Newsletters

Proposition 19 (Prop 19) recently passed in California and contains two relevant changes in California property tax assessments that may impact your estate planning. To ensure that you are not unaware of or adversely impacted by these changes, here is a summary of relevant planning information for your review.

Proposition 19 (Prop 19) recently passed in California and contains two relevant changes in California property tax assessments that may impact your estate planning. To ensure that you are not unaware of or adversely impacted by these changes, below is a summary of relevant planning information for your review.

Changes to the Transfer of Taxable Value for Certain Property Owners

Prop 19 expands the class of people who qualify for a transfer of their taxable value (i.e., property tax assessed value) from their current home to a new property.

Under existing law, only homeowners over 55 years of age or certain disabled persons could make use of this benefit one time during their lifetime. And they could do so only if (1) their new home is in the same county as their old home or in a few other select counties, (2) the value of their new home is less than or equal to the value of their old home, and (3) the sale and new purchase were done within a two year period.

The new law, which takes effect on April 1, 2021:

• Expands the class of homeowners who are able to transfer their taxable value to include victims of wildfire or other natural disasters, regardless of age or disability status;
• Permits homeowners to take advantage of this provision three times during their lifetime.
• Removes the restriction that the replacement home must be in the same county as the old home. Now such replacements must simply be in the state of California.
• Allows homeowners to buy a replacement home that is worth more than their old home, provided, however, that the increase in value is added to the transferred taxable value of the old home. For example, assume a homeowner is over 55. Her house has a taxable value of $500,000. She sells it for $3,000,000. If she buys a new home anywhere in California for $3,000,000 or less, she can transfer her $500,000 taxable value to the new home, and it will become its taxable value. However, if she wants to upgrade to a $5,000,000 home, her new home's taxable value will be $2,500,000 – the taxable value of her old home transferred ($500,000) plus the upgrade value ($5,000,000 - $3,000,000.)

While the new law keeps the two-year window requirement, it remains to be clarified by the California Board of Equalization if both the sale and new purchase have to occur after the April 1, 2021, effective date of the new law.

Changes to the Parent-Child Exclusion

Prop 19 limits the availability of the parent-child exclusion for purposes of real estate tax assessments. This aspect of Prop 19 takes effect on February 16, 2021.

Under current law, when a parent (or grandparent) transfers ownership of his or her principal residence to a child, the property's value for tax assessment purposes is not reassessed, regardless of how the child uses the residence. In California, transferring a parent's home to one or more children is permissible under current law without triggering reassessment, and the child or children could use it as a vacation home or a rental property.

Prop 19 changes this by requiring that the child or children use the residence as their own principal residence, or it will be reassessed. Furthermore, even if the child uses the residence as his or her own, there is a cap of $1,000,000 on the exclusion, as explained below. Technically, the new and old rules apply where a child transfers the residence to a parent, but this is much less common.

If your home has increased in value significantly from its taxable value, Prop 19 adds certain limitations that could result in an increased assessment. This new rule will apply to outright transfers and to transfers in trusts, such as the QPRT transfer illustrated below. If the increase in value is less than or equal to $1,000,000, no adjustment is made. If the increase in value is more than $1,000,000, the increase in value after the first $1,000,000 is added to the tax assessed value. For example, assume a parent's home has a taxable value of $500,000. Because the parent purchased the home many years ago, its value is now $5,000,000. In other words, it has increased by $4,500,000. The new reassessed value if the parent gifts the home to her child will be $3,500,000. There are inflation adjustments that apply to the $1,000,000 increase limitation for subsequent years.

This change to the parent-child exclusion may also affect many common estate planning trusts that were established several years (or even decades) ago. For example, a qualified personal residence trust (QPRT) allows the transfer of a residence to a trust while that residence can still be occupied for a fixed number of years. The parent(s) continue to live in the residence as their primary residence, and at the end of the fixed number of years, the residence transfers to someone else (typically their children or a trust for their benefit). Most parents who establish QPRTs want to continue living in the house after the fixed term ends. They may do so, but they need to pay rent to the trust or to their children, depending on who owns the residence at the end of the fixed term.

Under existing law, when the children become the owners they would qualify for the parent-child exclusion. But once Prop 19 takes effect, the children would need to use the residence as their primary residence or trigger reassessment. They could not rent it back to the parent, and if siblings are entitled to the residence at the end of the fixed term, they would need to move in together and share a household to qualify for the exemption – which perhaps is not ideal for most adult children. If parents have QPRTs whose fixed term ends on or after February 16, 2021, the value of their home may be reassessed to its current value. This could lead to a massive property tax increase, though it may be possible to mitigate this. A review of your estate planning documents is recommended.

Full text of Proposition is available at https://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2020/general/pdf/topl-prop19.pdf

The IRS began its "Dirty Dozen" list for 2022, which includes potentially abusive arrangements that taxpayers should avoid. The tax scams in this series focus on four transactions that are wrongfully promoted and will likely attract additional agency compliance efforts in the future. Those four abusive transactions involve charitable remainder annuity trusts, Maltese individual retirement arrangements, foreign captive insurance and monetized installment sales. These are the first four entries in this year’s Dirty Dozen series.

The IRS began its "Dirty Dozen" list for 2022, which includes potentially abusive arrangements that taxpayers should avoid. The tax scams in this series focus on four transactions that are wrongfully promoted and will likely attract additional agency compliance efforts in the future. Those four abusive transactions involve charitable remainder annuity trusts, Maltese individual retirement arrangements, foreign captive insurance and monetized installment sales. These are the first four entries in this year’s Dirty Dozen series.

Taxpayers who have already claimed the purported tax benefits of one of these four transactions on a tax return should consider taking corrective steps, including filing an amended return and seeking independent advice. Where appropriate, the IRS will challenge the purported tax benefits from the transactions on this list and may assert accuracy-related penalties. Further, the IRS informed that to combat the evolving variety of these potentially abusive transactions, the IRS created the Office of Promoter Investigations (OPI). The IRS has a variety of means to find potentially abusive transactions, including examinations, promoter investigations, whistleblower claims, data analytics and reviewing marketing materials.

Further, the IRS reminded taxpayers to watch out for and avoid advertised schemes, many of which are now promoted online, that promise tax savings that are too good to be true and will likely cause taxpayers to legally compromise themselves. Additionally, the IRS informed that taxpayers who have engaged in any of these transactions or who are contemplating engaging in them should carefully review the underlying legal requirements and consult independent, competent advisors before claiming any purported tax benefits.

The IRS announced that is completing the processing on a key group of individual tax returns filed during 2021. Business paper returns filed in 2021 will follow shortly after. The Service began 2022 with a larger than usual inventory of paper tax returns and correspondence filed during 2021 due to the pandemic. The IRS will continue to work on the few remaining 2021 individual tax returns that have processing issues or require additional information from the taxpayer. As of June 10, the IRS had processed over 4.5 million individual paper tax returns received in 2021.

The IRS announced that is completing the processing on a key group of individual tax returns filed during 2021. Business paper returns filed in 2021 will follow shortly after. The Service began 2022 with a larger than usual inventory of paper tax returns and correspondence filed during 2021 due to the pandemic. The IRS will continue to work on the few remaining 2021 individual tax returns that have processing issues or require additional information from the taxpayer. As of June 10, the IRS had processed over 4.5 million individual paper tax returns received in 2021.

To date, more than twice as many returns await processing compared to a typical year at this point in the calendar year. A greater percentage of this year’s inventory awaiting processing is comprised of original returns that, generally, take less time to process than amended returns. To address the unprocessed inventory by the end of this year, the IRS has taken aggressive steps including significant, ongoing overtime for staff throughout 2022, creating special teams of employees focused solely on processing aged inventory and expediting hiring of thousands of new workers and contractors. Additionally, the IRS has improved the process for taxpayers whose paper and electronically filed returns were suspended during processing for manual review and correction.

The IRS reminded taxpayers who have not yet filed their 2021 tax returns this year, including those who requested an extension until October 17, to make sure they file their returns electronically with direct deposit to avoid delays. The IRS urged taxpayers to file as soon as they are ready and to not wait until the last minute before the October 17 extension deadline. Filing sooner avoids potential delays for taxpayers and assists the larger ongoing IRS efforts to complete processing tax returns this year.

Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Charles Rettig is pushing back on assertions that the agency is spending less time targeting wealthy taxpayers for audit in favor of lower income taxpayers.

Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Charles Rettig is pushing back on assertions that the agency is spending less time targeting wealthy taxpayers for audit in favor of lower income taxpayers.

"This is damaging to tax administration in this country when people say IRS audits more lower income people than higher income people," Rettig told attendees June 23, 2022, at the NYU Tax Controversy Forum.

He asserted that audit rate figures can be skewed depending on when the calculation is taking place. For example, he noted that if data is published on rates of audit for the 2021 tax year in 2022, the numbers will be considerably off.

"[W]hen you see these audit rates, don't jump on that train and say IRS is only auditing .0000 something," he said. "I go, Wow. Who are these folks we picked up? Right? The average audit gets picked up, particularly for high wealth taxpayer at least 16 months after that return has been filed. Why would we audit in the same calendar year that it's filed?"

Rettig noted that wealthy people may be filing later toward the extended filing deadline and filing more returns covering multiple years simultaneously, which would push back when audits take place. The would give the appearance that audits for more wealthy taxpayers may not be happening as much as for lower income taxpayers when examining a single-year audit rate.

But in reality, he said that audit rates for those who make more than $10 million "runs right around seven or eight percent. And as of this year, it’s at 8.7 percent. You will see that the $5 to $10 million group runs about 4.2%. You will see the $1 to $5 million group runs about 2.2%. Most of you have done the math and you understand exactly what I'm telling you, you go for the higher income folks."

After that, the numbers drop off "considerably," he said.

"The $1 million-and-under person is really the executive who has W-2 and 1099 income and we have that information," Rettig said. "The over $1 million person is the entrepreneur who has a lot of pass-through entities and whatnot, we don't have that information," and they get audited more because of it.

Rettig also used the forum to continue advocacy for more funding and guaranteed funding over multiple years to help improve not only enforcement, but to help improve the services that the agency provides to taxpayers, including hiring for call centers and providing better outreach.

Republican members of the Senate Finance Committee are the latest group to call on the Internal Revenue Service to implement 2-D barcoding technology on individual tax forms.

Republican members of the Senate Finance Committee are the latest group to call on the Internal Revenue Service to implement 2-D barcoding technology on individual tax forms.

"We are writing to strongly encourage the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to work with tax return software companies to implement 2-D barcoding technology for use during the 2023 tax filing season for the 1040 family of paper returns," the GOP senators, led by Ranking Member Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), said in a May 24, 2022, letter to IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig.

Similar calls have been made by other stakeholders, including the National Taxpayer Advocate, who sent a directive to the IRS in March to implement 2-D barcoding in time for use with the 2023 tax season.

The GOP senators noted that the IRS is financially capable of doing this now. In the letter, the senators referenced the 2017 budget request of $8.4 million for implementation of 2-D barcoding and the $1 billion earmarked in the American Rescue Plan of 2021 for IT modernization, of which they state only $98.5 million so far has been spent.

The group also called on the agency to "stop chasing technological perfection" in the letter.

"If we were to wait for the promise of better technology, nothing would ever get implemented," the letter states. "To the contrary, the fact that 2-D technology is a bit older probably means it has been tested and is less expensive. Many states currently use 2-D barcoding for tax returns, so we have proof it works."

2-D barcoding came back into the forefront of needed IT upgrades for the IRS during the pandemic that caused a significant backlog of unprocessed paper returns. As of April 29, the agency still had more than 18 million unprocessed paper returns, though Commissioner Rettig has stated in numerous congressional hearings that the backlog will be back to its "normal" levels by the end of 2022.

The IRS Whistleblower Office has released the fiscal year (FY) 2021 annual report to Congress. In FY 2021, the Whistleblower Office made 179 award payments to whistleblowers totaling $36,144,926, including 20 awards paid under Code Sec. 7623(b). Whistleblower claim numbers assigned in FY 2021 grew by 55 percent year over year and claim closures increased by 13 percent. Additionally, this year’s report introduces the Code Sec. 7623 Payment and Claim Processing Analysis. The analysis shows Code Sec. 7623(b) awards were paid on average in 17 days.

The IRS Whistleblower Office has released the fiscal year (FY) 2021 annual report to Congress. In FY 2021, the Whistleblower Office made 179 award payments to whistleblowers totaling $36,144,926, including 20 awards paid under Code Sec. 7623(b). Whistleblower claim numbers assigned in FY 2021 grew by 55 percent year over year and claim closures increased by 13 percent. Additionally, this year’s report introduces the Code Sec. 7623 Payment and Claim Processing Analysis. The analysis shows Code Sec. 7623(b) awards were paid on average in 17 days.

Code Sec. 7623 Payment and Claim Processing Analysis

The average claim processing time for Code Sec. 7623(b) award payments made during FY 2021 increased by 2.9 percent from the prior year and average claim processing time for Code Sec. 7623(a) award payments increased by 10.4 percent. The report stated that it is likely average claim processing times will continue to increase as claim inventory continues to age while the Whistleblower Office awaits audits, exams, investigations, appeals, tech services, collection, statutes to expire, and whistleblower litigation.

Ten Most Common Allegations Submitted In FY 2021

The ten most common allegations submitted on Form 211, Application for Award for Original Information, for FY 2021 were:

• unreported income;
• general allegations of fraud, tax fraud, wire fraud, insurance fraud, and related allegations;
• false dependent exemptions;
• employee vs. subcontractor;
• failure to file;
• wage under reporter;
• capital gains tax;
• wages being paid in cash or under the table;
• rental income; and
• false deductions or expenses.

The report also provided other information including disclosures made under Taxpayer First Act, additional information on submissions received in FY 2021, information on claim numbers issued, claims remaining open and claims that were closed in each FY from 2019 to 2021, geographic location of all whistleblowers by region, open Code Sec. 7623(b) claims as of FY 2021, and reasons for closures that occurred during FY 2021.

Department of the Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is continuing to promote the agreement on international taxes reached by most members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development on a global corporate minimum tax, but acknowledged that its overall impact will be determined by the final details.

Department of the Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is continuing to promote the agreement on international taxes reached by most members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development on a global corporate minimum tax, but acknowledged that its overall impact will be determined by the final details.

Testifying before the Senate Finance Committee at a June 7, 2022, hearing about the White House’s fiscal 2023 budget request, Secretary Yellen noted in her opening remarks that she is "keenly focused on moving forward on the global agreement on international tax reform, including a global minimum tax that will level the playing field and raise crucial revenues to benefit people around the world."

However, she noted that because the specific details of how the international tax reforms will be defined and implemented, the impact on American businesses cannot be determined.

In response to a question as to whether the agency will provide Congress with the analysis of data currently available on whether the pillar one agreements will have a positive or negative impact, she said "that it could go either way, depending on the details which have not yet been decided. In the pillar one negotiations, the impact on fiscal revenues will be small."

Yellen continued: "Pillar two has a big impact. Pillar one will have a small impact. We're a very large market economy. We will gain revenue from our ability to tax foreign corporations that are doing business in the United States where we consume those services, we will lose some from revenue. Yet, it could be positive or negative, depending on details that have not yet been worked out. And that's why we've not provided data. We will when those details are clear."

That being said, Yellen also highlighted that countries will not be able to skirt the requirements of the treaty, responding to a question on whether China, a signee of the agreement, can be expected to comply with it when the nation has a questionable record complying with other international agreements.

Secretary Yellen testified that she expects China to comply with the terms of the agreement, but if it fails to do so, "this agreement contains an enforcement mechanism that will allow the United States or any other country that has adopted the global minimum tax to impose taxes on China's companies that would be the same as if China had complied. So there is a tough enforcement mechanism in this deal."

She also testified that Treasury will be negotiating on the details to ensure that business tax credits and subsidies will not negatively impact corporations once the international tax reforms are implemented.

Defending the Budget

During the hearing, she also addressed a number of issues that have become common themes among Biden Administration officials in recent months, including a recent focus on the tax gap and the disparities in auditing following a Government Accountability Office report that highlighted those concerns.

"Tackling that $600 billion annual tax gap is absolutely important in ensuring fiscal responsibility," Yellen told members of the Senate Finance Committee in response to a comment that the White House is requesting $80 billion over 10 years to address this. "It would generate substantial revenue in a manner that's efficient and fair. It would enable deficit reduction and help these price pressures by providing the funding a part of the funding we need for the urgent fiscal priorities."

She reinforced a common call to better fund the Internal Revenue Service to make sure it has the proper personnel in place to do things such as conducting more complicated audits to ensure the top earners are paying their fair share of taxes, in addition to helping the IRS serve the overall population and update its information technology infrastructure.

"We absolutely have to invest in the IRS to close that tax gap, which reflects opaque sources of income, mainly by high income earners that are not taxed," she said. "And they need the resources to serve taxpayers to be able to answer their phones to be able to ensure that they receive the payments that they are due, and they need to modernize their technology which is really the oldest dating back to the [19]60s in the federal government."

Yellen also took the opportunity to encourage Congress to extend the child tax credit, noting that while it may have played a minor role in contributing to the inflation issues the nation is tackling, it has had a significant effect on helping to reduce childhood hunger.

"It enabled families to get a little bit of breathing room and to help their kids afford nutritious food and clothing and back to school supplies." Yellen said.

She also mentioned during the Senate Finance Committee hearing that the Treasury Department is looking forward to working with Congress to get a tax deduction for union dues reinstated after it was cut in 2017.

A day later, on June 8, 2022, Secretary Yellen appeared before the House Ways and Means Committee in a hearing also advertised as a review of the White House budget but one that focused heavily on inflation, current energy policy, and international tax reform.

The American Institute of CPAs is calling on Congress to fund the Internal Revenue Service at the level requested by the White House in its fiscal year 2023 budget request. Separately, the group offered its suggestions on the IRS Guidance Priority List. "In advance of the Fiscal Year 2023 appropriations cycle, we request that you fund the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) at necessary levels to allow it to handle all the duties required of it by Congress, including properly administering and enforcing our nation’s tax laws as well as providing needed assistance to taxpayers and their advisers in a timely and professional manner," AICPA said in a May 25, 2022, letter to Democratic and Republican leadership in both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees.

The American Institute of CPAs is calling on Congress to fund the Internal Revenue Service at the level requested by the White House in its fiscal year 2023 budget request. Separately, the group offered its suggestions on the IRS Guidance Priority List. "In advance of the Fiscal Year 2023 appropriations cycle, we request that you fund the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) at necessary levels to allow it to handle all the duties required of it by Congress, including properly administering and enforcing our nation’s tax laws as well as providing needed assistance to taxpayers and their advisers in a timely and professional manner," AICPA said in a May 25, 2022, letter to Democratic and Republican leadership in both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees.

AICPA expressed concern that "service challenges will persist long after the pandemic has ended unless sufficient, targeted funding for technology improvements, human talent and training, and taxpayer services are appropriated."

The organization also noted that there needs to be more than money thrown at the agency to help its functioning. "It should be clear that funding alone will not solve the IRS’s problems,” AICPA wrote. “Structural reforms and organizational alignment from Congress, the President, the Secretary, and the Commissioner are necessary to delivering the promised goals. We look forward to working with all parties involved to this end and create an IRS that taxpayers deserve."

Priority Guidance Recommendations

In a separate letter sent to the IRS May 24, 2022, AICPA outlined its suggestions for the guidance that the agency should be prioritizing. The guidance recommendations cut across a range of programs and legislation, such as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the SECURE Act, and the CARES Act and covering a number of areas such as corporation and shareholder taxation, employee benefits taxation, individual taxation, and international taxation.

R&E Recommendations

AICPA is also recommending the Internal Revenue Service issue specific regulations related to the treatment of research and experimental (R&E) expenditures under Sec. 174.

In a May 26, 2022, letter to the IRS, AICPA said that the Department of the Treasury and the IRS should "issue regulations providing that section 174(a) expenditures include direct costs, including employee compensation, contract labor, and materials, and at the taxpayer’s election, allocable indirect and overhead costs."

AICPA also said that Treasury and the IRS "should issue regulations that illustrate, using detailed examples, which costs are ‘incident to’ the development or improvement of a product as per Reg. §1.174-2."

If the agency doesn’t issue new regulations, AICPA recommended guidance to cover these requests.

Additionally, AICPA identified issues that have arisen with Rev. Proc. 2000-50, which covers the treatment of costs paid or incurred to develop, purchase, or lease computer software.

"IRS should modify the scope limitation under section 4 of Rev. Proc. 2000-50 to clarify that the limitation on costs that a taxpayer has treated as R&E expenditures under section 174 only applies to costs previously subject to an irrevocable election under section 174, including 174(b) or charging the expenses to capital account."

The Department of the Treasury is continuing its push to get funding for much needed information technology infrastructure upgrades from Congress.

The Department of the Treasury is continuing its push to get funding for much needed information technology infrastructure upgrades from Congress.

During a June 14, 2022, hearing before the Senate Appropriations Committee’s Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government, Treasury Deputy Secretary Wally Adeyemo testified as to why the funds were needed.

The "IRS’ technology is decades out of date, written in a programming language no longer taught, and incredibly expensive to maintain the master file that under grids," Adeyemo told the committee in his opening statement. "The tax system dates back to the 1960s when there was no internet, no cell phones, and no spreadsheets or automatic payments."

The White House is requesting a 12 percent budget increase in fiscal year 2023 compared to 2022 enacted levels "to begin to remedy this mismatch between the IRS’ responsibilities and its resources."

Treasury’s request for increasing funds to help address IT infrastructure upgrades for the IRS did not come up during the hearing’s question-and-answer period, as the committee focused its attention on Russian sanctions, the role of using cryptocurrency to evade sanctions, energy policy and independence, and other criminal-focused activities.

The U.S. Supreme Court has granted a petition for certiorari in the case of A. Bittner, CA-5, 2021-2 USTC ¶50,242 . In Bittner, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that each failure to report a qualifying foreign account on the annual Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR) constituted a separate reporting violation subject to penalty. This means that the penalty applies on a per-account basis, not a per-form basis. The Fifth Circuit disagreed with a Ninth Circuit panel that adopted a per-form interpretation ( J. Boyd, CA-9, 2021-1 USTC ¶50,112).

The U.S. Supreme Court has granted a petition for certiorari in the case of A. Bittner, CA-5, 2021-2 USTC ¶50,242 . In Bittner, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that each failure to report a qualifying foreign account on the annual Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR) constituted a separate reporting violation subject to penalty. This means that the penalty applies on a per-account basis, not a per-form basis. The Fifth Circuit disagreed with a Ninth Circuit panel that adopted a per-form interpretation ( J. Boyd, CA-9, 2021-1 USTC ¶50,112).

—

Background

U.S. citizens and residents must keep records and/or file reports when the person makes a transaction or maintains a relation for any person with a foreign financial agency ( 31 USC 5314). Each person with a financial interest in a financial account in a foreign country must report the relationship to the IRS for each year the relationship exists by providing specified information on and filing the FBAR. The FBAR generally must be filed by June 30 of each calendar year for foreign financial accounts over $10,000 maintained during the previous calendar year (31 C.F.R. §§1010.350, 1010.306).

If the person fails to file the FBAR, the IRS can impose a penalty of up to $10,000 for non-willful violations, unless the violation was due to reasonable cause. For a willful violation, the maximum penalty is the greater of $100,000 or 50 percent of (1) the amount of the transaction when a violation involves a transaction, or (2) the balance in the account at the time of the violation when a violation involves a failure to report the existence of an account. There is no reasonable cause exception for willful violations ( 31 USC 5321).

Fifth Circuit: FBAR Penalty Per Account

In A. Bittner, the Fifth Circuit ruled that the text, structure, history, and purpose of the relevant statutory and regulatory provisions showed that the "violation" of 31 USC 5314 contemplated by the 31 USC 5321 penalty was the failure to report a qualifying account, not the failure to file an FBAR. Therefore, the $10,000 penalty cap applied on a per-account basis, not a per-form basis.

The Fifth Circuit agreed with the government that the district court had erred in determining what constituted a "violation" under 31 USC 5314 by focusing on the regulations under section 5314 to the exclusion of section 5314 itself. Section 5314 does not create the obligation to file a single report, stated the Fifth Circuit, but instead gives the Treasury Secretary discretion to prescribe how to fulfill the statute’s requirement of reporting qualifying accounts.

The Fifth Circuit observed that by authorizing a penalty for any "violation of ... any provision of section 5314," as opposed to the regulations under section 5314, section 5314 "naturally reads" as referring to the statutory requirement to report each account, not the regulatory requirement to file FBARs in a particular manner. Further, the circuit court stated that the reasonable cause exception for non-willful violations was framed in terms of "the transaction" and "the account," and thus it also "naturally reads" as excusing the failure to report a transaction or account, not the failure to file an FBAR.

Ninth Circuit: FBAR Penalty Per Form

In J. Boyd, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the IRS can impose only one non-willful penalty when an untimely but accurate FBAR is filed, regardless of the number of foreign financial accounts. The Ninth Circuit determined that the statutory and regulatory scheme under 31 USC 5314 authorizes a single non-willful penalty for the failure to file a timely FBAR, and that the taxpayer’s conduct in failing to timely file the FBAR amounted to one non-willful violation.

The Ninth Circuit was not persuaded by the government's argument that, based on the statutory scheme as a whole and legislative intent, the penalty amount could be assessed on a per-account basis. The Ninth Circuit found nothing in the statute or regulations to suggest that the penalty could be calculated that way for a single failure to file a timely FBAR that is otherwise accurate. The Ninth Circuit presumed that Congress had purposely excluded the per-account language from the non-willful penalty provision because it had included such language in the previously-enacted willful penalty provision. Further, the inclusion of per-account language in the reasonable cause exception supported the view that Congress had intentionally omitted per-account language from the non-willful penalty provision.

The Treasury and IRS have issued guidance on the recent order by President Trump to defer certain employee payroll tax obligations on wages paid from September 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020. Under the guidance:

The Treasury and IRS have issued guidance on the recent order by President Trump to defer certain employee payroll tax obligations on wages paid from September 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020. Under the guidance:

• the due date for the withholding and payment of the employee’s portion of the 6.2-percent old-age, survivors and disability insurance (OASDI) tax (Social Security tax) under Code Sec. 3101(a), and the employee’s portion of the Railroad Retirement Tax Act (RRTA) Tier 1 tax that is attributable to the 6.2-percent Social Security tax under Code Sec. 3201, on applicable wages is postponed until the period beginning on January 1, 2021, and ending on April 30, 2021; and
• the deferred taxes must be withheld and paid from wages and compensation paid between January 1, 2021, and April 30, 2021.

The guidance states that it does not separately postpone the deposit obligation for employee Social Security tax. This is because the deposit obligation does not arise until the tax is withheld, so by postponing the time for withholding the employee Social Security tax, the deposit obligation is delayed by operation of the tax regulations.

7508A Relief
In light of the coronavirus (COVID-19) disaster, President Trump issued a memorandum on August 8, 2020, directing the Treasury Secretary to use his Code Sec. 7508A authority to defer the withholding, deposit, and payment of the employee’s portion of Social Security tax, and the employee’s portion of the RRTA equivalent tax, on wages and compensation paid from September 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020. The deferral is available only for employees whose biweekly, pre-tax pay is less than $4,000, or a similar amount where a different pay period applies.

The Treasury Secretary has determined that employers required to withhold and pay the employee share of the Social Security tax under Code Sec. 3102(a) or the RRTA tax equivalent under Code Sec. 3202(a) are affected by the COVID-19 emergency for purposes of the relief described in the presidential memorandum.

Applicable Wages
The deferral applies to wages under Code Sec. 3121(a) or compensation under Code Sec. 3231(e) paid to an employee on a pay date during the period beginning on September 1, 2020, and ending on December 31, 2020 (collectively "applicable wages"), but only if the amount of wages or compensation paid for a biweekly pay period is less than $4,000, or the equivalent threshold amount with respect to other pay periods.

Applicable wages are determined on a pay period-by-pay period basis. If the amount of wages or compensation payable to an employee for a pay period is less than the corresponding pay period threshold amount, then that amount is considered applicable wages for the pay period. In that case, the relief provided in the guidance applies to the wages or compensation paid to that employee for that pay period, irrespective of the amount of wages or compensation paid to the employee for other pay periods.

Paying Deferred Taxes
An affected employer must withhold and pay the total applicable taxes that it has deferred ratably from wages and compensation paid between January 1, 2021, and April 30, 2021. Interest, penalties, and additions to tax will begin to accrue on May 1, 2021, on any unpaid deferred taxes.

If necessary, the employer can make arrangements to otherwise collect the total deferred taxes from the employee.

The IRS has released the 2020-2021 special per diem rates. Taxpayers use the per diem rates to substantiate the amount of ordinary and necessary business expenses incurred while traveling away from home. These special per diem rates include the special transportation industry meal and incidental expenses (M&IEs) rates, the rate for the incidental expenses only deduction, and the rates and list of high-cost localities for purposes of the high-low substantiation method. Taxpayers using the rates and list of high-cost localities provided in the guidance must comply with Rev. Proc. 2019-48, I.R.B. 2019-51, 1390.

The IRS has released the 2020-2021 special per diem rates. Taxpayers use the per diem rates to substantiate the amount of ordinary and necessary business expenses incurred while traveling away from home. These special per diem rates include the special transportation industry meal and incidental expenses (M&IEs) rates, the rate for the incidental expenses only deduction, and the rates and list of high-cost localities for purposes of the high-low substantiation method. Taxpayers using the rates and list of high-cost localities provided in the guidance must comply with Rev. Proc. 2019-48, I.R.B. 2019-51, 1390.

The guidance is effective for per diem allowances for lodging, meal and incidental expenses, or for meal and incidental expenses only, that are paid to any employee on or after October 1, 2020, for travel away from home on or after October 1, 2020. For computing the amount allowable as a deduction for travel away from home, the guidance is effective for M&IEs or for incidental expenses only paid or incurred on or after October 1, 2020.

Transportation Industry Rates
The special M&IE rates for taxpayers in the transportation industry are:

• $66 for any locality of travel in the continental United States (CONUS), and
• $71 for any locality of travel outside the continental United States (OCONUS).

Incidental Expenses Only Rate
The rate is $5 per day for any CONUS or OCONUS travel for the incidental expenses only deduction.

High-Low Substantiation Method
For purposes of the high-low substantiation method, the per diem rates in lieu of the rates described in Notice 2019-55 (the per diem substantiation method) are:

• $292 for travel to any high-cost locality, and
• $198 for travel to any other locality within CONUS.

The amount of these rates that is treated as paid for meals, and the per diem rates in lieu of the rates described in Notice 2019-55 (the M&IE only substantiation method), are:

• $71 for travel to any high-cost locality, and
• $60 for travel to any other locality within CONUS

The guidance provides a list of localities that have a federal per diem rate of $245 or more, and are high-cost localities for a specified portion of the calendar year. The list differs from the high-cost locality list in Notice 2019-55:

• Added to the list: Los Angeles, California; San Diego, California; Gulf Breeze, Florida; Kennebunk/Kittery/Sanford, Maine; Virginia Beach, Virginia.
• Localities that have changed the portion of the year in which they are high-cost localities: Sedona, Arizona; Monterey, California; Santa Barbara, California; District of Columbia; Naples, Florida; Jekyll Island/Brunswick, Georgia; Boston/Cambridge, Massachusetts; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Jamestown/Middletown/Newport, Rhode Island; Charleston, South Carolina.
• Removed from the list: Midland/Odessa, Texas; Pecos, Texas.