The White House is looking to lower the Internal Revenue Service budget by $1.4 billion in fiscal year 2027.

The White House is looking to lower the Internal Revenue Service budget by $1.4 billion in fiscal year 2027.

The budget request, released April 6, 2026, says the overall budget request for the agency will “streamline IRS operations utilizing technology improvements to help focus the IRS on providing high-quality customer service while ensuring the tax laws are fairly administered.”

The request highlighted two areas where it is currently saving money – ending the Direct File program and reducing staffing by 27 percent total – since January 2025.

The decrease accounts for most of the White House’s overall decreased budget request for the Department of the Treasury. The Trump Administration is an $11.5 billion budget for fiscal year 2027, a 12-percent decrease ($1.5 billion) from the budget enacted for fiscal year 2026.

The Office of the Inspector General would see a $4 million decrease to $44 million from the $48 million level in 2026, while the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration would see a decrease from $220 million to $206 million.

The IRS has issued final regulations for the "no tax on tips" deduction under Code Sec. 224, which was enacted as part of the the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (P.L. 119-21). The final regulations adopt proposed regulations that were issued in September 2025 ( NPRM REG-110032-25), with modifications and clarifications in response to comments received.

The IRS has issued final regulations for the "no tax on tips" deduction under Code Sec. 224, which was enacted as part of the the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (P.L. 119-21). The final regulations adopt proposed regulations that were issued in September 2025 ( NPRM REG-110032-25), with modifications and clarifications in response to comments received.

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).

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 provided eight broad categories of occupations that customarily and regularly received tips on or before December 31, 2024. For each occupation, the list provided 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).

List of Occupations that Receive Tips

The final regulations made several modifications to the list of the occupations set forth in the proposed regulations. Three new occupations were added:

• "Visual Artists" and "Floral Designers" were added to the Personal Services category; and
• "Gas Pump Attendants" was added to the Transportation and Delivery category.

The final regulations also made changes and clarifications under several of the occupation categories, including:

• Beverage & Food Service – For the "Wait Staff" occupation, "banquet staff" has been added as an illustrative example, and the occupation's description has been modified to include catered events. The "Food Servers, Non-restaurant" occupation has been changed to "Food and Beverage Servers, Non-restaurant," to clarify that winery tasting room servers are covered by this category.
• Entertainment and Events – The preamble to the final regulations states that "table game supervisors" are covered by the "Gambling Dealers" occupation. The IRS also clarified that individuals dressed up as Santa Claus, as well as other characters or celebrities, are covered by the "Entertainers and Performers" occupation.
• Hospitality and Guest Services – "Doorman" has been added to the list of illustrative examples for the "Baggage Porters and Bellhops" occupation.
• Personal Services – To clarify that resident care is included in the "Personal Care and Service Workers" occupation, the description in the list provides that "work is performed in various settings depending on the needs of the care recipient and may include locations such as their home, place of work, out in the community, at a daytime nonresidential facility or a residential facility." The "Pet Caretakers" occupation has been renamed as the "Pet and Show Animal Caretakers" occupation, and "horse groomer" has been added to the list of illustrative examples.
• Personal Appearance and Wellness – The "Eyebrow Threading and Waxing Technicians" occupation has been renamed as the "Eyebrow and Eyelash Technicians" occupation, and additions were made to the description in the list to include eyelash technicians.
• Recreation and Instruction – The "Travel Guides" occupation now includes a parenthetical noting that both indoor and outdoor locations are covered.
• Transportation and Delivery - "App/platform based delivery person" has been added to the illustrative list in both the "Goods Delivery People" occupation and the "Taxi and Rideshare Drivers and Chauffeurs" occupation. Also, the phrase "over established routes or within an established territory" has been removed from the description of the "Goods Delivery People" occupation.

The final regulations clarify that apprentices and assistants qualify under the applicable TTOC occupation category if they perform the same services as those listed in the TTOC occupation description.

Chiropractors, accountants, tax preparers, concert merchandise sellers, and "low bono" legal service providers were not added to the occupations list, despite requests in the comments to add these to the list.

No occupations included on the occupations list in the proposed regulations were removed from the list in the final regulations.

Voluntary Tips

Regarding the requirement that qualified tips must be voluntary, it is clarified that the customer must have the option to reduce the tip amount to zero. Tip selection methods such as Point-of-Sale (POS) systems with a tip slider that goes to zero or an option for the customer to select "other" and input zero are voluntary. Examples in the final regulations have been modified to clarify that these methods are considered voluntary tipping practices.

Further, the final regulations state that situations where nonpayment of a tip is "without consequence" include situations where nonpayment of the tip does not have any impact on the scope or cost of the service. The final regulations also contain a new example where the tip is part of a contract that is entered into before the services are provided. The example concludes that the tip is a qualified tip because it is paid without consequence. If the customer had chosen to not pay the tip, then the scope or cost of the service would not have been affected.

The final regulations include two new examples to help clarify when payments to digital content creators are tips and when they are compensation. It is also clarified that tipping digital content creators through audience engagement mechanisms that result in superficial digital rewards, such as highlighted messages or other digital tokens of appreciation from the tip recipient that are negligible in value, do not disqualify an otherwise qualified tip.

Other Matters

The final regulations state that amounts received as a tip that are not separately reported to an individual on a statement furnished to the individual pursuant to Code Secs. 6041(d)(3), 6041A(e)(3), 6050W(f)(2), or 6051(a)(18), or reported by the taxpayer on Form 4137 (or successor) are not eligible for the tips deduction. (The preamble recognizes, however, that Notice 2025-69 provides transition rules for this for 2025.)

It is also clarified that "cash tips" include amounts paid in foreign currency. Rules are also provided for tips received by digital tipping systems.

Regarding abuse of the tips deduction, the final regulations replace the provision prohibiting ownership in or employment by a payor with a provision stating that an amount is not a qualified tip, and thus not eligible for the deduction if, based on all relevant facts and circumstances, the amount represents a recharacterization of wages or payments for goods or services for purposes of claiming the deduction.

Effective Date

The final regulations are effective on June 12, 2026, the date that is 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.

T.D. 10044

IR 2026-49

The IRS issued updated frequently asked questions (FAQs) addressing educational assistance programs under Code Sec. 127. The FAQs provide general guidance on eligibility, tax treatment of benefits, and recent legislative updates.

The IRS issued updated frequently asked questions (FAQs) addressing educational assistance programs under Code Sec. 127. The FAQs provide general guidance on eligibility, tax treatment of benefits, and recent legislative updates.

General Background

The FAQs explained that a Code Sec. 127 educational assistance program is a written employer plan that provides benefits exclusively to employees. The program must satisfy nondiscrimination requirements that prevent preferential treatment for highly compensated employees, shareholders or owners.

Exclusion Limits and Tax Treatment

The FAQs clarified that employees could exclude up to $5,250 per year in educational assistance benefits for the tax years at issue. The limit applied to combined benefits, including tuition and qualified education loan repayments. Amounts exceeding this limit were taxable and unused amounts could not be carried forward. Expenses covered under Code Sec. 127 could not be used for other credits or deductions.

Eligible and Non-Eligible Benefits

Eligible benefits included tuition, fees, books, supplies, equipment and payments of principal or interest on qualified education loans. These benefits could be provided for undergraduate or graduate courses and did not need to be job-related. However, meals, lodging, transportation and equipment that employees could retain were not eligible. Courses involving hobbies or sports were not eligible unless required for a degree or related to the employer’s business.

Eligibility and Other Provisions

The FAQs emphasized that benefits were limited to employees and included restrictions on owners and shareholders to ensure compliance with nondiscrimination rules. Other provisions, such as working condition fringe benefits, could allow additional exclusions depending on the facts.

FS-2026-10

IR 2026-55

The IRS has issued procedures for nominating population census tracts that would be designated as qualified opportunity zones (QOZs). The tracts would designated as QOZs effective on January 1, 2027. The guidance was directed at Chief Executive Officers (CEO) of States, territories of the United States and the District of Columbia. The procedures fell under Reg. §§1400Z-1 and Code Sec. 1400Z-2, as amended by the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (P.L. 119-21).

The IRS has issued procedures for nominating population census tracts that would be designated as qualified opportunity zones (QOZs). The tracts would designated as QOZs effective on January 1, 2027. The guidance was directed at Chief Executive Officers (CEO) of States, territories of the United States and the District of Columbia. The procedures fell under Reg. §§1400Z-1 and Code Sec. 1400Z-2, as amended by the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (P.L. 119-21).

Background

A QOZ is an economically distressed area in which select new investments could be eligible for preferential tax treatment. The OBBBA makes the QOZ tax incentive permanent. The first round of QOZ designations following the enactment of the OBBBA will take effect on January 1, 2027. New rounds would follow every 10 years. Additionally, the OBBBA added tax benefits specific to investments made into QOZs that are comprised entirely of a rural area.

Identities of LICs

The Treasury and IRS identified 25,332 population census tracts that are low-income communities (LIC) eligible for nomination as a 2027 QOZ. Out of said tracts, 8,334 tracts are comprised entirely of a rural area. Beginning July 1, 2026, and lasting a period of 90 days, subject to a single 30-day extension, State CEOs would begin nominating eligible census tracts to be designated as QOZs.

The number of population census tracts in a State that may be designated as QOZs may not exceed 25 percent of the number of LICs in the State. This limitation is determined based on the 2020-2024 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year and the 2020 Decennial Census of Island Areas (DECIA) data sets. The tracts were identified using said data sets.

Further, boundaries established for the 2020 decennial census are controlling. They would not be subject to change during the 2027 QOZ designation period.

Nomination Tool

The Treasury has been developing a nomination tool. This would be accessible online and available for the benefit of State CEOs that nominate census tracts for designation as 2027 QOZs.

The QOZ designation period will begin on January 1, 2027, and end on December 31, 2036. Any request to modify such a nomination after October 28, 2026, would be denied. Finally, nominations of tracts not mentioned in this document would be considered, provided they satisfy Code Sec. 1400Z-1(c)(1).

Effective Date

This revenue procedure is effective on April 6, 2026.

Rev. Proc. 2026-14

IR 2026-45

The IRS has provided a waiver of the addition to tax under Code Sec. 6654 for the underpayment of estimated income tax by qualifying farmers and fishermen.

The IRS has provided a waiver of the addition to tax under Code Sec. 6654 for the underpayment of estimated income tax by qualifying farmers and fishermen. Under Code Sec. 6654(i)(1), a qualifying farmer or fisherman has only one required installment payment (instead of four quarterly payments) due on January 15 of the year following the taxable year if at least two-thirds of the taxpayer’s total gross income was from farming or fishing in either the tax year or the preceding tax year. For a qualifying farmer or fisherman who does not make the required estimated tax installment payment by January 15 of the year following the tax year, Code Sec. 6654(i)(1)(D) provides that the taxpayer is not subject to an addition to tax for failing to pay estimated income tax if the taxpayer files the return for the tax year and pays the full amount of tax reported on the return by March 1 of the year following the tax year.

Difficulty in Electronic Filing of Form 8995

The IRS has noted that some qualifying farmers and fishermen were unable to electronically file Form 8995, Qualified Business Income Deduction Simplified Computation, which was required to be included in their 2025 tax returns. Due to this inability, farmers and fishermen may have had difficulty filing their 2025 tax returns electronically by the March 2, 2026 due date. Accordingly, the IRS has determined to waive certain penalties for qualifying farmers and fishermen due to these unusual circumstances.

Waiver of Underpayment of Estimated Income Tax

The IRS has waived the addition to tax under Code Sec. 6654 for failure to make an estimated tax payment for the 2025 tax year for any qualifying farmer or fisherman who files a 2025 tax return and pays in full any tax due on the return by April 15, 2026. The waiver will apply to any taxpayer who is a qualifying farmer or fisherman for the 2025 tax year and fulfills the conditions stated in the previous sentence. Further, the waiver will apply automatically to any taxpayer who qualifies for the waiver and does not report an addition to tax under Code Sec. 6654 on the 2025 tax return.

In addition, taxpayers who otherwise satisfy the criteria for relief under the IRS’ notice, but have already filed a return and reported an addition to tax, may request an abatement of the addition to tax by filing Form 843, Claim for Refund and Request for Abatement, in accordance with the prescribed instructions.

Notice 2026-24

State and local housing credit agencies that allocate low-income housing tax credits and states and other issuers of tax-exempt private activity bonds have been provided with a listing of the proper population figures.

State and local housing credit agencies that allocate low-income housing tax credits and states and other issuers of tax-exempt private activity bonds have been provided with a listing of the proper population figures to be used when calculating the 2026:

• calendar-year population-based component of the state housing credit ceiling under Code Sec. 42(h)(3)(C)(ii);
• calendar-year private activity bond volume cap under Code Sec. 146; and
• exempt facility bond volume limit under Code Sec. 142(k)(5).

These figures are derived from the estimates of the resident populations of the 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, which were released by the Bureau of the Census on January 27, 2026. The figures for the insular areas of American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands and the U.S. Virgin Islands are the 2025 midyear population figures in the U.S. Census Bureau’s International Database.

Notice 2026-22

Internal Revenue Service CEO Frank Bisignano promoted some of the highlights of the 2026 tax filing season before a congressional committee while deflecting questions about data leaks and other issues.

Internal Revenue Service CEO Frank Bisignano promoted some of the highlights of the 2026 tax filing season before a congressional committee while deflecting questions about data leaks and other issues.

Testifying April 15, 2026, during a Senate Finance Committee hearing, Bisignano used his opening statement to promote the highlights of the tax filing season, including:

• 134 million individual returns filed, with 98 percent filed electronically;
• 80 million refunds issued with 98 percent of funds sent electronically; and
• An average refund of more than $3,400 (up 11 percent from last year), with more than 90 percent received by taxpayers in less than 21 days.

He also stated that 53 million American have taken advantage of new tax breaks found in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, including the No Tax On Tips (6 million filers), No Tax On Overtime (25 million filers), and No Tax On Car Loan Interest provision (1 million filers), as well as the deduction for seniors (30 million filers).

“When you look at all this, it’s the reason we talk about the historic refunds,” Bisignano testified.

These, along with the increase to the standard deduction and the child tax credit, along with the full expensing for capital investments being made permanent “prevented a tax increase of over $5 trillion on American families and small businesses,” Bisignano testified.

Bisignano defended the decision to end the Direct File program, noting that 2 million Americans have used a free file option, adding that “Direct File was a costly, unnecessary, and less popular duplicate of programs that already are in place.”

He continued: “Despite heavy promotion by the Biden Administration, Direct File was the by far the least used free filing option.”

When faced with questions regarding data breeches, including information given to ICE by Treasury and other data breeches, Bisignano refused to answer, stating that ongoing litigation was preventing him from commenting in the case of the information given to ICE, and that ongoing investigations in other data breeches precluded him from discussing them.

He also refused to express even a general opinion on the lawsuit filed by President Trump on the leaking of his tax information.

When challenged on the tax gap, Bisignano challenged assertions that it more than $1 trillion. Bisignano said the last published number was $650 billion and added that it was “big enough so we don’t have to debate the trillion.” He said the agency was working on a plan to address it but did not offer any specifics as to what the IRS had planned to close the tax gap. He did say the agency has increased the dollar amount of money recovered from compliance activities.

“Collections and enforcement is up 12 percent, and this is year to date,” he testified, adding that more than $2 billion has been collected in the top five audits.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel (TAP) has released its 2025 Annual Report. The report highlighted accomplishments and ongoing efforts to (1) strengthen IRS delivery; (2) improve communications with taxpayers; (3) reduce taxpayer burden; and (4) support continued modernization of tax administration. The TAP project committees submitted 20 project referrals to the IRS, including 188 recommendations for improving IRS operations and enhancing taxpayer experience.

Last year’s Tax Reform created a new 20-percent deduction of qualified business income for passthrough entities, subject to certain limitations. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97) created the new Code Sec. 199A passthrough deduction for noncorporate taxpayers, effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017. However, the provision was enacted only temporarily through 2025. The controversial deduction has remained a buzzing topic of debate among lawmakers, tax policy experts, and stakeholders. In addition to its impermanence, the new passthrough deduction’s ambiguous statutory language has created many questions for taxpayers and practitioners.

Last year’s Tax Reform created a new 20-percent deduction of qualified business income for passthrough entities, subject to certain limitations. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97) created the new Code Sec. 199A passthrough deduction for noncorporate taxpayers, effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017. However, the provision was enacted only temporarily through 2025. The controversial deduction has remained a buzzing topic of debate among lawmakers, tax policy experts, and stakeholders. In addition to its impermanence, the new passthrough deduction’s ambiguous statutory language has created many questions for taxpayers and practitioners.

The IRS released the much-anticipated proposed regulations on the new passthrough deduction, REG-107892-18, on August 8. The guidance has generated a mixed reaction on Capitol Hill, and while significant questions may have been answered, it appears that many remain. Indeed, an IRS spokesperson told Wolters Kluwer Tax & Accounting before the regulations were released that the IRS’s goal was to issue complete regulations but that the guidance "would not cover every question that taxpayers have."

Wolters Kluwer recently spoke with Joshua Wu, member, Clark Hill PLC, about the tax implications of the new passthrough deduction and proposed regulations. That exchange included a discussion of the impact that the new law and IRS guidance, both present and future, may have on taxpayers and tax practitioners.

I. Qualified Business Income and Activities

Wolters Kluwer: What is the effect of the proposed regulations requiring that qualified business activities meet the Code Sec. 162 trade or business standard? And for what industries might this be problematic?

Joshua Wu: The positive aspect of incorporating the Section 162 trade or business standard is that there is an established body of case law and administrative guidance with respect to what activities qualify as a trade or business. However, the test under Section 162 is factually-specific and requires an analysis of each situation. Sometimes courts reach different results with respect to activities constituting a trade or business. For example, gamblers have been denied trade or business status in numerous cases. In Groetzinger, 87-1 ustc ¶9191, 480 U.S. 23 (1987), the Court held that whether professional gambling is a trade or business depends on whether the taxpayer can show he pursued gambling full-time, in good faith, regularly and continuously, and possessed a sincere profit motive. Some courts have held that the gambling activity must be full-time, from 60 to 80 hours per week, while others have questioned whether the full-time inquiry is a mandatory prerequisite or permissive factor to determine whether the taxpayer’s gambling activity is a trade or business. See e.g., Tschetschot , 93 TCM 914, Dec. 56,840(M)(2007). Although Section 162 provides a built-in body of law, plenty of questions remain.

Aside from the gambling industry, the real estate industry will continue to face some uncertainty over what constitutes a trade or business under Code Secs. 162 and 199A. The proposed regulations provide a helpful rule, where the rental or licensing of tangible or intangible property to a related trade or business is treated as a trade or business if the rental or licensing and the other trade or business are commonly controlled. But, that rule does not help taxpayers in the rental industry with no ties to another trade or business. The question remains whether a taxpayer renting out a single-family home or a small group of apartments is engaged in a trade or business for purposes of Code Secs. 162 and 199A. Some case law indicates that just receiving rent with nothing more may not constitute a trade or business. On the other hand, numerous cases have found that managing property and collecting rent can constitute a trade or business. Given the potential tax savings at issue, I suspect there will be additional cases in the real estate industry regarding the level of activity required for the leasing of property to be considered a trade or business.

Qualified Business Income

Wolters Kluwer: How does the IRS define qualified business income (QBI)?

Joshua Wu: QBI is the net amount of effectively connected qualified items of income, gain, deduction, and loss from any qualified trade or business. Certain items are excluded from QBI, such as capital gains/losses, certain dividends, and interest income. Proposed Reg. §1.199A-3(b) provides further clarity on QBI. Most importantly, they provide that a passthrough with multiple trades or businesses must allocate items of QBI to such trades or businesses based on a reasonable and consistent method that clearly reflects income and expenses. The passthrough may use a different reasonable method for different items of income, gain, deduction, and loss, but the overall combination of methods must also be reasonable based on all facts and circumstances. Further, the books and records must be consistent with allocations under the method chosen. The proposed regulations provide no specific guidance or examples of what a reasonable allocation looks like. Thus, taxpayers are left to determine what constitutes a reasonable allocation.

Unadjusted Basis Immediately after Acquisition

Wolters Kluwer: What effect does the unadjusted basis immediately after acquisition (UBIA) of qualified property attributable to a trade or business have on determining QBI?

Joshua Wu: For taxpayers above the taxable income threshold amounts, $157,500 (single or married filing separate) or $315,000 (married filing jointly), the Code limits the taxpayer’s 199A deduction based on (i) the amount of W-2 wages paid with respect to the trade or business, and/or (ii) the unadjusted basis immediately after acquisition (UBIA) of qualified property held for use in the trade or business.

Where a business pays little or no wages, and the taxpayer is above the income thresholds, the best way to maximize the deduction is to look to the UBIA of qualified property. Rather than the 50 percent of W-2 wages limitation, Section 199A provides an alternative limit based on 25 percent of W-2 wages and 2.5 percent of UBIA qualified property. The Code and proposed regulations define UBIA qualified property as tangible, depreciable property which is held by and available for use in the qualified trade or business at the close of the tax year, which is used at any point during the tax year in the production of qualified business income, and the depreciable period for which has not ended before the close of the tax year. The proposed regulations helpfully clarify that UBIA is not reduced for taxpayers who take advantage of the expanded bonus depreciation allowance or any Section 179expensing.

De Minimis Exception

Wolters Kluwer: How is the specified service trade or business (SSTB) limitation clarified under the proposed regulations? And how does the de minimis exception apply?

Joshua Wu: The proposed regulations provide helpful guidance on the definition of a SSTB and avoid what some practitioners feared would be an expansive and amorphous area of section 199A. Under the statute, if a trade or business is an SSTB, its items are not taken into account for the 199A computation. Thus, the performance of services in the fields of health, law, accounting, actuarial science, performing arts, consulting, athletics, financial and brokerage services, investment management, trading, dealing in securities, and any trade or business where the principal asset of such is the reputation or skill of one or more of its employees or owners, do not result in a 199A deduction.

There is a de minimis exception to the general rule for taxpayers with taxable income of less than $157,500 (single or married filing separate) or $315,000 (married filing jointly). Once those thresholds are hit, the 199A deduction phases-out until it is fully eliminated at $207,500 (single) or $415,000 (joint).

The proposed regulations provide guidance for each of the SSTB fields. Importantly, they also limit the "reputation or skill" category. The proposed regulations state that the "reputation or skill" clause was intended to describe a "narrow set of trades or businesses, not otherwise covered by the enumerated specified services." Thus, the proposed regulations limit this definition to cases where the business receives income from endorsing products or services, licensing or receiving income for use of an individual’s image, likeness, name, signature, voice, trademark, etc., or receiving appearance fees. This narrow definition is unlikely to impact most taxpayers.

Wolters Kluwer recently spoke with Joshua Wu, member, Clark Hill PLC, about the tax implications of the new Code Sec. 199A passthrough deduction and its recently-released proposed regulations, REG-107892-18. That exchange included a discussion of the impact that the new law and IRS guidance, both present and future, may have on taxpayers and tax practitioners.

Wolters Kluwer recently spoke with Joshua Wu, member, Clark Hill PLC, about the tax implications of the new Code Sec. 199A passthrough deduction and its recently-released proposed regulations, REG-107892-18. That exchange included a discussion of the impact that the new law and IRS guidance, both present and future, may have on taxpayers and tax practitioners.

II. Aggregation, Winners & Losers

Wolters Kluwer: How do the proposed regulations provide both limitations and flexibility regarding the available election to aggregate trades or businesses?

Joshua Wu: Treasury agreed with various comments that some level of aggregation should be permitted to account for the legal, economic and other non-tax reasons that taxpayers operate a single business across multiple entities. Permissive aggregation allows taxpayers the benefit of combining trades or businesses for applying the W-2 wage limitation, potentially resulting in a higher limit. Under Proposed Reg. §1.199A-4, aggregation is allowed but not required. To use this method, the business must (1) qualify as a trade or business, (2) have common ownership, (3) not be a SSTB, and (4) demonstrate that the businesses are part of a larger, integrated trade or business (for individuals and trusts). The proposed regulations give businesses the benefits of electing aggregation without having to restructure the businesses from a legal standpoint. Businesses failing to qualify under the above test will have to consider whether a legal restructuring would be possible.

Wolters Kluwer: How does Notice 2018-64 Methods for Calculating W-2 Wages for Purposes of Section 199A, which accompanied the release of the proposed regulations, coordinate with aggregation?

Joshua Wu: Notice 2018-64 contains a proposed revenue procedure with guidance on three methods for calculating W-2 wages for purposes of section 199A. The Unmodified Box method uses the lesser of totals in Box 1 of Forms W-2 or Box 5 (Medicare wages). The Modified Box 1 method takes the total amounts in Box 1 of Forms W-2 minus amounts not wages for income withholding purposes, and adding total amounts in Box 12 (deferrals). The Tracking wages method is the most complex and tracks total wages subject to income tax withholding. The calculation method is dependent on the group of Forms W-2 included in the computation and, thus, will vary depending upon whether businesses are aggregated under §1.199A-4 or not. Taxpayers with businesses generating little or no Medicare wages may consider aggregating with businesses that report significant wages in Box 1 that are still subject to income tax withholding. Under the Modified Box 1 method, that may result in a higher wage limitation.

Crack & Pack

Wolters Kluwer: What noteworthy anti-abuse safeguards did the proposed regulations seek to establish? How do the rules address "cracking" or "crack and pack" strategies?

Joshua Wu: Treasury included some anti-abuse provisions in the proposed regulations. One area that Treasury noted was the use of multiple non-grantor trusts to avoid the income threshold limitations on the 199A deduction. Taxpayers could theoretically use multiple non-grantor trusts to increase the 199A deduction by taking advantage of each trust’s separate threshold amount. The proposed regulations, under the authority of 643(f), provide that two or more trusts will be aggregated and treated as a single trust if such trusts have substantially the same grantor(s) and substantially the same primary beneficiary or beneficiaries, and if a principal purpose is to avoid tax. The proposed regulations have a presumption of a principal purpose of avoiding tax if the structure results in a significant tax benefit, unless there is a significant non-tax purpose that could not have been achieved without the creation of the trusts.

Another anti-abuse issue relates to the "crack and pack" strategies. These strategies involve a business that is limited in its 199A deduction because it is an SSTB spinning off some of its business or assets to an entity that is not an SSTB and could claim the 199A deduction. For example, a law firm that owns its building could transfer the building to a separate entity and lease it back. The law firm is an SSTB and, thus, is subject to the 199A limitations. However, the real estate entity is not an SSTB and can generate a 199A deduction (based on the rental income) for the law partners. The proposed regulations provide that a SSTB includes any business with 50 percent common ownership (direct or indirect) that provides 80 percent or more of its property or services to an excluded trade or business. Also, if a trade or business shares 50 percent or more common ownership with an SSTB, to the extent that trade or business provides property or services to the commonly-owned SSTB, the portion of the property or services provided to the SSTB will be treated as an SSTB. The proposed regulations provide an example of a dentist who owns a dental practice and also owns an office building. The dentist rents half the building to the dental practice and half to unrelated persons. Under [Proposed Reg.] §1.199A-5(c)(2), the renting of half of the building to the dental practice will be treated as an SSTB.

Winners & Losers

Wolters Kluwer: Generally, what industries can be seen as "winners" and "losers" in light of the proposed regulations?

Joshua Wu: The most obvious "losers" in the proposed regulations are the specified services businesses (e.g., lawyers, accountants, doctors, etc.) who are further limited by the anti-abuse provisions in arranging their affairs to try and benefit from 199A. On the other hand, certain specific service providers benefit from the proposed regulations. For example, health clubs or spas are exempt from the SSTB limitation. Additionally, broadcasters of performing arts, real estate agents, real estate brokers, loan officers, ticket brokers, and art brokers are all exempt from the SSTB limitation.

Wolters Kluwer: What areas of the Code Sec. 199A provision stand out as most complex when calculating the deduction, and how does this complexity vary among taxpayers?

Joshua Wu: With respect to calculating the deduction, one complex area is planning to maximize the W-2 wages limitation. Because compensation as W-2 wages can reduce QBI, and potentially the 199A deduction, determining the efficient equilibrium point between having enough W-2 wages to limit the impact of the wage limitation, while preserving QBI, will be a fact-driven complex planning issue that must be determined by each taxpayer. Another area of complexity will be how taxpayers track losses which may reduce future QBI and, thus, the 199A deduction. The proposed regulations provide that losses disallowed for taxable years beginning before January 1, 2018, are not taken into account for purposes of computing QBI in a later taxable year. Taxpayers will be left to track pre-2018 and post-2018 losses and determine if a loss in a particular tax year reduces QBI or not.

III. Looking Ahead

Questions Remain

Wolters Kluwer: An IRS spokesperson told Wolters Kluwer that the IRS did not expect the proposed regulations to answer all questions surrounding the deduction. Indeed, Acting IRS Commissioner David Kautter has said that stakeholder feedback would help finalize the regulations. What significant questions remain unanswered for taxpayers and tax practitioners, and has additional uncertainty been created with the release of the IRS guidance?

Joshua Wu: On the whole, the proposed regulations did a good job addressing the most important areas of Section 199A. However, there are many areas where additional guidance would be helpful. Such guidance may be in the form of additional regulations or other administrative pathways. For example, the proposed regulations did not address the differing treatment between a taxpayer operating as a sole proprietor versus an S corporation. Wages paid to an S corporation shareholder boosts the W-2 limitation but are not considered QBI. Thus, with the same underlying facts, the 199Adeduction may vary between taxpayers operating as a sole proprietor versus those operating as an S corporation.

Possible Changes to Proposed Regulations

Wolters Kluwer: In what ways do you see the passthrough deduction rules changing when the final regulations are released?

Joshua Wu: I suspect that the core components of the proposed regulations will not change significantly. However, I would not be surprised if Treasury were to include more specific examples with respect to real estate and whether certain types of activity constitute a trade or business. Additionally, the proposed regulations will likely generate comments and questions from various industry groups related to the SSTB definitions and specific types of services (e.g., do trustees and executors fall under the legal services definition). Treasury may change the definitions of SSTBs in response to comments and clarify definitions for industry groups.

Tax Reform 2.0

Wolters Kluwer: The White House and congressional Republicans are currently moving forward on legislative efforts known as "Tax Reform 2.0." The legislative package proposes making permanent the passthrough deduction. How does the impermanence of this deduction currently impact taxpayers? (Note: On September 13, the House Ways and Means Committee marked up a three-bill Tax Reform 2.0 package. The measure is expected to reach the House floor for a full chamber vote by the end of September.)

Joshua Wu: The 199A deduction has a significant impact on the choice of entity question for businesses. With the 21 percent corporate rate, we have seen many taxpayers considering restructuring away from passthrough entities to a C corporation structure. The 199A deduction is a large consideration in whether to restructure or not, but its limited effective time does raise questions about the cost effectiveness of planning to obtain the 199A deduction where the benefit will sunset in eight years.

Key Takeways

Wolters Kluwer: Aside from advice on specific taxpayer situations, what key takeaways should tax practitioners generally alert clients to ahead of the 2019 tax filing season?

Wolters Kluwer: Aside from advice on specific taxpayer situations, what key takeaways should tax practitioners generally alert clients to ahead of the 2019 tax filing season?

Joshua Wu: Practitioners should remind clients who may benefit from the 199A deduction to keep detailed records of any losses for each line of business, as this may impact the calculation of QBI in the future. Practitioners should also help clients examine the whole of their activity to define their "trades or businesses." This will be essential to calculating the 199A deduction and planning to maximize any such deduction. Finally, practitioners should remember that some of the information that may be necessary to determine a 199A deduction may not be in their client’s possession. Practitioners need to plan in advance with their clients regarding how information about each trade or business will be obtained (e.g., how will a limited partner in a partnership obtain information regarding the partnership’s W-2 wages and/or UBIA of qualified property).

Wolters Kluwer: Any closing thoughts or comments?

Joshua Wu: Practitioners and taxpayers should remember that the regulations are only proposed and may change before they become final. Any planning undertaken this year should carefully weigh the economic costs and be rooted in the statutory language of 199A. It will be some time before case law helps clarify the nuances of Section 199A, and claiming the deduction allows the IRS to more easily impose the substantial understatement penalty if a taxpayer gets it wrong.

Wolters Kluwer has projected annual inflation-adjusted amounts for tax year 2019. The projected amounts include 2019 tax brackets, the standard deduction, and alternative minimum tax amounts, among others. The projected amounts are based on Consumer Price Index figures released by the U.S. Department of Labor on September 12, 2018.

Wolters Kluwer has projected annual inflation-adjusted amounts for tax year 2019. The projected amounts include 2019 tax brackets, the standard deduction, and alternative minimum tax amounts, among others. The projected amounts are based on Consumer Price Index figures released by the U.S. Department of Labor on September 12, 2018.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97) mandated a change from the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) to the Chained Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (C-CPI-U). Official amounts for 2019 should be released by the IRS later in 2018.

Individual Tax Brackets

The projected bracket ranges for individuals in 2019 are as follows.

For married taxpayers filing jointly:

The 10 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes up to $19,400
The 12 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $19,400 and up to $78,900
The 22 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $78,900 and up to $168,400
The 24 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $168,400 and up to $321,450
The 32 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $321,450 and up to $408,200
The 35 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $408,200 and up to $612,350
The 37 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $612,350

For heads of households:

The 10 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes up to $13,850
The 12 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $13,850 and up to $52,850
The 22 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $52,850 and up to $84,200
The 24 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $84,200 and up to $160,700
The 32 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $160,700 and up to $204,100
The 35 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $204,100 and up to $510,300
The 37 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $510,300

For unmarried taxpayers:

The 10 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes up to $9,700
The 12 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $9,700 and up to $39,450
The 22 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $39,450 and up to $84,200
The 24 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $84,200 and up to $160,700
The 32 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $160,700 and up to $204,100
The 35 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $204,100 and up to $510,300
The 37 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $510,300

For married taxpayers filing separately:

The 10 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes up to $9,700
The 12 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $9,700 and up to $39,450
The 22 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $39,450 and up to $84,200
The 24 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $84,200 and up to $160,725
The 32 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $160,725 and up to $204,100
The 35 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $204,100 and up to $306,175
The 37 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $306,175

For estates and trusts:

The 10 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes up to $2,600
The 24 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $2,600 and up to $9,300
The 35 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $9,300 and up to $12,750
The 37 percent bracket applies to taxable incomes over $12,750

Standard Deduction

TCJA also roughly doubled the amount of the standard deduction. For 2019, the following standard deduction amounts are projected:

For married taxpayers filing jointly, $24,400
For heads of households, $18,350
For unmarried taxpayers and well as married taxpayers filing separately, $12,200

AMT Exemptions

TCJA eliminated the AMT for corporations, and increased the exemption amounts, and the exemption phaseouts, for individuals. For 2019, the AMT exemption amounts are projected to be:

For married taxpayers filing jointly, $111,700
For unmarried individuals and heads of households, $71,700
For married taxpayers filing separately, $55,850

Estate and Gift Tax

The following amounts related to transfer taxes (estate, generation-skipping, and gift taxes) are projected for 2019:

The gift tax annual exemption is projected to be $15,000 in 2019

The estate and gift tax applicable exclusion (increased under TCJA) is projected to be $11,400,000 for decedents dying in 2019

The exclusion for gifts made in 2019 to a spouse who is not a U.S. citizen is projected to be $155,000 for 2019

Other Amounts

The following other amounts are also projected for 2019:

The adoption credit for 2019 is projected to be $14,080 for 2019.

For 2019, the allowed Roth IRA contribution amount is projected to phase out for married taxpayers filing jointly with income between $193,000 and $203,000 For heads of household and unmarried filers, the projected phaseout range is between $122,000 to $137,000.

The maximum amount of deductible contributions that can be made to an IRA is projected to be $6,000 for 2019. The increased contribution amount for taxpayers age 50 and over will, therefore, be $7,000.

The deduction for traditional IRA contributions is projected to begin to phase out for married joint filers whose income is greater than $103,000 if both spouses are covered by a retirement plan at work. If only one spouse is covered by a retirement plan at work, the phaseout is projected to begin when modified adjusted gross income reaches $193,000. For heads of household and unmarried filers who are covered by a retirement plan at work, the 2019 income phaseout range for deductible IRA contributions is projected to begin at $64,000.

For 2019, the $2,500 student loan interest deduction is projected to begin to phase out for married joint filers with modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) above $140,000. For single taxpayers, the 2019 deduction is projected to begin to phase out at a MAGI level of over $70,000.

The amount of the 2019 foreign earned income exclusion under Code Sec. 911 is projected to be $105,900.

The IRS has released long-awaited guidance on new Code Sec. 199A, commonly known as the "pass-through deduction" or the "qualified business income deduction." Taxpayers can rely on the proposed regulations and a proposed revenue procedure until they are issued as final.

The IRS has released long-awaited guidance on new Code Sec. 199A, commonly known as the "pass-through deduction" or the "qualified business income deduction." Taxpayers can rely on the proposed regulations and a proposed revenue procedure until they are issued as final.

Code Sec. 199A allows business owners to deduct up to 20 percent of their qualified business income (QBI) from sole proprietorships, partnerships, trusts, and S corporations. The deduction is one of the most high-profile pieces of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act ( P.L. 115-97).

In addition to providing general definitions and computational rules, the new guidance helps clarify several concepts that were of special interest to many taxpayers.

Trade or Business

The proposed regulations incorporate the Code Sec. 162 rules for determining what constitutes a trade or business. A taxpayer may have more than one trade or business, but a single trade or business generally cannot be conducted through more than one entity.

Taxpayers cannot use the grouping rules of the passive activity provisions of Code Sec. 469 to group multiple activities into a single business. However, a taxpayer may aggregate trades or businesses if:

• each trade or business is itself a trade or business;
• the same person or group owns a majority interest in each business to be aggregated;
• none of the aggregated trades or businesses can be a specified service trade or business; and
• the trades or businesses meet at least two of three factors which demonstrate that they are in fact part of a larger, integrated trade or business.

Specified Service Business

Income from a specified service business generally cannot be qualified business income, although this exclusion is phased in for lower-income taxpayers.

A new de minimis exception allows some business to escape being designated as a specified service trade or business (SSTB). A business qualifies for this de minimis exception if:

• gross receipts do not exceed $25 million, and less than 10 percent is attributable to services; or
• gross receipts exceed $25 million, and less than five percent is attributable to services.

The regulations largely adopt existing rules for what activities constitute a service. However, a business receives income because of an employee/owner’s reputation or skill only when the business is engaged in:

• endorsing products or services;
• licensing the use of an individual’s image, name, trademark, etc.; or
• receiving appearance fees.

In addition, the regulations try to limit attempts to spin-off parts of a service business into independent qualified businesses. Thus, a business that provides 80 percent or more of its property or services to a related service business is part of that service business. Similarly, the portion of property or services that a business provides to a related service business is treated as a service business. Businesses are related if they have at least 50-percent common ownership.

Wages/Capital Limit

A higher-income taxpayer’s qualified business income may be reduced by the wages/capital limit. This limit is based on the taxpayer’s share of the business’s:

• W-2 wages that are allocable to QBI; and
• unadjusted basis in qualified property immediately after acquisition.

The proposed regulations and Notice 2018-64, I.R.B. 2018-34, provide detailed rules for determining the business’s W-2 wages. These rules generally follow the rules that applied to the Code Sec. 199 domestic production activities deduction.

The proposed regulations also address unadjusted basis immediately after acquisition (UBIA). The regulations largely adopt the existing capitalization rules for determining unadjusted basis. However, "immediately after acquisition" is the date the business places the property in service. Thus, UBIA is generally the cost of the property as of the date the business places it in service.

Other Rules

The proposed regulations also address several other issues, including:

• definitions;
• basic computations;
• loss carryovers;
• Puerto Rico businesses;
• coordination with other Code Sections;
• penalties;
• special basis rules;
• previously suspended losses and net operating losses;
• other exclusions from qualified business income;
• allocations of items that are not attributable to a single trade or business;
• anti-abuse rules;
• application to trusts and estates; and
• special rules for the related deduction for agricultural cooperatives.

Effective Dates

Taxpayers may generally rely on the proposed regulations and Notice 2018-64 until they are issued as final. The regulations and proposed revenue procedure will be effective for tax years ending after they are published as final. However:

• several proposed anti-abuse rules are proposed to apply to tax years ending after December 22, 2017;
• anti-abuse rules that apply specifically to the use of trusts are proposed to apply to tax years ending after August 9, 2018; and
• if a qualified business’s tax year begins before January 1, 2018, and ends after December 31, 2017, the taxpayer’s items are treated as having been incurred in the taxpayer’s tax year during which business’s tax year ends.

Comments Requested

The IRS requests comments on all aspects of the proposed regulations. Comments may be mailed or hand-delivered to the IRS, or submitted electronically at www.regulations.gov (indicate IRS and REG-107892-18). Comments and requests for a public hearing must be received by September 24, 2018.

The IRS also requests comments on the proposed revenue procedure for calculating W-2 wages, especially with respect to amounts paid for services in Puerto Rico. Comments may be mailed or hand-delivered to the IRS, or submitted electronically to Notice.comments@irscounsel.treas.gov, with “ Notice 2018-64” in the subject line. These comments must also be received by September 24, 2018.

The IRS’s proposed pass-through deduction regulations are generating mixed reactions on Capitol Hill. The 184-page proposed regulations, REG-107892-18, aim to clarify certain complexities of the new, yet temporary, Code Sec. 199A deduction of up to 20 percent of income for pass-through entities. The new deduction was enacted through 2025 under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), ( P.L. 115-97). The pass-through deduction has remained one of the most controversial provisions of last year’s tax reform.

The IRS’s proposed pass-through deduction regulations are generating mixed reactions on Capitol Hill. The 184-page proposed regulations, REG-107892-18, aim to clarify certain complexities of the new, yet temporary, Code Sec. 199A deduction of up to 20 percent of income for pass-through entities. The new deduction was enacted through 2025 under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), ( P.L. 115-97). The pass-through deduction has remained one of the most controversial provisions of last year’s tax reform.

A legislative package that would make permanent the pass-through deduction, as well as other individual tax cuts, is expected to move though the House this fall. However, the House’s legislative efforts are not expected, at this time, to pass muster in the more narrowly GOP-controlled Senate.

Criticism

Several Democratic lawmakers and tax policy experts have already started to weigh in on the proposed regulations, which were released on August 8 while Congress remained in its annual August recess. Democrats have criticized the new deduction for primarily benefiting the wealthy. Meanwhile, several tax policy experts have taken to Twitter to note that the deduction is overly complex and administratively burdensome.

Senate Finance Committee (SFC) ranking member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., has reportedly said that the proposed regulations "confirm that the fortunate few win," under the new tax law. "Tax planners are already scouring through the nearly 200 pages of regulations in search of new ways to keep wealthy clients from paying their fair share."

Compliance Burdens

The pass-through deduction could add 25 million hours to taxpayers’ annual reporting burden, according to the proposed regulations. Additionally, the IRS has estimated that gross reporting annualized costs to taxpayers will total approximately $1.3 billion over 10 years.

Furthermore, the IRS has estimated that the compliance burden will vary between taxpayers, averaging between 30 minutes and 20 hours. The administrative burden on smaller pass-through entities is anticipated to be on the lower end of the estimate, according to the IRS.

Comment. Ryan Kelly, partner at Alston & Bird LLP, told Wolters Kluwer on August 13 that the IRS’s 25 million-hour estimate, whether accurate or not, suggests that there will be a significant increase in administrative compliance costs. "There is a real cost to tax compliance in lost time and productivity for taxpayers," Kelly said. However, Kelly predicted that taxpayers’ Code Sec. 199A compliance burden will eventually decrease. "Time will reveal the extent of taxpayers’ administrative burden to comply; however, it is likely that as time goes on the taxpayers’ compliance burden will fall as taxpayers, tax practitioners, and the Service all become more familiar with section 199A and how it is intended to operate."
Meanwhile, the chairs of the House and Senate tax writing committees have both praised Treasury and the IRS for quickly releasing the much anticipated regulations. Additionally, several tax policy experts have also praised the proposed regulations for alleviating confusion, as well as taxpayer anxiety, about ambiguous provisions of the law.

"This first-ever 20 percent deduction for small businesses allows our local job creators to keep more of their money so they can hire, invest, and grow in their communities," House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady, R-Tex., said in a statement. "These proposed regulations are intended to provide certainty and flexibility for Main Street businesses in this historic new small business deduction."

Improvements to the proposed regulations are expected in the coming months as stakeholders submit comments. A public hearing at IRS headquarters in Washington, D.C., has been scheduled for October 16. "Evolution of tax regulations is generally never a pretty process, but it is a necessary process that in this case will hopefully happen sooner rather than later," Kelly told Wolters Kluwer.