1. The court will appoint an administrator, for a fee. The administrator will distribute your money and your belongings according to state law. You don't want this to happen because a court-appointed administrator won't know your personal interests and keep your needs in mind. With a will, you choose the person, called an executor, who sees to it that your property is distributed according to your specific wishes.

2. Your spouse may end up with less than s/he needs. Your surviving spouse may not have enough funds to make ends meet because, for example, more money may go to your children than you wanted. In your will, you can make sure that your spouse gets enough money to live comfortably.

3. Your assets may be divided equally among your heirs. If there is no surviving spouse, your assets will be parceled out equally among your heirs. You may not want this to happen. For example, you won't be able to protect your assets from an adult child's creditors or the financial ravages of a divorce decree. Or, one adult child may be well off and not need the money while another child really could use some financial assistance. Also, you may have another family member or friend you want to help and, without a will, it won't be possible.

4. Your grandchildren may not get a cent. When no beneficiaries have been specified, most state courts will grant an estate's assets first to a surviving spouse, then children, often leaving out the generation after. With a will you can allocate assets to go to grandchildren and, through a trust, you can name a guardian to manage their financial affairs until they're ready to do so on their own.

5. Your stepchildren may get nothing. Because most states define heirs as "blood" relatives, stepchildren may not be recognized as heirs. An exception may be made when a stepchild has been legally adopted. A will, however, can insure stepchildren are not left out.

6. You can't name a guardian for minor children. Without a will, you may not get the guardian you want for minor children. With neither parent alive, the grandparents are the natural guardians of minor children, but it may be up to a court to decide which set of grandparents.

7. You won't be able to minimize estate taxes your children or other heirs might have to pay. You and a spouse can shelter as much as $1.3 million of assets from federal estate taxes by setting up trusts within your wills. You'll need the help of a lawyer to draft the wills for you.

8. You can't leave your favorite things to your favorite people. With a will, and an adjoining letter of intent, you can specify who gets what. It's a good way to avoid family fights. A letter of intent is like a laundry list of items with the corresponding beneficiary. (Note: In some states, letters of intent can be changed from time to time without having to re-do the will).

9. You can't leave contributions to a church or charity. State laws do not consider religious and charitable institutions as heirs. Only a will can spell out how your money can be passed to non-heirs and insure your favorite charity gets a donation.

10. Your loved one could lose his/her benefits. You may cause a problem if money ends up going to a parent or other family member who's being cared for by Medicaid in a nursing facility. Medicaid has strict income qualifications. The added income may disqualify your loved one for continuing to receive benefits.

Republicans’ 2017 overhaul of the tax code created a new 20-percent deduction of qualified business income (QBI), subject to certain limitations, for pass-through entities (sole proprietorships, partnerships, limited liability companies, or S corporations). The controversial QBI deduction—also called the "pass-through" deduction—has remained an ongoing topic of debate among lawmakers, tax policy experts, and stakeholders.

Republicans’ 2017 overhaul of the tax code created a new 20-percent deduction of qualified business income (QBI), subject to certain limitations, for pass-through entities (sole proprietorships, partnerships, limited liability companies, or S corporations). The controversial QBI deduction—also called the "pass-through" deduction—has remained an ongoing topic of debate among lawmakers, tax policy experts, and stakeholders.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97), enacted at the end of 2017, created the new Section 199A QBI deduction for noncorporate taxpayers, effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017. However, under current law the QBI deduction will sunset after 2025. In addition to the QBI deduction’s impermanence, its complexity and ambiguous statutory language have created many questions for taxpayers and practitioners.

The IRS first released much-anticipated proposed regulations for the new QBI deduction, REG-107892-18, on August 8, 2018. The proposed regulations were published in the Federal Register on August 16, 2018. The IRS released the final regulations and notice of additional proposed rulemaking on January 18, 2019, followed by a revised version of the final regulations on February 1, 2019. Additionally, Rev. Proc. 2019-11 was issued concurrently to provide further guidance on the definition of wages. Also, a proposed revenue procedure, Notice 2019-7, was issued concurrently to provide a safe harbor under which certain rental real estate enterprises may be treated as a trade or business for purposes of Section 199A.

Wolters Kluwer recently interviewed Tom West, a principal in the passthroughs group of the Washington National Tax practice of KPMG LLP, about the Section 199A QBI deduction regulations. Notably, West formerly served as tax legislative counsel at the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Tax Policy. This article represents the views of the author only and does not necessarily represent the views or professional advice of KPMG LLP.

Wolters Kluwer: What is your general overview of the revised, final regulations for the Section 199A Qualified Business Income (QBI) or "pass-through" deduction?

Tom West: I think it is admirable that Treasury and IRS were able to publish these final regulations so quickly and address so many of the comments and questions that the proposed regulations generated. I think they realized how important this particular package was to so many taxpayers for the 2018 filing season and, while questions obviously remain, having these rules out in time to inform decisions for this year’s tax returns is helpful. In particular, the liberalized aggregation rules and the additional examples regarding certain specified service trades or businesses (SSTBs) are the most consequential in my mind.

Wolters Kluwer: What should taxpayers and practitioners keep in mind in consideration of relying on either the proposed or final regulations for the 2018 tax year?

Tom West: I have to imagine that when choosing between the two, for most taxpayers the final regulations will ultimately provide the better result. The ability to aggregate at the entity level, which was only provided in the final regulations, may be a key consideration for those taxpayers with more complicated or tiered structures. That said, I do think taxpayers need to be careful in their aggregation modeling because you are going to be stuck with your aggregation once you’ve filed. It may be that some taxpayers wait on getting locked into a particular aggregation and continue to study the new rules—and even wait on additional guidance that may be coming. However, it may be important to note that the final regulations provide that if an individual fails to aggregate, the individual may not aggregate trades or businesses on an amended return—other than for the 2018 tax year.

Wolters Kluwer: How is the removal of the proposed 80 percent rule regarding specified service trades or businesses (SSTBs) from the final regulations likely to impact certain taxpayers?

Tom West: First of all, I think the removal of this rule is a demonstration of two important dynamics. One, the critical importance of the engagement of taxpayers in the comment process, and, two, the government’s willingness to listen and adapt in their rule-making. I don’t know if there are particular industries or taxpayers who will be impacted, but I do know that the change is a very logical and appropriate one, and logic doesn’t always prevail in these processes, so I’m happy to give the regulators credit when it does.

Wolters Kluwer: Which industries may have been helped or hindered by the final regulations with respect to SSTB rules?

Tom West: I’m not sure specific industries were helped, but the biggest positive in terms of the SSTB final rules is the carryover from the proposed regulations of the treatment of the skill or reputation provision. Had Treasury and the IRS gone in a different direction, there was a risk of that provision swallowing the rest of the 199A regime—not to mention how much more subjective the already sometimes difficult SSTB determinations would have become.

Wolters Kluwer: Are there any lingering, unanswered questions among taxpayers or practitioners that particularly stand out when determining what constitutes SSTB income?

Tom West: I think many taxpayers who have both SSTB and non-SSTB activities were hoping for more clarity, either in rules or examples, on how to acceptably segregate business lines or on when (or if) certain activities are inextricably tied together. There are also still lingering questions regarding when a trade or business is an SSTB—particularly in the field of health.

Wolters Kluwer: Were there any surprises in the final regulations?

Tom West: I don’t know if I’m surprised, knowing the concerns that led them to the decisions they made, but the fact that Treasury and IRS held the line on some of the SSTB-related rules is notable. I’m thinking specifically of the so-called "cliff" effect of the de minimis rule and the fact that owners of certain kinds of SSTB businesses, e.g., sports teams, are not allowed to benefit from the Section 199A deduction.

Republicans’ 2017 overhaul of the tax code created a new 20-percent deduction of qualified business income (QBI), subject to certain limitations, for pass-through entities (sole proprietorships, partnerships, limited liability companies, or S corporations). The controversial QBI deduction—also called the "pass-through" deduction—has remained an ongoing topic of debate among lawmakers, tax policy experts, and stakeholders.

Republicans’ 2017 overhaul of the tax code created a new 20-percent deduction of qualified business income (QBI), subject to certain limitations, for pass-through entities (sole proprietorships, partnerships, limited liability companies, or S corporations). The controversial QBI deduction—also called the "pass-through" deduction—has remained an ongoing topic of debate among lawmakers, tax policy experts, and stakeholders.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97), enacted at the end of 2017, created the new Section 199A QBI deduction for noncorporate taxpayers, effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017. However, under current law the QBI deduction will sunset after 2025. In addition to the QBI deduction’s impermanence, its complexity and ambiguous statutory language have created many questions for taxpayers and practitioners.

The IRS first released much-anticipated proposed regulations for the new QBI deduction, REG-107892-18, on August 8, 2018. The proposed regulations were published in the Federal Register on August 16, 2018. The IRS released the final regulations and notice of additional proposed rulemaking on January 18, 2019, followed by a revised version of the final regulations on February 1, 2019. Additionally, Rev. Proc. 2019-11, I.R.B. 2019-9, 742, was issued concurrently to provide further guidance on the definition of wages. Also, a proposed Revenue Procedure, Notice 2019-7, I.R.B. 2019-9, 740, was issued, concurrently providing a safe harbor under which certain rental real estate enterprises may be treated as a trade or business for purposes of Section 199A.

Wolters Kluwer recently interviewed Tom West, a principal in the passthroughs group of the Washington National Tax practice of KPMG LLP, about the Section 199A QBI deduction regulations. Notably, West formerly served as tax legislative counsel at the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Tax Policy. This article represents the views of the author only and does not necessarily represent the views or professional advice of KPMG LLP.

Wolters Kluwer: Neither the proposed nor final regulations for Section 199A give guidance as to when rental real estate activity constitutes a Section 162 trade or business. How might the application of the safe harbor provided for in IRS Notice 2019-7 offer taxpayers clarity? And how might failure to qualify for the safe harbor impact the determination of whether the rental activity is a trade or business under Section 199A?

Tom West: The safe harbor is helpful but it appears to be intended for relatively smaller taxpayers who may have had questions about their activities rising to the level of a trade or business. I don’t think falling outside of the safe harbor is dispositive—especially in light of the recent policy statement from Treasury regarding sub-regulatory guidance.

Wolters Kluwer: Can you speak to the some of the complexity that may be involved in tax planning with respect to achieving the right balance between adequate W-2 wages and QBI?

Tom West: Other than for small taxpayers, there is only a benefit under Section 199A if the limitations are met. It does not do any good to have QBI but then have insufficient W-2 wages and qualified property to meet the limitations. So when taxpayers are evaluating what constitutes a qualified trade or business (or whether to aggregate qualified trades or businesses) they will need to determine the amount of W-2 wages with respect to each QTB. Aligning the W-2 wages with the QTB will be important—but the salary expense will also result in a reduction in the amount of QBI and therefore the amount of any Section 199A benefit—so modeling becomes critical. Consideration should also be given to any collateral consequences—for instance the impact of the alignment on allocation and apportionment for state taxes.

Wolters Kluwer: According to a March 18, 2019, Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) report, Reference Number: 2019-44-022, IRS management indicated that the timeline related to the issuance of Section 199A guidance did not provide enough time for the IRS to develop a QBI deduction tax form. Although the IRS did create a worksheet, do you have a prediction on what key elements may be included on the new form once released?

Tom West: I do think that worksheets could be developed that would facilitate the reporting of Section 199A information—particularly through tiered structures—so as to ease the reporting burden and enhance compliance.

Wolters Kluwer: The IRS has estimated that nearly 23.7 million taxpayers may be eligible to claim the Section 199A deduction and that more than 22.2 million (94 percent) of those eligible taxpayers will not require a complex calculation for the deduction. What notable differences do you expect there are between "complex" and the majority of calculations?

Tom West: For taxpayers under the Section 199A income thresholds ($157.5K single, $315K joint), the deduction is very easy to calculate and claim. Those taxpayers don’t need to worry about being in an SSTB, how much wages they paid, or the basis of their property. Once those taxpayers hit those income thresholds though, even in the phase-out range, things very quickly get complex—and that’s as a consequence of the statute; it is not something that the regulators can change.

Wolters Kluwer: Do you anticipate the IRS will issue further guidance on the Section 199A deduction?

Tom West: I do. As I said at the top, I think part of the government’s motivation in finalizing these regulations so quickly was providing guidance to taxpayers ahead of the tax-filing season. And while for the majority of taxpayers who are below the 199A cap there is probably now sufficient guidance, I think there are still a lot of questions for those with more complex situations. Given the number of taxpayers who are eligible for this deduction, and the importance of Section 199A as the big benefit to non-corporate businesses in what the Administration views as a signature legislative achievement, I have to believe that the government will be responsive to taxpayers’ requests for additional help on this provision. However, given that the provision is due to sunset, it will be important that any guidance is forthcoming in fairly short order to be of any usefulness to taxpayers.

Wolters Kluwer: At this time, do you have any recommendations for taxpayers and practitioners moving forward?

Tom West: As people are going through their tax filings this year, I’d keep a list of issues, questions, and areas where additional guidance would be helpful. It often happens that problems with new legislation or regulations don’t reveal themselves until taxpayers have to put pencil to paper and track their real-world numbers through returns. We’ll all have that experience this year and, with those lists of issues and questions in hand, there may be an opportunity to approach the IRS and Treasury in the hopes of getting resolution going forward. Keeping that list could also help identify areas for tax planning and perhaps ease the complexity of filing for 2019.

A bipartisan House bill has been introduced that would fix a GOP tax law drafting error known as the "retail glitch." The House bill, having over a dozen co-sponsors, is a companion measure to a bipartisan Senate bill introduced in March.

A bipartisan House bill has been introduced that would fix a GOP tax law drafting error known as the "retail glitch." The House bill, having over a dozen co-sponsors, is a companion measure to a bipartisan Senate bill introduced in March.

Immediate Expensing

The Restoring Investment in Improvements Act (HR 1869), sponsored by House tax writers Reps. Jimmy Panetta, D-Calif., and Jackie Walorski, R-Ind., would allow restaurants, retailers, and other leaseholders to immediately write off the cost of certain improvements. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97), enacted at the end of 2017, inadvertently excludes qualified improvement property (QIP) from the new 100 percent bonus depreciation provision.

The measure is a "small but critical fix for our job creators, and technical corrections like this are a normal part of the process when Congress enacts major reforms," Walorski said in a recent press release. "This bipartisan, commonsense bill will allow restaurants, retailers, and other small businesses to unlock the full benefits of tax reform and continue driving our nation’s economic growth."

Similarly, Panetta highlighted the negative impact that the loss of immediate expensing has caused many small businesses. "Our bill will allow restaurants, retailers, and other businesses to make the improvements they need to keep their stores competitive and safe and plan for the future," he said.

Although the "retail glitch" measure has solid bipartisan support, Democrats in general have seemed hesitant to fix any errors in the GOP tax law. To that end, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal, D-Mass., has said he would like to hold a hearing on technical corrections for the TCJA. The committee’s March 27 hearing on the TCJA did not specifically address technical corrections.

The House on April 9 approved by voice vote a bipartisan, bicameral IRS reform bill. The IRS bill, which now heads to the Senate, would redesign the IRS for the first time in over 20 years.

The House on April 9 approved by voice vote a bipartisan, bicameral IRS reform bill. The IRS bill, which now heads to the Senate, would redesign the IRS for the first time in over 20 years.

IRS Reform

The Taxpayer First Act of 2019 (HR 1957), as amended, cleared the House Ways and Means Committee by voice on April 2. The House and Senate both introduced the bicameral, bipartisan measure on March 28. If enacted, the bill would make numerous reforms to the IRS, some of which include modernizing antiquated information technology systems and enhancing taxpayer services and identity protections.

"With a new tax code, it is time for a new tax administrator," House Ways and Means Committee ranking member Kevin Brady, R-Tex., said in an April 9 statement. "I applaud the House for passing the Taxpayer First Act—a bold step to redesign the IRS to be an agency with one singular mission: putting taxpayers first."

The IRS Reform bill has been "years in the making," Brady said on April 9, echoing a joint statement that he and Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal, D-Mass., along with other bipartisan tax writers recently issued. "The House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee have carefully and thoughtfully developed this legislation over several years, after numerous hearings and roundtables, in a bipartisan, bicameral manner," the lawmakers said.

AICPA Applauds Taxpayer First Act

The American Institute of CPAs (AICPA) issued an April 9 statement commending the House for passing HR 1957. "The AICPA appreciates the bipartisan recognition by members of the U.S. House of Representatives for bringing the Internal Revenue Service into the 21st Century," Edward S. Karl, vice president of taxation, said in a statement on behalf of the AICPA. "The AICPA has long been interested in and active in working to find ways to modernize the IRS so that it can better serve the needs of taxpayers and tax practitioners."

Free File Alliance

However, the bipartisan, bicameral bill has not advanced without its share of criticism. Several Democratic lawmakers have criticized a provision within the bill that would codify the Free File Alliance, which is an agreement between the IRS and certain tax preparation companies that includes the IRS being unable to directly assist in tax return preparation.

"Again and again in my service in the Senate I have battled the tax-preparation software industry to simplify filing taxes for the typical American," Senate Finance Committee (SFC) ranking member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said in an April 9 statement. "During the debate on the tax administration bill, my staff pushed back on a prohibition on the agency competing with private tax preparation services, and I will continue to push for my proposal for the pre-filed ‘simple’ return and the principle that a taxpayer should not have to use a private company to pay their taxes online," he added.

Looking Ahead

It remains unclear when the Senate will take up the Taxpayer First Act bill. However, the bill is presently expected on Capitol Hill to easily be approved in the Senate.

Proposed regulations address gains that may be deferred when taxpayers invest in a qualified opportunity fund (QOF). Taxpayers may generally rely on these new proposed regulations. The IRS has also requested comments.

Proposed regulations address gains that may be deferred when taxpayers invest in a qualified opportunity fund (QOF). Taxpayers may generally rely on these new proposed regulations. The IRS has also requested comments.

The proposed regulations also withdraw and replace placeholder provisions in an earlier set of proposed regulations ( REG-115420-18). These concern:

• the definition of "substantially all"regulations
• transactions that can trigger includible gain;
• the timing and amount of deferred gain that is included;
• treatment of leased property used in the qualified opportunity zone (QOZ) business;
• use of QOZ business property in the QOZ;
• sourcing of income to the QOZ business; and
• the reasonable period for a QOF to reinvest proceeds from the sale of qualifying assets.

In addition, within a few months the IRS expects to address administrative rules for a QOF that fails to maintain the required 90-percent investment standard, as well as information reporting requirements.

Finally, the IRS expects to revise Form 8996, Qualified Opportunity Fund, for 2019 and subsequent tax years. These revisions may require additional information, including the employer identification number (EIN) for the QOF business, and the amounts invested by QOFs and QOZ businesses located in particular QOZs.

"Substantially All" for QOZ Business

The 2018 regulations provided that a trade or business satisfies the "substantially all" test for a QOZ business if at least 70 percent of its tangible property is qualified opportunity zone business property. The new proposed regulations generally extend this 70-percent threshold to the "substantially all" tests for use. However, in the holding period context, the "substantially all" threshold is 90 percent.

Original Use of Purchased Tangible Property

The proposed regulations generally provide that the "original use" of tangible property acquired by purchase by any person starts on the date when that person or a prior person:

• first places the property in service in the qualified opportunity zone for purposes of depreciation or amortization; or
• first uses the property in the qualified opportunity zone in a manner that would allow depreciation or amortization if that person were the property’s owner.

Used tangible property will satisfy the original use requirement with respect to a QOZ so long as the property has not been previously used (that is, has not previously been used within that QOZ in a manner that would have allowed it to depreciated or amortized) by any taxpayer

In addition, a building or other structure that has been vacant for at least five years before being purchased by a QOF or QOZ business satisfies the original use requirement. Improvements made by a lessee to leased property satisfy the original use requirement and are considered purchased property for the amount of the unadjusted cost basis of the improvements.

Land can be treated as QOZ business property only if it is used in a trade or business of a QOF or QOZ business. The holding of land for investment does not give rise to a trade or business, and the land cannot be QOZ business property. Anti-abuse rules determine whether unimproved land can be qualifying property. However, other purchased real property generally must be substantially improved, determined on an asset-by-asset basis.

Leased Tangible Property in QOZ

Leased tangible property may be QOZ property if:

• the lease is entered into after 2017; and
• substantially all of the property’s use is in a QOZ during substantially all of the lease period.

However, the first-use requirement does not apply to leased tangible property. The leased property can generally also be acquired from a related person, though several conditions apply. The proposed regulations also provide methods for valuing the leased property.

QOZ Businesses

The proposed regulations:

• provide that in determining whether a substantial portion of intangible property of a QOZ is used in the active conduct of a trade or business, a substantial portion is at least 40 percent;
• address real property that straddles a QOZ;
• provide three safe harbors and a facts-and-circumstances test for determining whether a corporation or partnership derives at least 50 percent of its gross income from the active conduct of a qualified business;
• define "trade or business" by reference to Code Sec. 162, except that the ownership and operation (including leasing) of real property used in a trade or business can also be the active conduct of a trade or business; and
• provide a safe harbor for working capital.

Other Business Rules

The proposed regulations also address:

• Section 1231 gains;
• relief regarding the 90 percent asset test, including relief for newly contributed assets and QOF reinvestments;
• the amount of an investment for purposes of the deferral election;
• inclusion events, the timing on basis adjustments, includible amounts, and special rules for partnerships and S corporations;
• gifts and bequests;
• exceptions for disregarded transfers and some nonrecognition transactions;
• distributions and contributions;
• consolidated return provisions;
• holding periods and tacking rules;
• anti-abuse rules;
• special rules for Indian tribes and tribally leased property.

Comments Requested; Public Hearing Scheduled

A public hearing on the proposed regulations is scheduled for 10 am on July 9, 2019, at the New Carrollton Federal Building in Latnham, MD. Public comments may be mailed or hand-delivered to the IRS, or submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov (indicate IRS and REG-120186-18).

The IRS has provided a safe harbor for professional sports teams to avoid the recognition of gain or loss when trading players and/or draft picks. Under the safe harbor provision, the traded player’s contract or the traded draft pick would have a zero basis.

The IRS has provided a safe harbor for professional sports teams to avoid the recognition of gain or loss when trading players and/or draft picks. Under the safe harbor provision, the traded player’s contract or the traded draft pick would have a zero basis.

Value of Professional Sports Contracts

Professional sports teams enter into contracts with their personnel (e.g., managers, coaches, players, etc.). Typical personnel contracts provide an agreed-upon amount of compensation for a certain duration of service. The value of such a contract may fluctuate based on a variety of factors, including:

• player performance;
• the changing needs of the team and of other teams;
• a player’s effect on fan attendance; and
• the number of years until a player becomes a free agent and is able to sign a contract to play for any team in a league.

Other considerations affecting the value of a player contract include:

• the size of the team’s market (i.e., whether a smaller city or a major urban population);
• the cost of player development; and
• the impact of injuries and slumps on player performance.

In most cases, teams do not trade personnel contracts or draft picks unless the team thinks that it is receiving contracts of an equal or greater value. Because each party believes that they are receiving personnel contracts or draft picks of an equal or greater value, it is difficult to assign a monetary value to them. Accordingly, the IRS developed a safe harbor whereby each team is able to treat the traded contracts or draft picks as having a basis of zero, thus avoiding the recognition of gain or loss on the trade.

Safe Harbor Requirements

In order to use the safe harbor, professional sports teams must meet the following requirements:

• all teams involved in the trade must use the safe harbor;
• teams may only trade personnel contracts, draft picks, and/or cash;
• personnel contracts and/or draft picks cannot be Code Sec. 197 intangibles; and
• the financial statements of all teams involved in the trade must not reflect assets or liabilities resulting from the trade other than cash.

Application

Sports teams using the safe harbor will not recognize any gain or loss if they only trade personnel contracts or draft picks. However, teams that receive cash in a trade will recognize the amount of cash received as gain. In addition, the team providing cash to another team in the trade will receive basis in the personnel contract or draft pick equal to the amount of cash that it provided. A team providing cash to another team in a trade for two or more draft picks or personnel contracts must allocate its basis to each personnel contract or draft pick received from the other team by dividing the basis by the number of personnel contracts or draft picks received.

In certain cases, a team may have unrecovered basis in a draft pick or personnel contract under Code Sec. 167(c). In those instances, the team may recognize gain or loss based on the difference between the unrecovered basis and any cash received.

Effective Date

Teams may use the safe harbor for any trades involving personnel contracts or draft picks entered into after April 10, 2019. However, teams may choose to apply these rules in any open tax year.

Incentive stock options (ISOs) give employees a "piece of the action" while allowing employers to attract workers at relatively inexpensive costs. However, before you accept that job offer, there are some intricate rules regarding the taxation of ISOs that you should understand.

ISOs give employees a "piece of the action" while allowing employers to attract workers at relatively inexpensive costs. However, before you accept that job offer, there are some intricate rules regarding the taxation of ISOs that you should understand.

How are ISOs taxed?

An incentive stock option is an option granted to you as an employee which gives you the right to purchase the stock of your employer without realizing income either when the option is granted or when it is exercised. You are first taxed when you sell or otherwise dispose of the option stock. You then have capital gain equal to the sale proceeds minus the option price, provided that the holding period requirement is met.

Note. The IRS has temporarily suspended collection of ISO alternative minimum tax (AMT) liabilities through September 30, 2008.

How long do I need to hold ISOs to get capital gain treatment?

To obtain favorable tax treatment, the stock acquired under an incentive stock option qualifies for favorable long-term capital gain tax treatment only if it is not disposed of before the later of two years from the date of the grant of the option, or one year from the date of the exercise of the option. If this holding period is not satisfied, the portion of the gain equal to the difference between the fair market value (FMV) of the stock at the time of exercise and the option price is taxed as compensation income rather than capital gain. In this case, you may be subject to the higher rate of income imposed on ordinary income.

For example, your employer granted you an incentive stock option on April 1, 2006, and you exercised the option on October 1, 2006, you must not sell the stock until April 1, 2008, to obtain favorable tax treatment (the later of two years from the date of the grant or one year from the date of exercise).

What key dates should I remember?

Because of the importance of receiving capital gain treatment, it is important that you keep in mind key dates such as the date of grant of the ISO and its date of exercise. These periods are measured from the date on which all acts necessary to grant the option or exercise the option have been completed. Therefore, the date of grant is treated as the date on which the board of directors or the stock option committee completes the corporate action which constitutes an offer of stock, rather than the date on which the option agreement is prepared. The date of exercise is the date on which the corporation receives notice of the exercise of the option and payment for the stock, rather than the date the shares of stock are actually transferred.

Will I be subject to alternative minimum tax?

The effect of the alternative minimum tax (AMT) on ISOs can amount to a potential trap for the unwary. This is because under the regular tax there is no tax until the stock is sold or otherwise disposed of. Under the AMT, however, the trap takes place when the ISO is exercised, since alternative minimum taxable income includes the difference between the FMV of the stock on the date the ISO is exercised and the price paid for the stock (the "ISO spread").

If you pay AMT, you are given a credit against regular income tax for the portion of the AMT attributable to ISOs and other tax preference items that result in deferral of income tax. The credit is taken in later years when no AMT is due, and may be taken to the extent that regular tax liability exceeds tentative minimum tax liability. The effect of this is that the AMT is a prepayment of tax, rather than an additional tax.

Since the AMT only applies if it is higher than your regular income tax, one strategy is to time the exercise of ISOs each year to come under the AMT exemption levels. Purely from a tax standpoint, the ideal situation is to exercise ISOs each year that would result in AMT equal to your regular tax. Of course, other factors, such as market conditions, financial needs, etc. may play a greater role in deciding when to exercise an option. If you pay high property tax or state income tax, you may find it more challenging to calculate the optimum exercise of ISOs in relation to the AMT, since both of these deductions are counted against their annual AMT exemption.

ISOs can be a nice additional employee benefit when considering a job offer. However, because the tax implications surrounding certain key trigger events related to ISOs can have a significant impact on your tax liability, we suggest that you contact the office for additional guidance.

Business travel expenses are not created equal - some special rules apply to certain types of expenditures. Before you pack your bags for your next business trip, make sure that you have planned ahead to optimize your business travel deductions.

Business travel expenses are not created equal - some special rules apply to certain types of expenditures. Before you pack your bags for your next business trip, make sure that you have planned ahead to optimize your business travel deductions.

The basic rule for the deductibility of business travel is relatively simple--travel expenses incurred while you are away from home in pursuit of a trade or business are deductible so long as they are not lavish or extravagant. Business travel can take many different forms, however--conventions, educational seminars, cruise ship meetings and foreign travel, in addition to the run-of-the-mill business trip--and each has its own special rules which you should know about prior to departure so that optimum use is made of the business travel deduction.

The basic rules

Taxpayers who travel away from their tax home on business may deduct the expenses they incur, including fares, meals, lodging, and incidental expenses, if they are not lavish or extravagant. A business trip is considered travel away from home if you may reasonably need sleep or rest to complete a round trip. Your tax home is generally your principal place of business or your residence if you are temporarily employed away from the area of your residence.

To be deductible, traveling expenses must be incurred in pursuit of an existing trade or business. If the expenses are in connection with acquiring a new business, they are not deductible. Of course, there is no rule that prohibits you from enjoying yourself or from pursuing some recreational activities during your travel, but the primary purpose of the trip must be related to the taxpayer's trade or business.

Travel expenses of your spouse, dependents or other individuals are only deductible if the person accompanying you is an employee of the company, the travel is for a bona fide business purpose, and the expenses are otherwise deductible.

Special rules apply

Because special rules may apply, the following types of business travel may require some additional planning in advance in order to maximize your business travel deduction:

Foreign travel

Foreign travel expenses are subject to special rules that are not applicable if the business trip is within the United States. If your travel overseas takes longer than a week, or if less than 75 percent of the time is spent on business, expenses are allocated between business and leisure activities on a day-to-day basis. Each day is either entirely a business day, or it is considered to be a nonbusiness day. A day counts as entirely for business if your principal activity on that day was in pursuit of your trade or business. Travel days are counted as business days, as are days when events beyond your control prevent the conducting of business. Saturdays, Sunday, legal holidays, and other reasonably necessary stand-by days also count as business days.

Educational travel

Although the Tax Code prohibits deducting expenses for travel as a form of education, a recent Tax Court decision allowed a schoolteacher to deduct her travel and tuition costs for two university courses overseas. The court decided that the reason for taking the courses went beyond mere travel and helped the teacher maintain and improve skills needed in her employment.

Conventions and seminars

If there is a sufficient relationship of the convention to your trade or business, expenses for both self-employed persons and employees to attend a convention in the United States may be deducted. A special rule prohibits the deduction of costs of attending seminars or conventions for investment purposes.

Cruises

Although the IRS does not look favorably on cruise ship conventions, a limited deduction is available (to a maximum of $2,000 annually) if you can satisfy some rigorous reporting requirements, and the cruise ship is of US registry, all ports of call are in the US or its possessions, and the meeting is directly related to your trade or business. Reporting requirements include written statements by both you and the officer of the sponsoring organization, containing information as to the number of hours of each day of the trip devoted to scheduled business activities, and a program of the activities of each day of the meeting.

Foreign conventions

While the rule for stateside conventions (and those in Canada, Mexico, a US possession, or the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands) merely require that your business be related to the agenda of the convention, you are held to a higher standard for conventions held overseas. You must show that the meeting is directly related to the active conduct of your business and that it is as reasonable to be held overseas as it would have been to hold it in the US.

Stayovers

Sometimes costs can be decreased if you stay over at the out-of-town location on Saturday night, even though business was wrapped up on Friday. This occurs when, due to airline pricing policies, the additional lodging expense is more than offset by lower airfare. When this is the case, the additional meal and lodging expenses will still be deductible.

If you have any questions regarding the deductibility of business travel expenses or the related reporting requirements, please contact the office for more information and guidance.

For homeowners, the exclusion of all or a portion of the gain on the sale of their principal residence is an important tax break.

For homeowners, the exclusion of all or a portion of the gain on the sale of their principal residence is an important tax break. The maximum amount of gain from the sale or exchange of a principal residence that may be excluded from income is generally $250,000 ($500,000 for joint filers).

Unfortunately, the $500,000/$250,000 exclusion has a few traps, including a "loophole" closer that reduces the homesale exclusion for periods of "nonqualifying use." Careful planning, however, can alleviate many of them. Here is a review of the more prominent problems that homeowners may experience with the homesale exclusion and some suggestions on how you might avoid them:

Reduced homesale exclusion. The Housing Assistance Tax Act of 2008 modifies the exclusion of gain from the sale of a principal residence, providing that gain from the sale of principal residence will no longer be excluded from income for periods that the home was not used as a principal residence. For example, if you used the residence as a vacation home prior to using it as a principal residence. These periods are referred to as "nonqualifying use." This income inclusion rule applies to home sales after December 31, 2008 and is based on nonqualified use periods beginning on or after January 1, 2009, under a generous transition rule. A specific formula is used to determine the amount of gain allocated to nonqualifying use periods.

Use and ownership. Moreover, in order to qualify for the $250,000/$500,000 exclusion, your home must be used and owned by you as your principal residence for at least 2 out of the last 5 years of ownership before sale. Moving into a new house early, or delaying the move, may cost you the right to exclude any and all gain on the home sale from tax.

Incapacitated taxpayers. If you become physically or mentally incapable of self-care, the rules provide that you are deemed to use a residence as a principal residence during the time in which you own the residence and reside in a licensed care facility (e.g., a nursing home), as long as at least a one-year period of use (under the regular rules) is already met. Moving in with an adult child, even if professional health care workers are hired, will not lower the use time period to one year since care is not in a "licensed care facility." In addition, some "assisted-living" arrangements may not qualify as well.

Pro-rata sales. Under an exception, a sale of a residence more frequently than once every two years is allowed, with a pro-rata allocation of the $500,000/$250,000 exclusion based on time, if the sale is by reason of a change in place of employment, health, or other unforeseen circumstances to be specified under pending IRS rules. Needless to say, it is very important that you make certain that you take steps to make sure that you qualify for this exception, because no tax break is otherwise allowed. For example, health in this circumstance does not require moving into a licensed care facility, but the extent of the health reason for moving must be substantiated.

Tax basis. Under the old rules, you were advised to keep receipts of any capital improvements made to your house so that the cost basis of your residence, for purposes of determining the amount of gain, may be computed properly. In a rapidly appreciating real estate market, you should continue to keep these receipts. Death or divorce may unexpectedly reduce the $500,000 exclusion of gain for joint returns to the $250,000 level reserved for single filers. Even if the $500,000 level is obtained, if you have held your home for years, you may find that the exclusion may fall short of covering all the gain realized unless receipts for improvements are added to provide for an increased basis when making this computation.

Some gain may be taxed. Even if you move into a new house that costs more than the selling price of the old home, a tax on gain will be due (usually 20%) to the extent the gain exceeds the $500,000/$250,000 exclusion. Under the old rules, no gain would have been due.

Home office deduction. The home office deduction may have a significant impact on your home sale exclusion. The gain on the portion of the home that has been written off for depreciation, utilities and other costs as an office at home may not be excluded upon the sale of the residence. One way around this trap is to cease home office use of the residence sufficiently before the sale to comply with the rule that all gain (except attributable to recaptured home office depreciation) is excluded to the extent the taxpayer has not used a home office for two out of the five years prior to sale.

Vacation homes. As mentioned, in order to qualify for the $250,000/$500,000 exclusion, the home must be used and owned by you or your spouse (in the case of a joint return) as your principal residence for at least 2 out of the last 5 years of ownership before sale. Because of this rule, some vacation homeowners who have seen their resort properties increase in value over the years are moving into these homes when they retire and living in them for the 2 years necessary before selling in order to take full advantage of the gain exclusion. For example, doing this on a vacation home that has increased $200,000 in value over the years can save you $40,000 in capital gains tax. However, keep in mind the reduced homesale exclusion for periods of nonqualifying use.

As you can see, there is more to the sale of residence gain exclusion than meets the eye. Before you make any decisions regarding buying or selling any real property, please consider contacting the office for additional information and guidance.

An important IRS ruling shows how the use of trusts to hold personal assets can sometimes backfire if all tax factors are not considered. This ruling also drives home the fact that tax rules may change after assets have already been locked into a trust for a long period of time, making trusts sometimes inflexible in dealing with changing tax opportunities.

An important IRS ruling shows how the use of trusts to hold personal assets can sometimes backfire if all tax factors are not considered. This ruling also drives home the fact that tax rules may change after assets have already been locked into a trust for a long period of time, making trusts sometimes inflexible in dealing with changing tax opportunities.

In the ruling, the IRS determined that the sale of a home, in which an individual resided for many years but to which title was legally held by a family trust, did not qualify for the Tax Code's new capital gains exclusion on the sale of the house. The exclusion permits those who sell their personal residence anytime after May 6, 1997, to exclude up to $250,000 in capital gains ($500,000 for those filing joint returns). The IRS concluded that the individual's inability to control the assets of the trust prevented her from being deemed an owner of the trust for tax purposes.

Family trusts: A common estate planning tool

As part of an estate plan, an individual may place assets, such as a home, into a trust and name an income beneficiary or beneficiaries. The income beneficiary has rights to any income from the trust and may even have use of the assets but has no control to sell, mortgage or dispose of the assets of the trust. Only the trust's designated trustees have the power to make decisions related to the encumbrance or disposal of the trust's assets. When the asset is a personal residence, this type of trust allows for preferential estate tax treatment while the income beneficiary has the ability to continue living in the home.

IRS: "No Capital Gain Exclusion"

The IRS's stance is that, even though an individual may have enjoyed the use of a house for many years, if the house was in a family trust, ownership of the house would always be vested in the trust. Under the federal tax rules, a beneficiary of a trust may be deemed an owner of the trust if he or she has the power to reach and to take all of the trust's assets for his or her use. When a beneficiary is treated as an owner, a sale by the trust is equivalent to a sale by the beneficiary. However, when an income beneficiary has no control over the fate of the assets of the trust, the IRS has found that the beneficiary is not the owner of the trust and therefore would not qualify for the Tax Code's capital gains exclusion upon the sale of a residence held in such trust.

Planning for the smooth transition of your assets to your family upon death can be complicated and can have serious tax ramifications. Please contact the office for additional guidance in this area.

Q. The recent upturn in home values has left me with quite a bit of equity in my home. I would like to tap into this equity to pay off my credit cards and make some major home improvements. If I get a home equity loan, will the interest I pay be fully deductible on my tax return?

Q. The recent upturn in home values has left me with quite a bit of equity in my home. I would like to tap into this equity to pay off my credit cards and make some major home improvements. If I get a home equity loan, will the interest I pay be fully deductible on my tax return?

A. For most people, all interest paid on a home equity loan would be fully deductible as an itemized deduction on their personal tax returns. However, due to changes made to tax laws governing home mortgage interest deduction in 1987, there are limitations and special circumstances that must be considered when determining how much of your home mortgage interest expense is deductible.

Mortgages secured by your qualified home generally fall under one of three classifications for purposes of determining the home mortgage interest deduction: grandfathered debt, home acquisition debt, and home equity debt. Grandfathered debt is simply home mortgage debt taken out prior to October 14, 1987 (including subsequent refinancing of that debt). The other two types of mortgage debt are discussed below. A "qualified home" is your main or second home and, in addition to a house or condominium, can include any property with sleeping, cooking and toilet facilities (e.g., boat, trailer).

Home acquisition debt is a mortgage (including a refinanced loan) taken out after October 13, 1987 that is secured by a qualified home and where the proceeds were used to buy, build, or substantially improve that qualified home. "Substantial improvements" are home improvements that add to the value of your home, prolong the useful life of your home, or adapt your home to new uses.

In general, interest expense on home acquisition debt of up to $1 million ($500,000 if married filing separately) is fully deductible. Keep in mind, though, that to the extent that the mortgage debt exceeds the cost of the home plus any substantial improvements, your mortgage interest will be limited. Mortgage interest expense on this excess debt may be deductible as home equity debt (see below).

Example: You have a home worth $400,000 with a first mortgage of $200,000. If you get a home equity loan of $125,000 to build a new addition to your home, your mortgage interest would be fully deductible.

Home equity debt is debt that is secured by your qualified home and that does not qualify as home acquisition debt. There are generally no limits on the use of the proceeds of this type of loan to retain interest deductibility.

The amount of mortgage debt that can be treated as home equity debt for purposes of the mortgage interest deduction is the smaller of a) $100,000 ($50,000 if married filing separately) or b) the total of each qualified home's fair market value (FMV) reduced by home acquisition debt & debt secured prior to October 14, 1987. Mortgage debt in excess of these limits would be treated as non-deductible personal interest.

Example: You have a home worth $400,000 with a first mortgage of $200,000. If you get a home equity loan of $125,000 to pay off your credit cards (you really like to shop!), your mortgage interest deduction would be limited to the amount paid on only $100,000 of the home equity debt.

In addition to the above limitations, there are other circumstances that, if present, can affect your home equity debt interest expense deduction. Here are a few examples:

• You do not itemize your deductions;
• Your adjusted gross income (AGI) is over a certain amount;
• Part of your home is not a "qualified home"
• Your home is secured by a mortgage that was acquired (and/or subsequently refinanced) prior to October 14, 1987
• You used any part of the loan proceeds to invest in tax-exempt securities.

As illustrated above, determining your deduction for mortgage interest paid can be more complex than it appears. Before you obtain a home equity loan, please feel free to contact the office for advice on how it may affect your potential home mortgage interest deduction.

As a new business owner, you probably expect to incur many expenses before you even open the doors. What you might not know is how these starting up costs are handled for tax purposes. A little knowledge about how these costs will affect your (or your business') tax return can reduce any unexpected surprises when tax time comes around.

As a new business owner, you probably expect to incur many expenses before you even open the doors. What you might not know is how these starting up costs are handled for tax purposes. A little knowledge about how these costs will affect your (or your business') tax return can reduce any unexpected surprises when tax time comes around.

Starting a new business can be an exciting, although expensive, event that finds you, the small business owner, with a constantly open wallet. In most cases, all costs that you incur on behalf of your new company before you open the doors are capital expenses that increase the basis of your business. However, some of these pre-opening expenditures may be amortizable over a period of time if you choose. Pre-opening expenditures that are eligible for amortization will fall into one of two categories: start-up costs or organizational costs.

Start-up Costs

Start-up costs are certain costs associated with creating an active trade or business, investigating the creation or acquisition of an active trade or business, or purchasing an existing trade or business. If, before your business commences, you incur any cost that would normally be deductible as a business expense during the normal course of business, this would qualify as a start-up cost. Examples of typical start-up costs include attorney's fees, pre-opening advertising, fees paid for consultants, and travel costs. However, deductible interest taxes, and research and development (R&D) expenses are treated differently.

Start-up costs are amortized as a group on the business' tax return (or your own return on Schedule C, if you are a sole proprietor) over a period of no less than 60 months. The amortization period would begin in the month that your business began operations. In order to be able to claim the deduction for amortization related to start-up costs, a statement must be filed with the return for the first tax year you are in business by the due date for that return (plus extensions). However, both early (pre-opening) and late (not more than 6 months) submissions of the statement will be accepted by the IRS.

Organizational Costs

Organizational costs are those costs incurred associated with the organization of a corporation or partnership. If a cost is incurred before the commencement of business that is related to the creation of the entity, is chargeable to a capital account, and could be amortized over the life of the entity (if the entity had a fixed life), it would qualify as an organizational cost. Examples of organizational costs include attorney's fees, state incorporation fees, and accounting fees.

Organizational costs are amortized using the same method as start-up costs (see above), although it is not necessary to use the same amortization period for both. A similar statement must be completed and filed with the company's business tax return for the business' first tax year.

Before you decide which, if any, pre-opening expenditures related to your new business you'd like to treat as start-up or organizational costs, please contact our office for additional guidance.

In today's tight job market, small business owners are finding it increasingly difficult to keep good employees on board and content. A much overlooked employee benefit - employee achievement awards - can allow you to reward your best employees with tax-free income.

In today's tight job market, small business owners are finding it increasingly difficult to keep good employees on board and content. A much overlooked employee benefit - employee achievement awards - can allow you to reward your best employees with tax-free income.

What is an employee achievement award? As an employer, you may give your employees cash or other tangible personal property to reward them for achieving certain standards or milestones within the workplace. In order to qualify as an employee achievement award in the eyes of the IRS, an award must meet the following criteria:

• Amount limit: not to exceed $400 per employee for awards that are not "qualified plan awards," with the total for all awards not to exceed $1,600 (whether qualified or not). A qualified plan award is one that is awarded as part of an established plan that does not take into consideration compensation as to eligibility or benefits.
• Form of award: the award must be tangible personal property that is:
• Based upon length of service or safety achievement;
• Is given in a meaningful presentation; and
• Is not merely "disguised pay."

 Who can receive these awards?

Length-of-service award. In order to be eligible to receive an award based upon length of service with the employer, an employee must:

• Have worked for the employer for more than 5 years, or;
• Have not received a length-of-service award during the year of the award or in any of the prior 4 years.

Safety achievement award. In order to be eligible to receive an award based upon safety in the workplace, an employee must not be a manager, administrator, clerical or other professional employee. Also, if more than 10% of the employees are given the award, it will not qualify under this provision.

How much can I deduct? As an employer, you are entitled to deduct an amount given for employee achievement awards up to the amount limits specified above. This amount would be included on the "Other deductions" line of your company's tax return.

How much is taxable to the employee? As long as the award given does not exceed the amount limits specified above, the award will not be includible as wages to the employee. Any awards given on excess of the limits would be includible in the employee's wages.

While definitely not on the same level as stock options in a pre-IPO company as an employee retention tool, employee achievement awards are a nice way to reward your best employees with tax-free income. If you need more info regarding these types of awards, please feel free to contact the office.

Probably one of the more difficult decisions you will have to make as a consumer is whether to buy or lease your auto. Knowing the advantages and disadvantages of buying vs. leasing a new car or truck before you get to the car dealership can ease the decision-making process and may alleviate unpleasant surprises later.

Probably one of the more difficult decisions you will have to make as a consumer is whether to buy or lease your auto. Knowing the advantages and disadvantages of buying vs. leasing a new car or truck before you get to the car dealership can ease the decision-making process and may alleviate unpleasant surprises later.

Nearly one-third of all new vehicles (and up to 75% of all new luxury cars) are leased rather than purchased. But the decision to lease or buy must ultimately be made on an individual level, taking into consideration each person's facts and circumstances.

Buying

Advantages.

• You own the car at the end of the loan term.
• Lower insurance premiums.
• No mileage limitations.

Disadvantages.

• Higher upfront costs.
• Higher monthly payments.
• Buyer bears risk of future value decrease.

Leasing

Advantages.

• Lower upfront costs.
• Lower monthly payments.
• Lessor assumes risk of future value decrease.
• Greater purchasing power.
• Potential additional income tax benefits.
• Ease of disposition.

Disadvantages.

• You do not own the car at the end of the lease term, although you may have the option to purchase at that time.
• Higher insurance premiums.
• Potential early lease termination charges.
• Possible additional costs for abnormal wear & tear (determined by lessor).
• Extra charges for mileage in excess of mileage specified in your lease contract.

Before you make the decision whether to lease or buy your next vehicle, it makes sense to ask yourself the following questions:

How long do I plan to keep the vehicle? If you want to keep the car or truck longer than the term of the lease, you may be better off purchasing the vehicle as purchase contracts usually result in a lower overall cost of ownership.

How much am I going to drive the vehicle? If you are an outside salesperson and you drive 30,000 miles per year, any benefits you may have gained upfront by leasing will surely be lost in the end to excess mileage charges. Most lease contracts include mileage of between 12,000-15,000 per year - any miles driven in excess of the limit are subject to some pretty hefty charges.

How expensive of a vehicle do I want? If you can really only afford monthly payments on a Honda Civic but you've got your eye on a Lexus, you may want to consider leasing. Leasing usually results in lower upfront fees in the form of lower down payments and deferred sales tax, in addition to lower monthly payments. This combination can make it easier for you to get into the car of your dreams.

If you have any questions about the tax ramifications regarding buying vs. leasing an automobile or would like some additional information when making your decision, please contact the office.

Q. Last year I underwent a number of elective surgical procedures and would like to deduct the cost of these expensive procedures on my personal tax return. What are the criteria for medical expenses to be deductible? Do they have to exceed a certain dollar amount?

Q. Last year I underwent a number of elective surgical procedures and would like to deduct the cost of these expensive procedures on my personal tax return. What are the criteria for medical expenses to be deductible? Do they have to exceed a certain dollar amount?

A. While many medical expenses are clearly deductible, such as amounts paid for doctors/dentists, insurance premiums, prescription drugs, etc.., there are certain medical expenses that are not so easily identifiable as deductible and may require certain conditions be present to be considered deductible. Here are some examples of medical expenses that you should make sure you don't miss on this year's tax return:

Cosmetic Surgery. In general, you cannot include in medical expenses the amount you pay for unnecessary cosmetic surgery. "Unnecessary cosmetic surgery" is defined as any procedure that is directed at improving the patient's appearance and does not meaningfully promote the proper function of the body or prevent or treat illness or disease. Examples of these types of procedures include face-lifts, hair transplants, hair removal and liposuction. However, you can include in medical expenses the amount you pay for cosmetic surgery if it is necessary to improve a deformity arising from, or directly related to, a congenital abnormality, a personal injury resulting from an accident or trauma, or a disfiguring disease.

Stop Smoking Treatments. A new law change in 1999 means that you can now include in medical expenses amounts you paid for a program to stop smoking. Keep in mind, however, that you cannot include in medical expenses amounts you paid for drugs that do not require a prescription, such as nicotine gum or patches, that are designed to help stop smoking.

Alcoholism treatment. Medical expenses incurred in connection with an inpatient's treatment at a therapeutic center for alcohol addiction (including meals and lodging provided by the center during treatment) are deductible medical expenses. In addition, if you receive medical advice that states that you should attend meetings of an Alcoholics Anonymous Club for the treatment of a disease involving the excessive use of alcoholic liquors, you are entitled to deduct medical transportation expenses (at 10 cents per mile) for travel to the meetings.

Capital expenditures. Certain expenses you paid for special equipment installed in your home, or for improvements, may be deductible as medical expenses. To qualify, the main purpose of the expense is medical care for you, your spouse, or a dependent. The costs of permanent improvements that increase the value of the property may be partly included as a medical expense. These costs are deductible medical expenses to the extent that they exceed the increase in the value of the property. If the value of the property is not increased by the improvement, the entire cost is included as a medical expense.

Limit on deductibility. Unfortunately, the IRS has imposed a rather steep threshold for the deduction of medical expenses. Taxpayers can deduct only the amount of their medical and dental expenses that exceed 7.5% of their adjusted gross income.

If, as you are gathering your tax information, you have any questions about the potential deductibility of a medical expenditure, please contact our office and we will be happy to assist you.

Please contact the office for more information on this subject and how it pertains to your specific tax or financial situation.