Biden’s ‘aggressive’ use of a tax loophole he’s trying to shut down

Post Reply
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Biden’s ‘aggressive’ use of a tax loophole he’s trying to shut down

Post by vnatale » Wed Feb 08, 2023 8:11 pm

When I worked at a CPA firm one of the partners would not allow the Sub S income portion to be any greater than the owner's wages. That was fairly extreme on that side. Biden went extreme on the other end.

Vinny


Biden’s ‘aggressive’ use of a tax loophole he’s trying to shut down

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... shut-down/
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14225
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Biden’s ‘aggressive’ use of a tax loophole he’s trying to shut down

Post by dualstow » Wed Feb 08, 2023 8:39 pm

I heard good and bad news for accountants today and yesterday, Vinny.
The bad was just about the rise of A.I.
The good was that there is a shortage of accountants, both for regular customers and for large companies. You’re in demand!
RIP Marcello Gandini
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Biden’s ‘aggressive’ use of a tax loophole he’s trying to shut down

Post by vnatale » Wed Feb 08, 2023 9:18 pm

dualstow wrote:
Wed Feb 08, 2023 8:39 pm

I heard good and bad news for accountants today and yesterday, Vinny.
The bad was just about the rise of A.I.
The good was that there is a shortage of accountants, both for regular customers and for large companies. You’re in demand!


A.I. will be able to replace the "factory work" type accountants. Not the "non-factory" type.

I may be in demand but I don't want to offer that much supply! I work now for only one company but now is the time of year where I do the most for it. And, I am not liking how much of my time it is using to get all the work done.
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14225
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Biden’s ‘aggressive’ use of a tax loophole he’s trying to shut down

Post by dualstow » Thu Feb 09, 2023 8:56 am

Time to raise your fee?
RIP Marcello Gandini
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Biden’s ‘aggressive’ use of a tax loophole he’s trying to shut down

Post by vnatale » Fri Feb 10, 2023 8:16 am

dualstow wrote:
Thu Feb 09, 2023 8:56 am

Time to raise your fee?


Already did that not that long ago. Have an excellent relationship with the company so it will stay where it is.
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
I Shrugged
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2062
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:35 pm

Re: Biden’s ‘aggressive’ use of a tax loophole he’s trying to shut down

Post by I Shrugged » Fri Feb 10, 2023 3:11 pm

I can’t view the article, but I’m familiar with the concept. I think your former boss was way too conservative on that.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Biden’s ‘aggressive’ use of a tax loophole he’s trying to shut down

Post by vnatale » Fri Feb 10, 2023 9:15 pm

I Shrugged wrote:
Fri Feb 10, 2023 3:11 pm

I can’t view the article, but I’m familiar with the concept. I think your former boss was way too conservative on that.


I agree. His other partner had no formulas like that for the salary / Sub S split.

Were you a Sub S? If so, what was typically your split?

In recently reading how health insurance owners (and deemed owners) are treated for health insurance premiums paid (and other medical expenses paid) I came across this:

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-bu ... nce-issues

Reasonable Compensation
S corporations must pay reasonable compensation to a shareholder-employee in return for services that the employee provides to the corporation before non-wage distributions may be made to the shareholder-employee. The amount of reasonable compensation will never exceed the amount received by the shareholder either directly or indirectly.

The instructions to the Form 1120-S, U.S. Income Tax Return for an S Corporation, state "Distributions and other payments by an S corporation to a corporate officer must be treated as wages to the extent the amounts are reasonable compensation for services rendered to the corporation."

The IRS has the authority to reclassify payments made to shareholders from non-wage distributions (which are not subject to employment taxes) to wages (which are subject to employment taxes). Several court cases support the authority of the IRS to reclassify other forms of payments to a shareholder-employee as a wage expense which are subject to employment taxes.


The key to establishing reasonable compensation is determining what the shareholder-employee did for the S corporation by looking to the source of the S corporation's gross receipts.

The three major sources are:

Services of shareholder
Services of non-shareholder employees or
Capital and equipment
To the extent gross receipts are generated by services of non-shareholder employees and capital and equipment, payments to the shareholder would properly be treated as non-wage distributions that are not subject to employment taxes.

But to the extent gross receipts are generated by the shareholder's personal services, then payments to the shareholder-employee should be classified as wages that are subject to employment taxes.
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
I Shrugged
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2062
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:35 pm

Re: Biden’s ‘aggressive’ use of a tax loophole he’s trying to shut down

Post by I Shrugged » Mon Feb 13, 2023 7:00 pm

vnatale wrote:
Fri Feb 10, 2023 9:15 pm
I Shrugged wrote:
Fri Feb 10, 2023 3:11 pm
I can’t view the article, but I’m familiar with the concept. I think your former boss was way too conservative on that.
I agree. His other partner had no formulas like that for the salary / Sub S split.

Were you a Sub S? If so, what was typically your split?

In recently reading how health insurance owners (and deemed owners) are treated for health insurance premiums paid (and other medical expenses paid) I came across this:

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-bu ... nce-issues

Reasonable Compensation
S corporations must pay reasonable compensation to a shareholder-employee in return for services that the employee provides to the corporation before non-wage distributions may be made to the shareholder-employee. The amount of reasonable compensation will never exceed the amount received by the shareholder either directly or indirectly.

The instructions to the Form 1120-S, U.S. Income Tax Return for an S Corporation, state "Distributions and other payments by an S corporation to a corporate officer must be treated as wages to the extent the amounts are reasonable compensation for services rendered to the corporation."

The IRS has the authority to reclassify payments made to shareholders from non-wage distributions (which are not subject to employment taxes) to wages (which are subject to employment taxes). Several court cases support the authority of the IRS to reclassify other forms of payments to a shareholder-employee as a wage expense which are subject to employment taxes.


The key to establishing reasonable compensation is determining what the shareholder-employee did for the S corporation by looking to the source of the S corporation's gross receipts.

The three major sources are:

Services of shareholder
Services of non-shareholder employees or
Capital and equipment
To the extent gross receipts are generated by services of non-shareholder employees and capital and equipment, payments to the shareholder would properly be treated as non-wage distributions that are not subject to employment taxes.

But to the extent gross receipts are generated by the shareholder's personal services, then payments to the shareholder-employee should be classified as wages that are subject to employment taxes.

I had a Sub S. I and my CPA were comfortable with 5 or more to 1.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Biden’s ‘aggressive’ use of a tax loophole he’s trying to shut down

Post by vnatale » Tue Feb 14, 2023 7:44 am

I Shrugged wrote:
Mon Feb 13, 2023 7:00 pm

vnatale wrote:
Fri Feb 10, 2023 9:15 pm

I Shrugged wrote:
Fri Feb 10, 2023 3:11 pm

I can’t view the article, but I’m familiar with the concept. I think your former boss was way too conservative on that.


I agree. His other partner had no formulas like that for the salary / Sub S split.

Were you a Sub S? If so, what was typically your split?

In recently reading how health insurance owners (and deemed owners) are treated for health insurance premiums paid (and other medical expenses paid) I came across this:

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-bu ... nce-issues

Reasonable Compensation
S corporations must pay reasonable compensation to a shareholder-employee in return for services that the employee provides to the corporation before non-wage distributions may be made to the shareholder-employee. The amount of reasonable compensation will never exceed the amount received by the shareholder either directly or indirectly.

The instructions to the Form 1120-S, U.S. Income Tax Return for an S Corporation, state "Distributions and other payments by an S corporation to a corporate officer must be treated as wages to the extent the amounts are reasonable compensation for services rendered to the corporation."

The IRS has the authority to reclassify payments made to shareholders from non-wage distributions (which are not subject to employment taxes) to wages (which are subject to employment taxes). Several court cases support the authority of the IRS to reclassify other forms of payments to a shareholder-employee as a wage expense which are subject to employment taxes.


The key to establishing reasonable compensation is determining what the shareholder-employee did for the S corporation by looking to the source of the S corporation's gross receipts.

The three major sources are:

Services of shareholder
Services of non-shareholder employees or
Capital and equipment
To the extent gross receipts are generated by services of non-shareholder employees and capital and equipment, payments to the shareholder would properly be treated as non-wage distributions that are not subject to employment taxes.

But to the extent gross receipts are generated by the shareholder's personal services, then payments to the shareholder-employee should be classified as wages that are subject to employment taxes.



I had a Sub S. I and my CPA were comfortable with 5 or more to 1.


That's fairly high.

So okay with $100,000 profit and $20,000 salary or $200,000 profit and $40,000 salary or $300,000 profit and $60,000 salary ....
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
Post Reply