Tuesday, January 28, 2014

Le Grand Tax Savings

When you think of France, you probably think of food. The French are known throughout the world for their truffles, foie gras, and fine champagne. French chefs have spread the gospel of rich food and fine wine across the globe. Most of us think of "French" dining as the highest form of cuisine.
But it seems the French have a dirty little culinary secret they might not like the rest of the world to know. Would you believe they love McDonald's almost as much as we do? That's right, there are 1,258 golden arches across France, and France is actually McDonald's most profitable market outside the states. McDonald's outlets in France serve slightly more exotic fare than their American cousins — the "Premio au Parmesan" starts with the usual all-beef patty, then adds a ciabatta bun, parmigiano reggiano cheese, and creamy parmesan sauce. And French McDonald's serve beer, too. But — French gourmands can still sneak in anytime for "le Grand Big Mac."
Now, it seems, those French McDonald's are being accused of whipping up a different kind of dish — specifically, cooking "the books." Quelle horreure — can it really be true?
Here's the issue. Different countries set different tax rates for the corporations that operate within their borders. Naturally, smart accountants working for multinational corporations want to minimize their taxes by shifting whatever profits they can from high-tax jurisdictions like the United States (where they pay up to 35%) to lower-taxed jurisdictions. Tech firms like Apple and Google have made headlines for using strategies like the "Dutch Sandwich" (which shifts income to tax-free Netherlands Antilles corporations) and "Double Irish" (which shifts profits to Irish subsidiaries, where they're taxed at a low 12.5% rate). Some governments are working to close loopholes and make it harder to channel profits through lower-tax locations. But unless they change the rules, it's all perfectly legal.
Last week, the French magazine L'Express reported that McDonald's has funneled 2.2 billion euros of French earnings (roughly $3 billion) through subsidiaries outside France, avoiding several hundred million euros in corporate and value-added tax. For example, French franchisees pay their licensing fees for use of the brand and related intellectual property to a Luxembourg company called McD Europe Franchising SARL. The Luxembourg company then pays an annual fee on to the parent company here in the U.S. The franchisees then deduct those royalties from their French income, which is taxed as high as 33.33%. But for 2012, the Luxembourg entity paid just $3.2 million in tax on $172 million in profit. For their part, McDonald's responds that "McDonald's pays all of its taxes in France on the totality of its revenue, in line with current legislation." They add that they've paid a billion euros in company taxes since 2009 and they've cooperated fully with French tax authorities. French officials have launched similar investigations against Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and other corporations without finding fault.
Here's the real lesson. McDonald's didn't just wait until the end of the year to add up their income and hope to find a few deductions to pay less tax. They sat down, looked at the law, and planned a proactive menu of strategies to pay as little as possible. That sort of planning is the key to paying less tax. And you don't have to be a multinational corporation to do it. If you have your own business — even just a simple hamburger stand — call us for the plan you need to pay less. We're sure you'll enjoy some healthy and nutritious savings!

Tuesday, January 21, 2014

Excuses, Excuses

So-called "tax protestors" have dreamed up dozens of excuses for not paying the taxes the rest of us grumble about. They argue that the Sixteenth Amendment, which authorizes the government to levy an income tax without apportionment among the states, was never "properly ratified." They accuse the "alleged" Internal Revenue Service of being a massive premeditated conspiracy to defraud U.S. citizens. Some groups assert that the gold tassels around the American flags that stand in many federal courts are a "mutilation," rendering them "courts of admiralty" with no proper jurisdiction. Still others contend that taxpayers aren't required to file a federal tax return because the instructions associated with Form 1040 don't display an OMB control number as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. (Can you imagine risking jail time on an argument like that?)
Well, the IRS has heard it all. They've published a web page identifying 40 Frivolous Positions for Taxpayers to Avoid. They've warned taxpayers about a $5,000 penalty for using any of these arguments in a return. They've even pointed out that courts sometimes don't even bother refuting the frivolous claims anymore. But now Charles Adams, whom the First Circuit Court of Appeals described as "an unabashed opponent of the tax laws," has come up with a new argument to avoid facing the music. Think he'll fare any better?
Adams and his various co-conspirators are affiliated with a protest group called Save-a-Patriot. They ran a payroll service that helped client companies pay their employees "under the table" so they could hide their income from the IRS. On March 19, 2004, a federal magistrate issued a warrant to search Adams's home in Wrentham, Massachusetts. Four days later, armed agents executed that warrant and seized evidence. Prosecutors eventually used that evidence to convict Adams of tax evasion. District Court Judge Dennis Saylor IV sentenced Adams to four years in the pokey, and Adams appealed to the First Circuit.
Sounds straightforward enough, right? Well, here's the problem. Internal Revenue Code Section 7608(a)(1), which gives revenue enforcement officers their power, explicitly authorizes agents enforcing laws pertaining to alcohol, tobacco, and firearms to carry guns. Section 7608(b), which deals with all other tax laws, does not. The agents who searched Adams's home were packing heat. Therefore — at least according to Adams — the search was unlawful and the evidence they found should be suppressed. (It's like that scene in every episode of Law and Order when the defense attorney asks the judge to throw out the evidence against his client. Usually the judge says no, but sometimes he makes the cops go out and re-prove their case all over again.)
Not buying it? Neither did the First Circuit. The three-judge panel said "whatever intrusion may have occurred was not of constitutional dimension." They dismissed Adams's arguments as "futile" and "unavailing," and concluded, "without serious question, that the district court did not blunder in refusing to grant the defendant's motion to suppress." Even Adams's own lawyer acknowledged that his "convoluted ideas and beliefs seem far-fetched."
It's easy to laugh at protesters like Charles Adams. Their theories are clever and entertaining. But their refusal to pay their share of the tax bill leaves the rest of us holding the bag. That's why it's so important for you to have a plan to pay the least amount of tax allowed by law. Our strategies are all court-tested and IRS-approved. So call us when you're ready for your plan. And remember, we're here for your family, friends, and colleagues too!

Monday, January 13, 2014

The Endangered Species List

On September 1, 1914, "Martha," the last remaining passenger pigeon (ectopistes migratorius), died at the Cincinnati Zoo. On September 7, 1936, "Benjamin," the last Tasmanian tiger (thylacinus cynocephalus), died at Australia's Hobart Zoo. And on June 24, 2012, "Lonesome George," the last living Pinta Island tortoise (chelonoidis nigra abingdoni), died in Ecuador's Galapagos National Park.
When you think of endangered species, you naturally think of plants and animals. But the IRS has its own endangered species list (called "listed transactions"), and that means sometimes even tax strategies go extinct. So, for example, in October, 2006, the last grandfathered private annuity trust was formed. On April 10, 2007, most so-called "Section 419(e)" plans were shot down. Now, could the venerable Swiss bank account (bankum secretus strongius) be next?
Switzerland's banking laws have long made it a crime to reveal an account holder's name. At the same time, Swiss authorities have historically refused to cooperate with foreign countries where failure to report taxable income is concerned. Together, these policies made Switzerland the banker of choice for Colombian druglords, Sub-Saharan kleptocrats, Russian oligarchs, and even the so-called "Wolf of Wall Street," Jordan Belfort.
But recently those protections have melted away like so much Swiss chocolate sitting in the bright alpine sun. It started back in 2008 when Bradley Birkenfeld, a mid-level banker, blew the whistle on helping American taxpayers "forget" to report millions of dollars of interest income. Birkenfeld's bombshell landed him a 40-month prison sentence and a $104 million reward from the IRS. A year later, the Department of Justice fined the biggest Swiss bank $790 million and cut a deal with the Swiss government, giving them power to force their banks to disgorge information on American depositors almost on demand. In 2012, an even stronger settlement required 300 Swiss banks to identify their American account holders or face their own penalties. Most recently, "Beanie Babies" creator Ty Warner pled guilty to evading $5 million in tax and agreed to a $53 million fine — and still faces four years in jail.
And now? Well, some observers say that Swiss banks are actually doing the IRS's job for them. Better to rat out clients than pay IRS fines! Banks are pressuring Americans to report their accounts, and even freezing accounts unless clients can prove they're playing by the new rules. U.S. attorneys are generally advising clients with secret accounts to 'fess up now before the IRS finds them and penalizes them 50% of their balances. At this point, attorneys say, discovery is a matter of "when," not "if." That message appears to be hitting home. Since 2009, over 38,000 Americans have come forth and paid over $5 billion in taxes, penalties, and interest. The once-celebrated Swiss bank account appears headed the way of the dodo, as far as U.S. tax cheats are concerned.
Look, we understand that everybody wants to pay less tax. But there's a right way to do it and there's a wrong way to do it. The right way is to take advantage of hundreds of legitimate deductions, credits, and strategies contained in the tax code and treasury regulations. And it all starts with a plan. We can give you that plan, and it doesn't involve a trip to Zurich or Geneva to visit your money. So call us now to see how much you might be overpaying. And if you really like cuckoo clocks, fine watches, and yodeling, you can take a legitimate trip with the savings!

Tuesday, January 7, 2014

Test Your Tax Knowledge

They say that knowledge is power, and that's especially true with taxes. So here's a quick quiz to test your tax knowledge in 2014. But look out — the questions (and the answers) might not be what you expect!:
We'll start with an easy one. Last year's "fiscal cliff" legislation raised the top marginal tax rate to 39.6%. What's the top effective rate?
A. 39.6%
B. 43.4% (39.6% plus 3.8% Medicare tax)
C. >43.4% (depending on "PEP" and "Pease" phaseouts)
Give up? It's a trick question — all three answers can be correct, depending on your own circumstances!
Alright, let's shift gears a bit. The tabloids love running stories about celebrities who run into tax trouble. After all, if they make so much money, shouldn't they be able to afford their taxes? So here's our next question — which of the following sets of celebrities ran into tax trouble in 2013?
A. Boxer Manny Pacquiao, rapper MC Hammer, and racecar driver Juan Pablo Montoya
B. Actor Stephen Baldwin, singer Lauryn Hill, and "Beanie Babies" creator Ty Warner
C. Actor Al Pacino, rapper Fat Joe, and "Real Housewife of New Jersey" Teresa Giudice
Well, which did you pick? The answer is, another trick question — every single one ran into tax problems last year!
Okay, final question. We know that tax laws can be impenetrably dense and hard to understand. So maybe "context" will give you a hint. Which of these passages is taken from the 2013 fiscal cliff act, and which is taken from California's workers' comp regulations?
A. "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any refund (or advance payment with respect to a refundable credit) made to any individual under this title shall not be taken into account as income, and shall not be taken into account as resources for a period of 12 months from receipt, for purposes of determining the eligibility of such individual (or any other individual) for benefits or assistance (or the amount or extent of benefits or assistance) under any Federal program or under any State or local program financed in whole or in part with Federal funds."
B. "In the case of covered OPD services furnished on or after April 1, 2013, in a hospital described in clause (ii), if— (I) the payment rate that would otherwise apply under this subsection for stereotactic radiosurgery, complete course of treatment of cranial lesion(s) consisting of 1 session that is multisource Cobalt 60 based (identified as of January 1, 2013, by HCPCS code 77371 (and any succeeding code) and reimbursed as of such date under APC 0127 (and any succeeding classification group)); exceeds (II) the payment rate that would otherwise apply under this subsection for linear accelerator based stereotactic radiosurgery, complete course of therapy in one session (identified as of January 1, 2013, by HCPCS code G0173 (and any succeeding code) and reimbursed as of such date under APC 0067 (and any succeeding classification group)), the payment rate for the service described in subclause (I) shall be reduced to an amount equal to the payment rate for the service de scribed in subclause (II)."
Drumroll, please . . . the answer is, it's another trick question — both examples of sterling prose appeared in the fiscal cliff law! (Quit complaining about the trick questions — it's a tax quiz, after all!)
Don't be upset if you didn't get all three questions right. (Nobody else did, either!) Fortunately, there isn't any real money at stake. But that won't be true come April 15. So call us now for the plan you need to come up with the right answers in 2014!

Thursday, January 2, 2014

Resolutions We'd Like to See

2014 is here, and it's time for New Years' resolutions. Americans across the country are pledging to lose weight, quit smoking, exercise, and find new jobs. Some of them will succeed, others will lose faith before the first snow melt. (Want to make a fortune? Open a gym that turns into a sports bar on February 1!) So we thought we would take this opportunity to suggest some resolutions to the folks who determine how much tax we pay.
  • Congress: Put the Tax Code on a diet. According to one count, our tax code runs nearly 4 million words. That's four times the words in all the Harry Potter books put together, with none of the magic and wizardry. (You may think we work a version of the "obliteration charm" when we save you thousands in tax, but we assure you there's nothing supernatural involved.) We say it's high time to put the Tax Code on a diet — and if that doesn't work, try bypass surgery. We can raise just as much money for the government without dragging down the economy the way the tax code does.
    The problem, of course, is that there's no agreement in Washington to accomplish anything so ambitious. Our current Congress is widely considered to be the least productive in history, at least if you consider "bills passed" to be the right measure of productivity. House Speaker John Boehner has said that Congress should be measured by how many bills they repeal — if he's serious, maybe he can start with nightmares like the Alternative Minimum Tax, the Earned Income Tax Credit, and the passive activity loss rules.
    Back in 1986, Ronald Reagan cited the following language from the tax code (defining private foundations, if you're curious), to help make his case for comprehensive tax reform: "For purposes of paragraph (3), an organization described in paragraph (2) shall be deemed to include an organization described in section 501(c)(4), (5), or (6) which would be described in paragraph (2) if it were an organization described in section 501(c)(3)." Congress has passed a dozen "tax simplification" laws since then, and the language Reagan cited still remains. (Congress must have spent their time working on the really confusing stuff!)
  • IRS: Focus on customer service. Fighting IRS red tape makes a trip to the DMV look like a stay at a five-star hotel. The average hold time to speak to someone at the agency rose to 17 minutes in 2012, but the percentage of callers who actually get help fell to 68%. Mail is even slower — nearly half their correspondence takes more than 6½ weeks to answer. No private-sector business would accept those kinds of results.
    The problem here is that the IRS simply has an impossible job. They don't make the tax laws, but get blamed for them just the same. They don't get the budget they need to do their job, but get blamed for falling down on it just the same. (For Fiscal 2011, the IRS collected $2.52 trillion in tax with a budget of just $11.8 billion, which makes a pretty phenomenal return on investment of 214:1.) Few members of Congress want to be known for giving the IRS more money. But funding for basic technology and customer service shouldn't be nearly as hard a case to make as funding for more aggressive enforcement.
As for us, we're resolving to bring you even better, more proactive tax advice. That process starts with a comprehensive plan to take advantage of every deduction credit, and strategy you legally deserve. If you don't already have one, maybe you should make getting one your resolution for 2014!