Newsletters

Did you know you can use the “reconcile” feature on more than just bank accounts and credit card accounts? The reconcile feature can be used on a variety of balance sheet accounts including “clearing” accounts or loan payable accounts.

Did you know you can use the “reconcile” feature on more than just bank accounts and credit card accounts? The reconcile feature can be used on a variety of balance sheet accounts including “clearing” accounts or loan payable accounts.

1. Go to the reconciliation window within QuickBooks, and select the account you would like to reconcile.
2. Enter the statement ending balance of the monthly loan statement.
3. Add any interest expense to which was charged on the loan.
4. In the reconciliation window, check off all the applied payments and interest. Once everything is reconciled to -0- difference and click “Finish”

This will help keep you up to date on making all transaction and having an accurate read on how much you owe on the loan or what your actual interest expense.

If you need assistance with the reconcile feature or any other QuickBooks issue, please do not hesitate to contact us.

To view previous QuickBooks tips of the month navigate to the link under the top menu bar under "Newsletters" titled "Archived Newsletters and QuickBooks Tips".

On June 21, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in South Dakota v. Wayfair, a landmark sales and use tax nexus case that will have implications for many online sellers and multistate businesses. The Court ruled, in a 5-4 decision, that a state can require an out-of-state seller to collect sales or use tax on sales to customers in that state, even though the seller lacks an in-state physical presence. Under certain circumstances, an economic or virtual presence can create nexus (a sufficient connection with the state), subjecting a seller to tax collection and remittance requirements in a state.

On June 21, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in South Dakota v. Wayfair, a landmark sales and use tax nexus case that will have implications for many online sellers and multistate businesses. The Court ruled, in a 5-4 decision, that a state can require an out-of-state seller to collect sales or use tax on sales to customers in that state, even though the seller lacks an in-state physical presence. Under certain circumstances, an economic or virtual presence can create nexus (a sufficient connection with the state), subjecting a seller to tax collection and remittance requirements in a state.

Background

In Wayfair, The U.S. Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of a South Dakota law (S.D. Codified Laws § 10-64-1, et al.) that requires certain remote sellers to register for, collect, and remit South Dakota sales tax. Under the law, a remote seller has sales tax nexus with South Dakota if the seller, in the current or previous calendar year:

• had gross revenue from sales of taxable goods and services delivered into the state exceeding $100,000; or
• sold taxable goods and services for delivery into the state in 200 or more separate transactions.

The Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution requires that a seller have “substantial nexus” with a state before the state can require the seller to collect and remit sales and use taxes. Historically, under a precedent affirmed in the 1992 case of Quill Corp v. North Dakota, this nexus depended on whether the seller had a physical presence in the state. The presence could be through the company’s activities or property, or through the activities of its agents in the state. Over time, states have stretched the boundary of this standard by asserting “click through” nexus and affiliate nexus. Now “economic” nexus policies, like the South Dakota law in Wayfair, stretch it further still, with states asserting jurisdiction to impose sales tax collection responsibilities on companies that meet certain sales thresholds.

Considerations for Sellers

Sales and Use Tax Obligations

The Wayfair decision affects companies doing business in thousands of state and local tax-collecting jurisdiction across the country. The most immediate impact will be on sellers with a significant virtual or economic presence in a state that asserts economic nexus. Sellers delivering taxable products or services into South Dakota (and other economic nexus states) will need to determine if they surpassed the dollar amount or transaction volume thresholds for establishing nexus with the state.

Sellers will need to do this analysis for each state that has adopted an economic nexus threshold policy, including determining whether each product sold is taxable or nontaxable.

Sellers should be prepared for states to adopt and aggressively enforce expanded nexus provisions, although future legal challenges or Congressional action could limit the scope of the Court’s decision.

Notice and Reporting Requirements

A growing number of states, led by Colorado, recently enacted complex use tax notice and reporting requirements for remote sellers. Under these laws, remote sellers must provide information to customers about potential use tax liability and report transaction data to the state. Noncompliance can result in stiff per-occurrence penalties.

Other Considerations

Expanded sales tax nexus may have far-reaching effects for businesses, beyond collection and remittance of the sales tax itself.

In the realm of business acquisitions, state “successor liability” laws typically impose notice, withholding, and tax clearance requirements that limit the purchaser’s liability for unpaid sales tax liabilities of the seller in certain business asset acquisitions. As states begin to more aggressively assert sales tax nexus, companies contemplating business acquisitions should consult with a tax professional for assistance in navigating complex successor liability laws.

Companies should also consider potential financial statement impacts related to sales tax nexus issues.

Next Steps

We expect state revenue departments to issue guidance regarding the South Dakota v. Wayfair decision in the coming weeks and months, and we will be following those developments closely. In the meantime, if you would like to discuss how the decision may impact your business, please do not hesitate to contact us.

New IRS guidance fills in several more pieces of the Code Sec. 199A passthrough deduction puzzle. Taxpayers can generally rely on all of these new final and proposed rules.

New IRS guidance fills in several more pieces of the Code Sec. 199A passthrough deduction puzzle. Taxpayers can generally rely on all of these new final and proposed rules.

Final Regulations

The final regulations in T.D. 98xx_1 largely adopt the proposed regulations in NPRM REG-107892-18 (August 16, 2018), but with substantial modifications.

Taxpayers are likely to be disappointed in one thing that did not change: all items treated as capital gain or loss, including Section 1231 gains and losses, are still excluded from qualified business income (QBI). Taxpayers should continue to apply the Section 1231 netting and recapture rules when calculating the Code Sec. 199A deduction.

However, the final regulations drop the rule that treated an incidental non-specified services trade or business (SSTB) as part of an SSTB if the businesses were commonly owned and shared expenses, and the non-SSTB’s gross receipts were no more than five percent of the business’s combined gross receipts.

The final regulations make several adjustments to the proposed regulations for estates and trusts. Most significantly, the final regulations remove the definition of "principal purpose" under the anti-abuse rule that allows the IRS to aggregate multiple trusts. The IRS is taking this issue under advisement. Also, in determining if a trust or estate has taxable income that exceeds the threshold amount, distributions are no longer excluded. Instead, the entity’s taxable income is determined after taking into account any distribution deduction under Code Sec. 651 or Code Sec. 661.

The final regulations retain the presumption that an employee continues to be an employee while doing the same work for the same employer. However, the regulations provide a new three-year look back rule, and allow the worker to rebut the presumption by showing records (such as contracts or partnership agreements) that corroborate the individual’s status as a non-employee.

Other changes of note include:

• Disallowed, limited or suspended losses must be used in order from the oldest to the newest, on a FIFO (first in, first out) basis.
• A relevant passthrough entity (RPE) can aggregate businesses.
• If an RPE fails to report an item, only that item is presumed to be zero; the missing information may be reported on an amended return.
• The S portion and non-S portion of an electing small business trust (ESBT) are treated as a single trust for purposes of determining the threshold amounts.

Proposed Regs for QBI, RICs, Trusts, Estates

Taxpayers may rely on the proposed regulations in NPRM REG-134652-18, which cover three broad topics.

First, in calculating QBI, previously disallowed losses are treated as losses from a separate trade or business. If the losses relate to a publicly traded partnership (PTP), they must be treated as losses from a separate PTP. Attributes of the disallowed loss are determined in the year the loss is incurred.

Second, a RIC that receives qualified REIT dividends may pay Section 199A dividends. The IRS continues to consider permitting conduit treatment for qualified PTP income received by a RIC, and seeks public comment on this issue.

Finally, the proposed regulations also provide rules for charitable remainder unitrusts (and their beneficiaries), split-interest trusts, and separate shares.

Rental Real Estate Enterprise

The proposed revenue procedure set forth in Notice 2019-7 provides a safe harbor for a rental real estate enterprise to be treated as a trade or business for purposes of Section 199A. RPEs can also use the safe harbor.

A rental real estate enterprise must satisfy three conditions to qualify for the safe harbor:

• Separate books and records must be maintained to reflect income and expenses for each rental real estate enterprise.
• At least 250 or more hours of rental services must be performed per year with respect to the rental enterprise. For tax years beginning after December 31, 2022, this test can be satisfied in any three of the five consecutive tax years that end with the tax year.
• The taxpayer must maintain contemporaneous records of relevant items, including time reports, logs, or similar documents. (This requirement does not apply to tax years beginning in 2018.)

Relevant items include hours of all services performed, description of all services performed, dates on which such services were performed, and who performed the services.

W-2 Wages

Rev. Proc. 2019-11 allows taxpayers to use one of three methods to calculate W-2 wages for the passthrough deduction:

• the unmodified Box method;
• the modified Box 1 method; or
• the tracking wages method.

These methods were proposed in Notice 2018-64, I.R.B. 2018-35, 347. The unmodified Box method is simplest, but the other two methods are more accurate.

Comments Requested

The IRS requests comments on the proposed regulations and the proposed safe harbor. The IRS must receive the comments and any requests for public hearing within 60 days after the proposed regulations are published in the Federal Register.

The IRS has provided safe harbors for business entities to deduct certain payments made to a charitable organization in exchange for a state or local tax (SALT) credit. A business entity may deduct the payments as an ordinary and necessary business expenses under Code Sec. 162 if made for a business purpose. Proposed regulations that limit the charitable contribution deduction do not affect the deduction as a business expense.

The IRS has provided safe harbors for business entities to deduct certain payments made to a charitable organization in exchange for a state or local tax (SALT) credit. A business entity may deduct the payments as an ordinary and necessary business expenses under Code Sec. 162 if made for a business purpose. Proposed regulations that limit the charitable contribution deduction do not affect the deduction as a business expense.

Charitable Contributions and SALT Limit

An individual’s itemized deduction of SALT is limited to $10,000 ($5,000 if married filing separately). Some states and local governments have adopted or considered adopting laws that allowed individuals to receive a tax credit for contributions to funds controlled by the state and local government.

Under proposed regulations, however, an individual, estate, and trust generally must reduce the amount of any charitable contribution deduction by the amount of any SALT credit he or she receives or expects to receive for the transfer. A de minimis exception allows a taxpayer to disregard up to 15 percent of the payment or transfer to the charitable organization.

C Corporations

If a C corporation makes the charitable payment in exchange for a state and local tax credit, it may deduct the payment as an ordinary and necessary business expense to the extent of any SALT credit received or expected to receive.

Specified Pass-Through Entity

A specified pass-through entity may also deduct the payment as an ordinary and necessary business expense, but only if the SALT credit applies or is expected to apply to offset a SALT other than an income tax. A specified pass-through entity for this purpose is any business entity other than a C corporation that is regarded as separate from its owner for all federal income tax purposes (i.e., disregarded entity). The entity also must operate a trade or business within the meaning of Code Sec. 162 and be subject to SALT incurred in carrying on that trade or business that is imposed directly on the entity.

Effective Date

The safe harbors apply to any payments made to a charitable organization in exchange for a SALT credit paid on or after January 1, 2018.

The IRS has issued its annual revisions to the general procedures for ruling requests, technical memoranda, determination letters, and user fees, as well as areas on which the Associate Chief Counsel offices will not rule. The revised procedures are generally effective January 2, 2019.

The IRS has issued its annual revisions to the general procedures for ruling requests, technical memoranda, determination letters, and user fees, as well as areas on which the Associate Chief Counsel offices will not rule. The revised procedures are generally effective January 2, 2019.

Rev. Proc. 2019-1

This procedure explains how the IRS provides advice to taxpayers in the form of letter rulings, closing agreements, determination letters and information letters, and orally on issues under the jurisdiction of the various Associate Chief Counsel offices. It supersedes Rev. Proc. 2018-1, I.R.B. 2018-1, 1. In addition to changes made throughout the guidance, significant changes in the new procedure include:

• Sections 1, 1.01, 3.07, 5.12, 5.14, 5.15, 6.08, 9.23, 10.07, 15.11, Appendix A, Appendix B, Appendix C, Appendix D, and Appendix E have been amended to reflect the name change from "Associate Chief Counsel (Tax Exempt and Government Entities)" to "Associate Chief Counsel (Employee Benefits, Exempt Organizations, and Employment Taxes)."
• Section 5.15(3) has been removed to reflect the transfer of authority to waive excise tax under Code Sec. 4980F to the Commissioner, Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division, Employee Plans Rulings and Agreements.
• Section 8.02 has been amended to remove the exception for changes in accounting methods or accounting periods from the 21-day notification rule.
  Appendix A (Schedule of User Fees) has been amended with increased user fees to match the increase in costs incurred by the IRS. The new user fee schedule is effective February 2, 2019.
• Appendix E (Church Plan Checklist) has been amended to add a new item 11 to reflect the requirement that an applicant include a representation as to whether an election under Reg. §1.410(d)-1 to apply certain provisions of the Code and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) to the plan has ever been made.

Rev. Proc. 2019-2

This procedure explains when and how an Associate Office provides technical advice conveyed in a technical advice memorandum (TAM), as well as a taxpayer’s rights when a field office requests a TAM regarding a tax matter. It supersedes Rev. Proc. 2018-2, I.R.B. 2018-1, 106. Significant changes in the new procedure include:

• All references to Associate Chief Counsel (Tax Exempt and Government Entities) have been revised to read “Associate Chief Counsel (Employee Benefits, Exempt Organizations, and Employment Taxes).” All references to “Appeals Policy” have been revised to read “Appeals Policy Planning Quality & Analysis.”
• Section 3.04 has been amended to delete the mandatory TAM requirement in qualified retirement plan matters in cases concerning proposed adverse letters or proposed revocation letters on collectively bargained plans.
• Section 14.02 has been amended to clarify that requests for relief under Code Sec. 7805(b) on the revocation or modification of determination letters and letter rulings issued by TE/GE are handled under the procedures in sections 23 and 29 of Rev. Proc. 2019-4, and section 12 of Rev. Proc. 2019-5.

Rev. Proc. 2019-3

This procedure provides a revised list of areas under the jurisdiction of certain Associate Chief Counsel offices for which letter rulings or determination letters will not be issued. (Lists of areas of nonissuance under the jurisdiction of the Associate Chief Counsel (International) and the Commissioner, Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division (relating to plans or plan amendments) are presented in separate revenue procedures.) It supersedes Rev. Proc. 2018-3, I.R.B. 2019-1, 130.

The following have been added to the list of issues for which advance rulings will not be issued:

• Gross Income. Whether an amount is not included in a taxpayer’s gross income under Code Sec. 61 because the taxpayer receives the amount subject to an unconditional obligation to repay the amount.
• Trade or Business Expenses. Whether a taxpayer is engaged in a trade or business. This area does not include a request for a ruling that relies on a representation from a taxpayer that the taxpayer is or is not engaged in a trade or business, or a request for a ruling that relies on factual information provided by the taxpayer evidencing the active conduct of a trade or business.
• Losses; Carryovers in Certain Corporate Acquisitions; Regulations. In determining whether a loss for worthless securities is subject to Code Sec. 165(g)(3), (i) whether the source of any gross receipts may be determined by reference to the source of gross receipts of a counter party to an intercompany transaction, as defined in Reg. §1.1502-13(b)(1) (e.g., an intercompany distribution to which Reg. §1.1502-13(f)(2) applies), other than an intercompany transaction to which Code Sec. 381(a) applies, and (ii) in an intercompany transaction to which Code Sec. 381(a) applies, whether the acquiring corporation takes into account historic gross receipts of the distributor or transferor corporation, if the intercompany transaction is part of a plan to claim a deduction for worthless securities under Code Sec. 165(g)(3).
• Treatment of multiple trusts. Whether two or more trusts shall be treated as one trust for purposes of subchapter J of chapter 1.
• Returns Relating to the Cancellation of Indebtedness by Certain Entities. Requests for a ruling that the creditor is not required to report a discharge that include as grounds for the request a dispute regarding the underlying liability.

The following issues have been modified:

• Special Rules for Exchanges Between Related Persons. Except in the case of (i) a transaction involving an exchange of undivided interests in different properties that results in each taxpayer holding either the entire interest in a single property or a larger undivided interest in any of the properties or (ii) a disposition of property in a nonrecognition transaction in which the taxpayer or the related party receives no cash or other property that results in gain recognition, whether a Code Sec. 1031(f) exchange involving related parties, or a subsequent disposition of property involved in the exchange, has as one of its principal purposes the avoidance of federal income tax, or is part of a transaction (or series of transactions) structured to avoid the purposes of Code Sec. 1031(f).

Rev. Proc. 2019-4

This procedure explains how the IRS provides advice to taxpayers on issues under the jurisdiction of the Commissioner, Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division (TE/GE) Employee Plans Rulings and Agreements Office, and details the types of advice available to taxpayers, and the manner in which the advice is requested and provided. The new procedure supersedes Rev. Proc. 2018-4, I.R.B. 2018-1, 146. In addition to minor non-substantive changes, the following changes are made:

• Modifications to reflect Employee Plans Rulings and Agreement’s current practice of considering voluntary requests for closing agreements to resolve certain income or excise tax issues that are ineligible for resolution under the Employee Plans Compliance Resolution System (EPCRS).
• Letter ruling requests may not be submitted via facsimile transmission.
• A new category called "Other Circumstances" for which determination letters can be requested has been added.
• Code Secs. 414(b), (c) and (m) have been added to the list of sections for which a determination is not made when a determination letter is issued in accordance with the revenue procedure.
• For a plan to be reviewed for, and a determination letter relied upon with respect to, whether the terms of the plan satisfy one of the design-based safe harbors, the plan document must provide a definition of compensation that satisfies Reg. §1.414(s)-1(c).
• Employee Plans Rulings and Agreements will consider a request for an extension of time for making an election under Reg. §301.9100-3 to recharacterize annual contributions made to a Roth IRA. Employee Plans Rulings and Agreements will also consider recharacterization requests that relate to a conversion or rollover contribution to a Roth IRA but only if the rollover or conversion was made prior to January 1, 2018.
• SB/SE Exam will be notified if a request for an extension of time for making an election or other application for relief under Reg. §301.9100-3 is submitted when the return is under examination.
• Beginning April 1, 2019, VCP submissions and the applicable user fees must be made using www.pay.gov. Further, the payment of user fees for pre-approved plan submissions and letter ruling requests may not be made using www.pay.gov and such requests must still be accompanied by a check in the amount of the applicable user fee.
• Clarification has been provided regarding which forms must be submitted for VCP submissions made prior to April 1, 2019.
• User fee for Form 5310 will increase from $2,300 to $3,000 for submissions postmarked on or after July 1, 2019.

Rev. Proc. 2019-5

This procedure updates the procedures for organizations applying for, and the issuing of determination letters on, exempt status under Code Secs. 501and 521. These apply to exempt organizations other than those relating to pension, profit-sharing, stock bonus, annuity, and employee stock ownership plans. The procedures also apply to revocation or modification of determination letters. In addition, the procedure provides guidance on the exhaustion of administrative remedies for declaratory judgment under Code Sec. 7428. Finally, new procedure provides guidance on applicable user fees for requesting determination letters. The new procedure supersedes Rev. Proc. 2018-5, I.R.B. 2018-1, 233. Notable changes include:

• "Tax Exempt and Government Entities" was changed to "Employee Benefits, Exempt Organizations, and Employment Taxes" throughout the document to reflect the office’s name change.
• Section 2.02 was amended to add (6), which discusses Rev. Proc. 2018-15, I.R.B. 2018-9, 379.
• Section 2.03(1) was amended to clarify that a Code Sec. 501(c)(4) organization must submit a user fee along with its completed Form 8976.
• Section 3.02(4) was amended to clarify that the section only applies to an organization seeking to qualify under Code Sec. 501(c)(6).
• Sections 4, 15, and 18 were amended to reflect the new Form 1024-A.
• Section 4.09 was amended to clarify that a request for expedited handling of a determination letter will not be forwarded to the appropriate group for action unless the application is complete.
• Section 13 was amended throughout because Rev. Proc. 2018-32, I.R.B. 2018-23, 739, superseded Rev. Proc. 81-7, 1981-1 CB 621.
• Appendix A was amended to reflect the single user fee for non-1023-EZ exemption applications, and to reflect a change in the user fee for submissions postmarked on or after July 1, 2019, for advance approval of Code Sec. 4942(g)(2) set asides, Code Sec. 4945 advance approval of an organization’s grant making procedures, and Code Sec. 4945(f) advance approval of voter registration activities.

Rev. Proc. 2019-7

This procedure provides an updated list of subject areas under the jurisdiction of the Associate Chief Counsel (International) for which it will not issue advance letter rulings or determination letters, or will issue letters only if justified by unique and compelling circumstances. Section 4.01(01) related to Code Sec. 367(a) has been removed as obsolete. There are no other changes except renumbering to reflect the foregoing and updates to cross references and citations. The new procedure supersedes Rev. Proc. 2018-7, I.R.B. 2018-1, 271