|
| Everyday brings new tax challenges. Sales and use tax compliance in a new state; dealing with new federal depreciation rules; matching your clients retirement goals to tax considerations; figuring out the best structure for that new business venture; and on and on. When time, dollars and pressing business needs are at stake, it helps to have ideas to save the day—and it's nice to be the person to serve them up. CCH's tax editors and expert contributors are at work everyday finding ways to help you stay on top of your professional game and ahead of these demands. From the hundreds of CCH tax resources, our editors have chosen 101 planning tips, ideas and strategies that you can put to work today for your clients or your company. Click here to read these 101 planning tips that could help make you a hero to your client or your boss. |
|
|
|
Was this article useful?
Send us your comments: CCH-FocusOnTax@cch.com |
|
|
| Tax changes for 2003 returns affect the depreciation and deductibility of vehicle purchases, especially in the area of luxury cars. For many business owners, a hot topic is the ability to buy SUVs that can use the heavy vehicle exclusion and the new bonus depreciation rules to allow for some rapid write-offs of these popular vehicles. The editors of CCH's Standard Federal Tax Reports have taken a close look at the changes for 2003 to give tax professionals the tools they need to make the right choices on how to treat these vehicles on tax returns. Helpful charts with calculations provide guidance on the use of Code Sec. 179 for expense allowances. Click here to read the full luxury vehicle article with charts. |
| Click here to subscribe to Standard Federal Tax Reporter. |
| Related publications of interest include: |
|
|
Was this article useful?
Send us your comments: CCH-FocusOnTax@cch.com |
|
|
| Billions of dollars lie unused on the books of U.S. businesses in the form of unredeemed gift certificates and gift cards, uncashed payroll checks, abandoned bank accounts, and in the contents of long-forgotten safe-deposit boxes. Across the nation, states are stepping up efforts to get this money—ostensibly to put it in the hands of the rightful owners. But much of this money will remain unclaimed and it can revert to the states, which are facing tight financial times. Some states are even turning to third-party auditors to ferret out the billions of dollars of unclaimed property. Many businesses don't even know they have a problem in this area, which has typically been the realm of banks and financial institutions. A simple oversight or a misclassification on your general ledger could build up to a massive assessment by the state when compounded over the years. Click here to learn more about this time bomb that may be ticking in your company in the full article from Sales & Use Tax Alert. |
| Click here to subscribe to Sales & Use Tax Alert |
| Related publications of interest include: |
|
|
|
|
| Cost segregation studies done by engineers or accounting firms have become a useful tax minimization tool for real estate owners looking to take advantage of more rapid depreciation rules for certain classifications of property. For manufacturing facilities, as much as 70% of the value of the facility could be reclassified to take advantage of the five-, seven- and 10-year modified accelerated cost recovery system. This creates substantial tax savings immediately for the taxpayer. However, this can present a problem if the taxpayer chooses to dispose of the building in exchange for another piece of real property in a like-kind exchange under IRC §1031. Rapidly depreciated personal property could make an otherwise taxable exchange subject to steep tax bills when the depreciation recapture provisions kick in under IRC §1245. Authors Mary B. Foster and Martin E. Verdick tackle these complexities in a recent issue of Journal of Passthrough Entities. For access to a free copy of this article, click here. |
| Click here to order the Journal of Passthrough Entities. |
| Related publications of interest include: |
|
|
Was this article useful?
Send us your comments: CCH-FocusOnTax@cch.com |
|
|
| When it comes to hiring consultants, there is little requirement for written agreements and detailed descriptions of how a company will relate to the consultant. But from a tax standpoint, there is a big difference between a well-crafted agreement and one that could result in the IRS determining that the consultant is an employee. Such a finding could result in big liabilities for the company and could, in some instances, bring on litigation from the consultant seeking benefits that were available to employees. Expert Michael S. Melbinger, J.D., says that certain classifications of workers should always raise a red flag: temporary workers, independent contractors, leased employees, part-time employees, or seasonal employees. He notes that those employees, particularly independent contractors, raise a red flag for IRS examiners—and relationships that are clearly established by contracts could backfire on companies that were attempting to save money by using independent contractors in the first place. In his chapter on Consulting Agreements in the brand-new book, Executive Compensation, Melbinger outlines the potential traps and gives solid advice on how to avoid them and craft consulting agreements that will withstand IRS scrutiny. For a complete copy of this chapter, click here. |
For a full detailed Table of Contents from Executive Compensation, click here. |
| Related publications of interest include: |
|
|
Was this article useful?
Send us your comments: CCH-FocusOnTax@cch.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
