Signup To Receive CCH Tax News Headlines Via Email

August 13, 2009

Federal Headlines


IRS Clarifies Guidance on Disconnected Youth and Unemployed Veterans under the Work Opportunity Tax Credit; Extends Transition Deadline (Notice 2009-69)

 

The IRS has clarified its previous guidance (TAXDAY, 2009/05/29, I.3) regarding unemployed veterans and disconnected youth for purposes of the work opportunity tax credit (WOTC). First, an individual who received a high school diploma or GED certificate at least six months prior to the hiring date and who otherwise satisfies the requirements for a disconnected youth will not fail to qualify as a disconnected youth merely because the individual has been employed at times since graduation, as long as that employment was no more than occasional. Second, transition relief is extended for submitting certification requests.

 

Generally, a worker cannot be treated as a member of a targeted group unless the employer obtains certification from a designated local agency on or before the day the individual begins work that the individual is a member of a targeted group, or completes a prescreening notice (Form 8850, Pre-Screening Notice and Certification Request for the Work Opportunity Credit) on or before the day the individual is offered employment and submits that notice to the designated local agency to request certification not later than 28 days after the individual begins work. Under the extended transition relief, any employer who hires an unemployed veteran or disconnected youth after December 31, 2008, and before September 17, 2009, will be considered to satisfy the deadline if the employer submits the pre-screening notice to the designated local agency to request certification not later than October 17, 2009. Notice 2009-28, I.R.B. 2009-24, 1082, is clarified.

Notice 2009-69, 2009FED ¶46,443

Other References:

 

Code Sec. 51

 

CCH Reference - 2009FED ¶4803.03

 

CCH Reference - 2009FED ¶4803.04

 

CCH Reference - 2009FED ¶4803.64

 

CCH Reference - 2009FED ¶4803.65

 

Tax Research Consultant

 

CCH Reference - TRC BUSEXP: 54,258.60

CCH Reference - TRC BUSEXP: 54,262.02

 

IRS Adjusts Remedial Amendment Rules for Governmental Retirement Plans (Rev. Proc. 2009-36)

 

The IRS has extended the deadline for governmental retirement plans to be amended to reflect changes in the governing law. Reg. §1.401(b)-1(e)(3) and Rev. Proc. 2007-44, 2007-2 CB 54, generally provide that a plan sponsor has 91 days after its request for a determination letter has been rejected to make necessary retroactive remedial amendments. This 91-day extension may be insufficient for governmental plans if the governing body with authority to amend the plan is unable to do so because it is not in session or for other procedural reasons.

 

Under the new procedure, the remedial amendment period extends through the 91st day after the last day of the first regular legislative session beginning more than 120 days after the date on which the application for determination is finally disposed of by the IRS or the Tax Court. The procedure also formalizes an option previously announced by the IRS. The sponsor of an individually designed governmental may elect Cycle E (February 1, 2010, through January 31, 2011) instead of Cycle C (February 1, 2008, through January 31, 2009) as the plan's initial (EGTRRA) remedial amendment cycle.

 

Rev. Proc. 2007-44 is modified.

Rev. Proc. 2009-36, 2009FED ¶46,444

Other References:

 

Code Sec. 401

 

CCH Reference - 2009FED ¶17,929.65

 

Statement of Procedural Rules Sec. 601.201

 

CCH Reference - 2009FED ¶43,360.2116

 

Tax Research Consultant

 

CCH Reference - TRC RETIRE: 51,052.20


IRS Invites Comments on Proper Application of Code Sec. 704(c) Allocation Rules (Notice 2009-70)

 

The IRS has requested comments of the proper application of rules governing the creation and maintenance of multiple layers of forward and reverse Code Sec. 704(c) gain and loss to partnerships and tiered partnerships, including in the context of partnership mergers and divisions. The IRS had received numerous comments on proposed regulations issued in 2007 concerning the tax consequences of certain partnership mergers (NPRM REG-143397-05).

 

CCH Comment. Code Sec. 704(c) is intended to prevent the shifting among partners of the precontribution gain attributable to property contributed to a partnership.

 

Also, the IRS is aware of practitioners taking different positions based on varying interpretations of Reg. §1.704-3(a)(9). For example, some practitioners have taken the aggregate approach, so that a tiered partnership can be looked though and Code Sec. 704(c) applied as if the partners of the upper tier partnership directly own a portion of the assets of the lower tier partnership. In contrast, under the entity approach favored by some practitioners, the upper tier partnership is treated as owning an interest in the lower tier partnership but is not treated as owning any interest in the property of the lower tier partnership.

 

The IRS is asking for comments to clarify the issues raised by the different approaches. The questions relate to issues raised by the revaluation of assets, how tax items should be allocated among the different Code Sec. 704(c) "layers", how layers should be maintained in a tiered-partnership structure, issues related to mergers and divisions, and international issues.

Notice 2009-70, 2009FED ¶46,445

Other References:

 

Code Sec. 704(c)

 

CCH Reference - 2009FED ¶25,135.32

 

Tax Research Consultant

 

CCH Reference - TRC PART: 9,150

 

IRS Asks for Comments Regarding Eligible Combined Plans to Be Used for Future Guidance (Notice 2009-71)

 

The IRS plans to issue guidance relating to eligible combined plans under Code Sec. 414(x) and is seeking comments regarding the requirements for such plans. An eligible combined plan provides a vehicle through which an employer can maintain both a defined contribution plan and a defined benefit plan on a combined basis, thus reducing the administrative burdens and costs of maintaining separate plans. The effective date for Code Sec. 414(x) is plan years beginning after December 31, 2009, and any forthcoming guidance would apply prospectively. Comments must be submitted by October 15, 2009.

Notice 2009-71, 2009FED ¶46,446

Other References:

 

Code Sec. 414

 

CCH Reference - 2009FED ¶19,198B.01

 

Tax Research Consultant

 

CCH Reference - TRC RETIRE: 3,500


 

State Headlines


All States --Multiple Taxes: New Issue of the Journal of State Taxation Available

 

The new issue of the Journal of State Taxation, now available, includes articles and columns covering the following timely top state tax issues:

 
Articles

 

-- Comparison of Combined Reporting Groups: California, Illinois, New York and Texas (By Michael S. Schadewald)

 

-- Ohio's Commercial Activity Tax: Tax Reform and the Cost of Doing Business (By Thomas J. Niedzielski)

 

-- Kentucky's Limited Liability Entity Tax (By Mark A. Loyd)

 

-- The Single Sales Factor Apportionment Method Origins and Development (By Mark L. Nachbar and Brian L. Browdy)

 

-- Breaking State and Local Developments (By Members of Grant Thornton's SALT Practice)

 

-- Recessionary Impact on Unemployment Insurance Taxes --2009 and Beyond (By Lori Roberts)

 

-- Federal Audit Changes Deemed Final upon Issuance of IRS Letter 987 (By Christopher R. Grissom and William T. Thistle)

 

-- Frequently Asked Multistate Tax Questions

 

-- Property Factor: Basis and Valuation

 
Columns

 

-- Nexus News: "Oldies But Goodies" in Nexus Law: Connecticut Applies Traditional Nexus Analysis in Latest School Book Club Case (By Maryann B. Gall and Laura A. Kulwicki)

 

-- Apportionment Issues: Property Factor Primer (By Michael S. Schadewald)

 

-- Tax Trends: It Has Been a Cold Spring in Minnesota (By Rocky B. Cummings)

 

Subscribers to the CCH Tax Research Network (TRN) can access this Journal issue at the State Tax and State Business Income Tax tabs on TRN, depending on to which publications or libraries they have subscriptions. Subscribers to CCH IntelliConnect can access this Journal issue under News and Current Awareness --State Tax Current Features and Journals.

 

New York --Sales and Use Tax: Lawsuit Against Online Travel Companies Over Hotel Taxes Remanded

 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated a U.S. district court decision that dismissed a proposed class action lawsuit brought by New York's Nassau County against numerous online travel companies for their alleged underpayment of New York hotel occupancy taxes, and remanded the case to determine if class certification was appropriate. The U.S. district court had dismissed the proposed class action lawsuit because the county failed to exhaust its own administrative remedies before filing the lawsuit.

  

County of Nassau, New York v. Hotels.com, LP, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Docket No. 07-3919-cv, August 11, 2009

 

 

Copyright © 2009, CCH INCORPORATED. All rights reserved.