render a decision on a motion for summary judgment if the pleadings, answers to interrogatories, depositions, admissions, and other acceptable materials, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that a decision may be rendered as a matter of law..Rule 121(b). Because the effect of granting a motion for summary judgment is to decide the case against a party without allowing that party an opportunity for a trial, the Court should grant the motion only after a careful consideration of the case.. Associated Press v. United States, 326 U.S. 1, 6 (1945); Kroh v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. 383, 390 (1992).
For purposes of respondent's motion for summary judgment, respondent has the burden of showing the absence of a genuine issue as to any material fact..Petitioner is afforded the benefit of all reasonable doubt, and the material submitted by both sides is viewed in the light most favorable to petitioner. See, e.g., Adickes v. S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 157 (1970); Kroh v. Commissioner, supra at 390.
Respondent moves the Court for summary judgment on the ground that the settlement officer did not abuse her discretion in rejecting collection alternatives and determining to proceed with levy because petitioner was not in compliance with the filing requirements..Petitioner asks that the levy not be sustained because, if her wages are taken, she will be unable to pay her basic living expenses; and, if her car is taken, she will not be able to work.
B. Collection of Federal Taxes by Levy
If a taxpayer liable for Federal taxes fails to pay the taxes within 10 days after notice and demand, section 6331 authorizes the Secretary to collect the tax by levy upon all property and rights to property (except any property that is exempt under section 6334) belonging to the taxpayer or on which there is a lien for the payment of the tax.
Section 6343(a)(1) provides that, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, if the Secretary has determined that the levy is creating an economic hardship due to the financial condition of the taxpayer, the Secretary must release a levy upon all, or part of, a taxpayer's property or rights to property. 5 Sec. 6343(a)(1)(D)..The regulations provide that a levy is creating an economic hardship due to the financial condition of an individual taxpayer and must be released “if satisfaction of the levy in whole or in part will cause an individual taxpayer to be unable to pay his or her reasonable basic living expenses.” Sec. 301.6343-1(b)(4), Proced. & Admin. Regs.
A taxpayer alleging that collection of the liability would create undue hardship must submit complete and current financial data to enable the Commissioner to evaluate the taxpayer's qualification for collection alternatives or other relief. Picchiottino v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-231..The regulations provide that, for purposes of determining the taxpayer's reasonable amount of living expenses, any information that is provided by the taxpayer is to be considered, including the following:
(A) The taxpayer's age, employment status and history, ability to earn, number of dependents, and status as a dependent of someone else;
(B) The amount reasonably necessary for food, clothing, housing * * *, medical expenses * * *, transportation, current tax payments * * *, alimony, child support, or other court-ordered payments, and expenses necessary to the taxpayer's production of income * * *;
(C) The cost of living in the geographic area in which the taxpayer resides;
(D) The amount of property exempt from levy which is available to pay the taxpayer's expenses;
(E) Any extraordinary circumstances such as special education expenses, a medical catastrophe, or natural disaster; and
(F) Any other factor that the taxpayer claims bears on economic hardship and brings to the attention of the director.
Sec. 301.6343-1(b)(4)(ii), Proced. & Admin. Regs.
C. Section 6330 Procedures
Section 6330(a) provides the general rule that no levy may be made on any property or right to property of any taxpayer unless the Secretary has provided 30 days' notice to the taxpayer of the right to an administrative hearing before the levy is carried out..If the taxpayer makes a timely request for an administrative hearing, the hearing is conducted by the IRS Office of Appeals (Appeals Office) before an impartial officer. Sec. 6330(b)(1), (3).
The taxpayer may raise any relevant issue during the hearing, including appropriate spousal defenses and challenges to “the appropriateness of collection actions”, and may make “offers of collection alternatives, which may include the posting of a bond, the substitution of other assets, an installment agreement, or an offer-in-compromise.”. Sec. 6330(c)(2)(A)..The taxpayer also may raise challenges to the existence or amount of the underlying tax liability if he/she did not receive a notice of deficiency for that liability or did not otherwise have an opportunity to dispute it.. Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B).
During the hearing the Appeals officer must verify that the requirements of applicable law and administrative procedure have been met, consider issues properly raised by the taxpayer, and consider whether any proposed collection action balances the need for the efficient collection of taxes with the taxpayer's legitimate concern that any collection action be no more intrusive than necessary.. Sec. 6330(c)(3)..The Appeals Office then issues a notice of determination indicating whether the proposed levy may proceed.
Under section 6330(d)(1) the taxpayer may petition this Court to review the determination made by the Appeals Office. See sec. 301.6330-1(f)(1), Proced. & Admin. Regs..Where, as in this case, the underlying tax liability is not at issue, we review the Appeals Office's determinations regarding the collection action for abuse of discretion.. Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176 (2000)..An abuse of discretion occurs if the Appeals Office exercises its discretion “arbitrarily, capriciously, or without sound basis in fact or law.”. Woodral v. Commissioner, 112 T.C. 19, 23 (1999).
When a taxpayer establishes in a pre-levy collection hearing under section 6330 that the proposed levy would create an economic hardship, it is unreasonable for the settlement officer to determine to proceed with the levy which section 6343(a)(1)(D) would require the IRS to immediately release..Rather than proceed with the levy, the settlement officer should consider alternatives to the levy.
Respondent argues under the holdings of Rodriguez v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-153, and McCorkle v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-34, that there is no abuse of discretion if a settlement officer rejects collection alternatives because the taxpayer was not in compliance with the filing requirements for all required tax returns. 6
Generally, we have found the Commissioner's policy requiring individuals seeking collection alternatives to be current with filing their returns to be reasonable. 7 However, taxpayers in those cases have had sufficient income to meet basic living expenses..See, e.g., Speltz v. Commissioner, 124 T.C. 165, 178 (2005) (taxpayers claimed hardship because the tax liability was disproportionate to the value that they received from initial stock offerings and because they had already been forced to change their lifestyle), affd. 454 F.3d 782 (8th Cir. 2006); Peterson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2009-46 (the Court upheld rejection of taxpayers' offer of *20,000 to compromise *70,000 liability where, although they had minimal income from Social Security retirement and disability payments, they had reasonable collection potential of *68,000 from two parcels of real property valued at *80,000); Fangonilo v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2008-75 (Commissioner's refusal to treat taxpayer's tax liability as currently not collectible was not an abuse of discretion where although taxpayer's income was not sufficient to meet his stated monthly living expenses, he had a liquid asset worth more than his tax liability); Willis v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-302 (taxpayers' ability to make some payments toward their cumulative liability made them ineligible to have the cumulative liability classified as currently not collectible); Rodriguez v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-153 (taxpayer had not filed returns for 12 years and did not submit all of the financial information supporting her offer-in-compromise that the settlement officer requested); Ashley v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-286 (taxpayer had income in excess of expenses and sufficient equity in his real property to pay his tax liability in full).
We have found no cases addressing the requirement that the taxpayer be current with filing returns in a levy case involving economic hardship under section 6343(a)(1)(D) and section 301.6343-1(b)(4), Proced. & Admin. Regs..Neither section 6343 nor the regulations condition a release of a levy that is creating an economic hardship on the taxpayer's compliance with filing and payment requirements..The purpose of section 6330 is to “afford taxpayers adequate notice of collection activity and a meaningful hearing before the IRS deprives them of their property.”.S. Rept. 105-174, at 67 (1998), 1998-3 C.B. 537, 603 (emphasis added)..A determination in a hardship case to proceed with a levy that must immediately be released is unreasonable and undermines public confidence that tax laws are being administered fairly..In a section 6330 pre-levy hearing, if the taxpayer has provided information that establishes the proposed levy will create an economic hardship, the settlement officer cannot go forward with the levy and must consider an alternative.
D. Appeals Office's Determination To Proceed With Levy of Petitioner's Assets
The financial information petitioner submitted on the Form 433-A, which was consistent with other information the settlement officer obtained, showed that if petitioner's wages are levied on, she will be unable to pay her basic living expenses; and, if her car is levied on, she will not be able to work..After analyzing petitioner's financial information, the settlement officer concluded that the levy would create an economic hardship and so stated in her log..However, the settlement officer determined collection alternatives to the levy, including an installment agreement, an offer-in-compromise, and reporting the account as currently not collectible, were not available because petitioner had not filed her 2005 and 2007 returns..The settlement officer's determination to proceed with the levy was reviewed and approved by the Appeals team manager who signed the notice of determination..Although the attachment to the notice of determination shows that the Appeals team manager was aware of petitioner's financial situation and health problems, the Appeals team manager signed the notice of determination to proceed with the levy because petitioner had not filed her 2005 and 2007 returns..Proceeding with the levy would be unreasonable because section 6343 would require its immediate release, and the determination to do so was arbitrary..The determination to proceed with the levy was wrong as a matter of law and, therefore, was an abuse of discretion..Respondent is not entitled to summary judgment, and respondent's motion will be denied.
An order denying respondent's motion will be issued.

Footnotes


1
All Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, and all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code.
2
Petitioner explained to the settlement officer that she had previously agreed to pay in installments and that she was told she would be sent envelopes for each payment, but she never received the envelopes or monthly bills.
3
In the order we observed that our preliminary review of the record indicated that the proposed levy action involved a hardship situation and that petitioner needed the assistance of an attorney..We urged petitioner to contact the legal aid society or the local bar association pro bono services and provided their addresses and phone numbers.
4
After petitioner filed her response to respondent's motion for summary judgment, respondent filed a motion to continue the case wherein respondent stated that petitioner was in the process of submitting a collection alternative to the IRS and that, if the alternative is accepted by the IRS, a trial in this case would not be necessary..The Court granted respondent's motion and directed the parties to file a status report on or before July 27, 2009..In a status report filed on July 17, 2009, respondent reported that respondent has not received any communication from petitioner and requested the Court to grant respondent's motion for summary judgment.
5
The regulations provide a method whereby a taxpayer may inform the Secretary that a levy is creating an economic hardship and request that the levy be released..See sec. 301.6343-1(c), Proced. & Admin. Regs..“A taxpayer who wishes to obtain a release of a levy must submit a request for release in writing or by telephone to the district director for the Internal Revenue district in which the levy was made.”. Id..However, service center directors and compliance center directors (to whom requests by taxpayers are not made) who have determined that a levy is creating an economic hardship must also release the levy and promptly notify the taxpayer of the release pursuant to sec. 301.6343-1(a), Proced. & Admin. Regs.
6
Generally, the IRS will not grant an installment agreement, accept an offer-in-compromise, or report an account as currently not collectible if any tax return for which the taxpayer has a filing requirement has not been filed..See Internal Revenue Manual pts. 5.14.1.4.1(4)-(6) (Sept. 26, 2008) (installment agreements); 5.8.3.13(1), (2), (4) (Sept. 23, 2008) (offers-in-compromise); 5.16.1.1(5) and (6), 5.16.1.2.9(8) (May 5, 2009) (currently not collectible), 5.1.11.2.3 (June 2, 2004) (general collection procedures).
7
In Estate of Atkinson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-89, we found reasonable requirements that an entity seeking collection alternatives to full payment, including reporting an account as currently not collectible, filing any outstanding tax returns and submitting a full financial statement and verification information for analysis..Mandatory release of levy creating an economic hardship applies only to individuals..Sec. 301.6343-1(b)(4), Proced. & Admin. Regs.

Labels:

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

3 years sentencing for a tax protestor

No more portestor penaly in these cases. I am seeing more and more of this type of a decision


USTC Cases, United States of America v. Kenneth A. Evans, Appellant., U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, 2010-1 U.S.T.C. ¶50,118, (Dec. 15, 2009)

United States of America v. Kenneth A. Evans, Appellant.

U.S. Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit; 08-2528, December 15, 2009.
Before: Ambro, Garth and Roth, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

Ambro, Circuit Judge: Kenneth A. Evans (“Evans”) was convicted in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania of three counts of filing false tax returns (in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1)) and two counts of tax evasion (in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7201). The District Court sentenced him to 36 months' imprisonment. He now challenges his conviction and sentence. 1 We affirm both.
I. Background
Because we write solely for the parties, we will recite only those facts necessary to our disposition. Evans, a sales representative, stopped filing tax returns in 1999. In January 2001, he filed a civil suit in federal court against the Government requesting a full refund of his 1999 federal income tax. Evans claimed that no legal authority required him to pay income tax on his wages, the filing of a tax return would violate his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, and the Sixteenth Amendment does not grant the Government authority to tax directly his wages without apportionment. In June 2001, the District Court found in the Government's favor on summary judgment. The Court, noting that these types of tax protest claims were appearing with some frequency, rejected in detail Evans' claims. Evans appealed, and we affirmed the District Court, noting the clear precedent that explicitly rejects Evans' arguments. See Evans v. United States, No. 01-3161, 32 F. App'x 31 (3d Cir. Mar. 26, 2002) (unpublished). We ordered Evans to pay $4,000 as a sanction for filing a frivolous appeal. The United States Supreme Court denied Evans' request for a writ of certiorari.

In August 2001, the IRS sent Evans a report regarding Evans' failure to file his 1999 return. At a meeting requested by Evans, IRS agents Vastardis and Burton informed Evans that his earnings were taxable income and Evans was required to file a return to obtain a refund for 1999. The meeting was recorded at Evans' request.
After this meeting, Evans filed a late tax return for the year 2000. He listed his income as zero, yet the Form W-2 wage and tax statement submitted by his employer showed he was paid over $55,000 in wages in 2000. Evans again reported zero income in his 2001 tax return. The corresponding W-2 showed he earned over $77,000 in 2001. In his 2000 and 2001 tax returns, Evans sought a refund of all taxes that had been withheld from his paychecks. The IRS denied these refund claims.
In January 2002, Evans submitted an IRS Form W-4 to his employer claiming he was exempt from withholding because he had no tax liability. His employer complied with this request and did not withhold federal taxes from 2002 through 2004. Evans did not file a tax return for the years 2002 and 2003.
In March 2003, Evans filed a second civil suit against the Government for a refund of federal income tax he paid in the 2000 and 2001 tax years. The District Court held a hearing and allowed Evans to argue his position. In granting judgment for the Government and rejecting Evans' arguments, the District Court noted that, instead of paying the sanctions imposed by our Court, Evans chose to burden the federal courts with yet another frivolous suit. The District Court imposed an additional $1,000 sanction.
In November 2004, the IRS wrote to Evans regarding his failure to file returns, and Evans met with IRS Agents Michael Taibi and Susan Hough. This meeting also was recorded at Evans' request. Evans argued that he was not required to file returns because he had no taxable income. Agent Taibi communicated with Evans' employer to request they begin withholding federal income tax. Taibi then referred the matter for criminal investigation.
In January 2005, Evans submitted to his employer a form “W-4E,” captioned “Exemption from Withholding,” in which he claimed he was exempt from withholding. The company did not honor the exemption request, as the “form” was not Governmentissued. Evans filed a tax return for 2004 stating that he had no income, as he had done in his 2000 and 2001 returns.
A grand jury indicted Evans for filing false tax returns in the years 2000, 2001, and 2004, and tax evasion for the years 2002 and 2003. At trial, the Government presented testimony of several IRS agents regarding Evans' filing history. The agents testified about the meetings with Evans in 2001 and 2004, and a recording was played of a December 2005 interview between Evans and an IRS agent with the criminal investigation division. Evans' Forms W-4 and Forms W-2 were introduced, and representatives of his employer described his withholding and wage history. Evidence was presented of the rejection of Evans' position by two District Court judges and the imposition of sanctions by this Court for filing a frivolous appeal. The Government also introduced evidence of Evans' tax-protestor status and activities, including postings from Evans' website regarding his tax beliefs and e-mails between Evans and other tax protestors.
Evans testified at length on his own behalf. He presented his interpretation of the case law, Tax Code, and IRS regulations. Evans claimed that Agent Vastardis told him at the 2001 meeting that a filer must declare that he had no income in order to claim a refund, and that filing a return was voluntary and not mandatory. Evans played selected portions of the tape of this meeting, and introduced numerous exhibits, including attachments to his W-4s.
The jury convicted Evans on all counts, and this appeal followed his sentencing.
II. Discussion
Evans makes four arguments on appeal: (1) the District Court erred by not admitting attachments to Evans' Form W-4s contemporaneously under Federal Rule of Evidence 106; (2) the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to establish Evans willfully failed to file tax returns and filed false tax returns; (3) the District Court erred in its jury charge; and 4) it relied on an impermissible factor in varying upward from the advisory Guidelines range.

A. Evidentiary Challenge
The prosecution introduced into evidence the “Employee's Withholding Allowance Certificate,” IRS Form W-4, completed by Evans in the years 2002, 2003, and 2004. The District Court denied Evans' motion in limine to admit letters and a videotape Evans attached to his W-4s, including letters to his employer explaining his view that he had no income tax liability and instructing his employer not to withhold any taxes. The District Court's decision to admit or exclude evidence is reviewed for abuse of discretion. United States v. Mathis, 264 F.3d 321, 326-27 (3d Cir. 2001).
Evans claims that the District Court's denial of his motion was an abuse of discretion under Federal Rule of Evidence 106, which provides that
[w]hen a writing or recorded statement or part thereof is introduced by a party, an adverse party may require the introduction at that time of any other part or any other writing or recorded statement which ought in fairness to be considered contemporaneously with it.
This codification of the doctrine of completeness guards against the potential for evidence to be misleading when presented out of context. Admission of additional evidence is compelled “if it is necessary to (1) explain the admitted portion, (2) place the admitted portion in context, (3) avoid misleading the trier of fact, or (4) insure a fair and impartial understanding.” United States v. Soures, 736 F.2d 87, 91 (3d Cir. 1984). Evans asserts that failure to include his writings and the video with the Form W-4s gave the jury a distorted and misleading view, as Evans incorporated them specifically to provide his reasoning for completing the forms in the manner he did.
The District Court found that a Form W-4 is a distinct and complete Government issued document, and the mere fact that Evans appended writings or videos did not render these additional submissions part of the Form W-4. The District Court also concluded that the Form W-4 alone was not so misleading or unfairly prejudicial as to warrant application of Rule 106.
Even were we to assume this was an abuse of discretion, any conceivable error was harmless. Under our traditional harmless error standard, a non-constitutional error is harmless when it is “ highly probable that the error did not contribute to the judgment.” United States v. Gambone, 314 F.3d 163, 177 (3d Cir. 2003) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted) (emphasis in original). “High probability requires that the court possess a sure conviction that the error did not prejudice the defendant.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
Here, one of the letters attached to a Form W-4 was discussed in detail during cross-examination of Evans' employer's corporate counsel. ( See Gov't App. 170-74.) Moreover, Evans testified about various letters he wrote to the IRS containing largely the same arguments he made in letters attached to the Form W-4s. Evans opined at length at trial about his reasons for completing the Form W-4s as he did. Therefore, any error was harmless.

B. Sufficiency of the Evidence

Evans argues that the trial evidence was insufficient to show that he willfully failed to file tax returns and willfully filed false tax returns. 2 In support of this contention, Evans contends that the Government did not prove willfulness, an element of the five counts in the indictment. We are unpersuaded.
“Willfulness requires the voluntary, intentional violation of a known legal duty as a condition precedent to criminal liability.” United States v. McKee, 506 F.3d 225, 236 (3d Cir. 2007) ( citing Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192 (1991)). This element “protects the average citizen from criminal prosecution for innocent mistakes in filing tax forms that may result from nothing more than negligence or the complexity of the tax laws.” Id. Willfulness is negated by a defendant's good faith belief that he is not violating any laws. Cheek, 498 U.S. at 202. Once raised as a defense, the burden is on the Government to prove the defendant did not have a good faith belief. Id.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Government, the element of willfulness is satisfied here by the judgments of two District Courts and our Court in the civil cases brought by Evans, communications to Evans by IRS agents, Evans' failure to file, evidence of his tax protest activities, and his knowledge of the conviction and sentencing of another tax protestor. Numerous authorities, including our Court, informed Evans of his duty to file a return and treat his wages as income. This is not a case of a good faith misunderstanding of a tax law provision. This is a case where the defendant knew and understood the law. Someone who knows the law and disagrees with it is not someone who in good faith believes the law does not apply to him.
C. Jury Instructions
Evans next challenges several of the District Court's jury instructions. When a party timely objects to jury instructions, “[w]e exercise plenary review to determine whether jury instructions misstated the applicable law, but in the absence of a misstatement we review for abuse of discretion.” Cooper Distrib. Co. v. Amana Refrigeration, Inc., 180 F.3d 542, 549 (3d Cir. 1999). However, where a party claiming error in a jury instruction “did not make a timely objection, we review for plain error.” Id. We will reverse if that error was “fundamental and highly prejudicial, such that the instructions failed to provide the jury with adequate guidance and our refusal to consider the issue would result in a miscarriage of justice.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). 3
Where a district court denies a requested jury instruction, we will reverse “only when the requested instruction was correct, not substantially covered by the instructions given, and was so consequential that the refusal to give the instruction was prejudicial to the defendant.” United States v. Phillips, 959 F.2d 1187, 1191 (3d Cir. 1992). Jury instructions are to be read as a whole. United States v. Flores, 454 F.3d 149, 157 (3d Cir. 2006). “It is well-settled that the trial judge retains discretion to determine the language of the jury charge … [s]o long as the court conveys the required meaning,” and the court is under no obligation to use language proffered by the defendant. Id. at 161.
First, Evans challenges the District Court's use of the word “genuine” when it instructed the jury that a defendant's disagreement with a legal duty, even if genuine, does not provide a good faith defense. Read in context, the District Court accurately instructed the jury on the issue of good faith in accordance with Supreme Court and Third Circuit precedent.

Relatedly, Evans argues that the District Court erred in refusing to give his proposed good faith and willfulness instructions and a theory-of-the-defense instruction. However, the Court's explanation of willfulness in the jury charge substantially covered the relevant points and allowed Evans to argue his theory of the case. Therefore, the Court's refusal to include specific language or instruct on particular legal arguments requested by Evans was not an abuse of discretion.
Evans also claims that the District Court erroneously informed the jury that willfulness does not require that Evans knew his conduct was in violation of the law. Although Evans is correct in noting that the Court misspoke on one occasion while giving the jury instructions, the mistake was corrected when the Court accurately stated repeatedly that willfulness required proof that Evans knew his conduct violated the law, and on numerous occasions informed the jury that willfulness required violation of a “known legal duty.” Given the instructions in their entirety, this one misstatement could not have confused the jury. Therefore, the jury was properly charged on the willfulness element.

Evans' remaining challenges to the jury charge, which include a challenge to the state-of-mind instruction and a reference to income under the Tax Code, are without merit. Viewing the jury instructions in their entirety and in context, the District Court did not abuse its discretion.

D. Sentencing

Finally, Evans argues that the District Court improperly relied on the two civil tax suits filed by Evans against the United States in its consideration of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. This is Evans' only complaint regarding his sentencing; he does not challenge the calculation of the Guidelines range or the Court's consideration of the § 3553(a) factors in general.

We review the District Court's sentence for reasonableness under an abuse of discretion standard. United States v. Tomko, 562 F.3d 558, 564, 567 (3d Cir. 2009) (en banc). “Where, as here, a district court decides to vary from the Guidelines' recommendations, we ‘must give due deference to the district court's decision that the § 3553(a) factors, on a whole, justify the extent of the variance.’” Id. at 561 ( quoting Gall v. United States, 128 S.Ct. 586, 597 (2007)).

The Guidelines range was 15 to 21 months. The District Court imposed an above-Guidelines sentence of 36 months. It discussed at length the factors set forth at 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). We do not think it was improper for the Court, in evaluating those factors (including the nature and circumstances of the offense), to consider that, despite several courts' unequivocal rejection of Evans' claims that his income was not subject to taxation, Evans continued to violate the law. 4 The Court noted Evans' disrespect for the court process, his disdainful interactions with IRS agents, the need for him genuinely to appreciate the authority of the law, and the need to deter the public. We have no hesitancy in concluding that it rationally and meaningfully considered the § 3553(a) factors, and the sentence of 36 months was reasonable in this case.
* * * * *
For these reasons, we affirm both Evans' conviction and sentence.



Footnotes


1
The District Court had jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3231. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742.
2
"‘We apply a particularly deferential standard of review when deciding whether a jury verdict rests on legally sufficient evidence.’" United States v. Soto, 539 F.3d 191, 193-94 (3d Cir. 2008) ( quoting United States v. Dent, 149 F.3d 180, 187 (3d Cir. 1998)). We will sustain the verdict if, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Government, "‘any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.’" Id. at 194 ( quoting Dent, 149 F.3d at 187).
3
Evans objected to the Court's instructions on willfulness and the Court's refusal to give certain of Evans' proposed instructions. Therefore, these instructions are subject to harmless error review. Evans did not preserve his objection to his proposed theory of the defense instruction, and he concedes this issue is reviewed for plain error.
4
Evans' allegation that this violated his First Amendment rights is meritless.

Labels:

Monday, December 21, 2009

John Hancock Life Insurance Co. v. United States of America.
U.S. District Court, East. Dist. La.; CIV. 08-3911, October 14, 2009.


An insurance company’s claim that the IRS wrongfully levied a trust’s bank accounts that secured a loan it made to the trust was dismissed. The security documents and state (Louisiana) law indicated that the security interest was created directly in favor of the fiduciary bank as opposed to the insurance company. The bank had sole control over the funds deposited in the levied accounts; the insurance company had a contractually defined, limited and passive role with respect to those funds. Therefore, only the bank had standing to enforce the terms of the security agreements. Contrary to the insurance company’s argument, Code Sec. 6323(h)(1) recognizes that a security interest holder need not be the same person who loaned the money, which is why the definition of "security interest" expressly requires the holder of a security interest to have parted with money. This requirement does not imply that the security interest holder is the party who lent the money. Although the insurance company lent money to the trust, the fiduciary bank, not the insurance company, held a security interest in the funds pursuant to Code Sec. 6323(a). Therefore, the insurance company’s interest in the funds did not prime the federal tax lien and the IRS levy was proper.


I. BACKGROUND
This lawsuit arises out of a notice of levy that the IRS served on Capital One Bank. On December 10, 2007, the IRS levied $397,041.85 from three accounts held at Capital One for taxes owed by the Schwegmann Family Trust No. 2. The plaintiff, John Hancock Life Insurance Co. (“Hancock” or “Plaintiff”), contends that the IRS wrongfully levied the monies in those accounts because they were subject to a previously perfected security interest in its favor. The IRS, on the other hand, contends that Hancock had no security interest in the accounts at all.
The events leading up to this dispute began many years ago. In May 1994, the Schwegmann Trust (“Schwegmann”) borrowed in excess of $9 million from Hancock and executed several promissory notes to evidence the indebtedness. The notes were secured by an Act of Mortgage (“the Mortgage”) on certain immovable commercial property held by Schwegmann. Additional security for the notes was given by a Collateral Assignment of Leases and Rents (“the Assignment”) which created a lien against the rents-receivable for the properties covered by the Act of Mortgage.
In addition to the Mortgage, the Assignment, and the notes themselves, an Indenture (“the Indenture”) between Schwegmann and Capital One Bank 1 was executed to facilitate the issuance of the notes. The Indenture is a very detailed 22 page document pursuant to which the Capital One Trust Department agrees to serve as the Indenture Trustee. As Trustee, Capital One was vested with full power to inter alia enforce the security documents for the benefit of the note holders and to receive and collect as assignee for the benefit of the note holders under the Assignment, the rents received and to apply those rents to service the debt. (Rec. Doc. 39, Exh. A). The Indenture sets up a mechanism by which funds are received in the form of rents paid by tenants occupying properties owned by Schwegmann or in the form of the proceeds of insurance on those properties. Those funds are then either used to make payments due to the note holders, transferred from one of the three deposit accounts to another, or paid out to Schwegmann.
The three separate deposit accounts that the Indenture required Capital One to maintain on its books were: the Collection Account which was used to receive all rent and lease payments that had been assigned as security for the notes, the Reserve Account which contained those funds (rent revenues) transferred over from the Collection Account that were in excess of that needed to service the debt in any given month, 2 and an Insurance Account which received insurance proceeds from casualty insurers under insurance in place at the time of Hurricane Katrina. Schwegmann defaulted on the notes around October 2005 due to lack of rent payments from the tenants in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. 3
Schwegmann became in arrears with the IRS for its 2004 and 2005 taxes and the IRS eventually assessed the taxes that were the subject of the notice of levy. Pursuant to the IRS notice of levy, Capital One remitted to the IRS the following sums: $30,672.76 from the Collection Account, $322,513.27 from the Reserve Account, and $43,855.82 from the Insurance Account.
Hancock filed this suit against the IRS (the United States) pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §7426(a)(1). Hancock contends that the IRS levy was wrongful because its interest in the funds held in the deposit accounts was superior to the IRS's federal tax lien. Hancock is seeking return of the levied funds plus interest.
II. DISCUSSION
The statutory provision governing the federal tax lien at issue is found at I.R.C. §6321 which states in relevant part:
If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same after demand, the amount … shall be a lien in favor of the United States upon all property and rights to property, whether real or personal, belonging to such person.
26 U.S.C.A. §6321 (West 2002). The lien arises by operation of law at the time that the taxes are assessed and attaches to all property of the delinquent tax payer to the full extent of any tax liability. Aetna Ins. Co. v. Tex. Thermal Indus., Inc., 591 F.2d 1035, 1037 (5 th Cir. 1979). Federal tax liens are non-consensual, unlike most security interests that are voluntarily granted by the debtor. Planned Furniture Promos, v. Benjamin S. Youngblood, Inc., 374 F. Supp. 2d 1227, 1234 (M.D. Ga. 2005). The statute is broadly worded “to reach every interest in property that a taxpayer might have.” Id. (quoting U.S. v. Nat'l Bank of Comm., 472 U.S. 713, 720 (1985)).

A §6321 tax lien has priority over all other claims except those of a narrow class of stakeholders which includes secured creditors. This limitation on the §6321 lien arises from §6323 of the Internal Revenue Code, entitled Validity and Priority Against Certain Persons, which states in relevant part:
The lien imposed by section 6321 shall not be valid as against any purchaser, holder of a security interest, mechanic's lienor, or judgment lien creditor until notice thereof which meets the requirements of subsection (f) has been filed by the Secretary.

26 U.S.C.A. §6323(a) (West 2002) (emphasis added). The statute defines the term “security interest” as follows:
[A]ny interest in property acquired by contract for the purpose of securing payment or performance of an obligation or indemnifying against loss or liability. A security interest exists at any time (A) if, at such time, the property is in existence and the interest has become protected under local law against a subsequent judgment lien arising out of an unsecured obligation, and (B) to the extent that, at such time, the holder has parted with money or money's worth.

26 U.S.C.A. §6323(h)(1). Once a federal tax lien arises federal law governs the priority of competing liens asserted against a taxpayer's property and the question of whether a security interest under state law has priority over a federal tax lien. Planned Furniture, 374 F. Supp. 2d at 1235 (quoting Griswold v. U.S., 59 F.3d 1571, 1575 (11 th Cir. 1995)); Hunter's Supply Co. v. U.S., No. IP 84-1554-C, 1986 WL 6184 (S.D. Ind. Mar. 25, 1986) (citing Aquilino v. U.S., 363 U.S. 509 (1960)).

In the instant case it is undisputed that the IRS had a valid tax lien against Schwegmann property as of the time that the delinquent taxes were assessed, and it is also undisputed that the funds held at Capital One were the property of Schwegmann at all times. The IRS did not file a notice of federal tax lien before levying the funds in the three Capital One deposit accounts. Thus, if Hancock can establish that it falls within the narrow class of stakeholders enumerated in §6323(a) with respect to the funds held in the Capital One accounts, i.e., if it is the holder of a security interest, then its interest in the funds will prime the IRS's lien and the levy will have been improper. See Dupre v. Joe's Riverside Seafood, Inc., 578 So. 2d 158, 163-64 (La. App. 1 st Cir. 1991) (discussing burden of proof). Absent compliance with §6323(a), Hancock cannot prevail against the federal tax lien regardless of what its rights would be under state law.

The IRS takes the position that Hancock's interest in the funds does not fall within the reach of §6323(a) because Hancock is not the “holder” of whatever security interest was created in the funds. 4 The IRS points out that all of the pertinent security documents grant the security interest in favor of Capital One and not Hancock. The IRS argues that Hancock is assuming, without any basis in the operative documents, logic, or law that it can stand in the shoes of Capital One and exercise all of its rights under the Indenture and the Mortgage.
Hancock, on the other hand, contends that it is clearly the “holder” of a security interest in the Capital One funds because it is the party that lent money. Hancock argues that the relationship between Capital One and Hancock was one of agency pursuant to the terms of the Indenture and Mortgage, which vested Capital One will full power to effect and enforce Hancock's rights. Hancock points out that each of the security documents identifies Capital One as the Trustee for the ratable benefit of the note holders and Hancock has always been the sole note holder. Hancock contends that the grant of a special attorney-in-fact or agency status to Capital One does not divest Hancock of its interest in the secured property.
Although §6323 contains numerous definitions, neither this statute nor the Tax Code defines the term “holder.” Treasury Regulations provide that “the holder of a security interest is the person in whose favor there is a security interest.” 26 C.F.R. §301.6323(h)-1(a)(4). Although federal law controls here, the Court notes that state law likewise provides no specific guidance as to an appropriate definition. Assuming that the forgoing Treasury Regulation provides the definition for purposes of §6323(a) for the term “holder,” the definition nonetheless does very little to clarify the term because the question still remains whether “the person in whose favor” the interest is granted is the one in whose name the interest is granted or the one who benefits from the security interest. It is clearly foreseeable that a security interest could be granted in favor of one party but for the benefit of another. In fact, that is exactly what transpired in this case.
The notes secured by the Capital One accounts were issued pursuant to the Indenture, to which Schwegmann and Capital One Bank (through its predecessor Hibernia) were the sole parties. The Indenture is the document that maps out the structure of the lending arrangement whereby Schwegmann would issue and sell a note(s) to unnamed parties referred to only as the Note Holder(s). The notes were to be secured by the separately-executed Mortgage and Assignment. (Rec. Doc. 39 Exh. A, Indenture at 1). Pursuant to the Indenture, Capital One Bank obtained a security interest in the mortgaged and assigned property, not for its own personal benefit given that it lent no money, but for the benefit of the registered owners of the notes—the parties who would actually lend the money by purchasing the notes. ( Id.). The Indenture gave Capital One full power to effect and enforce the security documents and irrevocably appointed Capital One as the agent of Schwegmann for the payment, registration, transfer, and exchange of notes, and as special attorney-in-fact for the note holders in accordance with La. R.S. §9:5302 to act with full power on their behalf to effect and enforce the security documents for their benefit. (Rec. Doc. 39 Exh. A, Indenture §2.13).
It is important to note that none of the “rights” bestowed upon Capital One under the Indenture were granted by the note holders themselves, who were not parties to the document, although they were clearly intended to be beneficiaries of the arrangement that it created. The note holders were given virtually no “personal” rights to exercise on their own behalf and the sole instance where they could do so was pursuant to §6.4 of the Indenture. Section 6.4 provides that in the event of default where Capital One has failed to act notwithstanding a request to do so by a majority of the note holders, “then and only then” do the note holders have the right to institute enforcement proceedings on their own. (Rec. Doc. 39 Exh. A §6.4). At all other times, Capital One was the sole party with standing to take legal action to enforce the security and the monies held in the accounts were subject to “the sole dominion and control” of Capital One as trustee. ( Id. §§5.1 & 5.2).
Consistent with the arrangement created by the Indenture, the Mortgage was executed by Schwegmann and Capital One with Capital One being specifically named as the mortgagee. (Rec. Doc. 1-3). The Act of Mortgage specifically states that a security interest is being created in favor of Capital One albeit for the benefit of the note holders. ( Id. at 2). The Assignment contains the same language. (Rec. Doc. 1-5 at 2). As with the Indenture, the note holder(s) is not a party granted any specific rights to exercise on its own behalf. All rights are bestowed on Capital One who exercises those rights for the benefit of the note holders. Consistent with the Indenture, Mortgage, and Assignment, all of the pertinent public record filings that are intended to perfect the security interest as to third parties are in the name of Capital One.
The Indenture, Mortgage, and Assignment all expressly reference the statutory scheme found at La. R.S. §§5301 thru 5307, which specifically provides for the structure of the three-way arrangement involved here. Section 5302 of Title 9, entitled Fiduciary as Mortgagee in Trust for Creditors, provides:
A fiduciary for the holders of the obligations secured by the mortgage may be named in the act as mortgage in trust for the benefit of the creditors. He shall be irrevocably appointed special attorney-in-fact for the holders of the obligations and vested with full power in their behalf to effect and enforce the mortgage for their benefit.
La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §9:5302 (West 2007). Section 5304, Enforcement of Mortgage, further provides:
In case of default, the mortgage may be enforced by seizure and sale or otherwise, as the fiduciary shall deem expedient for the protection of the debt. However, the act of mortgage may provide that in the event of default, the fiduciary shall not be obliged to proceed to sell the property unless the holders of a designated portion of the obligations secured shall request the fiduciary to enforce the mortgage and agree to indemnify him against all costs and expenses incurred. The mortgagor may restrict the right of the fiduciary to foreclose or sell in the event of a default.
La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §9:5304 (West 2007). Thus, Louisiana law allows an obligor to place a security interest in the name of a third-party fiduciary who derives no direct personal benefit from the security interest but who acts for the benefit of the obligee. Such an arrangement makes the notes marketable to investors and because the law specifically allows for such an arrangement neither the debtor nor the obligee need fear that the fiduciary will claim the security interest for his personal benefit notwithstanding that all the pertinent documents and filings name him as the secured party. The Louisiana Supreme Court has held that when a mortgage is executed to a fiduciary trustee in accordance with this scheme, the note holders for whose benefit the mortgage is held have no personal right of action to enforce the mortgage based solely on their status as the secured party. See Rowe v. La. Agricultural Corp., 99 So. 206 (La. 1924).
Every aspect of the Indenture, Mortgage, Assignment, and the Louisiana statutory scheme upon which they are based, compels the conclusion that the security interest was created directly in favor of Capital One as opposed to Hancock or any other note holder. Capital One was the named recipient of the security interest and the pertinent documents establish that Capital One was the sole party with standing under Louisiana law to enforce the terms of the security agreements or to take any action with respect to the security agreements. The note holders' limited and passive role with respect to the security does not support the conclusion that Hancock was the “holder” of the security interest.
The fact that Capital One received that security interest as a fiduciary for the protection and benefit of another party does not compel a contrary conclusion because Louisiana law specifically provides for the scenario where a fiduciary can hold a security interest for the benefit of another. The identity of the note holders in this arrangement was not important because Capital One acted as fiduciary for the registered note holders, (Indenture §2.10), whoever they might be, and the note holders were always intended to have a passive as opposed to an active role with respect to the security for the loans. Thus, Hancock's contention that Capital One's agency status does not divest Hancock of its interest in the secured property is correct. But what Hancock fails to recognize is that whatever interest it had in the secured property it obtained via contract. And the pertinent contracts in this case establish that Capital One was the “holder” of the security interest, not Hancock.
After Schwegmann defaulted on the notes it entered into a Forbearance Agreement (“the Forbearance”) with Hancock in August 2006, and Hancock argues that this document demonstrates that it was in fact the secured party because it refers to Hancock as such. The Forbearance recognizes that an “Event of Default” had occurred under the Indenture because funds in excess of the authorized limit were taken out of the Reserve Account to service the debt after Hurricane Katrina. (Rec. Doc. 39 Exh. D). In the Forbearance Hancock agreed for a limited time (until October 1, 2006) to grant a temporary forbearance with respect to accelerating the notes and enforcing the security for the debt. ( Id. at 3-4).
The Forbearance did nothing to change the fact that in accordance with Louisiana law Capital One held the security interest on behalf of the note holders. The Forbearance agreement was important because as owner of 100 percent of the notes Hancock had the express right under the Indenture to require Capital One to enforce the security in light of Schwegmann's default. (Rec. Doc. 39 Exh. A Indenture §§6.1-6.4). Because Hancock was the party waiving its rights it necessarily had to be a party to this document. Hancock's reliance on the Forbearance to demonstrate that it was in fact the secured party is unnecessary. As a note holder, in fact the sole note holder, Hancock is clearly the secured party. But under Louisiana law, the fiduciary holder of the security interest need not be the secured party.
Hancock also argues the definition of a security interest in §6323(h)(1) requires that the holder have parted with money which Capital One did not do. To the contrary, the federal statute implicitly recognizes that a holder need not be the same person who loaned the money which is why the definition of “security interest” expressly imposes the requirement that the holder have parted with money. Imposing such a requirement does not necessarily imply that the holder is the party who lent money. The Court recognizes that the implication of concluding that Capital One is the holder notwithstanding that it lent no money means that neither Capital One nor Hancock can challenge the IRS's lien under §6323(a). But that is the unfortunate result that the facts dictate under the federal scheme when a security interest is held by a fiduciary for the benefit of another party.
Finally, Hancock argues that if Capital One is the holder then it has received a windfall security interest for which it did not pay and has deprived Hancock of its security interest for money of which it did not part all because the term “Note Holder” was used in the documents. This argument ignores the fact that this is not a contest between Capital One and Hancock over who benefits from the security. And as explained above, Louisiana law specifically recognizes that a security interest can be held by a fiduciary for the benefit of another party. Therefore, it does not follow that Capital One receives a windfall by being recognized as the fiduciary “holder” of the security interest at issue, all in accordance with Louisiana law.
Accordingly, and for the foregoing reasons;
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Summary Judgment (Rec. Doc. 41) filed by plaintiff John Hancock Life Insurance Co. is DENIED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Summary Judgment (Rec. Doc. 40) filed by and defendant The United States of America is GRANTED. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice.
October 14, 2009
JAY C. ZAINEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
JUDGMENT
For the written reasons of the Court issued October 14, 2009, and filed herein,
IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that there be judgment in favor of defendant, United States of America, and against plaintiff, John Hancock Life Insurance Co.
New Orleans, Louisiana, this 14th day of October 2009.

Footnotes


1
Hibernia Bank is the predecessor of Capital One so all of the pertinent loan and security documents reference Hibernia Bank. Because Capital One is the successor to Hibernia for all purposes relevant to this lawsuit, the Court will make all references to Capital One even if technically it should be Hibernia.
2
The Indenture required that all excesses from the Collection Account be transferred to the Reserve Account until such time as a $500,000 balance was attained in the Reserve Account. (Rec. Doc. 39, Exh. A at §5.2).
3
Most of the Schwegmann properties involved sustained substantial damage in Hurricane Katrina.
4
The IRS does not concede that Capital One had a "security interest" as that term is defined in I.R.C. §6323(h)(1) although it does recognize that Capital One may very well have a security interest under state law. Capital One's status is not at issue because Capital One is not a party to this case.

Labels:

Thursday, December 17, 2009

year end charitable deductions

IRS News Release IR-2009-114, December 8, 2009.



The IRS has reminded taxpayers that several important tax law provisions affecting charitable donations have taken effect in recent years. Specifically, the IRS addressed special charitable contributions for certain individual retirement account (IRA) owners, rules for clothing and household items, and the requirements to be able to deduct cash contributions.



IRS Offers Tips for Year-End Donations
Individuals and businesses making contributions to charity should keep in mind several important tax law provisions that have taken effect in recent years.

Some of these changes include the following:

Special Charitable Contributions for Certain IRA Owners
This provision, currently scheduled to expire at the end of 2009, offers older owners of individual retirement accounts (IRAs) a different way to give to charity. An IRA owner, age 701/2 or over, can directly transfer tax-free up to $100,000 per year to an eligible charity. This option, created in 2006, is available for distributions from IRAs, regardless of whether the owners itemize their deductions. Distributions from employer-sponsored retirement plans, including SIMPLE IRAs and simplified employee pension (SEP) plans, are not eligible.

To qualify, the funds must be contributed directly by the IRA trustee to the eligible charity. Amounts so transferred are not taxable and no deduction is available for the transfer.

Not all charities are eligible. For example, donor-advised funds and supporting organizations are not eligible recipients.

Amounts transferred to a charity from an IRA are counted in determining whether the owner has met the IRA's required minimum distribution. Where individuals have made nondeductible contributions to their traditional IRAs, a special rule treats transferred amounts as coming first from taxable funds, instead of proportionately from taxable and nontaxable funds, as would be the case with regular distributions. See Publication 590, Individual Retirement Arrangements (IRAs), for more information on qualified charitable distributions.

Rules for Clothing and Household Items
To be deductible, clothing and household items donated to charity generally must be in good used condition or better. A clothing or household item for which a taxpayer claims a deduction of over $500 does not have to meet this standard if the taxpayer includes a qualified appraisal of the item with the return. Household items include furniture, furnishings, electronics, appliances and linens.

Guidelines for Monetary Donations
To deduct any charitable donation of money, regardless of amount, a taxpayer must have a bank record or a written communication from the charity showing the name of the charity and the date and amount of the contribution. Bank records include canceled checks, bank or credit union statements, and credit card statements. Bank or credit union statements should show the name of the charity, the date, and the amount paid. Credit card statements should show the name of the charity, the date, and the transaction posting date.

Donations of money include those made in cash or by check, electronic funds transfer, credit card and payroll deduction. For payroll deductions, the taxpayer should retain a pay stub, a Form W-2 wage statement or other document furnished by the employer showing the total amount withheld for charity, along with the pledge card showing the name of the charity.

These requirements for the deduction of monetary donations do not change the long-standing requirement that a taxpayer obtain an acknowledgment from a charity for each deductible donation (either money or property) of $250 or more. However, one statement containing all of the required information may meet both requirements.

Reminders
To help taxpayers plan their holiday-season and year-end giving, the IRS offers the following additional reminders:

Contributions are deductible in the year made. Thus, donations charged to a credit card before the end of 2009 count for 2009. This is true even if the credit card bill isn't paid until 2010. Also, checks count for 2009 as long as they are mailed in 2009 and clear, shortly thereafter.

Check that the organization is qualified. Only donations to qualified organizations are tax-deductible. IRS Publication 78, available online and at many public libraries, lists most organizations that are qualified to receive deductible contributions. The searchable online version can be found at IRS.gov under Search for Charities. In addition, churches, synagogues, temples, mosques and government agencies are eligible to receive deductible donations, even if they are not listed in Publication 78.

For individuals, only taxpayers who itemize their deductions on Form 1040 Schedule A can claim deductions for charitable contributions. This deduction is not available to individuals who choose the standard deduction, including anyone who files a short form (Form 1040A or 1040EZ). A taxpayer will have a tax savings only if the total itemized deductions (mortgage interest, charitable contributions, state and local taxes, etc.) exceed the standard deduction. Use the 2009 Form 1040 Schedule A, available now on IRS.gov, to determine whether itemizing is better than claiming the standard deduction.

For all donations of property, including clothing and household items, get from the charity, if possible, a receipt that includes the name of the charity, date of the contribution, and a reasonably-detailed description of the donated property. If a donation is left at a charity's unattended drop site, keep a written record of the donation that includes this information, as well as the fair market value of the property at the time of the donation and the method used to determine that value. Additional rules apply for a contribution of $250 or more.

The deduction for a motor vehicle, boat or airplane donated to charity is usually limited to the gross proceeds from its sale. This rule applies if the claimed value is more than $500. Form 1098-C, or a similar statement, must be provided to the donor by the organization and attached to the donor's tax return.

If the amount of a taxpayer's deduction for all noncash contributions is over $500, a properly-completed Form 8283 must be submitted with the tax return.

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

New case on substantiation

Ian and Mary A. Menzies v. Commissioner.
Docket No. 4569-08S. Filed December 15, 2009.
.
Discussion
II. Deductions
A. Deductions in General
Deductions are a matter of legislative grace, and the taxpayer bears the burden of proving entitlement to any deduction claimed on a return. INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992). Taxpayers must maintain records sufficient to substantiate the amounts of the deductions claimed. Sec. 6001; Ronnen v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 74, 102 (1988).
Where the taxpayer establishes that the failure to produce adequate records is due to a loss of the records through circumstances beyond the taxpayer's control, the taxpayer may substantiate the deduction by reasonable reconstruction of the records. Gizzi v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 342, 345 (1976); sec. 1.274-5T(c)(5), Temporary Income Tax Regs., 50 Fed. Reg. 46022 (Nov. 6, 1985). A loss beyond the taxpayer's control includes events such as fire, flood, or earthquake. Gizzi v. Commissioner, supra at 345.
Section 162(a) allows a deduction for ordinary and necessary expenses incurred during the taxable year in carrying on a trade or business. Generally, the performance of services as an employee constitutes a trade or business. Primuth v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 374, 377 (1970). For such expenses to be deductible, the taxpayer must not have received reimbursement and must not have the right to obtain reimbursement from his employer. See Orvis v. Commissioner, 788 F.2d 1406, 1408 (9th Cir. 1986), affg. T.C. Memo. 1984-533; Leamy v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 798, 810 (1985).
If a taxpayer establishes that an expense is deductible but is unable to substantiate the precise amount, the Court may estimate the amount, bearing heavily against the taxpayer whose inexactitude is of his own making. Cohan v. Commissioner, 39 F.2d 540, 543-544 (2d Cir. 1930) (the Cohan rule or simply Cohan). The taxpayer must present sufficient evidence for the Court to form an estimate because without such a basis, any allowance would amount to unguided largesse. Williams v. United States, 245 F.2d 559, 560-561 (5th Cir. 1957); Vanicek v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 731, 742-743 (1985).
Section 274(d), however, supersedes the Cohan rule with regard to certain expenses. Sanford v. Commissioner, 50 T.C. 823, 827 (1968), affd. 412 F.2d 201 (2d Cir. 1969); Sec. 1.274-5T(a), Temporary Income Tax Regs., 50 Fed. Reg. 46014 (Nov. 6, 1985). Section 274(d) requires stricter substantiation for certain expenses including travel, meals, and listed property such as personal automobiles. Section 274(d) requires taxpayers to provide adequate records or sufficient other evidence to corroborate the taxpayer's statements as to the amount, time, place, business purpose, and business relationship of certain expenses. See sec. 1.274-5T(a), Temporary Income Tax Regs., supra. Taxpayers must maintain and produce substantiation that will constitute proof of each expenditure or use. Sec. 1.274-5T(c)(1), Temporary Income Tax Regs., 50 Fed. Reg. 46016 (Nov. 6, 1985).
Considering the above well-established principles, the Court turns to the deductibility of petitioner's claimed $18,649 in unreimbursed employee business expenses for 2005.
B. Vehicle Expenses
Petitioner claimed vehicle expenses of $12,249 for use of his personal vehicle during 2005, a 1998 Ford Crown Victoria. Petitioner used this vehicle for commuting and for travel that Porter and Titan required. The Ford was one of three cars owned by petitioners' household. The other vehicles included a car used by Mrs. Menzies for her insurance underwriting work and a Grand Prix used for their “personal pleasure”. Petitioner reported on Form 2106-EZ, Unreimbursed Employee Business Expenses, that he drove the Ford 52,000 miles in 2005, of which 27,400 miles were business-related travel, 14,480 miles were for commuting, and 11,200 miles were for personal travel.
Petitioner calculated the amount of the deduction by multiplying the business mileage by the standard mileage rates in effect during 2005. Each workday, petitioner recorded the mileage from his first worksite to the last worksite of the day in a “day planner”. Petitioner noted all the sites he visited during the day; however, he did not record the mileage between sites.
Petitioner testified that he discarded his day planner in 2007, sometime after filing his 2006 return and receiving his refund, because he felt the documentation was no longer necessary. Petitioner was therefore unable to produce any records to substantiate the business mileage and, further, he did not attempt to reconstruct a record of his business mileage.
The Court believes petitioner incurred unreimbursed vehicle expenses related to his work for Porter and Titan during 2005. However, the Court may not estimate vehicle expenses under Cohan. See Sanford v. Commissioner, supra; Rodriguez v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2009-22 (the strict substantiation requirement of section 274(d) precludes the Court and taxpayers from approximating expenses); sec. 1.274-5T(a), Temporary Income Tax Regs., supra. Therefore, we must sustain respondent's determination.
C. Travel Expenses
Petitioner also claimed $400 for travel expenses for an overnight trip to Morristown, Tennessee, in 2005 for training in fire and flood restoration in connection with his job at Porter. He did not maintain any receipts or other documentation verifying the expense but testified that the $400 included one night of lodging, two meals each day, and gasoline costs for his car. He could not recall exactly how much he separately spent for lodging, meals, or gasoline.
For travel expenses, section 274(d) requires the taxpayer to substantiate: (1) The amount of the expense; (2) the time and place the expense was incurred; and (3) the business purpose for which the expense was incurred. Sec. 1.274-5T(b)(2), Temporary Income Tax Regs., 50 Fed. Reg. 46014 (Nov. 6, 1985). Petitioner did not satisfy the first or the second element. He was unable to show receipts or other evidence of the expenses associated with this trip, and he did not provide a reconstruction of the expenses.
In the case of travel expenses, including meals and lodging while away from home, section 274(d) again overrides the Cohan rule. Sanford v. Commissioner, supra. Unfortunately, without substantiation, petitioner may not deduct these travel expenses. We therefore sustain respondent's determination.
D. Other Miscellaneous Unreimbursed Employee Business Expenses
Petitioner deducted $6,000 for other miscellaneous unreimbursed employee business expenses that he incurred in 2005. He testified that these expenditures included new uniform items, a specialized winter coat, duty gear, two pairs of steel-toed work boots, battle dress uniform (BDU-style) duty pants, a duty belt, a weapon holster, handcuffs, a flashlight, a bullet-resistant vest, a Sig Sauer Model P229 semiautomatic handgun which he purchased for about $1,000, and bullets. Petitioner also testified that he made all of the purchases during 2005, that he used the items exclusively for his security job with Titan, and that he did not receive reimbursement and was not eligible to receive reimbursement for these purchases.
Expenses for clothing are deductible only if the clothing is of a type specifically required as a condition of employment and is not adaptable to general or personal use. Yeomans v. Commissioner, 30 T.C. 757, 767-769 (1958); Beckey v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-514. Under section 262(a), no deductions are allowed for personal, living, or family expenses.
The Court finds petitioner's testimony to be highly credible with respect to the items he purchased and the employers' lack of a reimbursement policy. We also find that most of the clothing that petitioner purchased during 2005 was required by Porter or Titan and was not adaptable to personal use.
In summary, using our best judgment and on the entire record before us, the Court is satisfied that petitioner purchased, and was not reimbursed for, many miscellaneous work-related items for his employment with Titan and Porter in 2005. However, under Cohan, we must bear heavily against petitioner. Petitioner could not recollect many of the items that made up the $6,000 in expenses he claimed. Accordingly, petitioner is limited to a deduction of $3,000, subject to the 2-percent floor for other miscellaneous unreimbursed employee business expenses for 2005.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered under Rule 155.

Ian and Mary A. Menzies v. Commissioner.
Docket No. 4569-08S. Filed December 15, 2009.
.
Discussion
II. Deductions
A. Deductions in General
Deductions are a matter of legislative grace, and the taxpayer bears the burden of proving entitlement to any deduction claimed on a return. INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992). Taxpayers must maintain records sufficient to substantiate the amounts of the deductions claimed. Sec. 6001; Ronnen v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 74, 102 (1988).
Where the taxpayer establishes that the failure to produce adequate records is due to a loss of the records through circumstances beyond the taxpayer's control, the taxpayer may substantiate the deduction by reasonable reconstruction of the records. Gizzi v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 342, 345 (1976); sec. 1.274-5T(c)(5), Temporary Income Tax Regs., 50 Fed. Reg. 46022 (Nov. 6, 1985). A loss beyond the taxpayer's control includes events such as fire, flood, or earthquake. Gizzi v. Commissioner, supra at 345.
Section 162(a) allows a deduction for ordinary and necessary expenses incurred during the taxable year in carrying on a trade or business. Generally, the performance of services as an employee constitutes a trade or business. Primuth v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 374, 377 (1970). For such expenses to be deductible, the taxpayer must not have received reimbursement and must not have the right to obtain reimbursement from his employer. See Orvis v. Commissioner, 788 F.2d 1406, 1408 (9th Cir. 1986), affg. T.C. Memo. 1984-533; Leamy v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 798, 810 (1985).
If a taxpayer establishes that an expense is deductible but is unable to substantiate the precise amount, the Court may estimate the amount, bearing heavily against the taxpayer whose inexactitude is of his own making. Cohan v. Commissioner, 39 F.2d 540, 543-544 (2d Cir. 1930) (the Cohan rule or simply Cohan). The taxpayer must present sufficient evidence for the Court to form an estimate because without such a basis, any allowance would amount to unguided largesse. Williams v. United States, 245 F.2d 559, 560-561 (5th Cir. 1957); Vanicek v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 731, 742-743 (1985).
Section 274(d), however, supersedes the Cohan rule with regard to certain expenses. Sanford v. Commissioner, 50 T.C. 823, 827 (1968), affd. 412 F.2d 201 (2d Cir. 1969); Sec. 1.274-5T(a), Temporary Income Tax Regs., 50 Fed. Reg. 46014 (Nov. 6, 1985). Section 274(d) requires stricter substantiation for certain expenses including travel, meals, and listed property such as personal automobiles. Section 274(d) requires taxpayers to provide adequate records or sufficient other evidence to corroborate the taxpayer's statements as to the amount, time, place, business purpose, and business relationship of certain expenses. See sec. 1.274-5T(a), Temporary Income Tax Regs., supra. Taxpayers must maintain and produce substantiation that will constitute proof of each expenditure or use. Sec. 1.274-5T(c)(1), Temporary Income Tax Regs., 50 Fed. Reg. 46016 (Nov. 6, 1985).
Considering the above well-established principles, the Court turns to the deductibility of petitioner's claimed $18,649 in unreimbursed employee business expenses for 2005.
B. Vehicle Expenses
Petitioner claimed vehicle expenses of $12,249 for use of his personal vehicle during 2005, a 1998 Ford Crown Victoria. Petitioner used this vehicle for commuting and for travel that Porter and Titan required. The Ford was one of three cars owned by petitioners' household. The other vehicles included a car used by Mrs. Menzies for her insurance underwriting work and a Grand Prix used for their “personal pleasure”. Petitioner reported on Form 2106-EZ, Unreimbursed Employee Business Expenses, that he drove the Ford 52,000 miles in 2005, of which 27,400 miles were business-related travel, 14,480 miles were for commuting, and 11,200 miles were for personal travel.
Petitioner calculated the amount of the deduction by multiplying the business mileage by the standard mileage rates in effect during 2005. Each workday, petitioner recorded the mileage from his first worksite to the last worksite of the day in a “day planner”. Petitioner noted all the sites he visited during the day; however, he did not record the mileage between sites.
Petitioner testified that he discarded his day planner in 2007, sometime after filing his 2006 return and receiving his refund, because he felt the documentation was no longer necessary. Petitioner was therefore unable to produce any records to substantiate the business mileage and, further, he did not attempt to reconstruct a record of his business mileage.
The Court believes petitioner incurred unreimbursed vehicle expenses related to his work for Porter and Titan during 2005. However, the Court may not estimate vehicle expenses under Cohan. See Sanford v. Commissioner, supra; Rodriguez v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2009-22 (the strict substantiation requirement of section 274(d) precludes the Court and taxpayers from approximating expenses); sec. 1.274-5T(a), Temporary Income Tax Regs., supra. Therefore, we must sustain respondent's determination.
C. Travel Expenses
Petitioner also claimed $400 for travel expenses for an overnight trip to Morristown, Tennessee, in 2005 for training in fire and flood restoration in connection with his job at Porter. He did not maintain any receipts or other documentation verifying the expense but testified that the $400 included one night of lodging, two meals each day, and gasoline costs for his car. He could not recall exactly how much he separately spent for lodging, meals, or gasoline.
For travel expenses, section 274(d) requires the taxpayer to substantiate: (1) The amount of the expense; (2) the time and place the expense was incurred; and (3) the business purpose for which the expense was incurred. Sec. 1.274-5T(b)(2), Temporary Income Tax Regs., 50 Fed. Reg. 46014 (Nov. 6, 1985). Petitioner did not satisfy the first or the second element. He was unable to show receipts or other evidence of the expenses associated with this trip, and he did not provide a reconstruction of the expenses.
In the case of travel expenses, including meals and lodging while away from home, section 274(d) again overrides the Cohan rule. Sanford v. Commissioner, supra. Unfortunately, without substantiation, petitioner may not deduct these travel expenses. We therefore sustain respondent's determination.
D. Other Miscellaneous Unreimbursed Employee Business Expenses
Petitioner deducted $6,000 for other miscellaneous unreimbursed employee business expenses that he incurred in 2005. He testified that these expenditures included new uniform items, a specialized winter coat, duty gear, two pairs of steel-toed work boots, battle dress uniform (BDU-style) duty pants, a duty belt, a weapon holster, handcuffs, a flashlight, a bullet-resistant vest, a Sig Sauer Model P229 semiautomatic handgun which he purchased for about $1,000, and bullets. Petitioner also testified that he made all of the purchases during 2005, that he used the items exclusively for his security job with Titan, and that he did not receive reimbursement and was not eligible to receive reimbursement for these purchases.
Expenses for clothing are deductible only if the clothing is of a type specifically required as a condition of employment and is not adaptable to general or personal use. Yeomans v. Commissioner, 30 T.C. 757, 767-769 (1958); Beckey v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-514. Under section 262(a), no deductions are allowed for personal, living, or family expenses.
The Court finds petitioner's testimony to be highly credible with respect to the items he purchased and the employers' lack of a reimbursement policy. We also find that most of the clothing that petitioner purchased during 2005 was required by Porter or Titan and was not adaptable to personal use.
In summary, using our best judgment and on the entire record before us, the Court is satisfied that petitioner purchased, and was not reimbursed for, many miscellaneous work-related items for his employment with Titan and Porter in 2005. However, under Cohan, we must bear heavily against petitioner. Petitioner could not recollect many of the items that made up the $6,000 in expenses he claimed. Accordingly, petitioner is limited to a deduction of $3,000, subject to the 2-percent floor for other miscellaneous unreimbursed employee business expenses for 2005.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered under Rule 155.

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

recent case on substantiation

These cases are always a reality check on necessary substantiation to avoid the 6694 penalty

Gregory Houston v. Commissioner.

U.S. Tax Court, Dkt. No. 24342-07, TC Memo. 2009-286, December 14, 2009.
An individual was not entitled to some of the business expense deductions claimed on late-filed tax returns because he did not provide adequate evidence that those particular deductions were business related. Although he submitted receipts, he did not keep records of the business purpose of the expenditures and he did not show a ratio of business use to personal use on some of the items. He also failed to show that bank overdraft charges were ordinary and necessary expenses of his moving business. The individual was entitled to deduct some office supply expenditures, which were calculated based on "best judgment." He was also entitled to deduct parking and taxicab expenses since the amount claimed was small enough that it did not require documentary evidence and to deduct expenses for renting equipment for use in his moving business.—CCH.
MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION
GOEKE, Judge: Respondent determined deficiencies in petitioner's Federal income taxes and additions to tax as follows:
Additions to Tax
Year Deficiency Sec. 6651(a)(1)
Sec. 6651(a)(2)
Sec. 6654(a)

2003 $7,378 $1,525.05 $1,253.93 $173.17
2004 4,511 983.70 546.50 124.81
The issues for decision are: (1) Whether petitioner is entitled to certain business expense deductions for taxable years 2003 and 2004; and (2) whether petitioner is liable for additions to tax for failure to file under section 6651(a)(1), 1 failure to pay under section 6651(a)(2), and failure to pay estimated taxes under section 6654 for the years at issue.
FINDINGS OF FACT
ay.
OPINION
I. Schedule C Business Expenses
Deductions are a matter of legislative grace. Taxpayers generally bear the burden of proving that they are entitled to claimed deductions. See Rule 142(a); INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992); New Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering, 292 U.S. 435, 440 (1934). The taxpayer is required to maintain records that are sufficient to enable the Commissioner to determine his or her correct tax liability. See sec. 6001; sec. 1.6001-1(a), Income Tax Regs.
The Commissioner's determinations set forth in a notice of deficiency are generally presumed correct, and the taxpayer bears the burden of proving that the determinations are in error. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). Pursuant to section 7491(a), the burden of proof as to factual issues may shift to the Commissioner where the taxpayer complies with substantiation requirements, maintains records, and cooperates fully with reasonable requests for information. Petitioner does not claim and has not shown that the burden shifts to respondent under section 7491(a).
A. Automobile Expenses
Petitioner claimed deductions for automobile expenses of $857 and $2,215, respectively, for tax years 2003 and 2004 on his Schedules' C, Profit or Loss from Business, as business expenses. Pursuant to section 274(d), automobile expenses otherwise deductible as business expenses will be disallowed in full unless the taxpayer satisfies strict substantiation requirements. The taxpayer must substantiate the automobile expenses by adequate records or other corroborating evidence of items such as the amount of the expense, the time and place of the automobile's use, and the business purpose of its use. See Sanford v. Commissioner, 50 T.C. 823, 827-828 (1968), affd. per curiam 412 F.2d 201 (2d Cir. 1969); Maher v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-85. Petitioner provided gas receipts that he claimed are evidence that he had traveled to Baltimore, Pennsylvania, and New York. Petitioner did not (1) keep records of each trip, (2) keep a log as to the business purpose of each trip, and (3) keep a record of what vehicle was used. Gas expenses were paid from petitioner's personal checking account, and there is no indication that expenses listed on the receipts represent expenses paid for petitioner's business activities. Therefore, petitioner is not entitled to deductions for automobile expenses.
B. Bank Charges
Petitioner claimed deductions for bank charges of $60 and $154, respectively, for 2003 and 2004. Petitioner argues that the claimed bank charges were deductible ordinary and necessary business expenses. To substantiate his claim, petitioner provided bank statements and claimed the charges were for overdraft fees during the year. Petitioner admitted that the account giving rise to the overdraft fees was in part a personal account. Petitioner has not provided any evidence showing the fees for the returned checks to be ordinary and necessary expenses of his businesses. Cf. Bailey v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1991-385, affd. without published opinion 968 F.2d 25 (11th Cir. 1992). Petitioner has not sustained his burden of proving that the claimed bank charges for overdrafts were ordinary and necessary expenses of his businesses.
C. Computer Equipment and Repairs
Petitioner claimed deductions for computer equipment and repairs for 2003 and 2004 of $2,538 and $591, respectively. Petitioner claimed to have purchased a computer to maintain business records at his house. Petitioner also claimed deductions for repairing the computers as part of his moving business. As evidence, petitioner offered receipts from various computer stores with charges for computer equipment.
A computer is “listed property” and subject to the strict substantiation requirements of section 274(d). Sec. 280F(d)(4)(A)(iv). Petitioner failed to present any evidence that the computer was used for his moving business. Further, petitioner has not shown that he did not use the computer for personal reasons. Petitioner has failed to substantiate a Schedule C deduction relating to the computer.
Petitioner's purchase of computer equipment and/or upgrades to the computer equipment is not shown to be an ordinary and necessary business expense. See Riley v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-153; Wasik v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-148.
D. Client Entertainment
Petitioner claimed deductions for client entertainment expenses of $271 and $211, respectively, for 2003 and 2004 on his Schedules C. Petitioner must satisfy the requirements of section 274(d) to the extent provided under the applicable regulations. Under those regulations, petitioner must maintain adequate records showing the amount, time, place, business purpose, and business relationship of the recipient. Sec. 1.274-5T(b)(3), Temporary Income Tax Regs. 50 Fed. Reg. 46015 (Nov. 6, 1985). Petitioner testified that he would take clients and coworkers out after work for drinks and food and provided receipts from several social establishments. Petitioner has not met the section 274 substantiation requirements because he has not provided evidence as to the business nature of the expense. See Henry Schwartz Corp. v. Commissioner, 60 T.C. 728 (1973).
E. Office Expenses/Supplies
Petitioner claimed deductions for office expenses of $138 and $85, respectively, for 2003 and 2004 on his Schedule C. Petitioner testified that these deductions are for office paper and carbon paper. As evidence, petitioner provided receipts for purchases made at a Staples office supply store. Under these circumstances we may estimate the amount of deductible expenses, using our best judgment. Cohan v. Commissioner, 39 F.2d 540 (2d Cir. 1930). Considering the record as a whole, we find that petitioner is entitled to deductions for office expenses and supplies of $86 and $11, respectively, for 2003 and 2004.
F. Telephone/Internet/Faxes
Petitioner claimed deductions for telephone, Internet, and fax expenses for his residence of $1,058 and $517, respectively, for 2003 and 2004.
Section 262 provides that personal, living, and family expenses are not deductible unless expressly allowed, and the regulations specify that personal, living, and family expenses include utilities provided to a taxpayer's home unless the taxpayer uses a part of his home for his business. Sec. 1.262-1(b)(3), Income Tax Regs. Section 262(b) specifically disallows any deduction for the first line of basic local telephone service provided to a taxpayer's residence. Petitioner claimed a deduction for his telephone and fax expenses in 2003 and 2004. Petitioner has provided no evidence to establish that he uses his home as a place of business. Petitioner's telephone and fax expenses are nondeductible personal expenses under section 262.
Petitioner claimed a deduction for Internet expenses. Petitioner provided monthly bills for Internet services; however, he failed to show the ratio of business to personal use. In addition, petitioner did not produce evidence that his business required him to have Internet access. The Internet expense deductions petitioner claimed are therefore disallowed.
G. Parking and Taxicabs
Petitioner claimed deductions for taxicabs and parking of $43 and $36, respectively, for 2003. Petitioner often traveled to meet with clients in their offices. Petitioner would either take a taxicab to these local meetings or drive himself. Petitioner presented several taxicab receipts totaling $43.
Section 274(d)(4) applies to parking expenses, but expenditures of $75 or less for transportation charges do not require documentary evidence. See sec. 1.274-5(c)(2)(iii)(A)(2), Income Tax Regs. Petitioner presented receipts from parking garages totaling $36. We find that petitioner is entitled to a deduction of $79 for these business expenses.
H. Rental Expenses
Petitioner claimed deductions on his Schedule C for rental expenses in 2003 and 2004 totaling $3,542, respectively. Petitioner testified that those costs represented rental costs for shipping carts, trucks, and jacks for his moving business. At trial petitioner produced invoices of equipment rentals totaling $1,158.09 for 2003 as well as receipts for truck rentals totaling $262.26 for 2004. We find that petitioner is entitled to the claimed deductions.
II. Additions to Tax
Respondent determined that petitioner is liable for (1) additions to tax for failure to timely file a return under section 6651(a)(1); (2) failure to timely pay tax under section 6651(a)(2); and (3) failure to pay estimated income tax under section 6654(a), for the 2 years at issue. The Commissioner bears the burden of production with respect to a taxpayer's liability for additions to tax under sections 6651(a)(1) and (2) and 6654(a). Sec. 7491(c); Rule 142(a); Higbee v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. 438 (2001). At trial petitioner conceded that there was no reasonable cause for his failure to timely file his income tax returns nor any basis for not finding that he is liable for the additions to tax.
The evidence establishes that petitioner failed to timely file income tax returns for 2003 and 2004. Therefore, respondent has sustained his burden of proving that the additions to tax are appropriate. See sec. 7491(c); Rule 142(a)(2). Accordingly, we hold that petitioner is liable for the additions to tax under sections 6651(a)(1) and (2) and 6654 for the years in issue.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered under Rule 155.

Footnotes


1
All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the years in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, unless otherwise indicated

Monday, December 14, 2009

Case on dependent qualification

Aaron Lee Hill v. Commissioner., U.S. Tax Court, T.C. Summary Opinion 2009-188, (Dec. 10, 2009)
Docket No. 28057-08S. Filed December 10, 2009.

A taxpayer who provided a home and support for his niece and nephew was entitled to claim them as dependents. Because the children were his qualifying children, he was also entitled the to the child credit for each of them, as well as the earned income credit. However, he could not file his return as a head of household, absent evidence that he paid more than half of the total cost of maintaining the household.—CCH.

Discussion
In general, the Commissioner's determinations set forth in a notice of deficiency are presumed correct, and the taxpayer bears the burden of showing that the determinations are in error. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). Deductions are a matter of legislative grace. Deputy v. du Pont, 308 U.S. 488, 493 (1940); New Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering, 292 U.S. 435, 440 (1934). A taxpayer bears the burden of proving that the taxpayer is entitled to any deduction claimed. Rule 142(a); INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992); Welch v. Helvering, supra; Wilson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-139. A taxpayer is required to maintain records sufficient to substantiate deductions claimed on his or her income tax return. Sec. 6001; sec. 1.6001-1(a), (e), Income Tax Regs. The fact that a taxpayer reports a deduction on a return is not sufficient to substantiate the claimed deduction. Wilkinson v. Commissioner, 71 T.C. 633, 639 (1979); Roberts v. Commissioner, 62 T.C. 834, 837 (1974). Rather, an income tax return is merely a statement of the taxpayer's claim; it is not presumed to be correct. Wilkinson v. Commissioner, supra at 639; Roberts v. Commissioner, supra at 837; see also Seaboard Commercial Corp. v. Commissioner, 28 T.C. 1034, 1051 (1957) (a taxpayer's income tax return is a self-serving declaration that may not be accepted as proof for the claimed deduction or exclusion); Halle v. Commissioner, 7 T.C. 245 (1946) (a taxpayer's income tax return is not self-proving as to the truth of its contents), affd. 175 F.2d 500 (2d Cir. 1949).
Pursuant to section 7491(a), the burden of proof as to factual matters shifts to the Commissioner under certain circumstances. Petitioner has neither alleged that section 7491(a) applies nor established his compliance with the substantiation and recordkeeping requirements. Sec. 7491(a)(2)(A) and (B). Petitioner therefore bears the burden of proof. See Rule 142(a).
I. Dependency Exemption Deductions
Section 151 allows a deduction for each individual who qualifies as a dependent of the taxpayer as defined in section 152. Section 152(a) provides that a dependent means a qualifying child or a qualifying relative. Section 152(c)(1) defines a “qualifying child” as an individual:
(A) who bears a relationship to the taxpayer, such as a descendant of the taxpayer's brother or sister;
(B) who has the same principal place of abode as the taxpayer for more than one-half of such taxable year (aside from special rules applicable to divorced or separated parents);
(C) who is under the age of 19 or is a student who has not attained the age of 24 as of the close of the calendar year and
(D) who has not provided over one-half of such individual's own support for the calendar year in which the taxable year of the taxpayer begins.
Petitioner has produced sufficient evidence to show A.M. and S.M. meet the requirements of section 152(c)(1)(A) since they are children of his sister. Petitioner has produced credible evidence to show both that the children resided with him for more than one-half of 2007 and the ages of A.M. and S.M. (1 and 9 in 2007) to meet the requirements of section 152(c)(1)(B) and (C). The Court is further satisfied that the children, ages 1 and 9, did not provide more than one-half of their own support in 2007, and there is no evidence that A.M. and S.M. received any other support as defined in section 1.152-1(a)(2), Income Tax Regs. Thus, the children meet the requirement of section 152(c)(1)(D). Consequently, A.M. and S.M. are “qualifying children” under section 152(c) and are thus petitioner's dependents under section 152(a)(1). Consequently, petitioner is entitled to dependency exemption deductions for the two children. 3
II. Head of Household Filing Status
Section 1(b) imposes a special tax rate on an individual taxpayer who files a Federal income tax return as a head of household. Section 2(b) defines a head of household as an individual taxpayer who: (1) Is unmarried as of the close of the taxable year and is not a surviving spouse; and (2) maintains as his home a household that constitutes for more than one-half of the taxable year the principal place of abode, as a member of such household, of a dependent for whom the taxpayer is entitled to a deduction under section 151. See also, e.g., Rowe v. Commissioner, 128 T.C. 13, 16-17 (2007). The taxpayer is considered as maintaining a household only if the taxpayer furnishes over one-half of the cost of maintaining the household. Sec. 2(b)(1).
In order for the Court to determine whether the taxpayer provided over one-half of the cost of maintaining the household, the taxpayer must prove the total cost of maintaining the household. Costs of maintaining a household include “property taxes, mortgage interest, rent, utility charges, upkeep and repairs, property insurance, and food consumed on the premises.” Sec. 1.2-2(d), Income Tax Regs.
As indicated, petitioner testified that he gave his domestic partner approximately $400 per month for household expenses and expended approximately $200 per month on food for the household. There is no evidence of the total cost of maintaining the household. Without evidence showing the total cost, the Court cannot conclude that petitioner has provided more than one-half of the cost of maintaining the household. Since petitioner has not provided evidence to show he maintained the household as defined in the regulations, he is not entitled to head of household filing status.
III. Earned Income Credit
An eligible individual is entitled to a credit against his Federal income tax liability, calculated as a percentage of his earned income, subject to certain limitations. Sec. 32(a)(1); Rowe v. Commissioner, supra at 15. Different percentages and amounts are used to calculate the EIC, depending on whether the eligible individual has no qualifying children, one qualifying child, or two or more qualifying children. Sec. 32(b); Rowe v. Commissioner, supra at 15. A “qualifying child” means a qualifying child of the taxpayer as defined in section 152(c). Sec. 32(c)(3)(A).
As previously discussed, A.M. and S.M. are petitioner's qualifying children; thus, petitioner is entitled to the EIC for 2007 with two qualifying children.
IV. Child Tax Credits
Section 24(a) provides a credit with respect to each qualifying child of the taxpayer. Section 24(c)(1) defines the term “qualifying child” as “a qualifying child of the taxpayer (as defined in section 152(c)) who has not attained age 17.” 4 The child tax credit may not exceed the taxpayer's regular tax liability. Sec. 24(b)(3). Where a taxpayer is eligible for the child tax credit but the taxpayer's regular tax liability is less than the amount of the child tax credit potentially available under section 24(a), section 24(d) makes a portion of the credit, known as the additional child tax credit, refundable.
Since A.M. and S.M. are qualifying children and as noted above were below the age 17 in 2007, petitioner is entitled to the child tax credit and the additional child tax credit.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered under Rule 155.

Footnotes


1
The Court refers to minor children by their initials. Rule 27(a)(3).
2
Petitioner's income, without claiming the dependency exemption deductions, would make him ineligible for the EIC. Changing his filing status and disallowing the deductions and credits would show petitioner owing a tax of about $162. This amount, in addition to the $5,678 refund, results in the deficiency of $5,840.
3
We recognize that our conclusion suggests a finding that virtually all of petitioner's expendable income went to support the children. We found petitioner's testimony to be credible, and we are satisfied that he was committed to caring for his sister's children at a time when his sister was unable to care for them.
4
The credit is reduced by $50 for each $1,000 (or fraction thereof) by which an individual's modified adjusted gross income exceeds $110,000 in the case of a joint return, $75,000 in the case of an unmarried individual, and $55,000 in the case of a married individual filing a separate return. Sec. 24(b).

Saturday, December 12, 2009

Tax Extenders Act of 2009

Joint Committee on Taxation Technical Explanation of HR 4213, the Tax Extenders Act of 2009, As Introduced in the House of Representatives on December 7, 2009,Congress (United States)

JCX- 60-09

111th Congress


TECHNICAL EXPLANATION OF H.R. 4213, THE “TAX EXTENDERS ACT OF 2009,” AS INTRODUCED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON DECEMBER 7, 2009
Prepared by the Staff of the JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION

December 8, 2009

JCX-60-09

CONTENTS
Page

INTRODUCTION

TITLE I - GENERAL PROVISIONS

A. Individual Tax Relief

1. Deduction of State and local general sales taxes (sec. 101 of the bill and sec. 164 of the Code)

2. Additional standard deduction for State and local real property taxes (sec. 102 of the bill and sec. 63 of the Code)

3. Above-the-line deduction for qualified tuition and related expenses (sec. 103 of the bill and sec. 222 of the Code)

4. Deduction for certain expenses of elementary and secondary school teachers (sec. 104 of the bill and sec. 62(a)(2)(D) of the Code)

B. Business Tax Relief

1. Research credit (sec. 111 of the bill and sec. 41 of the Code)

2. Subpart F exception for active financing income (sec. 112 of the bill and secs. 953 and 954 of the Code)

3. Look-through treatment of payments between related controlled foreign corporations under foreign personal holding company rules (sec. 113 of the bill and sec. 954(c)(6) of the Code)

4. Extension of 15-year straight-line cost recovery for qualified leasehold improvements, qualified restaurant improvements, and qualified retail improvement property (sec. 114 of the bill and sec. 168 of the Code)

5. Seven-year cost recovery period for motorsports racing track facilities (sec. 115 of the bill and sec. 168 of the Code)

6. Railroad track maintenance credit (sec. 116 of the bill and sec. 45G of the Code)

7. Special expensing rules for certain film and television productions (sec. 117 of the bill and sec. 181 of the Code)

8. Expensing of environmental remediation costs (sec. 118 of the bill and sec. 198 of the Code)

9. Mine rescue team training credit (sec. 119 of the bill and sec. 45N of the Code)

10. Election to expense advanced mine safety equipment (sec. 120 of the bill and sec. 179E of the Code)

11. Employer wage credit for employees who are active duty members of the uniformed services (sec. 121 of the bill and sec. 45P of the Code)

12. Certain farming business machinery and equipment treated as 5-year property (sec. 122 of the bill and sec. 168 of the Code)

13. Treatment of certain dividends of regulated investment companies (sec. 123 of the bill and sec. 871(k) of the Code)

14. Special rule for regulated investment company stock held in the estate of a nonresident non-citizen (sec. 124 of the bill and sec. 2105 of the Code)

15. Treatment of RICs as “qualified investment entities” under section 897 (FIRPTA) (sec. 125 of the bill and sec. 897 of the Code)

16. Suspension of limitation on percentage depletion for oil and gas from marginal wells (sec. 126 of the bill and sec. 613A of the Code)

C. Charitable Provisions

1. Contributions of capital gain real property made for conservation purposes (sec. 131 of the bill and sec. 170 of the Code)

2. Enhanced charitable deduction for contributions of food inventory (sec. 132 of the bill and sec. 170 of the Code)

3. Enhanced charitable deduction for contributions of book inventories to public schools (sec. 133 of the bill and sec. 170 of the Code)

4. Enhanced charitable deduction for corporate contributions of computer technology and equipment for educational purposes (sec. 134 of the bill and sec. 170 of the Code)

5. Tax-free distributions from individual retirement plans for charitable purposes (sec. 135 of the bill and sec. 408 of the Code)

6. Modification of tax treatment of certain payments to controlling exempt organizations (sec. 136 of the bill and sec. 512 of the Code)

7. Exclusion of gain or loss on sale or exchange of certain brownfield sites from unrelated business taxable income (sec. 137 of the bill and secs. 512 and 514 of the Code)

8. Basis adjustment to stock of S corporations making charitable contributions of property (sec. 138 of the bill and sec. 1367 of the Code)

D. Miscellaneous Provisions

1. Indian employment tax credit (sec. 141 of the bill and sec. 45A of the Code)

2. Accelerated depreciation for business property on Indian reservations (sec. 142 of the bill and sec. 168(j) of the Code)

3. Deduction allowable with respect to income attributable to domestic production activities in Puerto Rico (sec. 143 of the bill and sec. 199 of the Code)

4. Temporary increase in limit on cover over of rum excise taxes to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands (sec. 144 of the bill and sec. 7652(f) of the Code)

5. American Samoa economic development credit (sec. 145 of the bill and sec. 119 of Pub. L. No. 109-432)

TITLE II - COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE PROVISIONS

1. Empowerment zone tax incentives (sec. 201 of the bill and secs. 1391 and 1202 of the Code)

2. Renewal community tax incentives (sec. 202 of the bill and secs. 1400E, 1400F, 1400I, and 1400J of the Code)

3. New markets tax credit (sec. 203 of the bill and sec. 45D of the Code)

4. Tax incentives for investment in the District of Columbia (sec. 204 of the bill and secs. 1400, 1400A, 1400B, and 1400C of the Code)

5. Special depreciation allowance for certain New York Liberty Zone property (sec. 205(a) of the bill and sec. 1400L(b) of the Code)

6. New York Liberty Zone bond provision (sec. 205(b) of the bill and sec. 1400L of the Code)

7. Work opportunity tax credit for Hurricane Katrina employees (sec. 206(a) of the bill)

8. Increased rehabilitation credit for structures in the Gulf Opportunity Zone (sec. 206(b) of the bill and sec. 1400N(h) of the Code)

9. Election for refundable low-income housing credit for 2010 (sec. 207 of the bill and sec. 42 of the Code)

TITLE III - DISASTER RELIEF PROVISIONS

1. Deductibility of personal casualty losses attributable to federally declared disasters (sec. 301 of the Act and sec. 165 of the Code)

2. Expensing of qualified disaster expenses (sec. 302 of the bill and sec. 198A of the Code)

3. Net operating losses attributable to federally declared disasters (sec. 303 of the bill and sec. 172 of the Code)

4. Special rules for mortgage revenue bonds in Federally declared disaster areas (sec. 304 of the bill and sec. 143 of the Code)

5. Special depreciation allowance and expensing for qualified disaster assistance property (sec. 305 of the bill and secs. 168(n) and 179(e) of the Code)

TITLE IV - ENERGY PROVISIONS

1. Incentives for biodiesel and renewable diesel (sec. 401 of the bill and sec. 40A of the Code)

2. Alternative motor vehicle credit for heavy hybrids (sec. 402 of the bill and sec. 30B of the Code)

3. Alternative fuel credits for natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas (sec. 403 of the bill and secs. 6426 and 6427(e) of the Code)

4. Special rule to implement FERC and State electric restructuring policy (sec. 404 of the bill and sec. 451(i) of the Code)

TITLE V - FOREIGN ACCOUNT TAX COMPLIANCE

A. Increase Disclosure of Beneficial Owners

1. Reporting on certain foreign accounts (sec. 501 of the bill and new secs. 1471, 1472, 1473, and 1474 of the Code, and sec. 6611 of the Code)

2. Repeal of certain foreign exceptions to registered bond requirements (sec. 502 of the bill and secs. 163, 165, 871, 881, 1287, and 4701 of the Code and 31 U.S.C. sec. 3121)

B. Under Reporting With Respect to Foreign Assets

1. Disclosure of information with respect to foreign financial assets (sec. 511 of the bill and new sec. 6038D of the Code)

2. Penalties for underpayments attributable to undisclosed foreign financial assets (sec. 512 of the bill and sec. 6662 of the Code)

3. Modification of statute of limitations for significant omission of income in connection with foreign assets (sec. 513 of the bill and secs. 6229 and 6501 of the Code)

C. Other Disclosure Provisions

1. Reporting of activities with respect to passive foreign investment companies (sec. 521 of the bill and sec. 1298 of the Code)

2. Secretary permitted to require financial institutions to file certain returns related to withholding on foreign transfers electronically (sec. 522 of the bill and sec. 6011 of the Code).

D. Provisions Related to Foreign Trusts

1. Clarifications with respect to foreign trusts which are treated as having a United States beneficiary (sec. 531 of the bill and sec. 679 of the Code)

2. Presumption that foreign trust has United States beneficiary (sec. 532 of the bill and sec. 679 of the Code)

3. Uncompensated use of trust property (sec. 533 of the bill and secs. 643 and 679 of the Code)

4. Reporting requirement of United States owners of foreign trusts (sec. 534 of the bill and sec. 6048 of the Code)

5. Minimum penalty with respect to failure to report on certain foreign trusts (sec. 535 of the bill and sec. 6677 of the Code)

E. Substitute Dividends and Dividend Equivalent Payments Received by Foreign Persons Treated as Dividends (sec. 541 of the bill and sec. 871 of the Code)

TITLE VI - OTHER REVENUE PROVISIONS

A. Income of Partners for Performing Investment Management Services Treated as Ordinary Income Received for Performance of Services (secs. 601 and 602 of the bill and secs. 83, 710, 856, 1402, 6662, 6662A, 6664, and 7704 of the Code)

B. Time for Payment of Corporate Estimated Taxes (sec. 611 of the bill and sec. 6655 of the Code)

C. Study of Extended Tax Expenditures (sec. 621 and 622 of the bill)

INTRODUCTION
This document, 1 prepared by the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation, provides a technical explanation of H.R. 4213, the “Tax Extenders Act of 2009,” as introduced in the House of Representatives on December 7, 2009.

TITLE I - GENERAL PROVISIONS
A. Individual Tax Relief
1. Deduction of State and local general sales taxes (sec. 101 of the bill and sec. 164 of the Code)
Present Law
For purposes of determining regular tax liability, an itemized deduction is permitted for certain State and local taxes paid, including individual income taxes, real property taxes, and personal property taxes. The itemized deduction is not permitted for purposes of determining a taxpayer's alternative minimum taxable income. For taxable years beginning in 2004-2009, at the election of the taxpayer, an itemized deduction may be taken for State and local general sales taxes in lieu of the itemized deduction provided under present law for State and local income taxes. As is the case for State and local income taxes, the itemized deduction for State and local general sales taxes is not permitted for purposes of determining a taxpayer's alternative minimum taxable income. Taxpayers have two options with respect to the determination of the sales tax deduction amount. Taxpayers may deduct the total amount of general State and local sales taxes paid by accumulating receipts showing general sales taxes paid. Alternatively, taxpayers may use tables created by the Secretary that show the allowable deduction. The tables are based on average consumption by taxpayers on a State-by-State basis taking into account number of dependents, modified adjusted gross income and rates of State and local general sales taxation. Taxpayers who live in more than one jurisdiction during the tax year are required to pro-rate the table amounts based on the time they live in each jurisdiction. Taxpayers who use the tables created by the Secretary may, in addition to the table amounts, deduct eligible general sales taxes paid with respect to the purchase of motor vehicles, boats and other items specified by the Secretary. Sales taxes for items that may be added to the tables are not reflected in the tables themselves.

The term “general sales tax” means a tax imposed at one rate with respect to the sale at retail of a broad range of classes of items. However, in the case of items of food, clothing, medical supplies, and motor vehicles, the fact that the tax does not apply with respect to some or all of such items is not taken into account in determining whether the tax applies with respect to a broad range of classes of items, and the fact that the rate of tax applicable with respect to some or all of such items is lower than the general rate of tax is not taken into account in determining whether the tax is imposed at one rate. Except in the case of a lower rate of tax applicable with respect to food, clothing, medical supplies, or motor vehicles, no deduction is allowed for any general sales tax imposed with respect to an item at a rate other than the general rate of tax. However, in the case of motor vehicles, if the rate of tax exceeds the general rate, such excess shall be disregarded and the general rate is treated as the rate of tax.

A compensating use tax with respect to an item is treated as a general sales tax, provided such tax is complementary to a general sales tax and a deduction for sales taxes is allowable with respect to items sold at retail in the taxing jurisdiction that are similar to such item.

Explanation of Provision
The present-law provision allowing taxpayers to elect to deduct State and local sales taxes in lieu of State and local income taxes is extended for one year (through December 31, 2010).

Effective Date
The provision applies to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

2. Additional standard deduction for State and local real property taxes (sec. 102 of the bill and sec. 63 of the Code)
Present Law
In general
An individual taxpayer's taxable income is computed by reducing adjusted gross income either by a standard deduction or, if the taxpayer elects, by the taxpayer's itemized deductions. Unless an individual taxpayer elects, no itemized deduction is allowed for the taxable year. The deduction for certain taxes, including income taxes, real property taxes, and personal property taxes, generally is an itemized deduction. 2

Special rule for State and local property taxes
An individual taxpayer's standard deduction for a taxable year beginning in 2009 is increased by the lesser of (1) the amount allowable 3 to the taxpayer as a deduction for State and local taxes described in section 164(a)(1) (relating to real property taxes), or (2) $500 ($1,000 in the case of a married individual filing jointly). The increased standard deduction is determined by taking into account real estate taxes for which a deduction is allowable to the taxpayer under section 164 and, in the case of a tenant-stockholder in a cooperative housing corporation, real estate taxes for which a deduction is allowable to the taxpayer under section 216. No taxes deductible in computing adjusted gross income are taken into account in computing the increased standard deduction.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the additional standard deduction for State and local property taxes for one year so that it is available for taxable years beginning before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision applies to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

3. Above-the-line deduction for qualified tuition and related expenses (sec. 103 of the bill and sec. 222 of the Code)
Present Law
An individual is allowed an above-the-line deduction for qualified tuition and related expenses for higher education paid by the individual during the taxable year. 4 The term qualified tuition and related expenses is defined in the same manner as for the Hope and Lifetime Learning credits, and includes tuition and fees required for the enrollment or attendance of the taxpayer, the taxpayer's spouse, or any dependent of the taxpayer with respect to whom the taxpayer may claim a personal exemption, at an eligible institution of higher education for courses of instruction of such individual at such institution. 5 The expenses must be in connection with enrollment at an institution of higher education during the taxable year, or with an academic period beginning during the taxable year or during the first three months of the next taxable year. The deduction is not available for tuition and related expenses paid for elementary or secondary education.

The maximum deduction is $4,000 for an individual whose adjusted gross income for the taxable year does not exceed $65,000 ($130,000 in the case of a joint return), or $2,000 for other individuals whose adjusted gross income does not exceed $80,000 ($160,000 in the case of a joint return). No deduction is allowed for an individual whose adjusted gross income exceeds the relevant adjusted gross income limitations, for a married individual who does not file a joint return, or for an individual with respect to whom a personal exemption deduction may be claimed by another taxpayer for the taxable year. The deduction is not available for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

The amount of qualified tuition and related expenses must be reduced by certain scholarships, educational assistance allowances, and other amounts paid for the benefit of such individual, 6 and by the amount of such expenses taken into account for purposes of determining any exclusion from gross income of: (1) income from certain U.S. savings bonds used to pay higher education tuition and fees; and (2) income from a Coverdell education savings account. 7 Additionally, such expenses must be reduced by the earnings portion (but not the return of principal) of distributions from a qualified tuition program if an exclusion under section 529 is claimed with respect to expenses eligible for the qualified tuition deduction. No deduction is allowed for any expense for which a deduction is otherwise allowed or with respect to an individual for whom a Hope or Lifetime Learning credit is elected for such taxable year.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the qualified tuition deduction for one year so that it is generally available for taxable years beginning before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for expenses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

4. Deduction for certain expenses of elementary and secondary school teachers (sec. 104 of the bill and sec. 62(a)(2)(D) of the Code)
Present Law
In general, ordinary and necessary business expenses are deductible. However, unreimbursed employee business expenses generally are deductible only as an itemized deduction and only to the extent that the individual's total miscellaneous deductions (including employee business expenses) exceed two percent of adjusted gross income. An individual's otherwise allowable itemized deductions may be further limited by the overall limitation on itemized deductions, which reduces itemized deductions for taxpayers with adjusted gross income in excess of $166,800 ($83,400 for married individuals filing separate returns) for 2009. In addition, miscellaneous itemized deductions are not allowable under the alternative minimum tax.

Certain expenses of eligible educators are allowed as an above-the-line deduction. Specifically, for taxable years beginning prior to January 1, 2010, an above-the-line deduction is allowed for up to $250 annually of expenses paid or incurred by an eligible educator for books, supplies (other than nonathletic supplies for courses of instruction in health or physical education), computer equipment (including related software and services) and other equipment, and supplementary materials used by the eligible educator in the classroom. 8 To be eligible for this deduction, the expenses must be otherwise deductible under section 162 as a trade or business expense. A deduction is allowed only to the extent the amount of expenses exceeds the amount excludable from income under section 135 (relating to education savings bonds), 529(c)(1) (relating to qualified tuition programs), and section 530(d)(2) (relating to Coverdell education savings accounts).

An eligible educator is a kindergarten through grade twelve teacher, instructor, counselor, principal, or aide in a school for at least 900 hours during a school year. A school means any school that provides elementary education or secondary education, as determined under State law.

The above-the-line deduction for eligible educators is not allowed for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the deduction for eligible educator expenses for one year so that it is available for taxable years beginning before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for expenses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

B. Business Tax Relief
1. Research credit (sec. 111 of the bill and sec. 41 of the Code)
Present Law
General rule
A taxpayer may claim a research credit equal to 20 percent of the amount by which the taxpayer's qualified research expenses for a taxable year exceed its base amount for that year. 9 Thus, the research credit is generally available with respect to incremental increases in qualified research.

A 20-percent research tax credit is also available with respect to the excess of (1) 100 percent of corporate cash expenses (including grants or contributions) paid for basic research conducted by universities (and certain nonprofit scientific research organizations) over (2) the sum of (a) the greater of two minimum basic research floors plus (b) an amount reflecting any decrease in nonresearch giving to universities by the corporation as compared to such giving during a fixed-base period, as adjusted for inflation. This separate credit computation is commonly referred to as the university basic research credit. 10

Finally, a research credit is available for a taxpayer's expenditures on research undertaken by an energy research consortium. This separate credit computation is commonly referred to as the energy research credit. Unlike the other research credits, the energy research credit applies to all qualified expenditures, not just those in excess of a base amount.

The research credit, including the university basic research credit and the energy research credit, expires for amounts paid or incurred after December 31, 2009. 11

Computation of allowable credit
Except for energy research payments and certain university basic research payments made by corporations, the research tax credit applies only to the extent that the taxpayer's qualified research expenses for the current taxable year exceed its base amount. The base amount for the current year generally is computed by multiplying the taxpayer's fixed-base percentage by the average amount of the taxpayer's gross receipts for the four preceding years. If a taxpayer both incurred qualified research expenses and had gross receipts during each of at least three years from 1984 through 1988, then its fixed-base percentage is the ratio that its total qualified research expenses for the 1984-1988 period bears to its total gross receipts for that period (subject to a maximum fixed-base percentage of 16 percent). All other taxpayers (so-called start-up firms) are assigned a fixed-base percentage of three percent. 12

In computing the credit, a taxpayer's base amount cannot be less than 50 percent of its current-year qualified research expenses.

To prevent artificial increases in research expenditures by shifting expenditures among commonly controlled or otherwise related entities, a special aggregation rule provides that all members of the same controlled group of corporations are treated as a single taxpayer. 13 Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, special rules apply for computing the credit when a major portion of a trade or business (or unit thereof) changes hands, under which qualified research expenses and gross receipts for periods prior to the change of ownership of a trade or business are treated as transferred with the trade or business that gave rise to those expenses and receipts for purposes of recomputing a taxpayer's fixed-base percentage. 14

Alternative simplified credit
Taxpayers may elect to claim an alternative simplified credit for qualified research expenses. The alternative simplified research credit is equal to 14 percent of qualified research expenses that exceed 50 percent of the average qualified research expenses for the three preceding taxable years. The rate is reduced to six percent if a taxpayer has no qualified research expenses in any one of the three preceding taxable years. An election to use the alternative simplified credit applies to all succeeding taxable years unless revoked with the consent of the Secretary.

Eligible expenses
Qualified research expenses eligible for the research tax credit consist of: (1) in-house expenses of the taxpayer for wages and supplies attributable to qualified research; (2) certain time-sharing costs for computer use in qualified research; and (3) 65 percent of amounts paid or incurred by the taxpayer to certain other persons for qualified research conducted on the taxpayer's behalf (so-called contract research expenses). 15 Notwithstanding the limitation for contract research expenses, qualified research expenses include 100 percent of amounts paid or incurred by the taxpayer to an eligible small business, university, or Federal laboratory for qualified energy research.

To be eligible for the credit, the research not only has to satisfy the requirements of present-law section 174 (described below) but also must be undertaken for the purpose of discovering information that is technological in nature, the application of which is intended to be useful in the development of a new or improved business component of the taxpayer, and substantially all of the activities of which constitute elements of a process of experimentation for functional aspects, performance, reliability, or quality of a business component. Research does not qualify for the credit if substantially all of the activities relate to style, taste, cosmetic, or seasonal design factors. 16 In addition, research does not qualify for the credit: (1) if conducted after the beginning of commercial production of the business component; (2) if related to the adaptation of an existing business component to a particular customer's requirements; (3) if related to the duplication of an existing business component from a physical examination of the component itself or certain other information; or (4) if related to certain efficiency surveys, management function or technique, market research, market testing, or market development, routine data collection or routine quality control. 17 Research does not qualify for the credit if it is conducted outside the United States, Puerto Rico, or any U.S. possession.

Relation to deduction
Under section 174, taxpayers may elect to deduct currently the amount of certain research or experimental expenditures paid or incurred in connection with a trade or business, notwithstanding the general rule that business expenses to develop or create an asset that has a useful life extending beyond the current year must be capitalized. 18 However, deductions allowed to a taxpayer under section 174 (or any other section) are reduced by an amount equal to 100 percent of the taxpayer's research tax credit determined for the taxable year. 19 Taxpayers may alternatively elect to claim a reduced research tax credit amount under section 41 in lieu of reducing deductions otherwise allowed. 20

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the research credit for one year, through December 31, 2010.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for amounts paid or incurred after December 31, 2009.

2. Subpart F exception for active financing income (sec. 112 of the bill and secs. 953 and 954 of the Code)
Present Law
Under the subpart F rules, 21 10-percent-or-greater U.S. shareholders of a controlled foreign corporation (“CFC”) are subject to U.S. tax currently on certain income earned by the CFC, whether or not such income is distributed to the shareholders. The income subject to current inclusion under the subpart F rules includes, among other things, insurance income and foreign base company income. Foreign base company income includes, among other things, foreign personal holding company income and foreign base company services income (i.e., income derived from services performed for or on behalf of a related person outside the country in which the CFC is organized).

Foreign personal holding company income generally consists of the following: (1) dividends, interest, royalties, rents, and annuities; (2) net gains from the sale or exchange of (a) property that gives rise to the preceding types of income, (b) property that does not give rise to income, and (c) interests in trusts, partnerships, and real estate mortgage investment conduits (“REMICs”); (3) net gains from commodities transactions; (4) net gains from certain foreign currency transactions; (5) income that is equivalent to interest; (6) income from notional principal contracts; (7) payments in lieu of dividends; and (8) amounts received under personal service contracts.

Insurance income subject to current inclusion under the subpart F rules includes any income of a CFC attributable to the issuing or reinsuring of any insurance or annuity contract in connection with risks located in a country other than the CFC's country of organization. Subpart F insurance income also includes income attributable to an insurance contract in connection with risks located within the CFC's country of organization, as the result of an arrangement under which another corporation receives a substantially equal amount of consideration for insurance of other country risks. Investment income of a CFC that is allocable to any insurance or annuity contract related to risks located outside the CFC's country of organization is taxable as subpart F insurance income. 22

Temporary exceptions from foreign personal holding company income, foreign base company services income, and insurance income apply for subpart F purposes for certain income that is derived in the active conduct of a banking, financing, or similar business, as a securities dealer, or in the conduct of an insurance business (so-called “active financing income”). These provisions were enacted in the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 as one-year temporary exceptions, and in 1998, 1999, 2002, 2006, and 2008, the provisions were extended, and in some cases, modified. 23

With respect to income derived in the active conduct of a banking, financing, or similar business, a CFC is required to be predominantly engaged in such business and to conduct substantial activity with respect to such business in order to qualify for the active financing exceptions. In addition, certain nexus requirements apply, which provide that income derived by a CFC or a qualified business unit (“QBU”) of a CFC from transactions with customers is eligible for the exceptions if, among other things, substantially all of the activities in connection with such transactions are conducted directly by the CFC or QBU in its home country, and such income is treated as earned by the CFC or QBU in its home country for purposes of such country's tax laws. Moreover, the exceptions apply to income derived from certain cross border transactions, provided that certain requirements are met. Additional exceptions from foreign personal holding company income apply for certain income derived by a securities dealer within the meaning of section 475 and for gain from the sale of active financing assets.

In the case of a securities dealer, the temporary exception from foreign personal holding company income applies to certain income. The income covered by the exception is any interest or dividend (or certain equivalent amounts) from any transaction, including a hedging transaction or a transaction consisting of a deposit of collateral or margin, entered into in the ordinary course of the dealer's trade or business as a dealer in securities within the meaning of section 475. In the case of a QBU of the dealer, the income is required to be attributable to activities of the QBU in the country of incorporation, or to a QBU in the country in which the QBU both maintains its principal office and conducts substantial business activity. A coordination rule provides that this exception generally takes precedence over the exception for income of a banking, financing or similar business, in the case of a securities dealer.

In the case of insurance, a temporary exception from foreign personal holding company income applies for certain income of a qualifying insurance company with respect to risks located within the CFC's country of creation or organization. In the case of insurance, temporary exceptions from insurance income and from foreign personal holding company income also apply for certain income of a qualifying branch of a qualifying insurance company with respect to risks located within the home country of the branch, provided certain requirements are met under each of the exceptions. Further, additional temporary exceptions from insurance income and from foreign personal holding company income apply for certain income of certain CFCs or branches with respect to risks located in a country other than the United States, provided that the requirements for these exceptions are met. In the case of a life insurance or annuity contract, reserves for such contracts are determined under rules specific to the temporary exceptions. Present law also permits a taxpayer in certain circumstances, subject to approval by the IRS through the ruling process or in published guidance, to establish that the reserve of a life insurance company for life insurance and annuity contracts is the amount taken into account in determining the foreign statement reserve for the contract (reduced by catastrophe, equalization, or deficiency reserve or any similar reserve). IRS approval is to be based on whether the method, the interest rate, the mortality and morbidity assumptions, and any other factors taken into account in determining foreign statement reserves (taken together or separately) provide an appropriate means of measuring income for Federal income tax purposes.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends for one year (for taxable years beginning before 2011) the present-law temporary exceptions from subpart F foreign personal holding company income, foreign base company services income, and insurance income for certain income that is derived in the active conduct of a banking, financing, or similar business, or in the conduct of an insurance business.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for taxable years of foreign corporations beginning after December 31, 2009, and for taxable years of U.S. shareholders with or within which such taxable years of such foreign corporations end.

3. Look-through treatment of payments between related controlled foreign corporations under foreign personal holding company rules (sec. 113 of the bill and sec. 954(c)(6) of the Code)
Present Law
In general
In general, the rules of subpart F 24 require U.S. shareholders with a 10-percent or greater interest in a controlled foreign corporation (“CFC”) to include certain income of the CFC (referred to as “subpart F income”) on a current basis for U.S. tax purposes, regardless of whether the income is distributed to the shareholders.

Subpart F income includes foreign base company income. One category of foreign base company income is foreign personal holding company income. For subpart F purposes, foreign personal holding company income generally includes dividends, interest, rents, and royalties, among other types of income. There are several exceptions to these rules. For example, foreign personal holding company income does not include dividends and interest received by a CFC from a related corporation organized and operating in the same foreign country in which the CFC is organized, or rents and royalties received by a CFC from a related corporation for the use of property within the country in which the CFC is organized. Interest, rent, and royalty payments do not qualify for this exclusion to the extent that such payments reduce the subpart F income of the payor. In addition, subpart F income of a CFC does not include any item of income from sources within the United States that is effectively connected with the conduct by such CFC of a trade or business within the United States (“ECI”) unless such item is exempt from taxation (or is subject to a reduced rate of tax) pursuant to a tax treaty.

The “look-through rule ”
Under the “look-through rule” (sec. 954(c)(6)), dividends, interest (including factoring income that is treated as equivalent to interest under section 954(c)(1)(E)), rents, and royalties received by one CFC from a related CFC are not treated as foreign personal holding company income to the extent attributable or properly allocable to income of the payor that is neither subpart F income nor treated as ECI. For this purpose, a related CFC is a CFC that controls or is controlled by the other CFC, or a CFC that is controlled by the same person or persons that control the other CFC. Ownership of more than 50 percent of the CFC's stock (by vote or value) constitutes control for these purposes.

The Secretary is authorized to prescribe regulations that are necessary or appropriate to carry out the look-through rule, including such regulations as are appropriate to prevent the abuse of the purposes of such rule.

The look-through rule is effective for taxable years of foreign corporations beginning before January 1, 2010, and for taxable years of U.S. shareholders with or within which such taxable years of such foreign corporations end.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends for one year the application of the look-through rule, to taxable years of foreign corporations beginning before January 1, 2011, and for taxable years of U.S. shareholders with or within which such taxable years of such foreign corporations end.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for taxable years of foreign corporations beginning after December 31, 2009, and for taxable years of U.S. shareholders with or within which such taxable years of such foreign corporations end.

4. Extension of 15-year straight-line cost recovery for qualified leasehold improvements, qualified restaurant improvements, and qualified retail improvement property (sec. 114 of the bill and sec. 168 of the Code)
Present Law
In general
A taxpayer generally must capitalize the cost of property used in a trade or business and recover such cost over time through annual deductions for depreciation or amortization. Tangible property generally is depreciated under the modified accelerated cost recovery system (“MACRS”), which determines depreciation by applying specific recovery periods, placed-in-service conventions, and depreciation methods to the cost of various types of depreciable property. 25 The cost of nonresidential real property is recovered using the straight-line method of depreciation and a recovery period of 39 years. Nonresidential real property is subject to the mid-month placed-in-service convention. Under the mid-month convention, the depreciation allowance for the first year property is placed in service is based on the number of months the property was in service, and property placed in service at any time during a month is treated as having been placed in service in the middle of the month.

Depreciation of leasehold improvements
Generally, depreciation allowances for improvements made on leased property are determined under MACRS, even if the MACRS recovery period assigned to the property is longer than the term of the lease. This rule applies regardless of whether the lessor or the lessee places the leasehold improvements in service. If a leasehold improvement constitutes an addition or improvement to nonresidential real property already placed in service, the improvement generally is depreciated using the straight-line method over a 39-year recovery period, beginning in the month the addition or improvement was placed in service. However, exceptions exist for certain qualified leasehold improvements and qualified restaurant property.

Qualified leasehold improvement property
Section 168(e)(3)(E)(iv) provides a statutory 15-year recovery period for qualified leasehold improvement property placed in service before January 1, 2010. Qualified leasehold improvement property is recovered using the straight-line method and a half-year convention. Leasehold improvements placed in service in 2010 and later will be subject to the general rules described above.

Qualified leasehold improvement property is any improvement to an interior portion of a building that is nonresidential real property, provided certain requirements are met. The improvement must be made under or pursuant to a lease either by the lessee (or sublessee), or by the lessor, of that portion of the building to be occupied exclusively by the lessee (or sublessee). The improvement must be placed in service more than three years after the date the building was first placed in service. Qualified leasehold improvement property does not include any improvement for which the expenditure is attributable to the enlargement of the building, any elevator or escalator, any structural component benefiting a common area, or the internal structural framework of the building.

If a lessor makes an improvement that qualifies as qualified leasehold improvement property, such improvement does not qualify as qualified leasehold improvement property to any subsequent owner of such improvement. An exception to the rule applies in the case of death and certain transfers of property that qualify for non-recognition treatment.

Qualified restaurant property
Section 168(e)(3)(E)(v) provides a statutory 15-year recovery period for qualified restaurant property placed in service before January 1, 2010. Qualified restaurant property is any section 1250 property that is a building (if the building is placed in service before January 1, 2010) or an improvement to a building, if more than 50 percent of the building's square footage is devoted to the preparation of, and seating for on-premises consumption of, prepared meals. 26 Qualified restaurant property is recovered using the straight-line method and a half-year convention. Additionally, qualified restaurant property is not eligible for bonus depreciation. 27 Restaurant property placed in service in 2010 and later will be subject to the general rules described above.

Qualified retail property
Section 168(e)(3)(E)(ix) provides a statutory 15-year recovery period and for qualified retail improvement property placed in service after December 31, 2008 and before January 1, 2010. Qualified retail improvement property is any improvement to an interior portion of a building which is nonresidential real property if such portion is open to the general public 28 and is used in the retail trade or business of selling tangible personal property to the general public, and such improvement is placed in service more than three years after the date the building was first placed in service. Qualified retail improvement property does not include any improvement for which the expenditure is attributable to the enlargement of the building, any elevator or escalator, or the internal structural framework of the building. In the case of an improvement made by the owner of such improvement, the improvement is a qualified retail improvement only so long as the improvement is held by such owner.

Retail establishments that qualify for the 15-year recovery period include those primarily engaged in the sale of goods. Examples of these retail establishments include, but are not limited to, grocery stores, clothing stores, hardware stores and convenience stores. Establishments primarily engaged in providing services, such as professional services, financial services, personal services, health services, and entertainment, do not qualify. It is generally intended that businesses defined as a store retailer under the current North American Industry Classification System (industry sub-sectors 441 through 453) qualify while those in other industry classes do not qualify.

Qualified retail property is recovered using the straight-line method and a half-year convention. Additionally, qualified retail property is not eligible for bonus depreciation. 29 Retail property placed in service in 2010 and later will be subject to the general rules described above.

Explanation of Provision
The present law provisions for qualified leasehold improvement property, qualified restaurant property, and qualified retail improvement property are extended for one year (through December 31, 2010).

Effective Date
The provision is effective for property placed in service after December 31, 2009.

5. Seven-year cost recovery period for motorsports racing track facilities (sec. 115 of the bill and sec. 168 of the Code)
Present Law
A taxpayer generally must capitalize the cost of property used in a trade or business and recover such cost over time through annual deductions for depreciation or amortization. Tangible property generally is depreciated under the modified accelerated cost recovery system (“MACRS”), which determines depreciation by applying specific recovery periods, placed-in-service conventions, and depreciation methods to the cost of various types of depreciable property. 30 The cost of nonresidential real property is recovered using the straight-line method of depreciation and a recovery period of 39 years. Nonresidential real property is subject to the mid-month placed-in-service convention. Under the mid-month convention, the depreciation allowance for the first year property is placed in service is based on the number of months the property was in service, and property placed in service at any time during a month is treated as having been placed in service in the middle of the month. Land improvements (such as roads and fences) are recovered over 15 years. An exception exists for the theme and amusement park industry, whose assets are assigned a recovery period of seven years. Additionally, a motorsports entertainment complex placed in service before December 31, 2009 is assigned a recovery period of seven years. 31 For these purposes, a motorsports entertainment complex means a racing track facility which is permanently situated on land that during the 36 month period following its placed in service date it hosts a racing event. 32 The term motorsports entertainment complex also includes ancillary facilities, land improvements (e.g., parking lots, sidewalks, fences), support facilities (e.g., food and beverage retailing, souvenir vending), and appurtenances associated with such facilities (e.g., ticket booths, grandstands).

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the present law seven-year recovery period for one year (to apply to property placed in service before January 1, 2011).

Effective Date
The provision is effective for property placed in service after December 31, 2009.

6. Railroad track maintenance credit (sec. 116 of the bill and sec. 45G of the Code)
Present Law
Present law provides a 50-percent business tax credit for qualified railroad track maintenance expenditures paid or incurred by an eligible taxpayer during the taxable year. 33 The credit is limited to the product of $3,500 times the number of miles of railroad track (1) owned or leased by an eligible taxpayer as of the close of its taxable year, and (2) assigned to the eligible taxpayer by a Class II or Class III railroad that owns or leases such track at the close of the taxable year. 34 Each mile of railroad track may be taken into account only once, either by the owner of such mile or by the owner's assignee, in computing the per-mile limitation. The credit may also reduce a taxpayer's tax liability below its tentative minimum tax. 35

Qualified railroad track maintenance expenditures are defined as gross expenditures (whether or not otherwise chargeable to capital account) for maintaining railroad track (including roadbed, bridges, and related track structures) owned or leased as of January 1, 2005, by a Class II or Class III railroad (determined without regard to any consideration for such expenditure given by the Class II or Class III railroad which made the assignment of such track). 36

An eligible taxpayer means any Class II or Class III railroad, and any person who transports property using the rail facilities of a Class II or Class III railroad or who furnishes railroad-related property or services to a Class II or Class III railroad, but only with respect to miles of railroad track assigned to such person by such railroad under the provision. 37

The terms Class II or Class III railroad have the meanings given by the Surface Transportation Board. 38

The provision applies to qualified railroad track maintenance expenditures paid or incurred during taxable years beginning before January 1, 2010.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the present law credit for one year, for qualified railroad track maintenance expenditures paid or incurred before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for expenses paid or incurred in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

7. Special expensing rules for certain film and television productions (sec. 117 of the bill and sec. 181 of the Code)
Present Law
The modified accelerated cost recovery system (“MACRS”) does not apply to certain property, including any motion picture film, video tape, or sound recording, or to any other property if the taxpayer elects to exclude such property from MACRS and the taxpayer properly applies a unit-of-production method or other method of depreciation not expressed in a term of years. Section 197 does not apply to certain intangible property, including property produced by the taxpayer or any interest in a film, sound recording, video tape, book or similar property not acquired in a transaction (or a series of related transactions) involving the acquisition of assets constituting a trade or business or substantial portion thereof. Thus, the recovery of the cost of a film, video tape, or similar property that is produced by the taxpayer or is acquired on a “stand-alone” basis by the taxpayer may not be determined under either the MACRS depreciation provisions or under the section 197 amortization provisions. The cost recovery of such property may be determined under section 167, which allows a depreciation deduction for the reasonable allowance for the exhaustion, wear and tear, or obsolescence of the property. A taxpayer is allowed to recover, through annual depreciation deductions, the cost of certain property used in a trade or business or for the production of income. Section 167(g) provides that the cost of motion picture films, sound recordings, copyrights, books, and patents are eligible to be recovered using the income forecast method of depreciation.

Under section 181, taxpayers may elect 39 to deduct the cost of any qualifying film and television production, commencing prior to January 1, 2010, in the year the expenditure is incurred in lieu of capitalizing the cost and recovering it through depreciation allowances. 40 Taxpayers may elect to deduct up to $15 million of the aggregate cost of the film or television production under this section. 41 The threshold is increased to $20 million if a significant amount of the production expenditures are incurred in areas eligible for designation as a low-income community or eligible for designation by the Delta Regional Authority as a distressed county or isolated area of distress. 42

A qualified film or television production means any production of a motion picture (whether released theatrically or directly to video cassette or any other format) or television program if at least 75 percent of the total compensation expended on the production is for services performed in the United States by actors, directors, producers, and other relevant production personnel. 43 The term “compensation” does not include participations and residuals (as defined in section 167(g)(7)(B)). 44 With respect to property which is one or more episodes in a television series, each episode is treated as a separate production and only the first 44 episodes qualify under the provision. 45 Qualified property does not include sexually explicit productions as defined by section 2257 of title 18 of the U.S. Code. 46

For purposes of recapture under section 1245, any deduction allowed under section 181 is treated as if it were a deduction allowable for amortization. 47

Explanation of the Provision
The provision extends the present law expensing provision for one year, to qualified film and television productions commencing prior to January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision applies to qualified film and television productions commencing after December 31, 2009.

8. Expensing of environmental remediation costs (sec. 118 of the bill and sec. 198 of the Code)
Present Law
Present law allows a deduction for ordinary and necessary expenses paid or incurred in carrying on any trade or business. 48 Treasury regulations provide that the cost of incidental repairs that neither materially add to the value of property nor appreciably prolong its life, but keep it in an ordinarily efficient operating condition, may be deducted currently as a business expense. Section 263(a)(1) limits the scope of section 162 by prohibiting a current deduction for certain capital expenditures. Treasury regulations define “capital expenditures” as amounts paid or incurred to materially add to the value, or substantially prolong the useful life, of property owned by the taxpayer, or to adapt property to a new or different use. Amounts paid for repairs and maintenance do not constitute capital expenditures. The determination of whether an expense is deductible or capitalizable is based on the facts and circumstances of each case.

Taxpayers may elect to treat certain environmental remediation expenditures paid or incurred before January 1, 2010, that would otherwise be chargeable to capital account as deductible in the year paid or incurred. 49 The deduction applies for both regular and alternative minimum tax purposes. The expenditure must be incurred in connection with the abatement or control of hazardous substances at a qualified contaminated site. In general, any expenditure for the acquisition of depreciable property used in connection with the abatement or control of hazardous substances at a qualified contaminated site does not constitute a qualified environmental remediation expenditure. However, depreciation deductions allowable for such property, which would otherwise be allocated to the site under the principles set forth in Commissioner v. Idaho Power Co. 50 and section 263A, are treated as qualified environmental remediation expenditures.

A “qualified contaminated site” (a so-called “brownfield”) generally is any property that is held for use in a trade or business, for the production of income, or as inventory and is certified by the appropriate State environmental agency to be an area at or on which there has been a release (or threat of release) or disposal of a hazardous substance. Both urban and rural property may qualify. However, sites that are identified on the national priorities list under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”) 51 cannot qualify as targeted areas. Hazardous substances generally are defined by reference to sections 101(14) and 102 of CERCLA, subject to additional limitations applicable to asbestos and similar substances within buildings, certain naturally occurring substances such as radon, and certain other substances released into drinking water supplies due to deterioration through ordinary use, as well as petroleum products defined in section 4612(a)(3) of the Code.

In the case of property to which a qualified environmental remediation expenditure otherwise would have been capitalized, any deduction allowed under section 198 is treated as a depreciation deduction and the property is treated as section 1245 property. Thus, deductions for qualified environmental remediation expenditures are subject to recapture as ordinary income upon a sale or other disposition of the property. In addition, sections 280B (demolition of structures) and 468 (special rules for mining and solid waste reclamation and closing costs) do not apply to amounts that are treated as expenses under this provision.

Section 1400N(g) permits the expensing of environmental remediation expenditures paid or incurred before January 1, 2010, to abate contamination at qualified contaminated sites located in the Gulf Opportunity Zone.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the present law expensing provision for one year to include expenditures paid or incurred before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for expenditures paid or incurred after December 31, 2009.

9. Mine rescue team training credit (sec. 119 of the bill and sec. 45N of the Code)
Present Law
As part of the general business credit, an eligible employer may claim a credit with respect to each qualified mine rescue team employee equal to the lesser of: (1) 20 percent of the amount paid or incurred by the taxpayer during the taxable year with respect to the training program costs of such qualified mine rescue team employee, including wages of the employee while attending the program; or (2) $10,000. 52 A qualified mine rescue team employee is any full-time employee of the taxpayer who is a miner eligible for more than six months of a taxable year to serve as a mine rescue team member by virtue of either having completed the initial 20 hour course of instruction prescribed by the Mine Safety and Health Administration's Office of Educational Policy and Development, or receiving at least 40 hours of refresher training in such instruction. 53

An eligible employer is any taxpayer which employs individuals as miners in underground mines in the United States. 54 The term “wages” has the meaning given to such term by section 3306(b) (determined without regard to any dollar limitation contained in that section). 55

No deduction is allowed for the portion of the expenses otherwise deductible which is equal to the amount of the credit. 56 The credit does not apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the credit for one year. Under the provision, the credit does not apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2010.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

10. Election to expense advanced mine safety equipment (sec. 120 of the bill and sec. 179E of the Code)
Present Law
A taxpayer is allowed to recover, through annual depreciation deductions, the cost of certain property used in a trade or business or for the production of income. The amount of the depreciation deduction allowed with respect to tangible property for a taxable year is determined under the modified accelerated cost recovery system (“MACRS”). 57 Under MACRS, different types of property generally are assigned applicable recovery periods and depreciation methods. The recovery periods applicable to most tangible personal property (generally tangible property other than residential rental property and nonresidential real property) range from 3 to 20 years. The depreciation methods generally applicable to tangible personal property are the 200-percent and 150-percent declining balance methods, switching to the straight-line method for the taxable year in which the depreciation deduction would be maximized.

In lieu of depreciation, a taxpayer with a sufficiently small amount of annual investment may elect to deduct (or “expense”) such costs under section 179. Present law provides that the maximum amount a taxpayer may expense for taxable years beginning in 2009 is $250,000 of the cost of the qualifying property for the taxable year. 58 For taxable years beginning in 2010, the limitation is $125,000. In general, qualifying property is defined as depreciable tangible personal property that is purchased for use in the active conduct of a trade or business. For taxable years beginning in 2009, the $250,000 amount is reduced (but not below zero) by the amount by which the cost of qualifying property placed in service during the taxable year exceeds $800,000. The reduction amount is $500,000 for taxable years beginning in 2010. The $125,000 and $500,000 amounts are indexed for inflation in taxable years beginning in 2010.

A taxpayer may elect to treat 50 percent of the cost of any qualified advanced mine safety equipment property as an expense in the taxable year in which the equipment is placed in service. 59 “Qualified advanced mine safety equipment property” means any advanced mine safety equipment property for use in any underground mine located in the United States the original use of which commences with the taxpayer and which is placed in service before January 1, 2010. 60

Advanced mine safety equipment property means any of the following: (1) emergency communication technology or devices used to allow a miner to maintain constant communication with an individual who is not in the mine; (2) electronic identification and location devices that allow individuals not in the mine to track at all times the movements and location of miners working in or at the mine; (3) emergency oxygen-generating, self-rescue devices that provide oxygen for at least 90 minutes; (4) pre-positioned supplies of oxygen providing each miner on a shift the ability to survive for at least 48 hours; and (5) comprehensive atmospheric monitoring systems that monitor the levels of carbon monoxide, methane and oxygen that are present in all areas of the mine and that can detect smoke in the case of a fire in a mine. 61

The portion of the cost of any property with respect to which an expensing election under section 179 is made may not be taken into account for purposes of the 50-percent deduction under section 179E. 62 In addition, a taxpayer making an election under section 179E must file with the Secretary a report containing information with respect to the operation of the mines of the taxpayer as required by the Secretary. 63

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends for one year, to December 31, 2010, the placed in service termination date for the present-law rule relating to expensing of mine safety equipment.

Effective Date
The provision applies to property placed in service after December 31, 2009.

11. Employer wage credit for employees who are active duty members of the uniformed services (sec. 121 of the bill and sec. 45P of the Code)
Present Law
In general, compensation paid by an employer to an employee is deductible by the employer under section 162(a)(1), unless the expense must be capitalized. In the case of an employee who is called to active duty to the uniformed services of the United States, some employers voluntarily pay the employee the difference between the compensation that the employer would have paid to the employee during the period of military service and the amount of pay received by the employee from the military (such payments are commonly referred to as “differential wage payments”).

If a taxpayer qualifies as an eligible small business employer, the taxpayer may take a credit against the taxpayer's income tax liability for a taxable year in an amount equal to 20 percent of the sum of the eligible differential wage payments for each of the taxpayer's qualified employees for the taxable year.

An eligible small business employer means, with respect to a taxable year, any taxpayer which: (1) employed on average less than 50 employees on business days during the taxable year; and (2) under a written plan of the taxpayer, provides eligible differential wage payments to every qualified employee of the taxpayer. Taxpayers under common control are aggregated for purposes of determining whether a taxpayer is an eligible small business employer.

Differential wage payments means any payment which: (1) is made by an employer to an individual with respect to any period during which the individual is performing service in the uniformed services of the United States while on active duty for a period of more than 30 days; and (2) represents all or a portion of the wages that the individual would have received from the employer if the individual were performing services for the employer. The term eligible differential wage payments means so much of the differential wage payments paid to a qualified employee as does not exceed $20,000.

A qualified employee of a taxpayer is a person who has been an employee for the 91-day period immediately preceding the period for which any differential wage payment is made.

No deduction may be taken for that portion of compensation which is equal to the credit. In addition, the amount of any other credit otherwise allowable under Chapter 1 (Normal Taxes and Surtaxes) of Subtitle A (Income Taxes) of the Code with respect to compensation paid to an employee must be reduced by the differential wage payment credit allowed with respect to such employee. The differential wage payment credit is part of the general business credit, and thus this credit is subject to the rules applicable to business credits. For example, an unused credit generally may be carried back to the taxable year that precedes an unused credit year or carried forward to each of the 20 taxable years following the unused credit year. 64 The credit is not allowable against a taxpayer's alternative minimum tax liability.

The credit is not available with respect to a taxpayer who has failed to comply with the employment and reemployment rights of members of the uniformed services (as provided under Chapter 43 of Title 38 of the U.S. Code).

The differential wage payment credit is not available for payments made after December 31, 2009.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends for one year the differential wage payment credit for employees who are active duty members of the uniformed services. Thus, the differential wage payment credit is available for payments made before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision is effective with respect to payments made after December 31, 2009.

12. Certain farming business machinery and equipment treated as 5-year property (sec. 122 of the bill and sec. 168 of the Code)
Present Law
A taxpayer is allowed to recover, through annual depreciation deductions, the cost of certain property used in a trade or business or for the production of income. The amount of the depreciation deduction allowed with respect to tangible property for a taxable year is determined under the modified accelerated cost recovery system (“MACRS”). 65 The class lives of assets placed in service after 1986 are generally set forth in Revenue Procedure 87-56. 66 Asset class 01.1 includes machinery and equipment, grain bins, and fences (but no other land improvements), that are used in the production of crops or plants, vines, and trees; livestock; the operation of farm dairies, nurseries, greenhouses, sod farms, mushrooms cellars, cranberry bogs, apiaries, and fur farms; and the performance of agricultural, animal husbandry, and horticultural services. These assets are assigned a class life of 10 years and a recovery period of seven years.

However, Section 168(e)(3)(C)(vii) provides a statutory 5-year recovery period for any machinery or equipment (other than any grain bin, cotton ginning asset, fence, or other land improvement) which is used in a farming business and placed in service before January 1, 2010, and the original use of which commences with the taxpayer after December 31, 2008. For these purposes, the term “farming business” means a trade or business involving the cultivation of land or the raising or harvesting of any agricultural or horticultural commodity. 67 A farming business includes processing activities that are normally incident to the growing, raising, or harvesting of agricultural or horticultural products. 68

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the 5-year recovery period for one year (to apply to property placed in service before January 1, 2011).

Effective Date
The provision is effective for property placed in service after December 31, 2009.

13. Treatment of certain dividends of regulated investment companies (sec. 123 of the bill and sec. 871(k) of the Code)
Present Law 69
In general
A regulated investment company (“RIC”) is an entity that meets certain requirements, including a requirement that its income generally be derived from passive investments such as dividends and interest, that it distribute 90 percent of its income, and that elects to be taxed under a special tax regime. Unlike an entity taxed as a corporation, an entity that is taxed as a RIC can deduct amounts paid to its shareholders as dividends. In this manner, tax on RIC income is generally not paid by the RIC but rather by its shareholders. However, income of a RIC is treated as a dividend by those shareholders, unless other special rules apply. Dividends received by foreign persons from a RIC are generally subject to gross-basis tax under sections 871(a) or 881, and the RIC payor of such dividends is obligated to withhold such tax under sections 1441 and 1442.

Under present law, a RIC that earns certain interest income that would not be subject to U.S. tax if earned by a foreign person directly may, to the extent of such income, designate a dividend it pays as derived from such interest income. A foreign person who is a shareholder in the RIC generally can treat such a dividend as exempt from gross-basis U.S. tax, as if the foreign person had earned the interest directly. Also, subject to certain requirements, the RIC is exempt from withholding the gross basis tax on such dividends. Similar rules apply with respect to the designation of certain short term capital gain dividends. However, these provisions relating to certain dividends with respect to interest income and short term capital gain of the RIC do not apply to dividends with respect to any taxable year of a RIC beginning after December 31, 2009.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the rules exempting from gross basis tax and from withholding tax the interest-related dividends and to short term capital gain dividends received from a RIC, to dividends with respect to taxable years of a RIC beginning before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision applies to dividends paid with respect to any taxable year of the RIC beginning after December 31, 2009 (but before January 1, 2011).

14. Special rule for regulated investment company stock held in the estate of a nonresident non-citizen (sec. 124 of the bill and sec. 2105 of the Code)
Present Law
The gross estate of a decedent who was a U.S. citizen or resident generally includes all property - real, personal, tangible, and intangible - wherever situated. 70 The gross estate of a nonresident non-citizen decedent, by contrast, generally includes only property that at the time of the decedent's death is situated within the United States. 71 Property within the United States generally includes debt obligations of U.S. persons, including the Federal government and State and local governments, but does not include either bank deposits or portfolio obligations the interest on which would be exempt from U.S. income tax under section 871. 72 Stock owned and held by a nonresident non-citizen generally is treated as property within the United States if the stock was issued by a domestic corporation. 73

Treaties may reduce U.S. taxation of transfers of the estates of nonresident non-citizens. Under recent treaties, for example, U.S. tax generally may be eliminated except insofar as the property transferred includes U.S. real property or business property of a U.S. permanent establishment.

Although stock issued by a domestic corporation generally is treated as property within the United States, stock of a regulated investment company (“RIC”) that was owned by a nonresident non-citizen is not deemed property within the United States in the proportion that, at the end of the quarter of the RIC's taxable year immediately before a decedent's date of death, the assets held by the RIC are debt obligations, deposits, or other property that would be treated as situated outside the United States if held directly by the estate (the “estate tax look-through rule for RIC stock”). 74 This estate tax look-through rule for RIC stock does not apply to estates of decedents dying after December 31, 2009.

Explanation of Provision
The provision permits the estate tax look-through rule for RIC stock to apply to estates of decedents dying before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

15. Treatment of RICs as “qualified investment entities” under section 897 (FIRPTA) (sec. 125 of the bill and sec. 897 of the Code)
Present law
Special U.S. tax rules apply to capital gains of foreign persons that are attributable to dispositions of interests in U.S. real property. In general, although a foreign person (a foreign corporation or a nonresident alien individual) is not generally taxed on U.S. source capital gains unless certain personal presence or active business requirements are met, a foreign person who sells a U.S. real property interest (USRPI) is subject to tax at the same rates as a U.S. person, under the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act (“FIRPTA”) provisions codified in section 897 of the Code. Withholding tax is also imposed under section 1445.

A USRPI includes stock or a beneficial interest in any U.S. real property holding corporation (as defined), with the exception of a domestically controlled “qualified investment entity.” A distribution from a “qualified investment entity” that is attributable to the sale of a USRPI is also subject to tax under FIRPTA unless the distribution is with respect to an interest that is regularly traded on an established securities market located in the United Sates and the recipient foreign corporation or nonresident alien individual did not hold more than 5 percent of that class of stock or beneficial interest within the 1-year period ending on the date of distribution. Special rules apply to situations involving tiers of qualified investment entities.

The term “qualified investment entity” includes a regulated investment company (“RIC”) that meets certain requirements, although the inclusion of a RIC in that definition is scheduled to expire, for certain purposes, on December 31, 2009. 75

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the inclusion of a RIC within the definition of a “qualified investment entity” under section 897 of the Code through December 31, 2010, for those situations in which that that inclusion would otherwise expire at the end of 2009.

Effective Date
The provision applies to distributions made after December 31, 2009.

16. Suspension of limitation on percentage depletion for oil and gas from marginal wells (sec. 126 of the bill and sec. 613A of the Code)
Present Law
The Code permits taxpayers to recover their investments in oil and gas wells through depletion deductions. Two methods of depletion are currently allowable under the Code: (1) the cost depletion method, and (2) the percentage depletion method. 76 Under the cost depletion method, the taxpayer deducts that portion of the adjusted basis of the depletable property which is equal to the ratio of units sold from that property during the taxable year to the number of units remaining as of the end of taxable year plus the number of units sold during the taxable year. Thus, the amount recovered under cost depletion may never exceed the taxpayer's basis in the property.

The Code generally limits the percentage depletion method for oil and gas properties to independent producers and royalty owners. 77 Generally, under the percentage depletion method, 15 percent of the taxpayer's gross income from an oil- or gas-producing property is allowed as a deduction in each taxable year. 78 The amount deducted generally may not exceed 100 percent of the net income from that property in any year (the “net-income limitation”). 79 The 100-percent net-income limitation for marginal production has been suspended for taxable years beginning before January 1, 2010.

Marginal production is defined as domestic crude oil and natural gas production from stripper well property or from property substantially all of the production from which during the calendar year is heavy oil. Stripper well property is property from which the average daily production is 15 barrel equivalents or less, determined by dividing the average daily production of domestic crude oil and domestic natural gas from producing wells on the property for the calendar year by the number of wells. Heavy oil is domestic crude oil with a weighted average gravity of 20 degrees API or less (corrected to 60 degrees Fahrenheit). 80

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the suspension of the 100-percent net-income limitation for marginal production for one year (to apply to tax years beginning before January 1, 2011).

Effective Date
The provision is effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

C. Charitable Provisions
1. Contributions of capital gain real property made for conservation purposes (sec. 131 of the bill and sec. 170 of the Code)
Present Law
Charitable contributions generally
In general, a deduction is permitted for charitable contributions, subject to certain limitations that depend on the type of taxpayer, the property contributed, and the donee organization. The amount of deduction generally equals the fair market value of the contributed property on the date of the contribution. Charitable deductions are provided for income, estate, and gift tax purposes. 81

In general, in any taxable year, charitable contributions by a corporation are not deductible to the extent the aggregate contributions exceed 10 percent of the corporation's taxable income computed without regard to net operating or capital loss carrybacks. For individuals, the amount deductible is a percentage of the taxpayer's contribution base, (i.e., taxpayer's adjusted gross income computed without regard to any net operating loss carryback). The applicable percentage of the contribution base varies depending on the type of donee organization and property contributed. Cash contributions of an individual taxpayer to public charities, private operating foundations, and certain types of private nonoperating foundations may not exceed 50 percent of the taxpayer's contribution base. Cash contributions to private foundations and certain other organizations generally may be deducted up to 30 percent of the taxpayer's contribution base.

In general, a charitable deduction is not allowed for income, estate, or gift tax purposes if the donor transfers an interest in property to a charity while also either retaining an interest in that property or transferring an interest in that property to a noncharity for less than full and adequate consideration. Exceptions to this general rule are provided for, among other interests, remainder interests in charitable remainder annuity trusts, charitable remainder unitrusts, and pooled income funds, present interests in the form of a guaranteed annuity or a fixed percentage of the annual value of the property, and qualified conservation contributions.

Capital gain property
Capital gain property means any capital asset or property used in the taxpayer's trade or business the sale of which at its fair market value, at the time of contribution, would have resulted in gain that would have been long-term capital gain. Contributions of capital gain property to a qualified charity are deductible at fair market value within certain limitations. Contributions of capital gain property to charitable organizations described in section 170(b)(1)(A) (e.g., public charities, private foundations other than private non-operating foundations, and certain governmental units) generally are deductible up to 30 percent of the taxpayer's contribution base. An individual may elect, however, to bring all these contributions of capital gain property for a taxable year within the 50-percent limitation category by reducing the amount of the contribution deduction by the amount of the appreciation in the capital gain property. Contributions of capital gain property to charitable organizations described in section 170(b)(1)(B) (e.g., private non-operating foundations) are deductible up to 20 percent of the taxpayer's contribution base.

For purposes of determining whether a taxpayer's aggregate charitable contributions in a taxable year exceed the applicable percentage limitation, contributions of capital gain property are taken into account after other charitable contributions. Contributions of capital gain property that exceed the percentage limitation may be carried forward for five years.

Qualified conservation contributions
Qualified conservation contributions are not subject to the “partial interest” rule, which generally bars deductions for charitable contributions of partial interests in property. A qualified conservation contribution is a contribution of a qualified real property interest to a qualified organization exclusively for conservation purposes. A qualified real property interest is defined as: (1) the entire interest of the donor other than a qualified mineral interest; (2) a remainder interest; or (3) a restriction (granted in perpetuity) on the use that may be made of the real property. Qualified organizations include certain governmental units, public charities that meet certain public support tests, and certain supporting organizations. Conservation purposes include: (1) the preservation of land areas for outdoor recreation by, or for the education of, the general public; (2) the protection of a relatively natural habitat of fish, wildlife, or plants, or similar ecosystem; (3) the preservation of open space (including farmland and forest land) where such preservation will yield a significant public benefit and is either for the scenic enjoyment of the general public or pursuant to a clearly delineated Federal, State, or local governmental conservation policy; and (4) the preservation of an historically important land area or a certified historic structure.

Qualified conservation contributions of capital gain property are subject to the same limitations and carryover rules of other charitable contributions of capital gain property.

Special rule regarding contributions of capital gain real property for conservation purposes
In general
Under a temporary provision that is effective for contributions made in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2005, 82 the 30-percent contribution base limitation on contributions of capital gain property by individuals does not apply to qualified conservation contributions (as defined under present law). Instead, individuals may deduct the fair market value of any qualified conservation contribution to an organization described in section 170(b)(1)(A) to the extent of the excess of 50 percent of the contribution base over the amount of all other allowable charitable contributions. These contributions are not taken into account in determining the amount of other allowable charitable contributions.

Individuals are allowed to carry over any qualified conservation contributions that exceed the 50-percent limitation for up to 15 years.

For example, assume an individual with a contribution base of $100 makes a qualified conservation contribution of property with a fair market value of $80 and makes other charitable contributions subject to the 50-percent limitation of $60. The individual is allowed a deduction of $50 in the current taxable year for the non-conservation contributions (50 percent of the $100 contribution base) and is allowed to carry over the excess $10 for up to 5 years. No current deduction is allowed for the qualified conservation contribution, but the entire $80 qualified conservation contribution may be carried forward for up to 15 years.

Farmers and ranchers
In the case of an individual who is a qualified farmer or rancher for the taxable year in which the contribution is made, a qualified conservation contribution is allowable up to 100 percent of the excess of the taxpayer's contribution base over the amount of all other allowable charitable contributions.

In the above example, if the individual is a qualified farmer or rancher, in addition to the $50 deduction for non-conservation contributions, an additional $50 for the qualified conservation contribution is allowed and $30 may be carried forward for up to 15 years as a contribution subject to the 100-percent limitation.

In the case of a corporation (other than a publicly traded corporation) that is a qualified farmer or rancher for the taxable year in which the contribution is made, any qualified conservation contribution is allowable up to 100 percent of the excess of the corporation's taxable income (as computed under section 170(b)(2)) over the amount of all other allowable charitable contributions. Any excess may be carried forward for up to 15 years as a contribution subject to the 100-percent limitation. 83

As an additional condition of eligibility for the 100 percent limitation, with respect to any contribution of property in agriculture or livestock production, or that is available for such production, by a qualified farmer or rancher, the qualified real property interest must include a restriction that the property remain generally available for such production. (There is no requirement as to any specific use in agriculture or farming, or necessarily that the property be used for such purposes, merely that the property remain available for such purposes.) Such additional condition does not apply to contributions made on or before August 17, 2006.

A qualified farmer or rancher means a taxpayer whose gross income from the trade or business of farming (within the meaning of section 2032A(e)(5)) is greater than 50 percent of the taxpayer's gross income for the taxable year.

Termination
The special rule regarding contributions of capital gain real property for conservation purposes does not apply to contributions made in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009. 84

Explanation of Provision
The Act extends the special rule regarding contributions of capital gain real property for conservation purposes for one year for contributions made in taxable years beginning before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for contributions made in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

2. Enhanced charitable deduction for contributions of food inventory (sec. 132 of the bill and sec. 170 of the Code)
Present Law
Charitable contributions in general
In general, an income tax deduction is permitted for charitable contributions, subject to certain limitations that depend on the type of taxpayer, the property contributed, and the donee organization (sec. 170).

Charitable contributions of cash are deductible in the amount contributed. In general, contributions of capital gain property to a qualified charity are deductible at fair market value with certain exceptions. Capital gain property means any capital asset or property used in the taxpayer's trade or business the sale of which at its fair market value, at the time of contribution, would have resulted in gain that would have been long-term capital gain. Contributions of other appreciated property generally are deductible at the donor's basis in the property. Contributions of depreciated property generally are deductible at the fair market value of the property.

General rules regarding contributions of food inventory
Under present law, a taxpayer's deduction for charitable contributions of inventory generally is limited to the taxpayer's basis (typically, cost) in the inventory, or if less the fair market value of the inventory.

For certain contributions of inventory, C corporations may claim an enhanced deduction equal to the lesser of (1) basis plus one-half of the item's appreciation (i.e., basis plus one-half of fair market value in excess of basis) or (2) two times basis. 85 In general, a C corporation's charitable contribution deductions for a year may not exceed 10 percent of the corporation's taxable income. 86 To be eligible for the enhanced deduction, the contributed property generally must be inventory of the taxpayer, contributed to a charitable organization described in section 501(c)(3) (except for private nonoperating foundations), and the donee must (1) use the property consistent with the donee's exempt purpose solely for the care of the ill, the needy, or infants, (2) not transfer the property in exchange for money, other property, or services, and (3) provide the taxpayer a written statement that the donee's use of the property will be consistent with such requirements. In the case of contributed property subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the property must satisfy the applicable requirements of such Act on the date of transfer and for 180 days prior to the transfer.

A donor making a charitable contribution of inventory must make a corresponding adjustment to the cost of goods sold by decreasing the cost of goods sold by the lesser of the fair market value of the property or the donor's basis with respect to the inventory. 87 Accordingly, if the allowable charitable deduction for inventory is the fair market value of the inventory, the donor reduces its cost of goods sold by such value, with the result that the difference between the fair market value and the donor's basis may still be recovered by the donor other than as a charitable contribution.

To use the enhanced deduction, the taxpayer must establish that the fair market value of the donated item exceeds basis. The valuation of food inventory has been the subject of disputes between taxpayers and the IRS. 88

Temporary rule expanding and modifying the enhanced deduction for contributions of food inventory
Under a special temporary provision, any taxpayer, whether or not a C corporation, engaged in a trade or business is eligible to claim the enhanced deduction for donations of food inventory. 89 For taxpayers other than C corporations, the total deduction for donations of food inventory in a taxable year generally may not exceed 10 percent of the taxpayer's net income for such taxable year from all sole proprietorships, S corporations, or partnerships (or other non C corporation) from which contributions of apparently wholesome food are made. For example, if a taxpayer is a sole proprietor, a shareholder in an S corporation, and a partner in a partnership, and each business makes charitable contributions of food inventory, the taxpayer's deduction for donations of food inventory is limited to 10 percent of the taxpayer's net income from the sole proprietorship and the taxpayer's interests in the S corporation and partnership. However, if only the sole proprietorship and the S corporation made charitable contributions of food inventory, the taxpayer's deduction would be limited to 10 percent of the net income from the trade or business of the sole proprietorship and the taxpayer's interest in the S corporation, but not the taxpayer's interest in the partnership. 90

Under the temporary provision, the enhanced deduction for food is available only for food that qualifies as “apparently wholesome food.” “Apparently wholesome food” is defined as food intended for human consumption that meets all quality and labeling standards imposed by Federal, State, and local laws and regulations even though the food may not be readily marketable due to appearance, age, freshness, grade, size, surplus, or other conditions.

The temporary provision does not apply to contributions made after December 31, 2009.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the expansion of, and modifications to, the enhanced deduction for charitable contributions of food inventory to contributions made before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for contributions made after December 31, 2009.

3. Enhanced charitable deduction for contributions of book inventories to public schools (sec. 133 of the bill and sec. 170 of the Code)
Present Law
Charitable contributions in general
In general, an income tax deduction is permitted for charitable contributions, subject to certain limitations that depend on the type of taxpayer, the property contributed, and the donee organization (sec. 170).

Charitable contributions of cash are deductible in the amount contributed. In general, contributions of capital gain property to a qualified charity are deductible at fair market value with certain exceptions. Capital gain property means any capital asset or property used in the taxpayer's trade or business the sale of which at its fair market value, at the time of contribution, would have resulted in gain that would have been long-term capital gain. Contributions of other appreciated property generally are deductible at the donor's basis in the property. Contributions of depreciated property generally are deductible at the fair market value of the property.

General rules regarding contributions of food inventory
Under present law, a taxpayer's deduction for charitable contributions of inventory generally is limited to the taxpayer's basis (typically, cost) in the inventory, or, if less, the fair market value of the inventory.

In general, for certain contributions of inventory, C corporations may claim an enhanced deduction equal to the lesser of (1) basis plus one-half of the item's appreciation (i.e., basis plus one-half of fair market value in excess of basis) or (2) two times basis. 91 In general, a C corporation's charitable contribution deductions for a year may not exceed 10 percent of the corporation's taxable income. 92 To be eligible for the enhanced deduction, the contributed property generally must be inventory of the taxpayer contributed to a charitable organization described in section 501(c)(3) (except for private nonoperating foundations), and the donee must (1) use the property consistent with the donee's exempt purpose solely for the care of the ill, the needy, or infants, (2) not transfer the property in exchange for money, other property, or services, and (3) provide the taxpayer a written statement that the donee's use of the property will be consistent with such requirements. In the case of contributed property subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the property must satisfy the applicable requirements of such Act on the date of transfer and for 180 days prior to the transfer.

A donor making a charitable contribution of inventory must make a corresponding adjustment to the cost of goods sold by decreasing the cost of goods sold by the lesser of the fair market value of the property or the donor's basis with respect to the inventory. 93 Accordingly, if the allowable charitable deduction for inventory is the fair market value of the inventory, the donor reduces its cost of goods sold by such value, with the result that the difference between the fair market value and the donor's basis may still be recovered by the donor other than as a charitable contribution.

To use the enhanced deduction, the taxpayer must establish that the fair market value of the donated item exceeds basis.

Special rule expanding and modifying the enhanced deduction for contributions of book inventory
The generally applicable enhanced deduction for C corporations is expanded and modified to include certain qualified book contributions made after August 28, 2005, and before January 1, 2010. 94 A qualified book contribution means a charitable contribution of books to a public school that provides elementary education or secondary education (kindergarten through grade 12) and that is an educational organization that normally maintains a regular faculty and curriculum and normally has a regularly enrolled body of pupils or students in attendance at the place where its educational activities are regularly carried on. The enhanced deduction for qualified book contributions is not allowed unless the donee organization certifies in writing that the contributed books are suitable, in terms of currency, content, and quantity, for use in the donee's educational programs and that the donee will use the books in such educational programs. The donee also must make the certifications required for the generally applicable enhanced deduction, i.e., the donee will (1) use the property consistent with the donee's exempt purpose solely for the care of the ill, the needy, or infants, (2) not transfer the property in exchange for money, other property, or services, and (3) provide the taxpayer a written statement that the donee's use of the property will be consistent with such requirements.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the expansion of, and modifications to, the enhanced deduction for contributions of book inventory to contributions made before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for contributions made after December 31, 2009.

4. Enhanced charitable deduction for corporate contributions of computer technology and equipment for educational purposes (sec. 134 of the bill and sec. 170 of the Code)
Present Law
In the case of a charitable contribution of inventory or other ordinary-income or short-term capital gain property, the amount of the charitable deduction generally is limited to the taxpayer's basis in the property. In the case of a charitable contribution of tangible personal property, the deduction is limited to the taxpayer's basis in such property if the use by the recipient charitable organization is unrelated to the organization's tax-exempt purpose. In cases involving contributions to a private foundation (other than certain private operating foundations), the amount of the deduction is limited to the taxpayer's basis in the property. 95

Under present law, a taxpayer's deduction for charitable contributions of computer technology and equipment generally is limited to the taxpayer's basis (typically, cost) in the property. However, certain corporations may claim a deduction in excess of basis for a “qualified computer contribution.” 96 This enhanced deduction is equal to the lesser of (1) basis plus one-half of the item's appreciation (i.e., basis plus one half of fair market value in excess of basis) or (2) two times basis. The enhanced deduction for qualified computer contributions expires for any contribution made during any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2009. 97

A qualified computer contribution means a charitable contribution of any computer technology or equipment, which meets standards of functionality and suitability as established by the Secretary. The contribution must be to certain educational organizations or public libraries and made not later than three years after the taxpayer acquired the property or, if the taxpayer constructed or assembled the property, not later than the date construction or assembly of the property is substantially completed. 98 The original use of the property must be by the donor or the donee, 99 and in the case of the donee, must be used substantially for educational purposes related to the function or purpose of the donee. The property must fit productively into the donee's education plan. The donee may not transfer the property in exchange for money, other property, or services, except for shipping, installation, and transfer costs. To determine whether property is constructed or assembled by the taxpayer, the rules applicable to qualified research contributions apply. Contributions may be made to private foundations under certain conditions. 100

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the enhanced deduction for computer technology and equipment to contributions made during taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009, and before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for contributions made in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

5. Tax-free distributions from individual retirement plans for charitable purposes (sec. 135 of the bill and sec. 408 of the Code)
Present Law
In general
If an amount withdrawn from a traditional individual retirement arrangement (“IRA”) or a Roth IRA is donated to a charitable organization, the rules relating to the tax treatment of withdrawals from IRAs apply to the amount withdrawn and the charitable contribution is subject to the normally applicable limitations on deductibility of such contributions. An exception applies in the case of a qualified charitable distribution.

Charitable contributions
In computing taxable income, an individual taxpayer who itemizes deductions generally is allowed to deduct the amount of cash and up to the fair market value of property contributed to a charity described in section 501(c)(3), to certain veterans' organizations, fraternal societies, and cemetery companies, 101 or to a Federal, State, or local governmental entity for exclusively public purposes. 102 The deduction also is allowed for purposes of calculating alternative minimum taxable income.

The amount of the deduction allowable for a taxable year with respect to a charitable contribution of property may be reduced depending on the type of property contributed, the type of charitable organization to which the property is contributed, and the income of the taxpayer. 103

A taxpayer who takes the standard deduction (i.e., who does not itemize deductions) may not take a separate deduction for charitable contributions. 104

A payment to a charity (regardless of whether it is termed a “contribution”) in exchange for which the donor receives an economic benefit is not deductible, except to the extent that the donor can demonstrate, among other things, that the payment exceeds the fair market value of the benefit received from the charity. To facilitate distinguishing charitable contributions from purchases of goods or services from charities, present law provides that no charitable contribution deduction is allowed for a separate contribution of $250 or more unless the donor obtains a contemporaneous written acknowledgement of the contribution from the charity indicating whether the charity provided any good or service (and an estimate of the value of any such good or service) to the taxpayer in consideration for the contribution. 105 In addition, present law requires that any charity that receives a contribution exceeding $75 made partly as a gift and partly as consideration for goods or services furnished by the charity (a “quid pro quo” contribution) is required to inform the contributor in writing of an estimate of the value of the goods or services furnished by the charity and that only the portion exceeding the value of the goods or services may be deductible as a charitable contribution. 106

Under present law, total deductible contributions of an individual taxpayer to public charities, private operating foundations, and certain types of private nonoperating foundations may not exceed 50 percent of the taxpayer's contribution base, which is the taxpayer's adjusted gross income for a taxable year (disregarding any net operating loss carryback). To the extent a taxpayer has not exceeded the 50-percent limitation, (1) contributions of capital gain property to public charities generally may be deducted up to 30 percent of the taxpayer's contribution base, (2) contributions of cash to private foundations and certain other charitable organizations generally may be deducted up to 30 percent of the taxpayer's contribution base, and (3) contributions of capital gain property to private foundations and certain other charitable organizations generally may be deducted up to 20 percent of the taxpayer's contribution base.

Contributions by individuals in excess of the 50-percent, 30-percent, and 20-percent limits may be carried over and deducted over the next five taxable years, subject to the relevant percentage limitations on the deduction in each of those years.

In addition to the percentage limitations imposed specifically on charitable contributions, present law imposes a reduction on most itemized deductions, including charitable contribution deductions, for taxpayers with adjusted gross income in excess of a threshold amount, which is indexed annually for inflation. The threshold amount for 2009 is $166,800 ($83,400 for married individuals filing separate returns). For those deductions that are subject to the limit, the total amount of itemized deductions is reduced by three percent of adjusted gross income over the threshold amount, but not by more than 80 percent of itemized deductions subject to the limit. From 2006 through 2009, the overall limitation on itemized deductions phases out for all taxpayers. The overall limitation on itemized deductions was reduced by one-third in taxable years beginning in 2006 and 2007, and is reduced by two-thirds in taxable years beginning in 2008 and 2009. The overall limitation on itemized deductions is eliminated for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009; however, this elimination of the limitation sunsets on December 31, 2010.

In general, a charitable deduction is not allowed for income, estate, or gift tax purposes if the donor transfers an interest in property to a charity (e.g., a remainder) while also either retaining an interest in that property (e.g., an income interest) or transferring an interest in that property to a noncharity for less than full and adequate consideration. 107 Exceptions to this general rule are provided for, among other interests, remainder interests in charitable remainder annuity trusts, charitable remainder unitrusts, and pooled income funds, and present interests in the form of a guaranteed annuity or a fixed percentage of the annual value of the property. 108 For such interests, a charitable deduction is allowed to the extent of the present value of the interest designated for a charitable organization.

IRA rules
Within limits, individuals may make deductible and nondeductible contributions to a traditional IRA. Amounts in a traditional IRA are includible in income when withdrawn (except to the extent the withdrawal represents a return of nondeductible contributions). Individuals also may make nondeductible contributions to a Roth IRA. Qualified withdrawals from a Roth IRA are excludable from gross income. Withdrawals from a Roth IRA that are not qualified withdrawals are includible in gross income to the extent attributable to earnings. Includible amounts withdrawn from a traditional IRA or a Roth IRA before attainment of age 59-1/2 are subject to an additional 10-percent early withdrawal tax, unless an exception applies. Under present law, minimum distributions are required to be made from tax-favored retirement arrangements, including IRAs. Minimum required distributions from a traditional IRA must generally begin by the April 1 of the calendar year following the year in which the IRA owner attains age 70- ½. 109

If an individual has made nondeductible contributions to a traditional IRA, a portion of each distribution from an IRA is nontaxable until the total amount of nondeductible contributions has been received. In general, the amount of a distribution that is nontaxable is determined by multiplying the amount of the distribution by the ratio of the remaining nondeductible contributions to the account balance. In making the calculation, all traditional IRAs of an individual are treated as a single IRA, all distributions during any taxable year are treated as a single distribution, and the value of the contract, income on the contract, and investment in the contract are computed as of the close of the calendar year.

In the case of a distribution from a Roth IRA that is not a qualified distribution, in determining the portion of the distribution attributable to earnings, contributions and distributions are deemed to be distributed in the following order: (1) regular Roth IRA contributions; (2) taxable conversion contributions; 110 (3) nontaxable conversion contributions; and (4) earnings. In determining the amount of taxable distributions from a Roth IRA, all Roth IRA distributions in the same taxable year are treated as a single distribution, all regular Roth IRA contributions for a year are treated as a single contribution, and all conversion contributions during the year are treated as a single contribution.

Distributions from an IRA (other than a Roth IRA) are generally subject to withholding unless the individual elects not to have withholding apply. 111 Elections not to have withholding apply are to be made in the time and manner prescribed by the Secretary.

Qualified charitable distributions
Present law provides an exclusion from gross income for otherwise taxable IRA distributions from a traditional or a Roth IRA in the case of qualified charitable distributions. 112 The exclusion may not exceed $100,000 per taxpayer per taxable year. Special rules apply in determining the amount of an IRA distribution that is otherwise taxable. The otherwise applicable rules regarding taxation of IRA distributions and the deduction of charitable contributions continue to apply to distributions from an IRA that are not qualified charitable distributions. Qualified charitable distributions are taken into account for purposes of the minimum distribution rules applicable to traditional IRAs to the same extent the distribution would have been taken into account under such rules had the distribution not been directly distributed under the qualified charitable distribution provision. An IRA does not fail to qualify as an IRA as a result of qualified charitable distributions being made from the IRA.

A qualified charitable distribution is any distribution from an IRA directly by the IRA trustee to an organization described in section 170(b)(1)(A) (other than an organization described in section 509(a)(3) or a donor advised fund (as defined in section 4966(d)(2)). Distributions are eligible for the exclusion only if made on or after the date the IRA owner attains age 70-1/2.

The exclusion applies only if a charitable contribution deduction for the entire distribution otherwise would be allowable (under present law), determined without regard to the generally applicable percentage limitations. Thus, for example, if the deductible amount is reduced because of a benefit received in exchange, or if a deduction is not allowable because the donor did not obtain sufficient substantiation, the exclusion is not available with respect to any part of the IRA distribution.

If the IRA owner has any IRA that includes nondeductible contributions, a special rule applies in determining the portion of a distribution that is includible in gross income (but for the qualified charitable distribution provision) and thus is eligible for qualified charitable distribution treatment. Under the special rule, the distribution is treated as consisting of income first, up to the aggregate amount that would be includible in gross income (but for the qualified charitable distribution provision) if the aggregate balance of all IRAs having the same owner were distributed during the same year. In determining the amount of subsequent IRA distributions includible in income, proper adjustments are to be made to reflect the amount treated as a qualified charitable distribution under the special rule.

Distributions that are excluded from gross income by reason of the qualified charitable distribution provision are not taken into account in determining the deduction for charitable contributions under section 170.

The exclusion for qualified charitable distributions applies to distributions made in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2005. Under present law, the exclusion does not apply to distributions made in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the exclusion for qualified charitable distributions to distributions made in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009, and before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for distributions made in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

6. Modification of tax treatment of certain payments to controlling exempt organizations (sec. 136 of the bill and sec. 512 of the Code)
Present Law
In general, organizations exempt from Federal income tax are subject to the unrelated business income tax on income derived from a trade or business regularly carried on by the organization that is not substantially related to the performance of the organization's tax-exempt functions. 113 In general, interest, rents, royalties, and annuities are excluded from the unrelated business income of tax-exempt organizations. 114

Section 512(b)(13) provides special rules regarding income derived by an exempt organization from a controlled subsidiary. In general, section 512(b)(13) treats otherwise excluded rent, royalty, annuity, and interest income as unrelated business income if such income is received from a taxable or tax-exempt subsidiary that is 50-percent controlled by the parent tax-exempt organization to the extent the payment reduces the net unrelated income (or increases any net unrelated loss) of the controlled entity (determined as if the entity were tax exempt). However, a special rule provides that, for payments made pursuant to a binding written contract in effect on August 17, 2006 (or renewal of such a contract on substantially similar terms), the general rule of section 512(b)(13) applies only to the portion of payments received or accrued in a taxable year that exceeds the amount of the payment that would have been paid or accrued if the amount of such payment had been determined under the principles of section 482 (i.e., at arm's length). 115 In addition, the special rule imposes a 20-percent penalty on the larger of such excess determined without regard to any amendment or supplement to a return of tax, or such excess determined with regard to all such amendments and supplements.

In the case of a stock subsidiary, “control” means ownership by vote or value of more than 50 percent of the stock. In the case of a partnership or other entity, “control” means ownership of more than 50 percent of the profits, capital, or beneficial interests. In addition, present law applies the constructive ownership rules of section 318 for purposes of section 512(b)(13). Thus, a parent exempt organization is deemed to control any subsidiary in which it holds more than 50 percent of the voting power or value, directly (as in the case of a first-tier subsidiary) or indirectly (as in the case of a second-tier subsidiary).

The special rule does not apply to payments received or accrued after December 31, 2009.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the special rule to payments received or accrued before January 1, 2011. Accordingly, under the provision, payments of rent, royalties, annuities, or interest income by a controlled organization to a controlling organization pursuant to a binding written contract in effect on August 17, 2006 (or renewal of such a contract on substantially similar terms), may be includible in the unrelated business taxable income of the controlling organization only to the extent the payment exceeds the amount of the payment determined under the principles of section 482 (i.e., at arm's length). Any such excess is subject to a 20-percent penalty on the larger of such excess determined without regard to any amendment or supplement to a return of tax, or such excess determined with regard to all such amendments and supplements.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for payments received or accrued after December 31, 2009.

7. Exclusion of gain or loss on sale or exchange of certain brownfield sites from unrelated business taxable income (sec. 137 of the bill and secs. 512 and 514 of the Code)
Present Law
Taxation of unrelated business income, in general
In general, an organization that is otherwise exempt from Federal income tax is taxed on income from a trade or business regularly carried on that is not substantially related to the organization's exempt purposes. Gains or losses from the sale, exchange, or other disposition of property, other than stock in trade, inventory, or property held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of a trade or business, generally are excluded from unrelated business taxable income. Gains or losses are treated as unrelated business taxable income, however, if derived from “debt-financed property.” Debt-financed property generally means any property that is held to produce income and with respect to which there is acquisition indebtedness at any time during the taxable year.

In general, income of a tax-exempt organization that is produced by debt-financed property is treated as unrelated business income in proportion to the acquisition indebtedness on the income-producing property. Acquisition indebtedness generally means the amount of unpaid indebtedness incurred by an organization to acquire or improve the property and indebtedness that would not have been incurred but for the acquisition or improvement of the property. Acquisition indebtedness does not include: (1) certain indebtedness incurred in the performance or exercise of a purpose or function constituting the basis of the organization's exemption; (2) obligations to pay certain types of annuities; (3) an obligation, to the extent it is insured by the Federal Housing Administration, to finance the purchase, rehabilitation, or construction of housing for low and moderate income persons; or (4) indebtedness incurred by certain qualified organizations to acquire or improve real property.

Special rules apply in the case of an exempt organization that owns an interest in a partnership that holds debt-financed property. An exempt organization's share of partnership income that is derived from debt-financed property generally is taxed as debt-financed income unless an exception provides otherwise.

Special rules for certain qualifying brownfield properties
In general
Section 512(b)(19) provides a special exclusion from unrelated business taxable income for the gain or loss from the qualified sale, exchange, or other disposition of a qualifying brownfield property by an eligible taxpayer. The exclusion from unrelated business taxable income generally is available to an exempt organization that acquires, remediates, and disposes of the qualifying brownfield property. In addition, present law provides an exception from the debt-financed property rules for such properties.

In order to qualify for the exclusions from unrelated business income and the debt-financed property rules, the eligible taxpayer is required to: (a) acquire from an unrelated person real property that constitutes a qualifying brownfield property; (b) pay or incur a minimum level of eligible remediation expenditures with respect to the property; and (c) transfer the remediated site to an unrelated person in a transaction that constitutes a sale, exchange, or other disposition for purposes of Federal income tax law. 116

The special exclusion applies only to gain or loss on the sale, exchange, or other disposition of property that is acquired by the eligible taxpayer or qualifying partnership during the period beginning January 1, 2005, and ending December 31, 2009. 117

Qualifying brownfield properties
The exclusion from unrelated business taxable income applies only to real property that constitutes a qualifying brownfield property. A qualifying brownfield property means real property that is certified, before the taxpayer incurs any eligible remediation expenditures (other than to obtain a Phase I environmental site assessment), by an appropriate State agency (within the meaning of section 198(c)(4)) in the State in which the property is located as a brownfield site within the meaning of section 101(39) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) (as in effect on the date of enactment of the provision). The taxpayer's request for certification must include a sworn statement of the taxpayer and supporting documentation of the presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant on the property that is complicating the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of the property given the property's reasonably anticipated future land uses or capacity for uses of the property (including a Phase I environmental site assessment and, if applicable, evidence of the property's presence on a local, State, or Federal list of brownfields or contaminated property) and other environmental assessments prepared or obtained by the taxpayer.

Eligible taxpayer
An eligible taxpayer with respect to a qualifying brownfield property is an organization exempt from tax under section 501(a) that acquired such property from an unrelated person and paid or incurred a minimum amount of eligible remediation expenditures with respect to such property. The exempt organization (or the qualifying partnership of which it is a partner) is required to pay or incur eligible remediation expenditures with respect to a qualifying brownfield property in an amount that exceeds the greater of: (a) $550,000; or (b) 12 percent of the fair market value of the property at the time such property is acquired by the taxpayer, determined as if the property were not contaminated.

An eligible taxpayer does not include an organization that is: (1) potentially liable under section 107 of CERCLA with respect to the property; (2) affiliated with any other person that is potentially liable thereunder through any direct or indirect familial relationship or any contractual, corporate, or financial relationship (other than a contractual, corporate, or financial relationship that is created by the instruments by which title to a qualifying brownfield property is conveyed or financed by a contract of sale of goods or services); or (3) the result of a reorganization of a business entity which was so potentially liable. 118

Qualified sale, exchange, or other disposition
A sale, exchange, or other disposition of a qualifying brownfield property is considered qualified if such property is transferred by the eligible taxpayer to an unrelated person, and within one year of such transfer the taxpayer has received a certification (a “remediation certification”) from the Environmental Protection Agency or an appropriate State agency (within the meaning of section 198(c)(4)) in the State in which the property is located that, as a result of the taxpayer's remediation actions, such property would not be treated as a qualifying brownfield property in the hands of the transferee. A taxpayer's request for a remediation certification must be made no later than the date of the transfer and must include a sworn statement by the taxpayer certifying that: (1) remedial actions that comply with all applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (consistent with section 121(d) of CERCLA) have been substantially completed, such that there are no hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants that complicate the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of the property given the property's reasonably anticipated future land uses or capacity for uses of the property; (2) the reasonably anticipated future land uses or capacity for uses of the property are more economically productive or environmentally beneficial than the uses of the property in existence on the date the property was certified as a qualifying brownfield property; 119 (3) a remediation plan has been implemented to bring the property in compliance with all applicable local, State, and Federal environmental laws, regulations, and standards and to ensure that remediation protects human health and the environment; (4) the remediation plan, including any physical improvements required to remediate the property, is either complete or substantially complete, and if substantially complete, 120 sufficient monitoring, funding, institutional controls, and financial assurances have been put in place to ensure the complete remediation of the site in accordance with the remediation plan as soon as is reasonably practicable after the disposition of the property by the taxpayer; and (5) public notice and the opportunity for comment on the request for certification (in the same form and manner as required for public participation required under section 117(a) of CERCLA (as in effect on the date of enactment of the provision)) was completed before the date of such request. Public notice must include, at a minimum, publication in a major local newspaper of general circulation.

Eligible remediation expenditures
Eligible remediation expenditures means, with respect to any qualifying brownfield property: (1) expenditures that are paid or incurred by the taxpayer to an unrelated person to obtain a Phase I environmental site assessment of the property; (2) amounts paid or incurred by the taxpayer after receipt of the certification that the property is a qualifying brownfield property for goods and services necessary to obtain the remediation certification; and (3) expenditures to obtain remediation cost-cap or stop-loss coverage, re-opener or regulatory action coverage, or similar coverage under environmental insurance policies, 121 or to obtain financial guarantees required to manage the remediation and monitoring of the property. Eligible remediation expenditures include expenditures to: (1) manage, remove, control, contain, abate, or otherwise remediate a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant on the property; (2) obtain a Phase II environmental site assessment of the property, including any expenditure to monitor, sample, study, assess, or otherwise evaluate the release, threat of release, or presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant on the property; or (3) obtain environmental regulatory certifications and approvals required to manage the remediation and monitoring of the hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant on the property. Eligible remediation expenditures do not include: (1) any portion of the purchase price paid or incurred by the eligible taxpayer to acquire the qualifying brownfield property; (2) environmental insurance costs paid or incurred to obtain legal defense coverage, owner/operator liability coverage, lender liability coverage, professional liability coverage, or similar types of coverage; 122 (3) any amount paid or incurred to the extent such amount is reimbursed, funded or otherwise subsidized by: (a) grants provided by the United States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State for use in connection with the property; (b) proceeds of an issue of State or local government obligations used to provide financing for the property, the interest of which is exempt from tax under section 103; or (c) subsidized financing provided (directly or indirectly) under a Federal, State, or local program in connection with the property; or (4) any expenditure paid or incurred before the date of enactment of the provision.

Qualified gain or loss
Section 512(b)(19) generally excludes from unrelated business taxable income the exempt organization's gain or loss from the sale, exchange, or other disposition of a qualifying brownfield property. Income, gain, or loss from other transfers does not qualify under the provision. 123 The amount of gain or loss excluded from unrelated business taxable income is not limited to or based upon the increase or decrease in value of the property that is attributable to the taxpayer's expenditure of eligible remediation expenditures. Further, the exclusion does not apply to an amount treated as gain that is ordinary income with respect to section 1245 or section 1250 property, including any amount deducted as a section 198 expense that is subject to the recapture rules of section 198(e), if the taxpayer had deducted such amount in the computation of its unrelated business taxable income. 124

Special rules for qualifying partnerships
In the case of a tax-exempt organization that is a partner of a qualifying partnership that acquires, remediates, and disposes of a qualifying brownfield property, the provision applies to the tax-exempt partner's distributive share of the qualifying partnership's gain or loss from the disposition of the property. 125 A qualifying partnership is a partnership that: (1) has a partnership agreement that satisfies the requirements of section 514(c)(9)(B)(vi) at all times beginning on the date of the first certification received by the partnership that one of its properties is a qualifying brownfield property; (2) satisfies the requirements of the provision if such requirements are applied to the partnership (rather than to the eligible taxpayer that is a partner of the partnership); and (3) is not an organization that would be prevented from constituting an eligible taxpayer by reason of it or an affiliate being potentially liable under CERCLA with respect to the property.

The exclusion is available to a tax-exempt organization with respect to a particular property acquired, remediated, and disposed of by a qualifying partnership only if the exempt organization is a partner of the partnership at all times during the period beginning on the date of the first certification received by the partnership that one of its properties is a qualifying brownfield property, and ending on the date of the disposition of the property by the partnership.

If the property is acquired and remediated by a qualifying partnership of which the exempt organization is a partner, it is intended that the certification as to status as a qualified brownfield property and the remediation certification will be obtained by the qualifying partnership, rather than by the tax-exempt partner, and that both the eligible taxpayer and the qualifying partnership will be required to make available such copies of the certifications to the IRS. Any elections or revocations regarding the application of the eligible remediation expenditure rules to multiple properties (as described below) acquired, remediated, and disposed of by a qualifying partnership must be made by the partnership. A tax-exempt partner is bound by an election made by the qualifying partnership of which it is a partner.

Special rules for multiple properties
The eligible remediation expenditure determinations generally are made on a property-by-property basis. An exempt organization (or a qualifying partnership of which the exempt organization is a partner) that acquires, remediates, and disposes of multiple qualifying brownfield properties, however, may elect to make the eligible remediation expenditure determinations on a multiple-property basis. In the case of such an election, the taxpayer satisfies the eligible remediation expenditures test with respect to all qualifying brownfield properties acquired during the election period if the average of the eligible remediation expenditures for all such properties exceeds the greater of: (a) $550,000; or (b) 12 percent of the average of the fair market value of the properties, determined as of the dates they were acquired by the taxpayer and as if they were not contaminated. If the eligible taxpayer elects to make the eligible remediation expenditure determination on a multiple property basis, then the election shall apply to all qualifying sales, exchanges, or other dispositions of qualifying brownfield properties the acquisition and transfer of which occur during the period for which the election remains in effect. 126

Debt-financed property
The present law provision provides that debt-financed property, as defined by section 514(b), does not include any property the gain or loss from the sale, exchange, or other disposition of which is excluded by reason of the provisions of the provision that exclude such gain or loss from computing the gross income of any unrelated trade or business of the taxpayer. Thus, gain or loss from the sale, exchange, or other disposition of a qualifying brownfield property that otherwise satisfies the requirements of the provision is not taxed as unrelated business taxable income merely because the taxpayer incurred debt to acquire or improve the site.

Termination date
As noted above, only gain or loss on the sale, exchange, or other disposition of property that is acquired by the eligible taxpayer or qualifying partnership during the period beginning January 1, 2005, and ending December 31, 2009, is eligible for the special exclusion. Property acquired during the five-year acquisition period need not be disposed of by the termination date in order to qualify for the exclusion. For purposes of the multiple property election, gain or loss on property acquired after December 31, 2009, is not eligible for the exclusion from unrelated business taxable income, although properties acquired after the termination date (but during the election period) are included for purposes of determining average eligible remediation expenditures.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the special exclusion from unrelated business taxable income to properties acquired by an eligible taxpayer or qualifying partnership before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for property acquired after December 31, 2009.

8. Basis adjustment to stock of S corporations making charitable contributions of property (sec. 138 of the bill and sec. 1367 of the Code)
Present Law
Under present law, if an S corporation contributes money or other property to a charity, each shareholder takes into account the shareholder's pro rata share of the contribution in determining its own income tax liability. 127 A shareholder of an S corporation reduces the basis in the stock of the S corporation by the amount of the charitable contribution that flows through to the shareholder. 128

In the case of contributions made in taxable years beginning before January 1, 2010, the amount of a shareholder's basis reduction in the stock of an S corporation by reason of a charitable contribution made by the corporation is equal to the shareholder's pro rata share of the adjusted basis of the contributed property. For contributions made in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009, the amount of the reduction is the shareholder's pro rata share of the fair market value of the contributed property.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the rule relating to the basis reduction on account of charitable contributions of property for one year to contributions made in taxable years beginning before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision applies to contributions made in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

D. Miscellaneous Provisions
1. Indian employment tax credit (sec. 141 of the bill and sec. 45A of the Code)
Present Law
In general, a credit against income tax liability is allowed to employers for the first $20,000 of qualified wages and qualified employee health insurance costs paid or incurred by the employer with respect to certain employees. 129 The credit is equal to 20 percent of the excess of eligible employee qualified wages and health insurance costs during the current year over the amount of such wages and costs incurred by the employer during 1993. The credit is an incremental credit, such that an employer's current-year qualified wages and qualified employee health insurance costs (up to $20,000 per employee) are eligible for the credit only to the extent that the sum of such costs exceeds the sum of comparable costs paid during 1993. No deduction is allowed for the portion of the wages equal to the amount of the credit.

Qualified wages means wages paid or incurred by an employer for services performed by a qualified employee. A qualified employee means any employee who is an enrolled member of an Indian tribe or the spouse of an enrolled member of an Indian tribe, who performs substantially all of the services within an Indian reservation, and whose principal place of abode while performing such services is on or near the reservation in which the services are performed. An “Indian reservation” is a reservation as defined in section 3(d) of the Indian Financing Act of 1974 or section 4(1) of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978. For purposes of the preceding sentence, section 3(d) is applied by treating “former Indian reservations in Oklahoma” as including only lands that are (1) within the jurisdictional area of an Oklahoma Indian tribe as determined by the Secretary of the Interior, and (2) recognized by such Secretary as an area eligible for trust land status under 25 C.F.R. Part 151 (as in effect on August 5, 1997).

An employee is not treated as a qualified employee for any taxable year of the employer if the total amount of wages paid or incurred by the employer with respect to such employee during the taxable year exceeds an amount determined at an annual rate of $30,000 (which after adjusted for inflation is currently $45,000 for 2009). In addition, an employee will not be treated as a qualified employee under certain specific circumstances, such as where the employee is related to the employer (in the case of an individual employer) or to one of the employer's shareholders, partners, or grantors. Similarly, an employee will not be treated as a qualified employee where the employee has more than a five percent ownership interest in the employer. Finally, an employee will not be considered a qualified employee to the extent the employee's services relate to gaming activities or are performed in a building housing such activities.

The wage credit is available for wages paid or incurred in taxable years that begin before January 1, 2010.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends for one year the present-law employment credit provision (through taxable years beginning on or before December 31, 2010).

Effective Date
The provision is effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

2. Accelerated depreciation for business property on Indian reservations (sec. 142 of the bill and sec. 168(j) of the Code)
Present Law
With respect to certain property used in connection with the conduct of a trade or business within an Indian reservation, depreciation deductions under section 168(j) are determined using the following recovery periods:

3-year property
2 years

5-year property
3 years

7-year property
4 years

10-year property
6 years

15-year property
9 years

20-year property
12 years

Nonresidential real property
22 years


“Qualified Indian reservation property” eligible for accelerated depreciation includes property described in the table above which is: (1) used by the taxpayer predominantly in the active conduct of a trade or business within an Indian reservation; (2) not used or located outside the reservation on a regular basis; (3) not acquired (directly or indirectly) by the taxpayer from a person who is related to the taxpayer; 130 and (4) is not property placed in service for purposes of conducting gaming activities. 131 Certain “qualified infrastructure property” may be eligible for the accelerated depreciation even if located outside an Indian reservation, provided that the purpose of such property is to connect with qualified infrastructure property located within the reservation (e.g., roads, power lines, water systems, railroad spurs, and communications facilities). 132

An “Indian reservation” means a reservation as defined in section 3(d) of the Indian Financing Act of 1974 or section 4(10) of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978. For purposes of the preceding sentence, section 3(d) is applied by treating “former Indian reservations in Oklahoma” as including only lands that are (1) within the jurisdictional area of an Oklahoma Indian tribe as determined by the Secretary of the Interior, and (2) recognized by such Secretary as an area eligible for trust land status under 25 C.F.R. Part 151 (as in effect on August 5, 1997).

The depreciation deduction allowed for regular tax purposes is also allowed for purposes of the alternative minimum tax. The accelerated depreciation for qualified Indian reservation property is available with respect to property placed in service on or after January 1, 1994, and before January 1, 2010.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends for one year the present-law incentive relating to depreciation of qualified Indian reservation property (to apply to property placed in service through December 31, 2010).

Effective Date
The provision is effective for property placed in service after December 31, 2009.

3. Deduction allowable with respect to income attributable to domestic production activities in Puerto Rico (sec. 143 of the bill and sec. 199 of the Code)
Present Law
In general
Present law provides a deduction from taxable income (or, in the case of an individual, adjusted gross income) that is equal to a portion of the taxpayer's qualified production activities income. For taxable years beginning in 2009 the deduction is six percent, and after 2009, the deduction is nine percent of qualified production activities income. For taxpayers subject to the 35-percent corporate income tax rate, the nine-percent deduction effectively reduces the corporate income tax rate to just under 32 percent on qualified production activities income.

Qualified production activities income
In general, qualified production activities income is equal to domestic production gross receipts (defined by section 199(c)(4)), reduced by the sum of: (1) the costs of goods sold that are allocable to those receipts and (2) other expenses, losses, or deductions which are properly allocable to those receipts.

Domestic production gross receipts
Domestic production gross receipts generally are gross receipts of a taxpayer that are derived from (1) any sale, exchange, or other disposition, or any lease, rental, or license, of qualifying production property 133 that was manufactured, produced, grown or extracted by the taxpayer in whole or in significant part within the United States; (2) any sale, exchange, or other disposition, or any lease, rental, or license, of qualified film 134 produced by the taxpayer; (3) any lease, rental, license, sale, exchange, or other disposition of electricity, natural gas, or potable water produced by the taxpayer in the United States; (4) construction of real property performed in the United States by a taxpayer in the ordinary course of a construction trade or business; or (5) engineering or architectural services performed in the United States for the construction of real property located in the United States.

Wage limitation
The amount of the deduction for a taxable year is limited to 50 percent of the wages paid by the taxpayer, and properly allocable to domestic production gross receipts, during the calendar year that ends in such taxable year. 135 Wages paid to bona fide residents of Puerto Rico generally are not included in the wage limitation amount. 136

Rules for Puerto Rico
When used in the Code in a geographical sense, the term “United States” generally includes only the States and the District of Columbia. 137 A special rule for determining domestic production gross receipts, however, provides that in the case of any taxpayer with gross receipts from sources within the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the term “United States” includes the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, but only if all of the taxpayer's gross receipts are taxable under the Federal income tax for individuals or corporations. 138 In computing the 50-percent wage limitation, that taxpayer is permitted to take into account wages paid to bona fide residents of Puerto Rico for services performed in Puerto Rico. 139

The special rules for Puerto Rico apply only with respect to the first four taxable years of a taxpayer beginning after December 31, 2005 and before January 1, 2010.

Explanation of Provision
The provision allows the special domestic production activities rules for Puerto Rico to apply for the first five taxable years of a taxpayer beginning after December 31, 2005 and before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

4. Temporary increase in limit on cover over of rum excise taxes to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands (sec. 144 of the bill and sec. 7652(f) of the Code)
Present Law
A $13.50 per proof gallon 140 excise tax is imposed on distilled spirits produced in or imported (or brought) into the United States. 141 The excise tax does not apply to distilled spirits that are exported from the United States, including exports to U.S. possessions (e.g., Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands). 142

The Code provides for cover over (payment) to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands of the excise tax imposed on rum imported (or brought) into the United States, without regard to the country of origin. 143 The amount of the cover over is limited under Code section 7652(f) to $10.50 per proof gallon ($13.25 per proof gallon before January 1, 2010).

Tax amounts attributable to shipments to the United States of rum produced in Puerto Rico are covered over to Puerto Rico. Tax amounts attributable to shipments to the United States of rum produced in the Virgin Islands are covered over to the Virgin Islands. Tax amounts attributable to shipments to the United States of rum produced in neither Puerto Rico nor the Virgin Islands are divided and covered over to the two possessions under a formula. 144 Amounts covered over to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands are deposited into the treasuries of the two possessions for use as those possessions determine. 145 All of the amounts covered over are subject to the limitation.

Explanation of Provision
The provision suspends for one year the $10.50 per proof gallon limitation on the amount of excise taxes on rum covered over to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Under the provision, the cover over limitation of $13.25 per proof gallon is extended for rum brought into the United States after December 31, 2009 and before January 1, 2011. After December 31, 2010, the cover over amount reverts to $10.50 per proof gallon.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for articles brought into the United States after December 31, 2009.

5. American Samoa economic development credit (sec. 145 of the bill and sec. 119 of Pub. L. No. 109-432)
Present and Prior Law
In general
For taxable years beginning before January 1, 2006, certain domestic corporations with business operations in the U.S. possessions were eligible for the possession tax credit. 146 This credit offset the U.S. tax imposed on certain income related to operations in the U.S. possessions. For purposes of the credit, possessions included, among other places, American Samoa. Subject to certain limitations described below, the amount of the possession tax credit allowed to any domestic corporation equaled the portion of that corporation's U.S. tax that was attributable to the corporation's non-U.S. source taxable income from (1) the active conduct of a trade or business within a U.S. possession, (2) the sale or exchange of substantially all of the assets that were used in such a trade or business, or (3) certain possessions investment. 147 No deduction or foreign tax credit was allowed for any possessions or foreign tax paid or accrued with respect to taxable income that was taken into account in computing the credit under section 936. 148 The section 936 credit generally expired for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2005, but a special credit, described below, was allowed with respect to American Samoa.

To qualify for the possession tax credit for a taxable year, a domestic corporation was required to satisfy two conditions. First, the corporation was required to derive at least 80 percent of its gross income for the three-year period immediately preceding the close of the taxable year from sources within a possession. Second, the corporation was required to derive at least 75 percent of its gross income for that same period from the active conduct of a possession business.

The possession tax credit was available only to a corporation that qualified as an existing credit claimant. The determination of whether a corporation was an existing credit claimant was made separately for each possession. The possession tax credit was computed separately for each possession with respect to which the corporation was an existing credit claimant, and the credit was subject to either an economic activity-based limitation or an income-based limitation.

Qualification as existing credit claimant
A corporation was an existing credit claimant with respect to a possession if (1) the corporation was engaged in the active conduct of a trade or business within the possession on October 13, 1995, and (2) the corporation elected the benefits of the possession tax credit in an election in effect for its taxable year that included October 13, 1995. 149 A corporation that added a substantial new line of business (other than in a qualifying acquisition of all the assets of a trade or business of an existing credit claimant) ceased to be an existing credit claimant as of the close of the taxable year ending before the date on which that new line of business was added.

Economic activity-based limit
Under the economic activity-based limit, the amount of the credit determined under the rules described above was not permitted to exceed an amount equal to the sum of (1) 60 percent of the taxpayer's qualified possession wages and allocable employee fringe benefit expenses, (2) 15 percent of depreciation allowances with respect to short-life qualified tangible property, plus 40 percent of depreciation allowances with respect to medium-life qualified tangible property, plus 65 percent of depreciation allowances with respect to long-life qualified tangible property, and (3) in certain cases, a portion of the taxpayer's possession income taxes.

Income-based limit
As an alternative to the economic activity-based limit, a taxpayer was permitted to elect to apply a limit equal to the applicable percentage of the credit that otherwise would have been allowable with respect to possession business income; in taxable years beginning in 1998 and subsequent years, the applicable percentage was 40 percent.

Repeal and phase out
In 1996, the section 936 credit was repealed for new claimants for taxable years beginning after 1995 and was phased out for existing credit claimants over a period including taxable years beginning before 2006. The amount of the available credit during the phase-out period generally was reduced by special limitation rules. These phase-out period limitation rules did not apply to the credit available to existing credit claimants for income from activities in Guam, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands. As described previously, the section 936 credit generally was repealed for all possessions, including Guam, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands, for all taxable years beginning after 2005, but a modified credit was allowed for activities in American Samoa.

American Samoa economic development credit
A domestic corporation that was an existing credit claimant with respect to American Samoa and that elected the application of section 936 for its last taxable year beginning before January 1, 2006 is allowed a credit based on the economic activity-based limitation rules described above. The credit is not part of the Code but is computed based on the rules of sections 30A and 936. The credit is allowed for the first four taxable years of a corporation that begin after December 31, 2005, and before January 1, 2010.

The amount of the credit allowed to a qualifying domestic corporation under the provision is equal to the sum of the amounts used in computing the corporation's economic activity-based limitation (described previously) with respect to American Samoa, except that no credit is allowed for the amount of any American Samoa income taxes. Thus, for any qualifying corporation the amount of the credit equals the sum of (1) 60 percent of the corporation's qualified American Samoa wages and allocable employee fringe benefit expenses and (2) 15 percent of the corporation's depreciation allowances with respect to short-life qualified American Samoa tangible property, plus 40 percent of the corporation's depreciation allowances with respect to medium-life qualified American Samoa tangible property, plus 65 percent of the corporation's depreciation allowances with respect to long-life qualified American Samoa tangible property.

The section 936(c) rule denying a credit or deduction for any possessions or foreign tax paid with respect to taxable income taken into account in computing the credit under section 936 does not apply with respect to the credit allowed by the provision.

The credit is not available for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

Explanation of Provision
The provision allows the American Samoa economic development credit to apply for the first five taxable years of a corporation that begin after December 31, 2005, and before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

TITLE II - COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE PROVISIONS
1. Empowerment zone tax incentives (sec. 201 of the bill and secs. 1391 and 1202 of the Code)
Present Law
The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (“OBRA 93”) authorized the designation of nine empowerment zones (“Round I empowerment zones”) to provide tax incentives for businesses to locate within certain targeted areas 150 designated by the Secretaries of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) and the U.S Department of Agriculture (“USDA”). The Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 authorized the designation of two additional Round I urban empowerment zones, and 20 additional empowerment zones (“Round II empowerment zones”). The Community Renewal Tax Relief Act of 2000 (“2000 Community Renewal Act”) authorized a total of ten new empowerment zones (“Round III empowerment zones”), bringing the total number of authorized empowerment zones to 40. 151 In addition, the 2000 Community Renewal Act conformed the tax incentives that are available to businesses in the Round I, Round II, and Round III empowerment zones, and extended the empowerment zone incentives through December 31, 2009. 152

The tax incentives available within the designated empowerment zones include a Federal income tax credit for employers who hire qualifying employees, accelerated depreciation deductions on qualifying equipment, tax-exempt bond financing, deferral of capital gains tax on sale of qualified assets sold and replaced, and partial exclusion of capital gains tax on certain sales of qualified small business stock.

The following is a description of the tax incentives that are currently all scheduled to expire as of December 31, 2009.

Employment credit
A 20-percent wage credit is available to employers for the first $15,000 of qualified wages paid to each employee (i.e., a maximum credit of $3,000 with respect to each qualified employee) who (1) is a resident of the empowerment zone, and (2) performs substantially all employment services within the empowerment zone in a trade or business of the employer. 153

The wage credit rate applies to qualifying wages paid before January 1, 2010. Wages paid to a qualified employee who earns more than $15,000 are eligible for the wage credit (although only the first $15,000 of wages is eligible for the credit). The wage credit is available with respect to a qualified full-time or part-time employee (employed for at least 90 days), regardless of the number of other employees who work for the employer. In general, any taxable business carrying out activities in the empowerment zone may claim the wage credit, regardless of whether the employer meets the definition of an “enterprise zone business.” 154

An employer's deduction otherwise allowed for wages paid is reduced by the amount of wage credit claimed for that taxable year. 155 Wages are not to be taken into account for purposes of the wage credit if taken into account in determining the employer's work opportunity tax credit under section 51 or the welfare-to-work credit under section 51A. 156 In addition, the $15,000 cap is reduced by any wages taken into account in computing the work opportunity tax credit or the welfare-to-work credit. 157 The wage credit may be used to offset up to 25 percent of alternative minimum tax liability. 158

Increased section 179 expensing limitation
An enterprise zone business is allowed an additional $35,000 of section 179 expensing (for a total of up to $285,000 in 2009) for qualified zone property placed in service before January 1, 2010. 159 The section 179 expensing allowed to a taxpayer is phased out by the amount by which 50 percent of the cost of qualified zone property placed in service during the year by the taxpayer exceeds $500,000. 160 The term “qualified zone property” is defined as depreciable tangible property (including buildings) provided that (i) the property is acquired by the taxpayer (from an unrelated party) after the designation took effect, (ii) the original use of the property in an empowerment zone commences with the taxpayer, and (iii) substantially all of the use of the property is in an empowerment zone in the active conduct of a trade or business by the taxpayer. Special rules are provided in the case of property that is substantially renovated by the taxpayer.

An enterprise zone business means any qualified business entity and any qualified proprietorship. A qualified business entity means, any corporation or partnership if for such year: (1) every trade or business of such entity is the active conduct of a qualified business within an empowerment zone; (2) at least 50 percent of the total gross income of such entity is derived from the active conduct of such business; (3) a substantial portion of the use of the tangible property of such entity (whether owned or leased) is within an empowerment zone; (4) a substantial portion of the intangible property of such entity is used in the active conduct of any such business; (5) a substantial portion of the services performed for such entity by its employees are performed in an empowerment zone; (6) at least 35 percent of its employees are residents of an empowerment zone; (7) less than five percent of the average of the aggregate unadjusted bases of the property of such entity is attributable to collectibles other than collectibles that are held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of such business; and (8) less than 5 percent of the average of the aggregate unadjusted bases of the property of such entity is attributable to nonqualified financial property. 161

A qualified proprietorship is any qualified business carried on by an individual as a proprietorship if for such year: (1) at least 50 percent of the total gross income of such individual from such business is derived from the active conduct of such business in an empowerment zone; (2) a substantial portion of the use of the tangible property of such individual in such business (whether owned or leased) is within an empowerment zone; (3) a substantial portion of the intangible property of such business is used in the active conduct of such business; (4) a substantial portion of the services performed for such individual in such business by employees of such business are performed in an empowerment zone; (5) at least 35 percent of such employees are residents of an empowerment zone; (6) less than 5 percent of the average of the aggregate unadjusted bases of the property of such individual which is used in such business is attributable to collectibles other than collectibles that are held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of such business; and (7) less than 5 percent of the average of the aggregate unadjusted bases of the property of such individual which is used in such business is attributable to nonqualified financial property. 162

A qualified business is defined as any trade or business other than a trade or business that consists predominantly of the development or holding of intangibles for sale or license or any business prohibited in connection with the employment credit. 163 In addition, the leasing of real property that is located within the empowerment zone is treated as a qualified business only if (1) the leased property is not residential property, and (2) at least 50 percent of the gross rental income from the real property is from enterprise zone businesses. The rental of tangible personal property is not a qualified business unless at least 50 percent of the rental of such property is by enterprise zone businesses or by residents of an empowerment zone.

Expanded tax-exempt financing for certain zone facilities
States or local governments can issue enterprise zone facility bonds to raise funds to provide an enterprise zone business with qualified zone property. 164 These bonds can be used in areas designated enterprise communities as well as areas designated empowerment zones. To qualify, 95 percent (or more) of the net proceeds from the bond issue must be used to finance: (1) qualified zone property whose principal user is an enterprise zone business, and (2) certain land functionally related and subordinate to such property.

The term enterprise zone business is the same as that used for purposes of the increased section 179 deduction limitation (discussed above) with certain modifications for start-up businesses. First, a business will be treated as an enterprise zone business during a start-up period if (1) at the beginning of the period, it is reasonable to expect the business to be an enterprise zone business by the end of the start-up period, and (2) the business makes bona fide efforts to be an enterprise zone business. The start-up period is the period that ends with the start of the first tax year beginning more than two years after the later of (1) the issue date of the bond issue financing the qualified zone property, and (2) the date this property is first placed in service (or, if earlier, the date that is three years after the issue date). 165

Second, a business that qualifies as at the end of the start-up period must continue to qualify during a testing period that ends three tax years after the start-up period ends. After the three-year testing period, a business will continue to be treated as an enterprise zone business as long as 35 percent of its employees are residents of an empowerment zone or enterprise community.

The face amount of the bonds may not exceed $60 million for an empowerment zone in a rural area, $130 million for an empowerment zone in an urban area with zone population of less than 100,000, and $230 million for an empowerment zone in an urban area with zone population of at least 100,000.

Elective roll over of capital gain from the sale or exchange of any qualified empowerment zone asset purchased after December 21, 2000
Taxpayers can elect to defer recognition of gain on the sale of a qualified empowerment zone asset 166 held for more than one year and replaced within 60 days by another qualified empowerment zone asset in the same zone. 167 The deferral is accomplished by reducing the basis of the replacement asset by the amount of the gain recognized on the sale of the asset.

Partial exclusion of capital gains on certain small business stock
For taxpayers other than corporations, 50 percent of the gain from the sale of qualified small business stock held for more than five years is excluded from gross income. 168 In the case of qualified small business stock acquired after December 21, 2000, in a corporation which is a qualified business entity (as defined in section 1397C(b)) during substantially all of the taxpayer's holding period, the exclusion is increased to 60 percent. 169 The portion of the gain includible in taxable income is taxed at a maximum rate of 28 percent under the regular tax. 170 A percentage of the excluded gain is an alternative minimum tax preference; 171 the portion of the gain includible in alternative minimum taxable income (“AMTI”) is taxed at a maximum rate of 28 percent under the AMT.

The amount of gain eligible for the exclusion by an individual with respect to any corporation is the greater of (1) ten times the taxpayer's basis in the stock or (2) $10 million. To qualify as a small business, when the stock is issued, the gross assets of the corporation may not exceed $50 million. The corporation also must meet certain active trade or business requirements.

For all qualified small business stock acquired after February 17, 2009, and before January 1, 2011, the exclusion is increased to 75 percent. As a result of the increased exclusion, gain from the sale of qualified small business stock to which the provision applies is taxed at maximum effective rates of seven percent under the regular tax 172 and 12.88 percent under the AMT. 173

Other tax incentives
Other incentives not specific to empowerment zones but beneficial to these areas include the work opportunity tax credit for employers based on the first year of employment of certain targeted groups, including empowerment zone residents (up to $2,400 per employee), and qualified zone academy bonds for certain public schools located in an empowerment zone, or expected (as of the date of bond issuance) to have at least 35 percent of its students receiving free or reduced lunches.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends for one year, through December 31, 2010, the period for which the designation of an empowerment zone is in effect, thus extending for one year the empowerment zone tax incentives, including the wage credit, accelerated depreciation deductions on qualifying equipment, tax-exempt bond financing, and deferral of capital gains tax on sale of qualified assets sold and replaced.

The provision extends for one year, through December 31, 2015, the period for which gain from the sale or exchange of qualified business stock held for more than five years is excluded from gross income.

Effective Date
The provision relating to the designation of an empowerment zone and the provision relating to the exclusion of gain from the sale or exchange of qualified small business stock held for more than five years applies to periods after December 31, 2009.

2. Renewal community tax incentives (sec. 202 of the bill and secs. 1400E, 1400F, 1400I, and 1400J of the Code)
Present Law
The Community Renewal Tax Relief Act of 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-554, authorized the designation of 40 “renewal communities” within which special Federal tax incentives are available to attract business and investment to distressed urban and rural areas. The targeted areas are those that have pervasive poverty, high unemployment, and general economic distress, and that satisfy certain eligibility criteria, including specified poverty rates and population and geographic size limitations.

The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development has awarded renewal community designations to 40 selected communities (12 rural and 28 urban), including areas that remained distressed after previously having received empowerment zone or enterprise community designations. 174 To qualify as a renewal community, the community must have (1) a minimum unemployment rate of 9.45 percent (versus 6.3 percent for enterprise communities and empowerment zones) and (2) a minimum population of 4,000 within a metro area or 1,000 otherwise and a maximum population of 200,000. The designation of an area as a renewal community is effective on January 1, 2002, and terminates after December 31, 2009. 175

The tax incentives provided under the renewal communities program include a Federal income tax credit for employers who hire qualifying employees, enhanced tax deductions on qualifying equipment and expenditures to construct or rehabilitate certain nonresidential buildings, and capital gains tax exclusion on sales of qualified assets. The tax incentives for renewal communities generally are available through December 31, 2009. 176

The following is a description of these tax incentives.

Renewal community employment credit
A 15-percent wage credit is available to employers for the first $10,000 of qualified wages paid to each employee (i.e., a maximum credit of $1,500 with respect to each qualified employee) who (1) is a resident of the renewal community, and (2) performs substantially all employment services within the renewal community in a trade or business of the employer. 177

The wage credit applies to qualifying wages paid before January 1, 2010. Wages paid to a qualified employee who earns more than $10,000 are eligible for the wage credit (although only the first $10,000 of wages is eligible for the credit). The wage credit is available with respect to a qualified full-time or part-time employee, employed for at least 90 days, regardless of the number of other employees who work for the employer. In general, any taxable business carrying out activities in the renewal community may claim the wage credit, regardless of whether the employer meets the definition of a “renewal community business.” 178

An employer's deduction otherwise allowed for wages paid is reduced by the amount of wage credit claimed for that taxable year. 179 Wages are not to be taken into account for purposes of the wage credit if taken into account in determining the employer's work opportunity tax credit under section 51 or the welfare-to-work credit under section 51A. 180 In addition, the $10,000 cap is reduced by any wages taken into account in computing the work opportunity tax credit or the welfare-to-work credit. 181 The wage credit may be used to offset up to 25 percent of alternative minimum tax liability. 182

Additional section 179 expensing
A renewal community business (as defined below in connection with the zero-percent capital gains rate) is allowed an additional $35,000 of section 179 expensing for qualified renewal property placed in service before January 1, 2010. 183 The section 179 expensing allowed to a taxpayer is phased out by the amount by which 50 percent of the cost of qualified renewal property placed in service during the year by the taxpayer exceeds $500,000. 184

The term “qualified renewal property” is defined as depreciable tangible property (including buildings), provided that (1) the property is acquired by the taxpayer (from an unrelated party) after the designation took effect, (2) the original use of the property in the renewal community commences with the taxpayer, and (3) substantially all of the use of the property is in the renewal community in the active conduct of a trade or business by the taxpayer. 185 Special rules are provided in the case of property that is substantially renovated by the taxpayer.

Commercial revitalization deduction
Each State is permitted to allocate up to $12 million of commercial revitalization expenditures to each renewal community located within the State for each calendar year after 2001 and before 2010. The appropriate State agency will make the allocations pursuant to a qualified allocation plan. 186

A commercial revitalization expenditure means the cost of a new building or the cost of substantially rehabilitating an existing building. The building must be used for commercial purposes and be located in a renewal community. In the case of the rehabilitation of an existing building, the cost of acquiring the building will be treated as a qualifying expenditure only to the extent that such costs do not exceed 30 percent of the other rehabilitation expenditures. The qualifying expenditures for any building cannot exceed $10 million.

A taxpayer can elect either to (a) deduct one-half of the commercial revitalization expenditures for the taxable year the building is placed in service or (b) amortize all the expenditures ratably over the 120-month period beginning with the month the building is placed in service. 187 No depreciation is allowed for amounts deducted under this provision. The adjusted basis of the building is reduced by the amount of the commercial revitalization deduction, and the deduction is treated as a depreciation deduction in applying the depreciation recapture rules.

The commercial revitalization deduction is treated in the same manner as the low-income housing credit in applying the passive loss rules. Thus, up to $25,000 of deductions (together with the other deductions and credits not subject to the passive loss limitation by reason of section 469(i)) are allowed to an individual taxpayer regardless of the taxpayer's adjusted gross income. The commercial revitalization deduction is allowed in computing a taxpayer's alternative minimum taxable income.

Zero-percent capital gains rate
A zero-percent capital gains rate applies with respect to gain from the sale of a qualified community asset acquired after December 31, 2001, and before January 1, 2010, and held for more than five years. 188 A qualified community asset includes: (1) qualified community stock (meaning original-issue stock purchased for cash in a renewal community business); (2) a qualified community partnership interest (meaning a partnership interest acquired for cash in a renewal community business); and (3) qualified community business property (meaning tangible property originally used in a renewal community business by the taxpayer) that is purchased or substantially improved after December 31, 2001.

A renewal community business is defined as a corporation or partnership (or proprietorship) if for the taxable year (1) the sole trade or business of the corporation or partnership is the active conduct of a qualified business 189 within a renewal community; (2) at least 50 percent of the total gross income is derived from the active conduct of a “qualified business” within a renewal community; (3) a substantial portion of the business's tangible property is used within a renewal community; (4) a substantial portion of the business's intangible property is used in the active conduct of such business; (5) a substantial portion of the services performed by employees are performed within a renewal community; (6) at least 35 percent of the employees are residents of the renewal community; and (7) less than 5 percent of the average of the aggregate unadjusted bases of the property owned by the business is attributable to (a) certain financial property, or (b) collectibles not held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of an active trade or business. Property will continue to be a qualified community asset if sold (or otherwise transferred) to a subsequent purchaser, provided that the property continues to represent an interest in (or tangible property used in) a renewal community business.

The termination of an area's status as a renewal community will not affect whether property is a qualified community asset, but any gain attributable to the period before January 1, 2002, or after December 31, 2014, is not eligible for the zero-percent rate.

Other tax incentives
Other incentives not specific to renewal communities but beneficial to these areas include the work opportunity tax credit for employers based on the first year of employment of certain targeted groups, including renewal community residents (up to $2,400 per employee), and qualified zone academy bonds for certain public schools expected (as of the date of bond issuance) to have at least 35 percent of its students receiving free or reduced-cost lunches.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends for one year, through December 31, 2010, the period for which the designation of a renewal community is in effect.

The provision extends for one year, through January 1, 2011, the period for which the taxpayer can acquire a qualified community asset defined to include qualified community stock, a qualified community partnership interest, and qualified community business property. The provision extends for one year, through December 31, 2015, the period for which qualified capital gain from the sale or exchange of a qualified community asset held for more than five years is excluded from gross income.

The provision extends for one year, through December 31, 2010, the period for which a taxpayer can place a qualified revitalization building in service for purposes of the commercial revitalization deduction.

The provision extends for one year, through December 31, 2010, the period through which the taxpayer can acquire qualified renewal property.

Effective Date
The provision relating to the designation of a renewal community and the provision relating to the exclusion of gain from the sale or exchange of a qualified community asset held for more than five years applies to periods after December 31, 2009. The provision relating to the period for which the taxpayer can acquire a qualified community asset or qualified renewal property applies to acquisitions after December 31, 2009. The provision relating to the placed in service date for qualified revitalization buildings eligible for the commercial revitalization deduction applies to buildings placed in service after December 31, 2009.

3. New markets tax credit (sec. 203 of the bill and sec. 45D of the Code)
Present Law
Section 45D provides a new markets tax credit for qualified equity investments made to acquire stock in a corporation, or a capital interest in a partnership, that is a qualified community development entity (“CDE”). 190 The amount of the credit allowable to the investor (either the original purchaser or a subsequent holder) is (1) a five-percent credit for the year in which the equity interest is purchased from the CDE and for each of the following two years, and (2) a six-percent credit for each of the following four years. The credit is determined by applying the applicable percentage (five or six percent) to the amount paid to the CDE for the investment at its original issue, and is available for a taxable year to the taxpayer who holds the qualified equity investment on the date of the initial investment or on the respective anniversary date that occurs during the taxable year. The credit is recaptured if at any time during the seven-year period that begins on the date of the original issue of the investment the entity ceases to be a qualified CDE, the proceeds of the investment cease to be used as required, or the equity investment is redeemed.

A qualified CDE is any domestic corporation or partnership: (1) whose primary mission is serving or providing investment capital for low-income communities or low-income persons; (2) that maintains accountability to residents of low-income communities by their representation on any governing board of or any advisory board to the CDE; and (3) that is certified by the Secretary as being a qualified CDE. A qualified equity investment means stock (other than nonqualified preferred stock) in a corporation or a capital interest in a partnership that is acquired directly from a CDE for cash, and includes an investment of a subsequent purchaser if such investment was a qualified equity investment in the hands of the prior holder. Substantially all of the investment proceeds must be used by the CDE to make qualified low-income community investments. For this purpose, qualified low-income community investments include: (1) capital or equity investments in, or loans to, qualified active low-income community businesses; (2) certain financial counseling and other services to businesses and residents in low-income communities; (3) the purchase from another CDE of any loan made by such entity that is a qualified low-income community investment; or (4) an equity investment in, or loan to, another CDE.

A “low-income community” is a population census tract with either (1) a poverty rate of at least 20 percent or (2) median family income which does not exceed 80 percent of the greater of metropolitan area median family income or statewide median family income (for a non-metropolitan census tract, does not exceed 80 percent of statewide median family income). In the case of a population census tract located within a high migration rural county, low-income is defined by reference to 85 percent (rather than 80 percent) of statewide median family income. For this purpose, a high migration rural county is any county that, during the 20-year period ending with the year in which the most recent census was conducted, has a net out-migration of inhabitants from the county of at least 10 percent of the population of the county at the beginning of such period.

The Secretary has the authority to designate “targeted populations” as low-income communities for purposes of the new markets tax credit. For this purpose, a “targeted population” is defined by reference to section 103(20) of the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994 (12 U.S.C. 4702(20)) to mean individuals, or an identifiable group of individuals, including an Indian tribe, who (A) are low-income persons; or (B) otherwise lack adequate access to loans or equity investments. Under such Act, “low-income” means (1) for a targeted population within a metropolitan area, less than 80 percent of the area median family income; and (2) for a targeted population within a non-metropolitan area, less than the greater of 80 percent of the area median family income or 80 percent of the statewide non-metropolitan area median family income. 191 Under such Act, a targeted population is not required to be within any census tract. In addition, a population census tract with a population of less than 2,000 is treated as a low-income community for purposes of the credit if such tract is within an empowerment zone, the designation of which is in effect under section 1391, and is contiguous to one or more low-income communities.

A qualified active low-income community business is defined as a business that satisfies, with respect to a taxable year, the following requirements: (1) at least 50 percent of the total gross income of the business is derived from the active conduct of trade or business activities in any low-income community; (2) a substantial portion of the tangible property of such business is used in a low-income community; (3) a substantial portion of the services performed for such business by its employees is performed in a low-income community; and (4) less than five percent of the average of the aggregate unadjusted bases of the property of such business is attributable to certain financial property or to certain collectibles.

The maximum annual amount of qualified equity investments is capped at $5 billion per year for calendar years 2008 and 2009.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the new markets tax credit for one year, through 2010, permitting up to $5 billion in qualified equity investments for that calendar year. The provision also extends for one year, through 2015, the carryover period for unused new markets tax credits.

Effective Date
The provision applies to calendar years beginning after 2009.

4. Tax incentives for investment in the District of Columbia (sec. 204 of the bill and secs. 1400, 1400A, 1400B, and 1400C of the Code)
Present Law
In general
The Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 192 designated certain economically depressed census tracts within the District of Columbia as the “District of Columbia Enterprise Zone,” or “DC Zone,” within which businesses and individual residents are eligible for special tax incentives. The census tracts that comprise the District of Columbia Enterprise Zone are (1) all census tracts that presently are part of the D.C. enterprise community designated under section 1391 (i.e., portions of Anacostia, Mt. Pleasant, Chinatown, and the easternmost part of the District of Columbia), and (2) all additional census tracts within the District of Columbia where the poverty rate is not less than 20 percent. The District of Columbia Enterprise Zone designation remains in effect for the period from January 1, 1998, through December 31, 2009.

The following tax incentives are available for businesses located in an empowerment zone and the District of Columbia Enterprise Zone is treated as an empowerment zone for this purpose: 193 (1) 20-percent wage credit, (2) an additional $35,000 of section 179 expensing for qualified zone property, and (3) expanded tax-exempt financing for certain zone facilities. In addition, a zero-percent capital gains rate applies to capital gains from the sale of certain qualified DC Zone assets held for more than five years.

Present law also provides for a nonrefundable tax credit for first-time homebuyers of a principal residence in the District of Columbia.

Employment credit
A 20-percent wage credit is available to employers for the first $15,000 of qualified wages paid to each employee (i.e., a maximum credit of $3,000 with respect to each qualified employee) who (1) is a resident of the District of Columbia, and (2) performs substantially all employment services within an empowerment zone in a trade or business of the employer. 194

The wage credit rate applies to qualifying wages paid after December 31, 2001, and before January 1, 2010. Wages paid to a qualified employee who earns more than $15,000 are eligible for the wage credit (although only the first $15,000 of wages is eligible for the credit). The wage credit is available with respect to a qualified full-time or part-time employee (employed for at least 90 days), regardless of the number of other employees who work for the employer. In general, any taxable business carrying out activities in the empowerment zone may claim the wage credit, regardless of whether the employer meets the definition of an “enterprise zone business,” as defined below. 195

An employer's deduction otherwise allowed for wages paid is reduced by the amount of wage credit claimed for that taxable year. 196 Wages are not to be taken into account for purposes of the wage credit if taken into account in determining the employer's work opportunity tax credit under section 51 or the welfare-to-work credit under section 51A. 197 In addition, the $15,000 cap is reduced by any wages taken into account in computing the work opportunity tax credit or the welfare-to-work credit. 198 The wage credit may be used to offset up to 25 percent of alternative minimum tax liability. 199

Increased section 179 expensing limitation
An enterprise zone business is allowed an additional $35,000 of section 179 expensing (for a total of up to $285,000 in 2009) for qualified zone property placed in service after December 31, 2001, and before January 1, 2010. 200 The section 179 expensing allowed to a taxpayer is phased out by the amount by which 50 percent of the cost of qualified zone property placed in service during the year by the taxpayer exceeds $500,000. 201 The term “qualified zone property” is defined as depreciable tangible property (including buildings) provided that (i) the property is acquired by the taxpayer (from an unrelated party) after the designation took effect, (ii) the original use of the property in an empowerment zone commences with the taxpayer, and (iii) substantially all of the use of the property is in an empowerment zone in the active conduct of a trade or business by the taxpayer. For this purpose, special rules are provided in the case of property that is substantially renovated by the taxpayer.

An enterprise zone business means any qualified business entity and any qualified proprietorship. A qualified business entity means, any corporation or partnership if for such year: (1) every trade or business of such entity is the active conduct of a qualified business within an empowerment zone; (2) at least 50 percent of the total gross income of such entity is derived from the active conduct of such business; (3) a substantial portion of the use of the tangible property of such entity (whether owned or leased) is within an empowerment zone; (4) a substantial portion of the intangible property of such entity is used in the active conduct of any such business; (5) a substantial portion of the services performed for such entity by its employees are performed in an empowerment zone; (6) at least 35 percent of its employees are residents of an empowerment zone; (7) less than five percent of the average of the aggregate unadjusted bases of the property of such entity is attributable to collectibles other than collectibles that are held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of such business; and (8) less than 5 percent of the average of the aggregate unadjusted bases of the property of such entity is attributable to nonqualified financial property. 202

A qualified proprietorship is any qualified business carried on by an individual as a proprietorship if for such year: (1) at least 50 percent of the total gross income of such individual from such business is derived from the active conduct of such business in an empowerment zone; (2) a substantial portion of the use of the tangible property of such individual in such business (whether owned or leased) is within an empowerment zone; (3) a substantial portion of the intangible property of such business is used in the active conduct of such business; (4) a substantial portion of the services performed for such individual in such business by employees of such business are performed in an empowerment zone; (5) at least 35 percent of such employees are residents of an empowerment zone; (6) less than 5 percent of the average of the aggregate unadjusted bases of the property of such individual which is used in such business is attributable to collectibles other than collectibles that are held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of such business; and (7) less than 5 percent of the average of the aggregate unadjusted bases of the property of such individual which is used in such business is attributable to nonqualified financial property. 203

A qualified business is defined as any trade or business other than a trade or business that consists predominantly of the development or holding of intangibles for sale or license or any business prohibited in connection with the employment credit. 204 In addition, the leasing of real property that is located within the empowerment zone is treated as a qualified business only if (1) the leased property is not residential property, and (2) at least 50 percent of the gross rental income from the real property is from enterprise zone businesses. The rental of tangible personal property is not a qualified business unless at least 50 percent of the rental of such property is by enterprise zone businesses or by residents of an empowerment zone.

Expanded tax-exempt financing for certain zone facilities
An enterprise zone business is permitted to borrow proceeds from the issuance of tax-exempt enterprise zone facility bonds (as defined in section 1394, without regard to the employee residency requirement) issued by the District of Columbia. 205 To qualify, 95 percent (or more) of the net proceeds must be used to finance: (1) qualified zone property whose principal user is an enterprise zone business, and (2) certain land functionally related and subordinate to such property. Accordingly, most of the proceeds have to be used to finance certain facilities within the DC Zone. The aggregate face amount of all outstanding qualified enterprise zone facility bonds per enterprise zone business may not exceed $15 million and may be issued only while the DC Zone designation is in effect, from January 1, 1998 through December 31, 2009.

The term enterprise zone business is the same as that used for purposes of the increased section 179 deduction limitation with certain modifications for start-up businesses. First, a business will be treated as an enterprise zone business during a start-up period if (1) at the beginning of the period, it is reasonable to expect the business to be an enterprise zone business by the end of the start-up period, and (2) the business makes bona fide efforts to be an enterprise zone business. The start-up period is the period that ends with the start of the first tax year beginning more than two years after the later of (1) the issue date of the bond issue financing the qualified zone property, and (2) the date this property is first placed in service (or, if earlier, the date that is three years after the issue date). 206

Second, a business that qualifies as at the end of the start-up period must continue to qualify during a testing period that ends three tax years after the start-up period ends. After the three-year testing period, a business will continue to be treated as an enterprise zone business as long as 35 percent of its employees are residents of an empowerment zone or enterprise community.

Zero-percent capital gains
A zero-percent capital gains rate applies to capital gains from the sale of certain qualified DC Zone assets held for more than five years. 207 In general, a “qualified DC Zone asset” means stock or partnership interests held in, or tangible property held by, a DC Zone business. For purposes of the zero-percent capital gains rate, the DC Zone is defined to include all census tracts within the District of Columbia where the poverty rate is not less than ten percent.

In general, gain eligible for the zero-percent tax rate is that from the sale or exchange of a qualified DC Zone asset that is (1) a capital asset or (2) property used in a trade or business, as defined in section 1231(b). Gain that is attributable to real property, or to intangible assets, qualifies for the zero-percent rate, provided that such real property or intangible asset is an integral part of a qualified DC Zone business. 208 However, no gain attributable to periods before January 1, 1998, and after December 31, 2014, is qualified capital gain.

District of Columbia homebuyer tax credit
First-time homebuyers of a principal residence in the District of Columbia 209 qualify for a tax credit of up to $5,000. 210 The $5,000 maximum credit amount applies both to individuals and married couples. The credit phases out for individual taxpayers with adjusted gross income between $70,000 and $90,000 ($110,000-$130,000 for joint filers). The credit is available with respect to purchases of existing property as well as new construction.

A “first-time homebuyer” means any individual if such individual (and, if married, such individual's spouse) did not have a present ownership interest in a principal residence in the District of Columbia during the one-year period ending on the date of the purchase of the principal residence to which the credit applies. A taxpayer will be treated as a first-time homebuyer with respect to only one residence—i.e., a taxpayer may claim the credit only once. A taxpayer's basis in a property is reduced by the amount of any homebuyer tax credit claimed with respect to such property.

The first-time homebuyer credit is a nonrefundable personal credit and may offset the regular tax and the alternative minimum tax. Any credit in excess of tax liability may be carried forward indefinitely. The homebuyer credit is generally available for property purchased after August 4, 1997, and before January 1, 2010. However, the credit does not apply to the purchase of a residence after December 31, 2008 to which the national first-time homebuyer credit under Section 36 of the Code applies.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends for one year, through December 31, 2010, the designation of the District of Columbia Enterprise Zone.

The provision extends for one year the zero-percent capital gains rate applicable to capital gains from the sale or exchange of any DC Zone asset held for more than five years (and, as amended, acquired or substantially improved before January 1, 2011). The provision also extends for one year the period for which the term “qualified capital gain” refers. As amended, the term “qualified capital gain” shall not include any gain attributable to periods before January 1, 1998, or after December 31, 2015.

The provision extends the first-time homebuyer credit for one year (as amended, to apply to property purchased before January 1, 2011).

Effective Date
The provision extending the period of designation of the District of Columbia Enterprise Zone and the provision extending the period for which the term “qualified capital gain” refers applies to periods after December 31, 2009. The provision extending tax-exempt financing for certain zone facilities applies to bonds issued after December 31, 2009. The provision amending the definitions of DC Zone business stock, DC Zone partnership interest, and DC Zone business property applies to property acquired or substantially approved after December 31, 2009. The provision extending the first-time homebuyer credit applies to property purchased after December 31, 2009.

5. Special depreciation allowance for certain New York Liberty Zone property (sec. 205(a) of the bill and sec. 1400L(b) of the Code)
Present Law
A taxpayer is allowed to recover, through annual depreciation deductions, the cost of certain property used in a trade or business or for the production of income. The amount of the depreciation deduction allowed with respect to tangible property for a taxable year generally is determined under the modified accelerated cost recovery system (“MACRS”). 211 Under MACRS, different types of property generally are assigned applicable recovery periods and depreciation methods. The recovery periods applicable to most tangible personal property (generally tangible property other than residential rental property and nonresidential real property) range from 3 to 20 years. The depreciation methods generally applicable to tangible personal property are the 200-percent and 150-percent declining balance methods, switching to the straight-line method for the taxable year in which the depreciation deduction would be maximized.

Present law includes an additional first-year depreciation deduction equal to 30 percent of the adjusted basis of qualified New York Liberty Zone (“Liberty Zone”) property. The additional first-year depreciation deduction is allowed for both regular tax and alternative minimum tax purposes. The basis of the property and the depreciation allowances in the year of purchase and later years are appropriately adjusted to reflect the additional first-year depreciation deduction. In addition, there are no adjustments to the allowable amount of depreciation for purposes of computing a taxpayer's alternative minimum taxable income with respect to property to which the provision applies. A taxpayer may elect out of the additional first-year depreciation for any class of property for any taxable year.

For property to qualify for the additional first-year depreciation deduction it must meet all of the following requirements. First, the property must be eligible real property. 212 Second, substantially all of the use of such property must be in the Liberty Zone. Third, the original use 213 of the property in the Liberty Zone must commence with the taxpayer on or after September 11, 2001. 214 Finally, the property must be acquired by purchase 215 by the taxpayer on or after September 11, 2001.

Nonresidential real property and residential rental property are eligible for the additional first-year depreciation only to the extent such property rehabilitates real property damaged, or replaces real property destroyed or condemned as a result of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Property is treated as replacing destroyed property, if as part of an integrated plan, such property replaces real property that is included in a continuous area that includes real property destroyed or condemned. It is intended that, for this purpose, real property destroyed (or condemned) only include circumstances in which an entire building or structure was destroyed (or condemned) as a result of the terrorist attacks. Otherwise, such property is considered damaged real property. For example, if certain structural components (e.g., wall, floors, or plumbing fixtures) of a building are damaged or destroyed as a result of the terrorist attacks, but the building is not destroyed (or condemned), then only costs related to replacing the damaged or destroyed components qualify for the provision.

Eligible real property that is constructed by the taxpayer for use by the taxpayer qualifies if the taxpayer begins the construction of the property after September 11, 2001, and the property is placed in service on or before December 31, 2009 (assuming all other requirements are met). Property that is constructed for the taxpayer by another person under a contract that is entered into prior to the construction of the property is considered to be constructed by the taxpayer. 216

The Liberty Zone means the area located on or south of Canal Street, East Broadway (east of its intersection with Canal Street), or Grand Street (east of its intersection with East Broadway) in the Borough of Manhattan in the City of New York, New York.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends for one year the additional 30-percent depreciation deduction for eligible real property (to apply to property placed in service on or before December 31, 2010).

Effective Date
The provision is effective for eligible real property placed in service after December 31, 2009.

6. New York Liberty Zone bond provision (sec. 205(b) of the bill and sec. 1400L of the Code)
Present Law
An aggregate of $8 billion in tax-exempt private activity bonds is authorized for the purpose of financing the construction and repair of infrastructure in New York City (“Liberty Zone bonds”). The bonds must be issued before January 1, 2010.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends authority to issue Liberty Zone bonds for one year (through December 31, 2010).

Effective Date
The provision is effective for bonds issued after December 31, 2009.

7. Work opportunity tax credit for Hurricane Katrina employees (sec. 206(a) of the bill)
Present Law
General work opportunity tax credit rules
Targeted groups eligible for the credit
The work opportunity tax credit is available on an elective basis for employers hiring individuals from one or more of nine targeted groups.

Qualified wages
Generally, qualified wages are defined as cash wages paid by the employer to a member of a targeted group. The employer's deduction for wages is reduced by the amount of the credit.

Calculation of the credit
Generally, the credit available to an employer for qualified wages paid to members of all targeted groups except for long-term family assistance recipients equals 40 percent (25 percent for employment of 400 hours or less) of qualified first-year wages. Generally, qualified first-year wages are qualified wages (not in excess of $6,000) attributable to service rendered by a member of a targeted group during the one-year period beginning with the day the individual began work for the employer. Therefore, the maximum credit per employee is $2,400 (40 percent of the first $6,000 of qualified first-year wages). With respect to qualified summer youth employees, the maximum credit is $1,200 (40 percent of the first $3,000 of qualified first-year wages). In the case of certain qualified veterans, the definition of first-year wages is increased from $6,000 to $12,000, which increases the maximum credit per such employee to $4,800. Except for long-term family assistance recipients, no credit is allowed for second-year wages.

In the case of long-term family assistance recipients, the credit equals 40 percent (25 percent for employment of 400 hours or less) of $10,000 for qualified first-year wages and 50 percent of the first $10,000 of qualified second-year wages. Generally, qualified second-year wages are qualified wages (not in excess of $10,000) attributable to service rendered by a member of the long-term family assistance category during the one-year period beginning on the day after the one-year period beginning with the day the individual began work for the employer. Therefore, the maximum credit per employee is $9,000 (40 percent of the first $10,000 of qualified first-year wages plus 50 percent of the first $10,000 of qualified second-year wages).

Minimum employment period
No credit is allowed for qualified wages paid to employees who work less than 120 hours in the first year of employment.

Certification requirement
In general, an individual is not treated as a member of a targeted group unless (1) on or before the day on which such individual begins work for the employer, the employer has received a certification from a designated local agency that such individual is a member of a targeted group or (2) on or before the day the individual is offered employment with the employer, a pre-screening notice is completed by the employer with respect to such individual and not later than the twenty-first day after the individual begins work for the employer, the employer submits such notice, signed by the employer and the individual under the penalties of perjury, to the designated local agency as part of a written request for such a certification from such agency.

Qualifying rehires
No credit is available for any individual if, prior to the hiring date of such individual, such individual had been employed by the employer at any time.

Other rules
The work opportunity tax credit is not allowed for wages paid to a relative or dependent of the taxpayer. Similarly, wages paid to replacement workers during a strike or lockout are not eligible for the work opportunity tax credit. Wages paid to any employee during any period for which the employer received on-the-job training program payments with respect to that employee are not eligible for the work opportunity tax credit. The work opportunity tax credit generally is not allowed for wages paid to individuals who had previously been employed by the employer. In addition, many other technical rules apply.

Expiration date
The work opportunity tax credit is effective for wages paid or incurred to a qualified individual who begins work for an employer before September 1, 2011.

Hurricane Katrina work opportunity tax credit rules
In general
A Hurricane Katrina employee is treated as a member of a targeted group for purposes of the work opportunity tax credit. A Hurricane Katrina employee is: (1) an individual who on August 28, 2005, had a principal place of abode in the core disaster area and is hired during the four-year period beginning on such date for a position, the principal place of employment of which is located in the core disaster area.

Certification requirement
The WOTC certification requirement is waived for such individuals. In lieu of the certification requirement, an individual may provide to the employer reasonable evidence that the individual is a Hurricane Katrina employee.

Qualifying rehires
The general rule that denies the credit with respect to wages of employees who had been previously employed by the employer is waived for the first hire of such employee as a Hurricane Katrina employee unless such employee was an employee of the employer on August 28, 2005.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the work opportunity tax credit for Hurricane Katrina employees for one year (through August 27, 2010).

Effective Date
The provision is effective for individuals hired after August 27, 2009 and before August 28, 2010.

8. Increased rehabilitation credit for structures in the Gulf Opportunity Zone (sec. 206(b) of the bill and sec. 1400N(h) of the Code)
Present Law
Present law provides a two-tier tax credit for rehabilitation expenditures.

A 20-percent credit is provided for qualified rehabilitation expenditures with respect to a certified historic structure. For this purpose, a certified historic structure means any building that is listed in the National Register, or that is located in a registered historic district and is certified by the Secretary of the Interior to the Secretary of the Treasury as being of historic significance to the district.

A 10-percent credit is provided for qualified rehabilitation expenditures with respect to a qualified rehabilitated building, which generally means a building that was first placed in service before 1936. The pre-1936 building must meet requirements with respect to retention of existing external walls and internal structural framework of the building in order for expenditures with respect to it to qualify for the 10-percent credit. A building is treated as having met the substantial rehabilitation requirement under the 10-percent credit only if the rehabilitation expenditures during the 24-month period selected by the taxpayer and ending within the taxable year exceed the greater of (1) the adjusted basis of the building (and its structural components), or (2) $5,000.

The provision requires the use of straight-line depreciation or the alternative depreciation system in order for rehabilitation expenditures to be treated as qualified under the provision.

Present law increases from 20 to 26 percent, and from 10 to 13 percent, respectively, the credit under section 47 with respect to any certified historic structure or qualified rehabilitated building located in the Gulf Opportunity Zone, provided the qualified rehabilitation expenditures with respect to such buildings or structures are incurred on or after August 28, 2005, and before January 1, 2010. The provision is effective for expenditures incurred on or after August 28, 2005, for taxable years ending on or after August 28, 2005.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends for one additional year the increase in the rehabilitation credit from 20 to 26 percent, and from 10 to 13 percent, respectively, with respect to any certified historic structure or qualified rehabilitated building located in the Gulf Opportunity Zone. Thus, the increase applies for qualified rehabilitation expenditures with respect to such buildings or structures incurred before January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The provision is effective upon enactment.

9. Election for refundable low-income housing credit for 2010 (sec. 207 of the bill and sec. 42 of the Code)
Present Law
Tax credits
In general
The low-income housing credit may be claimed over a 10-year period by owners of certain residential rental property for the cost of rental housing occupied by tenants having incomes below specified levels. 217 The amount of the credit for any taxable year in the credit period is the applicable percentage of the qualified basis of each qualified low-income building. The qualified basis of any qualified low-income building for any taxable year equals the applicable fraction of the eligible basis of the building.

Volume limits
A low-income housing credit is allowable only if the owner of a qualified building receives a housing credit allocation from the State or local housing credit agency. The aggregate credit authority provided annually to each State is indexed for inflation. For calendar year 2010 is $2.10 per resident, with a minimum annual cap of $2,430,000 for certain small population States. 218 These amounts are indexed for inflation. Projects that also receive financing with proceeds of tax-exempt bonds issued subject to the private activity bond volume limit do not require an allocation of the low-income housing credit.

Basic rule for Federal grants
The basis of a qualified building must be reduced by the amount of any federal grants with respect to such building.

Grants in lieu of tax credits for 2009
Low-income housing grant election amount
The Secretary makes a grant to the State housing credit agency of each State in an amount equal to the low-income housing grant election amount for 2009.

The low-income housing grant election amount for a State is an amount elected by the State subject to certain limits. The maximum low-income housing grant election amount for a State may not exceed 85 percent of the product of ten and the sum of the State's: (1) unused housing credit ceiling for 2008; (2) any returns to the State during 2009 of credit allocations previously made by the State; (3) 40 percent of the State's 2009 credit allocation; and (4) 40 percent of the State's share of the national pool allocated in 2009, if any).

These grants are not taxable income to recipients.

Subawards to low-income housing credit buildings
A State receiving a grant under this election is to use these monies to make subawards to finance the construction, or acquisition and rehabilitation of qualified low-income buildings as defined under the low-income housing credit. A subaward may be made to finance a qualified low-income building regardless of whether the building has an allocation of low-income housing credit. However, in the case of qualified low-income buildings without allocations of the low-income housing credit, the State housing credit agency must make a determination that the subaward with respect to such building will increase the total funds available to the State to build and rehabilitate affordable housing. In conjunction with this determination the State housing credit agency must establish a process in which applicants for the subawards must demonstrate good faith efforts to obtain investment commitments before the agency makes such subawards.

Any building receiving grant money from a subaward is required to satisfy the low-income housing credit rules. The State housing credit agency shall perform asset management functions to ensure compliance with the low-income housing credit rules and the long-term viability of buildings financed with these subawards. 219 Failure to satisfy the low-income housing credit rules will result in recapture enforced by means of liens or other methods that the Secretary (or delegate) deems appropriate. Any such recapture will be payable to the Secretary for deposit in the general fund of the Treasury.

Any grant funds not used to make subawards before January 1, 2011 and any grant monies from subawards returned on or after January 1, 2011 must be returned to the Secretary.

Basic rule for Federal grants
The grants received under the grant election do not reduce tax basis of a qualified low-income building.

Reduction in low-income housing credit volume limit for 2009
The otherwise applicable low-income housing credit volume limit for any State for 2009 is reduced by the amount taken into account in determining the low-income housing grant election amount.

Appropriations
Present law appropriates to the Secretary such sums as may be necessary to carry out this provision.

Explanation of Provision
The provision creates a refundable tax credit for 2010 (rather than to extend the 2009 election to substitute grants for nonrefundable tax credits). Specifically, the provision allows each State a refundable low income housing tax credit to finance low-income buildings through grants to taxpayers. The amount of such refundable credit for each State shall equal the low-income housing refundable tax credit election amount.

For 2010 the maximum low-income housing refundable credit election amount for a State may not exceed 85 percent of the product of ten and the sum of the State's: (1) unused housing credit ceiling for 2009; (2) any returns to the State during 2010 of credit allocations previously made by the State; (3) 40 percent of the State's 2010 credit allocation; and (4) 40 percent of the State's share of the national pool allocated in 2010, if any).

Any refundable tax credits allowed under this provision not used to make grants before January 1, 2012 and any grant monies to taxpayers under this provision returned on or after January 1, 2012 must be returned to the Secretary.

The payments made under the provision do not reduce the tax basis of a qualified low-income building.

No change is made to the operation of the 2009 election.

Effective Date
The provision is effective on the date of enactment.

TITLE III - DISASTER RELIEF PROVISIONS
1. Deductibility of personal casualty losses attributable to federally declared disasters (sec. 301 of the Act and sec. 165 of the Code)
Present Law
Personal casualty losses
In general
Under present law, a taxpayer may generally claim a deduction for any loss sustained during the taxable year and not compensated by insurance or otherwise. 220 For individual taxpayers, deductible losses must be incurred in a trade or business or other profit-seeking activity or consist of losses of property arising from fire, storm, shipwreck, or other casualty, or from theft. 221 In the case of any loss occurring in a disaster area and attributable to a federally declared disaster area, the taxpayer may elect to take into account the casualty loss for the taxable year immediately preceding the taxable year in which the disaster occurs. 222

Dollar limitation
In the case of an individual, a casualty or theft loss not connected with a trade or business or transaction entered into for profit (“personal casualty loss”) is allowed only to the extent the loss exceeds $500 ($100 for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009). 223

Adjusted gross income limitation
In general, the net aggregate personal casualty losses for a taxable year are deductible only to the extent they exceed 10 percent of an individual taxpayer's adjusted gross income. 224

Present law waives the 10-percent of adjusted gross income limitation for a “net disaster loss.” The term “net disaster loss” means the excess of personal casualty losses attributable to a federally declared disaster occurring before January 1, 2010, and occurring in a disaster area, over personal casualty gains. The term “federally declared disaster” means any disaster subsequently determined by the President of the United States to warrant assistance by the Federal Government under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. The term “disaster area” means the area so determined to warrant assistance.

Standard deduction
An individual taxpayer's taxable income is computed by reducing adjusted gross income either by a standard deduction or, if the taxpayer elects, by the taxpayer's itemized deductions. 225 Unless an individual elects, no itemized deductions are allowed for the taxable year. The deduction for personal casualty losses is an itemized deduction.

Present law increases an individual taxpayer's standard deduction by the “disaster loss deduction.” The “disaster loss deduction” means the net disaster loss (as defined above).

Explanation of Provision
One year extension of net disaster loss
The provision extends for one year the definition of a net disaster loss to include personal casualty losses attributable to federally declared disasters occurring in 2010. Thus the waiver of the 10-percent of adjusted gross income limitation for net disaster losses and the inclusion of net disaster losses in the standard deduction are extended for one year.

One year extension of the increase to $500 limitation per casualty
The provision extends the $500 per casualty dollar limitation for one year to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009, and before January 1, 2011.

Effective Dates
The provision generally applies to disasters occurring after December 31, 2009.

The provision increasing the limitation per casualty to $500 applies to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.

2. Expensing of qualified disaster expenses (sec. 302 of the bill and sec. 198A of the Code)
Present Law
Under present law, a taxpayer may elect to treat any qualified disaster expense that is paid or incurred by the taxpayer as a deduction for the taxable year in which paid or incurred. For purposes of the provision, a qualified disaster expense is any otherwise capitalizable expenditure paid or incurred in connection with a trade or business or with business-related property that is: (1) for the abatement or control of hazardous substances that were released on account of a Federally declared disaster 226 occurring before January 1, 2010; (2) for the removal of debris from, or the demolition of structures on, real property damaged or destroyed as a result of a Federally declared disaster occurring before January 1, 2010; or (3) for the repair of business-related property damaged as a result of a Federally declared disaster occurring before January 1, 2010. No inference is intended as to the proper present law treatment of expenditures to repair business-related property damaged in a casualty event. The purpose of the provision is to provide that, in any case in which such costs are otherwise required to be capitalized, the costs may be deducted in the taxable year paid or incurred to the extent incurred as a result of a Federally declared disaster.

For purposes of section 198A, “business-related property” is property held by the taxpayer for use in a trade or business, for the production of income, or as inventory. In addition, any deduction allowed under this provision is treated as a deduction for depreciation and section 1245 property for purposes of applying the depreciation recapture rules.

This provision does not apply to any disaster that has been declared by the President on or after May 20, 2008, and before August 1, 2008, under section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act by reason of severe storms, tornados, or flooding occurring in any of the States of Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, and Wisconsin.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the deduction for qualified disaster expenditures for one year (to apply to amounts paid or incurred in connection with Federally declared disasters occurring before January 1, 2011).

Effective Date
The provision is effective for expenditures on account of disasters occurring after December 31, 2009.

3. Net operating losses attributable to federally declared disasters (sec. 303 of the bill and sec. 172 of the Code)
Present Law
Under present law, a net operating loss (“NOL”) is, generally, the amount by which a taxpayer's business deductions exceed its gross income. In general, an NOL may be carried back two years and carried over 20 years to offset taxable income in such years. 227 NOLs offset taxable income in the order of the taxable years to which the NOL may be carried. 228

Section 172(b)(1)(J) provides a special five-year carryback period for NOLs to the extent of a qualified disaster loss. A qualified disaster loss is the lesser of: (1) the sum of (a) section 165 losses for the taxable year attributable to a Federally declared disaster 229 occurring after December 31, 2007, and before January 1, 2010, and occurring in a disaster area, 230 and (b) the deduction for the taxable year for qualified disaster expenses allowable under section 198A(a) or which would be allowable as a deduction under that section if not treated as an expense in another section of the Code; or (2) the NOL for the taxable year.

A qualified disaster loss does not include any loss with respect to any property used in connection with any private or commercial golf course, country club, massage parlor, hot tub facility, suntan facility, or any store the principal business of which is the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off premises, or any gambling or animal racing property (as defined in section 1400N(p)(3)(B)).

The amount of the NOL to which the five-year carryback period applies is limited to the amount of the corporation's overall NOL for the taxable year. Any remaining portion of the taxpayer's NOL is subject to the general two-year carryback period. Ordering rules similar to those for specified liability losses apply to losses carried back under section 172(b)(1)(J).

Any taxpayer entitled to the five-year carryback under section 172(b)(1)(J) may elect to have the carryback period determined without regard to this provision. In addition, the general rule which limits a taxpayer's NOL deduction to 90 percent of alternative minimum taxable income (“AMTI”) does not apply to any NOL to which the five-year carryback period applies under the provision. Instead, a taxpayer may apply such NOL carrybacks to offset up to 100 percent of AMTI.

Section 172(b)(1)(J) does not apply to any disaster that has been declared by the President on or after May 20, 2008, and before August 1, 2008, under section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act by reason of severe storms, tornados, or flooding occurring in any of the States of Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, and Wisconsin.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the five-year NOL carryback period for one year (to apply to losses incurred in connection with Federally declared disasters occurring before January 1, 2011).

Effective Date
The provision is effective for losses attributable to disasters occurring after December 31, 2009.

4. Special rules for mortgage revenue bonds in Federally declared disaster areas (sec. 304 of the bill and sec. 143 of the Code)
Present Law
Qualified mortgage bonds
Generally
Under present law, gross income does not include interest on State or local bonds. 231 State and local bonds are classified generally as either governmental bonds or private activity bonds. Governmental bonds are bonds that are primarily used to finance governmental functions or are repaid with governmental funds. Private activity bonds are bonds with respect to which the State or local government serves as a conduit providing financing to nongovernmental persons (e.g., private businesses or individuals). The exclusion from income for State and local bonds does not apply to private activity bonds, unless the bonds are issued for certain permitted purposes (“qualified private activity bonds”) (secs. 103(b)(1) and 141).

The definition of a qualified private activity bond includes a qualified mortgage bond (sec. 143). Qualified mortgage bonds are issued to make mortgage loans to qualified mortgagors for the purchase, qualified home improvement, or rehabilitation of owner-occupied residences.

The Code imposes several limitations on qualified mortgage bonds in the case of a purchase of a residence, including purchase price limitations for the residence financed with bond proceeds and income limitations for homebuyers. In general, the purchase price limitation is met if the acquisition cost of each residence financed does not exceed 90 percent of the average area purchase price (i.e., the average single-family residence purchase price purchased for the most recent one-year period in the statistical area in which the residence is located) (sec. 143(e)). The income limitation generally is met if all the owner-financing provided under the issue is provided to individuals who have family income of 115 percent or less of the applicable median family income (sec. 143(f)).

Qualified home improvement loans are defined as financing, not in excess of $15,000, of alterations, repairs, and improvements on or in connection with an existing residence by an owner thereof. These are further limited only to such items as substantially protect or improve the basic livability or energy efficiency of the property.

Rehabilitation loans are eligible for such financing if: (1) the mortgagor receiving the financing is the first resident after the completion of the rehabilitation; (2) at least 20 years have elapsed between the first use of the residence and the start of the physical work of the rehabilitation; (3) certain percentages of internal and external walls are retained after the rehabilitation; and (4) rehabilitation expenditures equal at least 25 percent of the taxpayer's adjusted basis in the residence after such rehabilitation (sec. 143 (k)(5)).

First-time homebuyers
In addition to the purchase price and income limitations, qualified mortgage bonds generally cannot be used to finance a mortgage for a homebuyer who had an ownership interest in a principal residence in the three years preceding the execution of the mortgage (the “first-time homebuyer” requirement) (sec. 143(d)). The first-time homebuyer requirement does not apply to targeted area residences (described below).

Special rules for targeted area residences
A targeted area residence is one located in either (1) a census tract in which at least 70 percent of the families have an income which is 80 percent or less of the state-wide median income or (2) an area of chronic economic distress (sec. 143(j)).

In addition to the waiver of the first-time homebuyer rule, targeted area residences have special purchase price limitations and income limitations. For targeted area residences, the purchase price limitation is applied by substituting 110 percent for 90 percent (i.e., the purchase price limitation is met if the acquisition cost of each residence financed does not exceed 110 percent of the average area purchase applicable to the residence) (sec. 143(e)(5)). For targeted area residences, the income limitation generally is met if at least two-thirds of all the owner-financing provided under the issue is provided to individuals who have family income of 140 percent or less of the applicable median family income. The other third is not subject to an income limitation (sec. 143(f)(3)).

Special rules for Federally declared disaster areas
A temporary provision waives the first-time homebuyer requirement for residences located in Federally declared disaster areas (sec. 143(k)(11)). Also, under the provision, residences located in Federally declared disaster areas are treated as targeted area residences for purposes of the income and purchase price limitations. The special rules for residences located in Federally declared disaster areas applies to bonds issued after May 1, 2008, and before January 1, 2010.

Election to waive certain mortgage revenue bond rules
In general
Present law allows certain taxpayers affected by natural disasters to elect to waive the first-time homebuyer requirement and modify the purchase price limitation from 90% to 110%, if taxpayer's principal residence is destroyed as a result of a Federally declared disaster. Any owner-financing provided with respect to repair or reconstruction is deemed a qualified rehabilitation loan, if the taxpayer's principal residence is damaged as a result of a Federally declared disaster. If a taxpayer makes such an election, then the otherwise applicable special rules for Federally declared disaster areas do not apply. If there is no such election, then the otherwise applicable special rules for Federally declared disaster areas apply.

Principal residence destroyed
This election for destroyed residences is available for principal residences located in Federally declared disaster areas when the principal residence of a taxpayer is: (1) rendered unsafe for use by reason of a Federally declared disaster occurring before January 1, 2010; or (2) demolished or relocated by reason of an order of the government of a State or political subdivision thereof on account of a Federally declared disaster occurring before January 1, 2010. This election applies for the two-year period beginning on the date of the disaster.

The election provides for: (1) a waiver of the first-time homebuyer requirement; and (2) the purchase price limitation otherwise applicable to targeted area residences (i.e., the purchase price limitation is met if the acquisition cost of each residence financed does not exceed 110 percent of the average area purchase applicable to the residence).

Principal residence damaged
The election for damaged residences allows certain taxpayers to elect to waive the otherwise applicable qualified rehabilitation loan rules and treat the cost of repair or reconstruction of a taxpayer's principal residence as a qualified rehabilitation loan. This election is limited to taxpayers whose principal residence is damaged as a result of a Federally declared disaster occurring before January 1, 2010. Such rehabilitation loans are limited to the lesser of $150,000 or the cost of repair or reconstruction.

Other rules
Once made, an election under these provisions may not be revoked by the taxpayer except with the consent of the Secretary.

For purposes of the provision, the term “Federally declared disaster” has the same definition as in section 165(h)(3)(C)(i) of the Code. 232 The provision is effective for disaster occurring after December 31, 2007. However, the provision does not apply to any disaster that has been declared by the President on or after May 20, 2008, and before August 1, 2008, under section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act by reason of severe storms, tornados, or flooding occurring in any of the States of Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, and Wisconsin. 233

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends: (1) the special rules for Federally declared disaster areas; and (2) the election to waive certain mortgage revenue bond rules relating to Federally declared disasters for one additional year (through 2010).

Effective Date
The provision relating to the special rules for Federally declared disaster areas is effective for bonds issued after December 31, 2009. The provision relating to the election to waive certain mortgage revenue bond rules relating to Federally declared disasters is effective for disasters occurring after December 31, 2009.

5. Special depreciation allowance and expensing for qualified disaster assistance property (sec. 305 of the bill and secs. 168(n) and 179(e) of the Code)
Present Law
Special depreciation allowance
A taxpayer is allowed to recover, through annual depreciation deductions, the cost of certain property used in a trade or business or for the production of income. The amount of the depreciation deduction allowed with respect to tangible property for a taxable year generally is determined under the modified accelerated cost recovery system (“MACRS”). 234 Under MACRS, different types of property generally are assigned applicable recovery periods and depreciation methods. The recovery periods applicable to most tangible personal property (generally tangible property other than residential rental property and nonresidential real property) range from 3 to 20 years. The depreciation methods generally applicable to tangible personal property are the 200-percent and 150-percent declining balance methods, switching to the straight-line method for the taxable year in which the depreciation deduction would be maximized.

Present law includes an additional first-year depreciation deduction equal to 50 percent of the adjusted basis of any “qualified disaster assistance property.” 235 The additional first-year depreciation deduction is allowed for both regular tax and alternative minimum tax purposes. The basis of the property and the depreciation allowances in the year of purchase and later years are appropriately adjusted to reflect the additional first-year depreciation deduction. In addition, there are no adjustments to the allowable amount of depreciation for purposes of computing a taxpayer's alternative minimum taxable income with respect to property to which the provision applies.

Qualified disaster assistance property means any property: (1) to which the general rules of the MACRS apply with (a) an applicable recovery period of 20 years or less, (b) computer software other than computer software covered by section 197, (c) water utility property (as defined in section 168(e)(5)), (d) certain leasehold improvement property, or (e) certain nonresidential real property and residential rental property; (2) substantially all of which is used in a disaster area with respect to a Federally declared disaster occurring before January 1, 2010, in the active conduct of a trade or business by the taxpayer in such disaster area; (3) which rehabilitates property damaged, or replaces property destroyed or condemned, as a result of the Federally declared disaster, except that property is treated as replacing property destroyed or condemned if, as part of an integrated plan, the property replaces property which is included in a continuous area which includes real property destroyed or condemned, and is similar in nature to, and located in the same county as, the property being rehabilitated or replaced; (4) the original use of the property in the disaster area commences with an eligible taxpayer (a taxpayer who has suffered an economic loss attributable to a Federally declared disaster) on or after the applicable disaster date (the date on which a Federally declared disaster occurs); (5) which is acquired by an eligible taxpayer by purchase (as defined under section 179(d)) by the taxpayer on or after the applicable disaster date (and no written binding contract for the acquisition was in effect before such date); and (6) which is placed in service by an eligible taxpayer on or before the date which is the last day of the third calendar year following the applicable disaster date (the fourth calendar year in the case of nonresidential real property and residential rental property). 236

Qualified disaster assistance property does not include any property: (1) to which the special allowance for depreciation under section 168(k) (regardless of any election under section 168(k)(4)), section 168(l) for cellulosic biofuel property, or section 168(m) for reuse and recycling property applies; (2) to which the special allowance for qualified Gulf Opportunity Zone property under section 1400N(d) applies; (3) used in connection with any private or commercial golf course, country club, massage parlor, hot tub facility, suntan facility, or any store the principal business of which is the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off premises, or any gambling or animal racing property (as defined in section 1400N(p)(3)(B)); (4) to which the alternative depreciation system under section 168(g) applies (determined without regard to the election to use such system under section 168(g)(7)); (5) any portion of which is financed with proceeds of any obligation the interest on which is exempt from tax under section 103; and (6) which is a qualified revitalization building with respect to which the taxpayer has made an election under section 1400I(a) to either expense one-half of qualified revitalization expenditures or recover such expenditures over 120 months. 237 A taxpayer may elect to not apply the rules of this provision with respect to any class of property for any taxable year.

The special rules of section 168(k)(2)(E) apply with modifications. For example, property that is manufactured, constructed, or produced by the taxpayer for use by the taxpayer qualifies if the taxpayer begins the manufacture, construction, or production of the property after the applicable disaster date, and which is placed in service by an eligible taxpayer on or before the date which is the last day of the third calendar year following the applicable disaster date (the fourth calendar year in the case of nonresidential real property and residential rental property). Property that is manufactured, constructed, or produced for the taxpayer by another person under a contract that is entered into prior to the manufacture, construction, or production of the property is considered to be manufactured, constructed, or produced by the taxpayer.

Recapture rules similar to section 179(d)(10) apply to any qualified disaster assistance property that ceases to be qualified disaster assistance property.

Section 179 expensing
A taxpayer that satisfies limitations on annual investment may elect under section 179 to deduct (or “expense”) the cost of qualifying property, rather than to recover such costs through depreciation deductions. 238 For taxable years beginning in 2009, the maximum amount that a taxpayer may expense is $250,000 of the cost of qualifying property placed in service for the taxable year. The $250,000 amount is reduced (but not below zero) by the amount by which the cost of qualifying property placed in service during the taxable year exceeds $800,000. 239 For taxable years beginning in 2010, the maximum amount that a taxpayer may expense is $125,000 of the cost of qualifying property placed in service for the taxable year. The $125,000 amount is reduced (but not below zero) by the amount by which the cost of qualifying property placed in service during the taxable year exceeds $500,000. The $125,000 and $500,000 amounts are indexed for inflation.

Qualified disaster assistance property is eligible for increased dollar limits on expensing under section 179. Specifically, the maximum amount that a taxpayer may expense is increased by the lesser of $100,000 or the cost of qualified section 179 disaster assistance property placed in service in the taxable year. The $800,000 limitation (for taxable years beginning in 2009) is increased by the lesser of $600,000 or the cost of qualified section 179 disaster assistance property placed in service during the taxable year. 240

Qualified section 179 disaster assistance property is depreciable tangible personal property that is purchased for use in the active conduct of a trade or business (not including off-the-shelf computer software) that meets the definition of qualified disaster assistance property. 241 Thus, the provision applies with respect to property placed in service in a disaster area with respect to a Federally declared disaster occurring before January 1, 2010.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends for one year the special depreciation allowance and expensing provisions for qualified disaster assistance property (to apply to property placed in service in a disaster area with respect to a Federally declared disaster occurring before January 1, 2011).

Effective Date
The provision is effective for disasters occurring after December 31, 2009.

TITLE IV - ENERGY PROVISIONS
1. Incentives for biodiesel and renewable diesel (sec. 401 of the bill and sec. 40A of the Code)
Present Law
Biodiesel
The Code provides an income tax credit for biodiesel fuels (the “biodiesel fuels credit”). 242 The biodiesel fuels credit is the sum of three credits: (1) the biodiesel mixture credit, (2) the biodiesel credit, and (3) the small agri-biodiesel producer credit. The biodiesel fuels credit is treated as a general business credit. The amount of the biodiesel fuels credit is includable in gross income. The biodiesel fuels credit is coordinated to take into account benefits from the biodiesel excise tax credit and payment provisions discussed below. The credit does not apply to fuel sold or used after December 31, 2009.

Biodiesel is monoalkyl esters of long chain fatty acids derived from plant or animal matter that meet (1) the registration requirements established by the EPA under section 211 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. sec. 7545) and (2) the requirements of the American Society of Testing and Materials (“ASTM”) D6751. Agri-biodiesel is biodiesel derived solely from virgin oils including oils from corn, soybeans, sunflower seeds, cottonseeds, canola, crambe, rapeseeds, safflowers, flaxseeds, rice bran, mustard seeds, camelina, or animal fats.

Biodiesel may be taken into account for purposes of the credit only if the taxpayer obtains a certification (in such form and manner as prescribed by the Secretary) from the producer or importer of the biodiesel that identifies the product produced and the percentage of biodiesel and agri-biodiesel in the product.

Biodiesel mixture credit
The biodiesel mixture credit is $1.00 for each gallon of biodiesel (including agri-biodiesel) used by the taxpayer in the production of a qualified biodiesel mixture. A qualified biodiesel mixture is a mixture of biodiesel and diesel fuel that is (1) sold by the taxpayer producing such mixture to any person for use as a fuel, or (2) used as a fuel by the taxpayer producing such mixture. The sale or use must be in the trade or business of the taxpayer and is to be taken into account for the taxable year in which such sale or use occurs. No credit is allowed with respect to any casual off-farm production of a qualified biodiesel mixture.

Per IRS guidance a mixture need only contain 1/10th of one percent of diesel fuel to be a qualified mixture. 243 Thus, a qualified biodiesel mixture can contain 99.9 percent biodiesel and 0.1 percent diesel fuel.

Biodiesel credit (straight biodiesel)
The biodiesel credit is $1.00 for each gallon of biodiesel that is not in a mixture with diesel fuel (100 percent biodiesel or B-100) and which during the taxable year is (1) used by the taxpayer as a fuel in a trade or business or (2) sold by the taxpayer at retail to a person and placed in the fuel tank of such person's vehicle.

Small agri-biodiesel producer credit
The Code provides a small agri-biodiesel producer income tax credit, in addition to the biodiesel and biodiesel fuel mixture credits. The credit is a 10-cents-per-gallon credit for up to 15 million gallons of agri-biodiesel produced by small producers, defined generally as persons whose agri-biodiesel production capacity does not exceed 60 million gallons per year. The agri-biodiesel must (1) be sold by such producer to another person (a) for use by such other person in the production of a qualified biodiesel mixture in such person's trade or business (other than casual off-farm production), (b) for use by such other person as a fuel in a trade or business, or, (c) who sells such agri-biodiesel at retail to another person and places such agri-biodiesel in the fuel tank of such other person; or (2) used by the producer for any purpose described in (a), (b), or (c).

Biodiesel mixture excise tax credit
The Code also provides an excise tax credit for biodiesel mixtures. 244 The credit is $1.00 for each gallon of biodiesel used by the taxpayer in producing a biodiesel mixture for sale or use in a trade or business of the taxpayer. A biodiesel mixture is a mixture of biodiesel and diesel fuel that (1) is sold by the taxpayer producing such mixture to any person for use as a fuel or (2) is used as a fuel by the taxpayer producing such mixture. No credit is allowed unless the taxpayer obtains a certification (in such form and manner as prescribed by the Secretary) from the producer of the biodiesel that identifies the product produced and the percentage of biodiesel and agri-biodiesel in the product. 245

The credit is not available for any sale or use for any period after December 31, 2009. This excise tax credit is coordinated with the income tax credit for biodiesel such that credit for the same biodiesel cannot be claimed for both income and excise tax purposes.

Payments with respect to biodiesel fuel mixtures
If any person produces a biodiesel fuel mixture in such person's trade or business, the Secretary is to pay such person an amount equal to the biodiesel mixture credit. 246 The biodiesel fuel mixture credit must first be taken against tax liability for taxable fuels. To the extent the biodiesel fuel mixture credit exceeds such tax liability, the excess may be received as a payment. Thus, if the person has no section 4081 liability, the credit is refundable. The Secretary is not required to make payments with respect to biodiesel fuel mixtures sold or used after December 31, 2009.

Renewable diesel
“Renewable diesel” is liquid fuel that (1) is derived from biomass (as defined in section 45K(c)(3)), (2) meets the registration requirements for fuels and fuel additives established by the EPA under section 211 of the Clean Air Act, and (3) meets the requirements of the ASTM D975 or D396, or equivalent standard established by the Secretary. ASTM D975 provides standards for diesel fuel suitable for use in diesel engines. ASTM D396 provides standards for fuel oil intended for use in fuel-oil burning equipment, such as furnaces. Renewable diesel also includes fuel derived from biomass that meets the requirements of a Department of Defense specification for military jet fuel or an ASTM for aviation turbine fuel.

For purposes of the Code, renewable diesel is generally treated the same as biodiesel. In the case of renewable diesel that is aviation fuel, kerosene is treated as though it were diesel fuel for purposes of a qualified renewable diesel mixture. Like biodiesel, the incentive may be taken as an income tax credit, an excise tax credit, or as a payment from the Secretary. 247 The incentive for renewable diesel is $1.00 per gallon. There is no small producer credit for renewable diesel. The incentives for renewable diesel expire after December 31, 2009.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the income tax, excise tax and payment provisions for biodiesel and renewable diesel for one additional year (through December 31, 2010).

Effective Date
The provision is effective for sales and uses after December 31, 2009.

2. Alternative motor vehicle credit for heavy hybrids (sec. 402 of the bill and sec. 30B of the Code)
Present Law
In general
A credit is available for each new qualified fuel cell vehicle, hybrid vehicle, advanced lean burn technology vehicle, and alternative fuel vehicle placed in service by the taxpayer during the taxable year. 248 In general, the credit amount varies depending upon the type of technology used, the weight class of the vehicle, the amount by which the vehicle exceeds certain fuel economy standards, and, for some vehicles, the estimated lifetime fuel savings. The credit generally is available for vehicles purchased after 2005. The credit terminates after 2009, 2010, or 2014, depending on the type of vehicle.

In general, the credit is allowed to the vehicle owner, including the lessor of a vehicle subject to a lease. If the use of the vehicle is described in paragraphs (3) or (4) of section 50(b) (relating to use by tax-exempt organizations, governments, and foreign persons) and is not subject to a lease, the seller of the vehicle may claim the credit so long as the seller clearly discloses to the user in a document the amount that is allowable as a credit. A vehicle must be used predominantly in the United States to qualify for the credit. The portion of the credit attributable to vehicles of a character subject to an allowance for depreciation is treated as a portion of the general business credit.

Hybrid vehicles
Qualified hybrid vehicles
A qualified hybrid vehicle is a motor vehicle that draws propulsion energy from on-board sources of stored energy that include both an internal combustion engine or heat engine using combustible fuel and a rechargeable energy storage system (e.g., batteries). A qualified hybrid vehicle must be placed in service before January 1, 2011 (January 1, 2010 in the case of a hybrid vehicle weighing more than 8,500 pounds).

Hybrid vehicles that are automobiles and light trucks
In the case of an automobile or light truck (vehicles weighing 8,500 pounds or less), the amount of credit for the purchase of a hybrid vehicle is the sum of two components: (1) a fuel economy credit amount that varies with the rated fuel economy of the vehicle compared to a 2002 model year standard (the “base fuel economy”) and (2) a conservation credit based on the estimated lifetime fuel savings of the qualified vehicle compared to a comparable 2002 model year vehicle that is powered solely by a gasoline or diesel internal combustion engine. A qualified hybrid automobile or light truck must have a maximum available power 249 from the rechargeable energy storage system of at least four percent. In addition, the vehicle must meet or exceed certain Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) emissions standards. For a vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating of 6,000 pounds or less, the applicable emissions standards are the Bin 5 Tier II emissions standards. For a vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating greater than 6,000 pounds and less than or equal to 8,500 pounds, the applicable emissions standards are the Bin 8 Tier II emissions standards.

Table 2, below, shows the fuel economy credit available to a hybrid passenger automobile or light truck whose fuel economy (on a gasoline gallon equivalent basis) exceeds that of the base fuel economy.

Table 2.—Fuel Economy Credit

If Fuel Economy of the Hybrid Vehicle Is:



Credit
at least
but less than


$400
125% of base fuel economy
150% of base fuel economy


$800
150% of base fuel economy
175% of base fuel economy


$1,200
175% of base fuel economy
200% of base fuel economy


$1,600
200% of base fuel economy
225% of base fuel economy


$2,000
225% of base fuel economy
250% of base fuel economy


$2,400
250% of base fuel economy



Table 3, below, shows the conservation credit.

Table 3.—Conservation Credit
Estimated Lifetime Fuel Savings (gallons of gasoline)
Conservation Amount


At least 1,200 but less than 1,800
$250


At least 1,800 but less than 2,400
$500


At least 2,400 but less than 3,000
$750


At least 3,000
$1,000



Limitation on number of qualified hybrid and advanced lean burn technology vehicles eligible for the credit
There is a limitation on the number of passenger and light truck qualified hybrid vehicles and advanced lean burn technology vehicles 250 sold by each manufacturer of such vehicles that are eligible for the credit. Taxpayers may claim the full amount of the allowable credit up to the end of the first calendar quarter after the quarter in which the manufacturer records the 60,000th hybrid and advanced lean burn technology vehicle sale occurring after December 31, 2005. Taxpayers may claim one half of the otherwise allowable credit during the two calendar quarters subsequent to the first quarter after the manufacturer has recorded its 60,000th such sale. In the third and fourth calendar quarters subsequent to the first quarter after the manufacturer has recorded its 60,000th such sale, the taxpayer may claim one quarter of the otherwise allowable credit.

Thus, for example, summing the sales of qualified hybrid vehicles that are passenger vehicles or light trucks and all sales of qualified advanced lean burn technology vehicles, if a manufacturer records the sale of its 60,000th qualified vehicle in February of 2007, taxpayers purchasing such vehicles from the manufacturer may claim the full amount of the credit on their purchases of qualified vehicles through June 30, 2007. For the period July 1, 2007, through December 31, 2007, taxpayers may claim one half of the otherwise allowable credit on purchases of qualified vehicles of the manufacturer. For the period January 1, 2008, through June 30, 2008, taxpayers may claim one quarter of the otherwise allowable credit on the purchases of qualified vehicles of the manufacturer. After June 30, 2008, no credit may be claimed for purchases of such hybrid vehicles or advanced lean burn technology vehicles sold by the manufacturer.

Hybrid vehicles that are medium and heavy trucks
In the case of a qualified hybrid vehicle weighing more than 8,500 pounds, the amount of credit is determined by the estimated increase in fuel economy and the incremental cost of the hybrid vehicle compared to a comparable vehicle powered solely by a gasoline or diesel internal combustion engine and that is comparable in weight, size, and use of the vehicle. For a vehicle that achieves a fuel economy increase of at least 30 percent but less than 40 percent, the credit is equal to 20 percent of the incremental cost of the hybrid vehicle. For a vehicle that achieves a fuel economy increase of at least 40 percent but less than 50 percent, the credit is equal to 30 percent of the incremental cost of the hybrid vehicle. For a vehicle that achieves a fuel economy increase of 50 percent or more, the credit is equal to 40 percent of the incremental cost of the hybrid vehicle.

The credit is subject to certain maximum applicable incremental cost amounts. For a qualified hybrid vehicle weighing more than 8,500 pounds but not more than 14,000 pounds, the maximum allowable incremental cost amount is $7,500. For a qualified hybrid vehicle weighing more than 14,000 pounds but not more than 26,000 pounds, the maximum allowable incremental cost amount is $15,000. For a qualified hybrid vehicle weighing more than 26,000 pounds, the maximum allowable incremental cost amount is $30,000.

A qualified hybrid vehicle weighing more than 8,500 pounds but not more than 14,000 pounds must have a maximum available power from the rechargeable energy storage system of at least 10 percent. A qualified hybrid vehicle weighing more than 14,000 pounds must have a maximum available power from the rechargeable energy storage system of at least 15 percent. 251

Base fuel economy
The base fuel economy is the 2002 model year city fuel economy by vehicle type and vehicle inertia weight class. For this purpose, “vehicle inertia weight class” has the same meaning as when defined in regulations prescribed by the EPA for purposes of Title II of the Clean Air Act. Table 4, below, shows the 2002 model year city fuel economy for vehicles by type and by inertia weight class.

Table 4.—2002 Model Year City Fuel Economy
Vehicle Inertia Weight Class (pounds)
Passenger Automobile (miles per gallon)
Light Truck (miles per gallon)


1,500
45.2
39.4


1,750
45.2
39.4


2,000
39.6
35.2


2,250
35.2
31.8


2,500
31.7
29.0


2,750
28.8
26.8


3,000
26.4
24.9


3,500
22.6
21.8


4,000
19.8
19.4


4,500
17.6
17.6


5,000
15.9
16.1


5,500
14.4
14.8


6,000
13.2
13.7


6,500
12.2
12.8


7,000
11.3
12.1


8,500
11.3
12.1



Explanation of Provision
The provision extends for one year the credit available to hybrid vehicles that are medium and heavy trucks.

Effective Date
The provision is effective for property purchased after December 31, 2009.

3. Alternative fuel credits for natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas (sec. 403 of the bill and secs. 6426 and 6427(e) of the Code)
Present Law
The Code provides two per-gallon excise tax credits with respect to alternative fuel, the alternative fuel credit, and the alternative fuel mixture credit. For this purpose, the term “alternative fuel” means liquefied petroleum gas, P Series fuels (as defined by the Secretary of Energy under 42 U.S.C. sec. 13211(2)), compressed or liquefied natural gas, liquefied hydrogen, liquid fuel derived from coal through the Fischer-Tropsch process (“coal-to-liquids”), compressed or liquified gas derived from biomass, or liquid fuel derived from biomass. Such term does not include ethanol, methanol, or biodiesel.

For coal-to-liquids produced after September 30, 2009 through December 30, 2009, the fuel must be certified as having been derived from coal produced at a gasification facility that separates and sequesters 50 percent of such facility's total carbon dioxide emissions. The sequestration percentage increases to 75 percent for fuel produced after December 30, 2009.

The alternative fuel credit is allowed against section 4041 liability, and the alternative fuel mixture credit is allowed against section 4081 liability. Neither credit is allowed unless the taxpayer is registered with the Secretary. The alternative fuel credit is 50 cents per gallon of alternative fuel or gasoline gallon equivalents 252 of nonliquid alternative fuel sold by the taxpayer for use as a motor fuel in a motor vehicle or motorboat, sold for use in aviation or so used by the taxpayer.

The alternative fuel mixture credit is 50 cents per gallon of alternative fuel used in producing an alternative fuel mixture for sale or use in a trade or business of the taxpayer. An “alternative fuel mixture” is a mixture of alternative fuel and taxable fuel that contains at least 1/10 of one percent taxable fuel. The mixture must be sold by the taxpayer producing such mixture to any person for use as a fuel, or used by the taxpayer producing the mixture as a fuel. The credits generally expire after December 31, 2009 (September 30, 2014 for liquefied hydrogen).

A person may file a claim for payment equal to the amount of the alternative fuel credit and alternative fuel mixture credits. These payment provisions generally also expire after December 31, 2009. With respect to liquefied hydrogen, the payment provisions expire after September 30, 2014. The alternative fuel credit and alternative fuel mixture credit must first be applied to excise tax liability for special and alternative fuels, and any excess credit may be taken as a payment.

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the alternative fuel credit and payment provisions for compressed and liquefied natural gas, and liquefied petroleum gas (other than liquefied petroleum gas for use in forklifts) for one additional year (through December 31, 2010).

Effective Date
The provision is effective for fuel sold or used after December 31, 2009.

4. Special rule to implement FERC and State electric restructuring policy (sec. 404 of the bill and sec. 451(i) of the Code)
Present Law
A taxpayer selling property generally recognizes gain to the extent the sales price (and any other consideration received) exceeds the seller's basis in the property. The recognized gain is subject to current income tax unless the gain is deferred or not recognized under a special tax provision.

One such special tax provision permits taxpayers to elect to recognize gain from qualifying electric transmission transactions ratably over an eight-year period beginning in the year of sale if the amount realized from such sale is used to purchase exempt utility property within the applicable period 253 (the “reinvestment property”). 254 If the amount realized exceeds the amount used to purchase reinvestment property, any realized gain is recognized to the extent of such excess in the year of the qualifying electric transmission transaction.

A qualifying electric transmission transaction is the sale or other disposition of property used by a qualified electric utility to an independent transmission company prior to January 1, 2010. A qualified electric utility is defined as an electric utility, which as of the date of the qualifying electric transmission transaction, is vertically integrated in that it is both (1) a transmitting utility (as defined in the Federal Power Act) 255 with respect to the transmission facilities to which the election applies, and (2) an electric utility (as defined in the Federal Power Act). 256

In general, an independent transmission company is defined as: (1) an independent transmission provider 257 approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”); (2) a person (i) who the FERC determines under section 203 of the Federal Power Act (or by declaratory order) is not a “market participant” and (ii) whose transmission facilities are placed under the operational control of a FERC-approved independent transmission provider no later than four years after the close of the taxable year in which the transaction occurs; or (3) in the case of facilities subject to the jurisdiction of the Public Utility Commission of Texas, (i) a person which is approved by that Commission as consistent with Texas State law regarding an independent transmission organization, or (ii) a political subdivision, or affiliate thereof, whose transmission facilities are under the operational control of an organization described in (i).

Exempt utility property is defined as: (1) property used in the trade or business of generating, transmitting, distributing, or selling electricity or producing, transmitting, distributing, or selling natural gas, or (2) stock in a controlled corporation whose principal trade or business consists of the activities described in (1). Exempt utility property does not include any property that is located outside of the United States.

If a taxpayer is a member of an affiliated group of corporations filing a consolidated return, the reinvestment property may be purchased by any member of the affiliated group (in lieu of the taxpayer).

Explanation of Provision
The provision extends the treatment under the present-law deferral provision to sales or dispositions by a qualified electric utility prior to January 1, 2011.

Effective Date
The extension provision applies to dispositions after December 31, 2009.

TITLE V - FOREIGN ACCOUNT TAX COMPLIANCE
A. Increase Disclosure of Beneficial Owners
1. Reporting on certain foreign accounts (sec. 501 of the bill and new secs. 1471, 1472, 1473, and 1474 of the Code, and sec. 6611 of the Code)
Present Law
Withholding on payments to foreign persons
Payments of U.S.-source fixed or determinable annual or periodical (“FDAP”) income, including interest, dividends, and similar types of investment income, that are made to foreign persons are subject to U.S. withholding tax at a 30-percent rate, unless the withholding agent can establish that the beneficial owner of the amount is eligible for an exemption from withholding or a reduced rate of withholding under an income tax treaty. 258 The term “FDAP income” includes all items of gross income, except gains on sales of property (including market discount on bonds and option premiums) and insurance premiums paid to a foreign insurer or reinsurer. 259

Interest is derived from U.S. sources if it is paid by the United States or any agency or instrumentality thereof, a State or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia. Interest is also from U.S. sources if it is paid by a resident or a domestic corporation on a bond, note, or other interest-bearing obligation. 260 Dividend income is sourced by reference to the payor's place of incorporation. 261 Thus, dividends paid by a domestic corporation are generally treated as entirely U.S.-source income. Similarly, dividends paid by a foreign corporation are generally treated as entirely foreign-source income. Rental income is sourced by reference to the location or place of use of the leased property. 262 The nationality or the country of residence of the lessor or lessee does not affect the source of rental income. Rental income from property located or used in the United States (or from any interest in such property) is U.S.-source income, regardless of whether the property is real or personal, intangible or tangible. Royalties are sourced in the place of use (or the privilege of use) of the property for which the royalties are paid. 263 This source rule applies to royalties for the use of either tangible or intangible property, including patents, copyrights, secret processes, formulas, goodwill, trademarks, trade names, and franchises.

The principal statutory exemptions from the 30-percent withholding tax apply to interest on bank deposits, portfolio interest, and capital gains. Since 1984, the United States has not imposed withholding tax on portfolio interest received by a nonresident individual or foreign corporation from sources within the United States. 264 Portfolio interest includes, generally, any interest (including original issue discount) other than interest received by a 10-percent shareholder, 265 certain contingent interest, 266 interest received by a controlled foreign corporation from a related person, 267 and interest received by a bank on an extension of credit made pursuant to a loan agreement entered into in the ordinary course of its trade or business. 268

In the case of interest paid on a debt obligation that is in registered form, 269 the portfolio interest exemption is available only to the extent that the U.S. person otherwise required to withhold tax (the “withholding agent”) has received a statement made by the beneficial owner of the obligation (or a securities clearing organization, bank, or other financial institution that holds customers' securities in the ordinary course of its trade or business) that the beneficial owner is not a U.S. person. 270

Interest on deposits with foreign branches of domestic banks and domestic savings and loan associations is not treated as U.S.-source income and is thus exempt from U.S. withholding tax (regardless of whether the recipient is a U.S. or foreign person). 271 In addition, interest on bank deposits, deposits with domestic savings and loan associations, and certain amounts held by insurance companies are not subject to the U.S. withholding tax when paid to a foreign person, unless the interest is effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business of the recipient. 272 Similarly, interest and original issue discount on certain short-term obligations is also exempt from U.S. withholding tax when paid to a foreign person. 273 Consequently, there is no information reporting with respect to payments of such amounts. 274

Gains derived from the sale of property by a nonresident alien individual or foreign corporation generally are exempt from U.S. tax, unless they are or are treated as effectively connected with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business. Gains derived by a nonresident alien individual generally are subject to U.S. taxation only if the individual is present in the United States for 183 days or more during the taxable year. 275 Foreign corporations are subject to tax with respect to certain gains on disposal of timber, coal, or domestic iron ore and certain gains from contingent payments made in connection with sales or exchanges of patents, copyrights, goodwill, trademarks, and similar intangible property. 276 Gain from the disposition of certain U.S. real property interests (which include interests in U.S. real property holding corporations) are treated as effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business. 277 Special rules apply in the case of interests in real estate investment trusts or regulated investment companies that may hold, or interests in which may be treated, as U.S. real property interests. 278 Most capital gains realized by foreign investors on the sale of portfolio investment securities thus are exempt from U.S. taxation.

The 30-percent withholding tax may be reduced or eliminated by a tax treaty between the United States and the country in which the recipient of income otherwise subject to withholding is resident. Thus, most U.S. income tax treaties provide a zero rate of withholding tax on interest payments (other than certain interest the amount of which is determined by reference to certain income items or other amounts of the debtor or a related person). Most U.S. income tax treaties also reduce the rate of withholding on dividends to 15 percent (in the case of portfolio dividends) and to five percent (in the case of “direct investment” dividends paid to a 10 percent-or-greater shareholder). 279 For royalties, the U.S. withholding rate is typically reduced to five percent or to zero. In each case, the reduced withholding rate is available only to a beneficial owner who qualifies as a resident of the treaty country within the meaning of the treaty and otherwise satisfies any applicable limitation on benefits provisions of the treaty.

Refund or credits of taxes withheld from foreign persons
A withholding agent that makes payments of U.S.-source amounts to a foreign person is required to report those payments, including any amounts of U.S. tax withheld, to the IRS on IRS Forms 1042 and 1042-S by March 15 of the calendar year following the year in which the payment is made. 280 To the extent that the withholding agent deducts and withholds an amount, the withheld tax is credited to the recipient of the income. 281 If the agent withholds more than is required, and results in an overpayment of tax, the excess may be refunded to the recipient of the income upon filing of a timely claim for refund.

Payment of tax
The date an amount is paid is relevant for determining the limitations period in which to claim a refund, the amount of refund available, 282 and the period for which interest may accrue on any overpayment. 283 An amount that is withheld, paid or credited as an estimate or deposit of tax generally does not count as the payment of tax until applied to a specific tax liability. To the extent that amounts previously withheld, paid or credited as an estimate or deposit of tax are applied to the tax liability for a year, they are deemed to have been paid as of the last day prescribed for payment of the tax, for both the recipient of the income 284 and the withholding agent. 285 Amounts that are refunded, credited to other periods, or offset against other liabilities are not considered as paid for this purpose. 286 Any amount that was previously paid but has been credited to a later year is considered credited on the last day prescribed for the payment of tax. 287

Interest on overpayments
The IRS is generally required to pay interest to a taxpayer whenever there is an overpayment of tax. 288 An overpayment of tax exists whenever more than the correct amount of tax is paid as of the last date prescribed for the payment of the tax. The last date prescribed for the payment of the income tax is the original due date of the return. 289 However, no interest is required to be paid by the IRS if it refunds or credits the amount due with 45 days of the filing of the return. 290 Notwithstanding these general rules, if a required return on which the payment should have been reported is either not filed, or is filed late, no interest on the overpayment accrues for any period prior to the filing of the return. 291

Different interest rates are provided for the payment of interest depending upon the type of taxpayer, whether the interest relates to an underpayment or overpayment, and the size of the underpayment or overpayment. Interest on both underpayments and overpayments is compounded daily. 292 A special net interest rate of zero applies in situations where interest is both payable and allowable on offsetting amounts of overpayment and underpayment. 293 For individuals, interest on both underpayments and overpayments accrues at a rate equal to the short term applicable Federal rate (AFR) plus three percentage points. 294 Interest on corporate overpayments generally accrues at a rate equal to the short term AFR plus two percentage points, unless the overpayment exceeds $10,000 in which case interest accrues at a rate equal to the short term AFR plus one-half percentage point.

Period of overpayment
If the overpayment is to be refunded to the taxpayer, interest accrues on the overpayment from the later of the due date of the return or the date the payment is made until a date that is not less than 45 days 295 before the date of the refund check. If the overpayment is to be credited or offset against some other liability, interest will accrue until the date it is so credited or offset.

A payment is not considered made by the taxpayer earlier than the time the taxpayer files a return showing the liability. In MNOPF Trustees, Ltd. V. United States, 296 the Federal Circuit held that overpayment interest accrued on the taxes unnecessarily withheld from the date that the withholdings were paid to the Service, because MNOPF was a tax-exempt organization, and, therefore, was not required to file tax returns. As a result, the court rejected arguments by the government that interest commenced no earlier than the filing of the refund claims. The court reasoned that sections 6611(d) and 6513(b)(3) did not apply because those sections only relate to taxable income and the taxpayer was exempt from federal taxation. Instead, the court held that the organization's overpayment was deemed paid, pursuant to section 6611(b)(2), on the date the withholding agent filed the returns reporting the withheld taxes.

No interest accrues on an overpayment if the IRS makes the refund within 45 days of the later of the filing or the due date of the return showing the refund. If the IRS fails to make the refund within such 45-day period, interest is required to be paid for the entire period of the overpayment. For example, an individual taxpayer files his return on April 15th, properly showing a refund due of $10,000. If the IRS pays the refund within 45 days, no interest on the overpayment will be required. However, if the IRS does not pay the refund until the 46th day, interest will be required from April 15th.

Certification of foreign status and reporting by U.S. withholding agents
The U.S. withholding tax rules are administered through a system of self-certification. Thus, a nonresident investor seeking to obtain withholding tax relief for U.S.-source investment income typically must provide a certification, on Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) Form W-8 to the withholding agent in order to establish foreign status and eligibility for an exemption or reduced rate. Provision of the IRS Form W-8 also establishes an exemption from the rules that apply to many U.S. persons governing information reporting on IRS Form 1099 and backup withholding (discussed below). 297

There are four relevant types of IRS Forms W-8. 298 Three of these forms are designed to be provided to the withholding agent by the beneficial owner of a payment of U.S.-source income: 299 (1) the IRS Form W-8BEN, which is provided by a beneficial owner of U.S.-source non-effectively-connected income; (2) the IRS Form W-8ECI, which is provided by a beneficial owner of U.S.-source effectively-connected income; 300 and (3) the IRS Form W-8EXP, which is provided by a beneficial owner of U.S.-source income that is an exempt organization or foreign government. 301 Each of these forms requires that the beneficial owner provide its name and address and certify that the beneficial owner is not a U.S. person. The IRS Form W-8BEN also includes a certification of eligibility for treaty benefits (for completion where applicable). All certifications on IRS Forms W-8 are made under penalties of perjury.

The fourth type of IRS Form W-8 is the IRS Form W-8IMY, which is provided by a payee that receives a payment of U.S.-source income as an intermediary for the beneficial owner of that income. The intermediary's IRS Form W-8IMY must be accompanied by an IRS Form W-8BEN, W-8EXP, or W-8ECI, as applicable, 302 furnished by the beneficial owner, unless the intermediary is a qualified intermediary (“QI”), a withholding foreign partnership, or a withholding foreign trust. The rules applicable to qualified intermediaries are discussed below. A withholding foreign partnership or trust is a foreign partnership or trust that has entered into an agreement with the IRS to collect appropriate IRS Forms W-8 from its partners or beneficiaries and act as a U.S. withholding agent with respect to those persons. 303

Information reporting and backup withholding with respect to U.S. persons
Every person engaged in a trade or business must file with the IRS an information return on IRS Form 1099 (or, for wages or other compensation, on IRS Form W-2) for payments of certain amounts totaling at least $600 that it makes to another person in the course of its trade or business. 304 Detailed rules are provided for the reporting of various types of investment income, including interest, dividends, and gross proceeds from brokered transactions (such as a sale of stock). 305 In general, the requirement to file IRS Form 1099 applies with respect to amounts paid to U.S. persons and is linked to the backup withholding rules of section 3406. Thus, to avoid backup withholding, a U.S. payee (other than exempt recipients, including corporations and financial institutions) of interest, dividends, or gross proceeds generally must furnish to the payor an IRS Form W-9 providing that person's name and taxpayer identification number. 306 That information is then used to complete the IRS Form 1099.

If an IRS Form W-9 is not provided by a U.S. payee (other than payees exempt from reporting), the payor is required to impose a backup withholding tax of 28 percent of the gross amount of the payment. 307 The backup withholding tax may be credited by the payee against regular income tax liability. 308 This combination of reporting and backup withholding is designed to ensure that U.S. persons not exempt from reporting pay tax with respect to investment income, either by providing the IRS with the information that it needs to audit payment of the tax or, in the absence of such information, requiring collection of the tax on payment.

As described above, amounts paid to foreign persons are generally exempt from information reporting on IRS Form 1099. Foreign persons are subject to a separate information reporting requirement linked to the nonresident withholding provisions of chapter 3 of the Code.

In the case of U.S. source investment income, the information reporting, backup withholding and nonresident withholding rules apply broadly to any financial institution or other payor, including foreign financial institutions. 309 As a practical matter, however, these reporting and withholding requirements are difficult to enforce with respect to foreign financial institutions, unless these institutions have some connection to the United States, e.g., the institution is a foreign subsidiary of a U.S. financial institution, or the foreign financial institution is doing business in the United States. Moreover, to the extent that these rules apply to foreign financial institutions, the rules may also be modified by QI agreements between the institutions and the IRS, as described below.

The qualified intermediary program
A QI is defined as a foreign financial institution or a foreign clearing organization, other than a U.S. branch or U.S. office of such institution or organization or a foreign branch of a U.S. financial institution that has entered into a withholding and reporting agreement (a “QI agreement”) with the IRS. 310

A foreign financial institution that becomes a QI is not required to forward beneficial ownership information with respect to its customers to a U.S. financial institution or other withholding agent of U.S.-source investment-type income to establish the customer's eligibility for an exemption from, or reduced rate of, U.S. withholding tax. 311 Instead, the QI is permitted to establish for itself the eligibility of its customers for an exemption or reduced rate, based on an IRS Form W-8 or W-9, or other specified documentary evidence, and information as to residence obtained under the know-your-customer rules to which the QI is subject in its home jurisdiction as approved by the IRS or as specified in the QI agreement. 312 The QI certifies as to eligibility on behalf of its customers, and provides withholding rate pool information to the U.S. withholding agent as to the portion of each payment that qualifies for an exemption or reduced rate of withholding.

The IRS has published a model QI agreement for foreign financial institutions. 313 A prospective QI must submit an application to the IRS providing specified information, and any additional information and documentation requested by the IRS. The application must establish to the IRS's satisfaction that the applicant has adequate resources and procedures to comply with the terms of the QI agreement.

Before entering into a QI agreement that provides for the use of documentary evidence obtained under a country's know-your-customer rules, the IRS must receive (1) that country's know-your-customer practices and procedures for opening accounts and (2) responses to 18 related items. 314 If the IRS has already received this information, a particular prospective QI need not submit it again. The IRS has received such information and has approved know-your-customer rules in 59 countries.

A foreign financial institution or other eligible person becomes a QI by entering into an agreement with the IRS. Under the agreement, the financial institution acts as a QI only for accounts that the financial institution has designated as QI accounts. A QI is not required to act as a QI for all of its accounts; however, if a QI designates an account as one for which it will act as a QI, it must act as a QI for all payments made to that account.

The model QI agreement describes in detail the QI's withholding and reporting obligations. Certain key aspects of the model agreement are described below. 315

Withholding and reporting responsibilities
As a technical matter, all QIs are withholding agents for purposes of the nonresident withholding and reporting rules, and payors (who are required to withhold and report) for purposes of the backup withholding and IRS Form 1099 information reporting rules. However, under the QI agreement, a QI may choose not to assume primary responsibility for nonresident withholding. In that case, the QI is not required to withhold on payments made to non-U.S. customers, or to report those payments on IRS Form 1042-S. Instead, the QI must provide a U.S. withholding agent with an IRS Form W-8IMY that certifies as to the status of its (unnamed) non-U.S. account holders and withholding rate pool information.

Similarly, a QI may choose not to assume primary responsibility for IRS Form 1099 reporting and backup withholding. In that case, the QI is not required to backup withhold on payments made to U.S. customers or to file IRS Forms 1099. Instead, the QI must provide a U.S. payor with an IRS Form W-9 for each of its U.S. non-exempt recipient account holders (i.e., account holders that are U.S. persons not generally exempt from IRS Form 1099 reporting and backup withholding). 316

A QI may elect to assume primary nonresident withholding and reporting responsibility, primary backup withholding and IRS Form 1099 reporting responsibility, or both. 317 A QI that assumes such responsibility is subject to all of the related obligations imposed by the Code on U.S. withholding agents or payors. The QI must also provide the U.S. withholding agent (or U.S. payor) additional information about the withholding rates to enable the withholding agent to appropriately withhold and report on payments made through the QI. These rates can be supplied with respect to withholding rate pools that aggregate payments of a single type of income (e.g., interest or dividends) that is subject to a single rate of withholding.

If a U.S. non-exempt recipient has not provided a IRS Form W-9, the QI must disclose the name, address, and taxpayer identification number (“TIN”) (if available) to the withholding agent (and the withholding agent must apply backup withholding). However, no such disclosure is necessary if the QI is, under local law, prohibited from making the disclosure and the QI has followed certain procedural requirements (including providing for backup withholding, as described further below).

Documentation of account holders
A QI agrees to use its best efforts to obtain documentation regarding the status of their account holders in accordance with the terms of its QI agreement. 318 A QI must apply presumption rules 319 unless a payment can be reliably associated with valid documentation from the account holder. The QI agrees to adhere to the know-your-customer rules set forth in the QI agreement with respect to the account holder from whom the evidence is obtained.

A QI may treat an account holder as a foreign beneficial owner of an amount if the account holder provides a valid IRS Form W-8 (other than an IRS Form W-8IMY) or valid documentary evidence that supports the account holder's status as a foreign person. 320 With such documentation, a QI generally may treat an account holder as entitled to a reduced rate of withholding if all the requirements for the reduced rate are met and the documentation supports entitlement to a reduced rate. A QI may not reduce the rate of withholding if the QI knows that the account holder is not the beneficial owner of a payment to the account.

If a foreign account holder is the beneficial owner of a payment, then a QI may shield the account holder's identity from U.S. custodians and the IRS. If a foreign account holder is not the beneficial owner of a payment (for example, because the account holder is a nominee), the account holder must provide the QI with an IRS Form W-8IMY for itself along with specific information about each beneficial owner to which the payment relates. A QI that receives this information may shield the account holder's identity from a U.S. custodian, but not from the IRS. 321

In general, if an account holder is a U.S. person, the account holder must provide the QI with an IRS Form W-9 or appropriate documentary evidence that supports the account holder's status as a U.S. person. However, if a QI does not have sufficient documentation to determine whether an account holder is a U.S. or foreign person, the QI must apply certain presumption rules detailed in the QI agreement. These presumption rules may not be used to grant a reduced rate of nonresident withholding; instead they merely determine whether a payment should be subject to full nonresident withholding (at a 30-percent rate), subject to backup withholding (at a 28-percent rate), or treated as exempt from backup withholding.

In general, under the QI agreement presumptions, U.S.-source investment income that is paid outside the United States to an offshore account is presumed to be paid to an undocumented foreign account holder. A QI must treat such a payment as subject to withholding at a 30-percent rate and report the payment to an unknown account holder on IRS Form 1042-S. However, most U.S.-source deposit interest and interest or original issue discount on short-term obligations that is paid outside the United States to an offshore account is presumed made to an undocumented U.S. non-exempt recipient account holder and thus is subject to backup withholding at a 28-percent rate. 322 Importantly, both foreign-source income and broker proceeds are presumed to be paid to a U.S. exempt recipient (and thus are exempt from both nonresident and backup withholding) when such amounts are paid outside the United States to an offshore account.

QI information return requirements
A QI must file IRS Form 1042 by March 15 of the year following any calendar year in which the QI acts as a QI. A QI is not required to file IRS Forms 1042-S for amounts paid to each separate account holder, but instead files a separate IRS Form 1042-S for each type of reporting pool. 323 A QI must file separate IRS Forms 1042-S for amounts paid to certain types of account holders, including: (1) other QIs which receive amounts subject to foreign withholding; (2) each foreign account holder of a nonqualified intermediary or other flow-through entity to the extent that the QI can reliably associate such amounts with valid documentation; and (3) unknown recipients of amounts subject to withholding paid through a nonqualified intermediary or other flow-through entity to the extent the QI cannot reliably associate such amounts with valid documentation. The IRS Form 1042 must also include an attachment setting forth the aggregate amounts of reportable payments paid to U.S. non-exempt recipient account holders, and the number of such account holders, whose identity is prohibited by foreign law (including by contract) from disclosure. 324

A QI has specified IRS Form 1099 325 filing requirements including: (1) filing an aggregate IRS Form 1099 for each type of reportable amount paid to U.S. non-exempt recipient account holders whose identities are prohibited by law from being disclosed; (2) filing an aggregate IRS Form 1099 for reportable payments other than reportable amounts 326 paid to U.S. non-exempt recipient account holders whose identities are prohibited by law from being disclosed; (3) filing separate IRS Forms 1099 for reportable amounts paid to U.S. non-exempt recipient account holders for whom the QI has not provided an IRS Form W-9 or identifying information to a withholding agent; (4) filing separate IRS Forms 1099 for reportable payments other than reportable amounts paid to U.S. non-exempt recipient account holders; (5) filing separate IRS Forms 1099 for reportable amounts paid to U.S. non-exempt recipient accounts holders for which the QI has assumed primary IRS Form 1099 reporting and backup withholding responsibility; and (6) filing separate IRS Forms 1099 for reportable payments to an account holder that is a U.S. person if the QI has applied backup withholding and the amount was not otherwise reported on an IRS Form 1099.

Foreign law prohibition of disclosure
The QI agreement includes procedures to address situations in which foreign law (including by contract) prohibits the QI from disclosing the identities of U.S. non-exempt recipients (such as individuals). Separate procedures are provided for accounts established with a QI prior to January 1, 2001, and for accounts established on or after January 1, 2001.

Accounts established prior to January 1, 2001 .-For accounts established prior to January 1, 2001, if the QI knows that the account holder is a U.S. non-exempt recipient, the QI must (1) request from the account holder the authority to disclose its name, address, TIN (if available), and reportable payments; (2) request from the account holder the authority to sell any assets that generate, or could generate, reportable payments; or (3) request that the account holder disclose itself by mandating the QI to provide an IRS Form W-9 completed by the account holder. The QI must make these requests at least two times during each calendar year and in a manner consistent with the QI's normal communications with the account holder (or at the time and in the manner that the QI is authorized to communicate with the account holder). Until the QI receives a waiver on all prohibitions against disclosure, authorization to sell all assets that generate, or could generate, reportable payments, or a mandate from the account holder to provide an IRS Form W-9, the QI must backup withhold on all reportable payments paid to the account holder and report those payments on IRS Form 1099 or, in certain cases, provide another withholding agent with all of the information required for that withholding agent to backup withhold and report the payments on IRS Form 1099.

Accounts established on or after January 1, 2001 .-For any account established by a U.S. non-exempt recipient on or after January 1, 2001, the QI must (1) request from the account holder the authority to disclose its name, address, TIN (if available), and reportable payments; (2) request from the account holder, prior to opening the account, the authority to exclude from the account holder's account any assets that generate, or could generate, reportable payments; or (3) request that the account holder disclose itself by mandating the QI to transfer an IRS Form W-9 completed by the account holder.

If a QI is authorized to disclose the account holder's name, address, TIN, and reportable amounts, it must obtain a valid IRS Form W-9 from the account holder, and, to the extent the QI does not have primary IRS Form 1099 and backup withholding responsibility, provide the IRS Form W-9 to the appropriate withholding agent promptly after obtaining the form. If an IRS Form W-9 is not obtained, the QI must provide the account holder's name, address, and TIN (if available) to the withholding agents from whom the QI receives reportable amounts on behalf of the account holder, together with the withholding rate applicable to the account holder. If a QI is not authorized to disclose an account holder's name, address, TIN (if available), and reportable amounts, but is authorized to exclude from the account holder's account any assets that generate, or could generate, reportable payments, the QI must follow procedures designed to ensure that it will not hold any assets that generate, or could generate, reportable payments in the account holder's account. 327

External audit procedures
The IRS generally does not audit a QI with respect to wit