The Treasury Department and the IRS have proposed regulations that identify occupations that customarily and regularly receive tips, and define "qualified tips" that eligible tip recipients may claim for the "no tax on tips" deduction under Code Sec. 224. This deduction was enacted as part of the the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (P.L. 119-21).

The Treasury Department and the IRS have proposed regulations that identify occupations that customarily and regularly receive tips, and define "qualified tips" that eligible tip recipients may claim for the "no tax on tips" deduction under Code Sec. 224. This deduction was enacted as part of the the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (P.L. 119-21).

Background

Under Code Sec. 224, an eligible individual can claim an income tax deduction for qualified tips received in tax years 2025 through 2028. The deduction is limited to $25,000 per tax year, and starts to phase out when modified adjusted gross income is above $150,000 ($300,000 for joint filers).

An employer must report qualified tips on an employee‘s Form W-2, or the employee must report the tips on Form 4137. A service recipient must report qualified tips on an information return furnished to a nonemployee payee (Form 1099-NEC, Form 1099-MISC, Form 1099-K).

If an individual tip recipient is "married" (under Code Sec. 7703), the deduction applies only if the individual and his or her spouse file a joint return. The deduction is not allowed unless the taxpayer includes his or her social security number (SSN) on their income tax return for the tax year. For this purpose, a SSN is valid only if it is issued to a U.S. citizen or a person authorized to work in the United States, and before the due date of the taxpayer’s return.

What is a Qualified Tip?

A "qualified tip" is a cash tip received in an occupation that customarily and regularly received tips on or before December 31, 2024. An amount is not a qualified tip unless (1) the amount received is paid voluntarily without any consequence for nonpayment, is not the subject of negotiation, and is determined by the payor; (2) the trade or business in which the individual receives the amount is not a specified service trade or business under Code Sec. 199A(d)(2); and (3) other requirements established in regulations or other guidance are satisfied.

The proposed regulations define qualified tips—and payments that are not qualified tips— based on several factors, including the following:

• Qualified tips must be paid in cash or an equivalent medium, such as check, credit card, debit card, gift card, tangible or intangible tokens that are readily exchangeable for a fixed amount in cash, or another form of electronic settlement or mobile payment application that is denominated in cash.

• Qualified tips do not include items paid in any medium other than cash, such as event tickets, meals, services, or other assets that are not exchangeable for a fixed amount in cash (such as most digital assets).

• Qualified tips must be received from customers. For employees, qualified tips can be received through a mandatory or voluntary tip-sharing arrangement, such as a tip pool.

• Qualified tips must be paid voluntarily by the customer, and not be subject to negotiation.

• Qualified tips do not include some service charges. For example, if a restaurant imposes an automatic 18-percent service charge for large parties and distributes that amount to waiters, bussers and kitchen staff, the amounts distributed are not qualified tips if the charge is added with no option for the customer to disregard or modify it.

• Qualified tips do not include amounts received for an illegal activity (a service the performance of which is a felony or misdemeanor under applicable law), prostitution services, or pornographic activity.

• Qualified tips do not include tips received by an employee or other service provider who has an ownership interest in or is employed by the tip payor.

The proposed regulations also include examples that illustrate some of the requirements and restrictions.

Occupations that Customarily and Regularly Receive Tips

The proposed regulations list the occupations that customarily and regularly received tips on or before December 31, 2024. For each occupation, the list provides a numeric Treasury Tipped Occupation Code (TTOC), an occupation title, a description of the types of services performed in the occupation, illustrative examples of specific occupations, and the related Standard Occupation Classification (SOC) system code(s) published by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

The list groups the eligible occupations into eight categories:

• Beverage and Food Service—includes bartenders; wait staff; food servers outside of a restaurant; dining room and cafeteria attendants and bartender helpers; chefs and cooks; food preparation workers; fast food and counter workers; dishwashers; host staff, restaurant, lounge, and coffee shop; bakers

• Entertainment and Events—includes gambling dealers; gambling change persons and booth cashiers; gambling cage workers; gambling and sports book writers and runners; dancers; musicians and singers; disc jockeys (but not radio disc jockeys); entertainers and performers; digital content creators; ushers, lobby attendants, and ticket takers; locker room, coatroom, and dressing room attendants

• Hospitality and Guest Services—includes baggage porters and bellhops; concierges; hotel, motel, and resort desk clerks; maids and housekeeping cleaners

• Home Services—includes home maintenance and repair workers; home landscaping and groundskeeping workers; home electricians; home plumbers; home heating and air conditioning mechanics and installers; home appliance installers and repairers; home cleaning service workers; locksmiths; roadside assistance workers

• Personal Services—includes personal care and service workers; private event planners; private event and portrait photographers; private event videographers; event officiants; pet caretakers; tutors; nannies and babysitters

• Personal Appearance and Wellness—includes skincare specialists; massage therapists; barbers, hairdressers , hairstylists, and cosmetologists; shampooers; manicurists and pedicurists; eyebrow threading and waxing technicians; makeup artists; exercise trainers and group fitness instructors; tattoo artists and piercers; tailors; shoe and leather workers and repairers

• Recreation and Instruction—includes golf caddies; self-enrichment teachers; recreational and tour pilots; tour guides; travel guides; sports and recreation instructors

• Transportation and Delivery—includes parking and valet attendants; taxi and rideshare drivers and chauffeurs; shuttle drivers; goods delivery people; personal vehicle and equipment cleaners; private and charter bus drivers; water taxi operators and charter boat workers; rickshaw, pedicab, and carriage drivers; home movers

Applicability Dates

The proposed regulations apply for tax years beginning after December 31, 2024. Taxpayers may rely on the proposed regulations for those tax years, and on or before the date the final regulations are published in the Federal Register, but only if the proposed regulations are followed in their entirety and in a consistent manner.

Request for Comments, Public Hearing

Written or electronic comments must be received by October 22, 2025 (30 days after the proposed regulations are published in the Federal Register). Comments may be submitted electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal (https://www.regulations.gov), or on paper submitted to: CC:PA:01:PR (REG-110032-25), Room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, P.O. Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044.

A public hearing is being held on October 23, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. Eastern Time (ET). Requests to speak and outlines of topics to be discussed at the public hearing must be received by October 22, 2025; if no outlines are received by that date, the public hearing will be cancelled. Requests to attend the public hearing must be received by 5:00 p.m. ET on October 21, 2023.

Proposed Regulations, NPRM REG-110032-25

The IRS issued final regulations implementing the Roth catch-up contribution requirement and other statutory changes to catch-up contributions made by the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 (P.L. 117-328). The regulations affect qualified retirement plans that allow catch-up contributions (including 401(k) plans, 403(b) plans, governmental plans, SEPs and SIMPLE plans) and their participants. The regulations generally apply for contribtions in tax years beginning after December 31, 2026, with extensions for collectively bargained, multiemployer, and governmental plans. However, plans may elect to apply the final rules in earlier tax years.

The IRS issued final regulations implementing the Roth catch-up contribution requirement and other statutory changes to catch-up contributions made by the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 (P.L. 117-328). The regulations affect qualified retirement plans that allow catch-up contributions (including 401(k) plans, 403(b) plans, governmental plans, SEPs and SIMPLE plans) and their participants. The regulations generally apply for contribtions in tax years beginning after December 31, 2026, with extensions for collectively bargained, multiemployer, and governmental plans. However, plans may elect to apply the final rules in earlier tax years.

The SECURE 2.0 Act amended the catch-up contribution provision to allow an increased contribution limit for participants aged 60 through 63 and an increased contribution limit for certain SIMPLE plans. The final regulations provide that SIMPLE plans may allow participant to take advantage of one of these increased contribution limits, but not both. However, beginning with the 2025 calendar year, a SIMPLE plan that provides for increased contribution limits for all participants may instead permit participants attaining age 60 to 63 to contribute the full amount allowed for that age group.

With respect to mandatory Roth catch-up contributions for particpants whose income exceeds a statutory threshold, the final regulations allow 401(k) and 403(b) plans to automatically treat catch-up contributions as Roth for affected participants, provided an opt-out opportunity is offered. The final regulations do not include a rule allowing deemed Roth elections for all employees' catch-up contributions, only for those employees whose income exceeds the threshold. In response to comments, the final regulations provide that deemed elections must cease within a reasonable period of time following the date on which the employee no longer meets the mandatory Roth threshold or an amended Form W-2 is filed or furnished to the employee indicating that the employee no longer meets the mandatory Roth threshold. As a result, Roth catch-up contributions made pursuant to the deemed election before the end of the reasonable period of time need not be recharacterized as pre-tax catch-up contributions. The IRS further indicated that the plan must be amended to implement deemed Roth elections, and that the deadline for adopting amendments implementing the SECURE 2.0 Act is generally December 31, 2026.

The final regulations provide two correction methods to address pre-tax contributions that should have been designated Roth. First, a plan may transfer pre-tax contributions to the participant's Roth account and report the contribution as an elective deferral that is a designated Roth contribution on the participant's Form W-2. This correction method is available only if the participant's Form W-2 for that year has not yet been filed or furnished to the participant. Alternatively, the plan can directly roll over the elective deferrals that would be catch-up contributions if they had been designated Roth contributions (adjusted for earnings and losses) from the participant’s pre-tax account to the participant’s designated Roth account and report the rollover on Form 1099-R. Failures do not need to be corrected if the amount of the pre-tax elective deferral that was required to be a designated Roth contribution does not exceed $250, or if the participant was incorrectly treated as subject to the Roth catch-up contribution requirement due to a Form W-2 that is later amended.

T.D. 10033

IR-2025-91

Revenue Procedure 2025-28 instructs taxpayers on how to make various elections, file amended returns or change accounting methods for research or experimental expenditures as provided under the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act (P.L. 119-21). The revenue procedure also provides transitional rules, modifies Rev. Proc. 2025-23, and grants an extension of time for partnerships, S corporations, C corporations, individuals, estates and trusts, and exempt organizations to file superseding 2024 federal income tax returns.

Revenue Procedure 2025-28 instructs taxpayers on how to make various elections, file amended returns or change accounting methods for research or experimental expenditures as provided under the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act (P.L. 119-21). The revenue procedure also provides transitional rules, modifies Rev. Proc. 2025-23, and grants an extension of time for partnerships, S corporations, C corporations, individuals, estates and trusts, and exempt organizations to file superseding 2024 federal income tax returns.

Background

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) required taxpayers to capitalize and amortize specified research or experimental expenditures over 5 years for domestic research or 15 years for foreign research, beginning with taxable years after December 31, 2021. The OBBB Act, enacted July 4, significantly modified these rules by adding new Code Sec. 174A to allow immediate deduction of domestic research or experimental expenditures while retaining the capitalization and amortization requirements only for foreign research expenditures.

Code Sec. 174A provides that domestic research or experimental expenditures paid or incurred in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2024, are generally deductible when paid or incurred. Alternatively, taxpayers may elect under Code Sec. 174A(c) to capitalize these expenditures and amortize them over at least 60 months, beginning when the taxpayer first realizes benefits from the expenditures.

The OBBB Act also provides transition relief, including retroactive application options for small business taxpayers and methods for recovering previously capitalized amounts.

Code Sec. 280C(c)(2) Elections and Revocations

Eligible small business taxpayers may make late elections under Code Sec. 280C(c)(2) to reduce their research credit in lieu of reducing their deductible research expenditures or revoke prior Code Sec. 280C(c)(2) elections. These are available for applicable taxable years where the original return was filed before September 15, 2025.

Elections are made by adjusting the research credit amount on amended returns, attaching amended Form 6765 marked with the appropriate revenue procedure reference, and including required declarations.

Code Sec. 174A(c) Election Procedures

For domestic research or experimental expenditures paid or incurred in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2024, taxpayers may elect to capitalize and amortize these expenditures under Code Sec. 174A(c). The election must be made by the due date of the return for the first applicable taxable year by attaching a statement specifying the amortization period (not less than 60 months) and the month when benefits are first realized.

Automatic Consent for Accounting Method Changes

Rev. Proc. 2025-28 modifies Rev. Proc. 2025-23 to provide automatic consent procedures for various accounting method changes related to research expenditures:

changes to comply with Code Sec. 174 for expenditures paid or incurred before January 1, 2025;

changes to implement the new Code Sec. 174A deduction or amortization methods for expenditures paid or incurred after December 31, 2024; and

changes to comply with modified Code Sec. 174 requirements for foreign research expenditures.

For the first taxable year beginning after December 31, 2024, taxpayers may use statements in lieu of Form 3115 for certain accounting method changes, with simplified procedures and waived duplicate filing requirements.

Small Business Retroactive Election

Small business taxpayers meeting the Code Sec. 448(c) gross receipts test (average annual gross receipts of $31,000,000 or less for 2025) may elect to retroactively apply Code Sec. 174A to domestic research or experimental expenditures paid or incurred in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2021. This election allows eligible taxpayers to either deduct these expenditures in the year paid or incurred or elect the Code Sec. 174A(c) amortization method.

The election is made by attaching a statement entitled "FILED PURSUANT TO SECTION 3.03 OF REV. PROC. 2025-28" to the taxpayer's original or amended federal income tax return for each applicable taxable year. The statement must include the taxpayer's identification information, declarations regarding tax shelter status and gross receipts test compliance, and specification of the chosen method.

Elections made on amended returns must be filed by July 6, 2026, subject to the normal statute of limitations under Code Sec. 6511 for refund claims.

Relief for Previously Filed Returns

Rev. Proc. 2025-28 grants automatic six-month extensions for eligible taxpayers to file superseding returns for 2024 taxable years. This relief is available to taxpayers who filed returns before September 15, 2025, without extensions, and need to make elections or method changes provided by the revenue procedure.

The extension applies to partnerships, S corporations, C corporations, individuals, trusts, estates, and exempt organizations with 2024 taxable years ending before September 15, 2025, where the original due date was before September 15, 2025.

Effective Date

Most provisions of Rev. Proc. 2025-28 are effective August 28, 2025. The modified automatic change procedures apply to Forms 3115 filed after August 28, 2025, with transition rules for taxpayers who properly filed duplicate copies before November 15, 2025.

Rev. Proc. 2025-28

The shareholders of S corporations engaged in cannabis sales could not include wages disallowed under Code Sec. 280E when calculating the Code Sec. 199A deduction. The Court reasoned that only wages "properly allocable to qualified business income" qualify, and nondeductible wages cannot be so allocated under the statute.

The shareholders of S corporations engaged in cannabis sales could not include wages disallowed under Code Sec. 280E when calculating the Code Sec. 199A deduction. The Court reasoned that only wages "properly allocable to qualified business income" qualify, and nondeductible wages cannot be so allocated under the statute.

The individuals owned three S corporations and reported pass-through income for the tax years at issue. Two corporations, engaged in cannabis sales, were subject to Code Sec. 280E, which bars deductions for expenses of businesses trafficking in controlled substances. Both entities paid significant W-2 wages, but portions were nondeductible under Code Sec. 280E. Petitioners claimed the full amount of reported wages in computing the Code Sec. 199A deduction.

The IRS reduced the deductions, asserting that only deductible wages could count as W-2 wages under Code Sec. 199A. The Court agreed, finding that Code Sec. 199A(b)(4)(B) excludes any amount not "properly allocable to qualified business income," and Code Sec. 199A(c)(3)(A)(ii) limits qualified items to those "allowed in determining taxable income." Because nondeductible wages are not allowed in determining taxable income, they cannot be W-2 wages. "Although certain amounts may have been reported by an employer to an employee in a Form W-2," the Court explained, "those amounts do not constitute "W-2 wages" for purposes of 199A if they are not properly allocated to qualified business income."

A dissenting judge argued that Congress intended the wage limitation to encourage job creation and that wages properly allocable to a trade or business should count regardless of deductibility. The majority, however, concluded that statutory text foreclosed this interpretation.

A.A. Savage, 165 TC No. 5, Dec. 62,714

A married couple was not entitled to claim a plug-in vehicle credit after the year in which their vehicle was first placed in service. 

A married couple was not entitled to claim a plug-in vehicle credit after the year in which their vehicle was first placed in service. The Tax Court explained that Code Sec. 30D provides a one-time credit available only in the year a qualified vehicle is first placed in service, meaning when it is ready and available for its intended function. The couple purchased a new plug-in electric vehicle and continued to claim the credit in later years. The IRS disallowed the credit for the tax year at issue and determined a deficiency. An accuracy-related penalty was also proposed but later conceded. Relying on regulations interpreting similar provisions under the general business credit, the Court emphasized that once the vehicle was in use in the year of purchase, it was considered placed in service. Accordingly, the Court held that the credit could not be claimed again in subsequent years.

A. Moon, 165 TC No. 4, Dec. 62,712

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has proposed regulations that would amend the Anti-Money Laundering/Countering the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) Program and Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) Filing Requirements for registered investment advisers (IA AML Rule) by delaying the obligations of covered investment advisers from January 1, 2026, to January 1, 2028. 

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has proposed regulations that would amend the Anti-Money Laundering/Countering the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) Program and Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) Filing Requirements for registered investment advisers (IA AML Rule) by delaying the obligations of covered investment advisers from January 1, 2026, to January 1, 2028. The proposed regulation follows an exemptive relief order issued earlier this summer (FinCEN Exemptive Relief Order, August 5, 2025).

The IA AML Rule requires covered investment advisers to establish AML/CFT programs, report suspicious activity, and keep relevant records, among other requirements.

By delaying the effective date, FinCEN states that it will have an opportunity to review the IA AML Rule, and ensure that the rule is effectively tailored to the diverse business models and risk profiles of firms in the investment adviser sector. According to FinCEN, the review may also provide an opportunity to reduce any unnecessary or duplicative regulatory burden, and ensure the IA AML Rule strikes an appropriate balance between cost and benefit, while still adequately protecting the U.S. financial system and guarding against money laundering, terrorist financing, and other illicit finance risks.

Request for Comments

FinCEN invites interested parties to submit comments on the proposed delay in the effective date of the IA AML Rule. Written or electronic comments must be received by October 22, 2025 (30 days after the proposed regulations are published in the Federal Register). Comments may be submitted electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal (https://www.regulations.gov), or by mail to: Policy Division, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, P.O. Box 39, Vienna, VA 22183. Refer to Docket Number FINCEN-2025-0072 and RIN 1506-AB58 and 1506-AB69.

FinCEN Proposed Rule RIN-1506-AB58 and 1506-AB69

Republicans’ 2017 overhaul of the tax code created a new 20-percent deduction of qualified business income (QBI), subject to certain limitations, for pass-through entities (sole proprietorships, partnerships, limited liability companies, or S corporations). The controversial QBI deduction—also called the "pass-through" deduction—has remained an ongoing topic of debate among lawmakers, tax policy experts, and stakeholders.

Republicans’ 2017 overhaul of the tax code created a new 20-percent deduction of qualified business income (QBI), subject to certain limitations, for pass-through entities (sole proprietorships, partnerships, limited liability companies, or S corporations). The controversial QBI deduction—also called the "pass-through" deduction—has remained an ongoing topic of debate among lawmakers, tax policy experts, and stakeholders.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97), enacted at the end of 2017, created the new Section 199A QBI deduction for noncorporate taxpayers, effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017. However, under current law the QBI deduction will sunset after 2025. In addition to the QBI deduction’s impermanence, its complexity and ambiguous statutory language have created many questions for taxpayers and practitioners.

The IRS first released much-anticipated proposed regulations for the new QBI deduction, REG-107892-18, on August 8, 2018. The proposed regulations were published in the Federal Register on August 16, 2018. The IRS released the final regulations and notice of additional proposed rulemaking on January 18, 2019, followed by a revised version of the final regulations on February 1, 2019. Additionally, Rev. Proc. 2019-11 was issued concurrently to provide further guidance on the definition of wages. Also, a proposed revenue procedure, Notice 2019-7, was issued concurrently to provide a safe harbor under which certain rental real estate enterprises may be treated as a trade or business for purposes of Section 199A.

Wolters Kluwer recently interviewed Tom West, a principal in the passthroughs group of the Washington National Tax practice of KPMG LLP, about the Section 199A QBI deduction regulations. Notably, West formerly served as tax legislative counsel at the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Tax Policy. This article represents the views of the author only and does not necessarily represent the views or professional advice of KPMG LLP.

Wolters Kluwer: What is your general overview of the revised, final regulations for the Section 199A Qualified Business Income (QBI) or "pass-through" deduction?

Tom West: I think it is admirable that Treasury and IRS were able to publish these final regulations so quickly and address so many of the comments and questions that the proposed regulations generated. I think they realized how important this particular package was to so many taxpayers for the 2018 filing season and, while questions obviously remain, having these rules out in time to inform decisions for this year’s tax returns is helpful. In particular, the liberalized aggregation rules and the additional examples regarding certain specified service trades or businesses (SSTBs) are the most consequential in my mind.

Wolters Kluwer: What should taxpayers and practitioners keep in mind in consideration of relying on either the proposed or final regulations for the 2018 tax year?

Tom West: I have to imagine that when choosing between the two, for most taxpayers the final regulations will ultimately provide the better result. The ability to aggregate at the entity level, which was only provided in the final regulations, may be a key consideration for those taxpayers with more complicated or tiered structures. That said, I do think taxpayers need to be careful in their aggregation modeling because you are going to be stuck with your aggregation once you’ve filed. It may be that some taxpayers wait on getting locked into a particular aggregation and continue to study the new rules—and even wait on additional guidance that may be coming. However, it may be important to note that the final regulations provide that if an individual fails to aggregate, the individual may not aggregate trades or businesses on an amended return—other than for the 2018 tax year.

Wolters Kluwer: How is the removal of the proposed 80 percent rule regarding specified service trades or businesses (SSTBs) from the final regulations likely to impact certain taxpayers?

Tom West: First of all, I think the removal of this rule is a demonstration of two important dynamics. One, the critical importance of the engagement of taxpayers in the comment process, and, two, the government’s willingness to listen and adapt in their rule-making. I don’t know if there are particular industries or taxpayers who will be impacted, but I do know that the change is a very logical and appropriate one, and logic doesn’t always prevail in these processes, so I’m happy to give the regulators credit when it does.

Wolters Kluwer: Which industries may have been helped or hindered by the final regulations with respect to SSTB rules?

Tom West: I’m not sure specific industries were helped, but the biggest positive in terms of the SSTB final rules is the carryover from the proposed regulations of the treatment of the skill or reputation provision. Had Treasury and the IRS gone in a different direction, there was a risk of that provision swallowing the rest of the 199A regime—not to mention how much more subjective the already sometimes difficult SSTB determinations would have become.

Wolters Kluwer: Are there any lingering, unanswered questions among taxpayers or practitioners that particularly stand out when determining what constitutes SSTB income?

Tom West: I think many taxpayers who have both SSTB and non-SSTB activities were hoping for more clarity, either in rules or examples, on how to acceptably segregate business lines or on when (or if) certain activities are inextricably tied together. There are also still lingering questions regarding when a trade or business is an SSTB—particularly in the field of health.

Wolters Kluwer: Were there any surprises in the final regulations?

Tom West: I don’t know if I’m surprised, knowing the concerns that led them to the decisions they made, but the fact that Treasury and IRS held the line on some of the SSTB-related rules is notable. I’m thinking specifically of the so-called "cliff" effect of the de minimis rule and the fact that owners of certain kinds of SSTB businesses, e.g., sports teams, are not allowed to benefit from the Section 199A deduction.