’Tis the (Tax) Season

E-mail Story
Print Story
JANUARY 2007 - Another holiday season is over and a new tax season has begun. CPAs all over the country are sharpening their pencils and revving up their calculators. Did I just write that out loud? What I meant to say was: They’re installing their tax preparation software. Things have changed considerably over the past 30 or so years.

For example, the dollar amounts for a variety of tax provisions must be revised each year to keep pace with inflation. As a result, taxpayers will see a rise in personal exemptions and standard deductions, an escalation of tax brackets, and an increase in income limits for IRAs in 2007.

One thing that hasn’t changed is the preference of most taxpayers to receive a refund. Most don’t comprehend the fundamental premise that receiving an income tax refund is tantamount to giving the government an interest-free loan during the year. Nevertheless, my guess is that most CPAs have experienced this pressure at some time during their career from their clients. Some may have even felt the need to use creative means to accomplish this goal. Beware—the IRS is watching!

The IRS is also keeping a closer eye on charitable donations. The recently passed Pension Protection Act of 2006 changed the recordkeeping requirements for taxpayers who claim a deduction for cash contributions. If the contributions are made by payroll deductions, the taxpayer needs to retain a paystub, Form W-2, or other employer-provided document. The document should show the total amount withheld for payment to the charity and include a pledge card indicating the name of the charity. For calendar-year taxpayers, application of this rule begins in 2007.

Abusive tax shelters have been a hot item on the IRS’s “naughty” list. These schemes often use multiple flow-through entities, such as trusts, limited liability companies (LLC), or limited liability partnerships (LLP), to conceal the true nature and ownership of income or assets for the purpose of evading taxes. “Form over substance” should be the effective guideline here. An arrangement that promises to eliminate or substantially reduce tax liability should be reviewed carefully. As the adage says, “If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.”

A Potential Pandora’s Box

But the most interesting development in 2006 was the issue of patenting tax advice. You’re probably asking yourself, How could this happen? A U.S. appeals court ruled in 1998 that “business methods” could be patented, and 50 tax-reduction strategy patents, primarily in the area of gift and estate taxation, have since been issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. To be granted a patent, a tax strategy must be considered novel, nonobvious, and useful. The fact that a tax strategy has been patented, however, doesn’t have any bearing on whether the IRS or the courts would find it legal. This could be extremely confusing for taxpayers who might assume a patent means the strategy has been approved by the government.

The patenting of tax strategies can lead to confusing situations for tax advisors as well. Earlier this year, Wealth Transfer Group sued the executive chairman of Aetna for using a tax-savings technique without paying a licensing fee for a strategy that it patented. The technique involved the transfer of stock options to a certain type of trust. An attorney representing the defendant contends that the strategy used in this case was clearly obvious and authorized in the tax law and, therefore, not patentable. It’s reasonable to ask whether the Patent Office has a knowledge of tax law sufficient to review patent applications for tax shelters.

It is also unclear how patent protection applies, as a practical matter, to tax strategy. For example, what are the implications when a tax advisor and taxpayer are unaware of the existence of a patent on a particular strategy they have independently decided to use? Furthermore, does the infringement occur at the time the tax advisor discusses tax planning with the client, at the time the tax planning structure is implemented, or at the time the taxpayer’s return is filed?

I admit, the idea of patenting a means to comply with federal tax law seems perverse, and the motives of firms that would do so seem strangely Machiavellian and opportunistic. It’s not clear whether Congress will take action anytime soon on this issue, but the patenting of tax advice is sure to elicit strong feelings on both sides for the foreseeable future.

As always, I welcome your comments and suggestions.

Mary-Jo Kranacher, MBA, CPA, CFE
Editor-in-Chief
mkranacher@nysscpa.org


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



The CPA Journal is broadly recognized as an outstanding, technical-refereed publication aimed at public practitioners, management, educators, and other accounting professionals. It is edited by CPAs for CPAs. Our goal is to provide CPAs and other accounting professionals with the information and news to enable them to be successful accountants, managers, and executives in today's practice environments.

©2008 The New York State Society of CPAs. Legal Notices