Federal Income Tax Free Outline
Federal Income Tax Free Outline
Federal Income Tax Free Outline
OUTLINE DETAILS:
School: Georgetown University Law Center
Course: Taxation I
Year: Fall, 2005
Professor: Ronald A. Pearlman
Text: Federal Income Tax, 13th Ed.
Text Authors: William A. Klein, Joseph Bankman, Daniel N. Shaviro
NOTICE:
This outline is © copyright 2006 by Maximilian Ventures, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company. This
outline, in whole or in part, may not be reproduced or redistributed without the written permission of the
copyright holder. A limited license for personal academic use is permitted, as described below. This
outline may not be posted on any other web site without permission. ILRG reserves the exclusive right to
distribute this outline.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 ii
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 1
II. DEFINITION OF “INCOME” –Compensation for Services & Work-Related Fringe Benefits
1. Statutory imposition of tax.
A. Internal Revenue Code ("Code") §§ 1(a)-(c) (introductory language only),
B. Be aware of pp. ix-xi of the CCH Code & Reg. volume—tax rate tables and other dollar amounts
adjusted for inflation.
2. Gross Income
A. General.
Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution—The Congress shall have power to lay and collect
taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several
states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Two broad categories of income:
a. Financial Accounting Income: income as defined by an accountant for the purpose of
providing the financial position of a person or business.
b. Economic Income (Hague Simons Income): concept intended to try and define income
in a way that identifies shifts in a taxpayer’s economic status (wealth). Very important in
understanding US Tax law.
1. Personal income may be defined as the algebraic sum of (1) the market value of rights
exercised in consumption and (2) the change of the value of the store of property
rights (net worth) between the beginning and the end of the period in question.
2. Bifurcated (two part definition):
(1) Net worth change—snapshot taken at two times, see changes in net worth
(assets & liabilities); fair mkt value of all taxpayer’s assets (balance sheet
notion)
(2) Consumption—expenditure of wealth for everything (necessities & luxuries)
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 2
3. Theory: Represents the view that we tax according to the ability to pay. Takes into
acct money spent in consumption, instead of only relying on end-of-year ability to
pay (balance sheet). Our system is limited to the realization principle—we don’t tax
until gain is realized (disbursed). Intuitively makes sense because it takes into
account ability to pay.
4. Short test—Wealth Increase: Does it increase my wealth?
Code § 62(a): Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) defined—gross income minus 18 enumerated
deductions.
Code § 63(a): Taxable Income—Adjusted gross income minus allowable deductions
Code §7701(c): Definitions
Income Tax Regulations ("Reg.") § 1.61-1(a).
B. Cases
Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass (US 1955): money received by settlement, as exemplary
damages for fraud & antitrust violations and as the punitive ⅔ portion of a treble damage
antitrust recovery was taxable.
Eisner v. Macomber (US 1920): attitude from §61(a) reflected; concept of income as very
broad; in exercising its authority, Congress went to its full taxing power; as far as congress
could go. (advocates Haig-Simons definition of income.)
3. Compensation for services—this is income because §61 says so.
A. Code Sections
Code § 61(a): Gross Income—All income from whatever source derived. Derived from 16th
Amendment. Congress can provide exceptions.
Reg. § 1.61-2(a)(1)—illustrative list of income types; Kind = cash; in kind = not cash
B. Cases
Old Colony Trust Co. v. Commissioner: Employer payment of income taxes of an employee is
considered income. Reimbursement of taxes is also taxable income. Under HS income, wealth
increase of employee occurred.
a. Under §61, “all income from whatever source derived” is considered income.
Satisfaction of an obligation by a 3rd party is an income event.
b. Court rejected gift argument because of employer-employee relationship is one of
compensation. Codified in §102(c)(1). Payment of tax by employee is not deductible.
4. Work-related non-cash, in-kind, fringe benefits
A. General:
Payment—Taxpayer is not excused from tax liability from a non-cash compensation because
he lacks cash to pay the liability.
HS economic definition—there is a benefit, but there is also a benefit to the employer
Fringe benefit rules—address when/under what circumstances we allow the benefit to the
employer override the employee benefit, and allow the employee to receive the benefit w/o it
becoming taxable income.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 3
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 4
Questions:
Lowest pays you $175 in cash and gives you a $75 housing voucher useable for any
housing that you choose. Does the voucher constitute income? If so, in what
amount? Voucher =income— (Old Colony—indirect income benefit). HS
income=wealth increase. Income = $175 + $75 [Reg. §1.161-2(d)(1)] FMV of
property is includible as income.
Does your answer change if the housing voucher may only be used at
a particular housing complex that you consider substandard? May argue that it’s a
condition of employment.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 5
Lowest pays you $175 cash and requires that you live in the hotel
(assume §132 doesn’t apply). Lowest does not charge you for lodging. (Assume
that § 132 does not apply.) Do you have income? HS income-don’t pay for housing;
Economic benefit-§61(a), from whatever source derived; If so, how much? FMV of apt
on open market. May be excludible income based on §119 (employer benefit from
having employee live on premises.)
BigCo maintains an on-site cafeteria for all of its employees.
Subsidizes the cafeteria & food prices are discounted; operates at a profit. The
cafeteria has two dining rooms, one for senior executives and one for everyone else.
May BigCo's executives exclude the meal subsidy from income? Anit-discirmination
rule—can’t exclude subsidy under de minimus §132(a)(4) & (e)(2) What about
BigCo's other employees? Excludable—de minimus fringe benefits if cafeteria
operates at a profit
5. Restricted Property—property provided as a benefit subject to certain restrictions (e.g., stock provided
upon staying with the company for certain number of years)
A. Code § 83—timing and amount when restrictive property is received for services. Most
frequently applies to stock (vesting conditions)
§ 83(a)—FMV of property received for services in excess what was paid for the property is
includable as gross income.
§ 83(b)—defer when stock is includable as income until the restriction lapses (stock that vests
—after each vesting period) on the theory that at that point taxpayer can sell it and raise the
cash necessary to pay the tax. Measured at the value of the stock when the restriction lapses.
May elect to include stock income prior to vesting.
§ 83(c)(1)—defines substantial risk of forfeiture for purposes of
B. Reg. §§ 1.83-1(a)(1), (b)(1), & (f) Ex. (1); 1.83-2(a); & 1.83-3(a)(1), (b), (c)(1), (c)(4) Ex. (1), &
(d).
Questions:
In add’n to cash compensation," Lowest issues you 10 shares of
Lowest Inc. common stock, which on the date of issue closed on the
New York Stock Exchange at $30 per share. At the time the stock was
issued, you agreed that you would return all of the shares to Lowest if
you terminated your employment with Lowest w/in 2 years & would
return 5 shares if you terminated your employment /in 3 years. At the
end of 3 years, the shares vest (i.e., they are yours without further
condition).
Do you have income when the shares are issued? If so, how
much? No, § 83 says the year in which those rights are transferable. Employee may have the
right to transfer to a third party (but it wouldn’t sell for much since it’s dependant upon the
employee staying)- normally the employer will impose a transferability requirement so this doesn’t
happen.
Do you have income at the end of two years? If so, how much? Yes,
market value of 5 stock at the time of vesting (if the employee is still employed). Time of
vesting is same as the time when the substantial risk of forfeiture lapses.
Do you have income at the end of three years? If so, how much? Yes,
value of 5 additional stock at the time of vesting (if the employee is still employed)
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 6
B. Swapped services.
Swapped services are includable as income because there is clearly something of value being
received from a third party.
No imputed income; considered income under Rev. Ruling 79-24.
Valuation: Measure of inclusion is not the value of your services (as you think) but rather the
value of what you receive for your services.
a. NOTE: Anytime you see a disparity in value ask (1) is there a family relationship that
results in gift (w/gift tax consequences)? (2) Is it employment compensation w/income
tax consequences?(3) If unexplainable for any other reason, is it a bargain
purchase/valuation disparities w/no implication?
Reg. § 1.61-1(a)
Question: What if Robert swaps accounting svcs w/Ed for cleaning svcs?
Economic Income: Yes—Bob got equivalent as if he had paid for accounting svcs
—FMV of services he gets; §61 Income: Yes—providing svcs in exchange for
something of wealth. Both parties have income per §61. Barter transactions must
be reported to the IRS per statute. Value of accounting svcs is the amt of the
consideration , if parties are unrelated.
§ 274(b)—dollar limitation
Reg. § 1.61-2(a)(1)—Tips included in income.
Note: § 61(a)(1) tips are included as income because of expectation of service returned in
kind. Contrast to street musician who does not expect compensation for their service
Rev. Rul. 57-102, 1957-1 C.B. 26.—General Welfare Exclusion: Certain types of payments to
public are not taxable. Rationale: Looks like a gift. Harsh to tax these kinds of payments.
Creates disparity between similarly situated taxpayers. Breaches horizontal equity
Questions:
a. Student gets $10K from her father that she uses to pay
GULC tuition. Does Student have income? HS income—YES,
wealth increase; §61—no includible income [102(a)], income
doesn’t include gifts. Would b e difficult for children to track
every time parents gave them money; societal good re:
financial support w/in a family.
b. Waiter receives an annual salary of $10K from his employer
and $5K in tips from his customers. Are the tips included in
his gross income? Yes—part of pay for svc to customers;
compensation under §61. There is a general societal
expectation that translates into the provision of svcs.
c. A homeless person successfully solicits coins at Union
Station. Does she have income? Not income—no services
performed, it’s a gift. HS—wealth increase, ∴ gift. Donative
intent = gift. No motivation to give money other than
detached and disinterested generosity.
repay. Intent has to be determined based on objective facts. Don’t give too much credence to
intent in the abstract.
C. James v. Commissioner—Illegal gains = income. If an individual repays stolen $$ during same
tax year, no taxable income.
D. Reg. § 1.61-14(a)
E. HS—Increased wealth; whenever scope of §61 is in question, go back to HS wealth increase.
o So after tax cost of the loan $100 x (1-0.35) = $65 in the first year. Saved $35 from interest deduction.
o Then when he makes $80 on the tax exempt obligation, he has a net of $15.
§ 265(a)(2)—Tax arbitrage: Interest on debts incurred to purchase or carry tax free bonds is not
deductible. (in response to above scenario)
Interpreted very narrowly as it relates to individuals; but at the business level the courts
have supported the service’s application of a broad definition of § 265(a)(2)Took the
position that it did not require actual tracing, but if a business tax payer had a portfolio of
tax obligation that those could be netted and, to the extent that you net the business
expense attributable to the tax obligation, are non-deductible
South Carolina v. Baker—federal income tax on interest on state/local obligations is
constitutional. Congress could repeal §103(a) if it wanted to (and tax state & local bonds)
Determining Taxable Equivalent: Tax exempt rates are lower because issuers of tax exempt
bonds can be competitive with taxed bonds at aftermarket rates. Taxable yield
equivalent=bond yield/1-marginal tax rate. After tax yield =bond yield x 1-marginal rate.
a. Marginal Tax rate—the rate to be paid on the next dollar earned
b. Statutory rate—various rate in the rate table
c. Average rate/effective rate—rate of tax on all income, whether taxable or not. (tax
paid/total income). Some people only include taxable income in the calculation.
Tax Equivalent Municipal Bond Yields [CM p. 81.]
11. Recovery of Capital -- Adjusted Tax Basis, Life Insurance, Annuities, and Damages
A. Recovery of Capital
Congress doesn’t have the authority to tax gross receipts under the Constitution
When trying to measure income, pay attention as to whether the taxpayer incurred a
cost when earning that income. Not all costs can be deducted.
We tax only the increase in wealth, thus adjusted tax basis is subtracted from gross
receipts to determine actual profit.
Must first determine adjusted tax basis for cost of goods sold, then determine when cost
should be recovered, then determine method to recover cost.
§61(a)(2) & (3) define income as including gains from property sale & business income.
§ 1016 requires taxpayer to adjust basis to reflect recovery of investment or additional
investment (e.g., if you make improvements on the home those are added on to the basis)
Reg. §§ 1.61-3(a)—Gross income is total sales minus cost of goods (COG) sold.
Reg. §§ 1.61-6(a)—Gain in sale of property is the amount realized minus the basis.
Code § 1001(b)— “amount realized” equals money received plus FMV of any other
property received
Questions:
If you sell a share of IBM stock for $130 that you purchased for $50, what is
your gross income? $80. Why? §1.61-6(a): gain in sale of property is gross
profits minus the basis. Congress can’t impose a tax on the gross amt;
wouldn’t take into acct the fact that you paid something for the stock. Need to
offset investment in asset.
Fuzzy owns a clothing store. He sells for $200 a coat that cost him $150. What
is Fuzzy's gross income? $50. Why? §1.161-3(a): gross income = sales – COG
sold.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 11
C. Life insurance.
§ 61(a)(10)—Life Insurance: Includes income from life insurance & endowment contracts.
§ 101(a)(1)—Life Insurance Exclusion: Life insurance payments are excluded in a single sum
or otherwise if the amounts are paid by reason of the death of the insured. Ignores recovery
basis. Rationale: (1) like intra-family gift; (2) sympathy; (3) taxes already paid on insurance
receipts, thus payouts should be tax free.
§ 101(g)—covered policies
§ 264(a)(1)—can’t deduct as expense the premiums on life insurance policies (consistent
with policy #3 above)
Reg. § 301.7702(g)(1)(A) & (B)(i)(I)—.
Insurance Policy distinctions:
Term insurance policy—pure insurance protection for a set length of time not income
under § 101(a)(1)
Whole Life policy—includes an investment component: (1) death benefit when you die;
(2) investment/cash surrender value. creates tax shelter not based on statute but
recognized by the courts (life insurance is socially useful)
Questions:
In 1990, Beth purchased a 10-year, level premium term life insurance policy with
a $100K death benefit—Charles is beneficiary. In 2003, Beth died, and the
insurance proceeds were paid to Charles. What must Charles include in income
for taxable year 2003? Term life, no cash value; NOT INCOME to Charles per
§101(a)(1)
Assume, instead, that Beth purchased a whole life insurance policy in 2002. On
the anniversary date of the policy in 2003 (as well as every year thereafter) the
policy’s cash surrender value increases by $1,000. Under the terms of the policy,
Beth, as the owner of the policy, is entitled to surrender the policy at any time
and receive the then cash surrender value. What must Beth include in income in
2003? Whole life policy; not includible income as long as cash surrender value
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 12
isn’t withdrawn. “Inside buildup” not subject to tax, not includable income until
realized (you get the cash, then pay taxes on it).
D. Annuities
Annuity— invests lump some and is paid back at certain intervals over time; has cash surrender
value; in order to determine income, § 72 requires the calculation of an exclusion ratio
(determines % of payments that are recovery of income and not taxable)
§ 72(a)—Annuities: except as otherwise provided, gross income includes any amt received as
an annuity, endowment or life insurance contract.
§ 72(b)—Exclusion Ratio. Gross income does not include that part of any amount received as
an annuity contract which bears the same ratio to such amount as the investment in the k bears
to the expected return under the k. Simplified: Investment in the k/expected return=% of
payment that will be counted as nontaxable recovery of investment.
§ 72(c)(1) defines “investment in the contract” as the amount initially paid
§ 72(c)(3) defines “expected return” as the total amount received over the life of the
contract
NOTE: Usually has a small life insurance component in order to qualify as a life insurance
contract & qualify for §72 life insurance annuity rules. In such cases where the payments are
made for the life of the taxpayer, mortality tables are used to determine the “expected return”
over the life of the taxpayer. Mortality gains and losses are now accounted for—losses
recovered in last tax year and gains taxed after calculated term.
Annuity Example:
Taxpayer purchases annuity for $10K that pays $1K a year for 25 years. $10K is “investment in the
contract” (§ 72(c)(1)) and $25K is the “expected return” (§ 72(c)(3))—
Exclusion Calculation—
Amount received as annuity x Investment in Contract/ Expected Return
$1,000 x $10,000/ $25,000 = $400 (nontaxable on every $1K return)
Does this make sense??—it would be more economically realistic to allocate more interest in
the first year when the principal sum held by the insurer is the greatest and to allocate less
interest thereafter as the remaining principal balance also decreases.
E. Damages
Recovery of Loss.
a. Clark v. Commissioner [KBS p. 120]—Facts: Tax lawyer gives bad advice to couple (has
them file joint instead of separate returns), causes taxpayer to overpay an add’l $20K;
lawyer reimburses taxpayers. IRS wants to include it as income. Holding: Not includible
income, merely compensation for a loss that impaired petitioner capital; no net gain by
taxpayer—if filing had been correct, he would have paid that amt less in taxes. No
wealth increase no inclusion as income.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 13
(2) the exclusion doesn’t apply where deduction is taken under § 213 [otherwise you’d
have double exclusion of the same amount];
(3) reimbursements are excludable so long as they qualify under § 105(h)
• § 105(h): set of nondiscrimination rules that say that the employer can’t create a
health insurance plan for the benefit of its employees that disproportionately
benefits high wage employees and nondiscrimination is tested by looking at
relative compensation levels.
• § 105(a)—except as otherwise provided (§ 105(b)) reimbursements shall be included in
income full exclusion of the benefits of the insurance (no requirement for cost recovery
analysis based on premiums paid)
12. The Realization Requirement, Deferral, the Claim of Right Doctrine, and the Tax Benefit Rule
A. The realization requirement.
Realization Principle—Recognize income when gain or loss is realized from a liquidizing
event. Can be a sale, disposition or exchange. Appreciation of property isn’t included in
income until property is sold or disposed of.
Eisner v. Macomber—Issue: Was 2nd share of stock received in the mail taxable?
Holding: NO. Because stock dividend was proportionate among the shareholders, in a
relative basis the shareholder wasn’t any better off. Only if there is a liquidating event,
will there be a taxable event (realization principle).
Drawback: gives preference to capital income over labor income because capital income
will defer taxation
§ 1001(a)—Computation of a gain or loss: The gain from the sale or other disposition of
property shall be the excess of the amt realized therefrom over the adjusted basis.
§ 1001(b)—Amount realized: The amt realized from the sale or other disposition of property
shall be the sum of any money received plus the FMV of the property (other than money)
received.
§ 1001(c)—Recognition: Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, the entire amt of the
gain or loss, on the sale or exchange of property shall be recognized. Realized gains are not
always recognized (tax is only imposed on recognized gains). Tax may be deferred because of
a statutory provision.
§61(a)(3)—requires inclusion in income any gain derived from dealings in property.
Reg. § 1.1001-1(a).
B. Annual accounting and its consequences.
Annual Accounting Principle—we impose tax for each taxable year, which is determined on an
annual basis. (1) creates the prospect of deferral; (2) if you lose money for a year, then you
won’t realize any benefit.
Burnet v. Sanford & Brooks Co.
• Two tax planning possibilities:
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 15
• Income: if you know you’re planning based on income you want to defer (push
inclusion off as long as possible) because you have the use of assets without having to
pay tax
• Expenses: if you know you are going to incur an expense which you can deduct you
want to incur it in the current year
received refunds from the IRS and the DC Dept of Revenue. Does Nancy have any
obligation to report the DC refund as income on her 2003 Federal income tax return?
When she got refund, the amt of taxes paid, and wasn’t eligible for as high a state tax
deduction as she was the year before. YES—she has to report refund as income.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 18
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 20
Did Albert realize income in 2001? If so, how much? Unrealized appreciation
is income in 2001. No realization, didn’t sell.
Did Albert realize income in 2002? If so, how much? Realization event: amt
realized = $10K (selling price)
What is Albert’s adjusted tax basis (or “adjusted basis” or “basis” or ATB) in
the stock? $6000
How much gain did Albert recognize on the sale? Gain Recognized = amt
realized – ATB = $4000.
2. Albert receives stock as a gift from mother. Mom’s basis = $20/share.
Value at time of gift = $40/share. Following the gift, Albert sells the stock
for $70/share.
How much gain does Albert realize on the sale? $7000 (sales price of the
stock)
What is Albert’s adjusted tax basis in the stock? $2000 [§1015—donor’s
basis = donee’s basis]
How much gain does Albert recognize on the sale? $5000
If stock sold at $15/shear what is result of transaction? Loss of $500.
Qualification on §1015—if FMV is less than basis, new ATB is FMV. Limitation
reduces amt of loss that Albert could use to offset gain on other property
sales.
3. Albert inherits stock from his father on dad’s death. Dad’s basis of the
stock immediately before his death = $20/share. Value of the stock at the
time of dad’s death = $40/share. Albert sells stock for $70/share.
How much gain does Albert realize on the sale? $7000
What is Albert’s basis in the stock? FMV at time of dad’s death ($40)
How much gain does Albert recognize on the sale? $3000
B. Acquisition indebtedness.
Debt has 3 relevancies:
a. Interest income
b. Satisfaction of obligation for less than full amt
c. ATB at sale of property
Recourse debt v. non-recourse debt—the extent to which the creditor has the right to recover
money in excess of the value of any collateral. Ability or inability to proceed against other
assets of the borrower.
a. Recourse Debt— Borrower is personally liable for repayment of debt. Creditor can go
after debtor’s assets. Merely securing debt with property does not restrict the creditor’s
ability to go after other assets. Nothing more than cash financing – a loan of cash secured
by some property (thus basis is equal to cash paid plus recourse debt incurred to purchase
property) if taxpayer borrows $$ on recourse basis = cash purchase of property =
cash transaction
b. Non-recourse Debt— Only the secured property can be sought by lender. Other assets
of borrower are protected. Not viewed as the equivalent of cash (but basis does include
non-recourse debt incurred to purchase property, as well as cash paid). Type of debt does
not matter. Lender is only looking at credit worthiness of property, not of lender like in
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 21
recourse debt – looks more like an equity investment by lender. More understandable
why analysis is about including debt in tax basis up front.
Cases:
a. Tufts—Facts: Building purchased using nonrecourse loan, used as tax shelter, utilizing
depreciation, but defaulted on loan. At time of foreclosure, amt of debt = value of
property. Holding: No distinction—for nonrecourse debt foreclosure, amt realized =
debt value. If value of property is < mortgage value, owner can’t recoup value. Crane
applies even when FMV is less—FMV isn’t important. Codified in §7701(g). Not sure
Crane reached the right conclusion, but we’re not going back & start anew.
b. Estate of Franklin—Facts: lender loaned purchaser nonrecourse amt in excess of
property value. Holding: something else is going on; ct thought this was a sham deal &
didn’t recognize the debt. Nonrecourse debt in excess of FMV has a basis of zero.
Rationale: No real purchase, thus no basis. Not an issue w/recourse debt, only non-
recourse debt.
c. Pleasant Summit Case—Holding: get basis = FMV of property (9th circuit). Most cts
think this wasn’t properly decided, & would decide per Franklin.
d. Crane v. Commissioner [CM p. 99]—Significant part of decision: Mrs. Crane’s
original ATB in the property: implies that she included the full amt of the non-recourse
debt in her ATB when she acquired the property, otherwise she’d have no ATB to
depreciate. Her claimed depreciation deductions during the time she owned the property
was critical to the decision. Holding: Non-recourse debt is included in ATB in the
beginning, but debt that was discharged (taken over by new owner) must be included in
amt realized in the end. Goes against § 1012, which says that basis is cash cost.
e. No way out of Crane and Tufts realization except death.
Code §§ 1001(b), 1012, 1016(a)(2), & 7701(g); glance at § 167(a) & (c)(1).
Reg. § 1.1001-2(a)(1), (2) & (4)(i)-(iii) & (b).
Reg. 1.1001-2(c) example 8: recourse indebtedness example
USE §1001 to calculate gain realized. May be a gain in add’n to a DOI income. Depends
on FMV at the time the creditor takes possession of the property.
Questions:
1. Uno purchases a building for $100K (its appraised value) in which to operate
her pizza business.
• If Uno pays cash, what is her ATB in the building? $100K
• If Uno borrows 50% of the purchase price from a local bank on a recourse
basis, what is her ATB? $100K
• If Uno borrows 50% of the purchase price from a local bank on a nonrecourse
basis, what is her ATB? $50K. bank has the equity interest in the property up
to the amt of the loan. Uno acquires interest in property as she repays the
loan. Tufts case. She has a beginning ATB of $50K cash + $50K non-recourse
debt (the debt creates the ATB)
• If Uno acquires the building by assuming the prior owner’s debt of $100K,
what is her ATB? $100K. Determine under §1012—apply Crane. If you
purchase property using borrowed funds, then funds used are included in the
cost.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 22
2. Same facts as #1, except the bank loans Uno $150K on a nonrecourse basis to
purchase the building on the understanding that she will use $50K for needed
improvements. What is her ATB? $100K. As she spends money to improve the
bldg, her cash will go down and value of property will go up. §1016—adjustment
to basis—amts incurred to improve the property.
3. Same facts as #1, except the seller sells the building to Uno for deferred
payments totaling $150K on a nonrecourse basis. What is Uno’s ATB in the
building? $100K (the rest could be considered interest) Seller—gain recognized
= $150K. Must be arms-length transaction, can’t artificially set the price much
higher to avoid tax liability—TAX FRAUD—purchaser gets inflated depreciation
deduction.
4. Uno borrowed the entire $100K purchase price on a nonrecourse basis. Further
assume that 3 yrs after the purchase, she sells it for $100K cash, which she uses
to pay off the purchase money debt. Finally, assume that Uno neither claimed
nor was entitled to any depreciation on the building during the period of her
ownership.
• What is her gain? ATB = $100K, sales price = $100K, Gain = $0
• What if she sells the building for $200K? $100K
5. Same facts as # 4, except that during the period Uno owned the building
she properly claimed depreciation deductions in the total amt of $50K. As a
result, her ATB is reduced by the amt of the depreciation deductions. Thereafter,
she defaults on the $100K nonrecourse purchase money indebtedness, and the
bank forecloses on the building at a time when the building is worth $100K.
Reduces ATB to $50K. Crane: amt realized includes amt of debt; §1001—
operates in foreclosure the same as if she received $100K from buyer. Reg.
§1.1001-2.
• What effect, if any, does the foreclosure have on Uno’s tax liability? Amt
realized = $100K [Reg. 1.1001-2(a)(4)(A)(i)]
• What if the building is worth $50K instead of $100K at the time of the
foreclosure? §1001 gain calculation: Sale price ($100K) - $50K ATB = $50K gain
realized. Gain calculation is the same, value is irrelevant whether the FMV is
$75K or $50K.
C. Deductible losses.
Other losses only deductible if there is a statutory provision in §165, unless it’s a capital loss
§165(f)
a. Key—whether loss is trade/business/investment loss (entered into for profit) or a personal
loss (non-investment/non-business loss)
b. A trade/business loss that involves sale or trade of capital asset—gives way to capital loss
provision of §165.
Code provisions:
a. §1011—also formula for calculating a loss.
b. § 165(a)—Losses: Losses can be deducted
c. § 165(b)—Property losses: Amt is limited to ATB of property (as provided in §1011) as
if it had been sold. Rationale: Basis is taxpayer’s investment in the property. (references
§1011)
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 23
D. Timing of Losses
Reg. § 1.165-1(b)—Timing of Losses (general rule): A loss is deductible when the
transaction is closed and completed, fixed by identifiable events and sustained during the
taxable year. English translation: At the time it is clear that the taxpayer did indeed have a
loss. Realization (disposal/sale) is required for loss, not merely accrual.
a. Property may realize a loss when it becomes obsolete or abandoned (e.g., equipment that
is rendered techonologically obsolete ATB after depreciation is a business loss)
b. Theft loss is realized when the theft is noticed (cannot amend past returns to reflect theft)
Character of loss (capital loss—only offset against capital gains; ordinary loss—offset against
ordinary income)
Cottage Savings—Facts: S&L companies were in troubled times because they held worthless
mortgages; wanted to dispose of these mortgages w/o incurring the loss because it would
bankrupt them. Scheme developed—exchange loans of same value w/o incurring an
accounting loss, but exchange results in a tax loss. Holding: Loss from exchange is
deductible. Difference in assets are material—“nature and character”, a factual matter to be
determined by the ct. Resulted in industry to help realize losses w/o change in assets.
Rev. Rul. 84-145.
E. Bad Debts
If there is a debt, §166 applies, and §165 can never apply
Timing: debt is deductible in the year the debt becomes uncollectible/worthless.
Code provisions:
a. § 166(a)—Business debts. Under certain circumstances, a creditor that determines that a
debt has become wholly or partially worthless/uncollectible may take a corresponding
deduction.
b. § 166(b)—Amt of deduction: the ATB provided in §1011 for determining the loss from
the sale or other disposition of property.
c. § 166(d)—Non business debts. Only deductible upon total loss (no partial recovery for
nonbusiness bad debts).
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 24
Questions:
Ecks, a personal injury lawyer, advanced court filing fees to a prospective plaintiff
whom Ecks met on her way to lunch one day. The client retains Ecks to sue a
cigarette manufacturer. When the defendant’s expert established that the plaintiff
merely had a bad cold and had never smoked, Ecks dismissed the lawsuit. Her
client refused to repay Ecks for the filing fees even though the client admitted
that he was under an obligation to do so. Ecks hasn't seen her client since. May
Ecks deduct these expenses? First, establish there is a debt (enforceable
obligation running from obligor to the taxpayer). If no indebtedness, there can’t
be a bad debt deduction. If there is a debt, §166 applies, and §165 can never
apply. If there’s a debt, it’s deductible in full against ordinary incomes.
Zorina, an active & successful stock market investor, loaned $50K to her niece,
Yuk for her new business. The business failed, and Yuk was unable to repay the
loan. Is Zorina entitled to a deduction? Maybe—close personal relationship will
usually be seen as a gift (rebuttable presumption)
or for investment if such property is exchanged solely for property of like kind which is to be
held either for productive use in a trade or business or for investment.
a. §1031(a)(2)—Exceptions: doesn’t apply to several categories, including stocks, bonds,
notes, other securities
b. Must distinguish between simultaneous sales & true exchanges.
c. Not enough for property to be similar. Properties must be (a) like-kind and (b) held for
productive use or investment.
1. Reg. 1.1031(a)-1(b); (b)-1 & (c) – Like-Kind. Like-kind depends on nature and
character of property, not its quality. Do not take into consideration kind or class.
Cash transaction will never be a like-kind exchange. Thus, unimproved vs. improved
real estate are same character of property, but different class – okay for like-kind
2. Categories of property that qualify—(1) real estate; (2) personal property used in
business (machine for machine, truck for truck); fleet cars, certain long-term leases (>
30 years) is treated like real estate (treated like a fee simple.)
§ 1031(d)—Basis rule: Historical basis in relinquished property becomes new basis in
replacement property (“substitute basis”). No gain recognized now—deferral provision.
a. Reg. § 1.1031(d)-1(b) & (c) for illustrations of the basis calculations
§ 1031(b)—Boot rule: Boot is a colloquial term describing nonqualified consideration—
anything other than the type of assets being exchanged (typically cash). If w/in §1031 except
boot, then exchange falls w/in §1031 and we analyze the boot separately.
a. A gain is recognized up to the amt of the boot and new basis is relinquished basis minus
boot (plus any gain recognized)—§ 1031(d)
b. Debt on the exchanged property is boot just as if the taxpayer received add’l money in the
amt of the debt that is assumed in the exchange.
§ 1031(f)—Related party rule— Will not allow nonrecognition in certain transactions
involving related parties. Concerns corporation and controlling shareholder, partnership and
principal partner, brother/sister corporations owned by same shareholder
§ 1031(c)—Loss recognition/loss limitation rule— losses on exchanges with boot are not
recognized.
§ 1223(1).—Holding period rule. In a transaction that would otherwise be eligible for taxable
gains there are holding requirements for preferential capital gains rates. § 1223(1) permits the
taxpayer to add the period of holding the exchange property to the period holding the new
property in order to qualify for preferential tax rate (tacking rule).
Step Transaction Doctrine—If the way a transaction occurs is not meaningful, a step may be
ignored for tax calculation purposes. Note: taxpayer gets to choose how to structure their
transaction, but they can’t disavow it.
Multi Party exchange—Allowable, but puts broker at risk. Under § 1031(a)(3), 45 day period
to consummate transactions that result in exchange. Under §1031(b), if property is received
w/in 180 days, certain rules apply. Three-party exchange is very common way to deal w/this
situation.
Questions:
Anne transfers $10K of Exxon stock to Bart for $10K of British Petroleum stock.
The value of the Exxon stock exceeds Anne’s adjusted tax basis in the stock. Will
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 26
C. Sales of Residences.
Code § 121(a) & (b)(1) & (2)(A)—Exclusion of gain from sale of principle residence:
Provides that if a taxpayer sells a residence, then a portion of the gain in that sale is excluded
from income ($250K-single, $500K married filing joint return).
Permanent exclusion from income (used to be a deferral)
Property doesn’t have to be owned jointly to use on joint return.
Time limitation: Must be in property for 2 yrs over a 5 yr period.
Doesn’t apply to vacation home, only primary residence.
Questions: Serena & Steve divorce. They have a 6-yr old child named Simon.
Incident to the property settlement & divorce decree, the following transactions
occur. What are the tax consequences to Serena and Steve?
• Serena transfers Ford Motor Co. stock to Steve. At the time of the transfer, it
has a fair market value of $50,000, and Serena’s adjusted tax basis in the stock
is $25,000. §1041(a)—no gain or loss recognized, provided transfer is incident
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 28
to divorce.
• The couple sells their jointly-owned yacht for $100,000. It has an adjusted tax
basis of $50,000. They split the sales proceeds. Each has $25K gain. Jointly
owned property—split proceeds. Owned property as tenants in common.
• Steve agrees to pay child support of $100 per month until Simon attains age
18. No deduction for child support per §71(c). HS income—consumption by
father, under state law has legal obligation to support his minor child
• Serena agrees to pay Steve alimony in the amount of $1,000 cash per month.
Depends on divorce decree. See §71(a)—usually, alimony is taxable income by
recipient, unless parties agree otherwise.
• Serena is awarded custody of Simon. Two tax consequences: (a) entitled to
use Head of Household tax rates [§2(b)] (b) entitles Serena to dependent
exemption [§151(c)(1)]. Serena can agree contractually to allow Steve to have
the exemption. Tax law allows state cts to award it.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 29
Partnership taxable year rule: forces it into a calendar year—a partnership (a business but not
a taxable entity—reported by the partners)—must use the taxable yr of its principle partners. If
the taxable yr by rule is the calendar yr for individuals, then it is a calendar yr as well for
partnerships.
§ 442—Change of annual accounting period: Once a taxpayer chooses taxable year, any
change requires approval. Can’t change taxable year w/o IRS permission. If they want to
change to a calendar yr and aren’t in business, then they can do so w/o seeking permission of
the Commissioner. If purpose of the change is to defer income, commissioner will deny the
change.
§ 443(a)—Returns for a period of less than 12 months: Made under the following
circumstances: (1) change in annual accounting period; (2) taxpayer not in existence for entire
taxable year.
2. Methods of Accounting
A. Code provisions:
§ 446(a)—Method of Accounting: Taxable income computed on basis of method regularly
used by taxpayer. Note: No default.
§ 446(b)—Exceptions: Discretionary authority to IRS commissioner to challenge taxpayer
method accounting where they believe it doesn’t clearly reflect income.
§ 446(c)—Permissible Methods: (1) Cash; (2) Accrual; (3) any other method permitted
§ 446(e)—Change in Accounting Method: Approval of IRS required. When a taxpayer has a
choice in method of accounting, once made, it can’t be changed w/o permission of the
commissioner, who can imposes conditions on the change.
§ 451(a)—Taxable Year of Inclusion (rules relating to income): The amt of any item of
gross income will be included in the gross income for the taxable year in which it was received
by the taxpayer (cash method), unless, under the method of accounting used in computing
taxable income, such amt is properly is to be properloy accounted for as of a different period
(accrual method).
§ 461(a)—Taxable Year of Deduction: Item is deductible when appropriate based on
taxpayer’s method of accounting.
§ 471(a)—Inventory: Establishes rules governing inventory—best accounting practice in trade
or business. Mandates accrual method if business has inventory (exception for family farms <
$25M gross receipts)
§ 481(a)—Adjustments required by changes in Accounting Method: Approval of IRS
required to change accounting method, & IRS often requires adjustments
Rev. Rul. 78-38—Charitable Contributions by Credit Card: deductible in yr contribution
made, not when credit card is paid.
Reg. § 1.451-1(a)
Reg. §1.461-1(a)(1)
Schedule C, Form 1040, [CM p. 63]
B. The Cash Method.
General.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 30
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 31
Only after service has been performed that EP rule has been met. Significant constraint on
All Events Test.
a. Where the expenditure results in the creation of an asset whose useful life extends beyond
the close of the taxable year the deduction may be denied—Reg 1.446-1(a)(1)
b. 12 Month Rule: (Reg. 1.263(a)-4(f)(1))—permits deduction for expenditure will life
beyond taxable year the earlier of 12 months after the first date on which the taxpayer
realizes the benefit or the end of the taxable year following the year in which the payment
is made
Code § 461(h)(3)—Recurring Item Exception to Economic Performance Rule: intended to
take expenditures where period of time between receipt of services & payment was relatively
short & exempt them from Economic Performance Rule. No distortion if annual.
Requirements: (1) recurring expense; (b) non-material expense (3) arbitrary safe harbor of 8.5
months or reasonable shorter period.
Reg. § 1.461-4(a), (b), & (d)(2)(i), (4)(i), & (7) Exs. 3 & 8.
Questions:
Portia operates a retail furniture store [sole proprietorship], average gross
receipts > $10M/yr. In Sept. 2002, a customer contracted for the purchase of a
custom-made chair. Portia received delivery of chair from manufacturer in early
Dec. 2002 & delivered it to the customer several days later. She billed the
customer at the end of the month, and the customer made payment in early Jan.
2003.
In what year must Portia include the profit from the sale of the chair in income?
Has to use accrual method per §1.446-1(c)(2)(i). Has income from chair in 2002—
all events test met—entitled to pmt in 2002, amt to be paid can be determined.
Assume that the chair wasn’t received from the manufacturer & delivered to the
customer until Jan. 2003 but the customer gave Portia a 50% deposit when the
chair was ordered. What result? Deposit not income in 2002 (Indianapolis Power
& Light case).
Questions:
Paul—self-employed tax lawyer. On Dec. 15, 2002, he paid the $2,500
subscription price for the year 2003 edition of the CCH Standard Federal Tax
Reporter.
1. Was the payment deductible in taxable year 2002?
[(Disregard applicability of § 461(h)] YES—he’s acquired right to the reporter,
getting a tangible item.
2. What if Paul paid the subscription price for years 2003-
2004? [(Disregard applicability of § 461(h)]. Can take 2003 deduction in 2002,
but not 2004 payment. 1-yr rule. If life of the asset doesn’t extend beyond 1
yr following the yr in which the taxpayer claims the deduction, it can be
claimed in that previous taxable year.
2. Quincy, Inc. is a cash-basis sawmill operator, and you are its tax lawyer. The
EPA determined that Quincy violated the Federal environmental laws by
dumping polluted materials on public land. Early in taxable year 2002, Quincy
acknowledged liability and entered into an agreement with the EPA--Quincy
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 32
has to remove the contaminated soil from the polluted site during the years
2003-04. Will cost $1.0M to effect the removal. It established a $1.0 M
reserve on its balance sheet and set the $1.0 M aside in a separate bank acct.
It proposes to deduct this amt on its taxable year 2002 return.
- What is your advice? All Events std met. It’s not deductible—the present
restriction of §461(h), economic performance test not met. Can’t deduct until
Economic Performance
- Would your advice differ if Quincy were an accrual method taxpayer? NO.
Advice wouldn’t differ under accrual method. Economic performance test also
applicable to deductions claimed by accrual method taxpayers.
- Would your advice differ if Quincy proposed to limit its taxable year 2002
deduction to the present value of the projected $1.0 million cost? No. Even
under HS economic analysis, AE test met & present value known, §461(h) says
NO to deduction. Congress says No.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 33
C. Assumption of debt: Results in income to person taking debt. Often has no effect on total
contract price because encumbrances must be subtracted, but increase gross profit rate, thus
accelerates recovery of basis.
D. Code provisions:
§§ 453(a), (b)(1), (d)(1) & (k)(2)(A)—Installment sales: Basis is apportioned over payments
received. Basis is Adjusted tax basis. (ATB)
§ 453(c)—Installment Sales: Income recognized for a taxable year is that proportion of the
payments received in that year which the gross profit bears to the total contract price.
Proportion of payment taxable = Gross profit/Total Contract price
§ 453(k)(2)(A)—Exceptions: Installment sale rules don’t apply to installment obligations
resulting from sale of stocks & securities, or personal property on a revolving credit plan. Treat
as regular transaction where gain calculated when money received—all taxable in 1st yr.
§§ 453A(a)(1), (b)(1), (c)(1)
§ 453A(d)(1)—Pledges of Installment Obligations: If you pledge installment obligations
towards a loan, the loan is treated as a payment & is taxable at exclusion ratio under §453(c).
§ 453B(a)—Disposition of Installment Obligations: If you sell or dispose of installment
obligations, the amt received is treated as a payment & is taxable at exclusion ration under
§453(c), up to remaining basis.
E. Regulations:
Temp. Reg. § 15A.453-1(a), (b)(1), (b)(2)(i)-(iii) & (v), (b)(3)(i), & (b)(5) Exs. (1)-(3).
a. §15A-453-1(a) & (b)—Installment sales calculation examples
b. §15A-453-1(b)(2)(ii)—Selling price: gross selling price w/o reduction from anything
encumbering the property
c. §15A-453-1(b)(2)(v)—Gross profit: selling price minus basis
d. §15A-453-1(b)(2)(i)—Total contract price: contract price (or selling price) minus
encumbrances.
Questions: Renee (cash method taxpayer) owns a piece of undeveloped real estate
that she purchased several years ago for $10K. She has agreed to sell it to Ralph for
$30K. Ralph is to pay Renee $10K at closing, on Nov. 30, 2003, and $2,000/yr in each
of the next 10 years plus a market rate of interest on the unpaid balance. Ralph’s
obligation will be secured by a nonrecourse mortgage on the property.
What will be Renee’s taxable income from the transaction in taxable
year 2003? ⅔ of $10K = includable gain (probable capital gain);
o Gross profit realized per §15A.453-1(b)(2)(v): ($30K sale
price -$10K ATB) = $20K
o Contract price/total payments to be received (reflect debt
which isn’t in this example) per §15A.453-1(b)(2)(i): $30K
o Find gross profit ratio (gross profit realized/total contract price)
= 2/3, which is multiplied against the payments = amt includible.
In taxable year 2004? ⅔ of $2K (about $1300 + mkt rate interest amt;
to be included in regular income)
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 34
What if she pledged Ralph’s agreement to the bank for a loan equal to
the present value of the deferred payments? There is no clear answer—if the
transaction is treated as a disposition of the installment sale, or are you selling to
installment payments, then the whole transaction is acceleration and you have to
pay the gain now. Was it really a loan? Did the bank expect the taxpayer to pay
interest on the principle of the loan? Is there a big enough difference between the
bank loan & the collateral? It shouldn’t be the same. On the other hand—it could
be deemed a loan; then the installment contract is intact.
Would your answer with respect to taxable year 2003 differ if Renee
sold Ralph’s obligation to the local bank for an amount equal to the present value of
the deferred payments? Clearly a disposition—gain from sale is recognized.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 35
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 36
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 37
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 38
Art Advisory Plan—curators of art museums come to Washington and review the asserted
valuations by taxpayers in connection with substantial pieces of art; this has changed the way
people give away art because they know it will be second guessed
Automobile contributions—Senate finance committee held hearings and the result was a
change in the law in 2004; the donor will get a charitable contribution in amount equal to the
sales proceeds that the donee obtains when the car is sold (departure from § 170 approach)
5. Interest.
A. General
Historically was fully deductible. Restricted under IRC after 1986. Mortgage deductions were
untouchable during 1986 reform. Regulations now more complex.
Def’n of interest not in tax code—must look in case law. Interest is “compensation for the use
of money.”
Common question: Is debt that produces interest a bona fide debt? Example: Shareholder in
connection w/formation of corporation advances funds to corp. for equity share. When corp.
repays, is there interest income? No—disguised equity payment (dividend). Questions to ask:
Was it intended to be debt? Is there a creditor/debtor relationship? What are the terms?
B. Code provisions
§ 163(a)—Interest: All interest paid or accrued w/in the taxable year on indebtedness is
deductible.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 39
§ 265(a)(2)—Interest relating to tax-exempt income: Any tax exempt item financed by debt
with deductible interest results in arbitrage. Interest on debt is disallowed. IRAs: Interest on
debt incurred to make contributions to IRAs are deductible because taxpayer acquired debt to
acquire IRA. Tax on interest is just deferred.
§ 163(d)(1)-(4)(C)—Investment Interest: If you incur investment interest, then interest
expense deductible only to extent of investment income.
a. Investment interest—interest expense related to property held for investment
b. Property held for investment—any property that produces income
c. Investment income—the sum of gross income from property held for investment
d. Carry-forward of Disallowed interest—amt not allowed as a deduction because of
limitation; shall be treated as interest paid or accrued by taxpayer in succeeding taxable
year.
§ 163(h)—Exceptions: (1) generally personal interest isn’t deductible for individuals; (2)
Exceptions: (a) interest related to trade or business debts; (b) investment interest; (d) qualified
residence interest; (f) interest on educational loans.
§163(h)(3)—Qualified Residence Interest: Interest is deductible if it relates to a qualified
residence interest. The following qualify:
a. Home Equity Indebtedness—secured by a qualified residence to the extent the aggregate
amt of debt doesn’t exceed FMV reduced by acquisition indebtedness of securing
residence. $100K debt cap.
b. Acquisition Indebtedness—debt incurred by acquiring, constructing or substantially
improving any qualified residence of the taxpayer. Debt must be secured by qualified
residence (major limitation). Capped at $1M (aggregate number—covers both homes;
not a per property limitation). Time limitation on acquisition of indebtedness—must
incur debt 90 days before or after acquisition of property or substantial improvement.
Qualified residence—principle residence and one other residence – § 163(h)(5)(A)
§ 221(a)-(c)—Interest on Education Loans. Deduction allowed for amount paid during the
taxable year in interest on qualified education loans.
a. § 62(a)(17)—Higher Education Expenses Deductible: deductible under § 221.
C. Regulations:
Temp. Reg. § 1.163-1(b)—interest on non-recourse debt is deductible by the taxpayer even
though he’s not personally obligated on the debt if he’s the owner of the property that secures
the debt.
Temp Reg. § 1.163-9T(b)(2)—Tax Deficiency Interest: Interest expense on a tax deficiency
is not deductible, even if person engaged in trade or business.
Temp Reg. § 1.163-10T(o)(1).
Temp. Reg. § 1.163-10T(p) [CM p. 124]
Questions: Under the following facts, is the interest paid on the loan deductible?
Judy borrows $50K to purchase a residence.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 40
6. Deductibility of Taxes.
A. Huge item—3rd largest tax expenditure budget.
B. Reasons for allowance: Comity Argument—state has right to impose taxes, but fed gov’t has no
right to impose tax on funds used to pay a tax (not a substantive argument)
C. Reasons against allowance: enable individuals to finance personal consumption on tax-
deductible basis (school, parks, etc.)
D. Code § 164(a)—Taxes: The following taxes are allowed as a deduction in year paid or accrued:
State, local, foreign, real property taxes
State and local personal property taxes
State & local, and foreign, income, war profits, excess profits taxes
The GST tax imposed on income distributions
Environmental tax imposed by §59A
F. Current Tax Rate Schedules & Other Dollar Amounts, CCH Code & Reg. § 1. pp. ix-xi.
2. Personal & Dependency Exemptions.
A. General: Can bring rate to zero or lower rate for lower income taxpayers
B. Code provisions:
§ 151(a)(1)—Personal exemptions: for individuals, personal exemptions can be deducted.
§ 151(b)—Spousal exemption: can take spousal exemption if not filing jointly & spouse has
no income.
§ 151(c)(1)—Dependent exemptions: (1) Dependents—exemptions for dependents may be
deducted. (2) Certain married dependents; (3) Children; (4) students
§ 151, (d)(1) & (2)—Exemption amount
§ 151(e)—Identifying Information required: TINS for tots provisions; exemptions for
individuals require the TIN (SSN) of the individual on the return.
§ 151(d)(3)—Phase-out of exemption above certain income levels. [CM p. 130]
152(a)—Dependents: Includes individuals related by blood or marriage whom the taxpayer
provides over half their support.
§ 153(e)—Amendment to dependent exemption rule, designed to deal w/rule in relation to a
domestic relations dispute. Generally, the custodial parent will be entitled to the exemption,
but provides that the taxpayers can change the result; agreement as part of separation agreement
or divorce decree. States have enacted provisions in state laws to assign dependent exemption
as the judge sees fit during divorce proceedings.
§ 7703(a)—determination of marital status for § 151.
C. Reg. § 1.151-1(b)—Deductions for Personal Exemptions (individual taxpayer & spouse).
3. Personal Credits (Earned Income Tax Credit, Elderly & Disabled Credits, Adoption Expenses, Child
Tax Credit, & Hope & Lifetime Learning Credits)
A. Policy-- Why do we care about the distinction between credits and deductions?—the same dollar
amount as a credit will reduce your taxes more than that dollar amount as a deduction; credits are
not affected by tax rate where as deductions are
Total forgone revenue of seven credits is $70 billion
good for policy advances (if you want to be pro-children you make a child tax credit) and
anyone can figure it out because politically it looks the most like a direct expenditure
B. Code provisions:
§ 22—credits for elderly & permanently & totally disabled.
§ 24—Child tax credit
§ 25A—Hope and Lifetime Learning Credits
§ 32—Earned Income Tax Credit
a. § 35—Creates a negative tax—refundable (even if taxpayer has no liability taxpayer still
gets it back)—creates sort of an overpayment entitling a refund which employers can
provide throughout the year
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 42
IX. WHOSE INCOME IS IT? INCOME SPLITTING AND THE ASSIGNMENT OF INCOME
DOCTRINE
1. Once we’ve identified that there is income subject to tax, who is the proper taxpayer? Taxpayers
usually have family relationship (higher income parent & low income child)
2. What drives splitting—(1) progressive tax rate; (2) schedules dependent on marital status of taxpayer;
(3) corporate and individual tax rate differences; (4) taxation of capital gains; (5) material incentive to
push income into/out of closely held corporation; (6) both parent and child are entitled to std deduction
& exemption; std deduction claimable by child can go unused unless income can be put in child’s
name; (7) income, credit & deduction phase outs (8) differing taxpayer tax histories
3. How the law responds—(1) limitation on carry-over basis rule that operates for gifts—can’t use
historical ATB, must use FMV at time of gift; (2) alimony & dependent exemption—permits taxpayers
to split income; (3) broad non-statutory rules (assignment of income rules)
4. Terms
A. Income splitting—act of either pushing income or a deduction/expense from one taxpayer to
another (not necessarily bad, depends on what the law is)
B. Assignment of income—generally used in a pejorative sense (income splitting that’s bad)
C. Income is not just income, but actions taken to maximize the use of deduction or credit.
5. In order to determine whether an income-splitting device is supportable under the law, use a 3-
step process:
A. Is the transaction a bona fide transaction, or does sham transaction apply? (MOST IMPORTANT
STEP). Often you never get to the law because the transaction isn’t deemed to be a real economic
transaction (it’s a sham)
B. Does the statute contain something that deals w/that particular transaction? (assuming it’s a real
transaction)
C. Assuming statute doesn’t specifically deal with it, do these broad judicial decisions relate to it?
6. Lucas v. Earl (1937)—Facts: earnings all earned by one spouse at a time when tax law didn’t provide
for joint return; earning spouse assigned a right to income (from law practice) to the non-earning
spouse and each filed separate return. Holding: you tax earned income to the taxpayer who earned
it. Fruit and tree analogy—no distinction can be taken to the motive for which the fruit can be
attributed to a tree other than from which grew it.
7. Poe v. Seaborn—Supreme Ct, state law property rule. Holding: state law principles govern for
federal tax purposes. If state law is CP, then each person can declare half the income, even w/o joint
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 43
return. In CL state, sole breadwinner reports entire income and other spouse reports nothing.
Aftermath: Congress adopted joint return regime (1940) in response to community property laws to
provide horizontal equity among married couples no matter where they live; produces marriage
neutrality, but as a consequence, produced disparity between married & unmarried individuals
depending on tax profiles…BE AWARE OF THE TRADE-OFF
8. Blair v. Commissioner—Facts: corpus given over (entire asset); Blair was owner of an equitable
interest in the corpus of the property, even though it was in a trust. Holding: assignment valid,
assignee became owner and was the taxable party. Assignment of asset
9. Helvering v. Horst—Facts: interest coupons given as gift to donee; corpus retained; taxpayer kept part
of asset (corpus of bond & future coupons); kept right to be repaid the principle, and just gave the
income. Holding: use fruit/tree analogy of Lucas v. Earl, Assignment of income, not the asset. Income
belongs to donor. Discussion: may be decided differently today, as coupons have value themselves
and are bought, sold, etc. independently of corpus. Today, as a matter of statute, the two interests are
treated as different interests; preempts Horst.
10. Code § 1(a), (c), (f)(8), & (g)—tax tables, phase out of ‘marriage penalty’, unearned income of minor
children
11. Druker v. Commissioner CM p. 132 (1982)—constitutionality of Marriage Penalty. Holding:
Congress has wide latitude, chose to hold horizontal equity. Upheld as constitutional.
Questions:
1. Sally, an unmarried individual with no dependants, has taxable income of $60K.
Sam and Stella, a married couple, each has taxable income of $60K and file a joint
return. Note—when someone is in the 35% bracket, it means the marginal tax rate
is 35% (the tax on the next dollar)
- Calculate Sally’s income tax and the tax on Stella’s portion of the couple’s
combined taxable income. Sally’s tax liability = $11,810 (tax table § 1(c)-page
ix); Stella’s share of the liability = $11, 890.25 (each had taxable income, their
joint taxable = $120K, joint return table § 1(a) page ix = § 23,870.50).
- Why the difference? How the break points have been defined.
- What is the difference commonly called? Marriage penalty; will typically result
when each spouse has income. Most severe when spouses have the same
income.
2. Tom, an unmarried individual, has taxable income of $30K. Thor and Theresa, a
married couple, have combined taxable income of $30K, which was earned entirely
by Thor. The couple files a joint return.
- Calculate the amount of Tom’s income tax and the couple’s income tax. Tom =
$4310 (25% bracket, page ix); Thor & Theresa == $3800 (15% bracket)
- Why the difference? Breakpoint for the higher rate in the joint table is higher
(25% starts at $28K; for couple, doesn’t start until $56K—benefit of extra space
in lower bracket)
- What is the difference commonly called? Marriage bonus
3. You are Member of Congress. You want to eliminate the disparities identified above.
How would you do it? To what criticism might you be subject? Have flat rate. There
are three assumptions: (1) need progressive tax rate; (2) must maintain horizontal
equity amongst married couples; (3) assure marriage unit neutrality—couple’s total
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 44
tax liability won’t change when they marry (won’t be different than single taxpayer
w/same income). CAN’T DO IT AND KEEP ALL THREE CONDITIONS.
4. Thor and Theresa have a 3-year old child named Tulip. They transfer shares of
dividend-paying stocks to a custodial acct for Tulip's benefit established under the
Uniform Gifts to Minors Act. The acct earns dividends totaling $3,000 on Tulip’s
stocks. To whom are the dividends taxed? Why? UGMA—convey assets for benefit
of minor child; IRS ruled that ownership is direct ownership by child, but acct itself
isn’t a taxpayer. Asset belongs to the child, but is taxed at parent’s rate. § 1(g).
5. Nard the computer whiz was self-employed & forms a partnership with his 4-year-
old son, Nard, Jr. pursuant to which he and Junior (when not in daycare) would
devote their best efforts to develop an alternative to the Windows OS and divide
the resulting profits equally. The partnership then entered into a contact with IBM
—IBM agreed to pay the partnership $100K for the services of the partnership’s
partners during calendar year 2003 with the understanding that if the partnership's
efforts are successful, IBM would own the resulting software. Not surprisingly, IBM
insists that Nard work on the project. Who should include the 2003 payment in
income? Service partnership. §1(g)—earned v. unearned income (paper route v.
dividends on stock); How would IRS challenge father and son each getting $50K?
(1) sham partnership, even if they executed partnership documents; characterized
$50K as gift to child; factually deemed earned by parent; no income tax
consequences to child, but gift tax to parent.; (2) if partnership valid, it’s income
earned by parent and illegal assignment to child (Lucas v. Earl)
6. Assume, instead, that on his own and w/o Junior's help, Nard develops Doors as an
alternative to Windows. Nard then gives the copyright/patent to Doors to Junior.
Junior then sells all of the rights to Doors to IBM for $1.0M and puts the sales
proceeds in his piggy bank. Who should report the income from the sale? Jr. would
include income; run up through the rate schedule is duplicative of parents. Jr. owns
asset; like Blair, not Horst. Assignment of asset. Assuming it’s an effective
transfer, there’s no assignment of income. Jr. has income from sale of asset.
X. BUSINESS EXPENSES
1. Business expenses – General
A. Focused on businesses, when and under what circumstances a business may claim a deduction
currently for an expense incurred
REMEMBER—all §62(a) deductions are used to arrive at AGI (doesn’t’ matter whether or not
taxpayer itemized deductions to claim them and isn’t subject to 2% floor or 3% limitation)
B. Code provisions:
§ 162(a)—Trade or Business Expenses: Deductions are allowed for all (i) ordinary and
necessary expenses (ii) paid or incurred during the taxable year (iii) in carrying on any
trade or business. Including (but not limited to):
(1) a (i) reasonable allowance (ii) for salaries or compensation (iii) for personal
services actually rendered; (disputes normally involve the reasonableness, not whether
services actually rendered). First hurdle: were services actually rendered?
(2) Traveling expenses; and
(3) Rentals (not all inclusive list, but does limit items)
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 45
§ 212—not a business expense provision, but enables investors to deduct expenses related to
assets that are income producing.
a. Examples: A doctor who owns rental property w/regular expenses (utilities,
maintenance) and has rental income. If Dr. isn’t deemed to be in the business of owning
rental real estate, she is viewed as an investor and can deduct expenses under §212.
b. Not as broad as §162—more pressure under §212 to make sure investor only gets
deductions for those related to the investment; walls off personal expenses.
c. If you’re an investor, §212 allows taxpayer to deduct expenses related to investment
activity, that, if it were a business, would be deductible under §162.
§ 62(a)(1)—Trade or business deductions allowed/employee expenses excluded: To arrive
at AGI, trade and business expenses are allowed, unless incurred by employee in connection
w/business of being an employee. Rationale: Not really a business expense.
§ 62(a)(2)—Trade & business deductions of employees allowed—If employee is reimbursed
for expenses incurred for employer under an accountable plan, employee may deduct 100% of
reimbursement or other expense allowance. Rationale: You won’t get penalized by floor or
limitation on itemized deduction due to business travel. Clearly an exception to §62(a)(1)
a. §62(a)(2)(A)—Reimbursed expenses of employees—in an accountable plan, agreement
between employer & employee, w/no net benefit to employee, doesn’t have to be
recorded on tax form at all—expense reimbursement arrangement is a wash between
expense & reimbursement (income and expense); employer is responsible to ensure
reimbursement is allowed.
§ 63(a)—Taxable income = gross income – certain enumerated expenses
§ 67(a) & (b)—Percent Floor on Miscellaneous Itemized Deductions: Deduction only
allowed to the extent they exceed 2% of AGI. Rationale: Not to hide rate increase, but to
simplify. Prevents claiming relatively small deductions & forces certain add’l taxpayers from
itemized to non-itemized status. Analysis: Pearlman doesn’t like this—denies taxpayer full amt
of allowed deduction.
C. Reg. §§ 1.162-1(a), 6, 15, & 17(b)(1)—Itemized deductions for Individuals & Corporations.
D. Go to § 162 first to determine if an expenditure is deductible or not. §162 is the central
section of the statute that allows for deduction of business expenses.
E. Look to §62 for “above the line” expense deductions (expenditures that taxpayer could claim
regardless if taxpayer itemizes; not subject to limitations): (1) contributions to certain
retirement plans; (2) alimony; (3) moving expenses; (4) interest on education al loans; (5)
employer-reimbursed business expenses.
F. Not all ‘expenses’ are deductible:
Compensation disguised as dividend: expenses labeled as such may not really be expenses,
but disguised payment such as gifts & dividends and mixed use expenses;
Timing: some expenses are business related but must be capitalized & aren’t currently
deductible;
Public Policy: some expenses, even if business related, shouldn’t be deductible because they
violate public policy (fines, penalties, bribes, kickbacks);
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 46
Because Congress says so: some expenses aren’t deductible because Congress decided, for
political reasons, not to make them deductible. (non-tax policy prohibition) Depart from HS.
G. Trade or Business Expenses: Judicial rule—expenses incurred by employee are trade/business
expenses deductible under §162 (Line 20, Schedule A)
H. Gilliam v. Commissioner—Facts: Artist freaks out on business trip, wants to claim cost of
freaking out as business expense. Holding: Not deductible; in order to be deductible, must be
ordinary, necessary expense, an expense of carrying on the taxpayer’s trade or business. What
expense is an appropriately-deductible expense?
I. Dancer—Holding: auto accident expenses are common enough to be ordinary & necessary.
J. Deputy v. Dupont—Holding: expenses were not deductible because this was essentially a capital
investment. Used ‘necessary & ordinary’ to distinguish between a currently deductible expense &
an expense that was capital. This case—difference between expenses that are normally incurred in
that business versus those that are not.
Questions:
Red, a bricklayer, is employed by Contractor Co. He is required to
pay annual union dues. Are the dues deductible? If so, where on Red's tax return
will he record the expense? (See Form 1040 & Schedule A, CM pp. 43 & 45.) Union
dues deductible under §67(b) and Reg. 1.162-15; deductible on the individual tax
return Schedule A, line 20. If Red’s deductions don’t exceed std deduction, he
won’t itemized and claim it. Also subject to 2% floor, so may not get full deduction.
Jean is a tax partner in a Washington law firm. She personally
subscribes to the Journal of Int’l Taxation and the Wall Street Journal. May Jean
deduct the cost of the subscriptions? If so, where on Jean's tax return will she
record the deductions? (See Form 1040 & Schedules B & C, CM pp. 43, 46, & 47.)
Can deduct journal per Reg. 1.162-6 (professional expenses include subscriptions).
WSJ may be relevant to her profession, but also has some personal relevance.
Subject to 2% floor & 3% cap on itemized deductions. If Jean is partner/self
employed, she deducts as a cost-recovery item (above the line), not subject to floor
or cap. Makes a difference if she’s an employee or partner
2. Compensation
A. § 162(m)(1)-(4)(C)—Excessive employee remuneration excluded: Business expenses
compensating executives >$1M not deductible. Bonuses are deductible if they are reasonably
confident that the bonus will be awarded at the end of the year. Note: Relative easy to get around
this statute.
B. §280(g)—Golden Parachutes excluded: Triggered upon change of business ownership.
Business expenses in connection w/certain golden parachutes aren’t deductible. Note: Hard to get
around.
C. Reg. §§ 1.162-7, 8, & 9—Compensation Guidelines; lots of questions involve closely held
businesses—issue is whether really compensation or disguised payment of another type. Hard to
challenge w/executives due to relative vs. absolute size of compensation.
D. Cases:
Elliotts, Inc. v. Commissioner, CM p. 140—the leading case (9th Cir.); many circuits adopt this
subjective approach; the five factor test. Holding: Look at the business and evaluate based on
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 47
these factors if the compensation is appropriate. The predominant way to evaluate the
reasonableness of compensation.
Exacto Spring Corp. v. Commissioner, CM p. 145—Judge Posner. Hypothetical investor test—
would an investor be willing to compensate the individual? Look and see whether other
shareholders in this business ended up with a higher return than had the employee not been
there. Tries to be non-subjective, but isn’t.
Really not much difference between the two.
Questions:
1. Boss is the sole shareholder of XCo, a Northern Virginia auto dealer, & serves as its
president and CEO. He receives an annual salary of $100K. XCo is having a
particularly good year. In order to reduce XCo’s taxable income, its accountant has
suggested that XCo pay Boss a cash bonus of $500K in Dec. 2003 immediately
before the end of XCo's taxable year. Will the bonus be deductible by XCo?
Maybe. Is it a good-faith attempt to provide an appropriate level of compensation
that were actually rendered? Reg. 1.162-9. Look at Elliots test (CM p. 140)
2. As a result of the recent reduction in the tax rate on dividend income to 15%,
effective Jan. 1, 2003, should XCo declare a $500K dividend rather than pay Boss a
$500K bonus? Tax rates on dividends = 15% (capital gains rate). §1(h)(11)—
dividend taxable at lower rate than compensation of Boss. He may prefer to have
dividend. From company’s standpoint, dividend isn’t deductible at the corporate
level (distribution of profits). Tension between what’s good for employee vs.
what’s good for corporation. If you have multiple shareholders, they all get
dividends.
3. Boss has a nephew who wants to go to law school in Australia but is short of funds.
In order to help, Boss agrees to place his nephew on XCo’ s payroll as an auto
mechanic during the school year at a salary of $2,000 per month, an amt
calculated to be sufficient on an after-tax basis to cover the nephew’s housing and
living expenses. Will the nephew’s salary be deductible by XCo? No services
rendered—no reasonable compensation. No corporate deduction for salary.
Could be constructive passage of gift from uncle to nephew (gift tax implications)
4. Lobbying expenses.
A. Code § 162(e)—denial of deduction for certain lobbying and political expenditures.
B. Reg. § 1.162-20, CM p. 135.
1. General.
A. Two edge analysis: (1) to what extent are these expenses deductible under § 162(a)? (2) To what
extent are the personal expenses non-deductible?
B. Two circumstances under which these expenses arise: (1) incurred directly by employer or on
behalf of employer; born by employer (buys the tickets or rents the hotel room). Does §162 apply
for deduction by employer? What are the potential implications for the employee? Do §132
fringe benefit rules apply? (2) incurred directly by employee; bears expense and gets deduction (§
162 below the line) or seeks reimbursement by employee (§ 62 not recorded in employee’s tax
form)
C. In general, employer expenses are deductible and employee expenses are excluded. If it fits in
§119 or §132, then that applies, otherwise case law might apply.
D. Hard to administer
E. Code § 162(a)
F. Code § 262(a).
G. Reg. § 1.262-1
2. Hobby losses.
A. Usually arises when taxpayer is trying to use net loss from hobby to offset other income.
B. Nickerson.
C. Code § 183.—Hobby Expenses (Activities not engaged in for profit)
(a) Hobby Expenses excluded: In general, no deduction for hobby losses
(b) Allowable Hobby Expenses: allows for (1) deductions that do not require a profit motive
are always deductible, even if no profit (i.e. interest expenses, financed as home equity
indebtedness, etc.); (2) a taxpayer may take a deduction in connection with an activity not
engaged in for profit, but only to the extent that related income is generated (minus interest,
taxes and other deductions that do not require a profit motive)
D. §183(d)—taxpayer favorable presumption: Unless an activity makes money 3 out of 5
consecutive years, then presumption is that activity isn’t for profit.
E. Reg. § 1.183-2(b)—look at what IRS agent looks at to determine if it’s a hobby. Regulation gives
list of factors (not exhaustive) to be considered when determining whether a particular activity is
“for profit”.
Questions:
Walter owns a weekend home near Leesburg, VA, prime horse country. He owns 2
horses, one for each of his children. Colt is produced by horses; Walter sold the colt
to a neighbor for $1,000. He wants to offset the gain on the sale by deducting the
expenses of feeding and caring for the colt’s parents. (Assume that a baby’s horse’s
elders are called parents). Are the expenses deductible? Probably not deductible;
just a judgement not withstanding the articulation of §183. Looks like a 1-shot thing,
claimed to offset expenses. Not enough facts to really know…
Would your answer change if one of Walter’s horses won a $1M purse at the
Kentucky Derby? Maybe now there is more income than expenses (operating at a
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 49
profit). Can still deduct expenses to the extent that they offset income.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 50
Are there instances in which deductions w/respect to this property could be allowed? [280F(d)
(3)]; if user is employee, then property (1) must be used for convenience of employer and (b)
ownership of property by employee must be required as condition of employment.
Employee is only allowed to claim a deduction for the business use of the asset; (1) keep log in
car—write down/written record of business use; (2) cell phone, pays expenses himself; to claim
business expense deduction, taxpayer must keep record of business use of cell phone (every
business call)
B. Code § 280F—Ids certain categories of personal property (notably computers and cars) that likely
have a personal use element and may also be used for business purposes
§ 280F(a)—limitation on amt of depreciation for luxury autos.
§ 280F(b)—Limitation where business use of property < 50%
§ 280F(d)(4)(A) & (B)—Listed property: (1) any passenger car; (2) property used for
transportation; (3) property generally used for entertainment; (4) computer (5) cell phone (6)
other property listed by regulations
§ 280F(d)—Cars, computers & other property: Property listed in (d)(4) shall be deductible if
used at the convenience of the employer. Property must be used for a business at a regular
business establishment; ownership of the property is a condition of employment.
G. United States v. Correll, CM p. 149—Overnight Rule: If travel is less than an overnight trip,
then meal expenses are NOT deductible because they are more akin to the expenses occurred if
taxpayer didn’t travel. Travel is defined as away from home overnight.
H. Rev. Rul. 99-7, CM p. 151.
Questions:
Jean lives in Annapolis and commutes by car from her home to her DC
law office. She maintains records of her various expenses and the miles traveled
during her commute. Are her car expenses deductible? NO. Commuting expenses
are not deductible.
In early September, Jean was assigned responsibility for a case her law
firm is litigating in Chicago. For the next two months, she will be required to spend
a great deal of time there. Normally, she works in DC on Mondays and Fridays and
in Chicago on Tuesdays through Thursdays. Are Jean’s travel expenses to and from
Chicago deductible? Yes, per §162(a)(2) and Correll.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 52
H. Code § 274(n)—any business meals are only deductible to 50% of their cost. Enacted to deal
w/personal consumption element; applies to all business meals, including those incurred during
travel. Has direct effect on restaurants and other entertainment facilities.
I. Code § 132(d)
J. Reg. §§ 1.162-2 & -17(b).
K. Reg. §§ 1.274-2, & 5T(a) & (c)(1) & (2).
L. Reg. § 1. § 1.274-4, CM p. 154.
Questions:
Red, our bricklayer, brings a sandwich from home to work everyday and eats with
his co-workers on the job site because there is no time to go elsewhere for lunch.
The workers talk almost exclusively about their jobs. They discuss who will do
what in the afternoon and what supplies they will need for the following day. Is
the cost of Red’s sandwich deductible? NO—not business related. It would have
to come in under § 162 or § 164 and the travel requirement isn’t met. Cash
equivalent standard—are you deriving more or less benefit for the meal than you
would have paid cash for? Homemade sandwich probably wouldn’t satisfy that
standard because taxpayer would pay the amount just for the value of consuming
the food and not for the business value (this is a § 262 personal expense not
deductible)
Jean, our tax lawyer, goes out to lunch at an upscale Italian restaurant
on a regular basis. She always invites a firm client to join her. They eat simple
meals costing approximately $65 per person. Jean's firm reimburses her the meal
expenses. Are the client’s meals deductible? Are Jean’s meals deductible? It
depends. It will depend on the specific facts. If she can show a business link
between the lunches and her practice, then expenses are deductible. See Moss
case. It’s all or nothing. Either both meals are deductible or neither.
a. When Jean travels out of town on business, she really splurges. It
is not unusual for her to spend $100 for dinner. She rarely conducts business
during these out-of-town meals; indeed, she frequently eats alone. Her
employer reimburses her for her meal costs. Are the costs deductible by her
employer? If not lavish and extravagant, then they’re deductible.
b. During Jean's time in Chicago (see ¶ E, Question 2), are her living
expenses while in Chicago deductible? YES; (Correl away from home overnight
rule)
c. What if the Chicago litigation becomes Jean's only project and
requires her to spend full time in Chicago for three years? NO—for tax purposes,
‘home’ is Chicago (§ 162(a) travel > 1 yr. rule) Also has retroactive effect—
expenses for 1st year are non-deductible.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 54
Questions:
1. CellCo operates a nationwide cellular phone system. It retains local distributors to
contract with customers for service. CellCo offers a free phone to each new
subscriber if the subscriber signs up for CellCo service. The subscriber agreement
imposes a monthly access charge of $20 plus usage charges. CellCo’s customer
agreement has a 3-year term and provides that if the agreement is terminated
during the 1st year, the subscriber must pay the entire cost of the phone, during
the 2nd year, ⅔ of the cost; and during the 3rd year, ⅓ of the cost. CellCo pays its
distributors $200 for each subscriber they sign up.
- Are the payments to the distributors currently deductible by CellCo? IRS would
argue that it’s clearly a capital expenditure, and must be capitalized. Economic
Income analysis—produces income for > 1 yr. INDOPCO would compel
capitalization.
- What if CellCo can establish that 90% of its subscribers terminate during the 1st
year? What about 40%? May make a difference; shows economic benefit < 1
yr.
2. Kellogg Co. is the largest producer of processed corn flakes. During the past
decade, Kellogg has seen its market share erode and has decided to try to do
something about it. Accordingly, it commissioned a prominent Madison Avenue
advertising agency to design a new box and corn flakes logo. Following completion
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 55
5. Acquisition expenses.
A. Code § 263(a)—Acquisition Expenses: must be capitalized and added to the adjusted tax basis. §
1016(a)(1). Brokerage fees to acquire securities also added to ATB.
B. Code §§ 1012 (basis of property) & 1016(a)(1) (adjustment to basis)
C. Reg. § 1.263(a)-1(a)
D. Woodward v. Commissioner, CM p. 169—Facts: Litigation expenses incurred in the acquisition
of stock. Holding: acquisition expenses must be capitalized (part of cost of stock).
E. Wells Fargo, CM p. 171—Facts: salaries paid to employees in the acquisition of several banks.
Holding: salaries paid to employees in the business that are not directly related to the acquisition
may be currently deductible. This differs from in-house counsel because those expenses are
direct.
F. Outside Counsel—must be capitalized (Woodward)
G. Salaries of in-house lawyers and accountants—Salaries paid to inside counsel must be
capitalized if they are acquisition expenses. Even if salary payments would otherwise be ordinary
and necessary.
Questions: Coca-Cola Co. acquires the stock of PepsiCo through a successful cash
tender offer. Coca-Cola incurs the following expenses in connection with the
acquisition. Which are currently deductible?
Purchase price of the stock. Capitalization (§1012); not currently
deductible, beginning basis of asset.
Fee paid to NY investment banker that served as Coca-Cola's
investment advisor in the transaction. Outside counsel, must be capitalized
(Woodward)
Fee paid to Coca-Cola's outside counsel retained to advise on the
transaction. Outside counsel, capitalize.
Salaries of in-house lawyers and accountants who worked on the
acquisition. If their sole function is acquisition related, then what portion of their
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 56
time did they spend on acquisition X v. acquisition Y. Question of what the people
did, then figure out if it’s subject to capitalization.
Salary of Coca-Cola's CEO who met with PepsiCo's CEO and negotiated
the final sticking points. Difficult to factually establish what amt of time is
allocateable to a particular issue. His whole job is related to the long-term
direction of the company. Usually resolved by IRS and taxpayer agreeing that
some portion of expenses will be capitalized.
Questions:
On Jan. 2, 2003, Chad purchased a new truck to be used in his business
for $10K. Assume the truck’s useful life is 5 years and that at the end of its useful
life, its value (i.e., its salvage value) will be zero. Further assume that Chad will be
in the 30% tax bracket for the next 5 years. Finally assume that Chad earns
sufficient income in his business to offset whatever deduction he is allowed by
reason of his purchase and use of the truck.
a. If Chad were entitled to deduct the entire cost of the truck in taxable year
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 57
2003, by how much tax would he be able to reduce his taxable income? $3K
—full cost of item deductible in the year purchased.
b. If, instead, Chad were required to wait until year 5 to deduct the cost of the
truck, how much tax would he save in that year? Wouldn’t have benefit of tax
savings for the five years, but would end up w/$3K in yr #5.
c. If, instead, Chad could deduct the cost of the truck ratably over the 5-year
period, how much tax would he save in the aggregate? In the aggregate,
would save $3K.
d. Which of these cost recovery methods would Chad prefer? Chad would prefer
(a). Gets money now, > because of future value of $3K, assuming he can use
the deduction, he can invest it & make money.
- The Director of the Office of Management and Budget, the Administration
official primarily responsible for balancing the budget, would prefer which
method? Would prefer (b)—IRS wants money now.
- As a Treasury tax policy official, which would you prefer? Why? Would
prefer (c)—want to match the use of the thing with the income from it.
Comparison of forms of individual retirement accounts.
Ruth invested $2,000 in a Roth IRA, a type of tax-preferred investment
vehicle in which (i) Ruth’s contribution is not currently deductible, (ii) the income
of the account accrues tax free, and (iii) Ruth will be subject to no tax when the
earnings are distributed to her from the account. What will be the net after-tax
value of Ruth’s IRA investment on Dec. 31, 2006 (see assumptions, below)?
Roger invested $2,000 in a so-called deductible IRA, a tax-preferred
vehicle in which (i) Roger’s contribution is fully deductible in the year made, (ii)
the income of the account accrues tax free, and (iii) all distributions from the
account, including the return of Roger’s original contribution, will be taxable to
Roger when distributed. What will be the net after-tax value of Roger’s investment
on Dec. 31, 2006 (see assumptions, below)?
Assumptions:
- Ruth and Roger made their investments on Jan. 1, 2002.
- The annual market rate of return for all relevant periods is 10%
(compounded). (Note: You may have difficulty accepting the assumption that
the taxable and tax-free rates of return will be the same. This reluctance is
understandable, but for purposes of this analysis, please force yourself to
make the assumption.)
- The balances in each of the IRAs will be distributed to Ruth and Roger on
December 31, 2006.
- Ruth and Roger will be in the 40% tax bracket for all relevant taxable years.
Which IRA investment produces the most favorable after-tax return?
Neither!
What is the relevance of this question to our consideration of the
capitalization requirement? Immediate deduction is equivalent of excluding the
asset from tax. Carey Brown formula.
2. Depreciation.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 58
A. General:
Recovering costs over a period of time. Recover costs as asset decreases in value. Periodic
deductions of cost recovery.
Tax depreciation is different from economic & financial accounting depreciation. This is more
generous—allows acceleration of cost recovery.
Theory: Cost of an asset should be recovered & apportioned over its useful life.
Steps: (1) See if it is a capitalized expense; (2) determine value based on § 1011, §1014-1016,
Reg. 1.165(g)-(1); (3) determine depreciation deduction; (4) reduce adjusted tax basis by
depreciation deduction under § 1016(a)(2).
Depreciation system doesn’t take inflation into account.
B. Definitions:
Depreciation—term used w/respect to cost recovery for tangible assets & real property
Amortization—term used for intangible assets
C. Code: §§ 167(a)-(c) & (f)(1)(A), § 168(a)-(e)—provides periodic system of cost recovery
§167(a)—General Rule:
a. Except as otherwise provided in this section, the depreciation deduction provided by
section 167(a) for any tangible property shall be determining using: (1) the applicable
depreciation method; (2) the applicable recovery period; (3) the applicable convention.
b. Categories: depreciation allowed for (1) property used in trade or business; or (2)
property held for the production of income.
§167(b)—Applicable Depreciation Methods (other than expensing):
a. 200% declining balance system: front loads the deductions faster than would be
allowed under HS depreciation—economic stimulus provision; broadly applicable to
tangible personal property w/relatively short lives (<10 yrs)
b. 150% delining balance system: mimics/more closely associated w/economic
depreciation; an asset depreciates more rapidly and in larger amts in earlier years.
c. Straight line method: used for improved property—factories, office buildings,
residential rental property (not for personal habitation)
§167(c)—basis: Determined by §1011
§167(f)—Computer software: Special rule that cross-references §197. Software is
recoverable over a 36-month straight line period.
§168(a)—Modified accelerated cost recovery system: depreciation deduction under §167(a)
determined by (1) applicable depreciation method; (2) applicable recovery period; and (3)
applicable convention.
§168(c)—applicable recovery period: Identify recovery period by class life/useful life of a
particular asset; property is depreciated from the time it is placed in service.
§168(d)—applicable convention
§168(d)(1)—half-year convention: arbitrary rule of convention where taxpayer only entitled
to 50% of normal depreciation during 1st and last year of an asset’s useful life.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 59
the 10th year, the value of the oven is projected to be $5,000; at the end of 20 yrs,
the value is expected to be $2K.
- Under a perfect HS income tax, how should Red recover the cost of the
oven? Determine actual reduction in productive value of the asset each year.
Not necessarily the resale value of asset.
- What difference would it make if the annual inflation rate were 5%? Tax
real increase, not inflationary gain. Inflate income to tax inflationary
component—we don’t do this.
- Assume Congress wants to use the cost recovery system to provide an
incentive for investing in brick ovens, how might it do so? Expensing,
accelerated depreciation (more generous than economic depreciation.)
- Is Red entitled to expense the purchase price in taxable year 2002 if he
prefers? Even if he can, why might he choose not to do so? Falls under §179
exemption for current expense? Can he use the whole expense this taxable
year? Small business expensing provision…focus on Statutory dollar amts. For
longer life asset (>10 yrs), taxpayer in loss position may forgo the §179
provision & recover under normal depreciation system.
- What is the economic significance of an expensing regime? Making
depreciation more generous than economic model should provide behavioral
incentive to taxpayers.
How may Red recover the cost of land that he purchased as the site for
his brick-making factory? When he sells the land, recovered in ATB. Would have
to sell the land; land not generally depreciable (exceptions—dumps, coal mines).
Building is depreciable, but not land. Allocate ATB between building & land.
How may Red recover the cost of the accounting system software that
he recently purchased for use in the business? § 167(f)—over 3 years.
How may Red recover the cost of the goodwill he acquired in
connection with the cash purchase of Stone’s gravel business? § 197(d)(1) Over
15 years.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 61
1. § 1221(a)(1)—Stock & inventory held for sale or trade is NOT a capital asset.
Generates business income that’s taxable as ordinary income. Doesn’t include
stocks/bonds even if by high volume trader.
2. § 1221(a)(2)—Depreciable property & property held for trade & business are
NOT capital assets.
3. § 1221(a)(3)—Self created copyrights & similar property are NOT capital assets
4. § 1221(a)(4)—Accounts receivable acquired in ordinary course of business or for sale
of inventory are NOT capital assets
b. § 1223(1), (2), (4), & (11)—Holding period of property
c. §§ 1231(a)(1)-(3), (b)(1)(A) & (B), & (c)(1) (c)(3) & (4)—Property used in trade
business and involuntary conversions:
1. If taxpayer has net gain from sale of 1231 property (including real & depreciable
property, conversions), then it is capital gain.
2. If taxpayer has net loss, then it’s ordinary income loss. Applicable to individuals in
business
3. Must be netted (1231 gain or 1231 loss)
4. Doesn’t apply to corporations because no preferential rate for corporations.
2. General.
A. Difference between capital gains & ordinary income: (1) rate difference; (2) benefit of deferral of
tax payment until disposed.
B. Most pervasive incentive in the tax law
C. Policy reasons:
It could/does have a material effect on relieving the over-taxation effect on inflationary gains.
HS—want to measure wealth on a real basis; don’t want to tax just the inflationary component
of income—isn’t a real increase in net worth;
Capital incentive argument—by providing preferential rate for capital assets, will affect
taxpayer behavior & cause them to invest in capital assets.
Averaging—gain isn’t recognized until property is disposed of, gain is bunched into a single
tax period
Provides some relief from double taxation on corporate earnings; already taxed as income to
corporation.
Lock-in effect of realization—taxpayers have incentive not to sell until death (step up basis)
D. Code: § 61(a)(3)–Property Gains: Creates separate regime for capital gains. 10 separate
preferential rates applicable to non-corporate taxpayers; no pref. rate for corporate taxpayers.
E. § 1(h) (authority for capital gains rate).
§1(h)(1)—Capital gains: starts with “if taxpayer has net capital gain” If taxpayer has net
capital gain; §1222 is the gateway to §1(h)(1)—link is §1222(11)
§1(h)(1)(c)—Capital gains rate: normally 20%
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 62
§1(h)(1)(b)—Capital gains rate: Taxpayers in < 20% tax bracket receive a 10% capital gains
rate.
F. Capital gain calculation:
Code §§ 1001(a)-(c); §1001—Definition of Gains: Measuring rod of what is a gain.
§ 1222—Definition of Net Capital Gains: takes us through
a. 1222(1)—STCG: gain from sale/exchange of capital asset not held >1 yr.
b. 1222(2)—STCL: loss from sale/exchange of capital asset held for NMT 1 yr.
c. 1222(3)—LTCG: gain from sale/exchange of capital asset held > 1yr. THREE
IMPORTANT PHRASES:
1. Sale or exchange: no meaningful guidance; coterminous w/sale or disposition of
property. Some things are treated as sales:
(1) Foreclosure of property by creditor
(2) Abandonment of property
(3) Property becomes worthless
(4) Lease of tangible or real property (financing lease)
2. Capital asset—term has a lot of judicial attention; not a real big deal today;
3. Held for > 1 yr (holding period requirement)
(1) ≤ 1 yr = ST
(2) > 1 yr = LT
d. 1222(4)—LTCL: loss from sale/exchange of capital asset held > 1 yr.
e. 1222(5)—Net STCG: Excess of STCG over STCL; If only net short term capital gain,
then treated as ordinary income
f. 1222(6)—Net STCL: excess of STCL over STCG [STCL > STCG]
g. 1222(7)— Net LTCG: excess of LTCG over LTCL [LTCG > LTCL]. Pushes you into
1222(11); if it produces a loss [1222(8)], then it can’t be used against ordinary income,
only against future capital gains.
h. 1222(8)— Net LTCL: excess of LTCL over LTCG [LTCL > LTCG]
i. 1222(11)—Net Capital Gain: compare net LTCG [1222(7)] against any net STCL
[1222(6)] = NCG; If there is an excess of long-term capital gain compared w/short term
capital loss; short term capital losses, that might otherwise be available to offset ordinary
income, must first be offset against capital gain.
Questions:
Kay inherits $10K. She is considering either purchasing a 2-year $10K
Treasury bond that will pay 10% interest annually or stock of a new start-up
company that she expects will be worth $12K in 2 years but will pay no dividend.
What is your tax (not investment) advice? (Assume that Kay will be subject to a
30% tax rate on ordinary income and a 15% rate on capital gains.)
Is there a tax policy justification for your answer?
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 63
4. Substitutes for Ordinary Income (Ordinary Income versus Capital Gain Characterization)
A. Cases: Hort, P.G. Lake.
Questions: Noreen purchased stock of Bell Atlantic Corp. on Aug. 5, 2002. Sold the
stock at a gain on Aug. 5, 2003.
What is the character of the gain? Short term
What if the sale date was Aug. 6, 2003? Long term
Questions: On Sept. 30, 2002, Jill sold 1,000 shares of Amgen stock (a capital asset)
at $50/share. She purchased the Amgen shares on Feb. 15, 2002 at $25/share. Also
on Sept. 30, 2002, she sold 1,000 shares of U.S. Steel stock at $40/share. She
purchased the U.S. Steel shares on Aug. 1, 2002 at $60/share.
What are the effects of these two transactions on Jill’s taxable income
for taxable year 2002? (You need not calculate Jill's taxable income.) Amgen =
STCG; US Steel = STCL; Net STCG [G > L] = $5000
Same base facts, except Jill purchased the Amgen stock on Feb. 15,
1997 and the U.S. Steel stock on Aug. 1, 1995. What effect? (No calculation
necessary.) Becomes LT Capital Gain
Same base facts, except Jill purchased the Amgen stock on Feb. 15,
1997. What effect? (No calculation necessary.) Amgen = LTCG; US Steel = STCL;
§1222(11); LTCG – STCL.
Same base facts, except Jill purchased the U.S. Steel stock on Aug. 1,
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 64
1995. Does the loss on the sale of the U.S. Steel stock reduce the Amgen gain?
(No calculation necessary.) US Steel = LTCL; don’t offset LTCL against STCG;
can only offset LTCL against LTCG.
Same base facts, except Jill purchased the Amgen stock on Feb. 15,
1997, and she purchased the U.S. Steel stock on Aug. 1, 2001 at $80/share. Does
the loss on the U.S. Steel stock reduce the Amgen gain? (No calculation
necessary.) US Steel = STCL; Amgen = LTCG; according to §1222(11), offset LTCG
against STCL.
6. Depreciation Recapture.
A. Code § 1245(a)(1), (2)(A), & (3)(A) & (B)—Depreciation recapture: Aimed at unused tax
benefit (statutory applicable of tax benefit rule). If I sell property for more than ATAB,
depreciation was unnecessary & will be taken back upon realization.. To extent of depreciation
taken, any gain is ordinary income.. Any income past original tax basis, then capital gain.
B. § 1250(a)—taxable real property: more generous than §1245.
Questions: In 1998, Morris purchased a machine for $10K to use in his business.
Thereafter, he claimed depreciation deductions totaling $4,000. He sold the machine
for cash in March 2002. What is the character of the gain or loss recognized by
Morris on the sale --
if the sales price was $8,000?
if the sales price was $15,000?
if the sales price was $3,000, and assuming that Morris engaged in no
other relevant transactions?
XV. THE CONCEPTS OF INCOME AND OF AN INCOME TAX AND ALTERNATIVE TAX BASES,
INCLUDING A CONSUMPTION TAX
1. Assumption: Traditional tax analysis assumes that gov’t needs some sort of revenue from some
source.
2. Issues:
A. Whether revenue should be raised by a user fee/charge for service basis, or by extracting a certain
amt of money from every taxpayer? Hart to figure out a charge for certain types of expenditures
(nat’l defense, military, public education, infrastructure). Our tax system is a mix.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 65
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 66
Three basic forms: (1) sales tax; (2) Value Added Tax (VAT); (3) cash-flow consumption tax
(think of a world where the only tax imposed by the fed gov’t is a sales tax).
Consumption tax = income minus (-) savings.
Example: State retail sales tax. Accounts for 53% of state income.
Fundamental difference between this and an income tax is that under this system, income from
capital is exempt from tax.
Positives: encourages savings; a more accurate assessment of ability to pay by looking at
consumption as the taxable event over lifetime; much easier to compute (consumption =
income – savings)
Negatives: Inherently regressive (imposes more tax on lower income taxpayers); owners of
capital are favored over wage earners; offshore purchases of goods—when it’s shipped into
US= no VAT. Evasion is major problem in VAT and sales tax
Retail Sales tax—no tax at business level; a sales tax is always borne by the consumer.
Value-added tax—form of sales tax; difference is that it’s collected in stages rather than when
consumer buys the product.
a. Impose tax on mfgr/producer of goods/svcs at each stage of production
b. Example: (1) car mfgr buys steel from steel mfgr; car mfgr pays tax on steel purchases.
(2) Steel company offsets price of tax they paid on iron ore. (3) Car mfgr sells car to
dealer, exceeds production costs, mfgr collects tax from dealer, offsets VAT w/whatever
taxes it paid to steel mfgr. (4) by the end, consumer buys car & pays tax that looks like a
sales tax. Through a credit for prior taxes, the only person who doesn’t get credit is the
consumer.
c. Acceleration of payment of tax through incremental payments, but the ultimate tax
burden falls on the consumer, who doesn’t get a credit. Price of product reflects the
imbedded VATs.
d. When goods are imported, VAT imposed; when goods exported, VAT refunded. Border
adjustability eliminates double taxation.
e. Many countries use VAT—Japan = 20% of revenues from 5% VAT; in most European
countries, VAT = 15-20%.
Cash flow consumption tax—looks like an income tax
a. Start w/income (broad def’n of income)
b. At individual level—earns wages: consumes some, saves some
1. When wages are saved, it goes into special acct, identified for tax purposes for system
to work (qualified acct) for which taxpayer takes a deduction. [get deduction if you
save money].
2. When you use savings to consume, you bring it back into income. Since system is
trying to tax consumption, not only the savings spent would be included, but if you
borrowed any money from a bank, that would be taxable income.
(1) Taxable income = Income – Net Savings + any borrowing – repayment of
borrowings
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 67
(2) Dividends, interest, rental income, etc. not subject to tax. As investment income
is earned, it isn’t taxed.
c. At business level—capital investment is fully deductible
1. Includes sales as income, but deducts all capital investments
2. Expending in capital investment results in income for the business, even though there
is a tax paid on the sales
d. Design is different, but in theory operates like VAT
e. No country has cash flow consumption tax—more complex to operate; means every
person and business has to file a return & is harder to understand.
6. Income versus consumption.
Why consumption tax is important: (1) you can’t really understand income tax unless you understand a
consumption tax; (2) we don’t have a pure income tax system; it’s a hybrid of the two; (3) the tax
system is being debated & could potentially change & adopt consumption tax alternatives & options.
7. Vocab
A. The incidence of a tax is its ultimate burden. So if a tax is imposed on the
manufacture of refrigerators and the manufacturer is able to raise prices and pass
the tax on to consumers, then it is said that the tax has been shifted and the
incidence is on consumers rather than on manufacturers.
B. Putative tax is the difference between the return on the tax-exempts and the higher
forgone return on taxable bonds that the taxpayer might have bought – is a form of
self-imposed tax.
C. A progressive income tax is one with rates that rise as income rises. The tax on a
person with a high income is not just a greater amount than the tax on a person with
a lower income, it is a greater proportion of income.
D. The marginal tax rate is the rate applicable to last, and the next dollar of income.
Under it, a person with an income of $30,000 would pay 15% on the first $20,000,
plus 25% on the next $10,000. So the marginal rate for such a person is 25%.
E. There are four rate schedules: married people (including surviving spouses), heads
of household (an unmarried person living with a dependent), unmarried individuals
(single people), and married people filing separately.
F. There are three different options available to a tax payer for judicial review.
He could decline to pay the tax and file a petition for review with the Tax Court.
These judgments are reviewable by the federal circuit courts of appeals in the
circuit where the taxpayer resides and ultimately by the Supreme Court.
He could pay the tax and sue for a refund in the federal district court where the
taxpayer resides. Here a jury trail is available.
He could pay the tax and sue for a refund in the United States Court of Federal
Claims. Its decision are reviewable by the United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit and by the Supreme Court.
G. The tax base is the amount to which the appropriate tax rate is applied. Under a
sales tax the base is sales, under a consumption tax the base is consumption or
expenditure.
H. The top line or starting point is gross income, as defined by §61.
http://outlines.ilrg.com
Tax I Outline—Fall 2005 68
http://outlines.ilrg.com