Published in Coatings Pro Magazine
Lance Wallach
It is tax time. There are many problems you can run into with the IRS. This article is a generalized overview of some of these confusing issues:
•IRS Penalties
•Unfiled Tax Returns
•IRS Liens
•IRS Audits
•Payroll Tax Problems
•IRS Levies
•Wage Garnishments
•IRS Seizures
When dealing with the IRS, it can seem like they have all the power. That is not always true. As a small business owner--and a taxpayer--it is vital that you know your options and your rights.
IRS Penalties
The IRS penalizes millions of taxpayers each year. In fact, they have so many penalties that it can be 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 interest on penalties. Many taxpayers often find out about IRS problems many years after they have occurred. As a result, the amount owed the IRS is substantially greater due to penalties and the accumulated interest on those penalties. Some IRS penalties can be as high as 75% to 100% of the original taxes owed. Often taxpayers can afford to pay the taxes owed, but 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. It is important to know that 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 a variety of reasons. What you must understand is that failure to file tax returns may be construed as a criminal act by the IRS--a criminal act punishable by up to 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 on your behalf. 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 to which you may be entitled, such as exemptions for a spouse or children, interest on your home mortgage and property taxes, cost of any stock or real estate sales, business expenses, etc.
Remember that regardless of what you have heard, you have the right to file your original tax return, no matter how late it is filed.
IRS Liens
The IRS can make your life miserable by filing Federal Tax Liens on your business or
property. Federal Tax Liens are public records indicating that 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 to obtain financing on an automobile or a home. Federal Tax Liens can also tie up your personal property, meaning that you cannot sell or transfer that property without a clear title.
Often taxpayers find themselves in a Catch-22 in which they have property that they
would like to borrow against, but because of the Federal Tax Lien, they cannot get a loan. Should a Federal Tax Lien be filed against you, a CPA can help get it lifted.
IRS Audits
The IRS conducts multiple types of audits. They can audit you by mail, in their offices, in your office or home. The location of the audit is a good indication of the severity.
Typically, Correspondence Audits are conducted to locate missing documents in your tax return that have been flagged by IRS computers. These documents usually include W-2s and 1099 income items or interest expense items. This type of audit can typically be handled through the mail with the correct documentation.
The IRS Office Audit--held in IRS offices--is usually conducted by a Tax Examiner who
will request numerous documents and explanations of various deductions. During this
type of audit you may be required 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--held in your home or office--should be taken very
seriously as these are conducted by IRS Revenue Agents. Revenue Agents receive more
training and learn more auditing techniques than typical Tax Examiners. Of course, all IRS audits should be taken seriously as they often lead to examinations of
other tax years and other tax problems not stated in the original 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 business owners to have an attorney present in these situations. Your answers to 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 your options.
IRS Levies--Bank and Wage
An IRS Levy is an action taken by the IRS to collect taxes. For example, the IRS can
issue a Bank Levy to obtain the cash in your 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 its own IRS problems.
When the IRS levies a bank account, the levy can only be honored on the particular day on which the bank receives the levy. The bank is required to remove whatever amount of money is in your account on that day (up to the amount of the IRS Levy) and send it to the IRS within 21 days unless otherwise notified 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 different. 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 remaining to meet basic needs. Both Bank and Wage Levies create difficult situations and should be avoided if possible.
Wage Garnishments
The IRS Wage Garnishment is a very powerful tool used to collect taxes that you owe
through your employer. Once a Wage Garnishment is filed with an employer, the
employer is required to collect a large percentage of each paycheck. The funds 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.
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. Seizures typically occur when taxpayers have been avoiding the IRS.
Similar to levies and garnishments, seizures are one of the IRS’s ultimate invasive
collection tools. They can seize cars, television sets, jewelry, computers, collectibles, business equipment, or anything of value, which can be sold in order to acquire the money the IRS wants to pay off your tax debts. If you are facing a seizure, you have a serious problem.
Hopefully this tax season will begin and end without any of these IRS issues coming into play. But if they do, help is out there. CPAs and attorneys can help you negotiate your rights should it become necessary.
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 Public 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. Contact him at 516.938.5007,
wallachinc@gmail.com or visit www.taxadvisorexpert.com.
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.
Showing posts with label Lance Wallach. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lance Wallach. Show all posts
No Shelter Here, Backlash on too-good-to-be-true insurance plan
Remodeling Hanley / Wood
September 2011
By: Lance Wallach
During the past few years, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has fined many business owners hundreds of thousands of dollars for participating in several particular types of insurance plans.
The 412(i), 419, captive insurance, and section 79 plans were marketed as a way for small-business owners to set up retirement, welfare benefit plans, or other tax-deductible programs while leveraging huge tax savings, but the IRS put most of them on a list of abusive tax shelters, listed transactions, or similar transactions, etc., and has more recently focused audits on them. Many accountants are unaware of the issues surrounding these plans, and many big-name insurance companies are still encouraging participation in them.
Seems Attractive
The plans are costly up-front, but your money builds over time, and there’s a large payout if the money is removed before death. While many business owners have retirement plans, they also must care for their employees. With one of these plans, business owners are not required to give their workers anything.
Gotcha
Although small business has taken a recessionary hit and owners may not be spending big sums on insurance now, an IRS task force is auditing people who bought these as early as 2004. There is no statute of limitations.
The IRS also requires participants to file Form 8886 informing the IRS of participation in this “abusive transaction.” Failure to file or to file incorrectly will cost the business owner interest and penalties. Plus, you’ll pay back whatever you claimed for a deduction, and there are additional fines — possibly 70% of the tax benefit you claim in a year. And, if your accountant does not confidentially inform on you, he or she will get fined $100,000 by the IRS. Further, the IRS can freeze assets if you don’t pay and can fine you on a corporate and a personal level despite the type of business entity you have.
Legal Wrangling
Currently, small businesses facing audits and potentially huge tax penalties over these plans are filing lawsuits against those who marketed, designed, and sold the plans. Find out promptly if you have one of these plans and seek advice from a knowledgeable accountant to help you properly file Form 8886.
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. Contact him at 516.938.5007, lawallach@aol.com or visit www.taxaudit419.com, www.vebaplan.org, www.section79.plan
This article is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as specific legal or financial advice.
Will Your Municipal Bond or Your Life Insurance Company Still Have Value Next Year?
Published in The Finance Toolbox
By Lance Wallach
Investor protection with municipal bonds is so spotty that there is potential for much mischief.
Disclosure, that bedrock of fair securities markets, is the heart of the problem facing municipal investors. Municipal issuers often don’t file the most basic reports outlining their operating results or material changes in their financial conditions.
Even though hospitals, cities and states that borrow money are required by their bond covenants to make such filings, nondisclosure among the nearly 60,000 issuers is common.
With the S.E.C. largely on the sidelines, disclosure enforcement in the municipal market is left to participants. Do you think they really want to police themselves very closely? That leaves individuals who trade the securities, the investors, and the dealers, to monitor the disclosure information. There is almost no penalty for not complying with those requirements. This is another disaster waiting to happen. If you own municipal bonds, you had better be careful. You may want to investigate www.financeexperts.org and select someone that knows what they are doing to assist you.
Do you have a life insurance or annuity policy? If so, you may be in trouble. The plummeting financial markets are dragging down the life insurance industry, which is an important component of the U.S. economy. Continuously escalating losses weaken the companies’ capital and eat away at investor confidence.
More than a dozen life insurers have been awaiting action on applications for aid from the government’s $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, and the industry is expecting an answer to its request for a bank-style bailout in the upcoming weeks. So far, the government hasn’t stated whether or not insurers qualify for the program.
Life insurers have undoubtedly been taking a beating in recent weeks. The Dow Jones Wilshire U.S. Life Insurance Index has fallen 82% since its May 2007 all time high. The Dow Jones Industrial Average has lost 21% this year to date.
Several of the hardest-hit companies are century-old names that insure the lives of millions of Americans. Shares of Hartford Financial Services Group Inc. are down 93% as of the close on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 from their 2008 high. MetLife Inc. and Prudential Financial Inc. are both suffering as the value of their vast investment portfolios declines.
As the economy weakens, analysts say many insurers face losses can eat away at the capital cushions regulators require them to maintain. In addition, experts say the industry is going through its most chaotic period in recent history and it’s a pretty scary situation right now.
The consequences of a weakened life-insurance industry for the overall economy are significant because life insurers are among the biggest holders of the nation’s corporate debt. For example, if life insurers stop buying bonds, the capital markets may not fully recover. Their buying activity has already declined.
Wall Street analysts say another problem for some life insurers is obligations for variable annuities, a retirement-income product that often guarantees minimum withdrawals or investment returns. As stock markets plunge to new lows, life insurers need to set aside additional funds to show regulators they can meet their obligations, further crimping sparse capital.
Life insurers’ woes have come largely from investment grade corporate bonds, commercial real estate and mortgages, regulatory filings show. Many insurers ended 2008 with high levels of losses that, due to accounting rules, they haven’t had to record on their bottom lines.
Hartford Financial had $14.6 billion in unrealized losses at year’s end. In addition, Hartford Insurance, through its agents, sold life insurance policies that were part of a welfare benefit plan popularly known as Niche Marketing, which has long been under IRS attack and is almost certainly regarded by the Service as an abusive tax shelter and/or listed transaction. Prudential, the second-largest insurer by assets, had nearly $11.3 billion in unrealized losses, up $5.4 billion in the fourth quarter from the previous quarter.
Lance Wallach, the National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year, speaks and writes extensively about retirement plans, Circular 230 problems and tax reduction strategies. He speaks at more than 40 conventions annually, writes for over 50 publications, is quoted regularly in the press, and has written numerous best-selling AICPA books, including Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Business Hot Spots. Contact him at 516.938.5007 or visit www.vebaplan.com.
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.
A Warning for 419, 412(i), Sec.79 and Captive Insurance
WebCPA
The dangers of being "listed"
Accounting Today: October 25, 2010
By: Lance Wallach
Taxpayers who previously adopted 419 plans, 412i, captive insurance plans 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, 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 Public 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 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. Contact
him at 516.938.5007, wallachinc@gmail.com or visit www.taxaudit419.com or www.taxlibrary.
us.
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.
Watch out because the IRS is watching 419 Plans. Lance Wallach, expert witness.
A business owner wants legitimate tax planning ideas. One solution sometimes offered today is a 419(e) plan (419 Welfare Benefit Plan). The local insurance agent or the company’s CPA who may have an insurance sales license, may suggest that the 419 Welfare Benefit Plan will provide shelter from taxes today, the costs of the plan are tax deductible and the plan will provide tax free benefits for the owner when he or she is ready to retire. The concept seems too good to be true.
Watch out because the IRS is watching, and it often says that the plan is too good to be true.
A 419 Welfare Benefit Plan is generally a plan set up in the form of a trust to provide certain benefits to the employees of a company. You will notice that the term trust is used because the large whole life insurance policies that the owner is instructed to buy go into a trust where neither the company nor the business owner actually owns them. The trust owns the policies.
The insurance agent or CPA wants you to set up a 419(e) plan because you are agreeing to buy high dollar life insurance with premiums payable until you retire. That can generate fees of up to 125% of the first year premium as a commission – that’s right; you read that correctly – 125%.
The plan is sold as a win-win for everyone. It is for the insurance company because it locks the business owner into long-term, expensive insurance. It is for the trust administrator (remember: the insurance policies must be put into a trust to make the plan work) because the business owner has to pay a fee every year to administer the plan. But for the business owner? Maybe not so much!
The big sales pitch often is that the contributions are tax deductible to the business and the business can exclude employees. Moreover, the seller promises that the big insurance policies that are paid for with tax free money can be cashed out or transferred from the trust to the business owner at some later date without paying taxes. It is all so easy: no taxes in and no taxes out. Good right?
Unfortunately, it is often too good to be true. The IRS has been actively attacking such 419 Welfare Benefit Plans as TAX SHELTERS. If a transaction is classified as a tax shelter then the salesperson and your CPA are supposed to tell you to file an 8886 form which highlights tax shelters to the IRS. Think of it as a beacon so that the IRS knows who to come pursue for taxes, penalties, interest and listed transaction charges.
The IRS focus on 419(e) plans came up in a case identified as Curcio v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, T.C. Memo 2010-115.
The end result was a financial disaster for the company that took the ordinary business deductions for the plan and the individual taxpayers that also took deductions on their personal taxes.
If something goes wrong on one of these plans (as it often does) who does the business owner look to? The insurance company will claim in defense that it simply sold insurance. The agent or the CPA will claim that it was the responsibility of the third party administrator (TPA) to make sure that the plan was solid and lawful. The TPA will claim that the business owner is not the owner of the product and cannot sue because it was in a trust. The business owner is often left facing the IRS on his or her own while paying other professionals to correct the tax situation.
If you are a business person in a 419(e) plan you should contact Lance Wallach.
Watch out because the IRS is watching, and it often says that the plan is too good to be true.
A 419 Welfare Benefit Plan is generally a plan set up in the form of a trust to provide certain benefits to the employees of a company. You will notice that the term trust is used because the large whole life insurance policies that the owner is instructed to buy go into a trust where neither the company nor the business owner actually owns them. The trust owns the policies.
The insurance agent or CPA wants you to set up a 419(e) plan because you are agreeing to buy high dollar life insurance with premiums payable until you retire. That can generate fees of up to 125% of the first year premium as a commission – that’s right; you read that correctly – 125%.
The plan is sold as a win-win for everyone. It is for the insurance company because it locks the business owner into long-term, expensive insurance. It is for the trust administrator (remember: the insurance policies must be put into a trust to make the plan work) because the business owner has to pay a fee every year to administer the plan. But for the business owner? Maybe not so much!
The big sales pitch often is that the contributions are tax deductible to the business and the business can exclude employees. Moreover, the seller promises that the big insurance policies that are paid for with tax free money can be cashed out or transferred from the trust to the business owner at some later date without paying taxes. It is all so easy: no taxes in and no taxes out. Good right?
Unfortunately, it is often too good to be true. The IRS has been actively attacking such 419 Welfare Benefit Plans as TAX SHELTERS. If a transaction is classified as a tax shelter then the salesperson and your CPA are supposed to tell you to file an 8886 form which highlights tax shelters to the IRS. Think of it as a beacon so that the IRS knows who to come pursue for taxes, penalties, interest and listed transaction charges.
The IRS focus on 419(e) plans came up in a case identified as Curcio v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, T.C. Memo 2010-115.
The end result was a financial disaster for the company that took the ordinary business deductions for the plan and the individual taxpayers that also took deductions on their personal taxes.
If something goes wrong on one of these plans (as it often does) who does the business owner look to? The insurance company will claim in defense that it simply sold insurance. The agent or the CPA will claim that it was the responsibility of the third party administrator (TPA) to make sure that the plan was solid and lawful. The TPA will claim that the business owner is not the owner of the product and cannot sue because it was in a trust. The business owner is often left facing the IRS on his or her own while paying other professionals to correct the tax situation.
If you are a business person in a 419(e) plan you should contact Lance Wallach.
As an expert witness Lance Wallach's side has never lost a case. People need to be careful of 419 Welfare Benefit Plans, 412i plans, Section 79 plans and Captive Insurance Plans. Most of these plans are sold by insurance agents. If you are in an abusive, listed or similar transaction plan you need to file under IRS 6707a. The participant files form 8886, and the salesmen or accountant who signs the tax returns files form 8918 if they got paid over $10,000. They are called Material Advisors and face a minimum $100,000 fine. Some plans are offshore which could involve FBAR or OVDI filings. If you have money overseas you probably need to file for IRS tax amnesty. If you want to reduce the tax we suggest that you first file and then opt out. For more information Google Lance Wallach.
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.
No Shelter Here, Backlash on too-good-to-be-true insurance plan
Remodeling Hanley / Wood
September 2011
By: Lance Wallach
During the past few years, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has fined many business owners hundreds of thousands of dollars for participating in several particular types of insurance plans.
The 412(i), 419, captive insurance, and section 79 plans were marketed as a way for small-business owners to set up retirement, welfare benefit plans, or other tax-deductible programs while leveraging huge tax savings, but the IRS put most of them on a list of abusive tax shelters, listed transactions, or similar transactions, etc., and has more recently focused audits on them. Many accountants are unaware of the issues surrounding these plans, and many big-name insurance companies are still encouraging participation in them.
Seems Attractive
The plans are costly up-front, but your money builds over time, and there’s a large payout if the money is removed before death. While many business owners have retirement plans, they also must care for their employees. With one of these plans, business owners are not required to give their workers anything.
Gotcha
Although small business has taken a recessionary hit and owners may not be spending big sums on insurance now, an IRS task force is auditing people who bought these as early as 2004. There is no statute of limitations.
The IRS also requires participants to file Form 8886 informing the IRS of participation in this “abusive transaction.” Failure to file or to file incorrectly will cost the business owner interest and penalties. Plus, you’ll pay back whatever you claimed for a deduction, and there are additional fines — possibly 70% of the tax benefit you claim in a year. And, if your accountant does not confidentially inform on you, he or she will get fined $100,000 by the IRS. Further, the IRS can freeze assets if you don’t pay and can fine you on a corporate and a personal level despite the type of business entity you have.
Legal Wrangling
Currently, small businesses facing audits and potentially huge tax penalties over these plans are filing lawsuits against those who marketed, designed, and sold the plans. Find out promptly if you have one of these plans and seek advice from a knowledgeable accountant to help you properly file Form 8886.
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. Contact him at 516.938.5007, lawallach@aol.com or visit www.taxaudit419.com, www.vebaplan.org, www.section79.plan
This article is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as specific legal or financial advice.
Economic Satire
By Lance Wallach
Being a new (Jewish) member of the Sons of Italy, I got to thinking about the next big bailout our government will have. That is, after this one raises everyone’s taxes and doesn’t work. You know…throwing billions to General Motors who will go bankrupt in a few years anyway and giving billions to AIG and the big brokerage firms so they can give bonuses to their executives…Oh, and how ‘bout handing over billions more to the states so they can continue to support with vigor, unemployment, welfare and other similar fixations that discourage people from looking for a job.
Maybe next year, just before we become a socialist country, we’ll have the biggest bailout of all. With a gun to our head, we’ll probably need to bail out the very organization that historically constitutes the economic perversion in this country and, in doing so; the resume of the Secretary of the Treasury will be forced to include “a lifetime of experience in organized crime and illegal affairs”. This way we could be assured of his qualifications for getting the job done. After all, how many loan sharks do you know whose loans are in default?
No longer does an entity like this need to fly below the radar. They’ve finally been superseded by the best of them, as they compete for turf with the U.S. Government. It becomes unnecessary to resort to the old way of doing things; why opt to “bodies in the trunk” for ransom when the real people being held hostage these days, are the poor-slob taxpayers.
In these difficult times, it would become this organization’s fiscal responsibility as well as their patriotic duty to behave like legitimate business people so they too could demand billions of dollars like GM and AIG. What’s the difference between giving it to them or squandering it on ineffective companies who haven’t a clue as to where the money is going (one would think they were given unmarked bills). Wait…I forgot; there’s a BIG difference. At least this organization doesn’t lose money on their investments. They have a way of making sure the return is guaranteed! In addition to giving the organization money, a further thirty billion would be set aside to protect the still-healthy loan shark sector from the “credit freeze” that has infected our banks.
Let’s face it, while banks and mortgage companies continue to go into default, you rarely run into someone who has not paid back money owed to a loan shark. Unlike banks which have closed their window on lending, the only time the organization sees fit to mimic these practices would be to close the window on the fingers of those who don’t pay up. Maybe the U.S. government should take a lesson…or two.
Although this article carries a humorous overtone, our current economic problems are serious issues that should be dealt with properly. Things are going to get a lot worse and people’s taxes are going to go up. In my opinion, working people like you and me will have to support the bailouts. I have not yet even mentioned the 51 plus billion the Obama State Budget intends to use to fund such things as aid to Palestinians in Gaza and other, useless foreign endeavors. Why not cut that budget and reduce our budget deficit. There are people suffering, right here in the U.S. who could benefit by some of those resources. Where’s their fair share?
Since I’m in the business of reducing taxes for my wealthy clients, as well as myself, I will not suffer like those reading this article. These people have the advantage of using people like me to reduce their taxes and make money in their retirement plans, even in a recession. I do however; help people that need help…sometimes, even for free.
If you want to get back some of your retirement plan losses or other losses, it’s not that difficult. Try some useful websites like www.financeexperts.org ; www.taxlibrary.us ;and www.IRS.gov. A few properly worded letters followed up by phone calls to the proper places usually result in getting some or all of your money back.
On the other extreme are lawsuits. I am now an expert witness in about 14 of them. In my last case, a business owner who lost $400,000 was awarded $800,000 by the jury. The judge, after listening to me on the witness stand for two days, commented that the broker was a crook. In my estimation, he was no different than almost all the other incompetent brokers that are out there serving the public. Be careful about lawyers because most of them will be happy to take your money but will not guarantee results. So far, all the cases I have been in have been victorious.
Enough about me; fire your financial planner insurance agent, get an accountant tax protector instead of your current accountant tax collector, and stop feeling sorry for yourself. There are a lot of opportunities out there and there is a lot of money to be made.
Lance Wallach, the National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year, speaks and writes extensively about retirement plans, Circular 230 problems and tax reduction strategies .He speaks at more than 40 conventions annually, writes for over 50 publications, is quoted regularly in the press, and has written numerous best-selling AICPA books, including Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Business Hot Spots. Contact him at 516.938.5007 or visit www.vebaplan.com.
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 a new (Jewish) member of the Sons of Italy, I got to thinking about the next big bailout our government will have. That is, after this one raises everyone’s taxes and doesn’t work. You know…throwing billions to General Motors who will go bankrupt in a few years anyway and giving billions to AIG and the big brokerage firms so they can give bonuses to their executives…Oh, and how ‘bout handing over billions more to the states so they can continue to support with vigor, unemployment, welfare and other similar fixations that discourage people from looking for a job.
Maybe next year, just before we become a socialist country, we’ll have the biggest bailout of all. With a gun to our head, we’ll probably need to bail out the very organization that historically constitutes the economic perversion in this country and, in doing so; the resume of the Secretary of the Treasury will be forced to include “a lifetime of experience in organized crime and illegal affairs”. This way we could be assured of his qualifications for getting the job done. After all, how many loan sharks do you know whose loans are in default?
No longer does an entity like this need to fly below the radar. They’ve finally been superseded by the best of them, as they compete for turf with the U.S. Government. It becomes unnecessary to resort to the old way of doing things; why opt to “bodies in the trunk” for ransom when the real people being held hostage these days, are the poor-slob taxpayers.
In these difficult times, it would become this organization’s fiscal responsibility as well as their patriotic duty to behave like legitimate business people so they too could demand billions of dollars like GM and AIG. What’s the difference between giving it to them or squandering it on ineffective companies who haven’t a clue as to where the money is going (one would think they were given unmarked bills). Wait…I forgot; there’s a BIG difference. At least this organization doesn’t lose money on their investments. They have a way of making sure the return is guaranteed! In addition to giving the organization money, a further thirty billion would be set aside to protect the still-healthy loan shark sector from the “credit freeze” that has infected our banks.
Let’s face it, while banks and mortgage companies continue to go into default, you rarely run into someone who has not paid back money owed to a loan shark. Unlike banks which have closed their window on lending, the only time the organization sees fit to mimic these practices would be to close the window on the fingers of those who don’t pay up. Maybe the U.S. government should take a lesson…or two.
Although this article carries a humorous overtone, our current economic problems are serious issues that should be dealt with properly. Things are going to get a lot worse and people’s taxes are going to go up. In my opinion, working people like you and me will have to support the bailouts. I have not yet even mentioned the 51 plus billion the Obama State Budget intends to use to fund such things as aid to Palestinians in Gaza and other, useless foreign endeavors. Why not cut that budget and reduce our budget deficit. There are people suffering, right here in the U.S. who could benefit by some of those resources. Where’s their fair share?
Since I’m in the business of reducing taxes for my wealthy clients, as well as myself, I will not suffer like those reading this article. These people have the advantage of using people like me to reduce their taxes and make money in their retirement plans, even in a recession. I do however; help people that need help…sometimes, even for free.
If you want to get back some of your retirement plan losses or other losses, it’s not that difficult. Try some useful websites like www.financeexperts.org ; www.taxlibrary.us ;and www.IRS.gov. A few properly worded letters followed up by phone calls to the proper places usually result in getting some or all of your money back.
On the other extreme are lawsuits. I am now an expert witness in about 14 of them. In my last case, a business owner who lost $400,000 was awarded $800,000 by the jury. The judge, after listening to me on the witness stand for two days, commented that the broker was a crook. In my estimation, he was no different than almost all the other incompetent brokers that are out there serving the public. Be careful about lawyers because most of them will be happy to take your money but will not guarantee results. So far, all the cases I have been in have been victorious.
Enough about me; fire your financial planner insurance agent, get an accountant tax protector instead of your current accountant tax collector, and stop feeling sorry for yourself. There are a lot of opportunities out there and there is a lot of money to be made.
Lance Wallach, the National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year, speaks and writes extensively about retirement plans, Circular 230 problems and tax reduction strategies .He speaks at more than 40 conventions annually, writes for over 50 publications, is quoted regularly in the press, and has written numerous best-selling AICPA books, including Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Business Hot Spots. Contact him at 516.938.5007 or visit www.vebaplan.com.
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.
A Warning for 419, 412i, Sec.79 and Captive Insurance
WebCPA
The dangers of being "listed"
Accounting Today: October 25, 2010
By: Lance Wallach
Taxpayers who previously adopted 419 plans, 412i, captive insurance plans 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, 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 Public 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 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. Contact
him at 516.938.5007, wallachinc@gmail.com or visit www.taxaudit419.com or www.taxlibrary.
us.
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.
Watch out because the IRS is watching 419 Plans. Lance Wallach, expert witness.
A business owner wants legitimate tax planning ideas. One solution sometimes offered today is a 419(e) plan (419 Welfare Benefit Plan). The local insurance agent or the company’s CPA who may have an insurance sales license, may suggest that the 419 Welfare Benefit Plan will provide shelter from taxes today, the costs of the plan are tax deductible and the plan will provide tax free benefits for the owner when he or she is ready to retire. The concept seems too good to be true.
Watch out because the IRS is watching, and it often says that the plan is too good to be true.
A 419 Welfare Benefit Plan is generally a plan set up in the form of a trust to provide certain benefits to the employees of a company. You will notice that the term trust is used because the large whole life insurance policies that the owner is instructed to buy go into a trust where neither the company nor the business owner actually owns them. The trust owns the policies.
The insurance agent or CPA wants you to set up a 419(e) plan because you are agreeing to buy high dollar life insurance with premiums payable until you retire. That can generate fees of up to 125% of the first year premium as a commission – that’s right; you read that correctly – 125%.
The plan is sold as a win-win for everyone. It is for the insurance company because it locks the business owner into long-term, expensive insurance. It is for the trust administrator (remember: the insurance policies must be put into a trust to make the plan work) because the business owner has to pay a fee every year to administer the plan. But for the business owner? Maybe not so much!
The big sales pitch often is that the contributions are tax deductible to the business and the business can exclude employees. Moreover, the seller promises that the big insurance policies that are paid for with tax free money can be cashed out or transferred from the trust to the business owner at some later date without paying taxes. It is all so easy: no taxes in and no taxes out. Good right?
Unfortunately, it is often too good to be true. The IRS has been actively attacking such 419 Welfare Benefit Plans as TAX SHELTERS. If a transaction is classified as a tax shelter then the salesperson and your CPA are supposed to tell you to file an 8886 form which highlights tax shelters to the IRS. Think of it as a beacon so that the IRS knows who to come pursue for taxes, penalties, interest and listed transaction charges.
The IRS focus on 419(e) plans came up in a case identified as Curcio v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, T.C. Memo 2010-115.
The end result was a financial disaster for the company that took the ordinary business deductions for the plan and the individual taxpayers that also took deductions on their personal taxes.
If something goes wrong on one of these plans (as it often does) who does the business owner look to? The insurance company will claim in defense that it simply sold insurance. The agent or the CPA will claim that it was the responsibility of the third party administrator (TPA) to make sure that the plan was solid and lawful. The TPA will claim that the business owner is not the owner of the product and cannot sue because it was in a trust. The business owner is often left facing the IRS on his or her own while paying other professionals to correct the tax situation.
If you are a business person in a 419(e) plan you should contact Lance Wallach.
Watch out because the IRS is watching, and it often says that the plan is too good to be true.
A 419 Welfare Benefit Plan is generally a plan set up in the form of a trust to provide certain benefits to the employees of a company. You will notice that the term trust is used because the large whole life insurance policies that the owner is instructed to buy go into a trust where neither the company nor the business owner actually owns them. The trust owns the policies.
The insurance agent or CPA wants you to set up a 419(e) plan because you are agreeing to buy high dollar life insurance with premiums payable until you retire. That can generate fees of up to 125% of the first year premium as a commission – that’s right; you read that correctly – 125%.
The plan is sold as a win-win for everyone. It is for the insurance company because it locks the business owner into long-term, expensive insurance. It is for the trust administrator (remember: the insurance policies must be put into a trust to make the plan work) because the business owner has to pay a fee every year to administer the plan. But for the business owner? Maybe not so much!
The big sales pitch often is that the contributions are tax deductible to the business and the business can exclude employees. Moreover, the seller promises that the big insurance policies that are paid for with tax free money can be cashed out or transferred from the trust to the business owner at some later date without paying taxes. It is all so easy: no taxes in and no taxes out. Good right?
Unfortunately, it is often too good to be true. The IRS has been actively attacking such 419 Welfare Benefit Plans as TAX SHELTERS. If a transaction is classified as a tax shelter then the salesperson and your CPA are supposed to tell you to file an 8886 form which highlights tax shelters to the IRS. Think of it as a beacon so that the IRS knows who to come pursue for taxes, penalties, interest and listed transaction charges.
The IRS focus on 419(e) plans came up in a case identified as Curcio v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, T.C. Memo 2010-115.
The end result was a financial disaster for the company that took the ordinary business deductions for the plan and the individual taxpayers that also took deductions on their personal taxes.
If something goes wrong on one of these plans (as it often does) who does the business owner look to? The insurance company will claim in defense that it simply sold insurance. The agent or the CPA will claim that it was the responsibility of the third party administrator (TPA) to make sure that the plan was solid and lawful. The TPA will claim that the business owner is not the owner of the product and cannot sue because it was in a trust. The business owner is often left facing the IRS on his or her own while paying other professionals to correct the tax situation.
If you are a business person in a 419(e) plan you should contact Lance Wallach.
As an expert witness Lance Wallach's side has never lost a case. People need to be careful of 419 Welfare Benefit Plans, 412i plans, Section 79 plans and Captive Insurance Plans. Most of these plans are sold by insurance agents. If you are in an abusive, listed or similar transaction plan you need to file under IRS 6707a. The participant files form 8886, and the salesmen or accountant who signs the tax returns files form 8918 if they got paid over $10,000. They are called Material Advisors and face a minimum $100,000 fine. Some plans are offshore which could involve FBAR or OVDI filings. If you have money overseas you probably need to file for IRS tax amnesty. If you want to reduce the tax we suggest that you first file and then opt out. For more information Google Lance Wallach.
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
Small Business Retirement Plans Fuel Litigation. Lance Wallach, expert witness.
Small businesses facing audits and potentially huge tax penalties over certain types of retirement plans are filing lawsuits against those who marketed, designed and sold the plans. The 412(i) and 419(e) plans were marketed in the past several years as a way for small business owners to set up retirement or welfare benefits plans while leveraging huge tax savings, but the IRS put them on a list of abusive tax shelters and has more recently focused audits on them.
By: Maryland Trial Lawyer - Dolan Media Newswires - January
The penalties for such transactions are extremely high and can pile up quickly.
There are business owners who owe taxes but have been assessed 2 million in penalties. The existing cases involve many types of businesses, including doctors’ offices, dental practices, grocery store owners, mortgage companies and restaurant owners. Some are trying to negotiate with the IRS. Others are not waiting. A class action has been filed and cases in several states are ongoing. The business owners claim that they were targeted by insurance companies; and their agents to purchase the plans without any disclosure that the IRS viewed the plans as abusive tax shelters. Other defendants include financial advisers who recommended the plans, accountants who failed to fill out required tax forms and law firms that drafted opinion letters legitimizing the plans, which were used as marketing tools.
A 412(i) plan is a form of defined benefit pension plan. A 419(e) plan is a similar type of health and benefits plan. Typically, these were sold to small, privately held businesses with fewer than 20 employees and several million dollars in gross revenues. What distinguished a legitimate plan from the plans at issue were the life insurance policies used to fund them. The employer would make large cash contributions in the form of insurance premiums, deducting the entire amounts. The insurance policy was designed to have a “springing cash value,” meaning that for the first 5-7 years it would have a near-zero cash value, and then spring up in value.
Just before it sprung, the owner would purchase the policy from the trust at the low cash value, thus making a tax-free transaction. After the cash value shot up, the owner could take tax-free loans against it. Meanwhile, the insurance agents collected exorbitant commissions on the premiums – 80 to 110 percent of the first year’s premium, which could exceed million.
Technically, the IRS’s problems with the plans were that the “springing cash” structure disqualified them from being 412(i) plans and that the premiums, which dwarfed any payout to a beneficiary, violated incidental death benefit rules.
Under §6707A of the Internal Revenue Code, once the IRS flags something as an abusive tax shelter, or “listed transaction,” penalties are imposed per year for each failure to disclose it. Another allegation is that businesses weren’t told that they had to file Form 8886, which discloses a listed transaction.
According to Lance Wallach of Plainview, N.Y. (516-938-5007), who testifies as an expert in cases involving the plans, the vast majority of accountants either did not file the forms for their clients or did not fill them out correctly.
Because the IRS did not begin to focus audits on these types of plans until some years after they became listed transactions, the penalties have already stacked up by the time of the audits.
Another reason plaintiffs are going to court is that there are few alternatives – the penalties are not appeasable and must be paid before filing an administrative claim for a refund.
The suits allege misrepresentation, fraud and other consumer claims. “In street language, they lied,” said Peter Losavio, a plaintiffs’ attorney in Baton Rouge, La., who is investigating several cases. So far they have had mixed results. Losavio said that the strength of an individual case would depend on the disclosures made and what the sellers knew or should have known about the risks.
In 2004, the IRS issued notices and revenue rulings indicating that the plans were listed transactions. But plaintiffs’ lawyers allege that there were earlier signs that the plans ran afoul of the tax laws, evidenced by the fact that the IRS is auditing plans that existed before 2004.
“Insurance companies were aware this was dancing a tightrope,” said William Noll, a tax attorney in Malvern, Pa. “These plans were being scrutinized by the IRS at the same time they were being promoted, but there wasn’t any disclosure of the scrutiny to unwitting customers.”
A defense attorney, who represents benefits professionals in pending lawsuits, said the main defense is that the plans complied with the regulations at the time and that “nobody can predict the future.”
An employee benefits attorney who has settled several cases against insurance companies, said that although the lost tax benefit is not recoverable, other damages include the hefty commissions – which in one of his cases amounted to 400,000 the first year – as well as the costs of handling the audit and filing amended tax returns.
Defying the individualized approach an attorney filed a class action in federal court against four insurance companies claiming that they were aware that since the 1980s the IRS had been calling the policies potentially abusive and that in 2002 the IRS gave lectures calling the plans not just abusive but “criminal.” A judge dismissed the case against one of the insurers that sold 412(i) plans.
The court said that the plaintiffs failed to show the statements made by the insurance companies were fraudulent at the time they were made, because IRS statements prior to the revenue rulings indicated that the agency may or may not take the position that the plans were abusive. The attorney, whose suit also names law firm for its opinion letters approving the plans, will appeal the dismissal to the 5th Circuit.
In a case that survived a similar motion to dismiss, a small business owner is suing Hartford Insurance to recover a “seven-figure” sum in penalties and fees paid to the IRS. A trial is expected in August.
But tax experts say the audits and penalties continue. “There’s a bit of a disconnect between what members of Congress thought they meant by suspending collection and what is happening in practice. Clients are still getting bills and threats of liens,” Wallach said. “Thousands of business owners are being hit with million-dollar-plus fines. … The audits are continuing and escalating. I just got four calls today,” he said. A bill has been introduced in Congress to make the penalties less draconian, but nobody is expecting a magic bullet.
“From what we know, Congress is looking to make the penalties more proportionate to the tax benefit received instead of a fixed amount.”
The penalties for such transactions are extremely high and can pile up quickly.
There are business owners who owe taxes but have been assessed 2 million in penalties. The existing cases involve many types of businesses, including doctors’ offices, dental practices, grocery store owners, mortgage companies and restaurant owners. Some are trying to negotiate with the IRS. Others are not waiting. A class action has been filed and cases in several states are ongoing. The business owners claim that they were targeted by insurance companies; and their agents to purchase the plans without any disclosure that the IRS viewed the plans as abusive tax shelters. Other defendants include financial advisers who recommended the plans, accountants who failed to fill out required tax forms and law firms that drafted opinion letters legitimizing the plans, which were used as marketing tools.
A 412(i) plan is a form of defined benefit pension plan. A 419(e) plan is a similar type of health and benefits plan. Typically, these were sold to small, privately held businesses with fewer than 20 employees and several million dollars in gross revenues. What distinguished a legitimate plan from the plans at issue were the life insurance policies used to fund them. The employer would make large cash contributions in the form of insurance premiums, deducting the entire amounts. The insurance policy was designed to have a “springing cash value,” meaning that for the first 5-7 years it would have a near-zero cash value, and then spring up in value.
Just before it sprung, the owner would purchase the policy from the trust at the low cash value, thus making a tax-free transaction. After the cash value shot up, the owner could take tax-free loans against it. Meanwhile, the insurance agents collected exorbitant commissions on the premiums – 80 to 110 percent of the first year’s premium, which could exceed million.
Technically, the IRS’s problems with the plans were that the “springing cash” structure disqualified them from being 412(i) plans and that the premiums, which dwarfed any payout to a beneficiary, violated incidental death benefit rules.
Under §6707A of the Internal Revenue Code, once the IRS flags something as an abusive tax shelter, or “listed transaction,” penalties are imposed per year for each failure to disclose it. Another allegation is that businesses weren’t told that they had to file Form 8886, which discloses a listed transaction.
According to Lance Wallach of Plainview, N.Y. (516-938-5007), who testifies as an expert in cases involving the plans, the vast majority of accountants either did not file the forms for their clients or did not fill them out correctly.
Because the IRS did not begin to focus audits on these types of plans until some years after they became listed transactions, the penalties have already stacked up by the time of the audits.
Another reason plaintiffs are going to court is that there are few alternatives – the penalties are not appeasable and must be paid before filing an administrative claim for a refund.
The suits allege misrepresentation, fraud and other consumer claims. “In street language, they lied,” said Peter Losavio, a plaintiffs’ attorney in Baton Rouge, La., who is investigating several cases. So far they have had mixed results. Losavio said that the strength of an individual case would depend on the disclosures made and what the sellers knew or should have known about the risks.
In 2004, the IRS issued notices and revenue rulings indicating that the plans were listed transactions. But plaintiffs’ lawyers allege that there were earlier signs that the plans ran afoul of the tax laws, evidenced by the fact that the IRS is auditing plans that existed before 2004.
“Insurance companies were aware this was dancing a tightrope,” said William Noll, a tax attorney in Malvern, Pa. “These plans were being scrutinized by the IRS at the same time they were being promoted, but there wasn’t any disclosure of the scrutiny to unwitting customers.”
A defense attorney, who represents benefits professionals in pending lawsuits, said the main defense is that the plans complied with the regulations at the time and that “nobody can predict the future.”
An employee benefits attorney who has settled several cases against insurance companies, said that although the lost tax benefit is not recoverable, other damages include the hefty commissions – which in one of his cases amounted to 400,000 the first year – as well as the costs of handling the audit and filing amended tax returns.
Defying the individualized approach an attorney filed a class action in federal court against four insurance companies claiming that they were aware that since the 1980s the IRS had been calling the policies potentially abusive and that in 2002 the IRS gave lectures calling the plans not just abusive but “criminal.” A judge dismissed the case against one of the insurers that sold 412(i) plans.
The court said that the plaintiffs failed to show the statements made by the insurance companies were fraudulent at the time they were made, because IRS statements prior to the revenue rulings indicated that the agency may or may not take the position that the plans were abusive. The attorney, whose suit also names law firm for its opinion letters approving the plans, will appeal the dismissal to the 5th Circuit.
In a case that survived a similar motion to dismiss, a small business owner is suing Hartford Insurance to recover a “seven-figure” sum in penalties and fees paid to the IRS. A trial is expected in August.
But tax experts say the audits and penalties continue. “There’s a bit of a disconnect between what members of Congress thought they meant by suspending collection and what is happening in practice. Clients are still getting bills and threats of liens,” Wallach said. “Thousands of business owners are being hit with million-dollar-plus fines. … The audits are continuing and escalating. I just got four calls today,” he said. A bill has been introduced in Congress to make the penalties less draconian, but nobody is expecting a magic bullet.
“From what we know, Congress is looking to make the penalties more proportionate to the tax benefit received instead of a fixed amount.”
As an expert witness Lance Wallach's side has never lost a case. People need to be careful of 419 Welfare Benefit Plans, 412i plans, Section 79 plans and Captive Insurance Plans. Most of these plans are sold by insurance agents. If you are in an abusive, listed or similar transaction plan you need to file under IRS 6707a. The participant files form 8886, and the salesmen or accountant who signs the tax returns files form 8918 if they got paid over $10,000. They are called Material Advisors and face a minimum $100,000 fine. Some plans are offshore which could involve FBAR or OVDI filings. If you have money overseas you probably need to file for IRS tax amnesty. If you want to reduce the tax we suggest that you first file and then opt out. For more information Google Lance Wallach.
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.
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.
Watch out because the IRS is watching 419 Plans
A business owner wants legitimate tax planning ideas. One solution sometimes offered today is a 419(e) plan (419 Welfare Benefit Plan). The local insurance agent or the company’s CPA who may have an insurance sales license, may suggest that the 419 Welfare Benefit Plan will provide shelter from taxes today, the costs of the plan are tax deductible and the plan will provide tax free benefits for the owner when he or she is ready to retire. The concept seems too good to be true.
IRS Issues Final Regulations for Material Advisors, Accountants, Attorneys and Insurance Agents
If you sold, advised on or had anything to do with a listed transaction you will be fined by the IRS. For those that bought listed transactions like, 419 welfare benefit plans or 412i plans, you have been or will also be fined.
Small business retirement plans fuel litigation
Dolan Media Newswires
Small business retirement plans fuel
litigation
Small businesses facing audits and
potentially huge tax penalties over certain types of retirement plans are
filing lawsuits against those who marketed, designed and sold the plans. The
412(i) and 419(e) plans were marketed in the past several years as a way for
small business owners to set up retirement or welfare benefits plans while
leveraging huge tax savings, but the IRS put them on a list of abusive tax shelters
and has more recently focused audits on them.
The penalties for such transactions are
extremely high and can pile up quickly - $100,000 per individual and $200,000
per entity per tax year for each failure to disclose the transaction - often
exceeding the disallowed taxes.
There are business owners who owe $6,000
in taxes but have been assessed $1.2 million in penalties. The existing cases
involve many types of businesses, including doctors' offices, dental practices,
grocery store owners, mortgage companies and restaurant owners. Some are trying
to negotiate with the IRS. Others are not waiting. A class action has been
filed and cases in several states are ongoing. The business owners claim that
they were targeted by insurance companies; and their agents to purchase the
plans without any disclosure that the IRS viewed the plans as abusive tax
shelters. Other defendants include financial advisors who recommended the
plans, accountants who failed to fill out required tax forms and law firms that
drafted opinion letters legitimizing the plans, which were used as marketing
tools.
A 412(i) plan is a form of defined benefit
pension plan. A 419(e) plan is a similar type of health and benefits plan.
Typically, these were sold to small, privately held businesses with fewer than
20 employees and several million dollars in gross revenues. What distinguished
a legitimate plan from the plans at issue were the life insurance policies used
to fund them. The employer would make large cash contributions in the form of insurance
premiums, deducting the entire amounts. The insurance policy was designed to
have a "springing cash value," meaning that for the first 5-7 years
it would have a near-zero cash value, and then spring up in value.
Just before it sprung, the owner would
purchase the policy from the trust at the low cash value, thus making a
tax-free transaction. After the cash value shot up, the owner could take
tax-free loans against it. Meanwhile, the insurance agents collected exorbitant
commissions on the premiums - 80 to 110 percent of the first year's premium,
which could exceed $1 million.
Technically, the IRS's problems with the
plans were that the "springing cash" structure disqualified them from
being 412(i) plans and that the premiums, which dwarfed any payout to a
beneficiary, violated incidental death benefit rules.
Under §6707A of the Internal Revenue Code,
once the IRS flags something as an abusive tax shelter, or "listed
transaction," penalties are imposed per year for each failure to disclose
it. Another allegation is that businesses weren't told that they had to file
Form 8886, which discloses a listed transaction.
According to Lance Wallach of Plainview,
N.Y. (516-938-5007), who testifies as an expert in cases involving the plans,
the vast majority of accountants either did not file the forms for their
clients or did not fill them out correctly.
Because the IRS did not begin to focus
audits on these types of plans until some years after they became listed
transactions, the penalties have already stacked up by the time of the audits.
Another reason plaintiffs are going to
court is that there are few alternatives - the penalties are not appealable and
must be paid before filing an administrative claim for a refund.
The suits allege misrepresentation, fraud
and other consumer claims. "In street language, they lied," said
Peter Losavio, a plaintiffs' attorney in Baton Rouge, La., who is investigating
several cases. So far they have had mixed results. Losavio said that the
strength of an individual case would depend on the disclosures made and what
the sellers knew or should have known about the risks.
In 2004, the IRS issued notices and
revenue rulings indicating that the plans were listed transactions. But
plaintiffs' lawyers allege that there were earlier signs that the plans ran
afoul of the tax laws, evidenced by the fact that the IRS is auditing plans
that existed before 2004.
"Insurance companies were aware this
was dancing a tightrope," said William Noll, a tax attorney in Malvern,
Pa. "These plans were being scrutinized by the IRS at the same time they
were being promoted, but there wasn't any disclosure of the scrutiny to unwitting
customers."
A defense attorney, who represents
benefits professionals in pending lawsuits, said the main defense is that the
plans complied with the regulations at the time and that "nobody can
predict the future."
An employee benefits attorney who has
settled several cases against insurance companies, said that although the lost
tax benefit is not recoverable, other damages include the hefty commissions -
which in one of his cases amounted to $860,000 the first year - as well as the
costs of handling the audit and filing amended tax returns.
Defying the individualized approach an
attorney filed a class action in federal court against four insurance companies
claiming that they were aware that since the 1980s the IRS had been calling the
policies potentially abusive and that in 2002 the IRS gave lectures calling the
plans not just abusive but "criminal." A judge dismissed the case
against one of the insurers that sold 412(i) plans.
The court said that the plaintiffs failed
to show the statements made by the insurance companies were fraudulent at the
time they were made, because IRS statements prior to the revenue rulings
indicated that the agency may or may not take the position that the plans were
abusive. The attorney, whose suit also names law firm for its opinion letters
approving the plans, will appeal the dismissal to the 5th Circuit.
In a case that survived a similar motion
to dismiss, a small business owner is suing Hartford Insurance to recover a
"seven-figure" sum in penalties and fees paid to the IRS. A trial is
expected in August.
Last July, in response to a letter from members of Congress, the
IRS put a moratorium on collection of §6707A penalties, but only in cases where
the tax benefits were less than $100,000 per year for individuals and $200,000
for entities. That moratorium was recently extended until March 1, 2010.
But tax experts say the audits and penalties continue.
"There's a bit of a disconnect between what members of Congress thought
they meant by suspending collection and what is happening in practice. Clients
are still getting bills and threats of liens," Wallach said.
"Thousands of business owners are being hit with
million-dollar-plus fines. ... The audits are continuing and escalating. I just
got four calls today," he said. A bill has been introduced in Congress to
make the penalties less draconian, but nobody is expecting a magic bullet.
"From what we know, Congress is looking to make the penalties
more proportionate to the tax benefit received instead of a fixed amount."
Section 79 & 419 Plans Litigation: The Team Approach to Tax, Financial and Estate Pla...
Section 79 & 419 Plans Litigation: The Team Approach to Tax, Financial and Estate Pla...: by Lance Wallach CPAs are the best and most qualified professionals when it comes to serving their clients needs, but they need to know w...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)