{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

C12-Chp-04-8-Cases Confirm Bad Tax Plan-PPC-Feb-2004

C12-Chp-04-8-Cases Confirm Bad Tax Plan-PPC-Feb-2004 -...

Info icon This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Recent Cases Confirm That Bad Tax Planning = Bad Tax Results Practitioners Publishing Company-February 2004- PPCnet [[email protected]] Shareholders of closely held C corporations commonly lease real estate, equipment, and other property to the corporate entity either directly or through a separate partnership, LLC, or S corporation. (A separate entity is often used to limit liability or to spread participation in the leasing activity among multiple investors.) Some of the tax advantages that can motivate these arrangements include the following: 1. Avoiding Payroll Taxes. Rental income from real estate is exempt from the self-employment (SE) tax. Rental income from personal property may be exempt from SE tax. Royalties are not subject to SE tax unless earned in an activity that is a trade or business. 2. Providing Retirement Cash Flow. Retaining valuable assets outside a controlled corporation allows a shareholder-lessor to continue to receive cash flow from the corporation in the form of rents or royalties, even though the shareholder sells or is no longer actively employed by the corporation. 3. Avoiding Corporate-level Gain. Retaining ownership of real estate and other tangible or intangible assets with a high probability of appreciating in value avoids the potential for triggering corporate-level gain when those assets are sold or distributed [IRC Secs. 311(b) (1) and 336(a)]. Recent Farm Corporation Cases In late 2003, the Tax Court issued four opinions, in sequence, all addressing the same employee fringe benefit issues with respect to four family-owned farm corporations. These four farm corporations all had essentially the same fact pattern because they were all designed by an attorney who also served as their tax preparer, as well as the taxpayers' counsel in the Tax Court litigation. As noted in a recent Farm Tax Network article written by PPC authors Andy Biebl and Bob Ranweiler, the four corporations received a mixed result from the Tax Court [ Weeldreyer v. Comm. , TC Memo 2003-324; Schmidt v. Comm. , TC Memo 2003-325; Tschetter v. Comm. , TC Memo 2003- 326; and Waterfall Farms, Inc. v. Comm. , TC Memo 2003-327]. The corporate-provided medical
Image of page 1

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.
  • Spring '08
  • Godfrey,H
  • Corporation, Limited Liability Company, S corporation, fringe benefits, Farm Tax Network, Mr. Weeldreyer

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern