ASK A TAX QUESTION

Close X
Please leave this field empty.

Tax Alerts

Tax Alerts

IRS starts private tax collection

Private collection agencies are slowly starting to work some taxpayer accounts, the IRS has announced. However, the IRS predicts that this iteration of private tax collection will move at a pace different from previous ones, with a slower initial start. But by summer, thousands of taxpayer accounts will be received by private collection agencies, the IRS predicted.

Comment. The IRS engaged with private collection agencies in the 1990s and again around 10 years ago. Both programs were terminated. Congress revived private tax collection to offset the cost of transportation and highway spending in the FAST Act. Now, the IRS has contracted with CBE Group, Cedar Falls, Iowa; Conserve, Fairport, N.Y.; Performant, Livermore, Calif.; and Pioneer, Horseheads, N.Y. to work some taxpayer cases.

The Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act of 2015 (FAST Act) directed the IRS to contract with private collection agencies to collect inactive tax receivables. Tax receivables are defined as any outstanding assessment that the IRS includes in potentially collectible inventory.

The FAST Act applies to any tax receivable:

  • Removed from the active inventory for lack of resources or inability to locate the taxpayer;
  • For which more than one-third of the applicable limitations period has lapsed and no IRS employee has been assigned to collect the receivable; or
  • For which, a receivable has been assigned for collection but more than 365 days have passed without interaction with the taxpayer or a third party for purposes of furthering the collection.

Exceptions. Certain taxpayer accounts will not be outsourced to private collection agencies. They include taxpayer accounts subject to a pending or active offer-in-compromise or installment agreement; classified as an innocent spouse case; or involving a taxpayer identified by the IRS as being deceased, under the age of 18, in a designated combat zone, or a victim of identity theft. Private collection agencies also will not work accounts that are currently under examination, litigation, criminal investigation, or levy; or accounts currently subject to a proper exercise of a right of appeal.

Communications. Before a private collection agency works a taxpayer’s account, the taxpayer will be contacted by the IRS. The IRS explained that first it will send a letter to the taxpayer advising that the taxpayer’s account has been assigned to a private collection agency. After the IRS mails its letter, the private collection agency will contact the taxpayer by letter.

IR-2017-74

Close

IRS clarifies changes to expensing/bonus depreciation under 2015 PATH Act

The IRS has issued guidance to clarify the application of several changes made to the Code Sec. 179 expensing allowance as well as the bonus depreciation deduction by the Protecting Americans From Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (PATH Act). The IRS explained that its guidance was issued in response to taxpayer questions.

Code Sec. 179

Although the PATH Act had deleted a provision providing that air conditioning and heating units do not qualify for expensing, the IRS clarifies that there are limitations. However, not only can portable air conditioning and heating units as code Sec. 1245 property continue to be expensed but that, if a component of a central air conditioning or heating system of a building is qualified real property under the expensing rules, the component can qualify for expensing if the taxpayer elects to treat its qualified real property as section 179 property.

The PATH Act has amended Code Sec. 179 to make permanent a taxpayer ability to revoke a Code Sec. 179 election without IRS consent. The guidance clarifies that such a Code Sec. 179 election may be made for tax years beginning after 2014 on an amended return for the tax year in which the section 179 property is placed in service without IRS consent.

Bonus depreciation

The IRS also clarified several issues involving amendments made by the PATH Act to the Code Sec. 168(k) bonus depreciation provision, among them:

Qualified improvement property. Qualified improvement property (QIP) placed in service after 2015 is eligible for bonus depreciation. The IRS has clarified that the term "first placed in service" means that first time the building was placed in service by any taxpayer. Several examples illustrate that so long as an improvement, including a "build out," is placed in service after the building is placed in service (e.g, even one-day later), the improvement can qualify for bonus depreciation.

Qualified restaurant property. Qualified property that is placed in service by the taxpayer after December 31, 2015, and that meets the definition of both qualified improvement property and qualified restaurant property is eligible for the additional first year depreciation deduction under Code Sec. 168(k), assuming all other requirements are met.

Elections out. Under the PATH Act, even though a taxpayer elects out of bonus depreciation for a class of property (e.g., MACRS 5-year property), the property retains its status as "qualified property" under Code Sec. 168(k). As a result, depreciation deductions are not subject to alternative minimum tax depreciation adjustment even though the election out is made. This rule does not apply to property placed in service before 2016. For a 2015/2016 fiscal-year tax year, the placed-in-service date controls.

Long-production property and noncommercial aircraft. The IRS also clarified operations of the acquisition date requirements for long-production property and noncommercial aircraft that are eligible for a one-year placed-in-service deadline extension (that is, acquired before January 1, 2020, or acquired pursuant to a binding contract entered into before January 1, 2020). For purposes of the special phase-out schedule applying 40, 30 and 0 percentages, the guidance clarifies to relationship between the placed-in-service year and when the asset is acquired.

For more on new expensing and bonus depreciation opportunities for your business, please contact our office.

Rev Proc. 2017-33

 

Close

Taxpayer’s depression qualifies for waiver of 60-day rollover rule

A taxpayer, a law-enforcement retiree, has persuaded the Tax Court that his struggle with depression qualified him for a hardship waiver of the 60-day retirement account rollover rule. The court rejected the IRS’s argument that its examining agent was precluded under its procedural rules from considering a hardship waiver.

Background

The taxpayer retired after working for 20 years in law enforcement. He received two checks from his pension fund totaling some $100,000. He failed to roll them over into an individual retirement account (IRA) before the 60-day period expired. A short time after distribution of the checks, the taxpayer began experiencing symptoms of major depressive disorder. He had a change in activity and sleep patterns; he left his home infrequently and had difficulty interacting with others

The taxpayer and the IRS did not dispute that the 60-day deadline had been missed. They disputed the taxpayer’s eligibility for a hardship waiver, which the taxpayer argued resulted from his depression during the rollover timeframe. The IRS claimed that its examining agent was not empowered to grant such waivers; rather the taxpayer had to apply through the IRS’s private ruling process.

Court’s analysis

The court first found that the IRS may waive the 60-day requirement in cases where failure to do so would be against equity or good conscience, including casualty, disaster, or other events beyond the reasonable control of the individual subject to such requirement. The court then found that nothing in the IRS rules (Rev. Proc. 2003-16) would prevent an examiner from considering a hardship waiver during the course of an audit. Further, the court found that the Internal Revenue Manual gives examiners the authority to recommend the proper disposition of all identified issues, as well as any issues raised by the taxpayer.

Here, the taxpayer had asked the IRS to consider his depression as the reason for his failure to abide by the 60-day rule. The court found that the IRS failed to even acknowledge the information provided by the taxpayer and the examiner apparently had an incomplete understanding of the statute.

The taxpayer and the IRS also disputed whether he had suffered from depression. The court found credible and reliable expert testimony that the symptoms, as reported by the taxpayer and his family, were consistent with the symptoms of depression.

Trimmer, 148 TC No. 14

Close

DOJ highlights actions to curb employment tax evasion

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Tax Division recently highlighted its actions to combat employment tax evasion. Employers are required to collect, account for and pay over taxes withheld from employee wages, including federal income taxes and Social Security and Medicare taxes. Employers have an independent responsibility to pay their matching share of Social Security and Medicare taxes.

DOJ described successful actions against employers that paid employees in cash to evade their obligations and employers that file fraudulent returns. DOJ also is aware of pyramid schemes to avoid employment taxes. Since January 1, 2017, DOJ has filed 17 suits, collectively seeking more than $10 million in unpaid employment taxes, against tax-delinquent medical-care providers, the agency reported.

"Employers that willfully fail to comply with their employment tax obligations are cheating the Treasury at the expense of taxpayers," Acting Assistant Attorney General, Tax Division, David Hubbert said in a statement. "DOJ is committed to holding employers that willfully fail to pay their employment taxes accountable with, as appropriate, criminal prosecution, bringing these offenders into compliance through civil actions, and working with the IRS," Hubbert said.

"Employment taxes are a critical part of the tax system, generating more than $1 trillion every year in payments to the government," IRS Commissioner John Koskinen added. "We want to help employers avoid problems. When problems do arise, we use civil enforcement tools and, when appropriate, we work closely with DOJ in the pursuit of criminal cases. Collection of employment taxes is a priority for the IRS," Koskinen said.

Close

IRS releases guidance on payroll tax credit for small business research expenses

Interim guidance describes for small businesses the new payroll tax credit election for increasing research expenses. The IRS also provided a special rule for 2016 for small businesses that did not claim the credit but want to claim the credit before year-end 2017. The interim guidance reflects changes made to the research credit by the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (PATH Act).

Before passage of the PATH Act, the research credit was only available as a credit against income tax liability. Congress created the employment tax credit to encourage research activities by small businesses. A qualified small business may now elect to claim an amount of its research credit as a payroll tax credit against the employer-share of Social Security taxes.

Qualified small business

A partnership or corporation, including an S corp, is a qualified small business during a tax year if its gross receipts are less than $5 million and the partnership or corporation did not have gross receipts in any tax year preceding the five-tax-year period that ends with the tax year of the election. A taxpayer other than a partnership or a corporation is a qualified small business during a tax year if the taxpayer's gross receipts for the election year are less than $5 million and it had no gross receipts in any tax year preceding the five-tax-year period that ends with the tax year of the election.

Amount of the credit

The payroll tax credit portion of the research credit is equal to smallest of the following amounts (1) an amount, not to exceed $250,000, specified by the taxpayer in its election to claim the credit; (2) the research credit determined for the tax year (determined without regard to the election made for the tax year); (3) or in the case of a qualified small business other than a partnership or S corp, the amount of the business credit carryforward under Code Sec. 39 from the tax year of the election (determined without regard to the election made for the tax year).

Comment. A small business makes the payroll tax credit election by submitting Form 6765, Credit for Increasing Research Activities, the IRS explained. Form 6765 must be attached to the taxpayer’s income tax return. The IRS also provided a transition rule. If a small business did not make the election on its already-filed 2016 income tax return, the small business may file an amended return and make the election, the IRS explained.

IR-2017-70, Notice 2017-23

Close

CBO reports on top tax incentives/expenditures

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) issued a report in mid-March about current tax incentives. Tax expenditures, CBPO explained, reduce the amount of revenue that is collected for any given set of statutory tax rates. Tax incentives also affect the distribution of the tax burden in ways that may not always be recognized, both among people at different income levels and among people who have similar income but differ in other ways, CBO reported.

CBO identified the top five largest tax expenditures in 2017 as:

  • The exclusion from workers’ taxable income of employers’ contributions for health care, health insurance premiums, and premiums for long-term care insurance;
  • The exclusion of contributions to and the earnings of pension funds (minus pension benefits that are included in taxable income);
  • Preferential tax rates on dividends and long-term capital gains;
  • The deferral for profits earned abroad, which certain corporations may exclude from their taxable income until those profits are returned to the U.S.; and
  • The deductions for state and local taxes (on nonbusiness income, sales, real estate, and personal property).

Other significant tax expenditures include the earned income tax credit (EITC), the deduction for mortgage interest, the immediate deduction for investments in certain business property, and the deduction for charitable contributions, according to CBO. Watch for all of these scores to play a role in the upcoming debate on tax reform.

Close

IRS updates 401(k) hardship distributions exam materials

The IRS Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division (TE/GE) has updated guidance used to determine whether a Code Sec. 401(k) plan hardship meets the safe-harbor standards set forth in applicable regulations. Specifically, the memorandum, TE/GE-04-0217-008, sets out the substantiation guidelines that IRS auditors are to use in conducting related examinations.

Under Code Sec. 401(k), plans may provide hat an employee can receive a distribution of elective contributions from the plan on account of hardship. Generally, a hardship distribution form a retirement account can only be made for immediate and heavy financial need of the employee and is in an amount necessary to satisfy the financial need of the applicable.

Under Reg. §1.401(k)-1(d)(3)(iii)(B), the safe harbor provides that a distribution is deemed to be as a result of immediate and heavy financial need if made for the following reasons:

  • Expenses for medical care deductible under Code Sec. 213(d);
  • Costs directly related to the purchase of a principle residence;
  • Payment of tuition, related educational fees, and room and board expenses for up to the next 12 months of post-secondary education for the employee or employee’s spouse, children or dependents;
  • Payments necessary to prevent the eviction of the employee from the employee’s principal residence or foreclosure of the mortgage on that residence;
  • Payments for burial or funeral expenses for the employee’s deceased parent, spouse, children or other dependent; or
  • Expenses for the repair of damage to the employee’s principal residence that would qualify for the Code Sec. 165 casualty deduction.

The TE/GE guidance details the steps that an examiner is to take in substantiation that a distribution is made for one of the enumerated reasons. Firstly, the examiner is to determine whether the employer or a third-party administrator had the requisite source documents or summary of source documents prior to making a distribution to an affected employee. In addition, the examiner may need to ensure that the employee was given the relevant notifications prior to a hardship distribution, to include being told that the hardship is taxable, and that the amount of the distribution may not exceed the immediate and heavy financial need.

Next, the IRS examiner is to review the provided documentation to determine if they substantiate the requested hardship distribution. If they do not, the examiner is to ask the employer or the third-party administrator to substantiate that a hardship distribution is deemed to be on account of an immediate and heavy financial need. If an examiner determines that the requirements of the first and second steps are met, the plan is to be treated as satisfying the substantiation requirement for making hardship distributions deemed to be for an immediate and heavy financial need.

Close

Employee consent requirements for employer refund claims released

The IRS recently issued the employee consent requirements that an employer need to adhere to in order to support a claim for refund of overpaid taxes under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) and the Railroad Retirement Tax Act (RRTA). The guidance clarifies the basic requirements for both a request for employee consent and the content needed for the employee consent. It also permits employee consent to be requested, furnished and retained in electronic format. In addition, the procedure contains guidance concerning what constitutes “reasonable efforts” if employee consent is not secured in order to permit the employer to claim a refund of the employer share of overpaid FICA and RRTA taxes.

The new guidance applies to employee consents requested as of June 5, 2017. It does not require employers to solicit new employee consents and will not affect the validity of any employee consent received pursuant to a request made prior to June 5, 2017, that was provided in accordance with existing law. For employee consents requested before June 5, 2017, employers may rely on the proposed revenue procedures set forth in Notice 2015-15.

Close

New Offers in Compromise policy starts April 27

The IRS informed taxpayers and tax professionals of its updated policy with regards to the Offer in Compromise (OIC) application process. OIC applications received on or after March 27, 2017, will now be returned without further consideration in instances where the taxpayer has not filed all required tax returns, the Service explained. In addition, the associated application fee will also be returned. Further any required initial payment submitted with the OIC will be applied to the outstanding tax debt. The agency also noted that taxpayers continue to be required to make nonrefundable partial payments with the submission of any OIC, the IRS noted. The new policy will not apply to current year tax returns so long as a valid extension is on file.

The new policy can be read on the Offer in Compromise page located on the IRS website and the newly updated Offer in Compromise Booklet, Form 656-B, available as of March 27.

Close

Tax refund offsets may be used toward unpaid debts

A taxpayer who incurs an unpaid debt may notice a reduction in his or her federal tax refund. The Treasury Offset Program is allowed to use all or part of a taxpayer’s federal refund to settle unpaid federal or state debts, to include unpaid individual shared responsibility payments.

For example, the IRS is prohibited from using liens or levies to collect any individual shared responsibility payment, if a taxpayer owes a shared responsibility payment, the IRS may offset the taxpayer’s tax refund against the liability.

The Department of Treasury’s Bureau of the Fiscal Service, or BFS, runs the Treasury Offset Program. The BFS may use part or all of a taxpayer’s tax refund to pay certain debts such as federal tax debts, federal agency debts (e.g. a delinquent student loan), state income tax obligations, past-due child and spousal support, and certain unemployment compensation debts owed to a state.

The BFS mails a taxpayer a notice if it offsets any part of the taxpayer’s refund to pay the debt incurred. The notice lists the original refund and the offset amount. It also includes the agency that received the offset payment, as well as the agency's contact information.

A taxpayer may dispute the offset by contacting the agency that received the offset payment. Note that taxpayers should only contact the IRS if the offset was applied to a federal tax debt.

Taxpayers who filed a joint tax return with their spouse may be entitled to part or the entire offset. However, this rule only applies if the spouse is solely responsible for the debt. For the taxpayer to obtain his or her part of the refund, he or she should file Form 8370, Injured Spouse.

Further, although the IRS is prohibited from using liens or levies to collect any individual shared responsibility payment, if a taxpayer owes a shared responsibility payment, the IRS may offset the taxpayer’s tax refund against the liability.

Close

Passport certifications will begin in early 2017, IRS posts on website

The IRS has informed taxpayers via its website that the agency will begin, in early 2017, to remit certifications to the U.S. State Department for individuals who are seriously delinquent in paying their tax debt. Such certification could impact an individual’s ability to obtain or keep a U.S. passport. At this time, the IRS has not started certifying tax debt to the State Department, the agency reported on its website.

On its website, the IRS explained that seriously delinquent tax debt is an individual's unpaid, legally enforceable federal tax debt totaling more than $50,000 (including interest and penalties) for which a notice of federal tax lien has been filed and all administrative remedies under Code Sec.6320 have lapsed or been exhausted, or a levy has been issued.

However, the IRS explained, some tax debt is not included in determining seriously delinquent tax debt. Such tax debt includes:

  • Being paid in a timely manner under an installment agreement entered into with the IRS.
  • Being paid in a timely manner under an offer in compromise accepted by the IRS or a settlement agreement entered into with the U.S. Justice Department.
  • For which a collection due process hearing is timely requested in connection with a levy to collect the debt.
  • For which collection has been suspended because a request for innocent spouse relief under Code Sec. 6015 has been made.

Before an applicant’s passport is denied, the State Department will hold the application for 90 days. During the 90 days, an individual can resolve any erroneous certification issues; make full payment of the tax debt; and/or enter into a payment alternative, such as an installment agreement. There is no grace period for resolving the debt before the State Department revokes a passport, the IRS added.

The IRS will notify taxpayers in writing if the agency makes a certification to the State Department. The agency will also notify taxpayers in writing if it reverses a certification. In addition, the IRS will provide notice within 30 days of the date the debt is fully satisfied, becomes legally unenforceable or ceases to be seriously delinquent tax debt.

Taxpayers may seek judicial review of certifications. If the Tax Court or a federal district court finds the certification was erroneous, the court may order the IRS to notify the State Department. There is no administrative process before filing suit in court, the IRS explained.

Close

Tax returns lacking ACA coverage status will not be rejected

The IRS has announced that it will continue to process individual returns that do not report the taxpayer’s health coverage status under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The IRS will accept returns that fail to indicate coverage, an exemption or a shared responsibility payment. The IRS had planned to reject these returns (known as "silent returns") this filing season after having accepted them in past years. Taxpayers may, however, be contacted later, the IRS cautioned.

The IRS left open the question of whether it would revise other aspects of ACA compliance during the balance of this filing season. The IRS announcement on processing silent returns began with the statement, without elaboration: "The IRS is currently reviewing the January 20, 2017, Executive Order on the ACA to determine the implications. Taxpayers should continue to file their tax returns as they normally would."

Executive order. Shortly after taking office, President Trump announced that it is the policy of his administration to seek "prompt repeal" of the ACA. In Executive Order 13765, the President instructed the heads of federal agencies "to waive, defer, grant exemptions from or delay the implementation of any provision or requirement of the ACA that would impose any cost, fee, tax, penalty, or regulatory burden on individuals."

Return processing. Processing silent returns means that returns are not systemically rejected by the IRS at the time of filing, allowing the returns to be processed and minimizing burden on taxpayers, including those expecting a refund,” the agency reported.

Follow-up. Taxpayers may receive follow-up questions and correspondence at a future date, about their coverage status, after the filing process is completed, the IRS reported. The IRS also emphasized that its revised treatment does not change the underlying legislative provisions of the ACA that remain in force at this time, including penalty payments, until changed by Congress.

Close

Dentist persuades Tax Court of material participation in real estate business

The Tax Court determined, in Zarrinnegar v. Commissioner, TC Memo. 2017-34, that a dentist by profession, was a real estate professional, and therefore could deduct rental real estate losses. As such, the losses were not barred by the passive activity rules.

The taxpayer was a dentist married to another dentist with whom he shared a dental practice. The two worked in shifts, often with the wife working the morning shift and the husband working the afternoon shift. The couple also owned a real estate brokerage firm and four rental properties. The husband managed the properties, while the wife did not. The husband reported that he spent over 1,000 hours every year on the real estate business.

For several years, the couple reported income from the dental practice on their returns, and losses from their real estate business. The IRS disallowed the deductions for the losses after characterizing them as passive activity losses.

In general, losses from the rental activities of a real estate professional are not considered passive losses. One requirement to be classified as a real estate profession, among many, is that an individual perform more than 750 hours of services during the tax year in real property trades or businesses in which he or she materially participates.

The Tax Court held that a passive activity is trade or business in which the taxpayer does not materially participate. Material participation requires regular, continuous and substantial involvement in business operations. Rental activities are generally considered passive in nature, regardless of a taxpayer’s material participation. However, there is an exception for rental activities of taxpayers who are real estate professionals.

A taxpayer is a real estate professional if more than one-half of the personal services performed in trades or businesses by the taxpayer during the tax year are performed in real property trades or businesses in which the taxpayer materially participates, and the taxpayer performs more than 750 hours of services during the tax year in real property trades or businesses in which the taxpayer materially participates.

The court determined that the husband had worked more than 1,000 hours each year on the real estate business, as he substantiated this claim with credible time logs. Witness testimony also substantiated the amount of time the husband spent on the real estate business. In addition, the court found that the husband worked less than 1,000 hours every year at the dental practice. As such, the court concluded that the couple was not bared from claiming the losses from their real estate business.

Close

IRS confirms automatic six-month extension for C corporations

The IRS has confirmed that a new revision of the Instructions for Form 7004 correctly reflects that calendar year C corporations are eligible for an automatic six-month extension. Code Sec. 6081(a) provides that the IRS may grant a reasonable extension of time for filing returns, so long as the extension is not more than six months, the IRS explained.

Domestic corporations are required to annually file Form 1120, U.S. Corporation Income Tax Return, to report the income, credits, gains, losses, deductions, and income tax liability of the corporation unless it elects, or is required to file, a special return. Corporate income tax returns are usually filed on Form 1120, but specified types of corporations are required to file on specialized forms.

The automatic extension provided by Reg. §1.6081-3(a) to C corporations filing Form 1120 was codified by the Surface Transportation Act and changed to six-months. This change applies to returns for tax years beginning after December 31, 2015. However, a special rule under Code Sec. 6081(b) provides that in the case of any calendar-year C corporation with a tax year beginning before January 1, 2026, the maximum extension allowed is five months. In the case of a C corporation with a fiscal year ending on June 30 and beginning before January 1, 2026, the maximum extension allowed is seven months.

Close

Future pension payouts not counted as asset in determining insolvency exclusion

The Tax Court, in Schieber v. Commissioner, TC Memo. 2017-32, found that the right to a continuing monthly payment state pension plan was not an asset in determining insolvency for purposes of exclusion from cancellation of indebtedness income. The court rejected the IRS’s argument that the ability of the taxpayers to use their monthly pension payments to continue to pay off existing tax indebtedness was sufficient to disprove insolvency.

The taxpayer-husband’s public employees’ defined benefit pension provided monthly payments with cost of living increases. Other than the monthly amounts as they became payable, the husband and his wife could not access the value in the plan. They could not convert their interest into a lump-sum cash amount, sell their interest, assign their interest, borrow against their interest or borrow from the plan. The plan withheld federal income tax from the payments.

A mortgage lender cancelled $418,000 of the taxpayers’ debt. The taxpayers claimed that their liabilities exceeded their asset by $293,000, and that should be excluded from cancellation of indebtedness income under the insolvency exception provided in Code Sec. 108. The IRS, however, claimed that the taxpayers were not insolvent since the income stream from the pension should be counted as an asset.

The Tax Court observed that although the Tax Code does not define assets, case precedent did find that an asset exempt from creditors could still be an asset for purposes of Code Sec. 108 because such an asset can give the taxpayer the ability to pay an immediate tax on income from the canceled debt. The IRS argued that the taxpayers’ interest in the pension plan should be considered an asset because they could use their monthly payments to pay liabilities.

However, the Tax Court appeared to view the insolvency test to be one predicated on whether the asset gives the taxpayer the ability to pay an “immediate tax on income” from the canceled debt, not to pay the tax gradually over time. Here, the taxpayers’ interest in the pension plan could not be used to immediately pay the income tax on canceled-debt income. Therefore, the court found that it could not be considered an asset within the meaning of Code Sec. 108.

Close

Tax Briefings

ACA Repeal and Replacement

2016 Tax Year-In-Review

Post-Election Tax Policy Update

Ask a Tax Question

Please leave this field empty.