Proposed regulations spell out the critical mineral and battery component requirements of the new clean vehicle credit, while also clarifying several other components of the credit. The proposed regs, along with modified Frequently Asked Questions on the IRS website, largely adopt previous IRS guidance, including Rev. Proc. 2022-42, Notice 2023-1, and Notice 2023-16. 

Proposed regulations spell out the critical mineral and battery component requirements of the new clean vehicle credit, while also clarifying several other components of the credit. The proposed regs, along with modified Frequently Asked Questions on the IRS website, largely adopt previous IRS guidance, including Rev. Proc. 2022-42, Notice 2023-1, and Notice 2023-16. Similarly, the critical minerals and battery component regs largely adopt the White Paper the Treasury Department released last December.

However, the proposed regs also:

• detail the income and price limits on the credit,
• prohibit multiple taxpayers from dividing the credit for a single vehicle, and
• coordinate the credit with other credits.

The regs are generally proposed to apply to vehicles placed in service after April 17, 2023, but taxpayers may rely on them for vehicles placed in service before that date. Comments are requested.

Critical Minerals Requirement

For purposes of the $3,750 credit for a qualified vehicle that satisfies the critical minerals requirement, the proposed regs provide a three-step process for determining the percentage of the value of the applicable critical minerals in a battery:

• 1. Determine the procurement chain for each critical mineral.
• 2. Identify qualifying critical minerals.
• 3. Calculate qualifying critical mineral content.

The proposed regs define relevant terms, including "procurement chain," "criticalminerals," "criticalmineral content," "extraction," "processing," "constituent materials," "recycling," and "value added."

For vehicles placed in service in 2023 and 2024, the proposed regs consider a critical mineral to meet the test if at least 50 percent of the value added by extracting, processing or recycling the mineral is due to extraction, processing or recycling in the U.S. or a country with which the U.S. has a free trade agreement in effect. The proposed regs identify the following countries as ones with a free trade agreement in effect with the U.S.: Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Israel, Jordan, Korea, Mexico, Morocco, Nicaragua, Oman, Panama, Peru, and Singapore. The regs also propose criteria for identifying additional countries, such as the factors that are part of the Critical Minerals Agreement (CMA) the U.S. recently entered into with Japan.

Battery Component Requirement

For purposes of the $3,750 credit for a qualified vehicle that satisfies the battery components requirement, the proposed regs provide a four-step process for determining the percentage of the value of the battery components in a battery:

• 1. Identify components that are manufactured or assembled in North America.
• 2. Determine the incremental value of each battery component and North American battery component.
• 3. Determine the total incremental value of battery components.
• 4. Calculate the qualifying battery component.

MAGI Limit

The credit does not apply if the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) for the credit year or, if less, the previous year exceeds a limit based on filing status. The proposed regs clarify that if the taxpayer’s filing status changes during this two-year period, this test applies the MAGI limit for each year based on the taxpayer's filing status for that year.

The proposed regs also clarify that the MAGI limit does not apply to a corporation or any other taxpayer that is not an individual for which AGI is computed under Code Sec. 62.

MSRP Limits

A vehicle does not qualify for the credit if the manufacturer’s suggested retail price (MSRP) exceeds $80,000 for a van, sport utility vehicle (SUV), or pickup truck; or $55,000 for any other vehicle. The proposed regs adopt the vehicle classification system the IRS announced in Notice 2023-16. This is the vehicle classification that appears on the vehicle label and on the website FuelEconomy.gov. The regs also provide a more detailed definition of "MSRP" using information reported on the label affixed to the vehicle’s windshield or side window.

Vehicle with Multiple Owners

The proposed regs generally prohibit any allocation or proration of the credit if multiple taxpayers place a vehicle in service. However, a partnership or S corporation that places a vehicle in service may allocate the credit among its partners or shareholders. The MAGI limits on the credit apply separately to each individual partner or shareholder. The seller’s report for the vehicle lists the entity’s name and TIN.

Final Assembly in North America

To qualify for the credit, the final assembly of a new clean vehicle must occur in North America. The proposed regs reiterate earlier guidance on this requirement, but they also provide more detailed definitions of "final assembly" and "North America." Taxpayers may rely on the vehicle’s plant of manufacture as reported in the vehicle identification number (VIN), or the final assembly point reported on the label affixed to the vehicle. Taxpayers may also continue to rely on the information in the "VIN decoder sites" at https://afdc.energy.gov/laws/electric-vehicles-for-tax-credit and https://www.nhtsa.gov/vin-decoder.

Coordination with Other Credits

While the new vehicle credit is generally a nonrefundable personal credit, the credit for a depreciable vehicle is treated as part of the general business credit. If the taxpayer’s business use of a qualified vehicle is less than 50 percent of its total use, the proposed regs require the taxpayer to apportion the credit. Only the portion of the credit that corresponds to the percentage of the taxpayer’s business use of the vehicle is part of the general business credit; the rest of the credit remains a nonrefundable personal credit.

The proposed regs clarify that when the new clean vehicle credit is allowed for a particular vehicle, a subsequent buyer in a later tax year may still claim the used clean vehicle credit. However, a subsequent buyer cannot claim the commercial clean vehicle credit.

Effective Dates

Taxpayers may rely on the proposed regulations before they are published as final regs, provided the taxpayer follows them in their entirety and in a consistent manner. The regs are generally proposed to apply to new clean vehicles placed in service after April 17, the date the regs are scheduled to be published in the Federal Register.

Comments Requested

The IRS requests comments on the proposed regs. Comments may be mailed to the IRS, or submitted electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov (indicate IRS and REG-120080-22). Written or electronic comments and requests for a public hearing must be received by June 16, 2023.

In particular, the IRS seeks comments on the following issues:

• 1. the critical mineral and battery component requirements, including the distinction between processing of applicable critical minerals and manufacturing and assembly of battery components, and related definitions;
• 2. the 50-percent value added test for critical minerals, and the best approach for adopting a more stringent test after 2024;
• 3. the list of countries with which the United States has free trade agreements in effect, proposed criteria for identifying other such countries, and other potential approaches; and
• 4. whether rules similar to those provided for partnerships and S corporation should apply to trusts and similar entities that place a qualified clean vehicle in service.

The IRS is obsoleting Rev. Rul. 58-74, 1958-1 CB 148, as of July 31, 2023. Rev. Rul. 58-74 generally allows a taxpayer that adopted the expense method for research and experimental (R&E) expenses to use a refund claim or amend a return to deduct R&E expenses that the taxpayer failed to deduct when they were paid or accrued.

The IRS is obsoleting Rev. Rul. 58-74, 1958-1 CB 148, as of July 31, 2023. Rev. Rul. 58-74 generally allows a taxpayer that adopted the expense method for research and experimental (R&E) expenses to use a refund claim or amend a return to deduct R&E expenses that the taxpayer failed to deduct when they were paid or accrued.

Rev. Rul. 58-74 conflicts with current procedures for accounting method changes.

TCJA Changes for R&E Expenses

The decision to obsolete Rev. Rul. 58-74 is unrelated to the changes made by the Tax Cut and Jobs Act (TCJA) (P.L. 115-97), even though the ruling relates to pre-TCJA accounting methods for R&E expenses.

Taxpayers could elect to amortize R&E expenses paid or incurred in tax years beginning before 2022, or deduct them currently. If the taxpayer did not make either election, the expenses had to be capitalized. A taxpayer that elected the expense method had to use it for all qualifying expenses unless the IRS consented to a different method for some or all of the expenses.

TCJA ended the expense election for R&E expenses paid or incurred in tax year beginning after 2021. Instead, the expenses must be amortized over five years (15 years for foreign expenses).

Rev. Rul. 57-74 and Change of Accounting Method Procedures

The IRS is obsoleting Rev. Rul. 58-74 because it includes insufficient facts to properly analyze whether the taxpayer’s failure to deduct certain R&E expenditures, such as the cost of obtaining a patent, when it deducted other R&E expenditures, constituted a method of accounting or an error.

For example, Rev. Rul. 58-74 does not explain whether the taxpayer consistently treated the costs of obtaining a patent in determining its taxable income. It also fails to describe the cause and extent of the deviation in the treatment of certain R&E expenditures that were not deducted.

In addition, filing an amended return, refund claim, or administrative adjustment request (AAR) under Rev. Rul. 58-74 is inconsistent with the IRS position that a taxpayer may not, without prior consent, retroactively change from an erroneous to a permissible method of accounting by filing amended returns. Rev. Rul. 58-74 is also inconsistent with the procedures for accounting method changes that qualify for automatic IRS consent.

Prospective Application of Decision to Obsolete Rev. Rul. 58-74

A taxpayer may rely on Rev. Rul. 58-74 if the taxpayer:

However, eligibility to rely on Rev. Rul. 58-74 does not imply that the IRS will grant the refund, deduction, or AAR. Instead, the IRS will continue to challenge the applicability of Rev. Rul. 58-74 when appropriate. For example, the IRS might challenge reliance on Rev. Rul. 58-74 when the taxpayer’s facts are distinguishable from Rev. Rul. 58-74, including where the taxpayer failed to adopt the expense method under pre-TCJA law.

The IRS has issued safe harbor deed language that may be used to amend eligible easement deeds intended to qualify for conservation contribution deductions under Code Sec. 170(f)(3)(B)(iii), to comply with changes to the law created by section 605(d) of the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022.

The IRS has issued safe harbor deed language that may be used to amend eligible easement deeds intended to qualify for conservation contribution deductions under Code Sec. 170(f)(3)(B)(iii), to comply with changes to the law created by section 605(d) of the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022. If a donor substitutes the prescribed safe harbor deed language for the corresponding language in the original eligible easement deed, and the amended deed is then signed by the donor and donee and recorded on or before July 24, 2023, the amended eligible easement deed will be treated as effective for purposes of Code Sec. 170 and section 605(d)(2) of the SECURE 2.0 Act. If these requirements are met, the amendment must be treated as effective from the date of the recording of the original easement deed.

The following are not considered an"eligible easement deed" for purposes of this safe harbor - any easement deed relating to any contribution:

• which is not treated as a qualified conservation contribution by reason of Code Sec. 170(h)(7);
• which is part of a reportable transaction under Code Sec. 6707A(c)(1), or is described in Notice 2017-10;
• if a deduction under Code Sec. 170 has been disallowed, the donor has contested such disallowance, and a case is docketed in federal court to resolve this dispute scheduled on a date before the date the amended deed is recorded by the donor; or
• if a claimed contribution deduction under Code Sec. 170 resulted in an underpayment penalty under either Code Sec. 6662 or 6663, and such penalty has been finally determined administratively or by final court decision.

If the safe harbor language is substituted according to the requirements spelled out in this Notice, the amended eligible easement deed will be treated as effective as of the date the eligible easement deed was originally recorded for federal purposes, regardless of whether the amended eligible easement deed is effective retroactively under the relevant state law.

The IRS closed out the 2023 Dirty Dozen campaign with a warning for taxpayers to beware of promoters peddling tax avoidance schemes. These schemes are primarily targeted at high income individuals seeking to reduce or eliminate their tax obligation. The IRS advice taxpayers to seek services from an independent, trusted tax professional and to avoid promotres focused on aggressively marketing and pushing questionable transactions.

The IRS closed out the 2023 Dirty Dozen campaign with a warning for taxpayers to beware of promoters peddling tax avoidance schemes. These schemes are primarily targeted at high income individuals seeking to reduce or eliminate their tax obligation. The IRS advice taxpayers to seek services from an independent, trusted tax professional and to avoid promotres focused on aggressively marketing and pushing questionable transactions.

The IRS has compiled a list of 12 scams and schemes that put taxpayers and tax professionals at risk. Some of them are:

• micro-captive insurance arrangements: is an insurance company whose owners elect to be taxed on the captive's investment income only;
• syndicated conservation easements: are arrangements wherein they attempt to game the system with grossly inflated tax deductions;
• offshore accounts & digital assets: unscrupulous promoters lure taxpayers into placing their asssets in offshore accounts under the pretense of being untraceable by the IRS;
• maltese individual retirement arrangements misusing treaty: are arrangements wherein the taxpayers attempt to avoid tax by contributing to foreign individual retirement arrangements in Malta; and
• puerto rican and other foreign captive insurance: are transactions wherein the business owners of closely held entities participate in a purported insurance arrangement with a Puerto Rican or other foreign corporation in which they have a financial interest.

Taxpayers are adviced to to rely on reputable tax professionals they know and trust to avoid such schemes. The IRS has also created the Office of Fraud Enforcement (OFE) and Office of Promoter Investigations (OPE) to coordinate service-wide enforcement activities against taxpayers committing tax fraud and promoters marketing and selling abusive tax avoidance transactions and schemes to effectuate tax evasion.

As part of the Dirty Dozen awareness effort, the IRS encourages people to report taxpayers who promote improper and abusive tax schemes as well as tax return preparers who deliberately prepare improper returns. To report an abusive tax scheme or a tax return preparer, taxpayers should mail or fax a completed and any supporting materials to the IRS Lead Development Center in the Office of Promoter Investigations. The postal address is: Internal Revenue Service Lead Development Center Stop MS5040 24000 Avila Road Laguna Niguel, California 92677-3405 Fax: 877-477-9135.

As part of the annual Dirty Dozen tax scams effort, the IRS and the Security Summit partners have urged taxpayers to be on the lookout for spearphishing emails. Through these emails, scammers try to steal client data, tax software preparation credentials and tax preparer identities with the goal of getting fraudulent tax refunds. These requests can range from an email that looks like it’s from a potential new client to a request targeting payroll and human resource departments asking for sensitive Form W-2 information.

As part of the annual Dirty Dozen tax scams effort, the IRS and the Security Summit partners have urged taxpayers to be on the lookout for spearphishing emails. Through these emails, scammers try to steal client data, tax software preparation credentials and tax preparer identities with the goal of getting fraudulent tax refunds. These requests can range from an email that looks like it’s from a potential new client to a request targeting payroll and human resource departments asking for sensitive Form W-2 information.

Cyber Security Tips to Prevent Spearphishing

Spearphishing is a tailored phishing attempt to a specific organization or business and usually begins with a suspicious email that may appear as a tax preparation application or another e-service or platform. Some scammers will even use the IRS logo and claim something like "Action Required: Your account has now been put on hold." Often these emails stress urgency and will ask tax pros or businesses to click on links to input or verify information.

How to prevent spearphishing:

• Never click suspicious links.
• Double check the requests with the original sender.
• Be vigilant year-round, not just during filing season.

The IRS and its Security Summit partners continue to see spearphishing attempts that impersonate a new potential client, known as the New Client scam. Lastly, taxpayers should never respond to tax-related phishing or spearfishing or click on the URL link. Instead, the scams should be reported by sending the email or a copy of the text/SMS as an attachment to phishing@irs.gov.

The American Institute of CPAs is recommending the Internal Revenue Service place a greater emphasis on service as the agency works on its strategic plan for the $80 billion in additional appropriations provided to the IRS in the Inflation Reduction Act.

The American Institute of CPAs is recommending the Internal Revenue Service place a greater emphasis on service as the agency works on its strategic plan for the $80 billion in additional appropriations provided to the IRS in the Inflation Reduction Act.

"Given the historic low levels of IRS taxpayer services, we are concerned that there was an insufficient allocation of funding to improve taxpayer services to appropriate levels" the AICPA March 28, 2023, letter to the IRS and the Department of the Treasury states, noting that the COVID-19 pandemic "made it painfully clear that the IRS was not funded to accomplish all its responsibilities."

AICPA argued that the agency’s service deficiencies "prevent taxpayers from complying with their tax obligations and hamper our members’ ability to as professional advisors to do their jobs, which is to help these taxpayers comply."

And despite funds being targeted toward enforcement and a stated goal of ensuring that wealthy individuals and corporations are paying their fair share of taxes, AICPA states that "enforcement actions must be in balance with the services the IRS provides to taxpayers."

The Inflation Reduction Act allocates $45.6 billion to enforcement activities and only $3.1 billion to service, and the AICPA suggested that more money be focused on service-related issues, including allocating sufficient funds for employee training to help replace the institutional knowledge that is expected to be lost in the coming years as the aging workforce retires.

AICPA is also calling on the IRS to develop a comprehensive customer service strategy, including creating more empowered employees; better access to timely information; and access to tailored resources, including resources designed specifically for tax professionals.

Additionally, the organization recommended that the agency develop a comprehensive plan to redesign the agency, including adopting a more customer-focused culture; integrating its technical infrastructure so the disparate legacy systems can communicate with each other; and creating a practitioner services division "that would centralize and modernize its approach to all practitioners."

Finally, AICPA recommended that IRS continue with its business systems modernizations initiatives.

"Currently, the IRS has two of the oldest information systems in the federal government making the information technology functions one of the biggest constraints overall for the IRS" the letter states. "Without modern infrastructure, the IRS is unable to timely and efficiently meet the needs of taxpayers and practitioners. … We recommend that the IRS more fully explore options to allocate IRA enforcement funding to BSM issues."

Automated Collection Notices To Resume

Another area that the organization recommends the funds be used for is the ongoing effort by the agency to reduce the backlog of unprocessed paper tax returns and other paper correspondence.

AICPA acknowledged the work done to reduce levels after the backlog spiked during the pandemic, but stated that "more needs to be done to ensure that taxpayers and practitioners are not faced at any time in 2023 with yet another year with significant levels of unprocessed returns, leading to additional delays in processing and incorrect notices and penalties."

And while this is going on, the organization recommends that the IRS "continue the suspension of certain automated collection notices until it is prepared to devote the necessary resources for a proper and timely resolution of matters. Until the IRS can respond to taxpayer replies to notices in a timely manner, these collection notices should not be restarted."

According to the letter, the agency is planning on restarting automated collection notices in June 2023, even though "this June date has not been widely publicized. The IRS should communicate the stat date of automated collection action to the public, specifically identifying what actions will be part of this process and providing resources for taxpayers on dealing with these actions."

Additionally, the organization is calling for "a streamlined reasonable cause penalty waiver without requiring a written request, similar to the procedures of the FTA administrative waiver, based solely on the pandemic’s effects on both the taxpayer and the practitioner."

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins offered both praise and criticism of the Internal Revenue Service’s Strategic Operating Plan outlining how it will spend the additional $80 billion allocated to the agency as part of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.

National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins offered both praise and criticism of the Internal Revenue Service’s Strategic Operating Plan outlining how it will spend the additional $80 billion allocated to the agency as part of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.

"This is a game changer to transform how the U.S. government administers the tax laws in a more helpful and efficient manner while focusing on providing the service taxpayers deserve,"Collins wrote in an April 6, 2023, blog post about the plan.

However, she reiterated criticism over how the funds would be allocated throughout the next 10 years. The IRA allocates only $3.2 billion going to taxpayer services and $4.8 billion allocated to business system modernization, two areas that are in need of funding to help improve the service the agency provides to taxpayers.

"Combined, that’s just ten percent of the total," she noted. "By contrast, 90 percent was allocated for enforcement ($45.6 billion) and operations support ($25.3 billion). The additional long-term funding provided by the IRA, while appreciated and welcomed, is disproportionately allocated for enforcement activities, and I believe Congress should reallocate IRS funding to achieve a better balance with taxpayer services and IT modernization."

Collins also cited the report in stating that the funds allocated for taxpayer services will be depleted within four years and cautioned that the agency needs to ensure that funds are continually being allocated for this specific purpose beyond that point.

"Although I share the long-term vision of the SOP, I want to caution that the IRS should not lose sight of its core mission and its immediate challenge of reducing the large backlog of amended returns and taxpayer correspondence."

Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

On April 4, 2023, the Internal Revenue Service released the Strategic Operating Plan, which details the agency’s plans to use Inflation Reduction Act resources to transform the administration of the tax system and services provided to taxpayers.

On April 4, 2023, the Internal Revenue Service released the Strategic Operating Plan, which details the agency’s plans to use Inflation Reduction Act resources to transform the administration of the tax system and services provided to taxpayers.

The goal of the changes outlined in the Strategic Operating Plan is to "provide taxpayers with world-class customer service" and reduce the deficit by "hundreds of billions by pursuing tax evasion by wealthy individuals, big corporations, and complex partnerships," said Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Wally Adeyemo.

The Strategic Operating Plan is organized around five key objectives:

• Dramatically improve services to help taxpayers meet their obligations and receive the tax incentives for which they are eligible.
• Quickly resolve taxpayer issues when they arise.
• Focus expanded enforcement on taxpayers with complex tax filings and high-dollar noncompliance to address the tax gap.
• Deliver cutting-edge technology, data, and analytics to operate more effectively.
• Attract, retain, and empower a highly skilled, diverse workforce and develop a culture that is better equipped to deliver results for taxpayers.

The plan outlines a series of initiatives and projects aligned to each objective, including 42 key initiatives, 190 key projects, and more than 200 specific milestones designed to achieve the objectives set forth by the IRS.

Improved customer service, compliance efforts, and technology updates are also essential to achieving the goals set forth in the Strategic Operating Plan.

With long-term funding in place, the IRS has hired more than 5,000 phone assisters, increased walk-in service availability, and added new digital tools, according to IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel.

"In the first five years of the 10-year plan, taxpayers will be able to securely file documents and respond to notices online," said Werfel. Taxpayers will also be able securely access and download account data and account history. "For the first time, the IRS will help taxpayers identify potential mistakes before filing, quickly fix errors that could delay their refunds, and more easily claim credits and deductions they may be eligible for," he said.

The Strategic Operating Plan also includes targeted efforts to ensure fair tax law enforcement and compliance with existing laws. The plan focuses on "areas where compliance has eroded the most," specifically compliance issues involving "wealthy individuals, complex partnerships, and large corporations," said Werfel. The IRS will increase hiring efforts for experienced accountants and attorneys to ensure enforcement "at the top." Werfel further noted that the IRS does not intend to increase the audit rate for small businesses or households making less than $400,000.

Finally, the Strategic Operating Plan utilizes Inflation Reduction Act funding to modernize the agency’s technology infrastructure to protect taxpayer data. In the first five years of the 10-year plan, the IRS aims to eliminate paper backlogs that have delayed taxpayer refunds by digitizing forms and returns when they are received and transitioning to fully digital correspondence processes.

"This plan is only the beginning of our work," Werfel said. "This is a unique opportunity for the IRS and the nation, and we will continue to work closely with our partners as this effort moves forward. This investment in the IRS is already helping taxpayers this tax season, and this plan shows that historic changes are coming."

The American Institute of CPAs is calling on the Internal Revenue Service to issue guidance related to how digital asset losses affect tax obligations.

The American Institute of CPAs is calling on the Internal Revenue Service to issue guidance related to how digital asset losses affect tax obligations.

"With the complexities and recent bankruptcies involved with digitalasset exchanges, taxpayers and practitioners are facing many issues with the taxtreatment of losses of digitalassets and need guidance," Eileen Sherr, AICPA Director for Tax Policy & Advocacy, said in a statement. "Taxpayers and their advisors need clear guidance to accurately calculate their losses and properly meet their tax obligations and we urge the IRS to adopt our recommendations and provide this guidance."

In an April 14, 2023, letter to the agency, AICPA said it hopes the submission of the comments that the "IRS will provide additional guidance to clarify how digitalassetlosses are handled in various scenarios. Such guidance will provide greater certainty to taxpayers and their preparers in confidently and properly complying with their overall reporting requirements for digitalassets, and better ensure consistent application of the tax law among taxpayers."

The organization offers a range of recommendations on a number of topics related to the tax treatment of digital asset losses, with a focus on losses incurred by an individual investor rather than a trade or business.

One scenario highlighted by the AICPA is the determination of worthlessness of a digital asset. The organization notes that Chief Counsel Advice (CAA) 20230211 "states that ‘a loss may be sustained…if the cryptocurrency becomes worthless resulting in an identifiable event that occurs during the tax year for purposes of section 165(a),"’ adding that the advice notes that cryptocurrency can be valued at less than one cent but still greater than zero because it can still be traded and "that could potentially create future value."

AICPA wrote that if "the position of Treasury and the IRS s that a cryptocurrency is listed on an exchange and has liquidating value greater than absolute zero, we recommend that Treasury and IRS state this in binding guidance (published in the Internal Revenue Bulletin)."

Another topic covered by the comments was the question of when, if ever, might digital assets be securities for tax purposes.

"Authoritative guidance is needed on when, if ever, the section 156(g) worthless security capital losstreatment applies to cryptocurrency and other digitalassets," AICPA wrote. "Binding guidance should also be provided on basis determination for digitalassets (currently the special options are only in non-binding FAQs), as this is a matter relevant to measuring gains and losses."

AICPA also stated that guidance "is needed on the treatment of lending of virtual currency other digital asses under sections 162 such as if the taxpayer is in a business of ‘lending’ digitalassets), 165, 166, 469, 1001, and 1058, and possibly other provisions. This guidance should cover not only losses from ‘lending’ virtual currency and other digitalassets, but the categorization of the income generated (portfolio, business or other) and related expenses."

Other topics covered by the comment letter include:

• What facts indicate abandonment of a digital asset?
• In the case of theft of a digital asset, does the Ponzi loss guidance apply beyond Ponzi-losses to other fraudulent arrangements, including digital asset losses from certain digital asset exchange activities?
• When would section 1234A apply to termination of a digital asset?
• How should a taxpayer report digital asset activity if they are unable to access their records due to bankruptcy of an exchange?
• Is a digital asset considered disposed of by transferring the investor’s interest in a bankruptcy proceeding? Must there be proof of transfer of the underlying digital asset?

This and other tax policy and advocacy comment letters filed by the AICPA can be found here.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

The American Institute of CPAs (AICPA) has urged the IRS and Treasury in an August 12 letter to issue guidance on President Trump’s payroll tax deferral memorandum. The executive action signed by the president on August 8 instructs Treasury to defer the collection and payment of payroll taxes from September 1 through years-end for eligible employees.

The American Institute of CPAs (AICPA) has urged the IRS and Treasury in an August 12 letter to issue guidance on President Trump’s payroll tax deferral memorandum. The executive action signed by the president on August 8 instructs Treasury to defer the collection and payment of payroll taxes from September 1 through years-end for eligible employees.

The presidential memorandum to defer payroll taxes has "caused confusion and concern among accountants and businesses," according to the AICPA. Thus, in its letter released on August 13, the AICPA asks IRS Commissioner Charles "Chuck" Rettig and Assistant Treasury Secretary David Kautter to issue guidance on a number of related issues, including the following items:

• Guidance stating that the deferral is voluntary and that an "eligible employee" is responsible for making an affirmative election to defer the payroll taxes;
• Guidance stating that an "eligible employee" is an employee whose wages are less than $4,000 per bi-weekly pay period;
• Guidance stating that the $4,000 limit should apply separately to each employer of an employee; and
• Guidance stating a payment due date(s) for the deferred taxes and a mechanism for employees to pay the deferred taxes.

Payroll Tax Forgiveness

Notably, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin indicated earlier this week that participation in the deferral of payroll taxes is not mandatory. "We cannot force people to participate," Mnuchin said in a televised interview. "But I think many small businesses will do this and pass on the benefits." Additionally, Mnuchin alluded that Trump intends to make the deferral a cut if reelected, essentially forgiving the deferred taxes.

To that end, White House economic advisor Larry Kudlow attempted to clarify Trump’s position that the payroll tax deferral should be forgiven rather than delayed. And when Trump talks about "terminating the payroll tax", he is only referring to those taxes specified within the presidential memorandum, not the entire payroll tax as a whole, according to Kudlow.

"I just want to be clear that the president is saying that he will provide forgiveness; he will terminate the deferral on a forgiveness basis," Kudlow told reporters at the White House on August 13. "That is what he is saying just to be clear…there was some confusion about that."

Additionally, Kudlow told reporters that the payroll tax deferral would apply to the self-employed. Although the applicable presidential memorandum is not currently written as such, Kudlow added that the administration "will make a technical change to it."

The IRS has released final regulations that address the interaction of the $10,000/$5,000 cap on the state and local tax (SALT) deduction and charitable contributions. The regulations include:

• a safe harbor for individuals who have any portion of a charitable deduction disallowed due to the receipt of SALT benefits;
• a safe harbor for business entities to deduct certain payments made to a charitable organization in exchange for SALT benefits; and
• application of the quid pro quo principle under Code Sec. 170 to benefits received or expected to be received by the donor from a third party.

The IRS has released final regulations that address the interaction of the $10,000/$5,000 cap on the state and local tax (SALT) deduction and charitable contributions. The regulations include:

• a safe harbor for individuals who have any portion of a charitable deduction disallowed due to the receipt of SALT benefits;
• a safe harbor for business entities to deduct certain payments made to a charitable organization in exchange for SALT benefits; and
• application of the quid pro quo principle under Code Sec. 170 to benefits received or expected to be received by the donor from a third party.

The final rules generally adopt the proposed regulations issued in December 2019 ( NPRM REG-107431-19) with minor clarifications.

SALT Limit

An individual’s itemized deduction of SALT taxes is limited to $10,000 ($5,000 if married filing separately) for tax years beginning after 2017. Some states and local governments adopted laws that allowed individuals to receive a state tax credit for contributions to certain charitable funds. These laws are aimed at getting around the SALT deduction limit by creating a charitable deduction for federal income tax purposes.

Under previously issued regulations, the receipt of a SALT credit for a charitable contribution is the receipt of a return benefit (quid pro quo benefit). Thus, the taxpayer must reduce any contribution deduction by the amount of any SALT credit received or expected to receive in return. A de minimis exception is available if the SALT credit does not exceed 15 percent of the taxpayer’s charitable payment.

A taxpayer is not required to reduce the charitable contribution deduction because of the receipt of SALT deductions. However, the taxpayer must reduce the charitable deduction if it receives or expects to receive SALT deductions in excess of the taxpayer’s payment or the fair market value of property transferred.

Payments by Individuals

The final regulations adopt the safe harbor for individuals whose have a portion of a charitable deduction disallowed due to the receipt of a SALT credit. Any disallowed portion of the charitable contribution deduction may be treated as the payment of SALT taxes for the purposes of deducting taxes under Code Sec. 164. The safe harbor is allowed in the tax year the charitable payment is made, but only to the extent that the SALT credit is applied as provided under state or local law to offset the individual’s SALT liability for the current or preceding tax year. Any unused credit may be carried forward as provided under state and local law.

The final regulations are not intended to permit a taxpayer to avoid the SALT deduction cap. Thus, any payment treated as a state or local tax under Code Sec. 164 is subject to the limit. Also, a taxpayer is not permitted to deduct the same under more than one rule, so a taxpayer who relies on this safe harbor to deduction payments as SALT taxes may also not deduct the same payment under any other Code provision.

Payments by Business Entities

The final regulations adopt the safe harbor that business entities may continue to deduct charitable contributions in exchange a SALT credit. A business entity may deduct the payments as an ordinary and necessary business expenses under Code Sec. 162 if made for a business purpose.

If a C corporation or specified passthrough entity makes the charitable payment in exchange for a SALT credit, it may deduct the payment as a business expense to the extent of any SALT credit received or expected to be received. In addition, if the charitable payment bears a direct relationship to the taxpayer’s business, then it may be deducted as a business expense rather than a charitable contribution regardless of whether the taxpayer receives or expects to receive a SALT credit.

The safe harbor for C corporations and specified passthrough entities applies only to payments of cash and cash equivalents. The safe harbor for specified passthrough entities does not apply if the credit received or expected to be received reduces a state or local income tax.

Benefits from Third Party

If a taxpayer receives any goods, services, or other benefits from a charitable organization in consideration for a contribution, then the charitable deduction must be reduced by the value of those benefits. If the contribution exceeds the fair market value of the benefits received, then only the excess is a deductible as a charitable contribution.

The final regulations continue to provide that this quid pro quo principal applies regardless of whether the party providing the goods, services, or other benefits is the charitable organization or not. A taxpayer will be treated as receiving goods and services in consideration for the taxpayer’s charitable contribution if, at the time the taxpayer makes the payment or transfer, the taxpayer receives or expects to receive goods or services in return. The final rules clarify that the quid pro quo principle applies regardless of whether the party providing the quid pro quo is the donee or a third party.

The IRS has provided guidance on the special rules relating to funding of single-employer defined benefit pension plans, and related benefit limitations, under Act Sec. 3608 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) (P.L. 116-136). The guidance clarifies application of the extended contribution deadline, and the optional use of the prior year’s adjusted funding target attainment percentage (AFTAP), with examples.

The IRS has provided guidance on the special rules relating to funding of single-employer defined benefit pension plans, and related benefit limitations, under Act Sec. 3608 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) (P.L. 116-136). The guidance clarifies application of the extended contribution deadline, and the optional use of the prior year’s adjusted funding target attainment percentage (AFTAP), with examples.

Affected Funding Rules

A single-employer defined benefit plan is subject to minimum required contribution rules under Code Sec. 430. The minimum required contribution for a plan year generally depends on a comparison of the value of plan assets (reduced by any credit balances) with the plan's funding target. If the value of plan assets is less than the funding target of the plan for the year, the minimum required contribution for that plan year is the sum of:

• the target normal cost for the plan year;
• the shortfall amortization installments for the plan year; and
• the waiver amortization installments for the plan year.

The minimum required contribution for a plan year must be paid within 8-1/2 months after the close of the plan year ( Code Sec. 430(j)). Payments made on a date other than the valuation date for the plan year must be adjusted for interest accruing for the period from the valuation date to the payment date, at the effective interest rate for the plan for the year. Employers maintaining plans that had a funding shortfall for the preceding plan year (i.e., the value of plan assets, reduced by credit balances, was less than the funding target for the preceding year) must make quarterly contributions to the plan. If the employer fails to pay the full amount of a required quarterly installment, interest is assessed at the plan's effective interest rate plus five percentage points.

Benefit limits apply to plans that have funded target attainment percentage for the preceding year below designated thresholds are deemed to be in "at-risk" status and are subject to increased target liability. The benefit limits on single-employer defined benefit plans are based on the plan’s AFTAP ( Code Sec. 436(b)). Generally, a plan's funding target attainment percentage is the ratio of the value of plan assets for the plan year (reduced by any funding standard carryover balance and prefunding balance) to the funding target for the plan year (determined without regard to the plan's at-risk status) ( Code Secs. 430(d)(2) and 436(j)(1)).

CARES Act Relief
Minimum required contributions to a single-employer retirement plan otherwise due in calendar year 2020 (including any quarterly contributions) are delayed until January 1, 2021. The amount of each such contribution is increased by any interest accruing for the period between the original due date (without regard to the delay) for the contribution and the payment date. A plan sponsor also may elect to treat the plan’s AFTAP for the last plan year ending before January 1, 2020, as the AFTAP for plan years that include calendar year 2020 (Act Sec. 3608 of P.L. 116-136.

Extended Deadline and Interest
The extended contribution due date of January 1, 2021, does not apply to a multiemployer plan, a CSEC plan, a fully-insured plan, or a money purchase pension plan. If the contribution deadline for a plan year is during 2020, a contribution in excess of the amount needed to satisfy the minimum required contribution for the plan year that is made by January 1, 2021, may be designated as a contribution for that plan year.

Any payment made after the original due date for the contribution and by the extended due date must be increased for the period between the original due date and the payment date at the effective interest rate for the plan year that includes the payment date. If the contribution is less than the amount that was due on the original due date for the minimum required contribution, as increased with interest pursuant to the CARES Act, then a portion of the minimum required contribution for that plan year would remain unpaid. The unpaid portion of the minimum required contribution, determined as of the valuation date and based on contributions made on or before January 1, 2021, with the contributions discounted for interest to the valuation date, would give rise to an unpaid minimum required contribution that would be subject to an excise tax. Furthermore, a contribution made after January 1, 2021, to satisfy that unpaid minimum required contribution must be adjusted for interest for the period between the date that the contribution is made and the valuation date at the effective interest rate for the plan year for which the contribution is made (with additional interest as required to reflect any late quarterly installments for the plan year).

The CARES Act specifies that to determine the amount of a quarterly installment due by the extended due date, the amount of that installment is increased from the installment’s original due date to the payment date at the effective interest rate for the plan year that includes the date the quarterly installment is paid. If a plan sponsor does not satisfy a quarterly installment originally due during 2020 by the extended due date, then the unpaid portion of that installment is subject to a higher interest rate for the period during which the installment (or a portion thereof) remains unpaid when determining the amount of the minimum required contribution that is satisfied by a contribution.

A contribution made after the original due date for a plan year but on or before the extended due date is taken into account as of a valuation date for a plan year after the plan year for which the contribution was made. For purposes of determining the value of plan assets, if an employer makes a contribution to the plan after the valuation date for the current plan year and the contribution is for an earlier plan year, then the present value of the contribution determined as of that valuation date is taken into account as an asset of the plan as of the valuation date, provided the contribution is made before a specified deadline. The specified deadline is the deadline for contributions for the plan year immediately preceding the current plan year. However, that deadline is extended by the CARES Act. Furthermore, the interest adjustment rules override the discounting rules that apply generally for this purpose. Note, however, that certification of the AFTAP for a plan year must not take into account contributions that are expected to be made after the certification date.

If the plan year is a plan year for which the extended due date for minimum required contributions applies, then the deadline for a plan sponsor’s election to increase a prefunding balance or to use a prefunding balance or a funding standard carryover balance to offset the minimum required contribution for that plan year is extended to January 1, 2021. However, the extended due date does not change the date by which a contribution must be made in order to be deducted for a tax year. A taxpayer is deemed to have made a payment on the last day of the preceding tax year if the payment is on account of that tax year and is made no later than the time prescribed by law for filing the return for that tax year (including extensions).

Guidance for AFTAP Election

A plan sponsor may elect to apply the AFTAP for the last plan year ending before January 1, 2020, for a plan year that includes any portion of calendar year 2020. For example, if a plan sponsor makes an election for a plan year that runs from July 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020, then the AFTAP that applies is the certified AFTAP from the plan year that ends on June 30, 2019. That plan sponsor may separately elect to use that same AFTAP for the plan year that begins on July 1, 2020.

The AFTAP election must be made using the procedures that apply for elections relating to funding balances. Thus, the plan sponsor must provide written notification of the election to the plan's actuary and the plan administrator. If a plan’s actuary has not certified the plan’s AFTAP for a plan year before the plan sponsor makes the election, then the plan sponsor’s election is treated as a certification of the AFTAP. Thus, beginning with the date of the election, the AFTAP for the last plan year ending on or before December 31, 2019, applies for the plan year for which the election is made, rather than any presumed AFTAP.

A plan’s actuary generally must certify the plan’s AFTAP for a plan year for which the plan sponsor makes the election. However, if the plan sponsor makes the election for a plan year that begins in 2019 and ends in 2020 and also makes an election for the next plan year, then the actuary is not required to certify the plan’s AFTAP for the plan year that begins in 2019. If the plan’s actuary has certified an AFTAP for a plan year, then the Schedule SB of Form 5500, Annual Return/Report of Employee Benefit Plan, for that plan year should reflect the certified AFTAP.

If a plan’s actuary certified the plan’s AFTAP for a plan year before the plan sponsor makes the election, then the plan sponsor’s election is treated as a subsequent determination of the AFTAP for that plan year. However, the plan sponsor’s election is eligible for deemed immaterial treatment, and the election is treated as the recertification on the part of the actuary that is otherwise required for deemed immaterial treatment. Thus, the AFTAP that applies pursuant to the plan sponsor’s election is applied on a prospective basis beginning with the election date.

If the AFTAP that applies is pursuant to a plan sponsor’s election, then the restriction on plan amendments and unpredictable contingent event benefits is applied, except that the AFTAP that applies pursuant to the election is substituted for the presumed AFTAP. Thus, for example, the AFTAP that applies pursuant to the plan sponsor’s election will be used to calculate a presumed adjusted funding target and an inclusive presumed AFTAP.

The AFTAP that applies pursuant to a plan sponsor’s election for a plan year generally will not apply for purposes of the presumptions used in a subsequent plan year. Instead, the actual AFTAP for the plan year that was certified by the plan’s actuary generally is used for purposes of applying the presumption rules the subsequent plan year.

The IRS has reminded taxpayers that the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act ( P.L. 116-136) can provide favorable tax treatment for withdrawals from retirement plans and Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs). Under the CARES Act, individuals eligible for coronavirus-related relief may be able to withdraw up to $100,000 from IRAs or workplace retirement plans before December 31, 2020, if their plans allow. In addition to IRAs, this relief applies to 401(k) plans, 403(b) plans, profit-sharing plans and others.

The IRS has reminded taxpayers that the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act ( P.L. 116-136) can provide favorable tax treatment for withdrawals from retirement plans and Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs). Under the CARES Act, individuals eligible for coronavirus-related relief may be able to withdraw up to $100,000 from IRAs or workplace retirement plans before December 31, 2020, if their plans allow. In addition to IRAs, this relief applies to 401(k) plans, 403(b) plans, profit-sharing plans and others.

Also, until September 22, 2020, individuals eligible to take coronavirus-related withdrawals may be able to borrow as much as $100,000 (up from $50,000) from a workplace retirement plan, if their plan allows. Loans are not available from an IRA. For eligible individuals, plan administrators can suspend, for up to one year, plan loan repayments due on or after March 27, 2020, and before January 1, 2021. A suspended loan is subject to interest during the suspension period, and the term of the loan may be extended to account for the suspension period.

To be eligible for COVID-19 relief, coronavirus-related withdrawals or loans can only be made to an individual if:

• the individual is diagnosed with COVID-19 by a test approved by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (including a test authorized under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act);
• the individual’s spouse or dependent is diagnosed with COVID-19 by such a test; or
• the individual, their spouse, or a member of the individual’s household experiences adverse financial consequences from: (1) being quarantined, furloughed or laid off, having work hours reduced, being unable to work due to lack of childcare, having a reduction in pay (or self-employment income), or having a job offer rescinded or start date for a job delayed, due to COVID-19; or (2) closing or reducing hours of a business owned or operated by the individual, the individual’s spouse, or a member of the individual’s household, due to COVID-19.

Taxpayers can learn more about these provisions in IRS Notice 2020-50, I.R.B. 2020-28, 35. The IRS has also posted FAQs that provide additional information.

The Treasury and IRS have issued final and proposed regulations under the global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI) and subpart F provisions for the treatment of high-taxed income. The final regulations provide guidance on determining the type of high-taxed income that is eligible for the exclusion (the "GILTI high-tax exclusion" or GILTI HTE).

The Treasury and IRS have issued final and proposed regulations under the global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI) and subpart F provisions for the treatment of high-taxed income. The final regulations provide guidance on determining the type of high-taxed income that is eligible for the exclusion (the "GILTI high-tax exclusion" or GILTI HTE).

Proposed regulations generally conform the rules for the subpart F high-tax exception to the rules for the GILTI high-tax exclusion. A single election is provided under Code Sec. 954(b)(4) for purposes of subpart F and tested income.

Under the Code Sec. 954(b)(4) high tax exception, income received by a controlled foreign corporation (CFC) is excluded under subpart F, if the income is subject to an effective rate of foreign tax that is greater than 90 percent of the maximum U.S. corporate tax rate.

Final Regulations on the GILTI HTE

The final regulations:

• provide that the GILTI HTE applies, on an elective basis, to high-taxed income of a CFC that is excluded from foreign base company (FBCI) ( Code Sec. 954) or insurance income ( Code Sec. 953) under Code Sec. 954(b)(4), regardless if the income would otherwise be FBCI or insurance income;
• provide that the effective foreign tax rate is determined on a tested unit basis;
• provide rules to determine the net amount of income (i.e., tentative tested income) and the foreign taxes paid or accrued with respect to such net amount of income that are used to compute the effective rate of tax;
• indicate how to make a GILTI HTE election; and
• do not provide rules that account for the use of foreign tax NOL carryforwards.

An exception under Code Sec. 954(b)(4) for purposes of the GILTI HTE applies to any item of income that is subject to an effective rate of tax greater than the maximum U.S. corporate tax rate, which is 18.9 percent based on a 21 percent tax. Controlling domestic shareholders of CFCs can elect to apply the exception to items of income that would not otherwise be FBCI or insurance income. An item of gross income is subject to a high-rate of foreign tax, if after taking into account properly allocable expenses, the net item of income is subject to an effective rate of tax above the statutory threshold.

The high-tax exception is applied on the basis of the items of gross income of a tested unit of a CFC, rather than the CFC as a whole. All tested units of a CFC in the same country are generally grouped together to determine the effective foreign tax rate for the purpose of applying the high-tax exclusion. The approach minimizes the blending of tax rates within a CFC and is thought to provide a more accurate idea of the income subject to a high-rate of foreign tax.

The election to exclude high-taxed income from gross tested income is generally made or revoked for a one-year period.

Proposed Regulations Single Election

The proposed regulations provide for a single election under Code Sec. 954(b)(4) for purposes of both subpart F and GILTI, based on the final GILTI high-tax exclusion regulations.

Under the proposed regulations:

• the election is made with respect to all members of a CFC group (rather than on a CFC-by-CFC basis);
• the determination of whether income is high taxed is made on a tested unit-by-unit basis;
• the determination of high tax income is simplified by grouping certain income that would otherwise qualify as subpart F income with income that would otherwise qualify as tested income for purposes of determining the effective foreign tax rate, and for purposes of the high-tax exception; and
• the method for allocating and apportioning deductions to items of gross income is modified for purposes of the high-tax exception.