The Centralized Partnership Audit Regime (CPAR) added by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 effectively barred partnerships that did not opt out of the regime from filing an amended return and sending out amended K-1s for prior years. Since many partnerships do not qualify to opt-out of the CPAR regime, a large number of partnerships had no ability to change a previously filed return once the period for filing a superseding return had passed.

This feature of the CPAR regime has now proved a major impediment to partners receiving the sort of retroactive benefits Congress added in the CARES Act, such as the use of bonus depreciation or a 15-year life on qualified improvement property. Recognizing the problem, the IRS has issued a Revenue Procedure allowing CPAR partnerships to temporarily file an amended Form 1065 and issue amended K-1s to partners (Revenue Procedure 2020-23).

Photo by Precondo CA on Unsplash

Some key additional information related to the Payroll Protection Program loans has been provided by the Small Business Administration in the evening of April 6, 2020. The agency posted an updated “Paycheck Protection Program Loans Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)”[1] that addressed some questions that had been left unanswered by the original guidance.

This article looks at most of the items, but not all, contained in the FAQ. Most notably, the article doesn’t look at the special rules that may apply to some businesses that may expand this program to cover an employer that otherwise would seem excluded either under the 500 employee test or more general qualifications for participation in SBA programs. Those are found in the FAQ in questions 2 and 3.

The IRS continued to expand the return filings that will have a delayed due date due to the national emergency declared by the President under the Stafford Act. Gift and generation skipping transfer tax returns originally due on April 15, 2020 will now be due on July 15, 2020, per Notice 2020-20.[1] Originally the IRS had indicated in the FAQ related to the extended filings that gift tax returns would not be granted the extended time to file.

The IRS, lining up with the Department of Labor’s start date for the mandatory sick time related to COVID-19 that was enacted in the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, has announced in Notice 2020-21[1] that the effective date for the refundable payroll tax credit is April 1.

Thus, employers will first qualify for the payroll tax credits, and self-employed individuals for the credit for self-employment taxes, for leave beginning April 1, 2020. No credit will be allowed for any such leave taken before that date.

The IRS released a set of frequently asked questions that provide additional details regarding the relief initially granted in Notice 2020-18 for the extension of time to file income tax returns due on April 15, 2020 and related income tax payments due on that date.[1]

In Notice 2020-18 the IRS provided for an extension of time to file the 2019 individual income tax return and first estimated tax payment for 2020, using Treasury’s authority granted under IRC §7508A due to the emergency under the Stafford Act declared by the President. But there were a number of questions about other acts that are also tied to that date and whether there was additional time for them.

As part of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (HR 6201),[1] employers of less than 500 employees face mandatory provision of sick time[2] and paid family leave[3] but are eligible for a refundable payroll tax credit to offset the costs. The bill was signed into law by the President on March 18, 2020.

The analysis below is based on a review of the provisions written immediately after the law was enacted. Readers should confirm all details independently. As well, the Department of Labor and other agencies will be issuing guidance in the application and interpretation of these provisions. Readers need to watch for such developments as they occur.

In Chief Counsel Advice 202009024,[1] the IRS looked into the issue of whether passive activity loss, basis, and at-risk limits impact the ability to use a self-employment loss from a partnership against other self-employment income of a taxpayer for the year in question.

A taxpayer’s decision to voluntarily withdraw from the IRS’s Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative (OVDI) program and instead argue a reasonable cause defense for the failure to file Foreign Bank Account Reporting forms did not end well. In the case of United States v. Ott, US DC SD Michigan, Case No. 2:18-cv-12174 the taxpayer ended up with almost $1 million in penalties when the Court determined that he had acted willfully in failing to file annual FBAR reports on his Canadian accounts.

An S corporation argued that it had reasonable cause for late filing its Forms 1120S for multiple years due to both its CEO and CFO having serious illnesses that in both cases led to their deaths. However, the corporation was not successful in the case of Hunter Maintenance and Leasing Corp. Inc. v. United States, US District Court ND Ill., Case No. 1:18-cv-06585 in obtaining an abatement of the penalties.

Victor Cacciatore had founded the company, along with a number of others, and was treated as CEO and Chairman of the Board of the Company, controlling and exercising final decision-making authority over all financial and tax matters.

A taxpayer argued that the failure to include the basis of the property in an appraisal summary supporting its charitable deduction for a conservation easement should not prove fatal to the deduction in the case of Oakhill Woods, LLC v. Commissioner, TC Memo 2020-24.[1] The letter attached to the appraisal noted:

A declaration of the taxpayer’s basis in the property is not included in * * * the attached Form 8283 because of the fact that the basis of the property is not taken into consideration when computing the amount of the deduction. Furthermore, the taxpayer has a holding period in the property in excess of 12 months and the property further qualifies as “capital gain property.”[2]