|
| With all closely-held corporations, income tax and estate planning are critical issues. S corporations offer their owners a wide range of options for achieving favorable tax treatments. There are also ways S corps can contribute to the care of elderly relatives while providing a solid financial basis for the next generation through estate planning. But such strategies require thought, research, and careful planning. The IRS has much to say about what S corp owners can—and cannot—do in this realm. For example, the business purpose (or a deemed lack thereof) can be critical in the IRS' approach to an S corp's tax planning. Michael Schlesinger, J.D., LL.M., analyzes the tax benefits and potential pitfalls in his chapter "Income Tax and Estate Planning with S Corporations" from his book S Corporations: Tax Practice and Analysis. He also offers a complete look at how S corps stack up against other business forms when it comes to estate and tax planning issues. |
|
To order S Corporations: Tax Practice and Analysis, click here. |
Related Titles to this Article: |
S Corporations Guide
Pass-Through Entities Income Tax Refresher CPE Course (2003 edition)
Partnerships and LLCs: Tax Practice and Analysis
Small Business Taxation: Planning and Practice (Third Edition) |
Was this article useful?
Send us your comments: CCH-FocusOnTax@cch.com |
|
|
While the IRS asserts the penalties charged to non-compliant taxpayers are mainly there to enhance voluntary compliance, the reality is that penalties generate substantial revenues for the federal budget. Many of these penalties are computer generated, face little review from administrators and are often seen as not worth fighting by many taxpayers because the high cost of hiring representation would outstrip the cost of simply paying a penalty that might be easily challenged. Robert J. Collins spent 34 years on the inside working for the IRS and has a complete understanding of both the official rules that exist on penalties, as well as the actual practice of administering those rules within the IRS. The first two chapters of his new book from CCH, Practitioner's Guide to IRS Tax Penalties, provide a practical overview of penalties and procedures in the IRS, while also giving the practitioner a look at how to win relief from those penalties, which can often be far more onerous than the actual taxes owed. |
Click here for complete copies of chapters one and two from this new book.
Click here to order Practitioner's Guide to IRS Tax Penalties |
Related Titles to this Article: |
IRS Tax Collections Procedure (Third Edition)
Resolving Your Clients' Tax Liabilities: Tax Code and Bankruptcy Code Remedies
Federal Taxation Practice and Procedure CPE Course
U.S. Master State Tax Practice and Procedure Guide
Internal Revenue Manual |
Was this article useful?
Send us your comments: CCH-FocusOnTax@cch.com |
|
|
Over recent years, tax professionals have often used two separate companies to handle the brick and mortar and e-commerce ends of a business. The theory is that the separate company for Internet sales could limit its nexus exposure and only have to collect and administer sales and use taxes in a few states at most. Or, in the case of some companies that locate in a no-sales tax state, file no sales and use tax returns at all. Arkansas and California have recently moved to break this strategy by passing laws that say a company with an Internet affiliate must collect sales and use taxes on Internet sales by the affiliate if a related company is doing business in either Arkansas or California. Arkansas' statute is law, while California's died under gubernatorial veto. While many question the legality of such laws, the reality is that states do not like the separate Internet affiliate strategy and are seeking to break it in any way possible. Business practices and customer service are often the chink in the separate company armor, note experts interviewed by CCH's E-Commerce Tax Alert editors. Having stores take returns of items sold over the 'net can bring all of this down by creating an agency relationship. One expert observes that the theory is a good one but retailers have trouble keeping the two operations sufficiently separate. |
|
Related Titles to this Article: |
Multistate Sales Tax Guide
Sales and Use Tax Desk Reference Set
Sales and Use Taxation of E-Commerce -- State Tax Administrator's Current Thinking with CCH Commentary
Understanding and Managing Sales and Use Tax (Fifth Edition) |
|
|
|
When Congress imposed mandatory mark-to-market accounting for securities in 1993, it created a complex system that left many questions unanswered. A decade later, many questions still remain and careful documentation, record retention and ongoing evaluation of business activities are the only strategies to ensure avoiding trouble under Internal Revenue Code Sec. 475, according to Lynne A. Brzezenski, J.D., in a recent issue of CCH's Journal of Taxation of Financial Products. Questions that remain for affiliated groups and taxpayers generally include: the definition of a customer; transitional issues; identification methodologies; treatment of securitization transactions; and appropriate approaches to valuation. While those questions remain, recent changes have cleared some murky issues. For a full report on the changes and clarifications that have come in this area, read "An Update on Code Sec. 475 Mark-to-Market Rules for Affiliated Groups." |
To order the Journal of Taxation of Financial Products, click here. |
Related Titles to this Article: |
U.S. Master Accounting Guide
U.S. Master Auditing Guide
U.S. Master Finance Guide
U.S. Master GAAP Guide |
Was this article useful?
Send us your comments: CCH-FocusOnTax@cch.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
