DOCSLIB.ORG

Taxation Section: Michigan Tax Lawyer Winter 1996

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Taxation Section: Michigan Tax Lawyer Winter 1996 Volume XXII, Issue 1 First Quarter 1996 >.._//, TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAIRPERSON'S LETTER TO TAXATION SECTION MEMBERS 2 REPORTS FROM THE COMMITTEES Corporation Committee 5 Employee Benefits Committee 6 Estates & Trusts Committee 6 International Tax Law Committee 7 Partnership Committee 8 Practice & Procedure Committee 8 State & Local Committee 10 FEATURE ARTICLES The Implied Covenant Not To Compete- An IRS Red Herring? By: Robert L. Cohen & Robert A. Bryant 12 General Considerations of Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Arrangements By: Bryan I. Pukoff 19 STATE AND LOCAL TAX UPDATE Recent Cases 26 SHORT SUBJECTS Book Review 29 Shortcuts 30 SECTION NEWS Calendar of Seminars & Events 32 MICHIGAN TAX LAWYER The Michigan Tax Lawyer is a quarterly publication of the Taxation Section of the State Bar of Michigan that is designed to be a practical and useful resource for the tax practitioner. Features include concise reports in a uniform format from the Section's committees, practitioner articles with the "how to" approach, news of events and of other Section members, and "Short Subjects" providing helpful practice information. Input from members of the Taxation Section is most welcome. Our publication is aimed toward involving you in Section activities and assisting you in your practice. If you have suggestions or an article you wish to have considered for publication, please contact Joseph A Bonventre, Esq. at 1600 First Federal Building, Detroit, Michigan 48226-1962, (313) 965-8300. JOSEPH A. BONVENTRE Editor Publication Committee ERIC T. WEISS WILLIAM E. SIDER State Bar of Michigan Taxation Section Council CAROL J. KARR STEPHEN M. FELDMAN GEORGE W. GREGORY Chairperson Vice Chairperson Secretary-Treasurer REGINALD J. NIZOL Ex-Officio Joseph A. Bonventre Mark C. Larson James H. N ovis William E. Sider Stewart L. Mandell Eric T. Weiss Gary Schwarcz Thomas G. Mies Robert R. Stead Editor's Assistant Mary G. Trayner Subscription Information The Michigan Tax Lawyer (ISSN 0899-2460), (USPS 093930) is published quarterly by the Taxation Section, State Bar of Michigan, 525 North Woodward, Suite 1300, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan 48304-2969. Subscription fee of $5.00 is included in the $30.00 annual Taxation Section membership fee. Second-class postage paid at Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. POSTMAS­ TER: Send address changes to Membership Records, Taxation Section, State Bar of Michigan, 306 Townsend, Lansing, Michigan 48904. Change of Address Individual subscribers should send notification in writing to: Membership Records, Taxation Section, State Bar of Michigan, 306 Townsend, Lansing, Michigan 48904. Citation Form The Michigan Tax Lawyer may be cited as follows: (Vol.) (Issue) MI Tax L. (Page) (Qtr. and Yr.). Disclaimer The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors exclusively and do not necessarily reflect those of the Publication Committee, the Taxation Section Council or the Taxation Section. It is the responsibility of the individual lawyer to determine if advice or comments in an article are appropriate or relevant in a given situation. The Publication Committee, the Taxation Section Council and the Taxation Section disclaim all liability resulting from statements and opinions contained in the Michigan Tax Lawyer. CHAIRPERSON CAROL J. KARR 800 CALDER PLAZA BLDG. GRAND RAPIDS 49503·2250 (616) 459-8311 TAXATION SECTION VICE-CHAIRPERSON STEPHEN M. FELDMAN SUITE 200 32300 NORTHWESTERN HWY. STATE MICHIGAN FARMINGTON HILLS 48334-1567 c (810) 855-6500 SECRETARY-TREASURER GEORGE W. GREGORY 300 WABEEK BLDG. 280 W. MAPLE RD. BIRMINGHAM 48009-3344 (810) 646-4200 COUNCIL February 7, 1996 JOSEPH A. BONVENTRE (313) 965-8293 MARK C. LARSON (313) 568-6790 STEWART L. MANDELL (313) 568-6796 THOMAS G. MIES Dear Taxation Section Members: (313) 421-8022 JAMES H. NOVIS (313) 256-7940 The Taxation Section is reaching out with ... GARY SCHWARCZ (810) 855-8808 WILLIAM E. SIDER (313) 961-8380 National speakers at the Summer Tax Conference. Register for ROBERT R. STEAD Friday and Saturday, June 14 and 15, 1996, at the Grand Traverse Resort for an (616) 949-2300 ERIC T. WEISS enjoyable way to broaden your knowledge. Out-of-state speakers include: Alan (810) 355-5000 M. Ellenby, Senior Manager at Ernst & Young in Chicago; Judge David Laro of EX-OFFICIO the U.S. Tax Court in Washington, D.C.; Andrew Katzenstein with Manatt, Phelps REGINALD J. NIZOL (313) 225-2676 & Phillips in Los Angeles; and C. Clinton Stretch, Director of Tax Legislative COMMISSIONER LIAISON Affairs for Deloitte & Touche in Washington, D.C. Also hear what is happening PAUL R. SOWERBY (810) 851-1200 in Lansing from David Kirvan, Administrator, Single Business Tax, and Paul ( COMMITIEE CHAIRPERSONS Hillegonds, Speaker of the House ofRepresentatives. CORPORATION KENNETH W. KINGMA (810) 528-1111 Liaisons with other State Bar Sections. As an outgrowth of EMPLOYEE BENEFITS SHERILL A. SIEBERT discussion between the Taxation Council and Probate Council regarding the (313) 256-7502 proposed Estate Settlement Act, Robin Ferriby from the Probate Council has ESTATES AND TRUSTS EDWARD M. DERON (313) 963-9625 volunteered to attend Taxation Council meetings to keep us apprised of Probate INTERNATIONAL Council activities. The Administrative Law Section has invited the Taxation EDWARD D. MacDONALD (313) 956-2677 Council to select a representative to their Council and Gary Schwarcz has agreed PARTNERSHIP ANTHONY ILARDI, JR. to serve in that capacity. We are also exploring the possibility of a liaison with the (810) 362-8212 Business Law Section. PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE ERIC M. NEMETH (810) 357-3010 STATE AND LOCAL A legislative liaison to the Michigan Legislature. For the first GREGORY A. NOWAK (313) 259-0500 time this year, we have appointed an official legislative liaison to the Michigan PROGRAM FACILITAlOR that KAREN A. NIZOL legislature and Jim Novis is working in capacity to encourage communication. 16411 NOLA DR. LIVONIA 48154-1206 Legislative representatives will also be invited to meet with Taxation Council (313) 953-0088 members before the May Council meeting in Lansing. A Computer Committee to explore communication through the Internet. The State Bar is preparing to establish a virtual private network on the Internet. Steve Feldman, George Gregory, and Tony llardi have agreed to ( PAST COUNCIL CHAIRPERSONS ALLAN J. CLAYPOOL OSCAR H. FELDMAN JOHN L. KING JACK E. MITCHELL B. COURTNEY RANKIN JOHN N. SEAMAN STEPHEN H. CLINK EUGENE A. GARGARO, JR. DONALD M. LANSKY DENNIS M. MITZEL JOHN J. RAYMOND, SR. PETER S. SHELDON JOHN J. COLLINS, JR. ERNEST GETZ JEFFREY A. LEVINE J. LEE MURPHY DAVID M. ROSENBERGER WILLIAM J. SIKKENGA ROGER COOK JOSEPH D. HARTWIG ARNOLD W. WNGERSHAUSEN LAWRENCE J. MURPHY ANDREW M. SAVEL I. JOHN SNIDER, II CLIFFORD H. DOMKE STEPHEN I. JURMU JERRY D. WPTAK ROBERT B. PIERCE BENJAMIN 0. SCHWENDENER. JR. LAWRFNr.F R VAN Til investigate how the Taxation Section can b~st utilize Internet access to facilitate communication among Section members. Participation in the National Association of State Bar Taxation Sections. Our Vice-Chairperson, Steve Feldman, represented our Taxation Section at the 16th Annual Meeting of the National Association of State Bar Taxation Sections in October. Once again, our Michigan. Tax Lawyer and Taxation Section Membership Directory were applauded as model publications and Steve learned what other Taxation Sections across the country are accomplishing. As we are reaching out, are we reaching you? Let us know what else we can do to maximize your Taxation Section membership. Sincerely, Carol J. Karr, Chairperson Reports from the Michigan Tax Lawyer-1st Quarter 1996 Committees Report of the 453 is not available in a 338(h)(10) Corporation Committee transaction. Kenneth M. Kingma, Chairperson 2. Article Regarding Purchase Kemp, Klein, Umphrey & Endelman, P.C. Price Allocations Involving Suite 600 Columbia Center Noncompete Agreements. The 201 West Big Beaver Road second part of a two-part article P.O. Box 4300 written by Robert L. Cohen concern­ Troy, Michigan 48099-4300 ing purchase price allocations (810) 528-1111 involving noncompete agreements is published in this issue of the 1. Recent Activities. Michigan Tax Lawyer. The portion On November 30, 1995, the Corpo­ printed in this issue discusses the ration Committee conducted a joint various shortcomings of the IRS meeting with the Partnership Com­ implied covenant theory that is based mittee regarding Section 338(h)(10) on Colten v Duvall, 254 Mich 346 elections, which are frequently made (1931), and also discusses two federal in merger and acquisition transac­ tax decisions rejecting that theory. tions today. Robert L. Cohen of Plante & Moran, LLP led the discus­ 3. Clinton Administration sion on this topic. Robert provided Proposal To Repeal The Built-In informative handouts (including a Gains Rules For Large C-To-S recent article he wrote) regarding the Corporation Conversions. Among basics of a 338(h)(10) election follow­ the Clinton administration proposals ing the enactment of recent regula­ to achieve a balanced budget is a tions that expanded its use to acqui­ proposal to repeal the built-in gains sitions of S corporation stock. He rules under Section 1374 for large C also discussed the election's applica­ corporations that elect S corporation tion to sales of stock of a subsidiary status after December 6, 1995. A in a consolidated group. During his notice regarding this proposal was discussion; Robert went through a mailed to members of the Corpora­ handout containing an example that tion Committee and the Tax Section. showed the results of a stock pur­ On February 22, 1996, the Treasury chase involving no 338 election, a Department announced that it will 338(g) election, a 338(h)(10) election, recommend to Congress that the and a straight asset sale by a sole proposed repeal apply only to S corporate shareholder or a sole corporation elections effective for individual shareholder. Copies of taxable years beginning after Janu­ these handouts are available upon ary 1, 1997. A notice regarding this request.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Publication 538, Accounting Periods and Methods
    Userid: CPM Schema: tipx Leadpct: 100% Pt. size: 10 Draft Ok to Print AH XSL/XML Fileid: … ons/P538/201901/A/XML/Cycle04/source (Init. & Date) _______ Page 1 of 21 15:46 - 28-Feb-2019 The type and rule above prints on all proofs including departmental reproduction proofs. MUST be removed before printing. Department of the Treasury Contents Internal Revenue Service Future Developments ....................... 1 Publication 538 Introduction .............................. 1 (Rev. January 2019) Photographs of Missing Children .............. 2 Cat. No. 15068G Accounting Periods ........................ 2 Calendar Year .......................... 2 Fiscal Year ............................. 3 Accounting Short Tax Year .......................... 3 Improper Tax Year ....................... 4 Periods and Change in Tax Year ...................... 4 Individuals ............................. 4 Partnerships, S Corporations, and Personal Methods Service Corporations (PSCs) .............. 5 Corporations (Other Than S Corporations and PSCs) .............................. 7 Accounting Methods ....................... 8 Cash Method ........................... 8 Accrual Method ........................ 10 Inventories ............................ 13 Change in Accounting Method .............. 18 How To Get Tax Help ...................... 19 Future Developments For the latest information about developments related to Pub. 538, such as legislation enacted after it was published, go to IRS.gov/Pub538. What’s New Small business taxpayers. Effective for tax years beginning
    [Show full text]
  • Tax Planning with Life Insurance William L
    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository William & Mary Annual Tax Conference Conferences, Events, and Lectures 1987 Tax Planning with Life Insurance William L. Haas Repository Citation Haas, William L., "Tax Planning with Life Insurance" (1987). William & Mary Annual Tax Conference. 574. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/tax/574 Copyright c 1987 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/tax 1986 TAX REFORM - THE AFTERMATH WEALTH TRANSFER TAX PLANNING WITH LIFE INSURANCE By: William L. Haas Tax and Investment Group 33 Bedford Street Lexington, MA 02173 617 861-9720 The Tax Reform Act of 1986 maintains the importance of insurance for risk protection and it enhances it's value for savings, investment, and tax purposes. 1. Tax reform as it relates to the insurance company and product had been significantly addressed by TEFRA in 1982 and DEFRA in 1984. The industry was able to escape the most threatening reform proposals suggested for 1986 legislation. a. The most important proposal threatening the industry was to impose a tax on inside build up of cash values. This proposal was defeated. But changes in the area are still anticipated. b. The most threatening proposal which was enacted was probably the limitation on interest deduction for financing insurance. 2. The 1986 legislation adversely affected products which directly or indirectly competed in markets where the insurance product is now anitipated to make major inroads. a. Traditional tax shelters offering current deductions appear a thing of the passt.
    [Show full text]
  • Constructive Receipt of Income Neil Harl Iowa State University, [email protected]
    Volume 8 | Number 2 Article 1 1-17-1996 Constructive Receipt of Income Neil Harl Iowa State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/aglawdigest Part of the Agricultural and Resource Economics Commons, Agricultural Economics Commons, Agriculture Law Commons, and the Public Economics Commons Recommended Citation Harl, Neil (1996) "Constructive Receipt of Income," Agricultural Law Digest: Vol. 8 : No. 2 , Article 1. Available at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/aglawdigest/vol8/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Agricultural Law Digest by an authorized editor of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Agricultural Law Digest An Agricultural Law Press Publication Volume 8, No. 2 January 17, 1997 Editor: Robert P. Achenbach, Jr. Contributing Editor Dr. Neil E. Harl, Esq. ISSN 1051-2780 CONSTRUCTIVE RECEIPT OF INCOME — by Neil E. Harl* The doctrine of constructive receipt of income is taxpayer’s attorney requested that the checks be reissued to repeatedly litigated in large part because there is no bright reflect payment in the later year. The ruling held that the line test for when the concept applies.1 Yet the doctrine is amounts were not deemed constructively received in the immensely important to farmers and ranchers on the cash earlier year. The ruling noted that the mere fact that a check method of accounting.2 is issued in one year and received in another does not make the check taxable in the year issued.
    [Show full text]
  • Us Preimmigration Tax Planning
    US PREIMMIGRATION TAX PLANNING - 12th Annual International Estate Planning Institute March 10, 2016 SUMMER AYERS LEPREE, ESQ. Summer A. LePree, Esq., Partner, Bilzin Sumberg Baena Price & Axelrod, LLP, 1450 Brickell Avenue, Suite 2300, Miami, FL 33137. Telephone: 305-350-7274. E-mail address: [email protected] Summer Ayers LePree is a Partner in Bilzin Sumberg's Tax Group, where she focuses her practice on international taxation. She has extensive experience advising clients on international restructurings, treaty planning techniques, and other international and domestic corporate and partnership tax matters, as well as significant experience with international tax planning and structuring for high net worth private clients, including pre-immigration planning, expatriation, and US income and transfer tax aspects of foreign trusts and estates. Summer has represented clients before the Unites States Tax Court, the Internal Revenue Service, and the United States Treasury. Summer is a frequent speaker and author on various topics in international tax law. She also lectures regularly for the New York University Summer Institute in International Taxation and Federal Tax Institute and sits on panels for various industry organizations, including the American Bar Association and the International Bar Association. Summer was selected by the Daily Business Review for the esteemed 2015 "On the Rise" award, an honor that only 40 South Florida Lawyers under the age of 40 were selected to receive. In addition, Summer was recognized in the 2016 edition of Best Lawyers in America, in the field of Tax Law. She also currently serves as the Vice Chairperson of the United States Activities of Foreigners and Tax Treaties Committee.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Federal Income Tax Developments Ira B
    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository William & Mary Annual Tax Conference Conferences, Events, and Lectures 1999 Recent Federal Income Tax Developments Ira B. Shepard Repository Citation Shepard, Ira B., "Recent Federal Income Tax Developments" (1999). William & Mary Annual Tax Conference. 374. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/tax/374 Copyright c 1999 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/tax RECENT FEDERAL INCOME TAX DEVELOPMENTS By Ira B. Shepard Professor of Law University of Houston Law Center Houston, Texas 77204 Tele: 713-743-2246 Fax: 713-743-2131 e-mail: ishepardpuh.edu Tennessee Tax Institute December 2, 1999 1. ACCOUNTING A. Accounting Methods 1. TAM 9848001 (7/16/98). Dentist custom-ordered crowns, bridges and dentures from independent laboratories for individual patients. Therefore, he does purchase and sell merchandise inventory. The TAM stated that neither a small year-end inventory nor custom-ordering was sufficient to prevent the accrual method from being required. Nevertheless, the dentist was not required to maintain inventories because the production, purchase or sale of merchandise was not a significant income- producing factor under Reg. § 1.471-1. 2. Updated procedures for taxpayers to obtain automatic consent to change accounting methods. Rev. Proc. 98-60, 1998-51 I.R.B. 16 (12/10/98), clarifying, modifying, amplifyin and superseding Rev. Proc. 97-37, 1997-2 C.B. 455. Updates the procedures by which a taxpayer may obtain automatic consent to change the methods of accounting set forth in the procedure.
    [Show full text]
  • Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plans: a Review and Critique," William Mitchell Law Review: Vol
    William Mitchell Law Review Volume 17 | Issue 1 Article 13 1991 Nonqualified efeD rred Compensation Plans: A Review and Critique Carter G. Bishop Marian McMahon Durkin Follow this and additional works at: http://open.mitchellhamline.edu/wmlr Recommended Citation Bishop, Carter G. and Durkin, Marian McMahon (1991) "Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plans: A Review and Critique," William Mitchell Law Review: Vol. 17: Iss. 1, Article 13. Available at: http://open.mitchellhamline.edu/wmlr/vol17/iss1/13 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at Mitchell Hamline Open Access. It has been accepted for inclusion in William Mitchell Law Review by an authorized administrator of Mitchell Hamline Open Access. For more information, please contact [email protected]. © Mitchell Hamline School of Law Bishop and Durkin: Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plans: A Review and Critique NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLANS: A REVIEW AND CRITIQUE CARTER G. BISHOPt MARIAN MCMAHON DURKINtt We live in the great world as well as in the little. We belong to groups that extend beyond particular places and we speak a language ... that aspires to universality. If it is to perform its expressive function, our theory must help us grasp this transcendent aspect of our experience.' The tax treatment of nonqualfied deferred compensation plans (NQDCPs) encourages the deferral of the payment of personal service income beyond the economic performance of the services, the natural mar- ket datefor payment. The current use of such plans is premised upon an exemption from a complex series of Department of Labor unfunded plan rules (ERISA2 funding, anti-discrimination and reporting standards) and avoidance of the common law income tax doctrines of constructive receipt and economic benefit.
    [Show full text]
  • Equitable Recoupment: Revisiting an Old and Inconsistent Remedy
    Fordham Law Review Volume 65 Issue 2 Article 11 1996 Equitable Recoupment: Revisiting an Old and Inconsistent Remedy Camilla E. Watson Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Camilla E. Watson, Equitable Recoupment: Revisiting an Old and Inconsistent Remedy , 65 Fordham L. Rev. 691 (1996). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol65/iss2/11 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Equitable Recoupment: Revisiting an Old and Inconsistent Remedy Cover Page Footnote Associate Professor, University of Georgia School of Law. I wish to thank Brookes Billman, Walter Hellerstein, Margaret V. Sachs, and Alan Watson for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this Article. I also wish to thank Patricia Bryant and David Gunderson for their research assistance. This article is available in Fordham Law Review: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol65/iss2/11 EQUITABLE RECOUPMENT: REVISITING AN OLD AND INCONSISTENT REMEDY Camilla E. Watson* TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................. 692 I. RELATED EQUITABLE REMEDIES AND THEIR USE IN FEDERAL TAX LITIGATION ............................. 699 A. Estoppel and Quasi-Estoppel........................ 700 B. Equitable Tolling .................................... 708 C. Election ............................................. 708 D. Duty of Consistency................................. 710 II. RECOUPMENT AND SETOFF ............................. 713 A . Setoff ............................................... 714 B. The Equitable Recoupment Decisions of the Supreme Court .....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Attorneys Audit Technique Guide
    Attorneys Audit Technique Guide NOTE: This document is not an official pronouncement of the law or the position of the Service and cannot be used, cited, or relied upon as such. This guide is current through the publication date. Since changes may have occurred after the publication date that would affect the accuracy of this document, no guarantees are made concerning the technical accuracy after the publication date. Revision Date - March 2011 Table of Contents Chapter 1 - Overview of Attorney Returns ......................................................................... 3 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3 RecordKeeping ............................................................................................................... 4 Bank Accounts ................................................................................................................ 5 General Trust Account ................................................................................................ 6 Segregated Trust Account ........................................................................................... 6 Other Revenue Sources ................................................................................................... 7 Client-Related Expenses ................................................................................................. 7 Attorney-Client Privilege ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • AALU's Washington Report
    AALU's Washington Report Premier analysis of federal legislative and regulatory developments for the nation's 2000 most advanced life insurance planners, focusing on business, estate, qualified and nonqualified retirement planning. Counsel AALU Buchanan Ingersoll PC Federal Policy Group Executive Vice President 2901 Telestar Court Gerald H. Sherman Ken Kies David J. Stertzer Falls Church, VA 22042 Stuart M. Lewis Patrick J. Raffaniello Director of Government Affairs Phone: (703) 641-9400 Deborah M. Beers Timothy Hanford Fax: (703) 641-9885 Norma Sharara Jim Carlisle Tom Korb www.aalu.org PricewaterhouseCoopers Ricchetti Inc. Assoc. Dir. of Gov. Affairs William Archer Steve Ricchetti Marc R. Cadin Donald Carlson Jeff Ricchetti AALU Bulletin No: 04-133 October 8, 2004 Subject: Analysis of Deferred Compensation Provisions in the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 Major References: Section 885, American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 Prior AALU Washington Reports: 04-128, 04-127; 04-126; 04-118; 04-94 MDRT Information Retrieval Index Nos.: 2400.00; 7400.023 One of the most significant aspects of the tax bill currently being finalized by Congress is the dramatic rewrite of the tax rules applicable to nonqualified deferred compensation arrangements. These rules can be expected to affect every deferred compensation plan in the United States, whether elective or nonelective, whether established through formal plan structures or simple board resolutions, and whether applied to a group of employees or to a single executive. Because of the short timeframe in which employers must react and adapt to these new rules, it is imperative that prompt and careful consideration be given to these new deferred compensation rules and to their consequences.
    [Show full text]
  • Schedularity in U.S. Taxation, Its Effect on Tax Distribution, Comparison with Sweden
    Saint Louis University School of Law Scholarship Commons All Faculty Scholarship 2012 Schedularity in U.S. Taxation, Its Effect on Tax Distribution, Comparison with Sweden Henry Ordower Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/faculty Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, and the Tax Law Commons No. 2012-31 Schedularity in U.S. Taxation, its Effect on Tax Distribution, Comparison with Sweden Henry Ordower ElectronicElectronic copy copy available available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2182871 Discussion Draft Schedularity in U.S. Taxation, its Effect on Tax Distribution, Comparison with Sweden A condensed version of this paper on U.S. schedularity only will appear in 108 Northwestern University Law Review, in its "100 Years under the Income Tax" Symposium By Henry Ordower, Professor of Law Saint Louis University School of Law The United States uses a global model as the basis for its federal income tax system. 1 Characteristic of global systems is the Internal Revenue Code’s definition of gross income. 2 The definition includes “all income from whatever source derived” and combines income from all sources under that single rubric of gross income. 3 Taxable income 4 upon which the Code imposes the income tax 5 also appears to combine deductions without regard to their source although the Code distinguishes business deductions 6 from all other deductions. 7 Several economically developed countries, including Sweden, 8 Germany, and Canada, however, employ a schedular model of taxation. Schedular models classify income and related expenses by schedular class and may compute tax separately for each class.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Publication
    Userid: CPM Schema: tipx Leadpct: 100% Pt. size: 8 Draft Ok to Print AH XSL/XML Fileid: … tions/P525/2015/A/XML/Cycle02/source (Init. & Date) _______ Page 1 of 40 13:37 - 13-Jan-2016 The type and rule above prints on all proofs including departmental reproduction proofs. MUST be removed before printing. Publication 525 Cat. No. 15047D Contents Future Developments ............ 1 Department of the Taxable and What's New .................. 1 Treasury Internal Reminders ................... 2 Revenue Nontaxable Service Introduction .................. 2 Income Employee Compensation .......... 3 Special Rules for Certain Employees ............... 14 For use in preparing Business and Investment Income .... 16 2015 Returns Sickness and Injury Benefits ....... 17 Miscellaneous Income ........... 20 Repayments ................. 34 How To Get Tax Help ........... 35 Index ..................... 36 Future Developments For the latest information about developments related to Publication 525, such as legislation enacted after it was published, go to www.irs.gov/pub525. What's New Health flexible spending arrangements (health FSAs) under cafeteria plans. For plan year 2015, health FSAs are subject to a $2,550 limit on salary reduction contributions. Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) account. This is a new type of savings account for individuals with disabilities and their families. For 2015, you can contribute up to $14,000. Distributions are tax-free if used to pay the ben- eficiary's qualified disability expenses. See Pub. 907 for more information. Public safety officers. Certain amounts you receive under federal or state law due to a death or disability of a public safety officer in the line of duty may be excluded from gross in- come.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Consumption Tax Proposals: Changes in the Taxation of Interspousal Transactions, Use of Trusts, and Revising the Meaning of "Tax Planning"
    Evaluating the Consumption Tax Proposals: Changes in the Taxation of Interspousal Transactions, Use of Trusts, and Revising the Meaning of "Tax Planning" LESTER B. SNYDER* & ROGER J. HIGGINS** TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION . 1486 II. DIVORCE AND REDEMPTION {OF STOCK, THAT IS) . • . 1490 A. Fact Pattern . 1490 B. Current Tax Law . 1491 1. Ninth Circuit . 1494 2. Tax Court . 1494 3. Assessing the Argument . 1495 C. Flat Tax, H.R. 2060 . 1499 1. Simplification . 1499 2. Wages Versus Investment Income . 1500 3. Business Expenses and Borrowing . 1502 4. The Divorce and Beyond: New Tax Planning Opportunities . 1503 D. USA Tax, S. 722 . 1505 * Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law. ** J.D. University of San Diego School of Law, 1996. The Authors wish to thank Alan Schenk for his advice. We also thank Amy K. F. Cramer for her helpful research assistance, and Bruce Boetter for his editorial help. 1485 1. Simplification . 1505 2. The Definitional Problem in the USA Tax and the Fallacy of Tax Equivalency ...................... 1506 3. Divorce and the Return of "Form is Substance" ....... 1508 4. Sale of the Business and Tax Planning Under the USA Tax ............................. ·...... 1511 Ill. THE USE OF TRUSTS: EXPLORING ALIMONY AND DEFERRED COMPENSATION .................... : ........ 1511 A. Taxation of Trusts Under Current Tax Law .............. 1512 B. Alimony Trusts .................................. 1513 1. Fact Pattern ................................. 1513 2. Results Under Current Tax Law ................... 1514 3. Results Under the Flat Tax ...................... 1517 4. Results Under the USA Tax ........... ,......... , .. 1519 C. Deferred Compensation Trusts: (The "Non-Qualified" Type) .. 1526 1. Fact Pattern ................................. 1526 2. Results Under Current Tax Law .....
    [Show full text]