Why own Variable Annuities? Frequently you see the word “guarantee” associated with Variable Annuities (VA). What does that mean?
The typical VA acts as a tax deferred tax shelter, like an IRA. Unlike an IRA, anyone can open any sized (e.g.: $1,000 or $1 million) Variable Annuity, independent of his or her income, age or employment status. This is quite attractive for someone looking to shelter income from taxation, particularly for those that cannot achieve their goal with an IRA.
Traditional IRAs can only be established by those under the age of 70 ½ and those (or the spouse of those, if married filing jointly) who receive income or alimony. An IRA has contributions limits, which limit the tax sheltering benefits.
In almost all cases a variable annuity (VA) is a form of life insurance. The traditional insurance salesperson markets the variable annuity as a way to safely invest in the financial markets, without risking your principal. We all know there is no such thing as a free lunch inside or outside the world of finance. The insurance salesperson will often tell you, you cannot earn less than 6% or 7% on the investment.
Inherent in most VA policies are two components, an investment component and an insurance component. The investment component offers a choice of investments similar to mutual funds, called sub-accounts. It is the insurance component that is hard to understand.
The insurance component of a VA includes a death benefit. The death benefit “guarantees” the beneficiary will receive the greater of the: value of the VA at death, or the total of all contributions.
Here is an example of an investor, whose portfolio was 100% invested in a stock sub-account of a variable annuity. Assuming the investor invested $5,000 each year for 20 years, contributions would total $100,000. If the average net return per year were 7%, the Variable Annuity would be worth approximately $205,000 at the end of 20 years.
One evening this same Variable Annuity (VA) buyer learns the stock market has declined 50% in that day. This buyer realizes his VA is worth $102,500, has a stroke and dies. His beneficiary would receive the greater of $102,500 or $100,000. In this case the beneficiary would receive $102,500.
So, where was the death benefit? There was NO death benefit. The only time the beneficiary receives a death benefit is when the policy value falls below the total value of contributions made AND the investor dies.
Well, at least the investor did not have to pay any expenses for a death benefit they did not receive, right? Wrong. In most Variable Annuities the policies are mortality and expense charges, called M&E charges. The “E”, or expense charge, represents the administrative component of the M&E. The “M”, or mortality charge, represents the life insurance component of M&E.
The industry average annual annuity charge for non-group open variable annuity contracts was 1.37%. In addition to M&E charges, most VA policies have surrender costs. These are penalties assessed on the policy if the investor moves the policy before the surrender period ends. Some insurance companies offer annuities with 10-12 surrender periods and 12%-15% surrender charges – something has to pay for the “Insurance Agents” commission. Of course, this is in addition to all underlying costs of the sub-accounts (similar to expense ratios inside all mutual funds).
A few companies offer no-load, low cost, no surrender penalty VA policies. An investor can transfer from one annuity to another annuity without tax consequences, like an IRA transfer, but it must be handled with care.
Like an IRA transfer, the transfer of a VA policy, should be conducted on a custodian-to-custodian basis. The transfer qualifies as a tax-free transfer if conducted using Internal Revenue Code 1035. A “1035 Exchange”, as it is commonly referred to as, is the transfer of one insurance policy into another insurance policy. Handled incorrectly, and the investor could have a taxable distribution and hefty tax bill to boot.
Guarantee? Insurance companies have been very quick to highlight the “guarantee” in their VA policies. A word of caution on that “guarantee”: it is not a guarantee by the U.S. Federal Government. Unlike FDIC, the guarantee provided by an insurance company is a promise by an insurance company that it will pay. Some investors who buy their variable annuities from bank are like-wise fooled. The bank does not guarantee the annuity. If the insurance company goes out of business, you cannot rely on the bank or the FDIC to pay you. This applies to all annuities. My Mother recently called me from a bank. By the way, my Mother belongs to Phi Beta Kappa and is intelligent. She was telling me how the bank manager was (helping her) get out of her CDs, where she pays taxes on the interest. She was being switched to FIXED Annuities. I asked her to ask the bank manager what were the guaranteed in the Fixed Annuities, what were the surrender charges if she wanted to cancel, what taxes would she have to pay if when she cashed the annuities in. A few minutes later my mother got back on the phone that the bank manager not only could not answer the questions, but now the manager was too busy to help her. In case you are wondering, had my Mother make the mistake of buying an annuity from the bank, there would have been substantial sales charges, substantial surrender charges and substantial taxes due when my Mother finally cashed the annuity. What should my Mother do? That is like asking me to prescribe without knowing the symptoms. That is a topic for another article. You may want to look at www.taxlibrary.us to read some very informative articles on point.
Buyer Beware! By the way, your typical Insurance Agent gets paid by commission therefore you have to be very careful. If you do the exchange wrong tax consequences will result.
-----------------------------
Lance Wallach, CLU, ChFC, the National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year, speaks and writes extensively about retirement plans, Circular 230 problems and tax reduction strategies. He speaks at more than 40 conventions annually, writes for over 50 publications, is quoted regularly in the press, and has written numerous best-selling AICPA books, including Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Business Hot Spots. He does extensive expert witness work and has never lost a case.
Contact Lance Wallach at 516.938.5007 or visit www.taxlibrary.us or http://www.taxaudit419.com/
The information provided herein is not intended as legal, accounting, financial or any type of advice for any specific individual or other entity. You should contact an appropriate professional for any such advice.
Tax Shelter Penalty Cases Hurt Thousands of Small Business Owners
Gerson Lehrman Group
March, 2011
· Analysis by: GLG Expert Contributor Lance Wallach
Summary
Insurance agents and others sell 412i, 419, captive insurance and section 79 plans to unsuspecting business owners. Since the IRS is calling these plans abusive tax shelters, many small business owners are getting audited and getting penalties under IRC 6707A. They have even fined material advisors and accountants for their participation, and small business owners need to know how to protect themselves from the long reach of the IRS.
Analysis
Insurance agents and others sell 412i, 419, captive insurance and section 79 scams to unsuspecting business owners. The IRS considers many of these plans abusive tax shelters, listed transactions, reportable transactions, or what it calls “similar to,” which allows them to target the plan. The unsuspecting business owners then get audited by the IRS, lose their deductions, and pay interest and penalties. Then comes the bad news. The IRS comes back and fines the business owners a large amount of money for not properly filing under IRC 6707A. They have even fined hundreds of business owners who have filed. The IRS says that they prepared the forms incorrectly or filed improperly, or lied to the IRS.
Taxpayers must report certain transactions to the IRS under Section 6707A of the Tax Code, which was enacted in 2004 to help detect, deter, and shut down abusive tax shelter activities. For example, reportable transactions may include being in a 419,412i, or other insurance plan sold by insurance agents for tax deduction purposes. Other abusive transactions could include captive insurance and section 79 plans, which are usually sold by insurance agents for tax deductions. Taxpayers must disclose their participation in these and other transactions by filing a Reportable Transactions Disclosure Statement (Form 8886) with their income tax returns. People that sell these plans are called material advisors and must also file 8918 forms properly. Failure to report the transactions could result in very large penalties. Accountants who sign tax returns that have these deductions can also be called material advisors and should also file forms 8918 properly.
The IRS has fined hundreds of taxpayers who did file under 6707A. They said that they did not fill out the forms properly, or did not file correctly. The plan administrator or a 412i advised over 200 of his clients how to file. They were then all fined by the IRS for filling out the forms wrong. The fines averaged about $500,000 per taxpayer.
A report by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) found that the procedures for documenting and assessing the Section 6707A penalty were not sufficient or formalized, and cases often are not fully developed.
TIGTA evaluated the IRS’s effectiveness in identifying, developing, and applying the Section 6707A penalty. Based on its review of 114 assessed Section 6707A penalties, TIGTA determined that many of these files were incomplete or did not contain sufficient audit evidence. TIGTA also found a need for better coordination between the IRS’s Office of Tax Shelter Analysis and other functions.
“As penalties are meant to encourage voluntary taxpayer compliance, it is important that IRS procedures for documenting and assessing them be well developed and fully documented,” said TIGTA Inspector General J. Russell George in a statement. “Any failure to do so raises the risk that taxpayers will not receive consistent and fair treatment under the law, and could further reduce their willingness to comply voluntarily.”
The Section 6707A penalty is a stand-alone penalty and does not require an associated income tax examination; therefore, it applies regardless of whether the reportable transaction results in an understatement of tax. TIGTA determined that, in most cases, the Section 6707A penalty was substantially higher than additional tax assessments taxpayers received from the audit of underlying tax returns. I have had phone calls from taxpayers that contributed less than $100,000 to a listed transaction and were fined over $500,000. I have had phone calls from taxpayers that went into 419, or 412i plans but made no contributions and were fined a large amount of money for being in a listed transaction and not properly filing forms under IRC section 6707A. The IRS claims that the fines are non appealable.
On July 7, 2009, at the request of Congress, the IRS agreed to suspend collection enforcement actions. However, this did not preclude the issuance of notices of assessment that are required by law and adjustment notices that inform the taxpayer of any account activity. In addition, taxpayers continued to receive balance due and final notices of intent to levy, and demands to pay Section 6707A penalties.
TIGTA recommended that the IRS fully develop, document, and properly process Section 6707A penalties. The IRS agreed with TIGTA’s recommendation and plans to take appropriate corrective actions. I think as a result of this many taxpayers who have not yet been fined will shortly receive the fines. Unless a taxpayer files properly there is no statute of limitations. The IRS has, and will continue to go back many years and fine people that are in listed, reportable or substantially similar to transactions.
If you are, or were in a 412i, 419, captive insurance or section 79 plan you should immediately file under 6707A protectively. If you have already filed you should find someone who knows what he is doing to review the forms. I only know of two people who know how to properly file. The IRS instructions are vague. If a taxpayer files wrong, or fills out the forms wrong he still gets the fine. I have had hundreds of phone calls from people in that situation.
Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, financial and estate planning, and abusive tax shelters. He writes about 412(i), 419, and captive insurance plans. He speaks at more than ten conventions annually, writes for more than 20 publications, is quoted regularly in the press and has been featured on television and radio financial talk shows including NBC, National Pubic Radio's All Things Considered, and others. Lance has written numerous books including Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence and Scams published by John Wiley and Sons, Bisk Education's CPA's Guide to Life Insurance and Federal Estate and Gift Taxation, as well as AICPA best-selling books, including Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hot Spots. He does expert witness testimony and his side has never lost a case. Visit www.taxaudit419.com for more on this subject.
The information provided herein is not intended as legal, accounting, financial or any type of advice for any specific individual or other entity. You should contact an appropriate professional for any such advice.
March, 2011
· Analysis by: GLG Expert Contributor Lance Wallach
Summary
Insurance agents and others sell 412i, 419, captive insurance and section 79 plans to unsuspecting business owners. Since the IRS is calling these plans abusive tax shelters, many small business owners are getting audited and getting penalties under IRC 6707A. They have even fined material advisors and accountants for their participation, and small business owners need to know how to protect themselves from the long reach of the IRS.
Analysis
Insurance agents and others sell 412i, 419, captive insurance and section 79 scams to unsuspecting business owners. The IRS considers many of these plans abusive tax shelters, listed transactions, reportable transactions, or what it calls “similar to,” which allows them to target the plan. The unsuspecting business owners then get audited by the IRS, lose their deductions, and pay interest and penalties. Then comes the bad news. The IRS comes back and fines the business owners a large amount of money for not properly filing under IRC 6707A. They have even fined hundreds of business owners who have filed. The IRS says that they prepared the forms incorrectly or filed improperly, or lied to the IRS.
Taxpayers must report certain transactions to the IRS under Section 6707A of the Tax Code, which was enacted in 2004 to help detect, deter, and shut down abusive tax shelter activities. For example, reportable transactions may include being in a 419,412i, or other insurance plan sold by insurance agents for tax deduction purposes. Other abusive transactions could include captive insurance and section 79 plans, which are usually sold by insurance agents for tax deductions. Taxpayers must disclose their participation in these and other transactions by filing a Reportable Transactions Disclosure Statement (Form 8886) with their income tax returns. People that sell these plans are called material advisors and must also file 8918 forms properly. Failure to report the transactions could result in very large penalties. Accountants who sign tax returns that have these deductions can also be called material advisors and should also file forms 8918 properly.
The IRS has fined hundreds of taxpayers who did file under 6707A. They said that they did not fill out the forms properly, or did not file correctly. The plan administrator or a 412i advised over 200 of his clients how to file. They were then all fined by the IRS for filling out the forms wrong. The fines averaged about $500,000 per taxpayer.
A report by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) found that the procedures for documenting and assessing the Section 6707A penalty were not sufficient or formalized, and cases often are not fully developed.
TIGTA evaluated the IRS’s effectiveness in identifying, developing, and applying the Section 6707A penalty. Based on its review of 114 assessed Section 6707A penalties, TIGTA determined that many of these files were incomplete or did not contain sufficient audit evidence. TIGTA also found a need for better coordination between the IRS’s Office of Tax Shelter Analysis and other functions.
“As penalties are meant to encourage voluntary taxpayer compliance, it is important that IRS procedures for documenting and assessing them be well developed and fully documented,” said TIGTA Inspector General J. Russell George in a statement. “Any failure to do so raises the risk that taxpayers will not receive consistent and fair treatment under the law, and could further reduce their willingness to comply voluntarily.”
The Section 6707A penalty is a stand-alone penalty and does not require an associated income tax examination; therefore, it applies regardless of whether the reportable transaction results in an understatement of tax. TIGTA determined that, in most cases, the Section 6707A penalty was substantially higher than additional tax assessments taxpayers received from the audit of underlying tax returns. I have had phone calls from taxpayers that contributed less than $100,000 to a listed transaction and were fined over $500,000. I have had phone calls from taxpayers that went into 419, or 412i plans but made no contributions and were fined a large amount of money for being in a listed transaction and not properly filing forms under IRC section 6707A. The IRS claims that the fines are non appealable.
On July 7, 2009, at the request of Congress, the IRS agreed to suspend collection enforcement actions. However, this did not preclude the issuance of notices of assessment that are required by law and adjustment notices that inform the taxpayer of any account activity. In addition, taxpayers continued to receive balance due and final notices of intent to levy, and demands to pay Section 6707A penalties.
TIGTA recommended that the IRS fully develop, document, and properly process Section 6707A penalties. The IRS agreed with TIGTA’s recommendation and plans to take appropriate corrective actions. I think as a result of this many taxpayers who have not yet been fined will shortly receive the fines. Unless a taxpayer files properly there is no statute of limitations. The IRS has, and will continue to go back many years and fine people that are in listed, reportable or substantially similar to transactions.
If you are, or were in a 412i, 419, captive insurance or section 79 plan you should immediately file under 6707A protectively. If you have already filed you should find someone who knows what he is doing to review the forms. I only know of two people who know how to properly file. The IRS instructions are vague. If a taxpayer files wrong, or fills out the forms wrong he still gets the fine. I have had hundreds of phone calls from people in that situation.
Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, financial and estate planning, and abusive tax shelters. He writes about 412(i), 419, and captive insurance plans. He speaks at more than ten conventions annually, writes for more than 20 publications, is quoted regularly in the press and has been featured on television and radio financial talk shows including NBC, National Pubic Radio's All Things Considered, and others. Lance has written numerous books including Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence and Scams published by John Wiley and Sons, Bisk Education's CPA's Guide to Life Insurance and Federal Estate and Gift Taxation, as well as AICPA best-selling books, including Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hot Spots. He does expert witness testimony and his side has never lost a case. Visit www.taxaudit419.com for more on this subject.
The information provided herein is not intended as legal, accounting, financial or any type of advice for any specific individual or other entity. You should contact an appropriate professional for any such advice.
Ray Appleton of KMJ Radio (Fresno) Interviews Lance about Tax Shelters
Ray Appleton of KMJ Radio in Fresno California today asked Lance Wallach for his input on the subject of international tax shelters, the target of a segment on CBS's 60 minutes last Sunday that criticizes the IRS for its lack of action against huge corporations.
Click here to listen to the broadcast.
Click here to get help from Lance for yourself.
Click here to listen to the broadcast.
Click here to get help from Lance for yourself.
How to Avoid IRS Fines for You and Your Clients | LifeHealthPro
Beware: The IRS is cracking down on small-business owners who participate in tax-reduction insurance plans sold by insurance agents, including defined benefit retirement plans, IRAs, and even 401(k) plans with life insurance. In these cases, the business owner is motivated by a large tax deduction; the insurance agent is motivated by a substantial commission.
A few years ago, I testified as an expert witness in a case in which a physician was in an abusive 401(k) plan with life insurance. It had a so-called "springing cash value policy" in it. The IRS calls plans with these types of policies "listed transactions." The judge called the insurance agent "a crook."
IRS: Disclose Offshore Accounts or Go to Jail
IRS: Disclose Offshore Accounts or Go to Jail
Brian
That's pretty much the headline from a CNBC article on Friday. And it's true.In 2009, 15,000 Americans came forward and admitted having foreign bank accounts. Unfortunately, Uncle Sam estimates there are some 500,000 more people hiding money offshore. Opening a bank account in another country isn't illegal. There are a whole host of reasons why people may wish to send money offshore. It only becomes illegal when you send money to a foreign country in the hopes of cheating Uncle Sam.
U.S. law makes it a felony if you fail to declare the income from foreign investments on your U.S. tax return and makes it illegal to not disclose the existence of the foreign account.
So what is a person to do? Taxpayers can do nothing and hope they don't lose the "audit lottery" (there are no winners with the IRS). Or taxpayers can come into compliance, report the account and pay the government ¼ of the highest dollar amount that was in the account. That's right, if you had an account with $200,000 in it, get out the checkbook and write a check to the IRS for $50,000.
Taxpayers wanting to take advantage of the current amnesty program (called the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative) must move quickly, however. Unlike the 2009 program, which simply said you had to apply be the deadline, the current amnesty requires that all missing forms ("FBAR's"), amended returns and payment must be made by the deadline. There is a great deal of paperwork involved with the new program, waiting until the last minute is a recipe for disaster.
Those that don't comply face prison and loss of 50% of their highest account value.
So what is the risk of getting caught? We think it is quite high.
Transparency within the international banking community is at an all time high. And the developed countries are exchanging information. That means if Germany obtains information about accounts in a Bermuda bank it will likely share that information with other countries.
The U.S. has been issuing "John Doe" subpoenas to foreign banks fishing for the names of American account holders. Countries like Germany have been bribing foreign bank officials to simply steal the information and turn it over.
Still not convinced? The IRS paid its first award under the new whistleblower program - $4.5 million to an accountant who reported his employer! If anyone, anywhere knows you have a foreign account; they may report you and keep a large percentage of what you pay.
The world suddenly got much smaller.
This is interesting article but I do not believe everything in it is correct. I have received numerous phone calls from participants in these plans and the IRS is auditing. For the most accurate information contact: Lance Wallach at lancewallach.com or call 516-935-7346
IRS Attacks FBAR Offshore Bank Accounts and Foreign Income
You may want to think about participation in the IRS' offshore tax amnesty program (called the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative). Do you want to play audit roulette with the IRS? Some clients think they are too small to be prosecuted. They are wrong.
To the average businessperson, only the guys with tens of millions secretly stashed in Swiss bank accounts get prosecuted. Don't tell that to Michael Schiavo, he was just prosecuted for hiding money in a Swiss account back in 2003. How much money does the IRS say he hid? A whopping $90,000. That's it.
But wait, there is more to the story. Schiavo attempted to do a quiet disclosure during the 2009 amnesty but instead of filling out the amnesty paperwork, he simply trusted that by coming forward voluntarily he could avoid criminal prosecution. He was wrong on all counts, nothing is too small for the IRS, and nothing is too old.
Section 79, captive insurance, 412i, 419, audits, problems and lawsuits
Section 79, captive insurance, 412i, 419, audits, problems and lawsuits
April 24, 2012 By Lance Wallach, CLU, CHFC
Captive insurance, section 79, 419 and 412i problems
WebCPA
The dangers of being "listed"
A warning for 419, 412i, Sec.79 and captive insurance
Accounting Today: October 25,
By: Lance Wallach
Taxpayers who previously adopted 419, 412i, captive insurance or Section 79 plans are in
big trouble.
In recent years, the IRS has identified many of these arrangements as abusive devices to
funnel tax deductible dollars to shareholders and classified these arrangements as "listed
transactions."
These plans were sold by insurance agents, financial planners, accountants and attorneys
seeking large life insurance commissions. In general, taxpayers who engage in a "listed
transaction" must report such transaction to the IRS on Form 8886 every year that they
"participate" in the transaction, and you do not necessarily have to make a contribution or
claim a tax deduction to participate. Section 6707A of the Code imposes severe penalties
($200,000 for a business and $100,000 for an individual) for failure to file Form 8886 with
respect to a listed transaction.
But you are also in trouble if you file incorrectly.
I have received numerous phone calls from business owners who filed and still got fined. Not
only do you have to file Form 8886, but it has to be prepared correctly. I only know of two
people in the United States who have filed these forms properly for clients. They tell me that
was after hundreds of hours of research and over fifty phones calls to various IRS
personnel.
The filing instructions for Form 8886 presume a timely filing. Most people file late and follow
the directions for currently preparing the forms. Then the IRS fines the business owner. The
tax court does not have jurisdiction to abate or lower such penalties imposed by the IRS.
Many business owners adopted 412i, 419, captive insurance and Section 79 plans based
upon representations provided by insurance professionals that the plans were legitimate
plans and were not informed that they were engaging in a listed transaction.
Upon audit, these taxpayers were shocked when the IRS asserted penalties under Section
6707A of the Code in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Numerous complaints from
these taxpayers caused Congress to impose a moratorium on assessment of Section 6707A
penalties.
The moratorium on IRS fines expired on June 1, 2010. The IRS immediately started sending
out notices proposing the imposition of Section 6707A penalties along with requests for
lengthy extensions of the Statute of Limitations for the purpose of assessing tax. Many of
these taxpayers stopped taking deductions for contributions to these plans years ago, and
are confused and upset by the IRS's inquiry, especially when the taxpayer had previously
reached a monetary settlement with the IRS regarding its deductions. Logic and common
sense dictate that a penalty should not apply if the taxpayer no longer benefits from the
arrangement.
Treas. Reg. Sec. 1.6011-4(c)(3)(i) provides that a taxpayer has participated in a listed
transaction if the taxpayer's tax return reflects tax consequences or a tax strategy described
in the published guidance identifying the transaction as a listed transaction or a transaction
that is the same or substantially similar to a listed transaction. Clearly, the primary benefit in
the participation of these plans is the large tax deduction generated by such participation. It
follows that taxpayers who no longer enjoy the benefit of those large deductions are no
longer "participating ' in the listed transaction. But that is not the end of the story.
Many taxpayers who are no longer taking current tax deductions for these plans continue to
enjoy the benefit of previous tax deductions by continuing the deferral of income from
contributions and deductions taken in prior years. While the regulations do not expand on
what constitutes "reflecting the tax consequences of the strategy", it could be argued that
continued benefit from a tax deferral for a previous tax deduction is within the contemplation
of a "tax consequence" of the plan strategy. Also, many taxpayers who no longer make
contributions or claim tax deductions continue to pay administrative fees. Sometimes,
money is taken from the plan to pay premiums to keep life insurance policies in force. In
these ways, it could be argued that these taxpayers are still "contributing", and thus still
must file Form 8886.
It is clear that the extent to which a taxpayer benefits from the transaction depends on the
purpose of a particular transaction as described in the published guidance that caused such
transaction to be a listed transaction. Revenue Ruling 2004-20 which classifies 419(e)
transactions, appears to be concerned with the employer's contribution/deduction amount
rather than the continued deferral of the income in previous years. This language may
provide the taxpayer with a solid argument in the event of an audit.
The dangers of being "listed"
A warning for 419, 412i, Sec.79 and captive insurance
Accounting Today: October 25,
By: Lance Wallach
Taxpayers who previously adopted 419, 412i, captive insurance or Section 79 plans are in
big trouble.
In recent years, the IRS has identified many of these arrangements as abusive devices to
funnel tax deductible dollars to shareholders and classified these arrangements as "listed
transactions."
These plans were sold by insurance agents, financial planners, accountants and attorneys
seeking large life insurance commissions. In general, taxpayers who engage in a "listed
transaction" must report such transaction to the IRS on Form 8886 every year that they
"participate" in the transaction, and you do not necessarily have to make a contribution or
claim a tax deduction to participate. Section 6707A of the Code imposes severe penalties
($200,000 for a business and $100,000 for an individual) for failure to file Form 8886 with
respect to a listed transaction.
But you are also in trouble if you file incorrectly.
I have received numerous phone calls from business owners who filed and still got fined. Not
only do you have to file Form 8886, but it has to be prepared correctly. I only know of two
people in the United States who have filed these forms properly for clients. They tell me that
was after hundreds of hours of research and over fifty phones calls to various IRS
personnel.
The filing instructions for Form 8886 presume a timely filing. Most people file late and follow
the directions for currently preparing the forms. Then the IRS fines the business owner. The
tax court does not have jurisdiction to abate or lower such penalties imposed by the IRS.
Many business owners adopted 412i, 419, captive insurance and Section 79 plans based
upon representations provided by insurance professionals that the plans were legitimate
plans and were not informed that they were engaging in a listed transaction.
Upon audit, these taxpayers were shocked when the IRS asserted penalties under Section
6707A of the Code in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Numerous complaints from
these taxpayers caused Congress to impose a moratorium on assessment of Section 6707A
penalties.
The moratorium on IRS fines expired on June 1, 2010. The IRS immediately started sending
out notices proposing the imposition of Section 6707A penalties along with requests for
lengthy extensions of the Statute of Limitations for the purpose of assessing tax. Many of
these taxpayers stopped taking deductions for contributions to these plans years ago, and
are confused and upset by the IRS's inquiry, especially when the taxpayer had previously
reached a monetary settlement with the IRS regarding its deductions. Logic and common
sense dictate that a penalty should not apply if the taxpayer no longer benefits from the
arrangement.
Treas. Reg. Sec. 1.6011-4(c)(3)(i) provides that a taxpayer has participated in a listed
transaction if the taxpayer's tax return reflects tax consequences or a tax strategy described
in the published guidance identifying the transaction as a listed transaction or a transaction
that is the same or substantially similar to a listed transaction. Clearly, the primary benefit in
the participation of these plans is the large tax deduction generated by such participation. It
follows that taxpayers who no longer enjoy the benefit of those large deductions are no
longer "participating ' in the listed transaction. But that is not the end of the story.
Many taxpayers who are no longer taking current tax deductions for these plans continue to
enjoy the benefit of previous tax deductions by continuing the deferral of income from
contributions and deductions taken in prior years. While the regulations do not expand on
what constitutes "reflecting the tax consequences of the strategy", it could be argued that
continued benefit from a tax deferral for a previous tax deduction is within the contemplation
of a "tax consequence" of the plan strategy. Also, many taxpayers who no longer make
contributions or claim tax deductions continue to pay administrative fees. Sometimes,
money is taken from the plan to pay premiums to keep life insurance policies in force. In
these ways, it could be argued that these taxpayers are still "contributing", and thus still
must file Form 8886.
It is clear that the extent to which a taxpayer benefits from the transaction depends on the
purpose of a particular transaction as described in the published guidance that caused such
transaction to be a listed transaction. Revenue Ruling 2004-20 which classifies 419(e)
transactions, appears to be concerned with the employer's contribution/deduction amount
rather than the continued deferral of the income in previous years. This language may
provide the taxpayer with a solid argument in the event of an audit.
IRS Issues Final Regulations for Material Advisors, Accountants, Attorneys and Insurance Agents - HG.org
IRS Issues Final Regulations for Material Advisors, Accountants, Attorneys and Insurance Agents - HG.org
If you sold, advised on or had anything to do with a listed transaction you will be fined by the IRS. For those that bought listed transactions like, 419 welfare benefit plans or 412i plans, you have been or will also be fined.
On July 30, 2014, the Internal Revenue Service issued final regulations regarding the imposition of penalties under Internal Revenue Code section 6707 against material advisors who fail to file true, complete or timely disclosure returns with respect to reportable or listed transactions. The effective date of the final regulations is July 31, 2014.
No Shelter Here: Beware of These Insurance Plans | Remodeling
No Shelter Here: Beware of These Insurance Plans | Remodeling
During the past few years, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has fined many business owners hundreds of thousands of dollars for participating in several particular types of insurance plans.
The 412(i), 419, captive insurance, and section 79 plans were marketed as a way for small-business owners to set up retirement, welfare benefit plans, or other tax-deductible programs while leveraging huge tax savings, but the IRS put most of them on a list of abusive tax shelters, listed transactions, or similar transactions, etc., and has more recently focused audits on them. Many accountants are unaware of the issues surrounding these plans, and many big-name insurance companies are still encouraging participation in them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)