![]() |
| From BlogComix2 |
Posted by taxguru on July 28, 2012
CBO: Obamacare levies $1 trillion in new taxes – This shouldn’t surprise anyone. Our rulers can’t do anything without soaking us for even more taxes. Trillions are now the new Billions when discussing government finances.
Posted by taxguru on July 26, 2012
Q:
Subject: S Corporation
Hello, I was doing some research on S corporations and came across your website through a Google search. You noted several times that a disadvantage of electing S corp status is that you must use a calendar year-end. Can you please provide a reference citing this requirement? IRS Form 2553 specifically allows the corporation to select a tax year, whether it be calendar year or fiscal year, so I’m curious to see what you are referencing.
Regards,
A:
Until the mid-1980s, an S corp was allowed to have a fiscal year ending at the end of any month, just as with C corps. Then there was a new law or regulation passed that required all S corps to switch to a December 31 tax year. I can remember having to do a lot of short year 1120S returns to make this transition for clients’ S corps.
Basically, the reason for the requirement was to keep the S corp tax year in sync with the tax year of its owners. If a majority of the owners have a different tax year, that is justification for using a similar tax year for their S corp. Since almost all individuals have a calendar tax year, S corps they own are required to use that same tax year.
Here is The Code section dealing with this:
§ 1378(a) General rule
For purposes of this subtitle, the taxable year of an S corporation shall be a permitted year.§ 1378(b) Permitted year defined
For purposes of this section, the term “permitted year” means a taxable year which—§ 1378(b)(1) is a year ending December 31, or
§ 1378(b)(2) is any other accounting period for which the corporation establishes a business purpose to the satisfaction of the Secretary.
For purposes of paragraph (2), any deferral of income to shareholders shall not be treated as a business purpose.
Here is the applicable section on Page 1 of the instructions for Form 2553:
7. It has or will adopt or change to one of the following
tax years.
a. A tax year ending December 31.
b. A natural business year.
c. An ownership tax year.
d. A tax year elected under section 444.
e. A 52-53-week tax year ending with reference to a year
listed above.
f. Any other tax year (including a 52-53-week tax year)
for which the corporation establishes a business purpose.While they do mention using a different year, in practical application, this is rarely granted by IRS except in cases where the shareholders also have a non-calendar tax year. When the S corp has a different tax year than its owners, it makes it more complicated for IRS to match things up between them, which is why they don’t like it.
If you feel you have a good case for using a non calendar tax year for your S corp, you can try to convince IRS to allow it. I seriously doubt it will be granted; but I would be interested in hearing about your results with this request.
I hope this helps you understand the rules regarding S corp tax years.
Good luck
Kerry Kerstetter
Posted in corp | Comments Off on Allowable S Corp Tax Years
Posted by taxguru on July 25, 2012
With a number of California cities already filing bankruptcy, there will be a chain reaction all over the country of more and more of them doing that. It is bound to happen at even faster pace, as governments are now required to be more honest in their disclosures of their unfunded pension liabilities, as Rush Limbaugh described in yesterday’s Morning Update (Text Video).
Besides a growing number of cities and counties filing for bankruptcy protection in order to get out from union pension obligations, I would bet money on the State of California having to do the same thing. By his own admission, Governor Moonbeam’s latest budget is based on the passage of two tax increases on the November ballot and the assumption that the targets of those tax hikes will just stick around, bend over and pay those higher taxes. That erroneous assumption and his idiotic plan for a multi-billion dollar bullet train boondoggle can have no other result than complete financial collapse for the State. Brown’s scenario isn’t that different from 0Bambi’s; except that the Federal government can print money and borrow from the ChiComs, which State governments can’t do.
Posted in StateTaxes | Comments Off on The dominos are going to fall…
Posted by taxguru on July 24, 2012
Romney donor bashed by Obama campaign now target of two federal audits – Anyone who thinks this is a coincidence is woefully naive. The 0Bambi regime is just as willing to use the power of the Federal government to attack their enemies as Nixon and Clinton were.
Pair inherits $65M sculpture, but can’t sell it to pay $29M tax bill – The kind of idiotic Catch 22 that the grave robbing vultures in the IRS love. However, if I were handling this case, I would make the case that the true market value of the sculpture is zero and thus not subject to estate tax. If that argument didn’t fly, I would advise donating the sculpture to a museum and deducting it from the taxable estate.
IRS sizes up political groups’ tax-exempt status – What are the odds that those groups supporting the 0baMao regime will be acceptable to IRS and those opposing it will get into trouble? If there is a safer bet, I can’t think of it.
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on