Posts Tagged ‘Jim Peterson’

Tax Roundup, 2/19/16: Sen. Bolkcom says Iowa coupling won’t happen. And: An expat writes the First Lady.

Friday, February 19th, 2016 by Joe Kristan

coupling20160213

Accounting Today visitors: Click here for the Presidents Day post.

The Fix is in. Small businesses fighting to retain the full $500,000 Section 179 deduction in Iowa got more bad news yesterday. Senator Joe Bolckom, Chairman of the Iowa Senate Ways and Means Committee, yesterday issued a statement saying it won’t happen:

Statement by Sen. Joe Bolkcom
Chair of the Senate’s Ways & Means Committee

“Based on a recommendation from Governor Terry Branstad and David Roederer, Director of the Iowa Department of Management, the Iowa Senate will not couple Iowa’s tax law with the federal changes for tax year 2015.

“We simply cannot afford to couple with federal changes this year and responsibly balance the state budget.”

I don’t recall Democratic Sen. Bolckom ever being so eager to accept Republican Governor Branstad’s recommendations. It appears that the fix is in. You might recall that the House passed a broad “coupling” bill overwhelmingly last month. I suspect the Senate would also, if it got a chance. Arrangements are apparently in place to ensure that vote never happens.

The Governor proposes (SSB 3107) to follow Congress only with respect to the research credit. Like Section 179 and the other provisions that the Governor proposes to not couple with, the research credit had expired at the end of 2014. Iowa law defines qualified research eligible for the credit with respect to the federal definition.  There may be no such thing as qualified research, and no research credit, for Iowa without retroactive coupling.

capitol burning 10904This means the Governor is proposing to continue big cash subsidies to some of Iowa’s largest corporations with retroactive coupling to the federal research credit renewal, while increasing taxes on Main Street taxpayers by not coupling the the Section 179 renewal.

The Des Moines Register reports on the controversy in today’s edition:

Sen. Randy Feenstra, R-Hull, criticized Senate Democrats on Thursday, saying they have failed Iowa farmers and small-business owners by choosing not to couple state law with federal tax depreciation changes. That will cost Iowans millions of dollars in additional taxes, he said.

“This is shameful,” Feenstra said. “This affects every small business and farmer in this state. Senate Democrats failing to move this bill will create significant hardships for many Iowans who anticipated we would pass this coupling legislation like we have in past years.”

The Register article closes:

Ben Hammes, Branstad’s spokesman, said late Thursday that the governor is working with the House and Senate to resolve their differences.

As the Senate and the Governor seem to be on the same side, resolution may be elusive.

The Department of Revenue has not issued guidance on how to deal on 2015 filings with non-coupled provisions, which include:

Exclusion for IRA contributions to charity
Exclusion of gain from qualified small business stock
Basis adjustment for S corporation charitable contributions
Built-in gain tax five-year recognition period
Educator expense deduction
Exclusion of home mortgage debt forgiveness
Qualified tuition deduction
Conservation easement deductions
Deduction for food inventory contributions

What to do? While efforts continue to prevent the unexpected tax increase caused by the Governor’s decision, that’s not the way to bet. If you have a big refund coming, or if you are a farmer who must file by March 1, file assuming that coupling won’t happen. But otherwise it may wise to wait for further guidance, especially for issues where the proper Iowa non-coupled treatment isn’t entirely clear — such as for IRA charitable distributions. And who knows – maybe the legislature will change its mind yet.

Related: Paul Neiffer, Why Won’t Iowa Couple Section 179?!

 

20151204-2

 

Robert Wood, Dear Mrs. Obama, Why I Gave Up My U.S. Citizenship:

I have lived abroad most of my life. This is my 46th year in Canada. I married Canadian, my kids are Canadian, not American, I have worked my entire life in Canada. I invest here, and will retire here. I am Canadian, but as you are likely aware, giving up that USA brand is not easy. I have many relatives living in the 50. I used to love to visit them. At the moment, I couldn’t care less if I ever cross that border again.

This brings me to my main reason for handing in my passport: you are still taxing me.

Mrs. Obama couldn’t care less.

Kay Bell, IRS issues an extra tax phishing alert on the heels of its annual Dirty Dozen tax scams list

TaxGrrrl, IRS Issues ‘Dirty Dozen’ List Of Tax Schemes & Scams For 2016

Jack Townsend, IRS Issues Publication Warning of Abusive Tax Shelters and Scams

Keith Fogg, Trustee Personally Liable Based on Application of Insolvency Statute (Procedurally Taxing). “It can trace its roots back further into English common law and the statement ‘the King’s debtor dying, the King comes first.'”

 

Joseph Henchman, Letter to IRS Commissioner Re IRS Website Data Vulnerability

Howard Gleckman, How The GOP Candidate’s Tax Plans Stack Up Against One Another (TaxVox)

Jeremy Scott, Obama’s Oil Barrel Tax Would Be Extremely Regressive (Tax Analysts Blog)

TaxProf, The IRS Scandal, Day 1016

Robert Goulder, Revenue Losses From Profit Shifting: The Numbers Tell a Story (Tax Analysts Blog)

 

Career Corner: L’Affaire Denim: Accounting Firm Dress Code Debates Span Borders, Decades (Jim Peterson, Going Concern).

Share