Showing posts with label IRS Audits. Show all posts
Showing posts with label IRS Audits. Show all posts

IRS Secrets You Should Know by Lance Wallach

Amazon.com: IRS Secrets You Should Know eBook: Lance Wallach: Books

Lance Wallach

National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, Wallach is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, financial and estate planning, and abusive tax shelters.

He is also a featured writer and has been interviewed on television and financial talk shows including NBC, National Pubic Radio's All Things Considered and others,Lance authored Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence and Scams published by John Wiley and Sons, Bisk education's CPA's Guide to Life Insurance and Federal Estate and Gift Taxation,

as well as AICPA best-selling books including

Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Trap.
Testimonials...
"Mr. Wallach, thanks so much for taking the

time to talk to me ..today about VEBAs.

Any information you can send me would be

helpful. Hopefully, we can work together in

the future as interest in VEBAs increase."
Corman G. Franklin

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy

U.S. Department of Labor






Protect your clients – and yourself – from all kinds of financial chicanery and stupidity with this vital new book
It doesn't matter if a financial error was made because of malice or ignorance – the end result is that you lose money. Luckily, you don't have to sit idly and take it. If you have Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence and Scams, you can identify and avoid the dysfunctional sectors of the financial industry, steer clear of the fallout from the Madoff Era, and guide your clients to real, healthy, sustainable returns. This powerful book
  • Pinpoints dysfunctional sectors within the financial industry and offers advice against frauds and scammers
  • Shows how a team approach to asset management can ward off financial predators
  • Offers practical strategies and tools to combat client risk for Risk and Asset Management
Offering insightful information to protect your clients from all sorts of frauds and incompetence, this essential guide equips you with tips and techniques to spot the red flags of fraud and prevent it before it starts.








IRS Secrets You Should Know



Including



Tax, Insurance, and Cost Reduction Strategies for Small Business



Just one of these ideas from the book will save you thousands:



IRS red flags and how to audit proof your tax return

Why your retirement plan is an audit target: how to upgrade it

The only way to deduct estate and business succession plan costs

Turn your life insurance into a tax deduction

Reduce health insurance, workers’ comp and other insurance costs

Discover the only deductible benefit plan where money comes out tax free, even before retirement

Protect assets from creditors while obtaining a tax deduction

Why the IRS has turned your accountant into a tax collector, and what to do about this

Seven best new tax reduction ideas

Use a captive insurance company to reduce taxes and costs



And much more!!!



Books can be purchased here

Amazon.com: Lance Wallach: Books, Biography, Blog, Audiobooks, Kindle

IRS Audits 419, 412i, Captive Insurance Plans With Life Insurance, and Section 79 Scams

IRS Audits 419, 412i, Captive Insurance Plans With Life Insurance, and Section 79 Scams
By Lance Wallach                                                                                          June 2011


The IRS started auditing 419 plans in the ‘90s, and then continued going after 412i and other plans that they considered abusive, listed, or reportable transactions, or substantially similar to such transactions.

In a recent Tax Court Case, Curcio v. Commissioner (TC Memo 2010-115), the Tax Court ruled that an investment in an employee welfare benefit plan was a listed transaction in that the transaction in question was substantially similar to the transaction described in IRS Notice 95-34. A subsequent case, McGehee Family Clinic, largely followed Curcio, though it was technically decided on other grounds. The parties stipulated to be bound by Curcio on the issue of whether the amounts paid by McGehee in connection with the 419 Plan and Trust were deductible. Curcio did not appear to have been decided yet at the time McGehee was argued. The McGehee opinion (Case No. 10-102) (United States Tax Court, September 15, 2010) does contain an exhaustive analysis and discussion of virtually all of the relevant issues.

Taxpayers and their representatives should be aware that the Service has disallowed deductions for contributions to these arrangements. The IRS is cracking down on small business owners who participate in tax reduction insurance plans and the brokers who sold them. Some of these plans include defined benefit retirement plans, IRAs, or even 401(k) plans with life insurance.

In order to fully grasp the severity of the situation, one must have an understanding of Notice 95-34, which was issued in response to trust arrangements sold to companies that were designed to provide deductible benefits such as life insurance, disability and severance pay benefits. The promoters of these arrangements claimed that all employer contributions were tax-deductible when paid, by relying on the 10-or-more-employer exemption from the IRC § 419 limits. It was claimed that permissible tax deductions were unlimited in amount.

In general, contributions to a welfare benefit fund are not fully deductible when paid. Sections 419 and 419A impose strict limits on the amount of tax-deductible prefunding permitted for contributions to a welfare benefit fund. Section 419A(F)(6) provides an exemption from Section 419 and Section 419A for certain “10-or-more employers” welfare benefit funds. In general, for this exemption to apply, the fund must have more than one contributing employer, of which no single employer can contribute more than 10% of the total contributions, and the plan must not be experience-rated with respect to individual employers.

According to the Notice, these arrangements typically involve an investment in variable life or universal life insurance contracts on the lives of the covered employees. The problem is that the employer contributions are large relative to the cost of the amount of term insurance that would be required to provide the death benefits under the arrangement, and the trust administrator may obtain cash to pay benefits other than death benefits, by such means as cashing in or withdrawing the cash value of the insurance policies. The plans are also often designed so that a particular employer’s contributions or its employees’ benefits may be determined in a way that insulates the employer to a significant extent from the experience of other subscribing employers. In general, the contributions and claimed tax deductions tend to be disproportionate to the economic realities of the arrangements.

The 419 plan advertised that enrollees should expect to obtain the same type of tax benefits as listed in the transaction described in Notice 95-34. The benefits of enrollment listed in its advertising packet included:
Virtually unlimited deductions for the employer;
Contributions could vary from year to year;
Benefits could be provided to one or more key executives on a selective basis;
No need to provide benefits to rank-and-file employees;
Contributions to the plan were not limited by qualified plan rules and would not interfere with pension, profit sharing or 401(k) plans;
Funds inside the plan would accumulate tax-free;
Beneficiaries could receive death proceeds free of both income tax and estate tax;
The program could be arranged for tax-free distribution at a later date;
Funds in the plan were secure from the hands of creditors.
The Court said that the 419 Plan was factually similar to the plans described in Notice 95-34 at all relevant times. In rendering its decision the court heavily cited Curcio, in which the court also ruled in favor of the IRS. As noted in Curcio, the insurance policies, overwhelmingly variable or universal life policies, required large contributions relative to the cost of the amount of term insurance that would be required to provide the death benefits under the arrangement. The 419 Plan owned the insurance contracts.

The McGehee Family Clinic had enrolled in the 419 Plan in May 2001 and claimed deductions for contributions to it in 2002 and 2005. The returns did not include a Form 8886,Reportable Transaction Disclosure Statement, or similar disclosure.

The IRS disallowed the latter deduction and adjusted the 2004 return of shareholder Robert Prosser and his wife to include the $50,000 payment to the plan. The IRS also assessed tax deficiencies and the enhanced 30% penalty totaling almost $21,000 against the clinic and $21,000 against the Prossers. The court ruled that the Prossers failed to prove a reasonable cause or good faith exception.


More you should know:

In recent years, some section 412(i) plans have been funded with life insurance using face amounts in excess of the maximum death benefit a qualified plan is permitted to pay.  Ideally, the plan should limit the proceeds that can be paid as a death benefit in the event of a participant’s death.  Excess amounts would revert to the plan.  Effective February 13, 2004, the purchase of excessive life insurance in any plan is considered a listed transaction if the face amount of the insurance exceeds the amount that can be issued by $100,000 or more and the employer has deducted the premiums for the insurance.
A 412(i) plan in and of itself is not a listed transaction; however, the IRS has a task force auditing 412i plans.
An employer has not engaged in a listed transaction simply because it is a 412(i) plan.
Just because a 412(i) plan was audited and sanctioned for certain items, does not necessarily mean the plan engaged in a listed transaction. Some 412(i) plans have been audited and sanctioned for issues not related to listed transactions.


Companies should carefully evaluate proposed investments in plans such as the 419 Plan. The claimed deductions will not be available, and penalties will be assessed for lack of disclosure if the investment is similar to the investments described in Notice 95-34. In addition, under IRC 6707A, IRS fines participants a large amount of money for not properly disclosing their participation in listed, reportable or similar transactions; an issue that was not before the Tax Court in either Curcio or McGehee. The disclosure needs to be made for every year the participant is in a plan. The forms need to be properly filed even for years that no contributions are made. I have received numerous calls from participants who did disclose and still got fined because the forms were not filled in properly. A plan administrator told me that he assisted hundreds of his participants file forms, and they still all received very large IRS fines for not properly filling in the forms.

IRS has been attacking all 419 welfare benefit plans, many 412i retirement plans, captive insurance plans with life insurance in them and Section 79 plans.

 Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, abusive tax shelters, financial, international tax, and estate planning.  He writes about 412(i), 419, Section79, FBAR, and captive insurance plans. He speaks at more than ten conventions annually, writes for over fifty publications, is quoted regularly in the press and has been featured on television and radio financial talk shows including NBC, National Pubic Radio’s All Things Considered, and others. Lance has written numerous books including Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence and Scams published by John Wiley and Sons, Bisk Education’s CPA’s Guide to Life Insurance and Federal Estate and Gift Taxation, as well as the AICPA best-selling books, including Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hot Spots. He does expert witness testimony and has never lost a case.

Dont Give the IRS Every Last Drop

By Lance Wallach

Have you seen the commercials where certain companies advertise that they can settle an IRS debt for “pennies on the dollar”? Usually the offer is too good to be true. Besides, you never want to have the problem in the first place.

The chances of an individual being audited have approximately doubled since 2000. So you need to be careful with your tax return.

IRS officials say research has shown that tax “noncompliance” typically is highest among people who work for themselves, who deal in large amounts of cash, who don’t have taxes withheld from their pay and whose income isn’t reported separately to the IRS, such as by their employer.




Dont Give the IRS Every Last Drop

Help with Cmmon IRS Problems

There are many problems you can run into with the IRS. The following is an overview and helpful information on some of these confusing issues.

· IRS Penalties
· Unfiled Tax Returns
· IRS Liens
· IRS Audits
· Payroll Tax Problems
· IRS Levies
· IRS Seizures
· Wage Garnishments

IRS Penalties

The penalizes millions of taxpayers each year. They have so many penalties that it's hard to understand which penalty they are hitting you with.

The most common penalties are Failure to File and Failure to Pay. Both of these penalties can substantially increase the amount you owe the IRS in a very short period of time.

To make matters worse the IRS charges you interest on penalties. Many tax-payers often find out about IRS problems many years after they have occurred. This causes the amount owed the IRS to be substantially greater due to penalties and the accumulated interest on those penalties.

Some IRS penalties can be as high as 75%-100% of the original taxes owed. Often taxpayers can afford to pay the taxes owed, however, the extra penalties make it impossible to pay off the entire balance.

The original goal of the IRS imposing penalties was to punish taxpayers in order to keep them in line. Unfortunately, the penalties have turned into additional sources of income for the IRS. So they are happy to add whatever penalties they can and to pile interest on top of those penalties. Your loss is their gain.

Under certain circumstances the IRS does abate, or forgive, penalties. Therefore before you pay the IRS any penalty amounts, you may want to consider requesting that the IRS abate your penalties.

Unfiled Tax Returns

Many taxpayers fail to file required tax returns for many reasons. What you must understand is that failure to file tax returns may be construed as a criminal act by the IRS. This type of criminal act is punishable by one year in jail for each year not filed.

Needless to say, its one thing to owe the IRS money but another thing to potentially lose your freedom for failure to file a tax return.

The IRS may file “SFR” (Substitute For Return) Tax Returns for you. This is the IRS's version of an unfiled tax return. Because SFR Tax Returns are filed in the best interest of the government, the only deductions you'll see are standard deductions and one personal exemption.

You will not get credit for deductions which you may be entitled to, such as exemptions for a spouse or children, interest and taxes on your home, cost of any stock or real estate sales, business expenses, etc.

Regardless of what you have heard, you have the right to file your original tax return, no matter how late its filed.

IRS Liens

The IRS can make your life miserable by filing Federal Tax Liens. Federal Tax Liens are public records that indicate you owe the IRS various taxes. They are filed with the County Clerk in the county from which you or your business operates.

Because they are public records, they will show up on your credit report. This often makes it difficult for a taxpayer to obtain any financing on an automobile or a home. Federal Tax Liens also can tie up your personal property, you cannot sell or transfer that property without a clear title.

Often taxpayers find themselves in a Catch-22 where hey have property that they would like to borrow against, but because of the Federal Tax Lien, they cannot get a loan. We can work toward getting the Tax Lien lifted so that you can borrow money on your property.

IRS Audits

The IRS can audit you by mail, in their offices, or in your office or home. The location of your audit is a good indication of the severity of the audit.

Typically, Correspondence Audits are for missing documents in your tax return that IRS computers have tried to find. These usually include W-2's and 1099 income items or interest expense items. This type of audit can be handled through the mail with the correct documentation.

The IRS Office Audit is usually with a Tax Examiner who will request numerous documents and explanations of various deductions. This type of audit may also require you to produce all bank records for a period of time so that the IRS can check for unreported income.

The IRS Home or Office Audit should be taken more seriously because the IRS auditor is a Revenue Agent. Revenue Agents receive more training and learn more auditing techniques than a typical Tax Examiner.

The IRS audits should be taken seriously because they often lead to other tax years and other tax problems not originally stated in the audit letter.

Payroll Tax Problems

The IRS is very aggressive in their collection attempts for past due payroll taxes. The penalties assessed on delinquent payroll tax deposits or filings can dramatically increase the total amount you owe in just a matter of months.

I believe that it is critical for a taxpayer to have an attorney for a representation in these situations. How you answer the first five IRS questions may determine whether you stay in business or are liquidated by the IRS. We always advise clients to avoid meeting with any IRS representatives regarding payroll taxes until you have met with a professional to discuss you options.

IRS Levies

An IRS Levy is the action taken by the IRS to collect taxes. For example, the IRS can issue a Bank Levy to obtain your cash in savings and checking accounts. Or the IRS can levy your wages or accounts receivable. The person, company, or institution that is served with the levy must comply or face their own IRS problems.

The additional paperwork this person, company, or institution, is faced with to comply with the IRS Levy often causes the taxpayers relationship with that person to suffer. Levies should be avoided at all costs and are usually the result of poor or no communication with the IRS.

When the IRS levies a bank account, the levy is only for the particular day the levy is received by the bank. The bank is required to remove whatever amount of money is in your account that day (up to the amount of the IRS Levy) and send it to the IRS within 21 days unless notified otherwise by the IRS. This type of levy does not affect any future deposits made into your bank account unless the IRS issues another Bank Levy.

An IRS Wage Levy is difficult. Wage Levies are filed with your employer and remain in effect until the IRS notifies the employer that the Wage Levy has been released. Most Wage Levies take so much money from the taxpayer's paycheck that the taxpayer doesn’t even have enough money to live on.

IRS Seizures

The IRS has extensive powers when it comes to Seizures of Assets. These powers allow them to seize personal and business assets to pay off outstanding tax liabilities. This occurs when taxpayers have been avoiding the IRS.

This is one of the IRS's ultimate weapons. They can seize cars, television sets, jewelry, computers, collectibles, business equipment, or anything with value which can be sold in order to acquire the money the IRS wants to pay off tax debts. If you are facing a seizure, you have a serious problem.

Wage Garnishments

The IRS Wage Garnishment is a very powerful tool used to collect taxes owed through your employer. Once a Wage Garnishment is filed with an employer. Once a Wage Garnishment is filed with an employer, the employer is required to collect a large percentage of each paycheck. The paycheck that would have otherwise been paid to the employee will then be paid to the IRS.

The Wage Garnishment stays in effect until the IRS is fully paid or until the IRS agrees to release the garnishment. Having wages garnished can create other debt problems because the amount left over after the IRS takes its cut is often small, so you may have difficulty with bills and other financial obligations.

Lance Wallach speaks at more than 20 conventions annually and writes for more than fifty publications about tax reduction ideas, abusive welfare benefit and retirement plans, captive insurance companies, cash balance plans, life settlements, premium finance, etc. He is a course developer and instructor for the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and a prolific author. He has written or collaborated on numerous books, including, The Team Approach to Tax and Financial Planning; Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hotspots; Alternatives to Commonly Misused Tax Strategies: Ensuring Your Clients Future, all published by the American Institute of CPAs. The CPA’s Guide to Life Insurance, and The CPA’s Guide to Trusts and Estates, both published by Bisk Education, and his latest book, Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence, and Scams, published by Wiley. In addition, Mr. Wallach writes for various national business associations that sell his books to their members and others. He has been an expert witness on some of the above issues, and to date his side has never lost a case. Contact lanwalla@aol.com or visit www.reprtabletransaction.com/IRSHelp.html


The information provided herein is not intended as legal, accounting, financial or any type of advice for any specific individual or other entity. You should contact an appropriate professional for any such advice.

IRS Very Large Fines

Lawyers for Audit

http://www.lawyer4audits.com/index.html

Defending and protecting businesses and financial professionals from IRS audits, 
Insurance companies and Brokerage firms.

Can you or your business afford to pay the IRS $200,000 a year?

Can you or your business afford to pay the IRS $200,000 a year?

Did you get a letter from the IRS threatening to impose this fine? If you haven't already, you still may. Consider yourself lucky if you have not because this means that you have more time to straighten this situation out. Do not wait for this letter to come from the IRS before you call an expert to help you. Even if you have been audited already, you could still get the letter and/or fine. One has nothing to do with the other, and once the fine has been imposed, it is not able to be appealed.

Many businesses that participated in a 412i retirement plan or a 419 welfare benefit plan are being audited by the IRS. Many of these plans were not in compliance with the law and are considered abusive tax shelters. Many business owners are not even aware that the welfare benefit plan or retirement plan that they are participating in may be an abusive tax shelter and that they are in serious jeopardy of huge IRS penalties for each year that they have been in this type of plan. 

Insurance companies, CPAs, sellers of these 419 welfare benefit plans or 412i retirement plans, as well as anyone that gave tax advice or recommended participation in one or more of these plans, also known as a material advisor, is in danger of being sued, fined by the IRS, or both. 

There is help available if you think you may be involved with one of these 419 welfare benefit plans, 412i retirement plans, or any abusive tax shelter. IRS penalty abatement is an option if you act now. Feel free to contact me for more information.


Contact him at 516.938.5007, wallachinc@gmail.com, or visit:www.taxadvisorexperts.org

Listed Transactions

Listed Transactions

  
If you are in what the IRS calls a Listed Transaction, or something similar to it, you will probably receive a very large fine for each year that you have been in the program.

You are fined whether or not you make a contribution. If an accountant signs a tax return for a client who is in a listed transaction, he is fined 100k for being what is called a material advisor.  If an insurance agent, or someone else, sells one of these plans he is also probably a material advisor.

We have assisted thousands of people in this situation. Once you receive the fine, we cannot help you. Usually, a lawsuit results.



Being "listed"

A warning for 419, 412i, Sec.79 and captive insurance 
Accounting Today: October 25, 2010 
By: Lance Wallach
Taxpayers who previously adopted 419, 412i, captive insurance or Section 79 plans are in
big trouble.

In recent years, the IRS has identified many of these arrangements as abusive devices to
funnel tax deductible dollars to shareholders and classified these arrangements as "listed
transactions."

These plans were sold by insurance agents, financial planners, accountants and attorneys
seeking large life insurance commissions. In general, taxpayers who engage in a "listed
transaction" must report such transaction to the IRS on Form 8886 every year that they
"participate" in the transaction, and you do not necessarily have to make a contribution or
claim a tax deduction to participate.  Section 6707A of the Code imposes severe penalties
($200,000 for a business and $100,000 for an individual) for failure to file Form 8886 with
respect to a listed transaction.

But you are also in trouble if you file incorrectly.

I have received numerous phone calls from business owners who filed and still got fined. Not
only do you have to file Form 8886, but it has to be prepared correctly. I only know of two
people in the United States who have filed these forms properly for clients. They tell me that
was after hundreds of hours of research and over fifty phones calls to various IRS
personnel.

The filing instructions for Form 8886 presume a timely filing.  Most people file late and follow
the directions for currently preparing the forms. Then the IRS fines the business owner. The
tax court does not have jurisdiction to abate or lower such penalties imposed by the IRS.
Many business owners adopted 412i, 419, captive insurance and Section 79 plans based
upon representations provided by insurance professionals that the plans were legitimate
plans and were not informed that they were engaging in a listed transaction.
Upon audit, these taxpayers were shocked when the IRS asserted penalties under Section
6707A of the Code in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Numerous complaints from
these taxpayers caused Congress to impose a moratorium on assessment of Section 6707A
penalties.

The moratorium on IRS fines expired on June 1, 2010. The IRS immediately started sending
out notices proposing the imposition of Section 6707A penalties along with requests for
lengthy extensions of the Statute of Limitations for the purpose of assessing tax.  Many of
these taxpayers stopped taking deductions for contributions to these plans years ago, and
are confused and upset by the IRS's inquiry, especially when the taxpayer had previously
reached a monetary settlement with the IRS regarding its deductions.  Logic and common
sense dictate that a penalty should not apply if the taxpayer no longer benefits from the
arrangement.

Treas. Reg. Sec. 1.6011-4(c)(3)(i) provides that a taxpayer has participated in a listed
transaction if the taxpayer's tax return reflects tax consequences or a tax strategy described
in the published guidance identifying the transaction as a listed transaction or a transaction
that is the same or substantially similar to a listed transaction.  Clearly, the primary benefit in
the participation of these plans is the large tax deduction generated by such participation.  It
follows that taxpayers who no longer enjoy the benefit of those large deductions are no
longer "participating ' in the listed transaction.   But that is not the end of the story.
Many taxpayers who are no longer taking current tax deductions for these plans continue to
enjoy the benefit of previous tax deductions by continuing the deferral of income from
contributions and deductions taken in prior years.  While the regulations do not expand on
what constitutes "reflecting the tax consequences of the strategy", it could be argued that
continued benefit from a tax deferral for a previous tax deduction is within the contemplation
of a "tax consequence" of the plan strategy. Also, many taxpayers who no longer make
contributions or claim tax deductions continue to pay administrative fees.  Sometimes,
money is taken from the plan to pay premiums to keep life insurance policies in force.  In
these ways, it could be argued that these taxpayers are still "contributing", and thus still
must file Form 8886.

It is clear that the extent to which a taxpayer benefits from the transaction depends on the
purpose of a particular transaction as described in the published guidance that caused such
transaction to be a listed transaction. Revenue Ruling 2004-20 which classifies 419(e)
transactions, appears to be concerned with the employer's contribution/deduction amount
rather than the continued deferral of the income in previous years.  This language may
provide the taxpayer with a solid argument in the event of an audit.

Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, financial and estate planning, and abusive tax shelters.  He writes about 412(i), 419, and captive
insurance plans. He speaks at more than ten conventions annually He does expert witness testimony and has never lost a case. Contact
him at 516.938.5007

The information provided herein is not intended as legal, accounting, financial or any
other type of advice for any specific individual or other entity.  You should contact an
appropriate professional for any such advice.


Being Listed



Being "listed"

A warning for 419, 412i, Sec.79 and captive insurance 

Accounting Today: October 25, 2010 

By: Lance Wallach


Taxpayers who previously adopted 419, 412i, captive insurance or Section 79 plans are in
big trouble.

In recent years, the IRS has identified many of these arrangements as abusive devices to
funnel tax deductible dollars to shareholders and classified these arrangements as "listed
transactions."

These plans were sold by insurance agents, financial planners, accountants and attorneys
seeking large life insurance commissions. In general, taxpayers who engage in a "listed
transaction" must report such transaction to the IRS on Form 8886 every year that they
"participate" in the transaction, and you do not necessarily have to make a contribution or
claim a tax deduction to participate.  Section 6707A of the Code imposes severe penalties
($200,000 for a business and $100,000 for an individual) for failure to file Form 8886 with
respect to a listed transaction.

But you are also in trouble if you file incorrectly.

I have received numerous phone calls from business owners who filed and still got fined. Not
only do you have to file Form 8886, but it has to be prepared correctly. I only know of two
people in the United States who have filed these forms properly for clients. They tell me that
was after hundreds of hours of research and over fifty phones calls to various IRS
personnel.

The filing instructions for Form 8886 presume a timely filing.  Most people file late and follow
the directions for currently preparing the forms. Then the IRS fines the business owner. The
tax court does not have jurisdiction to abate or lower such penalties imposed by the IRS.
Many business owners adopted 412i, 419, captive insurance and Section 79 plans based
upon representations provided by insurance professionals that the plans were legitimate
plans and were not informed that they were engaging in a listed transaction.
Upon audit, these taxpayers were shocked when the IRS asserted penalties under Section
6707A of the Code in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Numerous complaints from
these taxpayers caused Congress to impose a moratorium on assessment of Section 6707A
penalties.

The moratorium on IRS fines expired on June 1, 2010. The IRS immediately started sending
out notices proposing the imposition of Section 6707A penalties along with requests for
lengthy extensions of the Statute of Limitations for the purpose of assessing tax.  Many of
these taxpayers stopped taking deductions for contributions to these plans years ago, and
are confused and upset by the IRS's inquiry, especially when the taxpayer had previously
reached a monetary settlement with the IRS regarding its deductions.  Logic and common
sense dictate that a penalty should not apply if the taxpayer no longer benefits from the
arrangement.

Treas. Reg. Sec. 1.6011-4(c)(3)(i) provides that a taxpayer has participated in a listed
transaction if the taxpayer's tax return reflects tax consequences or a tax strategy described
in the published guidance identifying the transaction as a listed transaction or a transaction
that is the same or substantially similar to a listed transaction.  Clearly, the primary benefit in
the participation of these plans is the large tax deduction generated by such participation.  It
follows that taxpayers who no longer enjoy the benefit of those large deductions are no
longer "participating ' in the listed transaction.   But that is not the end of the story.
Many taxpayers who are no longer taking current tax deductions for these plans continue to
enjoy the benefit of previous tax deductions by continuing the deferral of income from
contributions and deductions taken in prior years.  While the regulations do not expand on
what constitutes "reflecting the tax consequences of the strategy", it could be argued that
continued benefit from a tax deferral for a previous tax deduction is within the contemplation
of a "tax consequence" of the plan strategy. Also, many taxpayers who no longer make
contributions or claim tax deductions continue to pay administrative fees.  Sometimes,
money is taken from the plan to pay premiums to keep life insurance policies in force.  In
these ways, it could be argued that these taxpayers are still "contributing", and thus still
must file Form 8886.

It is clear that the extent to which a taxpayer benefits from the transaction depends on the
purpose of a particular transaction as described in the published guidance that caused such
transaction to be a listed transaction. Revenue Ruling 2004-20 which classifies 419(e)
transactions, appears to be concerned with the employer's contribution/deduction amount
rather than the continued deferral of the income in previous years.  This language may
provide the taxpayer with a solid argument in the event of an audit.

Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, financial and estate planning, and abusive tax shelters.  He writes about 412(i), 419, and captive
insurance plans. He speaks at more than ten conventions annually He does expert witness testimony and has never lost a case. Contact
him at 516.938.5007

The information provided herein is not intended as legal, accounting, financial or any
other type of advice for any specific individual or other entity.  You should contact an
appropriate professional for any such advice.

Are You Being Aggressive Enough (Legally)?


Are You Being Aggressive Enough (Legally)?


     By Lance Wallach, CLU, CHFC 

The question in the 80′s used to be, “How far can I push it before I get audited?” However, with increased IRS enforcement, it’s now important to ask, “Will I pass an IRS audit?”

The IRS today now uses sophisticated statistical analysis with modern technology that identifies tax returns likely to yield an additional tax liability assessment.
In other words, if your numbers don’t make sense, the computers can detect these out-of-whack ratios with ease. What this means practically is that you can’t play the “audit lottery” anymore. The computers are just too good.

The question now becomes, “How can we be aggressive, legally?”
And the answer is simple: PLANNING. Actually, Year-round PLANNING.
So long as you pre-plan your tax strategy, and make sure you have ample proof to back yourself up in the implementation of the plan, there is no need to be worried about an IRS audit.

You can still be aggressive; you just need to be pro-active.

Some suggestions are have you maxed out your pension contribution? Do you have an HSA? Are you taking deductions for having an office in your home? Do you use a K or double K plan for large deductions? Have you reviewed the IRS industry specialization manual for your industry to see what the IRS is looking hard at this year?

Is your accountant an IRS tax collector, or your protector? Accountants now have to notify the IRS of some deductions on YOUR return, or be fined a minimum of $100,000. A lot of audits result from this. The form that your accountant has to file is confidential.

The information provided herein is not intended as legal, accounting, financial or any type of advice for any specific individual or other entity. You should contact an appropriate professional for any such advice.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Lance Wallach
Lance Wallach, CLU, ChFC, CIMC, speaks and writes extensively about financial planning, retirement plans, and tax reduction strategies. He is an American Institute of CPA’s course developer and instructor and has authored numerous bestselling books about abusive tax shelters, IRS crackdowns and attacks and other tax matters. He speaks at more than 20 national conventions annually and writes for more than 50 national publications. For more information and additional articles on these subjects, call 516-938-5007.

Copyright Lance Wallach, CLU, CHFC - Google+
More information about 

Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication, it is not intended to provide legal advice as individual situations will differ and should be discussed with an expert and/or lawyer. For specific technical or legal advice on the information provided and related topics, please contact the author.

There Is No Place to Hide from IRS Scrutiny


There Is No Place to Hide from IRS Scrutiny


     By Lance Wallach, CLU, CHFC 

Some people considering an IRS voluntary disclosure of their foreign income and assets don’t do so because they fear prosecution.

This seems counter-intuitive. The best way to avoid prosecution for undisclosed foreign income or accounts is unquestionably to enter the IRS program.

Yet some fear prosecution precisely because of the tepid protection the IRS seems to offer. The IRS says most people won’t be prosecuted. That isn’t the same as a guarantee and in itself is kind of unsettling.

Ever since 2009 when the IRS started its disclosure program, taxpayers have raised this concern. In 2009, I believe some people may not have come forward because the IRS did not guarantee that there would be absolutely no prosecution. For some, that was enough to cause them to remain quiet.

As it turned out, though, the 2009 program went smoothly. So did the 2011 program, and now the 2012 program.
In fact, many of the most sensitive cases in 2009 sailed through just fine. After that, clients and lawyers alike became more secure. The prosecution risk once in the program is nonexistent or at least nearly so.

There was one troubling development, though. A small number of taxpayers were evidently pre-cleared but then later rejected from the program.

Many tax lawyers have been highly critical of this IRS reversal, which undermines the program. Since then, the IRS appears to have backed off considerably.

It also impacted very few people, said the IRS. But worries remain. Indeed, some have noted the apparent mismatch between the IRS and the DOJ, both of which have a role in tax prosecutions.

As a technical matter, it is apparently possible for the U.S. Attorney to initiate prosecution without first obtaining Tax Division approval. See U.S. Attorney Manual 6-4.243. Even the IRS manual can stir up concern. It says that a voluntary disclosure is a fact to consider but that it does not automatically guarantee immunity from prosecution.

But the reality is that it is highly, highly unlikely that an OVDP participant would face prosecution. Has it ever happened? Not that I am aware. It seems more than wrongheaded to not enter the IRS program because of prosecution fears.

In the very near future–if it is not here already–there will be no place to hide from IRS scrutiny. Whether you think the IRS program is fair, it remains the best way by far to avoid the cost, heartache and danger of potential criminal liability.
We recommend disclosing and then opting out to reduce the fines.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Lance Wallach
Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, abusive tax shelters, financial, international tax, and estate planning. He writes about 412(i), 419, Section79, FBAR and captive insurance plans.

Copyright Lance Wallach, CLU, CHFC
More information about 

Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication, it is not intended to provide legal advice as individual situations will differ and should be discussed with an expert and/or lawyer. For specific technical or legal advice on the information provided and related topics, please contact the author.

If the IRS Contacts You...


If the IRS Contacts You...


     By Lance Wallach, CLU, CHFC 

Keep your mouth shut-take this advice seriously.

If you give the agents any opening, you're dead.

They'll start with soft background questions, but before you know it, will have trapped you. And many questions won't be genuine-that is, the agents already know the answers and are asking only to see if you will lie or confess.

Questions typically asked by agents include:

Have you reported all of your income?

Where are your bank accounts and safe deposit boxes?

Can you tell us about the cars, boats, planes, and real estate that you own?

What is the procedure for reporting sales in your business?

Do you keep a lot of cash on hand?

Who are your business associates?

Have you traveled out of the country recently?

Have you or any of your businesses been audited?

Faced with a barrage of questions from trained agents who show up unannounced, most people fall apart. They either blurt out a confession or a transparent lie within five minutes. This gives the Justice Department the rope to hang them with.

Don't Let that happen to you.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Lance Wallach
Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, abusive tax shelters, financial, international tax, and estate planning. He writes about 412(i), 419, Section79, FBAR, and captive insurance plans. He speaks at more than ten conventions annually, writes for over fifty publications, is quoted regularly in the press and has been featured on television and radio financial talk shows.

Copyright Lance Wallach, CLU, CHFC
More information about 

Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication, it is not intended to provide legal advice as individual situations will differ and should be discussed with an expert and/or lawyer. For specific technical or legal advice on the information provided and related topics, please contact the author.


Find a Local Lawyer


IRS Criminal Investigation Department Audits Section 79, Captive Insurance, 412i and 419 Scams

IRS Criminal Investigation (CI) has developed a nationally coordinated program to combat these abusive tax schemes. CI's primary focus is on the identification and investigation of the tax scheme promoters as well as those who play a substantial or integral role in facilitating, aiding, assisting, or furthering the abusive tax scheme, such as accountants or lawyers. Just as important is the investigation of investors who knowingly participate in abusive tax schemes.

First the IRS started auditing § 419 plans in the 1990s, and then continued going after § 412(i) and other plans that they considered abusive, listed, or reportable transactions, or substantially similar to such transactions. If an IRS audit disallows the § 419 plan or the § 412(i) plan, not only does the taxpayer lose the deduction and pay interest and penalties, but then the IRS comes back under IRC 6707A and imposes large fines for not properly filing.

http://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=35505

FBAR Offshore Bank Accounts and Foreign Income Attacked by IRS


You may want to think about participation in the IRS' offshore tax amnesty program (called the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative). Do you want to play audit roulette with the IRS?  Some clients think they are too small to be prosecuted. They are wrong.
To the average businessperson, only the guys with tens of millions secretly stashed in Swiss bank accounts get prosecuted. Don't tell that to Michael Schiavo, he was just prosecuted for hiding money in a Swiss account back in 2003. How much money does the IRS say he hid? A whopping $90,000. That's it.
But wait, there is more to the story. Schiavo attempted to do a quiet disclosure during the 2009 amnesty but instead of filling out the amnesty paperwork, he simply trusted that by coming forward voluntarily he could avoid criminal prosecution. He was wrong on all counts, nothing is too small for the IRS, and nothing is too old.

How to Avoid IRS Fines for You and Your Clients | LifeHealthPro


Beware: The IRS is cracking down on small-business owners who participate in tax-reduction insurance plans sold by insurance agents, including defined benefit retirement plans, IRAs, and even 401(k) plans with life insurance. In these cases, the business owner is motivated by a large tax deduction; the insurance agent is motivated by a substantial commission.
A few years ago, I testified as an expert witness in a case in which a physician was in an abusive 401(k) plan with life insurance. It had a so-called "springing cash value policy" in it. The IRS calls plans with these types of policies "listed transactions." The judge called the insurance agent "a crook."

Today's IRS audits are both targeted and coordinated

Today's IRS audits are both targeted and coordinated
Question: Are the IRS audits coordinated?
Answer: Yes. The IRS audits are both targeted and coordinated. They are targeted meaning that the IRS obtains a list of the participating employers in a plan promotion and audits the participating employers (and owners) for the purpose of challenging the deductions taken with respect to the plan. The audits are coordinated meaning that there is an IRS Issue Management Team for each promotion that has responsibility for both managing the promoter audit(s) and also developing the coordinated position to be followed by the Examination Agents. Their intention is that all taxpayers under audit will receive the similar treatment in Exam. There are also IRS Offices that specialize in 419 audits. For example, IRS offices in upstate New York and in El Monte California will manage many audits of specific promotions. Williams Coulson has significant experience in working with both of these offices.
Question: What is the general IRS position on these plans?
Answer: Though there can be some differences among plans, the basic IRS position is that the plans are not welfare benefit plans, but really plans of deferred compensation. As such, the contributions remain deductible at the business level but are included in the owner’s 1040 income for every open year and the value of the insurance policy with respect to contributions in closed years is included in the owner’s income either in the first open year or the year of termination or transfer. The IRS will normally apply 20% penalties on the tax applied and 30% with respect to non-reporting cases (see discussion below).
Question: Can the penalties ever be waived?
Answer:  Yes. The penalties can often be waived upon a showing of the taxpayer’s due diligence and good faith reasonable cause. For example, if the taxpayer can show reliance on an outside tax advisor who reviewed the plan and the law, the Examining Agent normally has the authority to waive the 20% negligence penalty. Note that there are different standards for waiving penalties among the IRS Offices. It is important to know the standards of each office before requesting a waiver.
Question: What if there is an opinion letter issued on the plan – will that eliminate penalties?
Answer:  Generally, the answer is a resounding – No. If the opinion letter was issued to the promoter or the promotion itself and a copy was merely provided to the taxpayer (even if the taxpayer paid for it), the IRS perceives the advice to be bias and not reasonable for reliance.
Question: What if the taxpayer relied upon the advisor who sold the promotion?
Answer:  The IRS also discounts any advice provided by parties who are part of the sales team for the promotion. It is possible to negate the bias against professionals involved in the sale if you can demonstrate that the professional was first a tax advisor and gave advice in that role and not as a salesman.
Question: What are the “listed transaction” penalties?
Answer: The IRS has identified certain multiple and single employer welfare benefit plans as listed transactions. Taxpayers who participate in listed transactions have an obligation to notify the IRS of their participation on IRS Form 8886. The Form 8886 must be filed with every tax return where a tax effect of the transaction appears on the return and for the first year of filing must also be filed with the IRS Office of Tax Shelter Analysis (OTSA). There are penalties that apply for the failure to file the Form 8886. The IRS position appears to be that although only the C corporation must file the 8886, if the business is a pass-through entity like an S Corporation, LLC or partnership, then the Form 8886 must be filed at both the entity level and also the individual level. The penalty for non-filing is 75% of the tax reduction for the tax year. Note that it is very clear that a plan does not have to be proven to be defective or abusive for the penalty to apply. Further, the IRS has made it very clear that they will construe the duty to disclose broadly. Thus, if there is even a possibility that a plan is a listed transaction, the taxpayer should consider strongly filing the Form 8886.
Question: Are there other negatives to not filing the Form 8886?
Answer:  Yes. In addition to the non-reporting penalty, the negligence penalty discussed above of 20% becomes 30% and is much more difficult to have waived. Further, the non-reporting penalty cannot be appealed to tax court. Therefore, the only recourse is to pay the penalty, file for a refund and fight the case in District Court.
Question: Whose responsibility is it to notify taxpayers of the need to file Form 8886?
Answer:  It depends. Many promoters take the initiative to inform their customers that the promotion may be considered to be a listed transaction and that they should consider filing Forms 8886, though some promoters have actually taken the opposite view and have directed customers to not file the Form 8886 to keep them off the IRS radar. These promoters face potential liability if the penalties are assessed. Because the Form 8886 is filed with the tax returns, it may be partly the responsibility of the CPA who prepares the returns to file the Form, though many CPAs may not know that the transaction is a listed transaction or how to prepare the Form. From the IRS perspective, the responsibility is clear – it is the taxpayer who bears the ultimate responsibility and will be penalized if the Form is not filed.
Question:  Are some plans better than others?
Answer:  Yes. Even though the IRS appears to have thrown a giant net over the entire industry, I have observed that many promoters have worked hard to develop a plan that complies with the tax law. The plans are supported by substantial legal and actuarial authority and make it clear that they are welfare plans and not deferred compensation plans. These plans are often very strong in their marketing materials as to the nature of the plan and also provide for less deductible amounts. On the other hand, some promotions have ignored new IRS Regulations (issued in 2003) and continue to sell and market plans that have been out of compliance for years. They make no attempt to bring their plans into compliance and seek to stay under the radar by directing their customers to not file Forms 8886.
Question:  Do taxpayers have causes of action?
Answer:  Maybe. We see two potential causes of action. First, in cases where the promoter has either created a defective product, or has turned a blind eye towards law changes, the promoter and potentially the insurance companies may have liability for the creating, marketing, endorsing and selling a defective product. Second, where planners have sold the product to customers improperly, by describing the plan as a safe, IRS approved retirement plan with unlimited deductions, they may have liability for fraudulent sales.
I do not agree with everything in this well written sales pitch. As an expert witness Lance Wallach’s side has never lost a case. I only know of two people that have successfully filed under IRS 8886, after the fact. Many of the hundreds of phone calls that I receive each year involve misfiling of 8886 forms.

If you are, or were in an abusive tax shelter like a 419 or 412i plan to time to act is now. If you are in a captive insurance or section 79 plan you should speak with someone that does not sell them. Many former promoters of abusive 419 plans now sell captive insurance or section 79 plans. IRS audits those plans. Who should you believe as many people still promote these scams?

Google Lance Wallach and the man pushing the plan.

Assistance with IRS Issues

irshelpblog.wordpress.com

Beware: The IRS is cracking down on small-business owners

Beware: The IRS is cracking down on small-business owners who participate in tax-reduction insurance plans sold by insurance agents, including defined benefit retirement plans, IRAs, and even 401(k) plans with life insurance. In these cases, the business owner is motivated by a large tax deduction; the insurance agent is motivated by a substantial commission.

A few years ago, I testified as an expert witness in a case in which a physician was in an abusive 401(k) plan with life insurance. It had a so-called "springing cash value policy" in it. The IRS calls plans with these types of policies "listed transactions." The judge called the insurance agent "a crook."

If your client was currently is in a 412(i), 419, captive insurance, or Section 79 plan, they may be in big trouble. Accountants who signed a tax return for a client in one of these plans may be what the IRS calls a "material advisor" and subject to a maximum $200,000 fine.

If you are an insurance professional who sold or advised on one of these plans, the same holds true for you.

Call us and see what we can do for you - 516938-5007