Newsletters

The IRS has released the 2024-2025 special per diem rates. Taxpayers use the per diem rates to substantiate certain expenses incurred while traveling away from home. These special per diem rates include:

The IRS has released the 2024-2025 special per diem rates. Taxpayers use the per diem rates to substantiate certain expenses incurred while traveling away from home. These special per diem rates include:

1. the special transportation industry meal and incidental expenses (M&IE) rates,
2. the rate for the incidental expenses only deduction,
3. and the rates and list of high-cost localities for purposes of the high-low substantiation method.

Transportation Industry Special Per Diem Rates

The special M&IE rates for taxpayers in the transportation industry are:

• $80 for any locality of travel in the continental United States (CONUS), and
• $86 for any locality of travel outside the continental United States (OCONUS).

Incidental Expenses Only Rate

The rate is $5 per day for any CONUS or OCONUS travel for the incidental expenses only deduction.

High-Low Substantiation Method

For purposes of the high-low substantiation method, the 2024-2025 special per diem rates are:

• $319 for travel to any high-cost locality, and
• $225 for travel to any other locality within CONUS.

The amount treated as paid for meals is:

• $86 for travel to any high-cost locality, and
• $74 for travel to any other locality within CONUS.

Instead of the meal and incidental expenses only substantiation method, taxpayers may use:

• $86 for travel to any high-cost locality, and
• $74 for travel to any other locality within CONUS.

Taxpayers using the high-low method must comply with Rev. Proc. 2019-48, I.R.B. 2019-51, 1392. That procedure provides the rules for using a per diem rate to substantiate the amount of ordinary and necessary business expenses paid or incurred while traveling away from home.

Notice 2023-68, I.R.B. 2023-41 is superseded.

Notice 2024-68

The U.S. Department of the Treasury announced it has recovered $172 million from 21,000 wealthy taxpayers who have not filed returns since 2017.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury announced it has recovered $172 million from 21,000 wealthy taxpayers who have not filed returns since 2017.

The Internal Revenue Service began pursuing 125,000 high-wealth, high-income taxpayers who have not filed taxes since 2017 in February 2024 based on Form W-2 and Form 1099 information showing these individuals received more than $400,000 in income but failed to file taxes.

"The IRS had not had the resources to pursue these wealthy non-filers," Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said in prepared remarks for a speech in Austin, Texas. Now it does [with the supplemental funding provided by the Inflation Reduction Act], and we’re making significant progress. … This is just the first milestone, and we look forward to more progress ahead.

This builds on a separate initiative that began in the fall of 2023 that targeted about 1,600 high-wealth, high-income individuals who failed to pay a recognized debt, with the agency reporting that nearly 80 percent of those with a delinquent tax debt have made a payment and leading to more than $1.1 billion recovered, including $100 million since July 2024.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

The Internal Revenue Service has made limited progress in developing a methodology that would help the agency meet the directive not to increase audit rates for those making less than $400,000 per year, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration reported.

National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins is working to address deficiencies highlighted by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration regarding the speed of service offered by the Taxpayer Advocate Service.

National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins is working to address deficiencies highlighted by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration regarding the speed of service offered by the Taxpayer Advocate Service.

Collins noted in a September 19, 2024, blog post that TAS, as highlighted by the TIGTA audit, is “not starting to work cases and we are not returning telephone calls as quickly as we would like.”

She noted that while overall satisfaction with TAS is high, Collins is hearing "more complaints than I would like of unreturned phone calls, delays in providing updates, and delays in resolving cases." She identified three core challenges in case advocacy:

• The increasing number of cases;

• An increase in new hires that need proper training before they can effectively assist taxpayers; and

• A case management system that is more than two decades old that causes inefficiencies and delays.

Collins noted that there has been an 18 percent increase in cases in fiscal year 2024 and advocates have inventories of more than 100 cases at a time. According to the blog post, in each of FY 2022 and 2023, there were about 220,000 cases. TAS is on track to receive nearly 260,000 in FY 2024.

"Our case advocates are doing their best to advocate for you," Collins wrote in the blog. "But when we experience a year like this in which case receipts have jumped by 18 percent, something must give. Since we don’t turn away taxpayers who are eligible for our assistance, the tradeoff is that we’re taking longer to assign new cases to be worked, longer to return telephone calls, and sometimes longer to resolve cases even after we’ve begun to work them."

Collins added that while the employment ranks continue to rise, about 30 percent of the case advocates "have less than one year of experience, and about 50 percent have less than two years of experience," meaning "nearly one-third of our case advocate workforce is still receiving training and working limited caseloads or have no caseloads yet, and half are likely to require extra support for complex cases."

She said TAS is revieing its training protocols, including focusing new hires on high volume cases so "they can begin to work those cases more quickly, while continuing to receive comprehensive training that will enable them to become effective all-around advocates over time."

TAS is also deploying a new case management system next year that will better integrate with the Internal Revenue Service’s electronic data offerings.

"My commitment is to continue to be transparent about our progress as we work toward becoming a more effective and responsive organization, and I ask for your understanding and patience as our case advocates work to resolve your issues with the IRS," Collins said.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

The IRS has highlighted important tax guidelines for taxpayers who are involved in making contributions and receiving distributions from online crowdfunding. The crowdfunding website or its payment processor may be required to report distributions of money raised, if the amount distributed meets certain reporting thresholds, by filing Form 1099-K, Payment Card and Third Party Network Transactions, with the IRS.

The IRS has highlighted important tax guidelines for taxpayers who are involved in making contributions and receiving distributions from online crowdfunding. The crowdfunding website or its payment processor may be required to report distributions of money raised, if the amount distributed meets certain reporting thresholds, by filing Form 1099-K, Payment Card and Third Party Network Transactions, with the IRS.

The reporting thresholds for a crowdfunding website or payment processor to file and furnish Form 1099-K are:

• Calendar years 2023 and prior – Form 1099-K is required if the total of all payments distributed to a person exceeded $20,000 and resulted from more than 200 transactions; and
• Calendar year 2024 – The IRS announced a plan for the threshold to be reduced to $5,000 as a phase-in for the lower threshold provided under the ARPA.

Alternatively, if non-taxable distributions are reported on Form 1099-K and the recipient does not report the transaction on their tax return, the IRS may contact the recipient for more information.

If crowdfunding contributions are made as a result of the contributor’s detached and disinterested generosity, and without the contributors receiving or expecting to receive anything in return, the amounts may be gifts and therefore may not be includible in the gross income of those for whom the campaign was organized. Additionally, contributions to crowdfunding campaigns by an employer to, or for the benefit of, an employee are generally includible in the employee’s gross income. If a crowdfunding organizer solicits contributions on behalf of others, distributions of the money raised to the organizer may not be includible in the organizer’s gross income if the organizer further distributes the money raised to those for whom the crowdfunding campaign was organized. More information is available to help taxpayers determine what their tax obligations are in connection with their Form 1099-K at Understanding Your Form 1099-K.

The IRS has significantly improved its online tools, using funding from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), to facilitate taxpayers in accessing clean energy tax credits. These modernized tools are designed to streamline processes, improve compliance, and mitigate fraud. A key development is the IRS Energy Credits Online (ECO) platform, a free, secure, and user-friendly service available to businesses of all sizes. It allows taxpayers to register, submit necessary information, and file for clean energy tax credits without requiring any specialized software. The platform also features validation checks and real-time monitoring to detect potential fraud and enhance customer service.

The IRS has significantly improved its online tools, using funding from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), to facilitate taxpayers in accessing clean energy tax credits. These modernized tools are designed to streamline processes, improve compliance, and mitigate fraud. A key development is the IRS Energy Credits Online (ECO) platform, a free, secure, and user-friendly service available to businesses of all sizes. It allows taxpayers to register, submit necessary information, and file for clean energy tax credits without requiring any specialized software. The platform also features validation checks and real-time monitoring to detect potential fraud and enhance customer service.

In November 2023, the IRS announced a significant enhancement to the ECO platform. Qualified manufacturers could submit clean vehicle identification numbers (VINs), while sellers and dealers were enabled to file time-of-sale reports completely online. Additionally, the platform facilitates advance payments to sellers and dealers within 72 hours of the clean vehicle credit transfer, significantly reducing processing time and enhancing the overall user experience.

In December 2023, the IRS expanded the ECO platform’s capabilities to accommodate qualifying businesses, tax-exempt organizations, and entities such as state, local, and tribal governments. These entities can now take advantage of elective payments or transfer their clean energy credits through the ECO system. This feature allows taxpayers who may not have sufficient tax liabilities to offset to still benefit from the available tax credits under the IRA and the Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors (CHIPS) Act.

The IRS’s move towards digital transformation also led to the creation of an online application portal for the Qualifying Advanced Energy Project Credit and Wind and Solar Low-Income Communities Bonus Credit programs in partnership with the Department of Energy. The portal, which launched in June 2023, simplifies the submission and review processes for clean energy projects, lowering barriers for taxpayers to participate in these incentives.

These advancements reflect the IRS’s commitment to modernizing taxpayer services, focusing on efficiency, and enhancing the overall user experience. Looking ahead, the IRS is poised to continue leveraging technology to further improve processes and support taxpayers in utilizing clean energy tax incentives.

Final regulations on consistent basis reporting have been issued under Code Secs. 1014 and 6035.

Final regulations on consistent basis reporting have been issued under Code Secs. 1014 and 6035.

Consistent Basis Requirement

The general rule is that a taxpayer's initial basis in certain property acquired from a decedent cannot exceed the property's final value for estate tax purposes or, if no final value has been determined, the basis is the property's reported value for federal estate tax purposes. The consistent basis requirement applies until the entire property is sold, exchanged, or otherwise disposed of in a recognition transaction for income tax purposes or the property becomes includible in another gross estate.

"Final value" is defined as: (1) the value reported on the federal estate tax return once the period of limitations on assessment has expired without that value being adjusted by the IRS; (2) the value determined by the IRS once that value can no longer be contested by the estate; (3) the value determined in an agreement binding on all parties; or (4) the value determined by a court once the court’s determination is final.

Property subject to the consistent basis requirement is property the inclusion of which in the gross estate increases the federal estate tax payable by the decedent’s estate. Property excepted from this requirement is identified in Reg. §1.1014-10(c)(2). The zero-basis rule applicable to unreported property described in the proposed regulations was not adopted. The consistent basis requirement is clarified to apply only to "included property."

Required Information Returns and Statements

An executor of an estate who is required to file an estate tax return under Code Sec. 6018, which is filed after July 31, 2015, is subject to the reporting requirements of Code Sec. 6035. Executors who file estate tax returns to make a generation-skipping transfer tax exemption or allocation, a portability election, or a protective election to avoid a penalty are not subject to the reporting requirements. An executor is required to file Form 8971 (the Information Return) and all required Statements. In general, the Information Return and Statements are due to the IRS and beneficiaries on or before the earlier of 30 days after the due date of the estate tax return or the date that is 30 days after the date on which the estate tax return is filed with the IRS. If a beneficiary acquires property after the due date of the estate tax return, the Statement must be furnished to the beneficiary by January 31 of the year following the acquisition of that property. Also, by January 31, the executor must attach a copy of the Statement to a supplement to the Information Return. An executor has the option of furnishing a Statement before the acquisition of property by a beneficiary.

Executors have a duty to supplement the Information Return or Statements upon the receipt, discovery, or acquisition of information that causes the information to be incorrect or incomplete. Reg. §1.6035-1(d)(2) provides a nonexhaustive list of changes that require supplemental reporting. The duty to supplement applies until the later of a beneficiary's acquisition of the property or the determination of the final value of the property under Reg. §1.1014-10(b)(1). With the exception of property identified for limited reporting in Reg. §1.6035-1(f), the property subject to reporting is included property and property the basis of which is determined, wholly or partially, by reference to the basis of the included property.

Penalties

Penalties may be imposed under Reg. §301.6721-1(h)(2)(xii) for filing an incorrect Information Return, and Reg. §301.6722-1(e)(2)(xxxv) for filing incorrect Statements. In addition, an accuracy-related penalty can be imposed under Reg. §1.6662-9 on the portion of the underpayment of tax relating to property subject to the consistent basis requirement that is attributable to an inconsistent basis.

Applicability Dates

Reg. §1.1014-10 applies to property described in Reg. §1.1014-10(c)(1) that is acquired from a decedent or by reason of the death of a decedent if the decedent's estate tax return is filed after September 17, 2024. Reg. §1.6035-1 applies to executors of the estate of a decedent who are required to file a federal estate tax return under Code Sec. 6018 if that return is filed after September 17, 2024, and to trustees receiving certain property included in the gross estate of such a decedent. Reg. §1.6662-9 applies to property described in Reg. §1.1014-10(c)(1) that is reported on an estate tax return required under Code Sec. 6018 if that return is filed after September 17, 2024.

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.