Tag Archives: taxpayer

Federal Tax Developments Related to Covid-19

By: Coleman Jackson, Attorney & Certified Public Accountant
March 30, 2020

As you can imagine, things are changing and developing fast and furious during this Covid-19 Pandemic. Developments in taxes are no exception! Our law firm desires to keep our clients and others informed with regards to certain tax developments that might impact their businesses. In keeping with that desire, note some of the most significant recent federal tax developments:

  1. Tax Day now July 15, 2020: The U.S. Treasury and Internal Revenue Service automatically extended from April 15, 2020 to July 15, 2020 the federal income tax filing due date. The IRS gives affected taxpayers until the last day of the Extension Period to file tax returns or make tax payments, including estimated tax payments, that have either an original or extended due date falling within the Period. The IRS will waive any interest and late filing and payment penalties related to these late tax returns.
  2. Small and midsize employers can begin taking advantage of two refundable payroll tax credits designed to immediately and fully reimburse them, dollar of dollar, for the cost of providing Coronavirus-related leave to their employees.
  3. The CARES Act of 2020 enacted in response to Covid-19 provides employers with an employee retention credit in the amount of 50% of their wages impacted by closure due to Covid-19. Further the Act which became law on March 27, 2020 extends the due date for paying employer payroll taxes. Taxpayers must carefully review the law and properly compute the amount of payroll taxes that can be deferred; because it is not 100% deferral of all payroll taxes. Note: The Small Business Administration has announced that they are taking applications for disaster relief from small businesses with respect to loans up to two million dollars for monies borrowed to make payroll and pay rent during this Covid-19 Crisis. The application process and details regarding what businesses qualify and the procedures for applying can be found on the Small Business Administration website. The SBA has announced that they have relaxed some of their processing and documentation requirements to expedite the processing of these emergency loans to small businesses impacted by Covid-19. It appears that these SBA emergency loans could be converted to grants under certain condition(s). The IRS will waive the usual fees and expedite requests for copies of previously filed tax returns for affected Covid-19 taxpayers who need them to apply for benefits or to file amended tax returns claiming casualty losses. Watch our blogs as more changes may be forth coming in the area of employer relief due to Covid-19 closures. But for now, this appears to be the game plan regarding employers.
  4. “Existing Installment Agreements –For taxpayers under an existing Installment Agreement, payments due between April 1 and July 15, 2020 are suspended. Taxpayers who are currently unable to comply with the terms of an Installment Payment Agreement, including a Direct Deposit Installment Agreement, may suspend payments during this period if they prefer. Furthermore, the IRS will not default any Installment Agreements during this period. By law, interest will continue to accrue on any unpaid balances.” Source: IR-2020-59, March 25, 2020.
  5. The CARES Act eliminates the 10% early withdrawal penalty for Covid-19 related distributions from retirement accounts and make other rule changes regarding retirement account contributions.
  6. The Act relaxes certain corporate and individual charitable contributions rules and provides for an above the line deduction up to $300 for charitable contributions.
  7. Texas has been declared a Presidential Disaster Area related to Covid-19, so more specific rules and provisions could be developed by the IRS related to individuals and businesses with business operations in Texas or impacted by this particular Presidential Disaster Area Declaration.

This law blog is written by the Taxation | Litigation | Immigration Law Firm of Coleman Jackson, P.C. for educational purposes; it does not create an attorney-client relationship between this law firm and its reader. You should consult with legal counsel in your geographical area with respect to any legal issues impacting you, your family or business.

Coleman Jackson, P.C. | Taxation, Litigation, Immigration Law Firm | English (214) 599-0431 | Spanish (214) 599-0432

Federal Taxation and Cutting Horses:  It’s Not Just About The Horses

By:  Coleman Jackson, Attorney, Certified Public Accountant
December 16, 2019

Federal Taxation and Cutting Horses: It’s Not Just About The Horses

Recently I came across a United States Tax Court memorandum decision dated November 25, 2019 involving a South Dakota farmer with a cutting horse and seed business.  The issues in the case that struck me were (1) whether the taxpayer’s cutting horse activity was an activity “not engaged in for profit” within the meaning of Section 183 of the Internal Revenue Code, and (2) whether the taxpayer should be required to pay the accuracy-related penalties under Section 6662(a) of the Internal Revenue Code.  The case was Lowell G. Den Besten, Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent, T.C. Memo 2019-154 (November 25, 2019).  Note that Tax Court Memo decisions cannot be used as precedent by other taxpayers.  So this blogs aim is to pull general observations from the Besten case because federal taxation and cutting horses is not just about the horses.

 

The significant thing for other individuals and businesses who find themselves tangled in a spirited horse race with the IRS is not whether they are in the cutting horse business or whether or not they are in the seed business

The taxpayer won on two of the three issues argued before the U.S. Tax Court.  The significant thing for other individuals and businesses who find themselves tangled in a spirited horse race with the IRS is not whether they are in the cutting horse business or whether or not they are in the seed business.  The significant points of this case are (a) the IRS holds a presumptive correctness in all tax deficiency matters, and (2) the taxpayer always bears the burden to prove that; more likely than not, they are entitled to the deductions claimed on their tax returns.  That means that the taxpayer must always maintain and produce credible substantiation of all items recorded on their tax returns.  This has been operative tax law governing IRS deficiency cases ever since the United States Supreme Court ruled on these two points in a pair of federal tax cases known as Welch v Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933) and New Colonial Ice Co., v. Helvering, 292 U.S. 435, 440 (1934).   Guy Tressillain Helvering, a Democrat from Kansas was the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue of the Bureau of Internal Revenue from 1933 to 1943.  This is the legacy agency of the Internal Revenue Service.  Today, typically tax cases are styled “Taxpayer v. Comm’r”.  Anyway, locks on doors are preparatory.  Folks put locks on their doors to prepare for when the thief comes.  The same way, taxpayer’s must collect, summarize, and maintain substantiation for all deductions claimed on their tax returns in the event the IRS examiner visits.  In the 2019 Besten case, we see the U.S. Tax Court applying the rules established in the 1930s.  In tax law and in law in general, predictability matters; there is little benefit of surprise, duplicity and uncertainty in law.  Taxpayers can prepare and comply with the law if they know the applicable law because federal tax law is not just about the horses.

 

Internal Revenue Code Section 6662 permits the IRS to assess a 20% accuracy penalty on tax deficiencies

Internal Revenue Code Section 6662 permits the IRS to assess a 20% accuracy penalty on tax deficiencies.  The accuracy-related penalties can be imposed by the IRS when tax deficiencies are due to the taxpayer’s negligence, recklessness or willful violations of the federal tax laws. In the Besten case, the taxpayer avoided paying the accuracy-related penalty because he was able to adequately convince the U.S. Tax Court that he acted reasonably and acted in good faith by relying on the professional advice of his tax professional.  This is often a viable defense for the taxpayer who can meet the burden that they (a) relied on the advice of their tax professional, (b) their tax professional was competent and experienced, and (c) they gave their tax professional accurate and complete information and documentation regarding the tax issue. So this particular reasonable cause defense (reliance of the tax professional’s advice and guidance), like the other reasonable cause defenses that might be applicable, depends on all the facts and circumstances because federal taxation and cutting horses is not just about the horses.  Reasonable cause defenses are not automatic relief; but like cutting horses, every reasonable defense should be explored when confronting additional taxes, penalties and interest, because cutting cost is another way of saving money.

This law blog is written by the Taxation | Litigation | Immigration Law Firm of Coleman Jackson, P.C. for educational purposes; it does not create an attorney-client relationship between this law firm and its reader.  You should consult with legal counsel in your geographical area with respect to any legal issues impacting you, your family or business.

Coleman Jackson, P.C. | Taxation, Litigation, Immigration Law Firm | English (214) 599-0431 | Spanish (214) 599-0432

What’s up with the Taxpayer First Act

By Coleman Jackson, Attorney & Certified Public Accountant
November 20, 2019

Taxpayer First Act - TFA

During this past summer, the Taxpayer First Act (“TFA”) became U.S. tax law.  The U.S. Congress’ stated purpose of implementing the Taxpayer First Act was to modernize and improve the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.  From a bird’s eye view, the following are three tax law changes that are among the more significant changes made to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 by the Taxpayer First Act:

 

Form 1040 Taxpayer

  1. The TFA established within the Internal Revenue Service an office known as the ‘Internal Revenue Service Independent Office of Appeals’ to be headed by a Chief of Appeals completely independent and reporting directly to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. The Office of Appeals is designed to give taxpayers a path to resolution of their disputes with the IRS in the administrative process without the need for costly tax litigation.  Any taxpayer in receipt of a notice of deficiency authorized under Internal Revenue Code section 6212 may request referral to the Internal Revenue Service Independent Office of Appeals.  Individuals and businesses in tax disputes with the IRS can request and obtain their IRS case files in advance of their appearing at an office of appeals conference in defense of their position.  This would permit the taxpayers to school themselves on the applicable law and marshal the facts in support of their tax return position.  Moreover taxpayers will have the right to have their tax cases heard by an independent decision maker and the right to protest adverse IRS decisions against them, including but not limited to, the IRS rejection of their request to go to the Independent Office of Appeals.  The taxpayer will have certain due process rights in the conduct of the Office of Appeals and the dispute resolution procedures.  Finally, the TFA provides that the IRS Independent Office of Appeals process will enjoy increased Congressional Oversight since the IRS Commissioner must submit annual reports to Congress under the TFA.

 

2.	The TFA modifies Internal Revenue Code Section 6015 with respect to Equitable Relief from Joint Liability

  1. The TFA modifies Internal Revenue Code Section 6015 with respect to Equitable Relief from Joint Liability, such as, the joint and severable liability associated with taxpayers signing a tax return with a spouse. The U.S. Tax Court now have the right to review de novo the administrative record established at the time of the IRS determination on the taxpayers innocent spouse relief or other equitable relief claim.  Under the TFA the Tax Court also can consider any additional newly discovered or previously unavailable evidence.  Equitable Relief cases are to be decided based on all the facts and circumstances.  Federal tax law governing equitable relief has always established certain limitations both in fact and time that are not removed or modified by the TFA.  The TFA changes impacting equitable relief claims apply to pending cases filed before this summer and all future equitable relief cases.

 

3.	The TFA modifies Internal Revenue Code Section 6503 with respect to IRS Issuance of Designated Summons

  1. The TFA modifies Internal Revenue Code Section 6503 with respect to IRS Issuance of Designated Summons. First the issuance of such summons must now be preceded by a review and written approval by the Commissioner of the relevant operating division of the Internal Revenue Service and Chief Counsel.  Moreover the burden is on the IRS to establish in the court proceeding that reasonable requests were made for the information forming the basis of the summons.  Taxpayers defending summons in court have due process rights to present counter argument and evidence to the contrary.

These are only three of the changes to tax law pursuant to the Taxpayer First Act (“TFA”); there are other significant changes as well.  Watch our future blog posts which could deal with the IRS implementation of the TFA; Internal Revenue Service Independent Office of Appeals developments under the TFA; and the federal court’s interpretations of the TFA.

This law blog is written by the Taxation | Litigation | Immigration Law Firm of Coleman Jackson, P.C. for educational purposes; it does not create an attorney-client relationship between this law firm and its reader.  You should consult with legal counsel in your geographical area with respect to any legal issues impacting you, your family or business.

Coleman Jackson, P.C. | Taxation, Litigation, Immigration Law Firm | English (214) 599-0431 | Spanish (214) 599-0432

Giving is good! Giving is Subject to Federal Taxation

By Coleman Jackson, Attorney and Certified Public Accountant
June 10, 2019

Giving is good!  Giving is Subject to Federal Taxation

The Holy Bible at 1 Timothy 6:17 says that God gives to us richly all things….  It is a blessing to be able to give.  Giving is an expression of gratitude and love.  It is good to give.  Every relationship should be based on the desire to give.  It is more blessed to give than to receive.

Giving in the United States creates tax obligations on the giver.  Internal Revenue Code Section 2503 defines “taxable gifts” as the “total amount of gifts made during the calendar year, less deductions provided in subchapter C (section 2522 and following).”  The federal gift tax rules applies to gifts of present interest to a donee as oppose to transfers of future interest by the donor to the donee.  Under United States federal tax laws, the donor (giver) is taxed on the fair market value of the gift.  The recipient of the gift or donee is not taxed on the gift.  But!   Special tax reporting rules imposes on the donee a duty to disclose to the IRS certain large gifts from foreign nationals.

 

Giving in the United States creates tax obligations on the giver

 

The total annual valuation of gifts given by a donor is a tally of all gifts given by the donor for the calendar year.  Such gifts are reported annually on Form 709, United States Gift (and Generation-Skipping Transfer) Tax ReturnForm 709, United States Gift (and Generation-Skipping Transfer) Tax Return is due on April 15th of the year following the year of the gift.  For example if Jose Giver gives the following gifts in 2019:

  • Stocks and bonds to Jeremiah Recipient worth $40,000 fair market value;
  • Wires $250,000 to the foreign bank account of Jennifer Recipient ; and
  • Gives $4,000 to his niece, Carolyn Recipient under 21 years of age at the date of the gift.

 

Form 709 United States Gift

Jose Giver must tally the three gifts to all recipients made in 2019 and report the gifts on April 15th 2020 on Form 709, United States Gift (and Generation-Skipping Transfer) Tax Return.  The total amount of gifts for 2019 is $294,000. Internal Revenue Code Section 2503 provides an annual exclusion for gifts of present interests made to any person by a donor.  In 2018 the annual exclusion amount is $15,000 and pursuant to IRC Sec. 2523 the annual exclusion is $155,000 on gifts to spouses who are not U.S. Citizens.  For gifts given in 2019 the annual exclusion amount remains $15,000, but the annual exclusion for gifts to spouses who are not U.S. Citizens decreases to $152,000 for gift made in 2019.  Note that the annual exclusion amount is indexed to the inflation rate; therefore, it could change from year to year.

 

Form 114, Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts

Other federal laws, including other tax reporting and disclosure rules could be implicated by the facts described in the above hypothetical.  For example, Jeremiah Recipient may have to report gains & losses realized on the stocks and bonds.  The $250,000 wired to Jennifer Recipient’s foreign bank account could possibly create reporting requirements under the Bank Secrecy Act which requires that U.S. persons; which includes U.S. citizens, resident aliens, trusts, estates, and domestic entities to file Form 114, Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts with the Financial Crimes Network on April 15th 2020 if the foreign account balance is $10,000 or more at any time during the calendar year.  Further the $4,000 to his under aged niece implicates the Generation- Skipping Transfer tax rules. That applies when gifts skip a generation.   Giving is good!  Giving is subject to federal taxation.

This law blog is written by the Taxation | Litigation | Immigration Law Firm of Coleman Jackson, P.C. for educational purposes; it does not create an attorney-client relationship between this law firm and its reader.  You should consult with legal counsel in your geographical area with respect to any legal issues impacting you, your family or business.

Coleman Jackson, P.C. | Taxation, Litigation, Immigration Law Firm | English (214) 599-0431 | Spanish (214) 599-0432.

 

 

 

A Spouse May Be Relieved of Federal Tax Liability under Certain Circumstances

April 08, 2019
By Coleman Jackson, Attorney, Certified Public Accountant

 

Innocent Spouse Relief from Federal Tax Liability

 

Texas is a community property state, which means that income earned by either spouse during their marriage is an item of community income.  Under federal tax law, each spouse is liable for federal taxes on community income regardless of which spouse earned the item of community income.

Under Internal Revenue Code Section 66(b), the Internal Revenue Service can modify the federal tax  outcome resultant from application of community property laws and charge only one spouse with respect to an item of community income if that spouse acted as if they were solely entitled to the  item of income; that is, they used it on themselves and not the community or household benefit,  and they did not notify their spouse of the item of community income before the due date for filing the spouse’s federal tax return for the applicable tax period.

 

Relief from Federal Tax Liability

 

 

This is only one of the many situations where an innocent spouse might be relieved of federal tax liability.  There is also, sometimes equitable relief available for innocent spouses even when the couple filed a joint tax return which created joint and severable liability for both spouses for the entire amount of the tax deficiency, penalties and interest due on the joint return.

This law blog is written by the Taxation | Litigation | Immigration Law Firm of Coleman Jackson, P.C. for educational purposes; it does not create an attorney-client relationship between this law firm and its reader.  You should consult with legal counsel in your geographical area with respect to any legal issues impacting you, your family or business.

Coleman Jackson, P.C. | Taxation, Litigation, Immigration Law Firm | English (214) 599-0431 | Spanish (214) 599-0432.

Civil Action by Taxpayer in Denial or Revocation of United States Passport Cases

By Coleman Jackson, Attorney, Certified Public Accountant
January 08, 2019

 

Civil Action by Taxpayer in Denial or Revocation of United States Passport Cases

The United States Congress has authorized the denial or revocation of United States passports to taxpayers with seriously delinquent tax debt.  This authorization is codified in Internal Revenue Code Section 7345 and is pursuant to section 32101 of the FAST Act (the “Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act”), which became law in the United States on December 14, 2015.  Seriously delinquent tax debt means an unpaid, legally enforceable federal tax debt of an individual totaling more than $50,000 that has been assessed and for which a Notice of Federal Tax Lien has been filed and all administrative remedies under Internal Revenue Code Section 6320 has lapsed or been exhausted, or where a federal tax levy has been issued.  The IRS is required under law to issue a Notice of Intent to Levy before issuing a federal tax levy.  These notices informs taxpayers that they could be certified as seriously delinquent taxpayers; and they might be the only notices received that alert taxpayers that their U.S. passport is in danger or being denied or revoked.

 

Seriously delinquent taxpayer

Any seriously delinquent taxpayer who is liable for a tax debt, which includes taxes, penalties and interest, in excess of $50,000 and has not entered into an installment agreement or made other arrangements with the IRS to resolve the tax obligation can have their United States Passport denied or revoked.  The IRS is authorized under U.S. Tax Law to certify to the U.S. State Department that the taxpayer’s tax debt is seriously delinquent.

 

The State Department may revoke the seriously delinquent taxpayer’s current passport preventing them from traveling outside of the United States

Once the U.S. State Department receives the IRS seriously delinquent taxpayer certification, the State Department will not issue or renew a passport.  The State Department may revoke the seriously delinquent taxpayer’s current passport preventing them from traveling outside of the United States.  If the revocation occurs while the taxpayer is abroad, the taxpayer could have difficulty reentering the Unites States at the port of entry because their U.S. Passport would no longer be valid.  Obviously taxpayers certified by the IRS as seriously delinquent can have their lives turned up-side-down with little or no advance warning beyond IRS Notice CP504.

 

Seriously Delinquent Taxpayers only have a judicial remedy to challenge the IRS seriously delinquent taxpayer certification

Seriously Delinquent Taxpayers only have a judicial remedy to challenge the IRS seriously delinquent taxpayer certification.  Internal Revenue Code Section 7345(e) allows an aggrieved taxpayer to bring a civil action against the United States Government in the U.S. Tax Court or in the appropriate U.S. District Court to challenge the seriously delinquent taxpayer certification.

 

 

This law blog is written by the Taxation | Litigation | Immigration Law Firm of Coleman Jackson, P.C. for educational purposes; it does not create an attorney-client relationship between this law firm and its reader.  You should consult with legal counsel in your geographical area with respect to any legal issues impacting you, your family or business.

Coleman Jackson, P.C. | Taxation, Litigation, Immigration Law Firm | English (214) 599-0431 | Spanish (214) 599-0432

What’s wrong with paying business expenses in cash?

By Coleman Jackson, Attorney, CPA
October 15, 2018

What’s wrong with paying business expenses in cash?

 

Pursuant to Internal Revenue Code Section 162, a business can deduct an expense incurred in the business if it is an ordinary and necessary expense.  An ordinary expense is customary to the taxpayer’s industry, trade or profession.   Business expenses must be necessary, useful or helpful in the carrying on of the business purpose, or conducting of the taxpayer’s business enterprise.  Part and parcel of the term “ordinary and necessary” is the reality that an expense must be reasonable.  Whether an expense is ordinary, necessary and reasonable depends upon all the facts and circumstances.

 

 

Taxpayer’s must prove expenses are deductible on their tax returns!  In order to deduct an ordinary, necessary and reasonable expense, a taxpayer must substantiate or prove the expense.  Substantiation simply means that the taxpayer must maintain documentation that shows the date, the amount, and the business purpose of the transaction.  The taxpayer should also substantiate the manner and method of payment for the transaction.  What’s wrong with paying business expenses in cash?  Cash is fungible, which means that, generally, it leaves no trace of where it is going or where it is coming from.  Therefore, if a taxpayer must transact business in cash, the taxpayer must create and maintain a contemporary record documenting the date, the amount, the parties, and the business purpose of the transaction.  A cash receipt could be a convenient way of documenting cash transactions.  Likewise, a contemporary diary could be a useful tool to use to document cash transactions.

 

 

Best business practices are to never conduct business in cash because large or frequent cash transactions could be indicative of tax fraud or other nefarious business dealings.  Undocumented cash transactions cannot be substantiated, and might be difficult to trace.  Taxpayer’s always must, upon request by the Internal Revenue Service, produce credible substantiation for all business expenses.  Unsubstantiated expenses do not satisfy the requirements of Internal Revenue Code Section 162.  Remember!  Business expenses are only deductible on the federal tax return if they are ordinary, necessary and reasonable.  Unsubstantiated cash payments spell super bad news— potentially huge tax bills and possible criminal prosecution for federal tax evasion.

 

This law blog is written by the Taxation | Litigation | Immigration Law Firm of Coleman Jackson, P.C. for educational purposes; it does not create an attorney-client relationship between this law firm and its reader.  You should consult with legal counsel in your geographical area with respect to any legal issues impacting you, your family or business.

Coleman Jackson, P.C. | Taxation, Litigation, Immigration Law Firm | English (214) 599-0431 | Spanish (214) 599-0432

REASONABLE CAUSE AND GOOD FAITH – IRS Penalties Can Be Abated, Forgiven or Waived

By Coleman Jackson, Attorney & Certified Public Accountant
June 21, 2018

IRS Penalties Can Be Abated, Forgiven or Waived

The Internal Revenue Code is full of various kinds of penalties that the Internal Revenue Service is authorized to assess and collect from errant, indifferent, negligent, ambivalent, and indecisive or otherwise noncompliant taxpayers who fail to collect or pay their tax bill or attempt to evade the federal tax laws.  Six IRS penalties that seem to be common in recent years are as follows:

Code Sec. 6672 Penalties:  penalties assessed when taxpayers fail to timely collect, turn over withholding taxes or avoid timely payment of tax obligations;

Code Sec. 6701 Penalties:  penalties assessed against tax return preparers, such as enrolled agents, certified public accountants or others working in the tax return preparation services industry who aids and abet taxpayers in filing false or fraudulent tax returns;

Code Sec. 6676 Penalties:  penalties assessed against taxpayers and others who file tax refund claims or take tax credits without basis in reality, truth or facts.  Unsubstantiated deductions and credits on a tax return commonly give rise to Code Sec. 6676 penalties.   Filing a tax return with the IRS with a false refund request constitutes a false statement under the penalty of perjury.

IRS Penalties

Code Sec. 6697-6699 Penalties:  penalties for failure to file various types of tax returns that should be filed.  Such as failure to file a Form 1040, Form 1120, Form 1120S or Form 1165 can all be the basis for the IRS to assess a failure to file penalty.  Pass through entities, such as, partnerships and s-corporations must still file entity tax returns even though federal taxes are paid at the individual ownership level rather than the entity level.

Code Sec. 6712 Penalties:  penalties assessed against taxpayers who fail to disclose treaty based tax positions.  Immigrants, expatriates and foreigners are especially susceptible to incurring faulty tax treaty position penalties unless they hire well qualified tax consultants in preparation of their annual tax returns.

Code Sec 6662 Penalties:  penalties assessed against taxpayers who fail to report income from foreign sources, such as, foreign bank accounts, foreign businesses, and foreign asset holdings can incur very severe penalties.  U.S. citizens, resident aliens and certain nonresident aliens must report worldwide income from all sources including foreign bank accounts, foreign businesses, foreign trusts and other foreign assets.  Moreover, taxpayers with foreign holdings whose aggregate value exceeds $10,000 at any point during the calendar year must file Form 114, Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR) electronically with the Financial Crimes Network (FinCen’s BSA E-Filing System).  Failure to report the existence of offshore holdings is subject to civil and criminal penalties.  It is anticipated that this set of penalties and potential criminal prosecution will be on the rise in the near future because the IRS has announced that it will end the 2014 Voluntary Disclosure Program on September 28, 2018.

REASONABLE CAUSE AND GOOD FAITH

Another special set of tax rules have long been in force to forgive tax penalties due to reasonable cause and good faith.  The reasonable cause relief is set out in Code Sec. 6664.  The IRS will not impose accuracy related penalties upon a showing by the taxpayer that there was reasonable cause for the tax position and that they acted in good faith with respect to the tax position or act in question.  The reasonable cause defense under Code Sec. 6664 turns on all the facts and circumstances.  That simply means that the IRS and Courts try to determine ‘why’ the taxpayer failed to comply with the federal tax laws.  A taxpayer’s substantial knowledge of federal tax law is a significant factor that the IRS and Courts consider in determining whether a taxpayer acted in good faith and reasonable.  Immigrants or those recently immigrating to the U.S. often lack the sophistication and knowledge of U.S. tax laws.  U.S. tax laws complexity often confounds well educated Americans as well.  Taxpayers reliance on tax return preparers’ suggestions, recommendations and guidance also have been found by many Courts to meet the taxpayers burden to show that they acted reasonable and with good faith.  Taxpayers exercising ordinary business care and diligence sometimes likewise are found by the IRS and Courts as acting in good faith and reasonably.  These various examples simply show that the IRS can abate, forgive or waive federal tax penalties in a very broad spectrum of situations.  Taxpayers confronted with IRS tax penalty situations must act reasonable and be prudent in exploring with their tax attorney the potential that the penalties can be abated, forgiven or waived.  Even fraud penalties can be waived under certain circumstances and criminal charges may likewise be averted.

This law blog is written by the Taxation | Litigation | Immigration Law Firm of Coleman Jackson, P.C. for educational purposes; it does not create an attorney-client relationship between this law firm and its reader.  You should consult with legal counsel in your geographical area with respect to any legal issues impacting you, your family or business.

Coleman Jackson, P.C. | Taxation, Litigation, Immigration Law Firm | English (214) 599-0431 | Spanish (214) 599-0432