Los Angeles California Tax Attorney Blog

California Tax Attorney:

Here is a quick summary of a recent US TAX COURT case against the Internal Revenue Service to challenge the taxpayer’s right to deduct donations to a Catholic Church. The case involves a married couple who got audited by the Internal Revenue Service concerning donations they deducted on their Internal Revenue Service Form 1040 tax return.

Anonymous U.S. Tax Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF Internal Revenue Service
Docket No. 6851-08. Filed May 2010.

Tax Problem
Can an American taxpayer deduct as charitable contributions of $25,050 in wire transfers to his wife’s relative who distributed the money for the benefit of the Catholic Church of a foreign country on their Internal Revenue Service Form 1040?

Can a taxpayer deduct the airfare expense incurred while rendering services for a Catholic church in a foreign country on their Internal Revenue Service Form 1040?

APPLICABLE TAX CODE SECTION

Internal Revenue Code §170 allows taxpayers to claim a deduction for a charitable contribution if the contribution is made to or for the use of a qualified organization.

Internal Revenue Code §170 (c)(2) identifies an eligible recipient of a charitable deduction as “a corporation, trust, or community chest, fund, or foundation created or organized in the United States or under the law of the United States”.

CAN YOU DEDUCT DONATIONS MADE TO CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY?

Taxpayers claimed the charitable contribution deductions on their joint IRS Form 1040 Income Tax Return. Taxpayers also claimed a charitable contribution deduction for the airplane ticket taxpayer wife purchased to travel to her native country and provide services to Catholic churches of that foreign country. The IRS issued a notice of deficiency disallowing certain charitable contribution deductions. Most of the disallowed deductions originated from taxpayer wife’s donations and charity work for the benefit of Catholic churches in a foreign country. Taxpayers filed a tax court petition appealing the report issued by the IRS Audit with the US Tax Court .

Taxpayer’s wife was born in a foreign country. Her parents were devout Catholics. Her father served as an officer in that country’s army during the conflict with the guerilla forces. Taxpayer wife was a young girl when the guerrilla forces initiated a military campaign. Taxpayer wife’s uncle was a Catholic priest in her hometown. When the guerrilla forces seized her hometown, taxpayer wife witnessed over 400 of her fellow Catholics, including her uncle and other citizens of her hometown, being buried alive. The guerrilla forces destroyed much of her hometown, including the Catholic Church. The foreign country’s government eventually fell. Taxpayer wife and her family later escaped from their country to the United States. Taxpayer wife later married U.S. taxpayer. She is a member of a church that belongs to the local Catholic diocese near her home in Texas.

Taxpayer’s wife completed her college education and was hired as an engineer at an international corporation. After completing college she returned to her native country and witnessed extreme poverty. Her experience motivated her to contribute money and services to help rebuild Catholic churches in that country. These Catholic churches provide food, education, and shelter to the poor. During one of her trips to her native country, the local police detained and interrogated taxpayer’s wife about her activities in her hometown.. The police also informed taxpayer’s wife that they had been monitoring her whereabouts in the country and were aware of her family’s support for the former government.

Fearing for her life, taxpayer’s wife devised a plan to disguise her contributions to Catholic churches in her native country. She would wire the money to the personal bank account of her mother’s cousin (cousin) who lived in taxpayer wife’s original hometown. The cousin then transferred the money to selected Catholic churches in that country.

UNITED STATES TAX COURT DID NOT ALLOW TAXPAYERS TO DEDUCT DONATIONS TO A FOREIGN CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION
Taxpayers argue that the ultimate beneficiary of the wire transfers was the Roman Catholic Church, a qualified donee under Internal Revenue Code §170(c)(2), and that taxpayer wife thus made the wire transfers to or for the use of a qualified organization.

Taxpayers claim that the Catholic Church is a universal organization, and therefore Catholic churches in taxpayer wife’s native country are qualified as donees under Internal Revenue Code §170. The Tax Court found no basis as to if the Catholic churches in that foreign country to which taxpayer wife’s wire transfers were distributed were created or organized in the United States or under the laws of the United States in compliance with Internal Revenue Code . The language of Internal Revenue Code §170(c)(2) is explicit, and the Tax Court must follow such plain language.

Regarding the airfare expense deducted on the IRS Form 1040 Income Tax Return for Individuals , taxpayers assert that the unreimbursed expenditure incident to taxpayer wife’s services should be deductible under Internal Revenue Code §170 because petitioner wife worked on behalf of several qualified organizations.

Nonetheless, taxpayers have failed to show that any of the Catholic churches in the foreign country to which taxpayer wife’s rendered services is a qualified organization within the meaning of Internal Revenue Code § 170(c)(2). Taxpayer wife did not render services in the foreign country under the direction of, or to or for the use of her local church or the local diocese. The record shows only that her priest at her local church had some awareness of her work in her native country. Nor is there any evidence that petitioner wife provided those services.

US Tax Court found taxpayer wife’s testimony to be sincere. However, taxpayers have failed to prove that they contributed to a qualified organization under Internal Revenue Code §170 . Tax Court has held in favor of the Internal Revenue Service .

Los Angeles Tax Attorney:

California Income Tax - Franchise Tax Board FTB released

its annual list of top 250 California taxayers who haven't paid their taxes.

Tax Debt - Top 250 Honor Roll List

Highest Unpaid Tax Debt: $13,120,479
Lowest Unpaid Tax Debt: $ 290,964

Notable Celebrity:
Pamela Anderson (Website:http://pamelaanderson.com/)
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Income tax due - $ 493,144.68 - 04/07/2009

According to the Franchise Tax Board FTB ,

Vast majority of individual and business taxpayers file their return and pay their lawful tax liability. Those who fail to pay the taxes they lawfully owe contribute to the tax gap. The tax gap is the difference between what taxpayers owe and what they voluntarily pay. As a result, an increased tax burden is passed on to those who pay what they owe. Closing the tax gap is in the best interest of all Californians.

FTB tries to collect taxes through tax liens, tax levy and wage garnishment. As part of the collection process, FTB annually publish the Delinquent Taxpayers list on their website Franchise Tax Board FTB to "encourage" tax payment compliance.

The FTB list shows the top 250 individual and business taxpayers with state income tax liens where the total balance owed is greater than $100,000. In most instances, taxpayers who owe to the FTB also owe even larger tax debt to Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Many of these taxpayers could benefit from either a Tax Bankruptcy or Offer in Compromise to resolve their tax situation.

Los Angeles Tax Attorney:

Here is a quick summary of a recent US TAX COURT case against the Internal Revenue Service to challenge the taxpayer’s right to deduct tax losses from a “S” Corporation. The tax case involves an attorney who claimed a loss from his incorporated law practice on his individual IRS Form 1040 tax return. IRS charged taxpayer with penalties and interests based on improper tax deduction.

R.WEISBERG et al v. COMMISSIONER OF Internal Revenue Service

Tax Problem
Is a taxpayer entitled to deduct a loss from his S corporation as a shareholder?

APPLICABLE TAX CODE SECTION

Internal Revenue Code §1363(a). A qualifying small business corporation that makes the proper election is generally not subject to income tax. Rather, its items of income, deductions, credits, and losses pass through to its shareholders, Internal Revenue Code §1366(a)(1), who then claim those items on their own income tax returns.

Internal Revenue Code §1366(d)(1). However, an S corporation shareholder may not claim a loss deduction greater than his basis in the S corporation, with “basis” in this context consisting essentially of his investment in the corporation. A taxpayer who claims a loss from a S corporation must establish his basis in the S corporation.

Internal Revenue Code §61 (a) includes in gross income “all income from whatever source derived” unless excluded by a specific provision of the Code.

CAN YOU DEDUCT LOSSES FROM YOUR CORPORATION?

Taxpayer, who is an attorney, owned shares in an S corporation and in 2000 personally guaranteed a line of credit to the corporation. The S corporation incurred losses in 2003, and taxpayer deducted part of those losses on his 2003 IRS Form 1040 Income Tax return. In March 2004 taxpayer took out a loan and paid off the corporation’s line of credit in the amount. The IRS disallowed the 2003 loss on the grounds that taxpayer had insufficient basis in the S corporation and determined a tax deficiency, a late-filing addition to tax, and an accuracy-related penalty.

TAXPAYER NEEDS TO ESTABLISH TAX BASIS IN THE CORPORATION BEFORE ANY DEDUCTIONS FOR TAX LOSSES ON IRS INDIVIDUAL TAX RETURN

The US Tax Court and tax audit records contained no information concerning taxpayer’s basis in his S corporation before 2000. In that year he personally guaranteed a line of credit for the firm. Under certain conditions, debt can contribute to a shareholder’s basis in an S corporation, but those conditions are not satisfied in this tax court case. US Tax Court has held that mere shareholder guaranties of S corporation indebtedness generally fail to satisfy the requirements of section Internal Revenue Code §1366(d)(1).

No form of indirect borrowing, including a guaranty, gives rise to indebtedness from the corporation to the shareholders for such purpose until and unless the shareholders pay part or the entire obligation. US Tax Court also held that the mere guaranty of a loan does not involve any economic outlay. Until the guarantor pays the obligation, the guarantor does not have an actual investment.

Taxpayer’s guaranty of the line of credit did not, by itself, increase his basis in the S corporation. Consequently, US Tax Court had no evidence that in 2003 he had a basis in any amount. In 2004 taxpayer incurred his own personal loan and used it to pay off the firm’s line of credit. It may assumed that by doing that act taxpayer did increase his basis in the S corporation per Internal Revenue Code §1366(d)(1). However, the year in issue here is 2003, and that act in 2004 did not increase his basis in 2003. Consequently, taxpayer has not shown that he is entitled to claim any portion of the loss in 2003. Overall, taxpayer’s guaranty of the S corporation’s line of credit did not increase his basis in the S corporation per Internal Revenue Code §1366(d)(1) during the year in issue. Taxpayer was not allowed to deduct the losses from his corporation on his individual tax return in 2003. The decision was entered for the Internal Revenue Service .

Los Angeles Tax Attorney:

Internal Revenue Service IRS
released information on its tax audit and tax collection activity results from 2009. Tax Audit, Tax Collection and Tax Audit Category base on income can be found here .

Interesting points to note:

1) IRS Collected through tax levies and tax liens $48.9 Billion Dollars last year. However that was about $7 Billion less than in 2008.

2) IRS audited 1,099,639 tax returns last year which shows an increasing trend over the last 10 years. It is expected that IRS will increase its tax audit by 3.5% in 2010.

3) If you make less than $200,000, your chances of getting audited is about 1%.

4) If you make between $200,000 and million dollars, your chances of getting audited is about 3%.

5) If you make more than $1,000,000, your chances of getting audited is about 6.5%.

California Tax Attorney:

Internal Revenue Service IRS catches another tax evader.

Another UBS client pleaded guilty today in a criminal IRS tax case concerning FBAR and Offshore Bank Accounts. According to the Wall Street Journal, US Taxpayer Barouh operated a watch business since 1976 and hid some of his unreported income in various UBS offshore accounts.

A Florida man pleaded guilty to filing a false tax return by failing to report income on money held in UBS AG (UBS) Swiss bank accounts.

In addition to any jail sentence, Barouh has agreed to pay some $5 million, half the estimated amount he owned or controlled offshore, as well as any additional taxes, interest and penalties.

In all likelihood, this taxpayer probably could not have participated in the preferred voluntary disclosure program which ended last year. Before any criminal tax case comes to an indictment or reaches guilty plea stage, there would have been an ongoing tax investigation into this taxpayer before the tax amnesty program became available.

Based on the IRS FBAR-Voluntary Disclosure program, any taxpayer(s) under any tax investigation would not have qualified for the tax amnesty program which existed last year.

If you did not disclose your foreign bank account(s) to the IRS yet, there are several options that are availabe to avoid criminal exposure so you can avoid sleepless nights.

California Tax Attorney:

Last year Democrats Proposed 30% Tax on Foreign Banks that refuse to disclose US Taxpayers as part of continuing efforts by the IRS to quash offshore asset protection and tax evasion strategies conjured up by various financial planners. US Taxpayers with offshore or foreign bank account are required to disclose this information by filing IRS Foreign Bank Account Report.

The Baucus-Rangel bill proposed to impose a thirty percent (30%) withholding tax on income from U.S. financial assets held by a foreign financial institution unless the offshore bank agrees to disclose the identity of any U.S. taxpayers with an account at the foreign bank with additional condition to annually report on the foreign account balance including payments and withdrawals from the foreign bank account.

However, the FBAR game has suddenly changed with this new development from Germany. According to Tax Section of Businessweek , Germany has decided to buy stolen bank data from a former employee of an unidentified Swiss bank. The data contains names of German citizens who hold undisclosed foreign bank accounts.

Swiss government issued a statement expressing its concern over Germany’s decision to buy stolen information but IRS may make similar decision in light of the billions of dollars which the IRS may realize from its recent FBAR Voluntary Disclosure program.

Any offshore or foreign banks with complex operation will eventually realize that in the digital age, it would be nearly impossible to maintain banking secrecy as it existed in previous generations. The source for the stolen Swiss Bank data is from a computer specialist at the Swiss bank.

Los Angeles Tax Attorney:

Here is a quick summary of a recent US TAX COURT case against the Internal Revenue Service . The ruling on this case may apply to other documents filed with the tax court or the IRS including late filed FBAR Voluntary Disclosure Program.

Tax Court Petitioners MADDOX v.
COMMISSIONER OF Internal Revenue Service

TAX PROBLEM:

This case seems to reflect the current trend by IRS Attorneys when dealing with tax court petitions that they receive 90 days after issuance of Notice of Determination arising from IRS Tax Audit or Collection Due Process hearing.

IRS TAX CODE

Internal Revenue Code §6213(a) provides that a petition for redetermination of a deficiency determined by the Commissioner is timely filed if it is filed within 90 days after a notice of deficiency is mailed. Internal Revenue Code §7502 - If a petition is received by the Court after the 90-day period, then the postmark date can be deemed the date of delivery.

IRS MAY CHALLENGE TAX COURT PETITION IF RECEIVED 90 DAYS AFTER MAILING NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY

The IRS moved to dismiss this case on the ground that the petition was not filed within 90 days of the mailing of the notice of deficiency. Taxpayers state the petition was timely mailed even though not received by the Court within the 90-day period. IRS mailed on October 7, 2008, a notice of deficiency to taxpayers. A petition signed by taxpayers’ attorney, dated December 17, 2008, was received and filed by the Court on January 23, 2009, which was 108 days after the mailing of the notice of deficiency. The U.S. Postal Service (USPS) cancellation stamps appeared on the envelope, but the exact date of cancellation was illegible. January 5, 2009, was the 90th day after the mailing of the notice of deficiency. On March 11, 2009, the IRS filed a motion to dismiss for lack of IRS tax court jurisdiction.

TAXPAYER'S TESTIMONY MAY BE SUFFICIENT TO SHOW THAT TAX COURT PETITION WAS MAILED

Taxpayers’ attorney mailed the petition by placing it in the mailroom in his office building before 4 p.m. on Friday, January 2, 2009. The mailroom was locked, and only building tenants and the USPS had access. The outgoing mail was placed in a USPS basket.

Usually, the postmark placed on the envelope in which the petition has been mailed is accepted as evidence of timely mailing and timely filing. In this case, however, the postmark is illegible. Because taxpayer’s petition was received and filed outside the prescribed period, bearing an illegible USPS postmark, it will be considered timely filed only if petitioners can show the date that the postmark was made and that the date was within the 90-day period.

Taxpayers have shown that the envelope was postage prepaid and had a USPS cancellation. Taxpayers also testified that the petition was timely placed in the USPS mail before the expiration of the 90-day period and timely postmarked (illegibly). The envelope was received by the Court and the petition was filed.

The decision was entered against the Internal Revenue Service . The tax court denied the IRS' motion to dismiss tax court case and concluded that the tax court petition was timely postmarked, timely mailed and timely filed.

Note that some documents filed with the IRS may be deemed filed upon receipt while others are deemed filed upon mailing of the document. Check with your tax attorney on the filing variations.

Foreign Bank Account Tax Amnesty Attorney:

Failure to file FBAR can have devastating consequences to a taxpayer. We attached a summary of potential penalties and criminal tax exposure related to an unfiled FBAR- FBAR Tax Penalty Summary.

We've been receiving calls from stressed taxpayers regarding their unfiled FBAR- IRS Form TDF 90-22.1. We can't offer psychiatric help but you can reach me this weekend on my cell (310) 968 9820 if you have few questions which may help ease your mind.

FBAR Tax Attorney:

Internal Revenue Service IRS issued a statement this week stating that they will be pursuing foreign bank accounts held by US taxpayers in other countries including South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore and several European countries.

US Senate also introduced a new tax and banking legislation which will further frustrate US taxpayers seeking tax shelters through foreign bank accounts.

FBAR- IRS Voluntary Disclosure Attorneys

Even if the taxpayer has missed the October 15, 2009, deadline, IRS voluntary disclosure program may still be available to those with delinquent FBAR, unreported income or undisclosed foreign bank accounts. However, taxpayers need to proceed with caution if they are considering filing their voluntary disclosure post October 15, 2009. We recommend that you seek a competent FBAR- IRS Voluntary Disclosure Attorneys to navigate through these proceedings. A thorough risk analysis with your tax attorney must be performed before implementing any FBAR Voluntary Disclosure after 10/15/09.

Voluntary disclosure allows IRS taxpayers to resolve their tax debt or compliance issues with the IRS and reduce the probability of IRS criminal prosecution. Foreign Bank Account Report or FBAR which many US taxpayers have failed to file falls in the ambit of the Voluntary Disclosure program. Whether the foreign bank account is located at UBS or any other banks, the failure to file FBAR may result in criminal prosecution by the IRS.

Internal Revenue Service IRS Voluntary Disclosure is a program implemented by IRS Criminal Investigation Division which involves taking timely, accurate, and complete voluntary disclosures by IRS taxpayer in deciding whether to recommend to the Department of Justice that a taxpayer be criminally prosecuted.

Los Angeles Tax Attorney:

If you are looking for information on the IRS voluntary disclosure or the IRS FBAR program you can visit here FBAR - Why file IRS Voluntary Disclosure or here IRS Voluntary Disclosure for FBAR

If you owe a debt to a bank or any other creditor and they agree to forgive or reduce the balance of the debt, the canceled amount of the debt may be taxed by the Internal Revenue Service.

The Mortgage Debt Relief Act of 2007 generally allows IRS taxpayers to exclude income from the reduced debt on their principal place of residence. IRS taxpayers who were able to reduce debt owed their home through mortgage restructuring, as well as mortgage debt forgiven in connection with a foreclosure, may not be taxed on the amount of the canceled debt.

Up to $2 million of forgiven debt is eligible for this IRS income tax exclusion ($1 million if married filing separately). The tax exclusion does not apply if the debt forgiveness is due to services performed, trades or offsets with the lender or any other reason which is not directly related to a decline in real estate value of the taxpayer's home or their changed financial circumstance.

If you have any questions regarding the Internal Revenue Service Rules or Procedures (IRS) you may contact us here.

Los Angeles Tax Attorney:

Based on the numerous last minute IRS Voluntary Disclosures most tax attorneys expect a surge of US TAX COURT filings against the Internal Revenue Service to challenge the IRS tax and penalty assessments which may be proposed in the next several months. We'll update you with any new procedures or news concerning IRS audits which may be initiated through the IRS Voluntary Disclosure application submission.

Internal Revenue Service IRS Voluntary Disclosure Program

One of the most common questions we received from taxpayers regarding the IRS voluntary disclosure program was: "why should I make IRS voluntary disclosure?"

IRS Taxpayers with unreported offshore or foreign bank accounts or entities should make a voluntary disclosure because it allows them to become compliant, avoid large IRS civil penalties and generally reduce or eliminate the risk of IRS criminal prosecution.

Making a IRS voluntary disclosure also provides the opportunity to resolve all offshore tax issues at a reasonable settlement amount.

Taxpayers who do not submit an IRS voluntary disclosure may face IRS assessment of substantial penalties, including the fraud penalty and foreign information return penalties, and high risk of IRS criminal prosecution.

Torrance Tax Attorney:

Here is a quick summary of a recent US TAX COURT case against the Internal Revenue Service to challenge the taxability of lawsuit settlement funds. The case involves money settlement received by a taxpayer from a class action against the US Air Force.

KEVIN HENNESSEY v.
COMMISSIONER OF Internal Revenue Service
Docket No. 20484-07.

Tax Problem
The issue is whether a lump-sum amount of money the petitioner received pursuant to a class action settlement agreement is excludable from gross income under section Internal Revenue Code 104(a)(2).

Internal Revenue Code

Internal Revenue Code §61 (a) includes in gross income “all income from whatever source derived” unless excluded by a specific provision of the Code.

Internal Revenue Code §104 (a)(2) excludes from gross “amount of any damages received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sum or as periodic payments) on account of personal physical injuries or physical sickness”.

IS MONEY FROM LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT TAXABLE?
Mr. Hennessey and other officers, whom the U.S. Air Force selected for involuntary separation because of congressionally mandated personnel reductions in the Armed Forces, filed a complaint in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. The plaintiffs claimed that the Board in charge violated their equal protection rights under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution because it improperly considered race and gender in selecting officers for involuntary separation. The class action case was settled and each member received a lump-sum payment. When petitioners filed their tax return, they did not include in income the lump-sum payment.

IRS TAXES ALL COMPENSATION UNLESS EXCLUDED BY SECTION 104(a)(2)

The lump-sum payment was not compensation for physical injuries or physical sickness that Mr. Hennessey might have suffered as a consequence of any actions taken by the U.S. Air Force. Therefore, the exception of Internal Revenue Code §104 (a) (2) is not applicable. The decision was entered for the Internal Revenue Service .

Los Angeles Tax Attorney:

Congratulations Los Angeles Lakers #15

Los Angeles Lakers 2009 World Champions Game Highlights

Los Angeles Tax Attorney:

Internal Revenue Service IRS TAX has set a deadline for reporting offshore bank accounts and other offshore income activities through its voluntary disclosure program. Voluntary disclosure may eliminate risk of IRS criminal prosecution and reduce or eliminate assessment of tax penalties.

Even taxpayers who do not have offshore activities but have unreported income, fraud, unpaid taxes or unfiled tax returns will benefit from the IRS Voluntary Disclosure program.

Internal Revenue Manual Section 9.5.11.9
Voluntary Disclosure Practice:

IRS Voluntary Disclosure is the truthful, timely and complete communication from a taxpayer to the IRS, regarding the accuracy of the taxpayer’s federal income tax returns. The IRS considers voluntary disclosure along with other factors in the investigation of fraudulent tax reporting practices when determining whether criminal prosecution would be recommended. Voluntary disclosure is simply the procedural practice of the IRS, and does not provide the taxpayer with any rights.

As each case if different, taxpayers should not rely on a similar taxpayer’s situation where criminal prosecution was not recommended. It is important to note that this practice doesn’t apply to taxpayers with illegal source income.

For a IRSvoluntary disclosure to occur, the communication must be truthful, timely, complete, and meet the following requirements:

The taxpayer must express willingness to cooperate with the IRS in determining his/her correct tax liability, and the taxpayer does actually cooperate.

The taxpayer must make good faith arrangements with the IRS to pay in full, the tax, interest, and any penalties owed to the IRS, and to be determined by the IRS.

A disclosure is considered timely if it is received before:

The IRS has initiated a civil examination or criminal investigation of the taxpayer, or has notified the taxpayer that it intends to initiate such an examination or investigation.

The IRS received from a third party (e.g., informant, other governmental agency, or the media) information regarding the taxpayer’s noncompliance.

The IRS has already begun a civil examination or criminal investigation that is directly in connection with the specific liability of the taxpayer.

The IRS has acquired information directly related to the specific liability of the taxpayer from a criminal enforcement action (e.g., search warrant, grand jury subpoena).

Below please find a few examples of what constitute a voluntary disclosure:

An attorney writes a letter to the IRS enclosing amended returns from a client which are complete and accurate (reporting legal source income omitted from the original returns). The letter states that the taxpayer will pay the tax, interest, and any penalties determined by the IRS to be applicable in full. The correspondence meets the timeliness standard set forth above.

The IRS sends a notice stating that it has no record of a tax return filed for a certain year and inquires whether the taxpayer has filed a return for that year. The taxpayer has not filed that year’s tax return and makes a disclosure after receiving such a letter. The individual files complete and accurate returns and makes arrangements with the IRS to pay, in full, the tax, interest, and any penalties determined by the IRS to be applicable . Because the IRS hasn’t started investigation or notified the taxpayer of its intent to investigate, this is considered a voluntary disclosure.

Examples of what are not voluntary disclosures include:

A correspondence from an attorney requesting to resolve his/her client’s tax liability, and that his/her client wants to remain anonymous. This does not meet the requirements of voluntary disclosure and in addition, the identity of the taxpayer is not disclosed.

If a taxpayer discloses its IRS tax liability, while already under grand jury investigation. The end result would be the same whether or not the taxpayer knew about the grand jury investigation.

A taxpayer who is in a partnership, is not currently under investigation and makes a disclosure. However, the partner in the partnership is under investigation. The disclosure in this case is not considered a voluntary disclosure because the investigation of the specific liability is already under investigation, whether or not the taxpayer knew about the investigation.

A taxpayer’s employee notifies the IRS regarding a double set of books. Thereafter, the taxpayer discloses to the IRS. Since the IRS has already been informed by the third party of the specific taxpayer’s noncompliance, this is not a voluntary disclosure, whether or not the taxpayer knew of the about the third party’s contact with the IRS.

Internal Revenue Manual Section 9.5.11.9.1
Voluntary Disclosure Protocols

All voluntary disclosures must meet the requirements contained in subsection 9.5.11.9 above. There is not particular format that the voluntary disclosure must abide by when making the voluntary disclosure communication. In addition, the communication by the taxpayer or their representative can be either verbally or in writing. Determining whether or not a communication is a IRS Voluntary Disclosure can only be done by examining the facts and circumstances of each situation and investigation.

Los Angeles Tax Attorney:

Today is tax day - the 15th of April. If you need any last minute information you can find a lot of information here at Internal Revenue Service's website IRS TAX. Hope everyone got their IRS 1040 and California 540 tax returns filed on time. Our current income tax system has been in effect since the United States Congress (website) ratified the 16th Amendment in 1913. The following single sentence in our constitution is the genesis of the most dreaded day for most Americans:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

The 16th amendment to the United States Constitution was proposed to the legislatures of the several States by the 61st Congress on the 12th of July, 1909, and was declared, in a proclamation of the Secretary of State, dated the 25th of February, 1913, to have been ratified by 36 of the 48 States. Ratification was completed on February 3, 1913.

Back in 1913 income tax forms were only 2 pages long. For some of us, it still is. President Obama's 2008 tax return was 43 pages long (including state return).

Los Angeles Tax Attorney: Internal Revenue Service IRS Tax Audit case.

In a recent IRS Tax Court case, DOUGLAS K. AND GAYLE L. BARRETT, Petitioners v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Respondent, July 21, 2008,
California taxpayers filed a US Tax Court US TAX COURT Complaint against the IRS for tax increases resulting from IRS Tax Audit. Taxes at issue are not for IRS payroll tax.

In the tax court, taxpayers claimed certain deductions including tools and automobiles used for the taxpayer's contractor business. However, IRS disallowed these deductions in the tax audit. IRS also charged an accuracy-related penalty-20 percent pursuant to IRS Tax Code section 6662(a).

IRS taxpayer did not provided any documentation to substantiate the cost of goods sold reported on their tax return. IRS tax auditor denied most of the business related expenses.

> US Tax Courts have held that where taxpayers’ testimony is general, conclusory, or uncorroborated, the Court is not required to accept such testimony as sustaining taxpayers’ burden of proof. See Lerch v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1987-295, affd. 877 F.2d 624 (7th Cir. 1989); Geiger v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1969-159, affd. 440 F.2d 688 (9th Cir. 1971).

Tax Practice Note:
Taxpayers bear the burden of proving the Commissioner’s determinations are erroneous. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933).

IRC Section 162(a) allows deductions for ordinary and necessary expenses of carrying on a trade or business. Section 7491 regarding the burden of proof is not applicable in this case because petitioners have failed to meet the requirements of section 7491(a)(1) and (2).

IRS tax deductions are strictly a matter of legislative grace, and taxpayers bear the burden of proving they are entitled to any claimed deductions. INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992).

Section 6001 requires taxpayers to maintain adequate books and records sufficient to substantiate all costs of goods sold and all deductions claimed on tax returns.

Section 274(d) requires taxpayers to substantiate any claimed deductions of listed property by adequate records or sufficient evidence and bars any deduction for an expenditure governed by section 274 on the basis of unsupported testimony of the taxpayers or on the basis of the taxpayers’ approximation.

IRS must prove penalty assessments under Section 6662(a) and (b)(1). This section imposes a 20-percent penalty on the portion of an underpayment attributable to negligence. Negligence includes any failure to keep adequate books and records or to substantiate items properly.

Sec. 1.6662-3(b)(1), Income Tax Regs. The Commissioner has the burden of production with respect to accuracy-related penalties. Sec. 7491(c). To meet that burden, the Commissioner must produce sufficient evidence indicating that it is appropriate to impose the penalty. See
Higbee v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. 438, 446 (2001). Once the Commissioner meets his burden of production, the taxpayer must come forward with persuasive evidence that the ommissioner’s
determination is incorrect. Rule 142(a); Higbee v. Commissioner, supra at 446-447.

The taxpayer may meet this burden by proving that he or she acted with reasonable cause and in good faith. See sec. 6664(c)(1); sec. 1.6664-4(a) and (b)(1), Income Tax Regs.

Tax Attorney Advice - Each year there are over 10 million IRS taxpayers who haven't filed their taxes or IRS 1040 tax return.

Taking the following action may save a lot of taxes and avoid criminal prosecution by the IRS. If you are being contacted by the IRS or are receiving threatening letters from the Internal Revenue Service, you may need to contact a tax attorney for guidance.

File All Tax Returns

Taxpayers should file all tax returns that are due, regardless of whether or not full payment can be made with the return. Depending on an individual’s circumstances, a taxpayer filing late may qualify for a payment plan. All payment plans require continued compliance with all filing and payment responsibilities after the plan is approved.

Facts About Filing Tax Returns

Failure to file a return or filing late can be costly. If taxes are owed, a delay in filing may result in penalty and interest charges that could increase your tax bill by 25 percent or more per year.
There is no penalty for failure to file a tax return if a refund is due. But by waiting too long to file, you can lose your refund.

In order to receive a refund, the return must be filed within 3 years of the due date. If you file a return, and later realize you made an error on the return, the deadline for claiming any refund due is three years after the return was filed, or two years after the tax was paid, whichever expires later.

Taxpayers who are entitled to the Earned Income Tax Credit must file a return to claim the credit even if they are not otherwise required to file. The return must be filed within 3 years of the due date in order to receive the credit.

If you are self-employed, you must file returns reporting self-employment income within three years of the due date in order to receive Social Security credits toward your retirement.

Taxpayers who continue to not file a required return and fail to respond to IRS requests for a return may be considered for a variety of enforcement actions. Continued non-compliance by flagrant or repeat nonfilers could result in additional penalties and/or criminal prosecution.

Documents Required to File Your Taxes - IRS Tax Return Form 1040:

Forms W-2 – Forms from employers showing wages for the year.

Forms 1099 – Forms from banks and other financial institutions showing interest and dividends. Forms 1099 also report self-employment income.

Information on expenses to claim on the return, such as itemized deductions, child care expenses, or employee business expenses.

Social Security numbers for dependent children and any other person claimed as a dependent

A copy of the last tax return filed.

We are tax attorneys and serve our clients in the following areas: New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, San Jose, Detroit, Jacksonville, Indianapolis, San Francisco, Columbus, Austin, Memphis, Baltimore, Fort Worth, Charlotte, El Paso, Milwaukee, Seattle, Boston, Denver, Washington DC, Las Vegas, Portland, Oklahoma City, Tucson, Albuquerque, Long Beach, Atlanta, Fresno, Sacramento, New Orleans, Cleveland, Kansas City, Mesa, Virginia Beach, Omaha, Oakland, Miami, Tulsa, Honolulu, Minneapolis, Colorado Springs, Arlington.

IRS Tax Audit Rate Increase for Los Angeles area Taxpayers and Businesses.

Long Beach Tax Attorney -The IRS continues to make strong progress in a number of key tax collection, IRS tax audit and tax enforcement areas. Taxpayers in the Los Angeles area including Pasadena, Long Beach, Sherman Oaks, Woodland Hills, Santa Monica, Redondo Beach, Torrance, Gardena, Santa Ana, Irvine, Anaheim, El Monte and Palmdale received more IRS Tax audit notices than in prior years.

The IRS tax audit, tax collection and IRS tax enforcement efforts increased again last year. IRS audited 84 percent more returns of individuals with incomes of $1 million or more than during 2006. Overall, IRS tax enforcement revenue reached $59.2 billion, up from $48.7 billion in 2006 and nearly $34.1 billion in 2002.

Highlights of the enforcement and services numbers for fiscal year 2007, which ended on September 30, include:

Individuals
IRS Tax Audit rates increased in 2007, both for overall individual rates and for higher-income taxpayers.
Tax Audits of individuals with incomes of $1 million or more increased from 17,015 during fiscal year 2006 to 31,382 during fiscal year 2007, an increase of 84 percent. One out of 11 individuals with incomes of $1 million or more faced an audit in 2007.

Overall, the total individual returns audited increased by 7 percent to 1,384,563 in 2007 from 1,293,681 in 2006. That’s the highest number since 1998.

Audits of individuals with incomes over $200,000 reached 113,105 returns, up 29.2 percent from the prior year total of 87,885.

The IRS increased audits of individual returns with income of $100,000 or more, auditing 293,188 of these returns in 2007, up 13.7 percent from last year’s total of 257,851.

The IRS filed 3.8 million tax levies and almost 700,000 IRS tax liens during 2007, an increase from the previous year and a substantial increase from five years earlier.

Businesses

In the business arena, the IRS continued efforts to review more returns of flow-through entities – partnerships and S Corporations. While large corporate audits are down slightly, IRS has increased focus on mid-market corporations – those with assets between $10 million and $50 million dollars. The IRS enforcement budget in 2007 was similar to the budget in 2006, and in times of flat budgets, the agency cannot increase activity across the board but must address the areas where there is growth and potential risk.

IRS Tax Audit of S Corporations increased to 17,681 during 2007, up 26 percent from the prior year’s total of 13,984.

IRS Tax Audit of partnerships increased to 12,195 during 2007, up almost 25 percent from the prior year’s total of 9,777.

IRS Tax Audit of mid-market corporations increased to 4,473, up 6 percent from last year’s total of 4,218.

IRS Tax Audit of businesses in general rose to 59,516, an increase of almost 14 percent from the prior year’s total of 52,223.

Although the IRS Tax Audit of large corporations dipped slightly in 2007 to 9,644 IRS Tax Audit, the number of IRS Tax Audit is up 14 percent from the fiscal year 2002 level.

The key to proper IRS tax audit defense is to establish tax audit strategy at the beginning of the audit. If you are being audited by the IRS or California FTB and need an experienced tax attorney contact a Tax Attorney at Tax Lawyers Group.

Torrance Tax Attorney —The Internal Revenue Service(IRS) announced today that it has automated the user fee calculations for IRS taxpayers entering into an installment agreement throughout California including IRS taxpayers seeking payment plan in the Los Angeles, Long Beach, Pasadena, Torrance, Gardena, Garden Grove, El Monte, Sherman Oaks, Woodland Hills, Orange, San Jose.

Previously, IRS taxpayers were required to submit a paper IRS Form 13844 to request a reduced user fee. Now, eligibility for reduced fees is determined automatically by the IRS.

An IRS installment agreement allows IRS taxpayers who have tax problems to pay their full tax debt in smaller, more manageable amounts, though penalties and interest continue to accrue on the unpaid portion of that IRS tax debt. IRS taxpayers are charged a one-time fee to set up an installment agreement with the IRS. A reduced fee is available for qualifying taxpayers.

Contact a tax attorney if you have any tax problems (310) 788 9820.

Continue reading "IRS Tax Problem? Installment Payment Plan for California taxpayers in Los Angeles, Long Beach, Torrance, Pasadena, Gardena, Orange and Riverside County." »

Many Los Angeles, Long Beach, Orange, Riverside, San Jose area business owners and taxpayers who have IRS tax problems may not have been aware of the tax settlement program called offer in compromise. Tax attorneys who handle these type of cases should prepare a comprehensive tax and financial analysis in order to prepare the most favorable tax settlement proposal which would result in minimum tax debt being paid to the IRS.

Although the IRS discourages and may create obstacles to have your IRS taxes reduced, a good tax attorney will often be able to prepare legal arguments that would contest and challenges put forth by the IRS concerning the tax settlement proposal.

An IRS Offer in Compromise allows taxpayers to settle their tax liabilities for less than the full amount. The objective of the IRS Offer in Compromise program is to accept a compromise when it is in the best interests of both the taxpayer and the government and promotes voluntary compliance with all future payment and filing requirements.

Major Changes to the IRS Offer in Compromise Program

The Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 (TIPRA), created major changes to the IRS IRS Offer in Compromise program as it relates to lump sum offers, periodic payment offers, and a determination as to when an offer is accepted. These changes affect all offers received by the IRS on or after July 16, 2006.

Continue reading "IRS Offer in Compromise - Resolve Tax Problem - Los Angeles, Long Beach California Tax Attorney" »

Los Angeles Tax AttorneyLos Angeles – The Internal Revenue Service today announced that interest rates for the calendar quarter beginning April 1, 2008, will drop by one percentage point. The new rates will be:

• six (6) percent for overpayments [five (5) percent in the case of a corporation];
• six (6) percent for underpayments;
• eight (8) percent for large corporate underpayments; and
• three and one-half (3.5) percent for the portion of a corporate overpayment exceeding $10,000.

These rates relate to interest on IRS taxes but not on the IRS Tax penalties. Often times, our clients in Los Angeles, Long Beach, Torrance, El Monte, Pasadena and San Jose California area taxpayers are inundated with IRS tax, interest and penalties. Depending on your case, some of your interest and much of your penalties may be reduced. If you require more information contact us at 310 788 9820.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, the rate of interest on IRS tax is determined on a quarterly basis. For taxpayers other than corporations, the overpayment and underpayment of tax rate is the federal short-term rate plus 3 percentage points. Generally, in the case of a corporation tax, the underpayment tax rate is the federal short-term rate plus 3 percentage points and the overpayment IRS tax rate is the federal short-term rate plus 2 percentage points.

The rate for large corporate tax underpayments is the federal short-term rate plus 5 percentage points. The rate on the portion of a corporate overpayment of tax exceeding $10,000 for a taxable period is the federal short-term rate plus one-half (0.5) of a percentage point.

California IRS Offices to Contact Third Parties for IRS Tax Audit and IRS Tax Collection

Los Angeles Tax Attorney - In 1998, the Congress amended Code Section 7602 to prohibit Internal Revenue Service employees including IRS Agents and IRS Auditors from contacting third parties with respect to the taxpayer’s IRS tax liability without providing reasonable advance notice to the taxpayer that third-party contacts may be made.

Most IRS tax attorneys and tax lawyers who resolve tax problems were concerned that (1) that such contacts by the IRS may have negative effect on the taxpayer’s business and could damage the IRS taxpayer’s reputation in the community, and (2) that taxpayers should have the opportunity to resolve his tax problems through his tax attorney before the IRS contacted third parties.

IRS third party contact notice provides a general tax notice to the taxpayer before most third-party contacts are made, and then to periodically (or upon the taxpayer’s request) provide the taxpayer with a record of the persons contacted by the Internal Revenue Service. If you are a taxpayer located in Los Angles or California with IRS tax problems, IRS tax audit or IRS tax levy collection, make sure you contact IRS tax attorney so that your IRS tax rights are protected.

IRS Tax and Penalty Collection to increase in Los Angeles and California metro regions.

IRS Tax Attorneys and lawmakers advising Congress are likely to endorse giving Internal Revenue Service more tools to improve IRS tax debt collection, compliance and boost revenue.
Internal Revenue Service faces congressional pressure collect additional $290 billion per year in taxes which go uncollected each year.

Los Angeles and California based IRS centers have been increasing support staff trained for IRS tax collection and audits over the last three years. IRS and the government concurs that collecting additional tax, interest and tax penalties from those who already owe IRS taxes is seen as a smarter move than raising new taxes or tax penalties.

If the president's proposals pass, it would require that brokerage houses and mutual funds to report to the Internal Revenue Service monies invested by taxpayers into various securities. Currently, taxpayer or brokerage houses are not required to report to the Internal Revenue Service such investment records. IRS estimates that if the new tax proposal passes, IRS would raise additional 7.5 billion dollars from 2008 through 2018. “President’s new tax proposal has high level of support from both houses of Congress and is likely to pass this Congressional term,” said tax attorney Victor Yoo, Los Angeles tax attorney with Tax Lawyers Group, APC.