• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Income Tax Aid

  • Home
  • About/Contact
  • Income Tax News

Income Tax News

House Republicans Pitch Tax Relief and Boost in Education Spending

May 2, 2023 by

House Minority Leader Vincent Candelora during a budget press conference on May 2, 2023 Credit: Hugh McQuaid / CTNewsJunkie

A two-year, $51.9 billion budget package proposed Tuesday by House Republicans accelerates the implementation of income tax cuts proposed by the governor while boosting state spending by 1% to support local schools. 

The tax and spending plan, outlined during a morning press conference in the Legislative Office Building, preserves Gov. Ned Lamont’s proposed reduction of the 5% income tax rate to 4.5% and the 3% to 2%, but makes those cuts retroactive to the beginning of the year. The plan also includes a recapture provision ensuring that top earning taxpayers will not benefit from the cuts.

The proposal comes from one of two Republican minority caucuses. Senate Republicans opted not to participate and issued a statement promising to seek even deeper tax reductions. 

In many ways, the House Republicans’ plan shores up proposals made by Lamont, a fiscally moderate Democrat, in February. Since then, the legislature’s Democratic majority has produced a tax plan that scaled back some of Lamont’s income tax cuts in favor of other relief proposals while employing off-budget accounting techniques deemed “gimmicks” by the governor in an effort to increase municipal aid. 

The GOP plan is the first complete budget package from minority Republicans since 2017, when a more evenly divided legislature adopted the state spending cap, which Lamont has sought to preserve. 

On Tuesday, House Minority Leader Vincent Candelora said those 2017 policies have resulted in historic surpluses, responsible spending, and payments toward the state’s unfunded pension liabilities. 

“So five years later we are here today to renew that call because we all know that when Republicans are in the room and part of the conversation, good things happen,” Candelora said. 

Rep. Tammy Nuccio, R-Tolland, and Rep. Holly Cheeseman, R-East Lyme, the ranking Republicans on the Appropriations and Finance Committees respectively, said their plan avoided any so-called budget “gimmicks.”

The Republican proposal includes provisions that will appeal to many in the legislature.

The recommendations included $290 million to support boosts in Education Cost Sharing grants to towns, $50 million for special education costs and another $20 million to prevent the impact of previously scheduled decreases in state support for towns considered to be over-funded by the state. Nuccio said those increases necessitated spending more money than Lamont had proposed. 

“Education, especially in the elementary and secondary areas are a priority for us,” she said. “It is the pathway out of poverty, it is the pathway to better jobs, it is the pathway to success as an adult.”

Meanwhile, the plan addresses calls from many lawmakers to provide additional support for a network of nonprofits that provide much of the social services once offered by state government. The proposal recommends a 2.5% funding increase in each year of the budget where Lamont had called for level funding and the Appropriations Committee had provided a 1% increase.

In a statement, Gian Carl Casa, president of the CT Community Nonprofit Alliance, said the increase was a good start.

“We are encouraged by the House Republican proposal and we hope the support for nonprofits on both sides of the aisle will result in a bi-partisan budget that provides the 9 and 7 percent increases community nonprofits need,” he said. 

Candelora told reporters his caucus’s plan was meant to mirror that of Lamont while acknowledging priorities important to majority Democrats. 

Where many legislative Democrats had sought to establish a permanent version of a one-time $250 child tax credit, which the state offered last year, House Republicans have called for a new deduction allowing parents to reduce their taxable income by up to $2,000 per child. How much benefit families receive as a result of the reduction would depend on their overall income and number of children. 

“I think it recognizes what they have championed and we are trying to bring both the Democrats and the governor to the table with this tax package,” he said. 

The Republican proposal is likely to find opposition in its funding recommendations for higher education institutions, another point of contention in this year’s budget negotiations. Last week, representatives of the Connecticut State Colleges and Universities system argued that proposals from both Lamont and legislative Democrats would force the system to raise tuition and layoff staff. 

They would not receive additional funding under the Republican plan, which generally matches Democratic proposals in the first year. But the funding would come with strings attached in the second year, when the state Office of Policy and Management would withhold one-third of the funding if the schools had not demonstrated certain efficiencies. Candelora said that closures at underperforming campuses could potentially be on the table in some instances. 

“Have they right-sized themselves? Are the administrative costs in line? Are the student-faculty ratios still balanced?” Candelora said. “All of that needs to be looked at because our education systems can’t be running that level of deficits and we can’t just come up with $300 million.”

During the press conference, Republican legislators described the governor as receptive to their ideas and Lamont released a statement, which generally lauded Connecticut’s fiscal position. 

“To continue that momentum, we need to pass an honestly balanced budget that invests in Connecticut’s growth, avoids the gimmicks and mistakes of the past, and adheres to our spending and revenue caps,” Lamont said.

Meanwhile, Democratic legislative leaders lauded House Republicans for producing a complete budget proposal. In a statement, House Speaker Matt Ritter worried the GOP plan relied too heavily on unspecified savings to make the numbers add up. 

“Between the Appropriations and Finance packages, the Governor’s proposal and now the House Republicans’ plan, we are in a stronger position to achieve our goal: a bipartisan budget,” Ritter said.

Senate President Martin Looney questioned whether Senate Republicans would follow the lead of their House counterparts. Looney said Democratic leaders would evaluate the Republican proposals as they had in 2017. 

“Our philosophy then was ‘a good idea is a good idea’ and that remains true today. We Democrats will review the House Republican budget proposal to find areas of potential agreement and points for additional conversation,” Looney said.

Originally Appeared Here

Filed Under: Income Tax News

Is $6 Million Enough to Retire Comfortably at 50?

April 29, 2023 by

Is $6 Million Enough to Retire at 50?

If you save up $6 million by age 50, you’ll position yourself for a long, comfortable retirement. However, you’ll still need to navigate taxes, income calculations and economic forces, all of which can create financial pressure during your golden years. Here’s how to turn your $6 million into a self-sustaining income powerhouse for your early retirement.

And if you need additional help planning for retirement, consider speaking with a financial advisor.

Can I Retire at 50 With $6 Million?

Detailed preparation is necessary to retire 14 years ahead of the average retirement age. Although a $6 million nest egg seems cushy, it’s crucial to ensure that your savings generate enough income to cover your expenses for 30 years or more. Therefore, retirement requires defining your lifestyle, expenses and investment income.

Moreover, retiring at 50 means you can’t rely on traditional retirement vehicles like IRAs or 401(k)s early on, as these accounts only become accessible at age 59 ½. Instead, you’ll have to look to alternative retirement savings instruments like real estate and brokerage accounts.

Finally, it’s best to use a retirement calculator to assess how your financial situation matches your retirement objectives. By entering your savings rate, Social Security benefit, and the state in which you live, you can determine if retiring at 50 is feasible.

How to Determine How Much You Need to Retire 

Is  Million Enough to Retire Comfortably at 50?

Is $6 Million Enough to Retire at 50?

No matter when you retire, you’ll face the same challenges as most retirees during their golden years: paying taxes, living expenses and generating income. The following steps can help you estimate these factors to develop an accurate retirement plan.

If you’re ready to be matched with local advisors that can help you achieve your financial goals, get started now.

Calculate Your Costs in Retirement

The cornerstone of realistic retirement planning is understanding your expenses because your cost of living sets the stage for how much income you’ll need to generate.

Story continues

First, your spending behavior impacts your monthly expenses. For example, a huge mortgage payment or numerous trips overseas can strain your budget. Additionally, the state you live in impacts your standard of living.

Similarly, taxes modify your retirement expenses, especially when you have multiple income streams. For instance, living in a state with minimal income tax benefits, such as California or Rhode Island, means state taxes are a financial burden, unlike a tax-friendly state like Nevada. Likewise, it’s paramount to consider how assets like real estate or cryptocurrency impact your tax situation. Furthermore, property and sales taxes vary by location and influence your monthly bills.

Make Sure to Include Health Care Costs 

Health care expenses generally become more expensive as you age. As a result, it’s wise to include them while planning out your retirement. For example, data from HealthView Services Financial suggests that a 65-year-old couple in good health spends approximately $683,306 on health care during retirement. Therefore, retiring at 50 means budgeting for about $683,000 plus the 15 years before you become eligible for Medicare. You can estimate this amount by designating 15% of your annual income to medical expenses. That said, chronic health conditions mean you’ll spend more.

Lastly, retiring young can mean having children who haven’t left the nest yet. As a result, it’s essential to factor in dependent costs. Estimates vary but the average annual cost of caring for a child is understood to be approximately $17,000. So, it’s crucial to remember this expense when laying out your budget.

Pinpoint Income Streams

The next piece of your retirement plan is identifying your sources of income. Specifically, you must invest $6 million in assets that provide a high enough return to pay for your expenses. Otherwise, you’ll withdraw the principal to afford retirement, causing your savings to dwindle every month and eventually run out.

For instance, say your $6 million nest egg generates a 4% annualized return. So, your annual income is $240,000. If you’re invested in low-risk assets, you can count on that income to remain stable. Conversely, you can increase your returns through stocks but will incur more risk and possibly lose money. Therefore, it’s best to diversify your assets and split your money among numerous assets because doing so generally mitigates risk and increases income.

In addition, Social Security is part of the conversation about income, even for early retirees. Specifically, you can start receiving Social Security at age 62 but will maximize your benefit if you wait until 70. So, although you’ll wait at least 12 years before collecting this benefit, it can supplement your budget in later years.

Crunch the Numbers

Perhaps you and your spouse plan to retire at 50 with a 14-year-old child in the house. Your life expectancies are 90, so you plan for a 40-year retirement. In addition, you’ll retire in Nevada, so you can avoid state income taxes. Lastly, you’ll be living in a house you own but haven’t paid off yet. Here are your annual expenses:

  • $30,000 for housing

  • $36,000 for healthcare

  • $9,000 for utilities and property taxes

  • $7,000 for food

  • $10,000 for entertainment, phone, and internet

  • $7,500 for auto upkeep and insurance

  • $17,000 for raising your child

So, your annual expenses are $116,600 total, or about $9,700 each month.

Next, let’s look at your assets and income streams. You have $2 million in a brokerage account, a $1.5 million annuity, $500,000 worth of real estate, $1 million in certificates of deposit (CDs), and $1 million spread across several savings accounts. Here’s a specific breakdown of your income:

  • Brokerage account return is 4.5% per year for a total of $90,000 or $7,500 per month. Your annuity will provide another $7,500 per month, but you won’t start receiving payments until age 59 ½, so that income won’t be available for the first 9 ½ years of retirement.

  • Real estate creates $5,000 of monthly rental income.

  • CD has a 4% return, giving you another $40,000 per year or $3,333 per month.

  • Savings accounts have a 3% return, generating $30,000 per year or $2,500 per month.

So, your total income (not counting the annuity) is $18,333 per month or $219,996 per year. But before you count your cash, taxes take a chunk out of your income.

Filing jointly with your spouse puts you in the 22% federal income tax bracket. This rate applies to your rental income, CDs, and savings accounts. $129,996 of your income is from these sources, so you’ll pay $19,833 in taxes, leaving you with about $110,000 per year or $9,166 monthly.

Account for Capital Gains

Plus, your brokerage account incurs long-term capital gains taxes of 15%. Therefore, your brokerage account income drops to $76,500 annually or $6,375 per month. Combined with your regular income, your total retirement income is $186,500 annually or $15,541 monthly. Remember, this is a simplified example because your brokerage account may produce short-term gains at some point and incur standard income taxes on part of your returns.

In addition, you’ll pay off your mortgage by age 54, and your child will move out the same year, decreasing your expenses by almost $50,000 per year. Furthermore, your income will jump by $7,500 more per month before taxes once you start receiving distributions from your annuity at age 59 ½. Therefore, not only will you be able to afford your annual expenses of $116,600 once you retire, but your budget will become even roomier before you hit 60.

Plan for Inflation 

However, inflation annually raises your cost of living, even without supply chain issues or global conflicts – albeit at a lower rate of 3%. As a result, $116,600 of annual expenses will grow to $156,701 in 10 years. So, it’s best to reinvest the extra income your assets generate to store up for the years to come.

Fortunately, you’ll receive another income stream to help offset inflation when you reach 62: Social Security. According to the Social Security Administration’s 2022 Statistical Supplement, the average 62-year-old’s monthly check is about $2,360. Therefore, a working couple would collect $4,730 ($56,760 annually). Remember, you can delay taking it for a higher distribution. Specifically, you’ll boost your check by 8% for every year you wait.

How to Boost Your Retirement Income

While $6 million can provide over $200,000 per year when you retire at 50, financial challenges can still arise. For example, you or your spouse might develop a medical condition, or one of your investments could tank. You can prepare for rough waters with these tactics:

Delay Social Security Benefits

Again, delaying Social Security eventually increases your income by 8% per year, maxing out at a 32% boost at age 70. So, you can take it whenever you need to supplement your budget, but you won’t benefit by waiting after 70.

Boost Your Interest Rate

If your interest rates on your savings accounts and CDs are lackluster, you’ll have less income from those assets. Because inflation and economic dynamics have raised interest rates, you can shop around to find better returns. Specifically, banks offer rates upwards of 4% on high-yield savings accounts and CDs. Securing a better rate helps you increase your income without sinking money into risky stocks.

Understand Your Tax Ramifications

As seen in the example above, various assets incur different taxes. For instance, your federal income tax bracket of 22% will only increase with more regular income. So, you could transfer cash from your CDs into your brokerage count, which has a 15% capital gains tax rate due to your income level. Doing so will be especially helpful once your annuity kicks in and raises your income by several thousand dollars per month. In other words, knowing how you’re taxed will help you make optimal financial decisions.

How to Make Your Savings Go Further in Retirement

Is $6 Million Enough to Retire at 50?

Is $6 Million Enough to Retire at 50?

Aside from boosting your income, you can also get the most out of each dollar you make by doing the following:

Use a Budget

Budgeting is the best way to understand if you’re spending more than you make and how to cut back. Plus, the plethora of budgeting tools and apps has made budgeting easier than ever.

Lower Investment Costs

Be mindful of management fees that can eat into your investment income. Because all assets and funds aren’t equal, shopping around can lower your fees and optimize investment performance. It can pay to research and choose investments with low management costs, such as passively managed funds, to save on fees and maximize your returns.

Protect Your Health

Factoring in health care costs is essential when planning for retirement. Likewise, lowering those expenses can help your nest egg go the distance in retirement. You can do so by being proactive with your health. Your dietary and physical habits can keep you in good shape as you age. Plus, annual wellness visits can head off health complications.

Pay Off Debt

Debt can be deadly for an otherwise healthy budget if it gets out of control. For example, carrying balances month to month on your credit card can incur interest charges of 20% or more. This could be four or five times higher than your investment return, so paying it off is the best investment you can make. Instead of putting money in stocks or bonds, your best annual percentage yield (APY) lies in knocking down your debt. You can use the snowball method, paying off smaller balances first, or the avalanche method, prioritizing debts with the highest interest rates to save on interest.

Bottom Line

A $6 million nest egg can provide a healthy income stream for early retirees. Combining income from diverse assets, such as a brokerage account, CD ladders and real estate can help you generate annual distributions well above your budgetary needs. This is good news, since inflation will raise your cost of living as you age. Plus, you can combat financial challenges with strategies to raise your income and make your money last, such as changing your tax situation and finding lower asset management fees.

Tips for Retiring at 50 with $6 Million

  • Investing $6 million can be a challenge. Trying to decide between stocks, bonds, real estate investment trusts (REITs), and a host of other assets can leave you wondering how to make the most of your money. Fortunately, a financial advisor can help you create a solid retirement plan with wise investments. Finding a financial advisor doesn’t have to be hard. SmartAsset’s free tool matches you with up to three vetted financial advisors who serve your area, and you can interview your advisor matches at no cost to decide which one is right for you. If you’re ready to find an advisor who can help you achieve your financial goals, get started now.

  • If you don’t have $6 million, don’t worry. The size of your nest egg won’t prevent you from investing like a millionaire. SmartAsset’s investment calculator can also show you how your money can grow over time.

Photo credit: ©iStock.com/insta_photos, ©iStock.com/PeopleImages, ©iStock.com/monkeybusinessimages

The post Is $6 Million Enough to Retire at 50? appeared first on SmartAsset Blog.

Originally Appeared Here

Filed Under: Income Tax News

US Seeks Dismissal of Ken Griffin Lawsuit Over IRS Data Breach

April 26, 2023 by

(Bloomberg) — The US asked a judge to dismiss a lawsuit by hedge fund manager Ken Griffin against the Internal Revenue Service after the billionaire accused the agency of failing to protect his confidential financial information.

Most Read from Bloomberg

The Citadel founder seeks financial damages over a data breach that led to ProPublica’s publication of private data about some of the wealthiest US taxpayers. Griffin accused the IRS of failing to establish appropriate safeguards, saying on “information and belief” that unidentified IRS workers leaked his tax returns and return information to ProPublica between 2019 and March 2022.

In a filing Tuesday in Miami federal court, US lawyers said Griffin filed a “textbook shotgun pleading” that speculates IRS workers leaked his information even though ProPublica said it didn’t know the source of the tax information it published about Griffin and other wealthy Americans.

“Griffin speculates that some unknown individual(s) in an organization of nearly 80,000 employees, using unknown methods and exploiting unspecified security weaknesses, wrongfully obtained his return information,” US lawyers wrote. Griffin infers that someone at the IRS “gave that information to ProPublica, while omitting or discounting all other possibilities or explanations.”

While it’s “certainly understandable” that Griffin would want to know how his return information became public, the section of the Internal Revenue Code dealing with privacy bars release of “the existence or details of any investigations” related to the case, the US said.

Lawyers for Griffin, 54, didn’t immediately respond Wednesday to a request for comment.

Story continues

‘Needle in Haystack’

Finding a culprit among the vast IRS workforce requires the US to “search for a needle in a haystack,” the US wrote. “But the needle may not even be in the haystack,” the government said. “ProPublica does not know if the source of the information was the IRS and acknowledges that the source may be a hostile state actor.”

Both Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and former IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig said they referred publication of Griffin’s return information to the US Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.

If events reveal “beyond speculation and conjecture” that his return information violated the Internal Revenue Code, “then Griffin can file suit,” the government said.

In a statement at the time he filed the lawsuit, Griffin said: “IRS employees deliberately stole the confidential tax returns of several hundred successful American business leaders.”

He said it’s “unacceptable that government officials have failed to thoroughly investigate this unlawful theft of confidential and personal information. Americans expect our government to uphold the laws of our nation when it comes to our private and personal information — whether it be tax returns or health care records.”

Read More: Thiel Gets Tax Edge With $5 Billion in Roth IRA, ProPublica Says

Republicans, who control the House of Representatives, have pledged to use their power to investigate the breach and the IRS response.

The ProPublica report said billionaires including Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk had in some years paid minimal or no income tax even as their fortunes soared. It outlined the tax strategies available to the top 0.1%.

Griffin reported an average annual income of almost $1.7 billion between 2013 and 2018 and paid an average federal tax rate of 29.2% during that time, ProPublica reported.

Griffin has a net worth of $34.8 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index.

Michael Bloomberg, majority owner of Bloomberg News parent Bloomberg LP, was also among those included in the reporting.

In its filing, the US said that Griffin failed to allege actual damages, which is necessary under the Privacy Act.

The case is Griffin v. Internal Revenue Service, 22-cv-24023, US District Court, Southern District of Florida.

(Updates with details of US filing)

Most Read from Bloomberg Businessweek

©2023 Bloomberg L.P.

Originally Appeared Here

Filed Under: Income Tax News

Your tax refund may actually land on time this year. Thank the IRS.

April 23, 2023 by

As Americans turn the page on another tax season, the Internal Revenue Service may finally be turning the corner on a mountainous backlog of tax returns, delayed refunds and poor customer service that gave people even more reason to groan about the federal agency they love to hate.

Over the past year, the IRS has rebuilt its ranks and has worked through a heap of unprocessed returns that are now down to roughly 2 million from over 12 million, the U.S. Treasury Deported reported this week. Getting help from an agent is easier, too. Taxpayers now face an average wait time of four minutes to get an IRS employee on the phone, down from a soul-sapping 28 minutes last year.

“Tax filing season this year has gone much more smoothly than 2020 and 2021,” Howard Gleckman, a senior fellow in the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, told CBS MoneyWatch. “They did get extra money and were able to hire more people to answer the phone. They dug through a pile of paper returns, which was an unimaginable mess. So even with a small amount of money, things are better.”

Click here to view related media.

click to expand

Tax pros concur. Though smaller refunds may be the cause of frustration for some this year, experts say the filing process itself has been free of disaster.

“We’re returning to the way taxes really worked, mostly, before COVID,” said Eric Bronnenkant, head of tax at Betterment.

What went right?

The IRS was able to hire 5,000 customer service agents and install new online systems thanks to additional funding last year as part of the Inflation Reduction Act. Some pundits have touted these results, pointing to the IRS’ improvement as an example of government performing “when you let it work,” as Steven Rattner, a former member of the Obama administration and now CEO of investment firm Willett Advisors said this week on Twitter.

With new Inflation Reduction Act funding, the IRS was able to provide 87% of customer calls this tax season with live support, up from 15% last year. The average time on hold decreased from 27 minutes to just four.

Gov’t works when you let it work. pic.twitter.com/o7Qx6K5DQm

— Steven Rattner (@SteveRattner) April 18, 2023

2022’s budget increase was just a small fraction of the $80 billion injection the IRS expects to receive over the next decade. In addition to restoring its depleted ranks, the agency also plans to update its telephone systems to allow callers to leave messages and receive callbacks — a feature that banks, utilities and airlines have been using for years.

“For years and years you couldn’t leave a message, but now you can,” Gleckman said. He also noted that, while there’s a lot of partisan argument today about the exact portion of phone calls that the IRS is answering — one camp puts it at 87%, while another puts it in the high seventies — “there’s not much debate that they’re better.”

Replacing manual data entry with scanners

Critically, the IRS has been processing paper returns more quickly by scanning them rather than, as was its practice for decades, having staff manually type in people’s information. It’s on track to scan “millions” of returns this year, the agency said, which means faster refunds.

Congress also helped out this year by refraining from its recent habit of changing the tax law just weeks before, or even during, tax season.


What the IRS is actually looking for that could trigger a tax audit

“Late legislation, a relatively new phenomenon 10 years ago, has taken on a life of its own. But this year we didn’t have any of that,” said Mark Steber, chief tax information officer at Jackson Hewitt. “It’s been a very smooth tax season. No glitches, no IRS shutdowns, no computer problems for most people.”

The IRS’ improved performance is only an initial step in a multiyear modernization plan the agency released earlier this month. However, even with the most modern technology and improved staffing, there’s a limit to how good the tax-filing experience can be, Gleckman noted.

“They’re not going to make the tax code any simpler. The IRS can’t do that — that’s Congress’ problem,” he said.

The National Taxpayer Advocate recently ranked the complexity of the tax code No. 2 on its list of the 10 most serious problems at the IRS, noting that the average individual spends 13 hours — one and a half working days — filing a single annual return, while the average small business spends upward of 80 hours and nearly $3,000 on the effort.

“One of the things I fear is people are still going to be mad,” Gleckman said. “They’ll say [of taxes], it’s too complicated! And it’s not the IRS’ problem — that’s Congress.”

More


Originally Appeared Here

Filed Under: Income Tax News

Lamont Pans Attempts To Get Around Spending Cap

April 20, 2023 by

Gov. Ned Lamont

Gov. Ned Lamont had harsh words on Thursday for a two-year revenue plan from the legislature’s tax-writing committee which his administration said moved roughly $400 million out from under the state spending cap. 

“If you don’t like the spending caps, vote ‘em out but don’t play games,” Lamont said during a late morning press conference in his state Capitol office. 

The governor’s comments follow two days of legislative action to advance a counter proposal to the $50.5 billion budget plan he recommended back in February. On Tuesday, the Appropriations Committee moved a roughly $51 billion spending plan to be paid for by a revenue package advanced Wednesday by the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee.

In broad strokes, the two plans largely reflect the priorities pushed by the governor’s office, though the General Assembly’s response spends more on legislative priorities while remaining under a statutory spending cap and the finance package slightly scales back a broad-based income tax cut proposed by the governor in favor of other tax relief proposals. 

Lamont and his budget chief, Jeffrey Beckham, said the two legislative plans were not aligned. The appropriations plan outspent the revenue provided by the tax plan by around $240 million over two years, Beckham said.

The administration said many of the details would be ironed out through negotiations with lawmakers in the coming weeks and the exact amount of money the state was working with would be uncertain until consensus revenue estimates are released at the start of May. 

However, the governor drew a hard line on adherence to a set of fiscal guard rails, which limit state spending and require excess revenue to pay down Connecticut’s long-neglected unfunded pension liabilities. Lamont, a fiscally conservative Democrat, has advocated maintaining those guardrails and the legislature voted to continue them for at least five years earlier this session.

Beckham said the finance proposal called for diverting about a total of about $400 million, largely from revenue that exceeds forecasted amounts, so it would not be counted against the state spending cap. The committee has proposed sending most of that money to aid municipalities, Beckham said. 

Lamont said the tactics worried him and pledged to avoid them. 

“When you start moving some muni-aid off budget, when you start siphoning off revenues, all of the sudden your budget is out of whack and you violated your own spending caps,” Lamont said. 

“My pledge to you is that we’re going to get an honestly balanced budget without gimmicks, with significant tax cuts for the middle class and honoring the commitments to folks most in need,” he said.

The governor’s remarks echoed those of Rep. Holly Cheeseman, an East Lyme Republican, who objected to the finance proposals budgeting techniques during Wednesday’s meeting. 

“One may not argue with the intended destination of this money, I have the issue of how it is accomplished and that we are basically bypassing that statutory requirement that we set in place for another five years,” Cheeseman said. “In the belief of my caucus, and I may get some sympathy in the Executive Branch, that this is not the way to go about directing funds where they may very well be needed.”

However, the spending cap has left many legislative Democrats feeling that their proposed budget leaves too many needs unanswered, especially given a projected $3 billion state surplus.

Earlier this week, many members of the Appropriations Committee lamented that their budget plan provided only a 1% increase in funding for a network of nonprofits that provide much of the social services once offered by state government.

Meanwhile, Democratic legislative leaders released a joint statement Wednesday, calling for additional investments in a variety of areas.

“As we move forward, we will be looking at finding ways to bolster funding in a number of critical areas – including nonprofits, public schools, higher education, healthcare and childcare workers, paraprofessionals and group homes – while still protecting the fiscal health of the state and providing residents with historic tax relief,” Senate President Martin Looney and House Speaker Matt Ritter said. 

Lamont suggested he may be open to providing additional funding for nonprofits, if the coming revenue estimates provided the state additional fiscal latitude. 

“If we have a little bit of flexibility, that’d be a priority for me to do a little more help for not-for-profits,” he said. 

Originally Appeared Here

Filed Under: Income Tax News

NTA Blog: Chapter 61 Foreign Information Penalties: Part One: Taxpayers and Tax Administration Need a Legislation Fix

April 17, 2023 by

Since 2020, I have repeatedly recommended a legislative change under which Congress would make foreign information return penalties and assessable penalties subject to deficiency procedures for the benefit of both the IRS and taxpayers. This change would provide taxpayers with a more efficient, less costly, and more equitable regime governing the initial imposition of these penalties, as well as the mechanisms by which they can be challenged by taxpayers.

This blog specifically addresses information reporting penalties in Chapter 61, Subchapter A, Part III, Subpart A (hereafter referred to as Chapter 61 for brevity’s sake).

Taxpayers who receive foreign gifts or control certain foreign corporations and partnerships and fail to file required information returns are subject to penalties under IRC §§ 6038 and 6039 (which are in Chapter 61 of the IRC). IRC § 6038 is one of several code sections that require similar filings and provide for similar penalties for taxpayers with various types of foreign corporations, partnerships, assets, and accounts. These Chapter 61 penalties are peculiar in that each section specifically imposes the penalties but provides no authority to assess and collect the penalties. I raised this concern in my 2020 Annual Report to Congress and recommended that the IRS take steps to protect the government fisc and also taxpayer rights by maximizing taxpayers’ access to administrative and judicial review.

Farhy v. Commissioner

The ability of the IRS to assess a Chapter 61 penalty was recently challenged before the U.S. Tax Court in Farhy v. Commissioner and, in a precedential decision, the court held that the IRS lacks statutory authority to assess and collect penalties under IRC § 6038(b).

In Farhy, the taxpayer had a reporting requirement under IRC § 6038(a) to report his ownership interests in two foreign corporations but failed to file required Form 5471, Information Return of U.S. Persons With Respect to Certain Foreign Corporations, for multiple tax years. The IRS assessed an initial penalty under IRC § 6038(b)(1) for each year and continuation penalties under IRC § 6038(b)(2). The IRS sought to collect the penalties via levy, and the taxpayer timely filed a petition with the Tax Court challenging the IRS’s authority to assess and attempt to collect via levy.

The taxpayer put forth a simple argument: that, unlike many other penalty provisions in the Internal Revenue Code, IRC § 6038 has no language authorizing assessment of the penalty it imposes. Essentially, the taxpayer argued, because this code section falls outside of the sections in Subchapter B of Chapter 68 of Subtitle F, entitled “Assessable Penalties,” and because it has no language linking its penalty provision to any other authorization to assess and collect penalties, the IRS does not have authority to assess and collect this penalty.

The IRS raised several arguments in favor of its contrary position. The primary contention was that the term “assessable penalties” refers to any penalty in the IRC not subject to deficiency procedures and that no code section limits the term “assessable penalties” to those found within Subchapter B of Chapter 68. Otherwise put, because the penalties were not subject to deficiency procedures, then, by definition, they had to be assessable, an argument that, if sustained, would have been decisive. The IRS also contended that the definition of “taxes,” which includes “assessable penalties,” in IRC § 6201 is broad enough to encompass IRC § 6038(b) penalties. The Tax Court, however, was unimpressed by this analysis.

Rather, the court found the taxpayer’s arguments persuasive, holding that the IRS did not have authority to assess and collect penalties under IRC § 6038. Among other reasons, the court noted that other assessable penalties outside of Subchapter B of Chapter 68 typically contain language authorizing their penalties or cross-referencing the authorizing statute, or else they are explicitly covered by the list of assessable penalties in Chapter 68.

Assessments and Collections

In my opinion, given that Chapter 61 penalties are not currently subject to deficiency proceedings, and given that, under the court’s ruling, the IRS lacks the statutory authority to treat them as assessable penalties, the IRS cannot itself directly assess and collect them. Instead, collection activities would need to be undertaken by the Department of Justice, but that would add to the burden on taxpayers, tax administration, the government, and the court system. This holding impacts a significant number of IRC § 6038 cases open within the IRS.

To illustrate the potential scope of this disruption, one need only glance at data relating to the IRC § 6038 penalties, which are most often imposed systemically at the time of filing a late information return. In these circumstances, collection efforts generally begin before an employee ever reviews the validity of the assessment. Between 2014 and 2022, there were an average of 9,800 IRC § 6038 penalties systemically assessed per year. Of those penalties, the mean abatement rate was 69 percent per year, with a minimum of 58 percent (as of February 2023) and a maximum of 88 percent. These systemic assessments totaled $354 million per year, of which $281 million was abated – an average abatement rate of 80 percent per year by dollars. We note that because of broad penalty relief provided by the IRS with respect to late filing penalties for 2019 and 2020 returns in Notice 2022-36, we cannot differentiate which abatements were due to the broad penalty relief for those tax years, but we believe that the initiative contributed to a higher abatement rate for those years and consequently a higher average abatement rate for the period of 2014-2022. As I discussed in my 2020 Annual Report to Congress, the IRS’s determination over a decade ago to systemically assess foreign information  penalties has caused administrative burdens and unnecessary expenses for taxpayers and the government.

In comparison, penalties assessed manually by an IRS employee during the course of an examination occurred much less often than systemic assessments, and most of these manually assessed penalties affect individuals, not businesses. The number of manual assessments averaged only 685 returns per year from 2014-2022, with an average abatement rate of 23 percent per year. In terms of dollars, the average aggregate manual penalty assessment per year was $36 million, of which 19 percent was abated.

As I explained in my 2020 Annual Report to Congress, this was a real concern for taxpayer rights and tax administration even before the Tax Court’s Farhy ruling. As shown by the data presented above, because the IRS views IRC § 6038(b) penalties as assessable, most of those penalties are asserted systemically without any kind of upfront human review. This systemic approach resulted in far more penalties being assessed than are ultimately sustained.

This approach, which causes headaches to all concerned, has now been ruled legally unsupportable, wastes everyone’s resources, and subjects taxpayers to a range of hardships. Thus, taxpayers, and now particularly the government, are between a rock and a hard place. This situation cries out for a congressional fix.

The best means of resolving this dilemma, as I proposed in my 2020 Annual Report to Congress, is to treat Chapter 61 penalties in the same way as tax deficiencies:

To protect taxpayer rights and reduce taxpayer burden, we strongly recommend that Congress amend the IRC to allow deficiency procedures for all Chapter 61 penalties, including the IRC §§ 6038 and 6038A penalties. As one possibility, these IRC sections could be amended to add a cross-reference directing that the penalties be asserted in the same way as other IRC sections subject to deficiency procedures. This approach would allow taxpayers to contest these penalties before Tax Court judges familiar with tax law in a prepayment judicial forum.

Benefits to Taxpayers and Tax Administration

Making Chapter 61 subject to deficiency procedures would allow taxpayers the ability for an administrative and judicial review before assessment. This puts judicial review of penalties in the hands of the Tax Court, where it belongs. Due to the tax expertise of its judges, the Tax Court is often better equipped to consider tax controversies than other courts.

Under the IRS’s approach to IRC § 6038, taxpayers assessed a $10,000 penalty must pay the penalty, file a claim for refund, and, if necessary, file a refund suit in the appropriate U.S. district court or the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. As a practical matter, taxpayers make a business decision weighing the cost of representation and legal action in the district court or the U.S. Court of Federal Claims against the cost of conceding and paying the penalty. Such a structure is neither efficient nor equitable for taxpayers and violates their fundamental right to pay no more than the correct amount of tax. This approach is not good for tax administration.

The Tax Court is more accessible, especially to less knowledgeable and unrepresented taxpayers, than other courts because it uses informal procedures, particularly in disputes that do not exceed $50,000 (IRC § 7463). Another benefit is that taxpayers may be offered the option of receiving free legal assistance from a Low Income Taxpayer Clinic or other pro bono representatives. Usually, the Tax Court is by far the least expensive and easiest-to-navigate judicial forum for taxpayers, including low-income taxpayers.

Conclusion

Since 2020, I have repeatedly recommended this legislative change to Congress. Such a step would protect the IRS from the future ramifications of the Farhy decision. More importantly, it would provide taxpayers with a more efficient and equitable regime governing the initial imposition of Chapter 61 penalties and the mechanisms by which they can be challenged by taxpayers while also protecting their rights.

Originally Appeared Here

Filed Under: Income Tax News

IRS Rejects GAO Audit Advice to Learn Why So Many Taxpayers Make Mistakes

April 14, 2023 by

As many Americans who waited until the last minute will likely rediscover this weekend, filing federal taxes is a complicated and frustrating task. No matter how much care is taken, mistakes happen—and fairly often.

During the 2021 tax filing season, for example, the IRS “suspended and reviewed 35 million returns with errors,” according to a new report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which annually reviews the IRS’ performance and makes recommendations for improvement.

Those errors can be the result of taxpayers failing to include a necessary form or complete information, though they can also be the results of mistakes by IRS employees, the GAO reported. In either case, they cause long delays in getting refunds to taxpayers and are a costly strain on the IRS itself—during the 2021 filing year, IRS employees worked 10 hours of overtime per week for several months to deal with a backlog of incorrect tax returns.

There was a significant increase in the number of errors found by the IRS in 2021, which the GAO attributed to taxpayers being confused about how to report aid received during the COVID-19 pandemic, but more than 15 million returns have been flagged for errors in other recent years.

This is a persistent issue for the IRS, but the GAO’s audit found that the tax agency “does not have a process to identify and analyze their underlying causes. This limits IRS’s ability to reduce instances of recurring errors and anticipate potential future problems.”

Until the IRS has such a system in place, the GAO warned, “taxpayers will continue to experience delayed returns and refunds,” and the “IRS risks creating a perpetual backlog of work that will be difficult to address before the start of the next filing season.”

The IRS’ response: nah.

In a written response to the GAO, IRS Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement Douglas O’Donnell rejected the recommendation to study frequently occurring tax errors because the agency already has a “robust” system in place to track and identify errors. O’Donnell added that further study of this problem would be redundant.

In its own response, the GAO disputed the notion that the IRS’ current system is robust—and, based on the numbers, it’s also clearly not very effective. The IRS provided no evidence, the GAO concluded, that its existing processes “have contributed to lower error rates for certain errors.”

If only the IRS had just gotten $80 billion in new funding that could be used to better understand why so many taxpayers struggle to file without making mistakes.

Instead, much of that new funding will beef up the agency’s auditing powers. In other words: Rather than helping taxpayers make fewer mistakes when they file, the IRS will have an opportunity to turn innocuous mistakes into much bigger headaches.

“Congress should override the IRS’ disagreement with this key recommendation, and require a multi-year study on the main causes for taxpayer errors while filing,” said Andrew Lautz, director of federal policy for the National Taxpayers Union, a free market group that advocates for lower, fairer taxes. “More importantly, Congress should carefully consider the results of such a study, and then even more carefully consider expanding the agency’s authority to make corrections for certain common errors on a case-by-case basis—so long as taxpayers have reasonable courses to appeal or protest an IRS correction made on their behalf.”

While it’s at it, Congress should also think about reducing the overall complexity of the tax code so that Americans can file their taxes without needing the costly assistance of accountants or services like H&R Block.

Whether any further action is taken or not, the IRS’ refusal to even consider further reviews of common mistakes provides a tidy illustration of a key difference between government and private sector business. If a business’s customers are confused by a poorly designed website or an overly complicated order form, they might spend their money elsewhere. A business has a clear incentive to reduce its clients’ mistakes, which might be costly and time-consuming to fix even if they don’t drive customers away.

The IRS has none of those incentives, and its customer service will always lag because, well, none of us are really customers.

Originally Appeared Here

Filed Under: Income Tax News

Legislature saves money for families with lower income taxes

April 11, 2023 by

LITTLE ROCK – The legislature passed legislation to save Arkansas families about $100 million a year in lower income taxes. The bill also lowers corporate income taxes and will save Arkansas businesses about $24 million a year.

Senate Bill 549 lowers the top rate for individual income taxes from 4.9% to 4.7%. It will benefit about 1.1 million Arkansas taxpayers whose annual income is more than $24,300. The lower rate takes effect in tax year 2023, and state revenue officials expect employers to adjust withholding for their workers later this year.

The bill lowers the top rate for businesses from 5.3% to 5.1%.

Passage of the tax cut bill gives legislators a more definite estimate of state revenue for next fiscal year. At the same time, lawmakers are finalizing spending requests from state agencies for next year. One of the final last pieces of legislation to be considered this session will be a balanced budget bill.

The Arkansas balanced budget law is known as the Revenue Stabilization Act. For next fiscal year it projects total general revenue spending of about $6.2 billion. There are three major sources of general revenue in Arkansas — the sales tax, the individual income tax and the corporate income tax.

The largest single spending category in the Revenue Stabilization Act is the Public School Fund, from which state aid is distributed to school districts for K-12 education. The Public School Fund, which includes funding of career and technical education, will amount to $2.4 billion next fiscal year.

Divisions of the Human Services Department (DHS) will spend about $1.8 billion in state general revenue. However, total spending levels for DHS will be much greater because the department also receives federal matching funds that are not counted in state general revenue.

Traditionally the state provides about 30% of Medicaid spending and federal funding provides the rest.

State prisons and its related agencies will receive a significant increase in state funding, so that tougher sentencing laws can be effective. The Division of Correction will receive and spend about $379 million this year and will get an estimated $434 million next year. The Division operates state prisons.

The Division of Community Correction operates specialty courts, such as drug courts, and re-entry programs that help inmates transition into society. It also hires parole officers to supervise inmates who have been released early, before their sentence has been completed. The Division’s budget will increase from $98 million this year to $105 million next year.

State reimbursements to county jails represent another major cost of the prison system. Due to a lack of space in state prison units, as many as 2,000 inmates a day are housed in county jails, and the state reimburses county governments for the expenses incurred.

Legislators are working on a major criminal justice package, among other reasons, to reduce the backlog of inmates in county jails. County sheriffs have told lawmakers that there are so many serious offenders in county lockups, they present a danger to staff and to people in jail for relatively minor offenses.

Highway and transportation is not included in the Revenue and Stabilization Act, because it is not funded from general revenue. Highway construction is paid mostly from special revenue such as motor fuels taxes, which are collected at the pump.

Editor’s note: Sen. Joshua Bryant represents District 32 in Arkansas. He and his family live in Rogers. He serves on the Committee of Education and the committee on City, County and Local Affairs.

Originally Appeared Here

Filed Under: Income Tax News

IRS Overhaul Means Chances of an Audit Increases Tenfold (For The Wealthy) | Clayton News The Street Partner Content

April 8, 2023 by

The IRS plans to use the $80 billion in new federal funding to increase audits of corporations and wealthy residents.

During an already-stressful tax season, few words can bring greater fear into the hearts of filers confused by the nuances of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) than “audit.” 

While an audit was recently estimated to occur for 4.1 out every 1,000 returns, the fear of being the one singled out and caught inadvertently doing something wrong is extremely common — a recent Bankrate survey found that 69% of filers are worried about some kind of issue related to their tax return this year.

In 2023, the IRS also expects to use the $80 billion in new federal funding passed as part of the Inflation Reduction Act to increase its audits of the country’s corporations, complex businesses and wealthiest residents.

The $80B In Federal Funding Will Go Toward More Audits Of The Rich, IRS Says

In a 150-page report filed to the U.S. Treasury Department on April 6, the IRS said that it plans to bring audits of those groups back to what they were a decade ago — the last available data from the IRS shows that just 0.4% of those earning above $500,000 were audited in 2019 while that number was at 4.5% in 2011.

This change will not, the agency stresses, raise the audit rates  for or affect those earning below $400,000.

“In compliance initiatives, the IRS will ensure that the agency follows Treasury Secretary Yellen’s directive not to raise audit rates above historical levels for households making less than $400,000,” the government agency said.

The outlined plan follows long-term political pressure to prioritize oversight of the wealthy rather than random audits that strike fears in the hearts of Americans struggling to get by. 

Data compiled by TRAC, a nonpartisan data research center affiliated with Syracuse University, shows the number of revenue agent audits of people making more than $1 million fell from 28,260 in 2016 to 7,108 in 2020. 

During his February 2023 State of the Union address, President Joseph Biden called the current tax system “not fair” for allowing situations in which a “billionaire [may be] paying a lower tax rate than a schoolteacher or a firefighter.”

Here’s What The Audit Increase Means For The Average Taxpayers

Biden’s nominee for IRS Commissioner, Danny Werfel, vowed not to increase taxes or audit rates for those earning below $400,000 during his recent senate confirmation hearing.

“Through both service and technology enhancements, the experience of the future will look and feel much different from the IRS of today,” Werfel said in a statement. “This plan charts the course forward for the IRS and tax administration.”

Other promises made in the report to the Treasury Department include streamlining certain filing processes — there is still a pandemic-related backlog of more than 2.17 million unprocessed returns — by improving “customer service activities, putting an end to long wait times on the phone, adding capacity to the in-person taxpayer assistance centers around the country, and providing new online tools.”

“The plan is a bold look at what the future can look like for taxpayers and the IRS,” Werfel said.

On the lower-earner level, the tax season is expected to be even less pleasant than usual this year — amid the expiration of a number of pandemic-related credits and deductions, the average filer receiving money will get $326 less than in 2022.

The same Bankrate numbers also found that, on top of concerns of getting a smaller refund this year, 34% expecting to get one also worry that whatever they get will not stretch as far due to inflation.

Originally Appeared Here

Filed Under: Income Tax News

What to know about tax brackets, refunds, deadline

April 5, 2023 by

If you’ve lost track of time when it comes to sending in those tax forms, it appears you’re not the only one.

The deadline to file your federal tax return is just over a week away, and fewer than half of the expected 168 million returns have reached the IRS.

According to the latest information available, the IRS has received 80,683,000 returns as of March 24.

How to file extension:If you can’t make the April 18 tax deadline, file an extension now. Here’s what to know.

What is a 1098-E form?What you need to know about the student loan interest statement

Building your retirement portfolio:Here’s how much you can make from investing your tax return every year

What is the federal tax deadline for 2023?

Deadline to file your federal income taxes is April 18.

Taxpayers in portions of Alabama, California and Georgia that have been declared disaster areas have until Oct. 16 to file their taxes.

How do you know whether you have to file a tax return?

If you are a U.S. citizen or resident alien, whether you must file a federal income tax return depends on your gross income, your filing status, your age, and whether you are a dependent. Generally, most U.S. citizens and permanent residents who work in the United States need to file a tax return if they make more than a certain amount for the year.

For most taxpayers, that includes filing a return if you meet these requirements:

If your filing status is and at the end of 2022 you were File if gross income was at least
Single under 65/65 or older $12,950/$14,700
Head of household under 65/65 or older $19,400/$21,150
Married filing jointly both under 65/1 spouse under 65/both over 65 $25,900/$27,300/$28,700
Married filing separately any age $5
Qualifying surviving spouse under 65/65 or older $25,900/$27,300

How to file a tax extension

If you can’t file by the April 18 deadline, you can request an automatic six-month extension. A few words of caution:

How long does it take to get a refund?

If a return is filed electronically file, you should receive your refund within three weeks — although some may take longer — after the IRS receives the tax return. Get the refund even sooner if you opt to have it directly deposited to your checking or savings account.

Tax returns that are mailed can take six months or more to process, the IRS said.

How do you check on the status of a refund?

The best way to check the status your refund is through Where’s My Refund? on IRS.gov. You will need the following information:

  • Your Social Security number
  • Your filing status
  • Your exact whole dollar refund amount

You can start checking on the status of your return within 24 hours after the IRS received your e-filed return, or four weeks after mailing a paper return.

What are the 2023 tax brackets and how do you know which one you’re in?

What to know about tax brackets, refunds, deadline

The 2022 tax brackets for people filing individual returns in 2023 are:

  • 37% for incomes greater than $539,900.
  • 35% for incomes over $215,950.
  • 32% for incomes over $170,050. 
  • 24% for incomes over $89,075.
  • 22% for incomes over $41,775.
  • 12% for incomes over $10,275. 
  • 10% for incomes $10,275 or less. 

The tax brackets for married couples filing joint returns are: 

  • 37% for incomes greater than $647,850.
  • 35% for incomes over $431,900.
  • 32% for incomes over $340,100.
  • 24% for incomes over $178,150.
  • 22% for incomes over $83,550.
  • 12% for incomes over $20,550.
  • 10% for incomes $20,550 or less. 

Where can you download IRS tax forms?

Forms can be downloaded, along with instructions, directly from the IRS.

What kind of help does IRS offer taxpayers?

IRS Free File lets qualified taxpayers prepare and file federal income tax returns online using guided tax preparation software. It’s safe, easy and is offered at no cost.

Free File is a public-private partnership between the IRS and many tax preparation and filing software industry companies that provide their online tax preparation and filing for free. 

Taxpayers whose adjusted gross income is $73,000 or less qualify for a free federal tax return.

Those who don’t qualify can still use Free File Fillable Forms.

Originally Appeared Here

Filed Under: Income Tax News

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 23
  • Page 24
  • Page 25
  • Page 26
  • Page 27
  • Page 28
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

More to See

NHL, NHLPA downplay concerns about state income tax

NHL, NHLPA downplay concerns about state income tax

EDMONTON — The state-tax issue is a non-issue, according to the NHL power brokers currently in the thick of hammering out a new collective bargaining … [Read More...] about NHL, NHLPA downplay concerns about state income tax

Keselowski compares NASCAR rulebook to IRS tax code | Sports

Keselowski compares NASCAR rulebook to IRS tax code | Sports

State … [Read More...] about Keselowski compares NASCAR rulebook to IRS tax code | Sports

Nation needs revenue, not a hobbled IRS, to fix finances (Letters to The Republican)

Nation needs revenue, not a hobbled IRS, to fix finances (Letters to The Republican)

When a businessperson looks at their financial status and realizes that there is more money going out than coming in, what do they do? They take a … [Read More...] about Nation needs revenue, not a hobbled IRS, to fix finances (Letters to The Republican)

Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | About/ Contact
Copyright © 2025 · Income Tax Aid - Lasiter CPAs

Powered by Electric Oak