Here is my summary of the TPR items as well as a recent news release by the California Franchise Tax Board on conformity with TPR.
Policy Item: Both the ACA items (particularly the relief from the $100/employee/day penalty for health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs) that violate ACA provisions), and the TPR relief for small businesses came after many diligent tax practitioners had already invested time with their clients and clients had invested money and may have changed business practices that may have been adverse to employees (to fix HRA problems). It would be nice to see some practice implemented such that IRS can get this filing season related guidance out well before the start of filing season. Perhaps there should be a meeting in October with IRS and key tax practitioner groups (AICPA, NAEA, etc.) to identify the filing season challenges and suggest solutions that the IRS could issue guidance on before December).
What do you think?
Here is my TPR summary: Hope it is helpful.
Adopting the Tangible Property Regulations
in Light of IRS Simplified Procedure of Rev. Proc. 2015-20
+ FTB Announcement on Conformity
in Light of IRS Simplified Procedure of Rev. Proc. 2015-20
+ FTB Announcement on Conformity
On February 13, 2015, the IRS
finally responded to requests of many practitioners to provide relief from
filing Forms 3115 for all clients with depreciable assets, whether used for
business or rental properties. Basically, this guidance – Rev. Proc. 2015-20, allows “a
small business taxpayer, defined as a business with total assets of less than
$10 million or average annual gross receipts of $10 million or less for the
prior three taxable years” to adopt the tangible property regulations (TPR) on
a cut-off basis. That means, no need for a Form 3115 or calculation of any §481(a)
adjustment. With this approach, the small business just adopts the TPR for its
tax year beginning on or after 1/1/14. The taxpayer continues to use its old
method for repairs versus capitalization and supplies for prior tax years.
It is highly recommended that you
read Rev. Proc. 2015-20. This will help in deciding whether to take
this simplified method versus reviewing the clients tax records to determine
where it has method changes and §481(a) adjustments. For example, you need to
review the records to determine if in the past, something was expensed as a
repair which the TPR would treat as an improvement. If that item would still be
on the depreciation records if capitalized back in the year incurred, it
generates a positive §481(a) adjustment. There may also be pre-2014
transactions where something was capitalized as an improvement when under the
TPR, it is not an improvement so should have been expensed. If this asset is
still being depreciated, a negative §481(a) adjustment is generated equal to
the adjustment basis of the asset at 12/31/13 (assuming the taxpayer is using a
calendar year as its tax year).
The nature of the possible
adjustments to adopt the TPR for prior years are summarized in Rev. Proc. 2015-14, Section
10.11 on Tangible Property. This was formerly in Rev. Proc. 2014-16.
Also relevant are the regulations
on dispositions of property that related to the TPR. These regulations and Rev. Proc. 2014-54 (now part
of Rev. Proc. 2015-14) allowed a one-time retroactive adjustment
via a negative Section 481(a) adjustment for 2014 (assuming a calendar year) (see
Section 6 of Rev. Proc. 2015-14).
Some observations to consider
when you read Rev. Proc. 2015-20 and decide whether to go the Form 3115/§481(a)
route or the simplified approach for your small clients.
Rev. Proc. 2015-20 Simplified
Approach
(No 3115 or 481(a) adj.) |
Rev. Proc. 2015-14 Method Changes
and Forms 3115
|
|
Audit protection for prior years
|
No
|
Yes
|
Possibility of reducing 2014
taxable income for any negative §481(a) adjustment (after using the netting
process of Rev. Proc. 2015-14).
|
No
|
Yes
(note that if the 481(a) adjustment relates
to a passive activity, it is a passive activity deduction only usable against
passive activity income).
|
Ability to make the optional
late partial disposition election that is only available for 2014 (producing
a negative §81(a) adjustment).
|
No
|
Yes
|
Time commitment
|
To
consider whether to go the simplified route (no 3115 or §481(a) adjustment)
or do the full method adoption.
|
Time is needed to review depreciation
schedule and inquire about past repairs. Need to review supplies treatment in
light of TPR. Creation of documents to support required §481(a) adjustments. Spend
time with Rev. Proc. 2015-14 on how to make the method changes.
|
Taxpayer’s tax records
|
·
2014 and
later follow TPR
·
Tax years
prior to 2014 follow the taxpayer’s method used prior to the TPR.
|
All of taxpayer’s tax records follow the
TPR (due to the §481(a) adjustments made).
|
Additional Information
·
Rev. Proc. 2015-20 includes a special rule in identifying taxpayers
eligible for the $10 million measure of being “small.” Basically, if the
taxpayer has separate and distinct trades or businesses, it does not aggregate
their gross receipts to see if the $10 million threshold is crossed. See Section 4 of Rev. Proc. 2015-20.
·
In
Rev. Proc. 2015-20, the IRS requests comments on
whether the $500 de minimis safe harbor election amount of Reg. 1.263(a)-1(f)
should be increased.
·
In
March 2015, the IRS released FAQs on the TPR. The FAQ on Rev. Proc.
2015-20 suggests that taxpayers using the simplified procedure include a
statement on the 2014 return that the taxpayer is a qualifying trade or
business using the simplified procedure of Rev. Proc. 2015-20.
California and TPR and
Method Changes
In its March 2015 newsletter, the Franchise Tax Board (FTB)
explains how the federal TPR apply in California and the effect of a federal
Form 3115. Quoting one key part of this news:
“Does California Follow the Repair Regulations?
Yes, for taxable years starting on or after January 1,
2010, California conforms to the Internal Revenue Code as enacted on January 1,
2009. Any regulations for the Internal Revenue Code as in effect on January 1,
2009, are applicable as regulations of the FTB unless they conflict with a
provision of the Revenue and Taxation Code or a regulation of the FTB. The FTB
is currently not aware of any specific repair regulations which the FTB would
not follow”
The FTB also
states that any method change made for federal income tax purposes also changes
the method for California purposes. FTB notes though, that if the §481(a)
adjustment involves depreciation, the §481(a) amount for California
corporations will be different..
Finally, the
FTB states that it will follow Rev. Proc. 2015-20.
No comments:
Post a Comment