Congress recently passed the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, which President Bush signed on Feb. 13, 2008. While much publicity surrounds the "recovery rebates" for individuals, the new law also includes $44.8 billion in business incentives. 

CCH provides full coverage of the bill, including its generous expensing and bonus depreciation allowances for business and additional help for home mortgage financing.

In an article in the Journal of Taxation of Financial Products, Richard G. Larkins, Kyle H. Klein and Jasper J. Nzedu describe the shortcomings of the final mark-to-market safe harbor regulations under Code Sec. 475 and discuss the need for clearer guidance and a broader application of the safe harbor. This is necessary if the stated goals of the safe harbor - reducing the compliance burdens on taxpayers and improving the administration of the valuation requirement of Sec. 475 - are to be met.

Many companies have absolutely no idea how much electronically stored information (ESI) is resident in their firm at any given point in time, much less how much of it might be subject to, or relevant to, a particular investigation or litigation. Certainly, the firm wants to employ "best practices" in this area of electronic document retention, retrieval and destruction. But what exactly, Joe Bartling asks in an article in CPA Practice Management Forum is the "best practice?"

Lisa Brown, in an article in the Journal of Retirement Planning, explains a well-reasoned retirement planning timeline that indicates a general time frame in which executives should consider major decisions regarding retirement income strategies and other important decisions. This approach allows time for careful consideration of these decisions so that the retiring executive feels secure in the decisions and the overall plan.

One of the more common challenges in the state tax area relates to the constitutionality of a particular tax or taxing statute. When considering constitutional challenges, the Commerce Clause typically springs to mind.  

Yet, in an article in Corporate Business Taxation Monthly, Karen H. Currie analyzes the Kentucky case of AT&T v. Rudolph, which held that a Kentucky statute prohibiting telecommunications service providers from collecting gross revenues tax directly from their customers by separately stating that tax on the bill to the customer violated the First Amendment right to free speech.