Newsletters

The IRS has postponed the federal tax filing and payment deadlines, and associated interest, penalties, and additions to tax, for certain taxpayers who have been adversely affected by the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. 

The IRS has postponed the federal tax filing and payment deadlines, and associated interest, penalties, and additions to tax, for certain taxpayers who have been adversely affected by the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. For individual taxpayers, the notice postpones to May 17, 2021, certain deadlines that would normally fall on April 15, 2021, such as the time for making IRA contributions and for filing federal income tax refund claims. The notice also extends the time for return preparers to participate in the Annual Filing Season Program for the 2021 calendar year.

The IRS has released this notice as a follow-up to a previous announcement on March 17 that the federal income tax filing due date for individuals for the 2020 tax year was extended from April 15, 2021, to May 17, 2021. This notice provides details on the additional tax deadlines which have been postponed until May 17.

Federal Tax Returns and Tax Payments
For an affected taxpayer, the due date for filing federal income tax returns in the Form 1040 series having an original due date of April 15, 2021, and for making federal income tax payments in connection with one of these forms, is automatically postponed to May 17, 2021. Affected taxpayers do not have to file any form, including Form 4868, Application for Automatic Extension of Time to File U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, to obtain this relief.

This relief includes the filing of all schedules, returns, and other forms that are filed as attachments to the Form 1040 series, or are required to be filed by the due date of the Form 1040 series, including, for example, Schedule H, Household Employment Taxes, and Schedule SE, Self-Employment Tax, as well as:

• Form 965-A (Individual Report of Net 965 Tax Liability);
• Form 3520 (Annual Return to Report Transactions with Foreign Trusts and Receipt of Certain Foreign Gifts);
• Form 5329 (Additional Taxes on Qualified Plans (Including IRAs) and Other Tax-Favored Accounts);
• Form 5471 (Information Return of U.S. Persons With Respect to Certain Foreign Corporations);
• Form 8621 (Information Return by a Shareholder of a Passive Foreign Investment Company or Qualified Electing Fund);
• Form 8858 (Information Return of U.S. Persons With Respect to Foreign Disregarded Entities (FDEs) and Foreign Branches (FBs));
• Form 8865 (Return of U.S. Persons With Respect to Certain Foreign Partnerships);
• Form 8915-E (Qualified 2020 Disaster Retirement Plan Distributions and Repayments); and
• Form 8938 (Statement of Specified Foreign Financial Assets).

Additionally, elections that are made or required to be made on a timely filed Form 1040 series (or attachment to such form) will be timely made if filed on such form or attachment, as appropriate, on or before May 17, 2021.

Claims for Refund
Individuals with a period of limitations to file a claim for credit or refund of federal income tax expiring on or after April 15, 2021, and before May 17, 2021, have until May 17, 2021, to file those claims for credit or refund. This postponement is limited to claims for credit or refund properly filed on the Form 1040 series or on a Form 1040-X. As a result of this postponement, the period beginning on April 15, 2021, and ending on May 17, 2021, will be disregarded in determining whether the filing of those claims is timely.

IRA and HSA Contributions
The postponement also automatically postpones to May 17, 2021, the time for affected taxpayers to make 2020 contributions to their individual retirement arrangements (IRAs and Roth IRAs), health savings accounts (HSAs), Archer Medical Savings Accounts (Archer MSAs), and Coverdell education savings accounts (Coverdell ESAs). It also automatically postpones to May 17, 2021, the time for reporting and payment of the 10-percent additional tax on amounts includible in gross income from 2020 distributions from IRAs or workplace-based retirement plans.

For affected taxpayers that must file forms in the Form 5498 series, the due date for filing and furnishing the Form 5498 series is postponed to June 30, 2021. The period beginning on the original due date of those forms and ending on June 30, 2021, will be disregarded in the calculation of any penalty for failure to file those forms.

Estimated Tax Payments, Other Items Not Extended
The postponement also automatically postpones to May 17, 2021, the time for affected taxpayers to make 2020 contributions to their individual retirement arrangements (IRAs and Roth IRAs), health savings accounts (HSAs), Archer Medical Savings Accounts (Archer MSAs), and Coverdell education savings accounts (Coverdell ESAs). It also automatically postpones to May 17, 2021, the time for reporting and payment of the 10-percent additional tax on amounts includible in gross income from 2020 distributions from IRAs or workplace-based retirement plans.

The IRS has provided guidance related to the temporary 100-percent deduction for business meals provided by a restaurant. The Taxpayer Certainty and Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2020 ( P.L. 116-260) temporarily increased the deduction from 50 percent to 100 percent for a business’s restaurant food and beverage expenses for 2021 and 2022. All other food and beverage expenses are still subject to the 50 percent deduction limitation unless some other exception applies.

The IRS has provided guidance related to the temporary 100-percent deduction for business meals provided by a restaurant. The Taxpayer Certainty and Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2020 ( P.L. 116-260) temporarily increased the deduction from 50 percent to 100 percent for a business’s restaurant food and beverage expenses for 2021 and 2022. All other food and beverage expenses are still subject to the 50 percent deduction limitation unless some other exception applies.

Restaurants Defined
According to the IRS’s guidance, a restaurant is a business that prepares and sells food or beverages to retail customers for immediate consumption. Note that the food and beverages do not need to be consumed on the premises for the 100-percent deduction to apply.

Restaurants are not businesses that predominantly sell pre-packaged food or beverages that are intended for later consumption. Food or beverages purchased from such businesses are still subject to the 50-percent deduction limitation. Examples of businesses that are not restaurants include grocery stores, specialty food stores, liquor stores, drug stores, convenience stores, newsstands, vending machines, or kiosks.

Restaurants are also not eating facilities located at an employer’s business that provide meals that are excluded from the employees’ gross income under Code Sec. 119, or that are considered a de minimis fringe under Code Sec. 132(e)(2). This also applies to eating facilities on the employer’s premises that are operated by a third party with regards to Reg. §1.132-7(a)(3).

Effective Date
This IRS guidance is effective for food and beverages purchases made after December 31, 2020, and before January 1, 2023.

The IRS has issued guidance for employers claiming the employee retention credit under Act Sec. 2301 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) ( P.L. 116-136), as modified by Act Secs. 206 and 207 of the Taxpayer Certainty and Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2020 (Relief Act) (Division EE of P.L. 116-260), for the first and second calendar quarters in 2021. The guidance amplifies previous guidance which addressed amendments made by section 206 of the Relief Act for calendar quarters in 2020.

The IRS has issued guidance for employers claiming the employee retention credit under Act Sec. 2301 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) ( P.L. 116-136), as modified by Act Secs. 206 and 207 of the Taxpayer Certainty and Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2020 (Relief Act) (Division EE of P.L. 116-260), for the first and second calendar quarters in 2021. The guidance amplifies previous guidance which addressed amendments made by section 206 of the Relief Act for calendar quarters in 2020.

In general, eligible employers can claim a refundable employee retention credit against the employer share of Social Security tax equal to 70 percent of the qualified wages they pay to employees after December 31, 2020, through June 30, 2021. Qualified wages are limited to $10,000 per employee per calendar quarter in 2021. Thus, the maximum employee retention credit available is $7,000 per employee per calendar quarter, for a total of $14,000 for the first two calendar quarters of 2021.

For calendar quarters beginning after 2020, an employer is generally eligible for the credit if it was carrying on a trade or business during the calendar quarter for which the credit is determined, and either (1) had operations that were fully or partially suspended during the calendar quarter due to governmental orders limiting commerce, travel, or group meetings due to COVID-19, or (2) experienced a decline in gross receipts for the calendar quarter when compared to the same quarter in 2019.

The guidance explains changes made to the employee retention credit for the first two calendar quarters of 2021, including:

• the increase in the maximum credit amount,
• the expansion of the types of employers that may be eligible to claim the credit,
• modifications to the gross receipts test,
• revisions to the definition of qualified wages, and
• new restrictions on the ability of eligible employers to request an advance payment of the credit.

The guidance does not address the employee retention credit provided by Code Sec. 3134, enacted by the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 ( P.L. 117-2), for wages paid after June 30, 2021, and before January 1, 2022. The IRS will address Code Sec. 3134 in future guidance.

Highlights of some of the items addressed in the guidance are summarized below.

Eligible Employers
While the employee retention credit is not available to most governmental employers, it is available to tax-exempt organizations described in Code Sec. 501(c)(1), and to any governmental entity that is a college or university or whose principal purpose is providing medical or hospital care. For this purpose, a college or university means an educational organization as defined in Code Sec. 170(b)(1)(A)(ii) and Reg. §1.170A-9(c)(1). An entity that has the principal purpose or function of providing medical or hospital care means an entity that has the principal purpose or function of providing medical or hospital care within the meaning of Code Sec. 170(b)(1)(A)(iii) and Reg. §1.170A-9(d)(1).

Decline in Gross Receipts
One way an employer can be eligible for the credit is if it experienced a decline in gross receipts. Whether an employer is an eligible employer based on a decline in gross receipts is determined separately for each calendar quarter, and is based on an 80 percent threshold compared to the same calendar quarter in 2019.

If an employer did not exist as of the beginning of the first calendar quarter of 2019, the employer generally determines whether the decline in gross receipts test is met in the first calendar quarter of 2021 by comparing its gross receipts in that quarter of 2021 to its gross receipts in the first calendar quarter of 2020. If an employer did not exist as of the beginning of the second calendar quarter of 2019, the employer generally determines whether the test is met in the second calendar quarter of 2021 by comparing its gross receipts in that quarter of 2021 to its gross receipts in the second calendar quarter of 2020. An employer may also elect to use an alternative quarter to calculate gross receipts.

Eligible employers must maintain documentation to support the determination of the decline in gross receipts, including which calendar quarter an eligible employer elects to use in measuring the decline.

Qualified Wages
Whether wage payments by an eligible employer will be considered qualified wages depend, in part, on the average number of full-time employees an eligible employer employed during 2019. For the first and second calendar quarters of 2021, large eligible employers are those whose average number of full-time employees during 2019 was greater than 500. For these employers, qualified wages are wages paid to an employee for time that the employee is not working for the reasons the credit is allowed.

Small eligible employers are those whose average number of full-time employees during 2019 was 500 or less. For these employers, qualified wages are the wages paid an employee whether the employee is working or not working for the reasons the credit is allowed.

An employer may not claim a credit under Code Secs. 41, 45A, 45P, 45S, 51, or 1396 with qualified wages for which it claims the employee retention credit, but it may be able to take a credit under these provisions for wages for which it did not claim an employee retention credit if the particular credit’s requirements are met.

Claiming the Credit
Eligible employers may continue to access the employee retention credit for the first and second calendar quarters of 2021 prior to filing their employment tax returns by reducing employment tax deposits in anticipation of the credit. However, advance payment of the employee retention credit is available only to small eligible employers, who can may elect to receive an advance payment of not more than 70 percent of the average quarterly wages paid in calendar year 2019.

For this purpose, average quarterly wages generally means the average of wages or compensation determined without regard to the social security wage base, paid in each calendar quarter in 2019. The guidance provides details for calculating average quarterly wages. Small eligible employers that come into existence in 2021 are ineligible to receive advance payment.

Effect on Other Documents
Notice 2021-20, I.R.B. 2021-11, 922, is amplified.

The IRS has issued guidance clarifying that amounts paid for personal protective equipment—such as masks, hand sanitizer and sanitizing wipes—for the primary purpose of preventing the spread of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19 PPE) are treated as amounts paid for medical care under Code Sec. 213(d).

The IRS has issued guidance clarifying that amounts paid for personal protective equipment—such as masks, hand sanitizer and sanitizing wipes—for the primary purpose of preventing the spread of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19 PPE) are treated as amounts paid for medical care under Code Sec. 213(d).

Therefore, amounts paid by an individual taxpayer for COVID-19 PPE for use by the taxpayer, the taxpayer’s spouse, or the taxpayer’s dependent(s) that are not compensated for, by insurance or otherwise, are deductible under Code Sec. 213(a) if the taxpayer’s total medical expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income.

Since amounts paid for COVID-19 PPE are medical care expenses under Code Sec. 213(d), they are also eligible to be paid or reimbursed under:

• health flexible spending arrangements (health FSAs),
• Archer medical savings accounts (Archer MSAs),
• health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs), or
• health savings accounts (HSAs).

Note, however, that amounts paid or reimbursed under one of these arrangements or accounts are not deductible under Code Sec. 213.

Group Health Plans
If COVID-19 PPE expenses may not be reimbursed under the terms of a group health plan (including a health FSA and an HRA), the plan can be amended under this IRS guidance to provide for reimbursements of expenses for COVID-19 PPE incurred for any period beginning on or after January 1, 2020. Such an amendment will not be treated as causing a failure of any reimbursement to be excludable from income under Code Sec. 105(b), or as causing a cafeteria plan to fail to meet the requirements of Code Sec. 125.

Group health plans can be amended under this IRS guidance if:

• the amendment is adopted no later than the last day of the first calendar year beginning after the end of the plan year in which the amendment is effective,
• no amendment with retroactive effect is adopted after December 31, 2022, and
• the plan is operated consistent with the terms of the amendment, including during the period beginning on the effective date of the amendment through the date the amendment is adopted.

The U.S. Department of Labor has published a new webpage with guidance implementing the Continuation of Health Coverage premium assistance provisions of the American Rescue Plan (ARP), to provide full COBRA premium assistance to certain individuals who experienced a reduction in hours or involuntary termination of employment.

The U.S. Department of Labor has published a new webpage with guidance implementing the Continuation of Health Coverage premium assistance provisions of the American Rescue Plan (ARP), to provide full COBRA premium assistance to certain individuals who experienced a reduction in hours or involuntary termination of employment. This guidance, from the Labor Department’s Employee Benefits Security Administration, includes documents to implement these provisions, such as FAQs about COBRA premium assistance, FAQs on COBRA continuation health coverage for workers, and model notices.

COBRA Premium Subsidy
COBRA allows employees and their families who would otherwise lose their group health coverage due to certain life events to continue their group health coverage, known as COBRA continuation coverage. The ARP provides a 100 percent premium subsidy between April 1, 2021 and Sept. 30, 2021, for individuals whose reduction in hours or involuntary termination of employment makes them eligible for COBRA continuation coverage during this period. The ARP also requires group health plans to provide notices to individuals losing health coverage to inform them about premium assistance that may be available to them.

The IRS has announced that, under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARP) ( P.L. 117-2), the requirement that taxpayers increase their tax liability by all or a portion of their excess advance payments of the Premium Tax Credit (excess APTC) is suspended for tax year (TY) 2020.

The IRS has announced that, under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARP) ( P.L. 117-2), the requirement that taxpayers increase their tax liability by all or a portion of their excess advance payments of the Premium Tax Credit (excess APTC) is suspended for tax year (TY) 2020. A taxpayer’s excess APTC is the amount by which the taxpayer’s advance payments of the Premium Tax Credit (APTC) exceed his or her Premium Tax Credit (PTC). Eligible taxpayers with excess APTC for 2020 are not required to file Form 8962, Premium Tax Credit, or report an excess advance Premium Tax Credit repayment on their 2020 Form 1040 or Form 1040-SR when they file. Taxpayers claiming a net PTC must file Form 8962 when they file their TY 2020 return.

Taxpayers who have already filed their TY 2020 return and who have excess APTC do not need to file an amended tax return or contact the IRS. Taxpayers who enrolled, or enrolled a family member, in health insurance coverage for TY 2020 through the marketplace should have received Form 1095-A, Health Insurance Marketplace Statement, from the marketplace. Taxpayers can check with their tax professional or use tax software to figure the amount of allowable PTC and reconcile it with their APTC received using the information from Form 1095-A.

The Premium Tax Credit helps pay for health insurance coverage bought from the health insurance marketplace. If the taxpayer’s PTC computed on the return is more than the APTC paid on the taxpayer’s behalf during the year, the difference is a net PTC.

The IRS has extended the penalty relief provided in Notice 2020-22, I.R.B. 2020-17, 664, for failure to deposit employment taxes, to eligible employers that reduce their required deposits in anticipation of the following credits.

The IRS has extended the penalty relief provided in Notice 2020-22, I.R.B. 2020-17, 664, for failure to deposit employment taxes, to eligible employers that reduce their required deposits in anticipation of the following credits:

• the paid sick and family leave credits under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (Families First Act) ( P.L. 116-127), as amended by the COVID-related Tax Relief Act of 2020 (Tax Relief Act) (Division N of P.L. 116-260), for qualified leave wages paid with respect to the period beginning January 1, 2021, and ending March 31, 2021;
• the paid sick and family leave credits under Code Secs. 3131, 3132, and 3133, added by the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARP) ( P.L. 117-2), for qualified leave wages paid with respect to the period beginning April 1, 2021, and ending September 30, 2021;
• the employee retention credit under section 2301 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) ( P.L. 116-136), as amended by the Taxpayer Certainty and Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2020 (Relief Act) (Division EE of P.L. 116-260), for qualified wages paid with respect to the period beginning January 1, 2021, and ending June 30, 2021;
• the employee retention credit under Code Sec. 3134, added by ARP, for qualified wages paid with respect to the period beginning July 1, 2021, and ending December 31, 2021; and
• the COBRA Continuation Coverage Premium Assistance credit under Code Sec. 6432, added by ARP, for continuation coverage premiums not paid by assistance eligible individuals under section 9501(a)(1) of the ARP, during the period beginning April 1, 2021, and ending September 30, 2021.

Background
Eligible employers claim the paid sick and family leave credits under the Families First Act, and the employee retention credit under the CARES Act, against the employer’s share of the Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (Social Security) portion of FICA tax under Code Sec. 3111(a). Employers that are eligible for the paid sick and family leave credits under Code Secs. 3131, 3132, and 3133, the employee retention credit under Code Sec. 3134, or the COBRA Continuation Coverage credit under Code Sec. 6432, can claim the credit(s) against the employer’s share of the Hospital Insurance (Medicare) portion of FICA tax under Code Sec. 3111(b). The credits are also available to eligible railroad employers for the attributable Railroad Retirement Tax Act (RRTA) taxes under Code Sec. 3221(a).

These refundable tax credits are reported on the employer’s employment tax return for reporting its FICA tax liability, which for most employers is the quarterly Form 941. Certain employers may claim an advance payment of the refundable credits by filing Form 7200, Advance Payment of Employer Credits Due to COVID-19.

Code Sec. 6656 imposes a penalty for failure to timely deposit required tax amounts, unless the failure is due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect. Failure to deposit employment taxes required under Code Sec. 6302 generally subjects an employer to the penalty. The various legislative acts and provisions implementing the refundable employment tax credits described above either instruct the IRS to waive the penalty or authorize guidance that provides penalty relief.

Paid Leave Credit Penalty Relief
An employer can reduce an employment tax deposit for a calendar quarter without a penalty, by the amount of the applicable paid sick or family leave credit anticipated for the calendar quarter prior to the required deposit, as long as:

• the employer paid qualified leave wages, qualified health plan expenses, or qualified collectively bargained contributions, for the period beginning on April 1, 2021, and ending on September 30, 2021, to its employees in the calendar quarter prior to the time of the required deposit,
• the amount of employment taxes that the employer does not timely deposit is less than or equal to its anticipated applicable paid leave credits claimed for the calendar quarter as of the time of the required deposit, and
• the employer did not seek payment of an advance credit by filing Form 7200 for the anticipated credits it relied upon to reduce its deposits.

The total amount of the deposit reduction cannot be more than the total amount of the employer’s anticipated paid leave credits as of the time of the required deposit, minus any amount of those anticipated credits that had previously been used (1) to reduce a prior required deposit in the calendar quarter and obtain this relief or (2) to seek payment of an advance credit.

Employee Retention Credit Penalty Relief
After a reduction, if any, of an employment tax deposit by the amount of the anticipated paid sick or family leave credits, an employer may further reduce an employment tax deposit for a calendar quarter without a penalty, by the amount of its applicable employee retention credit anticipated for the calendar quarter prior to the required deposit, as long as:

• the employer paid qualified retention wages for the period beginning January 1, 2021 and ending December 31, 2021, to its employees in the calendar quarter prior to the time of the required deposit,
• the amount of employment taxes that the employer does not timely deposit— reduced by the amount of employment taxes not deposited in anticipation of the paid leave credits claimed— is less than or equal to the amount of the employer’s anticipated applicable employee retention credits for the calendar quarter as of the time of the required deposit, and
• the employer did not seek payment of an advance credit by filing Form 7200 for the anticipated credits it relied upon to reduce its deposits.

The total amount of any deposit reduction cannot be more than the total amount of the employer’s anticipated employee retention credit as of the time of the required deposit, minus any amount of the anticipated credit that had previously been used (1) to reduce a prior required deposit in the calendar quarter and obtain this relief or (2) to seek payment of an advance credit.

COBRA Credit Penalty Relief
After a reduction, if any, of an employment tax deposit by the amount of the anticipated paid sick or family leave credits and the anticipated employee retention credit, an employer may further reduce an employment tax deposit for a calendar quarter without a penalty, by the amount of the employer’s COBRA continuation coverage credit anticipated for the calendar quarter prior to the required deposit, as long as:

• the employer is a “person to whom premiums are payable,”
• the amount of employment taxes that the employer does not timely deposit— reduced by the amount of employment taxes not deposited in anticipation of the paid leave credits and the employee retention credits claimed—is less than or equal to the amount of the employer’s anticipated credits under Code Sec. 6432 for the calendar quarter as of the time of the required deposit, and
• the employer did not seek payment of an advance credit by filing Form 7200 for the anticipated credits it relied upon to reduce its deposits.

The total amount of any deposit reduction cannot be more than the total amount of the employer’s anticipated COBRA continuation coverage credit as of the time of the required deposit, minus any amount of the anticipated credit that had previously been used (1) to reduce a prior required deposit in the calendar quarter and obtain this relief or (2) to seek payment of an advance credit.

Effect on Other Documents
Notice 2020-22, I.R.B. 2020-17, 664, is amplified.

Continuing an ongoing effort to help those experiencing homelessness during the pandemic, the IRS has reminded people who do not have a permanent address or a bank account that may still qualify for Economic Impact Payments (EIP) and other tax benefits.

Continuing an ongoing effort to help those experiencing homelessness during the pandemic, the IRS has reminded people who do not have a permanent address or a bank account that may still qualify for Economic Impact Payments (EIP) and other tax benefits.

While EIPs are made automatically to most people, payments cannot be issued to eligible Americans when there is no information available in the tax agency’s systems. For this reason, the IRS urges employers and others to share information about EIPs and encourage the rural poor and other historically under-served groups to file returns so they can receive the benefits they are entitled to.

Individuals who do not normally file tax returns should nevertheless file a basic 2020 tax return with the IRS. Returns can be filed for free using the Free File tool available on IRS.gov. Once the return is processed, the IRS can send stimulus payments to an address that is selected by the eligible individual. Importantly, people do not need a permanent address, bank account, or a job. Payments are issued to eligible individuals even if the person has not filed returns in years.

Individuals in this category can still qualify for the first two EIPs when they file their 2020 return by claiming recovery rebate credit. For the current round of payments, individuals who are experiencing homelessness may qualify to receive $1,400 for themselves. If they are married or have dependents, they can get an additional $1,400 for each of their family members.

In addition, some eligible workers experiencing homelessness may qualify for Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). To be eligible, the worker must have lived in the U.S. for more than half of the year and meet other requirements. For 2020, the income limit is $15,820 for individuals with no children, and $21,710 for couples with no children.

If individuals want to receive their payments through direct deposit, many financial institutions are helping them open a low-cost or no-cost bank account. Those that open accounts will then have an account and routing number available when they claim a direct deposit of their EIP. Those with a prepaid debit card may be able to have their refund applied to the card.

Death benefits that an S corporation provided to its sole shareholder under a split-dollar life insurance arrangement were employee compensation rather than a corporate distribution. In reaching this decision, the Tax Court firmly rejected the contrary conclusion reached by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in J.J. Machacek, CA-6, 2018-2 U.S.T.C. 50,447.

Death benefits that an S corporation provided to its sole shareholder under a split-dollar life insurance arrangement were employee compensation rather than a corporate distribution. In reaching this decision, the Tax Court firmly rejected the contrary conclusion reached by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in J.J. Machacek, CA-6, 2018-2 U.S.T.C. 50,447.

Background
The taxpayers were a medical doctor and his wife. The doctor was the sole owner of his practice, which was organized as an S corporation that employed him and his wife. The taxpayers received wages from the S corporation, as well as fringe benefits from an employee welfare benefit plan.

The fringe benefits included death benefits that the Tax Court had previously concluded were provided under a compensatory split-dollar life insurance program ( R. De Los Santos, Dec. 61.270). However. the taxpayers responded by seeking summary judgment that the economic benefits provided by the program actually constituted a corporate distribution.

Tax Court Rejects Machacek
In Machacek, the Sixth Circuit had relied on Reg. §1.301-1(q), which states that economic benefits that a corporation provides to a shareholder under a split-dollar life insurance policy are treated as distributions of property. The Sixth Circuit emphasized that the regulation’s cross reference to Reg. §1.61-22(b) meant that it applied to both compensatory and noncompensatory split-dollar arrangements.

The Tax Court rejected this analysis. Instead, it determined that Code Sec. 301 clearly requires distributions to be made to a shareholder in the shareholder’s capacity as a shareholder. Because the compensatory split-dollar life insurance arrangement afforded benefits to the doctor in his capacity as an employee of the S corporation, the Tax Court concluded that the economic benefits he received under the arrangement could not be characterized as “distributions” under Code Sec. 301.

S Corporation Fringe Benefits
The benefits also were fringe benefits paid by an S corporation under Code Sec. 1372. As such, they were treated as guaranteed partnership payments that were ordinary income, and not a corporate distribution.

The termination date for an empowerment zone designation under Code Sec. 1391 is generally deemed to extend until December 31, 2025. However, the state or local government that nominated the zone may decline the deemed extension.

The termination date for an empowerment zone designation under Code Sec. 1391 is generally deemed to extend until December 31, 2025. However, the state or local government that nominated the zone may decline the deemed extension.

Empowerment Zone Designation Termination Dates
Empowerment zone designations generally continue until the termination date selected by the government that nominated the zone (the designated termination date), or the termination date established by legislation (the statutory termination date).

The statutory termination date has been extended multiple times, with each extension deemed to extend the designated termination date as well. Most recently, the Taxpayer Certainty and Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2020 ( P.L. 116-260) extended the statutory termination date to December 31, 2025. Thus, the designated termination dates for all empowerment zones are also deemed to be extended to December 31 2025.

A state or local government may decline the extension via a written notification to the IRS by May 25, 2021. The notification must be faxed to Bruce Chang, CC:ITA:B07, at (855) 576-2341.

Rev. Proc. 2020-16, I.R.B. 2020-27, 10, is obsoleted for tax years beginning after 2020.

The IRS and the Treasury Department have automatically extended the federal income tax filing due date for individuals for the 2020 tax year, from April 15, 2021, to May 17, 2021. Individual taxpayers can also postpone federal income tax payments for the 2020 tax year due on April 15, 2021, to May 17, 2021, without penalties and interest, regardless of the amount owed.

The IRS and the Treasury Department have automatically extended the federal income tax filing due date for individuals for the 2020 tax year, from April 15, 2021, to May 17, 2021. Individual taxpayers can also postpone federal income tax payments for the 2020 tax year due on April 15, 2021, to May 17, 2021, without penalties and interest, regardless of the amount owed.

This postponement applies to individual taxpayers, including those who pay self-employment tax. Penalties, interest and additions to tax will begin to accrue on any remaining unpaid balances as of May 17, 2021.

The IRS has informed taxpayers that they do not need to file any forms or call the IRS to qualify for this automatic federal tax filing and payment relief.

Individual taxpayers who need additional time to file beyond the May 17 deadline can request a filing extension until October 15 by filing Form 4868 through their tax professional or tax software, or by using the Free File link on the IRS website. Filing Form 4868 gives taxpayers until October 15 to file their 2020 tax return, but does not grant an extension of time to pay taxes due.

Not for Estimated Taxes, Other Items

This relief does not apply to estimated tax payments that are due on April 15, 2021. Taxes must be paid as taxpayers earn or receive income during the year, either through withholding or estimated tax payments. Also, the federal tax filing deadline postponement to May 17, 2021, only applies to individual federal income returns and tax (including tax on self-employment income) payments otherwise due April 15, 2021, not state tax payments or deposits or payments of any other type of federal tax. The IRS urges taxpayers to check with their state tax agencies for details on state filing and payment deadlines.

Winter Storm Relief

The IRS had previously announced relief for victims of the February winter storms in Texas, Oklahoma and Louisiana. These states have until June 15, 2021, to file various individual and business tax returns and make tax payments. The extension to May 17 does not affect the June deadline.

On March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. Some of the tax-related provisions include the following:

On March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. Some of the tax-related provisions include the following:

• 2021 Recovery Rebate Credits of $1,400 for eligible individuals ($2,800 for joint filers) plus $1,400 for each eligible dependent. Credit begins to phase out at adjusted gross income of $150,000 for joint filers, $112,500 for a head of household, $75,000 for other individuals. The IRS has already begun making advance refund payments of the credit to taxpayers.
• Exclusion of up to $10,200 of unemployment compensation from income for tax year 2020 for households with adjusted gross income under $150,000.
• Enhancements of many personal tax credits meant to benefit individuals with lower incomes and children.
• Exclusion of student loan debt from income, for loans discharged between December 31, 2020, and January 1, 2026.
• For tax years after December 31, 2026, the $1,000,000 deduction limit on compensation of a publicly-held corporation’s covered employees will expand to include the five highest paid employees after the CEO and CFO. The rule in current law applies to the CEO, the CFO, and the next three highest paid officers.
• For the payroll credits for paid sick and family leave: The credit amounts are increased by an employer’s collectively bargained pension plan and apprenticeship program contributions that are allocable to paid leave wages. Also, paid leave wages do not include wages taken into account as payroll costs under certain Small Business Administration programs.

The president is conducting a nationwide tour to explain and promote the over 600-page, $1.9 trillion legislation.

Stimulus Payments

Many of the 158.5 million American households eligible for the payments from the stimulus package can expect to receive them soon, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said the same afternoon Biden signed the legislation into law. Payments are coming by direct deposit, checks, or a debit card to those eligible.

FTC: Beware of Scams

Scammers are right now crawling out from under their rocks to fleece businesses and consumers receiving the aid, the Federal Trade Commission warned on March 12.

It is important for business owners and consumers to know that the federal government will never ask them to pay anything up front to get this money, said the FTC: "That’s a scam. Every time." The regulatory agency also cautioned that the government will not call, text, email or direct mail aid recipients to ask for a Social Security, bank account, or credit card number.

The IRS needs to issue new rules and guidance to implement the American Rescue Plan, experts said on March 11 as President Joe Biden signed his COVID-19 relief measure.

The IRS needs to issue new rules and guidance to implement the American Rescue Plan, experts said on March 11 as President Joe Biden signed his COVID-19 relief measure.

"I hope Treasury will say something very soon: FAQs, press release, something. IRS undoubtedly will have to write new regs," commented Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center Senior Fellow Howard Gleckman. He stressed IRS certainly will have to figure out how to make the retroactive tax exemption for some 2020 unemployment benefits work. Gleckman also said he suspects the Child Tax Credit will require new guidance.

Gleckman claimed a new form this late in the tax season is unlikely. "Amended returns seems easiest," said the veteran IRS observer.

To help implement the tax-related changes in the American Rescue Plan, a colleague at the Tax Policy Center, Janet Holtzblatt, said that she, as well, is looking for guidance from the IRS on what taxpayers would do if they received unemployment benefits in 2020. Holtzblatt noted the law would exclude $10,200 of those benefits from adjusted gross income if the taxpayers’ adjusted gross income is less than $150,000.

What people will want to know, Holtzblatt stated, is:

• What to do if they already filed their tax return and paid income taxes on those benefits? Do they have to file an amended tax return just to get the tax refund for that reason, or will the IRS establish a simpler method to do so?
• And going forward, what about people who have not yet filed their tax return? If a new form is not released, what should they report on the existing return—the full amount or the partial amount? And how will the IRS know when the tax return is processed whether the taxpayer reported the full amount or the partial amount? (Eventually, the IRS could—when, after the filing season is over and tax returns are matched to 1099s from UI offices—but that could be months before taxpayers would be made whole.)

For the CARES Act, Holtzblatt said the IRS generally provided guidance through FAQs on their website which was insufficient for some tax professionals and later voided. "Some of their interpretations raised questions—and in the case of the treatment of prisoners, was challenged in the courts and led to a reversal of the interpretation in the FAQ," she explained.

National Association of Tax Professionals Director of Marketing, Communications & Business Development Nancy Kasten said new rules are musts and the agency will have to issue new FAQs, potentially on all of the key provisions in the legislation. The NATP executive asserted that old forms are going to need to be revised for Tax Year 2021. "Regarding 2020 retroactive items, we are waiting on IRS guidance," said Kasten.

National Conference of CPA Practitioners National Tax Policy Committee Co-Chair Steve Mankowski said the primary rules that will need to be written ASAP relate to the changes in the 2020 unemployment, especially since it appears to be income based as well as the increased child tax credit with advanced payments being sent monthly unless a taxpayer opts out. He added there will most likely need to be a worksheet added to the 2020 tax returns to show the unemployment received and adjusting UE income down to the taxable amount.

Mankowski, immediate past president of NCCCPAP said the primary items for new FAQs include the unemployment and the income limit on the non-taxability, changes in the child tax credit; and changes in the Employee Retention Credit.

In response to an email seeking what the agency plans to do to help implement the pandemic relief measure, an IRS spokesman forwarded the following statement released on March 10:

"The IRS is reviewing implementation plans for the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 that was recently passed by Congress. Additional information about a new round of Economic Impact Payments and other details will be made available on IRS.gov, once the legislation has been signed by the President."

Strengthening tax breaks to promote manufacturing received strong bipartisan support at a Senate Finance Committee hearing on March 16.

Strengthening tax breaks to promote manufacturing received strong bipartisan support at a Senate Finance Committee hearing on March 16.

Creating new incentives and making temporary ones permanent are particularly critical for helping American competitiveness in semiconductors, batteries and other high-tech products, Senate Banking Chair Ron Wyden (D-Ore) and Ranking Minority Party Member Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) stressed at the session.

Wyden said it is urgent business for elected officials to create conditions for the American semiconductor industry to thrive for years as part of a Congressional job creation toolkit. "I have seen too many short-term tax policies and mistakes," the Senate Finance Chair said. His sentiment was echoed by Crapo, the committee’s top Republican: "This is an area of bipartisan interest, and I welcome the opportunity to work with Chairman Wyden on this."

Crapo: Don’t Raise Corporate Rate

At the same time, Crapo cautioned Congress should not offset losses in federal revenue from increasing the stability of investment importance of protecting tax credit credits by raising the overall corporate tax rate. He said he is "very concerned" by reports he has heard that the White House is preparing to propose just that. Currently at 21 percent, the corporate tax rate was 35 percent before the 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act took effect.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Sloan School Of Management Accounting Professor Michelle Hanlon told the hearing raising corporate tax rates would put American industry at a competitive disadvantage globally. She said the 2017 tax cuts should be built upon to expand manufacturing.

While saying expanding tax breaks for tech including clean energy is critical, Senator Tom Carper (D-Del) warned the federal government is looking at an avalanche of debt. To lessen that surge, he said it is important to go after the tax gap: money that taxpayers owe but they are not paying.

Senator Todd Young (R-Ind) warned that left unchanged, starting in 2022 companies will no longer be able to expense research and development expenses in the year incurred. "This would come at the expense of manufacturing jobs," he said. Young has introduced legislation to let businesses write up R&D as they are currently allowed.

If businesses are not allowed to continue to amortize their research and development expenses in the year they are incurred, it would significantly increase the cost to perform R&D in the U.S., Intel Chief Financial Officer George Davis warned the panel.

Ford Embraces Biden Proposal

Ford Motor Company Vice President, Global Commodity Purchasing And Supplier Technical Assistance Jonathan Jennings told the Senate that the auto maker embraces President Joe Biden’s proposal to provide a 10 percent advanceable tax credit for companies creating U.S. manufacturing jobs.

IRS Commissioner Charles "Chuck" Rettig told Congress on February 23 that the backlog of 20 million unopened pieces of mail is gone.

IRS Commissioner Charles "Chuck" Rettig told Congress on February 23 that the backlog of 20 million unopened pieces of mail is gone.

"There were trailers in June filled (with unopened paper returns). There are none today," Rettig said in an appearance before the House Appropriations Committee Financial Services Subcommittee.

When there was a delay in getting to a return, Rettig said that a taxpayer was credited on the date the mail was received, not the day the payment was processed.

The IRS leader stated that virtual currency, which is designed to be anonymous, has probably significantly increased the amount of money taxpayers owed but have not paid since the last formal figure of $381 billion was estimated in 2013.

To close the gap between money owed and money paid, Rettig said there has to be an increase in guidance as well as enforcement. "The two go together," said Rettig, who pointed out that the IRS must support the people who are working to get their tax payments right as well as working against those who are trying to thwart the agency’s efforts.

Rettig cited high-income/high-wealth taxpayers, including high-income non-filers, as high enforcement priorities. "We have not pulled back enforcement efforts for higher income individuals during the pandemic. We can be impactful," said Rettig. He added that the IRS is using artificial intelligence and other information technology (IT) advances to catch wealthy tax law and tax rule breakers. "Our advanced data and analytic strategies allow us to catch instances of tax evasion that would not have been possible just a few years ago," said the IRS leader.

Rettig contended that the agency’s IT improvement efforts are being hampered by a shortage of funding. According to Rettig, three years into a six-year business modernization plan, the IRS has received half of the money it requested from Congress for the initiative.

One of the impacts of the pandemic on the IRS and the taxpayers and tax professionals it serves, said Rettig, is the average length of phone calls has risen to 17 minutes from 12 minutes because the issues have been more complex.

On another issue related to COVID-19, Rettig said the IRS has been diligently working to alert taxpayers and tax professionals to scams related to COVID-19, especially calls and email phishing attempts tied to the Economic Impact Payments (EIPs). He said people can reduce the chances of missing their EIP payments through lost, stolen or thrown-away debit cards by filing their tax returns electronically.

The Commissioner told the panel that the delay in starting the tax filing season this year will not add to any additional delays to refunds on returns claiming the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) or the Additional Child Tax Credit (ACTC).

Rettig also noted that taxpayers who interact with an IRS representative now have access to over-the-phone interpreter services in more than 350 languages.

The Tax Court ruled that rewards dollars that a married couple acquired for using their American Express credit cards to purchase debit cards and money orders—but not to purchase gift cards—were included in the taxpayers’ income. The court stated that its holdings were based on the unique circumstances of the case.

The Tax Court ruled that rewards dollars that a married couple acquired for using their American Express credit cards to purchase debit cards and money orders—but not to purchase gift cards—were included in the taxpayers’ income. The court stated that its holdings were based on the unique circumstances of the case.

Background

During the tax years at issue, each taxpayer had an American Express credit card that was part of a rewards program that paid reward dollars for eligible purchases made on their cards. Card users could redeem reward dollars as credits on their card balances (statement credits). To generate as many reward dollars as possible, the taxpayers used their American Express credit cards to buy as many Visa gift cards as they could from local grocery stores and pharmacies. They used the gift cards to purchase money orders, and deposited the money orders into their bank accounts. The husband occasionally purchased money orders with one of the American Express cards.

The taxpayers also occasionally paid their American Express bills through a money transfer company. Using this method, they paid the American Express bill with a reloadable debit card, and the money transfer company would transmit the payment to American Express electronically. The taxpayers used their American Express cards to purchase reloadable debit cards that they used to pay their American Express bills, and the purchase of debit cards and reloads also generated reward dollars.

All of the taxpayers' charges of more than $400 in single transactions with the American Express cards were for gift cards, reloadable debit cards, or money orders. On their joint tax returns, the taxpayers did not report any income from the rewards program.

The IRS determined that the reward dollars generated ordinary income to the taxpayers. When a payment is made by a seller to a customer as an inducement to purchase property, the payment generally does not constitute income but instead is treated as a purchase price adjustment to the basis of the property ( Pittsburgh Milk Co., 26 TC 707, Dec. 21,816; Rev. Rul. 76-96, 1976-1 CB 23). The IRS argued that the taxpayers did not purchase goods or property, but instead purchased cash equivalents—gift cards, reloads for debit cards, and money orders—to which no basis adjustment could apply. As a result, the reward dollars paid as statement credits for the charges relating to cash equivalents were an accession to wealth.

Rebate Policy; Cash Equivalency Doctrine

The Tax Court observed that the taxpayers' aggressive efforts to generate reward dollars created a dilemma for the IRS which was largely the result of the vagueness of IRS credit card reward policy. Under the rebate rule, a purchase incentive such as credit card rewards or points is not treated as income but as a reduction of the purchase price of what is purchased with the rewards or points ( Rev. Rul. 76-96; IRS Pub. 17). The court observed that the gift cards were quickly converted to assets that could be deposited into the taxpayers’ bank accounts to pay their American Express bills. According to the court, to avoid offending its long-standing policy that card rewards are not taxable, the IRS sought to apply the cash equivalence concept, but that concept was not a good fit in this case.

The court stated that a debt obligation is a cash equivalent where it is a promise to pay of a solvent obligor and the obligation is unconditional and assignable, not subject to set-offs, and is of a kind that is frequently transferred to lenders or investors at a discount not substantially greater than the generally prevailing premium for the use of money ( F. Cowden, CA-5, 61-1 ustc ¶9382, 289 F2d 202). The court found that the three types of transactions in this case failed to fit this definition.

The court ruled that the reward dollars associated with the gift card purchases were not properly included in income. The reward dollars taxpayers received were not notes, but instead were commitments by American Express to allow taxpayers credits against their card balances. The court found that American Express offered the rewards program as an inducement for card holders to use their American Express cards.

However, the court upheld the inclusion in income of the related reward dollars for the direct purchases of money orders and the cash infusions to the reloadable debit cards. The court observed that the money orders purchased with the American Express cards, and the infusion of cash into the reloadable debit cards, were difficult to reconcile with the IRS credit card reward policy. Unlike the gift cards, which had product characteristics, the court stated that no product or service was obtained in these uses of the American Express cards other than cash transfers.

As the court noted, the money orders were not properly treated as a product subject to a price adjustment because they were eligible for deposit into taxpayers' bank account from acquisition. The court similarly found that the cash infusions to the reloadable debit cards also were not product purchases. The reloadable debit cards were used for transfers by the money transfer company, which the court stated were arguably a service, but the reward dollars were issued for the cash infusions, not the transfer fees.

Finally, the court stated that its holdings were not based on the application of the cash equivalence doctrine, but instead on the incompatibility of the direct money order purchases and the debit card reloads with the IRS policy excluding credit card rewards for product and service purchases from income.

The IRS Office of Chief Counsel has embarked on its most far-reaching Settlement Days program by declaring the month of March 2021 as National Settlement Month. This program builds upon the success achieved from last year's many settlement day events while being shifted to virtual format due to the pandemic. Virtual Settlement Day (VSD) events will be conducted across the country and will serve taxpayers in all 50 states and the District of Colombia.

The IRS Office of Chief Counsel has embarked on its most far-reaching Settlement Days program by declaring the month of March 2021 as National Settlement Month. This program builds upon the success achieved from last year's many settlement day events while being shifted to virtual format due to the pandemic. Virtual Settlement Day (VSD) events will be conducted across the country and will serve taxpayers in all 50 states and the District of Colombia.

Settlement Day

Settlement Day events are coordinated efforts to resolve cases in the U.S. Tax Court by providing taxpayers who are not represented by counsel with the opportunity to receive free tax advice from Low Income Taxpayer Clinics (LITCs), American Bar Association (ABA) volunteer attorneys, and other pro bono organizations. Taxpayers can also discuss their Tax Court cases and related tax issues with members of the Office of Chief Counsel, the IRS Independent Office of Appeals and IRS Collection representatives. These communications can aid in reaching a settlement by providing taxpayers with a better understanding of what is needed to support their case.

The Taxpayer Advocate Service (TAS) employees also participate in VSDs to assist taxpayers with tax issues attributable to non-docketed years. Local Taxpayer Advocates and their staff can work with and inform taxpayers about how TAS may be able to assist with other unresolved tax matters, or to provide further assistance after the Tax Court matter is concluded. IRS Collection personnel will be available to discuss potential payment alternatives if a settlement is reached. For those who choose to take their cases to court, the VSD process can also give a better understanding of what information taxpayers need to present to the court to be successful.

Following its first announcement of virtual settlement days in May last year, the Chief Counsel and LITCs have successfully used VSD events to help more than 259 taxpayer resolve Tax Court cases without having to go to trial.

Registration and Information

The IRS proactively identifies and reaches out to taxpayers with Tax Court cases which appear most suitable for this settlement day approach, and invites them attend VSD events. The IRS also generally encourages taxpayers with active Tax Court cases to contact the assigned Chief Counsel attorney or paralegal about participating in the March VSD events.

This year, the IRS has included the following locations where these events have never been offered: Albuquerque, Billings, Buffalo, Cheyenne, Cleveland, Denver, Des Moines, Indianapolis, Little Rock, Milwaukee, Nashville, Peoria, Omaha, Reno, Sacramento, San Diego and San Jose.

LITCs can contact their local Chief Counsel offices about the event in their area. If additional information is needed, individuals can reach out to Chief Counsel’s Settlement Day Cadre, or contact Sarah Sexton Martinez at (312) 368-8604. Pro bono volunteers are encouraged to contact Meg Newman (Megan.Newman@americanbar.org) with the American Bar Association Tax Section.

An individual who owned a limited liability company (LLC) with her former spouse was not entitled to relief from joint and several liability under Code Sec. 6015(b). The taxpayer argued that she did not know or have reason to know of the understated tax when she signed and filed the joint return for the tax year at issue. Further, she claimed to be an unsophisticated taxpayer who could not have understood the extent to which receipts, expenses, depreciation, capital items, earnings and profits, deemed or actual dividend distributions, and the proper treatment of the LLC resulted in tax deficiencies. The taxpayer also asserted that she did not meaningfully participate in the functioning of the LLC other than to provide some bookkeeping and office work.

An individual who owned a limited liability company (LLC) with her former spouse was not entitled to relief from joint and several liability under Code Sec. 6015(b). The taxpayer argued that she did not know or have reason to know of the understated tax when she signed and filed the joint return for the tax year at issue. Further, she claimed to be an unsophisticated taxpayer who could not have understood the extent to which receipts, expenses, depreciation, capital items, earnings and profits, deemed or actual dividend distributions, and the proper treatment of the LLC resulted in tax deficiencies. The taxpayer also asserted that she did not meaningfully participate in the functioning of the LLC other than to provide some bookkeeping and office work.

However, the taxpayer, a high school graduate, testified that she had “a little bit of banking education,” indicating that she had some familiarity with bookkeeping. Her ex-spouse added during trial that the taxpayer had worked at a bank for a few years. Regarding her role in the LLC, the taxpayer maintained the business' books and records, prepared and signed sales tax returns and unemployment tax contribution forms on its behalf, and worked with an accountant to prepare its tax returns. Nothing in the record indicated that her ex-spouse tried to deceive or hide anything from her.

Further, the taxpayer’s joint ownership of the LLC, her involvement in maintaining its books and records, her role in preparing and signing tax-related documents on behalf of the business, and her cooperation with an accountant to prepare the LLC’s tax returns, showed that she had actual knowledge of the factual circumstances that made the deductions unallowable. Thus, she also was not entitled to relief under Code Sec. 6015(c).

The taxpayer was not eligible for streamlined determination under Rev. Proc. 2013-34, 2013-43 I.R.B. 397, because no evidence corroborated her testimony that her former spouse had abused her in any sense to which the tax law or common experience would accord any recognition. The history of acrimony between the taxpayer and her ex-spouse called into question the weight to be given to her claims of spousal abuse. Finally, the taxpayer was unable to persuade the court that she was entitled to equitable relief under Code Sec. 6015(f). She was intimately involved with the LLC, knew or had reason to know of the items giving rise to the understatement, and failed to make a good-faith effort to comply with her income tax return filing obligations.

A married couple’s civil fraud penalty was not timely approved by the supervisor of an IRS Revenue Agent (RA) as required under Code Sec. 6751(b)(1). The taxpayers’ joint return was examined by the IRS, after which the RA had sent them a summons requiring their attendance at an in-person closing conference. The RA provided the taxpayers with a completed, signed Form 4549, Income Tax Examination Changes, reflecting a Code Sec. 6663(a) civil fraud penalty. The taxpayers declined to consent to the assessment of the civil fraud penalty or sign Form 872, Consent to Extend the Time to Assess Tax, to extend the limitations period.

A married couple’s civil fraud penalty was not timely approved by the supervisor of an IRS Revenue Agent (RA) as required under Code Sec. 6751(b)(1). The taxpayers’ joint return was examined by the IRS, after which the RA had sent them a summons requiring their attendance at an in-person closing conference. The RA provided the taxpayers with a completed, signed Form 4549, Income Tax Examination Changes, reflecting a Code Sec. 6663(a) civil fraud penalty. The taxpayers declined to consent to the assessment of the civil fraud penalty or sign Form 872, Consent to Extend the Time to Assess Tax, to extend the limitations period.

Thereafter, the RA obtained written approval from her immediate supervisor for the civil fraud penalty, and sent the taxpayers a notice of deficiency determining the same. The taxpayers contended that the civil fraud penalty was not timely approved by the RA’s supervisor because the revenue agent report (RAR) presented at the conference meeting embodied the first formal communication of the RA’s initial determination to assert the fraud penalty.

Due to the use of a summons letter requiring the taxpayers' attendance, the closing conference at the end of the taxpayers’ examination process carried a degree of formality not present in most IRS meetings. The closing conference was, like an IRS letter, a formal means of communicating the IRS’s initial determination that taxpayers should be subject to the fraud penalty. Therefore, the RA communicated her initial determination to assert the fraud penalty when she provided the taxpayers with a completed and signed RAR at the closing conference. The RA had also informed the taxpayers during the closing conference that they did not have appeal rights at that time, which was incomplete and potentially misleading.

The completed RAR given to the taxpayers during the closing conference, coupled with the context surrounding its presentation, represented a "consequential moment" in which the RA formally communicated her initial determination that the taxpayers should be subject to the fraud penalty.