The American Institute of CPAs in a March 31 letter to House of Representatives voiced its “strong support” for a series of tax administration bills passed in recent days.

The American Institute of CPAs in a March 31 letter to House of Representatives voiced its “strong support” for a series of tax administration bills passed in recent days.

The four bills highlighted in the letter include the Electronic Filing and Payment Fairness Act (H.R. 1152), the Internal Revenue Service Math and Taxpayer Help Act (H.R. 998), the Filing Relief for Natural Disasters Act (H.R. 517), and the Disaster Related Extension of Deadlines Act (H.R. 1491).

All four bills passed unanimously.

H.R. 1152 would apply the “mailbox” rule to electronically submitted tax returns and payments. Currently, a paper return or payment is counted as “received” based on the postmark of the envelope, but its electronic equivalent is counted as “received” when the electronic submission arrived or is reviewed. This bill would change all payment and tax form submissions to follow the mailbox rule, regardless of mode of delivery.

“The AICPA has previously recommended this change and thinks it would offer clarity and simplification to the payment and document submission process,” the organization said in the letter.

H.R. 998 “would require notices describing a mathematical or clerical error be made in plain language, and require the Treasury Secretary to provide additional procedures for requesting an abatement of a math or clerical adjustment, including by telephone or in person, among other provisions,” the letter states.

H.R. 517 would allow the IRS to grant federal tax relief once a state governor declares a state of emergency following a natural disaster, which is quicker than waiting for the federal government to declare a state of emergency as directed under current law, which could take weeks after the state disaster declaration. This bill “would also expand the mandatory federal filing extension under section 7508(d) from 60 days to 120 days, providing taxpayers with additional time to file tax returns following a disaster,” the letter notes, adding that increasing the period “would provide taxpayers and tax practitioners much needed relief, even before a disaster strikes.”

H.R. 1491 would extend deadlines for disaster victims to file for a tax refund or tax credit. The legislative solution “granting an automatic extension to the refund or credit lookback period would place taxpayers affected my major disasters on equal footing as taxpayers not impacted by major disasters and would afford greater clarity and certainty to taxpayers and tax practitioners regarding this lookback period,” AICPA said.

Also passed by the House was the National Taxpayer Advocate Enhancement Act (H.R. 997) which, according to a summary of the bill on Congress.gov, “authorizes the National Taxpayer Advocate to appoint legal counsel within the Taxpayer Advocate Service (TAS) to report directly to the National Taxpayer Advocate. The bill also expands the authority of the National Taxpayer Advocate to take personnel actions with respect to local taxpayer advocates (located in each state) to include actions with respect to any employee of TAS.”

Finally, the House passed H.R. 1155, the Recovery of Stolen Checks Act, which would require the Treasury to establish procedures that would allow a taxpayer to elect to receive replacement funds electronically from a physical check that was lost or stolen.

All bills passed unanimously. The passed legislation mirrors some of the provisions included in a discussion draft legislation issued by the Senate Finance Committee in January 2025. A section-by-section summary of the Senate discussion draft legislation can be found here.

AICPA’s tax policy and advocacy comment letters for 2025 can be found here.

By Gregory Twachtman, Washington News Editor

The Tax Court ruled that the value claimed on a taxpayer’s return exceeded the value of a conversation easement by 7,694 percent. The taxpayer was a limited liability company, classified as a TEFRA partnership. The Tax Court used the comparable sales method, as backstopped by the price actually paid to acquire the property.

The Tax Court ruled that the value claimed on a taxpayer’s return exceeded the value of a conversation easement by 7,694 percent. The taxpayer was a limited liability company, classified as a TEFRA partnership. The Tax Court used the comparable sales method, as backstopped by the price actually paid to acquire the property.

The taxpayer was entitled to a charitable contribution deduction based on its fair market value. The easement was granted upon rural land in Alabama. The property was zoned A–1 Agricultural, which permitted agricultural and light residential use only. The property transaction at occurred at arm’s length between a willing seller and a willing buyer.

Rezoning

The taxpayer failed to establish that the highest and best use of the property before the granting of the easement was limestone mining. The taxpayer failed to prove that rezoning to permit mining use was reasonably probable.

Land Value

The taxpayer’s experts erroneously equated the value of raw land with the net present value of a hypothetical limestone business conducted on the land. It would not be profitable to pay the entire projected value of the business.

Penalty Imposed

The claimed value of the easement exceeded the correct value by 7,694 percent. Therefore, the taxpayer was liable for a 40 percent penalty for a gross valuation misstatement under Code Sec. 6662(h).

Ranch Springs, LLC, 164 TC No. 6, Dec. 62,636

State and local housing credit agencies that allocate low-income housing tax credits and states and other issuers of tax-exempt private activity bonds have been provided with a listing of the proper population figures to be used when calculating the 2025:

State and local housing credit agencies that allocate low-income housing tax credits and states and other issuers of tax-exempt private activity bonds have been provided with a listing of the proper population figures to be used when calculating the 2025:

• calendar-year population-based component of the state housing credit ceiling under Code Sec. 42(h)(3)(C)(ii);
• calendar-year private activity bond volume cap under Code Sec. 146; and
• exempt facility bond volume limit under Code Sec. 142(k)(5)

These figures are derived from the estimates of the resident populations of the 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, which were released by the Bureau of the Census on December 19, 2024. The figures for the insular areas of American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands and the U.S. Virgin Islands are the midyear population figures in the U.S. Census Bureau’s International Database.

Notice 2025-18

The value of assets of a qualified terminable interest property (QTIP) trust includible in a decedent's gross estate was not reduced by the amount of a settlement intended to compensate the decedent for undistributed income.

The value of assets of a qualified terminable interest property (QTIP) trust includible in a decedent's gross estate was not reduced by the amount of a settlement intended to compensate the decedent for undistributed income.

The trust property consisted of an interest in a family limited partnership (FLP), which held title to ten rental properties, and cash and marketable securities. To resolve a claim by the decedent's estate that the trustees failed to pay the decedent the full amount of income generated by the FLP, the trust and the decedent's children's trusts agreed to be jointly and severally liable for a settlement payment to her estate. The Tax Court found an estate tax deficiency, rejecting the estate's claim that the trust assets should be reduced by the settlement amount and alternatively, that the settlement claim was deductible from the gross estate as an administration expense (P. Kalikow Est., Dec. 62,167(M), TC Memo. 2023-21).

Trust Not Property of the Estate

The estate presented no support for the argument that the liability affected the fair market value of the trust assets on the decedent's date of death. The trust, according to the court, was a legal entity that was not itself an asset of the estate. Thus, a liability that belonged to the trust but had no impact on the value of the underlying assets did not change the value of the gross estate. Furthermore, the settlement did not burden the trust assets. A hypothetical purchaser of the FLP interest, the largest asset of the trust, would not assume the liability and, therefore, would not regard the liability as affecting the price. When the parties stipulated the value of the FLP interest, the estate was aware of the undistributed income claim. Consequently, the value of the assets included in the gross estate was not diminished by the amount of the undistributed income claim.

Claim Not an Estate Expense

The claim was owed to the estate by the trust to correct the trustees' failure to distribute income from the rental properties during the decedent's lifetime. As such, the claim was property included in the gross estate, not an expense of the estate. The court explained that even though the liability was owed by an entity that held assets included within the taxable estate, the claim itself was not an estate expense. The court did not address the estate's theoretical argument that the estate would be taxed twice on the underlying assets held in the trust and the amount of the settlement because the settlement was part of the decedent's residuary estate, which was distributed to a charity. As a result, the claim was not a deductible administration expense of the estate.

P.B. Kalikow, Est., CA-2

An individual was not entitled to deduct flowthrough loss from the forfeiture of his S Corporation’s portion of funds seized by the U.S. Marshals Service for public policy reasons. The taxpayer pleaded guilty to charges of bribery, fraud and money laundering. Subsequently, the U.S. Marshals Service seized money from several bank accounts held in the taxpayer’s name or his wholly owned corporation. 

An individual was not entitled to deduct flowthrough loss from the forfeiture of his S Corporation’s portion of funds seized by the U.S. Marshals Service for public policy reasons. The taxpayer pleaded guilty to charges of bribery, fraud and money laundering. Subsequently, the U.S. Marshals Service seized money from several bank accounts held in the taxpayer’s name or his wholly owned corporation. The S corporation claimed a loss deduction related to its portion of the asset seizures on its return and the taxpayer reported a corresponding passthrough loss on his return.

However, Courts have uniformly held that loss deductions for forfeitures in connection with a criminal conviction frustrate public policy by reducing the "sting" of the penalty. The taxpayer maintained that the public policy doctrine did not apply here, primarily because the S corporation was never indicted or charged with wrongdoing. However, even if the S corporation was entitled to claim a deduction for the asset seizures, the public policy doctrine barred the taxpayer from reporting his passthrough share. The public policy doctrine was not so rigid or formulaic that it may apply only when the convicted person himself hands over a fine or penalty.

Hampton, TC Memo. 2025-32, Dec. 62,642(M)

The IRS has released the annual inflation adjustments for 2023 for the income tax rate tables, plus more than 60 other tax provisions. The IRS makes these cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) each year to reflect inflation.

The IRS has released the annual inflation adjustments for 2023 for the income tax rate tables, plus more than 60 other tax provisions. The IRS makes these cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) each year to reflect inflation.

2023 Income Tax Brackets

For 2023, the highest income tax bracket of 37 percent applies when taxable income hits:

• $693,750 for married individuals filing jointly and surviving spouses,
• $578,125 for single individuals,
• $578,100 for heads of households,
• $346,875 for married individuals filing separately, and
• $14,450 for estates and trusts.

2023 Standard Deduction

The standard deduction for 2023 is:

• $27,700 for married individuals filing jointly and surviving spouses,
• $20,800 for heads of households, and
• $13,850 for single individuals and married individuals filing separately.

The standard deduction for a dependent is limited to the greater of:

• $1,250 or
• the sum of $400, plus the dependent’s earned income.

Individuals who are blind or at least 65 years old get an additional standard deduction of:

• $1,500 for married taxpayers and surviving spouses, or
• $1,850 for other taxpayers.

Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) Exemption for 2023

The AMT exemption for 2023 is:

• $126,500 for married individuals filing jointly and surviving spouses,
• $81,300 for single individuals and heads of households,
• $63,250 for married individuals filing separately, and
• $28,400 for estates and trusts.

The exemption amounts phase out in 2023 when AMT exceeds:

• $1,156,300 for married individuals filing jointly and surviving spouses,
• $578,150 for single individuals, heads of households, and married individuals filing separately, and
• $94,600 for estates and trusts.

Expensing Code Sec. 179 Property in 2023

For tax years beginning in 2023, taxpayers can expense up to $1,160,000 in Code Sec. 179 property. However, this dollar limit is reduced when the cost of Code Sec. 179 property placed in service during the year exceeds $2,890,000.

Estate and Gift Tax Adjustments for 2023

The following inflation adjustments apply to federal estate and gift taxes in 2023:

• the gift tax exclusion is $17,000 per donee, or $175,000 for gifts to spouses who are not U.S. citizens;
• the federal estate tax exclusion is $12,920,000; and
• the maximum reduction for real property under the special valuation method is $1,310,000.

2023 Inflation Adjustments for Other Tax Items

The maximum foreign earned income exclusion amount in 2023 is $120,000.

The IRS also provided inflation-adjusted amounts for the:

• adoption credit,
• earned income credit,
• excludable interest on U.S. savings bonds used for education,
• various penalties, and
• many other provisions.

Effective Date of 2023 Adjustments

These inflation adjustments generally apply to tax years beginning in 2023, so they affect most returns that will be filed in 2024. However, some specified figures apply to transactions or events in calendar year 2023.

The 2023 cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) that affect pension plan dollar limitations and other retirement-related provisions have been released by the IRS. In general, many of the pension plan limitations will change for 2022 because the increase in the cost-of-living index due to inflation met the statutory thresholds that trigger their adjustment. 

The 2023 cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) that affect pension plan dollar limitations and other retirement-related provisions have been released by the IRS. In general, many of the pension plan limitations will change for 2022 because the increase in the cost-of-living index due to inflation met the statutory thresholds that trigger their adjustment. However, other limitations will remain unchanged.

The 2023 cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) were released for:

• pension plan dollar limitations, and
• other retirement-related provisions.

Highlights of Changes for 2023

The contribution limit has increased from $20,500 to $22,500 for employees who take part in:

• 401(k),
• 403(b),
• most 457 plans, and
• the federal government’s Thrift Savings Plan

The annual limit on contributions to an IRA increased from $6,000 to $6,500.

The catch-up contribution limit for individuals aged 50 and over is not subject to an annual cost-of-living adjustment and remains $1,000.

The income ranges increased for determining eligibility to make deductible contributions to:

• IRAs,
• ROTH IRAs, and
• to claim the Saver's Credit.

Phase-Out Ranges

Taxpayers can deduct contributions to a traditional IRA if they meet certain conditions. The deduction phases out if the taxpayer or their spouse takes part in a retirement plan at work. The phase out depends on the taxpayer's filing status and income.

• For single taxpayers covered by a workplace retirement plan, the phase-out range is $73,000 to $83,000, up from between $68,000 and $78,000.
• For joint filers, when the spouse making the contribution takes part in a workplace retirement plan, the phase-out range is $116,000 to $136,000, up from between $109,000 and $129,000.
• For an IRA contributor, who is not covered by a workplace retirement plan but their spouse is, the phase out is between $218,000 and $228,000, up from between $204,000 and $214,000.
• For a married individual covered by a workplace plan filing a separate return, the phase-out range remains between $0 and $10,000.

The phase-out ranges for Roth IRA contributions are:

• $138,000 and $153,000, for singles and heads of household,
• $218,000 and $228,000, for joint filers, and
• $0 to $10,000 for married separate filers.

The income limit for the Saver' Credit is:

• $73,000 for joint filers,
• $54,750 for heads of household, and
• $36,500 for singles and married separate filers.

Lastly, the amount individuals can contribute to their SIMPLE retirement accounts is increased to $15,500, up from $14,000.

For 2023, the Social Security wage cap will be $160,200, and social security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits will increase by 8.7 percent. These changes reflect cost-of-living adjustments to account for inflation.

For 2023, the Social Security wage cap will be $160,200, and social security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits will increase by 8.7 percent. These changes reflect cost-of-living adjustments to account for inflation.

Wage Cap for Social Security Tax

The Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax on wages is 7.65 percent each for the employee and the employer. FICA tax has two components:

• a 6.2 percent social security tax, also known as old age, survivors, and disability insurance (OASDI); and
• a 1.45 percent Medicare tax, also known as hospital insurance (HI).

For self-employed workers, the Self-Employment tax is 15.3 percent, consisting of:

• a 12.4 percent OASDI tax; and
• a 2.9 percent Medicare tax.

OASDI tax applies only up to a wage base, which includes most wages and self-employment income up to the annual wage cap.

For 2023, the wage base is $160,200. Thus, OASDI tax applies only to the taxpayer’s first $160,200 in wages or net earnings from self-employment. Taxpayers do not pay any OASDI tax on earnings that exceed $160,200.

There is no wage cap for Medicare tax.

Maximum Social Security Tax for 2023

For workers who earn $160,200 or more in 2023:

• an employee will pay a total of $9,932.40 in social security tax ($160,200 x 6.2 percent);
• the employer will pay the same amount; and
• a self-employed worker will pay a total of $19,864.80 in social security tax ($160,200 x 12.4 percent).

Additional Medicare Tax

Higher-income workers may have to pay an Additional Medicare tax of 0.9 percent. This tax applies to wages and self-employment income that exceed:

• $250,000 for married taxpayers who file a joint return;
• $125,000 for married taxpayers who file separate returns; and
• $200,000 for other taxpayers.

The annual wage cap does not affect the Additional Medicare tax.

Benefit Increase for 2023

A cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) will increase social security and SSI benefits for 2023 by 8.7 percent. The COLA is intended to ensure that inflation does not erode the purchasing power of these benefits.

The IRS announced broad-based penalty relief for taxpayers affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. The relief applies to failure to file penalties and certain international information return (IIR) penalties with respect to tax returns for tax years (TY) 2019 and TY 2020, filed on or before September 30, 2022.

The IRS announced broad-based penalty relief for taxpayers affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. The relief applies to failure to file penalties and certain international information return (IIR) penalties with respect to tax returns for tax years (TY) 2019 and TY 2020, filed on or before September 30, 2022. Relief is also provided to banks, employers and other businesses from certain information return penalties with respect to TY 2019 returns filed on or before August 1, 2020, and with respect to TY 2020 returns that were filed on or before August 1, 2021.

The relief will also help the IRS focus resources on processing backlogged tax returns and tax correspondence.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the IRS issued a series of notices and other guidance to provide relief to affected taxpayers, including:

• postponing the due date for certain Federal income tax payments ( Notice 2020-17, I.R.B. 2020-15, 590);
• expanded relief postponing the due date for filing Federal income tax returns originally due April 15, 2020, to July 15, 2020, among other things ( Notice 2020-18, I.R.B. 2020-15, 590); and
• postponing the due date for filing Federal income tax returns in the Form 1040 series and making certain Federal income tax payments that were originally due on April 15, 2021, due on May 17, 2021 ( Notice 2021-21, I.R.B. 2021-15, 986.

Waiver and Abatement of Certain Penalties

The IRS will not impose penalties with respect to specifically identified tax returns for TY 2019 and TY 2020, filed on or before September 30, 2022. The relief will be automatically applied-taxpayers do not have to request relief.

The IRS will not impose additions to tax under Code Sec. 6651(a)(1) for failure to file the following income tax returns:

• Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, and others in the series;
• Form 1041, U.S. Income Tax Return for Estates and Trusts, and others in the series;
• Form 1120, U.S. Corporation Income Tax Return, and others in the series;
• Form 1066, U.S. Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit (REMIC) Income Tax Return; and
• Form 990-PF, Return of Private Foundation or Section 4947(a)(1) Trust Treated as Private Foundation and Form 990-T, Exempt Organization Business income Tax Return (and Proxy Tax under Code Sec. 6033(e)).

Further, certain penalties will not be imposed under Code Secs. 6038, 6038A, 6038C, 6038F [ 6039F] and 6677 for failure to timely file several IIRs, such as Form 5471, Information Return of U.S. Persons With Respect to Certain Foreign Corporations.

Comment. Note that the Notice refers to Code Sec. 6038F, which does not exist. The context indicates that the reference should be to Code Sec. 6039F. The IRS may issue a correction.

Certain penalties will not be imposed under Code Sec. 6698(a)(1) and (2) for failure to timely file and show the required information on a Form 1065, U.S. Return of Partnership Income.

Certain penalties will not be imposed under Code Sec. 6699(a)(1) and (2) for failure to timely file and show the required information on a Form 1120-S, U.S. Income Tax Return for an S corporation.

In addition, the IRS will not impose the penalties under Code Sec. 6721(a)(2)(A) for failure to timely file any information return as defined under Code Sec. 6724(d)(1) that includes (1) 2019 returns that were filed on or before August 1, 2020, with an original due date of January 31, 2020, February 28, 2020 (if filed on paper) or March 31, 2020 (if filed electronically) or March 15, 2020; and (2) 2020 returns that were filed on or before August 1, 2021, with an original due date of January 31, 2021, February 28, 2021 (if filed on paper) or March 31, 2021 (if filed electronically) or March 15, 2021.

Exceptions

The penalty relief does not apply to any penalties not listed. Additionally the penalty relief does not apply to returns for which the penalty for fraudulent failure to file under Code Sec. 6651(f) or the penalty for fraud under Code Sec. 6663 apply. The penalty relief also does not apply to penalties in an accepted offer in compromise under Code Sec. 7122 or any penalty settled in a closing agreement under Code Sec. 7121 or finally determined in a judicial proceeding.

NTA Applauds IRS Move To Provide Late Filing Penalty Relief

National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins applauded the Internal Revenue Service’s decision to provide late-filing penalty relief to taxpayers who filed late tax returns for tax years 2019 and 2020.

"The IRS has taken a major step in providing broad, taxpayer-favorable relief from late-filing penalties for 2019 and 2020 tax years," Collins said in an August 24, 2022 blog post, adding that the agency " deserves substantial credit for its willingness to listen to Congress, stakeholders, and TAS [Taxpayer Advocate Service], and undertake a bold step requiring significant administrative effort and resources to benefit all taxpayers affected by the pandemic".

Businesses are still waiting for pandemic relief made available to them during the COVID-19 outbreak amid ongoing processing delays at the Internal Revenue Service, according to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.

Businesses are still waiting for pandemic relief made available to them during the COVID-19 outbreak amid ongoing processing delays at the Internal Revenue Service, according to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.

According to an August 31, 2022, report posted to the TIGTA web site, the IRS "did not begin processing claims for qualified Sick and Family Leave Credits and the Employee Retention Credit for 12 months and claims for the Social Security Tax Deferral for 16 months after the pandemic relief legislation was enacted."

TIGTA attributed this delay to a "lack of updated programming and procedural guidance," as well as a "lack of training, erroneously suspended claims, and a lack of prioritization of claims" that contributed to the delays in processing claims.

Employers filing claims for these pandemic benefits would have filed a Form 941-X, which would have amended a previously filed Form 941 if they did not make the initial claim for these benefits on the Form 941 or if they needed to amend the amount of original claim on the already-filed Form 941.

"As of February 1, 2022, there were 447,435 Forms 941-X waiting to be processed," the report states. "Over 90 percent (402,814) of these Forms 941-X were over-aged, i.e. have not been processed within 45 calendar days. In addition, 60,885 (13.6 percent of the Forms 941-X were not processed within 180 calendar days."

TIGTA described the over-aged inventory as "an ongoing challenge for the IRS."

Additionally, the IRS watchdog found claims that should have been reviewed but were not resulted "in $45 million in potentially erroneous nonrefundable employer tax credits being allowed" when they otherwise might not have had proper reviews been conducted.

TIGTA recommends that IRS develop a plan to prioritize processing backlogged claims, update the examination referral process, and update training for IRS employees regarding referrals. IRS did not agree with the latter recommendations, but did all others stated in the report.

"Management stated they completed subsequent review of completed Form 941-X claims and determined no additional training was needed," the report states. "However, the IRS’s subsequent reviews do not address the concerns identified in our report. Accounts Management employees cited unclear guidance and training as to why 73 percent of claims were not referred when required."