|

Five Hot Tax Issues Making News In 2015: Where Are They Now?

Congress made a lot of noise this year about tax reform and other tax bills. Mostly, it was just noise. With the exception of some administrative moves (like changing due dates), there wasn’t a lot of movement. With just a few weeks to go in the calendar year and Congress scheduled to break for the holidays shortly, here’s a quick peek at some hot tax issues:

1. Tax Extenders. After 2014’s last-minute dash to approve tax extenders, many taxpayers (including me) were encouraged when Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), together with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), announced in July that the Senate Finance Committee would begin markup on a tax extenders bill. But July came and went without any movement on the extenders bill. By September, taxpayers were growing anxious. On September 10, the Broad Tax Extenders Coalition sent a letter to members of Congress asking them to “act immediately” to either extend or make permanent the expiring tax provisions. Over 2,000 businesses signed the letter which was apparently ignored – that, or Congress has a significantly different understanding of the word “immediate.” Cut to December. Still no movement.

About 55 individual tax breaks expired at the end of 2014. That’s right: expired, past tense. That means that Congress has 27 days to decide whether to extend these tax breaks to make them retroactive to January 1, 2015. Of the breaks, making the most news is bonus depreciation, which allows businesses to deduct the cost of certain business expenses at once rather than depreciate the cost over a number of years. Also included in the bill? The research and development tax credit. A deduction for educator expenses. A deduction for state and local sales taxes. The mortgage insurance premiums deduction. The energy-efficient home improvement credit. And don’t forget the popular charitable IRA rollover.

So where is it now? Nobody seems to know. Congress claims to be in talks but there are reports that “extras” in the tax deal are gumming up the works. The cost of the extenders is the big hold up which makes you wonder: if it’s too expensive, why not just let the extenders die? The problem, of course, is that Congress lacks the willpower to say no to spending. The uncertainty is bad for taxpayers.

2. Internet Tax Freedom Act. Currently, taxing internet access is barred by law – that’s been the rule since 1997. It’s not a permanent law: it’s a moratorium. To keep the moratorium in place, Congress has to extend it. As of last year, this had happened four times so far: in 2001, 2004, 2007, and 2014. But hold on because it gets more confusing. The moratorium was supposed to end in November of 2014 – just before the midterm elections – and was not so coincidentally extended for a few weeks through December 11, 2014. It was then re-upped to October 1, 2015 (stay with me). In another band-aid, it was again extended to December 11, 2015. That’s in seven days.

So where is it now? Earlier this year, the House approved H.R. 235, the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act, which “amends the Internet Tax Freedom Act to make permanent the ban on state and local taxation of Internet access and on multiple or discriminatory taxes on electronic commerce.” A companion bill, the S.431, the Internet Tax Freedom Forever Act, was read in the Senate. There’s been no additional movement.

3. Highway Bill. The Highway Trust Fund has been losing money for years. In 2005, the Highway Trust Fund actually had a surplus of $10 billion: now, it will need almost $15 billion each year in additional gas tax receipts to make up the hole. The Senate passed a multi-year extension for the trust fund this summer, but the House didn’t agree. Additionally, Congress has been squabbling over how to pay for much-needed infrastructure improvements.

The Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act, or FAST Act, was introduced earlier this year. The final version of the bill is a five-year measure meant to “improve the Nation’s surface transportation infrastructure, including our roads, bridges, transit systems, and rail transportation network.” But it has lots of extra stuff in it because that’s what Congress likes to do. Included in the final text? Provisions that revive the charter of the U.S. Export-Import Bank, allow the government to revoke your passport if you owe “seriously delinquent taxes” and an order to make the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) turn over collections of delinquent accounts.

So where is it now? The House and the Senate passed conflicting versions of the bill. Those versions were reconciled this week. President Obama is expected to sign the $305 billion bill today – the day that transportation spending is set to expire.

4. Corporate Tax Reform. Remember when tax reform was all the rage? Last year, tax reform was constantly in the news – especially corporate tax reform in response to allegations that companies were paying pennies on the dollar due to loopholes (I don’t love that word). In 2013, then-Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI) took their quest for tax reform on the road, saying both were “committed” to reform. Both have since retired. In 2014, Sen. Michael F. Bennet (D-CO) introduced a bill, Partnership to Build America Act of 2014 (S. 1957), that would provide for investments and improvements in infrastructure projects with a catch: it included a repatriation tax holiday; it moved to committee where it sits (dead) today. Presidential hopeful Donald Trump has introduced his own version of the plan which would raise revenue through a one-time repatriation tax of 10% for corporate cash held overseas but of course, that’s just a proposal.

So where is it now? Corporate tax reform was tops on the list of priorities, for now, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) before his ascent to Speaker of the House. There’s nothing new happening now and most pundits don’t expect any real action until after the 2016 election.

5. Licensing Tax Preparers. Efforts by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to license tax return preparers were shot down by the courts in Loving v. Commissioner (and subsequent appeals). The IRS eventually gave up on appeals and moved to a voluntary program with the hope that Congress would grant IRS the authority that the courts found lacking.

In September, Senate Finance Committee Chair Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Ranking Committee Member Ron Wyden (D-OR) announced they would mark up a bill that would, among other things, require licensing to “help root out the bad actors who pose as law-abiding return preparers” as a step towards protecting taxpayers from identity theft and fraud. The markup session was postponed and has not, to date, been rescheduled.

So where is it now? Congress is taking another stab at legislation to license tax preparers: Representatives Diane Black (R-TN) and Pat Meehan (R-PA) have introduced H.R. 4141, the Tax Return Preparer Competency Act. The bill currently sits in committee.

Author’s Note: The status of these provisions could change at any time. Check back for updates.

Facebooktwitterlinkedinmail
author avatar
Kelly Phillips Erb
Kelly Phillips Erb, known as Taxgirl, is a tax attorney, writer, and speaker who explains tax news, IRS updates, scams, financial crime, and money in plain English.

Similar Posts

  • 11 Reasons Why I Never Want To Own A House Again

    [caption id="" align="alignright" width="240" caption="red sold sign (Photo credit: Diana Parkhouse)"]red sold sign[/caption]

    When my phone vibrated, I didn’t even have to look. I knew what it meant: the house had finally sold.
    I wasn’t sure how I was going to feel when it was finally over. I wondered if I would feel sad or anxious or regretful. What I actually felt was relief.
    It was a great house. It was where my children took their first steps, where they learned to ride bikes and scooters. It was the location for dinner parties and cocktail parties and birthday parties and our annual Halloween potluck. But it was time to go. We happened upon a great new house that was nearly perfect. And even better: it was a rental.
    I know what you’re thinking: didn’t you want to buy another house? It was a question we were asked over and over as we approached our closing. But I didn’t want to buy another house. After fifteen years, I was tired of being a homeowner. After a few months of renting, I was sold – on not buying again.
    There’s a lot of hype about why you need to own a house. But buying a house isn’t the key to financial security for everyone – and those alleged tax advantages? Also not quite what they’re painted to be. I hope to never own a house again. Here’s a list of eleven reasons – many of them tax-related – why:

    1. As investments go, it’s not always a great deal. While it’s true that some homes do appreciate, so do many other assets. If you bought a house for, say, $200,000 thirty years ago, it would be worth $468,375.09 today. While that gain feels impressive, that appreciation is based solely on inflation – which means that, in theory, the same appreciation would have happened with any asset. While we did “make” money on the sale of our house, I suspect we would have had a similar increase had we invested that money in the market or in our business.
    2. The mortgage interest deduction doesn’t make up for the fact that you’re still paying a lot of interest. While I understand that it’s possible to buy a house without a mortgage, the large percentage of homeowners (more than 70%) take out a loan. With average mortgage rates at 4.3% (as of this morning), you’ll actually pay $356,307.44 for a $200,000 home: $156,307.44 in interest alone. Averaged over 30 years, that works out to a little over $5,000 per year (even though in practice you pay the most interest at the beginning). Assuming you’re in a 25% bracket – and you itemize – that works out to a tax savings of just over $1,300 per year. But the word “savings” is somewhat of a misnomer because you’re still out of pocket more than you get back in tax savings: in our example, you would “save” less than $40,000 while paying out more than $150,000 in interest.
    3. Homes often tempt people borrow more than they can afford. As Congress tosses around the idea of taking away the home mortgage interest deduction, homeowners are screaming that they won’t be able to afford their homes without it. In fact, when you’re looking to buy, most lenders and realtors will use the deduction as a selling point to boost prices. But is that a great strategy? When buying a new dress or a new car, consumers tend to focus on the cost of the item alone when determining how much to spend. But when it comes to mortgages, that number edges up because of the potential for tax savings (again, see #2). With that temptation, combined with a sluggish economy, it’s no wonder that more than 10 million homeowners are currently underwater on mortgages worth more than actual house values. We were fortunately not one of them but not for lack of the banks trying. When we bought our home, we were actually approved for a mortgage which was hundreds of thousands of dollars more than the home we ultimately bought. We opted for a less expensive home – and thankfully so.
    4. Owning a house subject to a mortgage drives up debt to income ratios. Assuming that you borrow to buy your home – again, a pretty reasonable assumption – that debt load can be a drag on your credit and ability to borrow for other things (like a new car). I’ve made no secret about the fact that I owe a significant amount in student loans. That already affects my perceived ability to pay when figuring my credit. A mortgage dramatically increases that ratio. Interestingly, our monthly rental payment is actually more than our monthly mortgage payment – but on paper, our rent is not a debt, it’s an expense. The two may be treated very differently, depending on the circumstances.
    5. A mortgage is typically 20 or 30 years while, at any given time, the current administration has only four (or possibly eight). I can’t stress this enough. The home mortgage interest deduction has been around for what seems like forever. Does that mean it that you can count on it to be around in 10, 20 or 30 years? Don’t be so sure. The deduction has become increasingly vulnerable: it has been a talking point in practically every administration from Bush to Obama, despite Reagan’s famous promise to the National Association of Realtors in a 1984 speech that he would “preserve the part of the American dream which the home mortgage interest deduction symbolizes.” Just this year, Eric J. Toder, the co-director of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, advised Congress that “[a]chieving a revenue-neutral tax reform that reduces marginal tax rates significantly would be difficult or impossible to achieve without cutting back the mortgage interest deduction or some other equally popular and widely used provisions.”
    6. A mortgage is typically 20 or 30 years. So yeah, I said that already. But I have another point: home ownership can limit your mobility. We were fortunate that we were able to write checks for our rent and our mortgage. While we could afford to make both payments, chances are that we would not have been able to obtain a mortgage for a second house while continuing to carry the first. Often, in order to move, you have to sell – or rent – your first home. I’ve been a landlord before and I’m not inclined to do it again. And selling our house in this economy was no small feat. That’s part of the reason that we stayed so long in one place: it was hard to move. In addition to our own missed opportunities, that may not be good for the country’s economy: economists Andrew Oswald and David Blanchflower found that rates of high homeownership lead to higher rates of unemployment in both the U.S. and Europe because, among other issues, owning a home may keep people from moving to areas with good jobs and creates “negative externalities.”
    7. Houses take a lot of your money. There’s a reason that many folks refer to their homes as money pits: you often put a lot of money that you’ll never see again into a home. Not all improvements are deductible. Deductible expenses are generally limited to casualty loss deductions. In most cases, significant repairs to your home merely increase your basis for purposes of calculating a gain at sale. As most taxpayers aren’t likely to experience the kind of gain that would subject them to capital gains, basis isn’t always an issue which means that those expenditures get lost. Thousands of dollars to replace the air conditioning unit? The new garbage disposal? Replacing the flooring in the kitchen? The new washer/dryer? Landscaping additions? You can’t write them off and while you may recover some dollars at sale, rarely do you recover the entire amount. If you add all of those expenditures up over a 30 year period, you might see an explanation for some of that “gain” at sale. Often homeowners get fixated on two numbers: the purchase price of the house and the selling price of the house – but don’t forget to account for all of the money you spent in between.
    8. If you do hit the home appreciation jackpot, there can be significant taxes. Not all houses bleed money. Not all appreciation can be attributed to inflation and/or a combination of home improvements – sometimes, it turns out to be a good investment. But there is a price: if the gain on the sale of your home exceeds the $250,000 exclusion (or $500,000 for married taxpayers), the proceeds over that exclusion are subject to capital gains. Additionally, under the new health care law, a Medicare tax of 3.8% will be imposed on investment/unearned income, which includes gain from the sale of your home, for high income taxpayers. High income taxpayers means those individual taxpayers reporting income over $200,000 and married taxpayers filing jointly reporting income over $250,000.
    9. I like for things to be predictable and real estate taxes can vary. While mortgage payments can remain fairly flat, assuming you have a fixed mortgage rate, you more or less know what you’re paying each year. You don’t always have the same result with real estate taxes. Your tax bill can change based on property assessments and reassessments (just ask Philadelphia) or a change in tax rates – especially in today’s climate as townships and counties search for revenue. Unlike most commercial leases, residential leases don’t tend to be “triple net” meaning that the expenses are not directly passed through but tend to be figured as part of the total rental payments. Real estate taxes are generally accounted for in the cost of the rental; when they are not, they may be limited by statute or otherwise capped.
    10. You can’t deduct a loss on the sale of your home. If I lose money on stocks, I can net those losses against other gains. If I lose money in my business, I can deduct those losses or use them to offset other gains (even in other years). But it doesn’t work that way when it comes to housing. You can never claim a capital loss on the sale of a personal residence – no matter how much it hurts. In this market, many taxpayers are finding this to be the case. That makes putting all of your investment eggs in the housing basket a risky proposition.
    11. It’s getting more difficult to claim the itemized deduction. Home mortgage interest is only deductible if you itemize on your Schedule A, meaning that only about 1/3 of taxpayers even have the option of taking the deduction. You itemize if your deductions exceed the standard deduction: for 2013, the applicable standard deduction rates are $12,200 for married taxpayers filing jointly; $8,950 for head of household; $6,100 for individual taxpayers and $6,100 for married taxpayers filing separate. Those numbers are getting harder to get to for many taxpayers, including me. Mathematically, the longer you own your house, the less you owe in interest and the smaller the deduction. Add that to the bump in the threshold for the medical expense deduction (which means that I’m not going to be able to claim those expenses in 2013), restrictions due to the Pease limitations and the bar for miscellaneous deductions, and taxpayers are increasingly finding that the deduction is actually quite elusive.

    I’m not saying that owning a home is a bad thing. I liked being a homeowner. I just happen to like renting more. I liked that when our oven died, it was replaced – at no additional cost to me – that same day. And I liked that as I wandered through Home Depot, I happily gazed at cabinet pulls and meandered through the garden center rather than making a beeline for caulk, wood putty or other maintenance items. Maintenance is no longer my problem.
    I’m also not advising folks to eschew real estate: it can be a good investment for some taxpayers. In addition to owner occupied properties, rentals can be a good financial move. While I have no desire to be a landlord again, it has been a good bet for many taxpayers. My father-in-law has rented properties for years. He realized, like many other taxpayers, that rental real estate is not only a good income stream but a forced retirement plan. But he, like other savvy real estate owners, also understands the rules and the economics, and makes decisions accordingly.

    What I am saying is that we shouldn’t buy into the idea that owning a home is for everyone. And it’s not just me: at the end of August, the U.S. Census Bureau reported that the home ownership rate was 65.5%, the lowest rate in the past 50 years (downloads as a pdf); adding borrowers in risk of default, the number is closer to 62%. In contrast, ownership in 2010 was nearly 69%: for purposes of context, a one-percent change in the ownership represents well over a million homeowners. That dip doesn’t spell disaster for our country. It would be a mistake to assume that countries with high incidents of home ownership are synonymous with a strong economy: Russia, Italy, Greece and Spain – countries with struggling economies – have significantly higher home ownership rates than the U.S. Conversely, some countries with traditionally strong economies like Germany, Switzerland and Japan, have lower home ownership rates than in the U.S.
    There are so many considerations when deciding whether to buy a home. It’s not the ‘ideal’ scenario for all families. Don’t be fooled by promises of tax savings and tax-free appreciation: that’s not always the case. A home is a huge investment so be sure to research what it might mean for you before taking the leap – and don’t be afraid to say no. I did. And tonight, as I sit on my rented porch, staring out at my rented view while my kids happily play inside a house that they’ve already made their home, I don’t regret my decision one bit.

  • | |

    New York Fight Keeps Court Dockets Smoking

    I’ve often said that I believe that the behaviors associated with sales tax rates are overstated. I actually don’t believe that folks will drive across the border from Pennsylvania to Delaware to avoid sales tax on a roll of paper towels or a magazine. And despite the hue and cry otherwise, I don’t believe that…

  • |

    Hit A Pothole? It’s Gonna Cost You – One Way Or Another

    According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, a pothole is “a bowl-shaped depression in the pavement surface.” Those aren’t exactly the words that drivers where I live are using to describe them. Those words, I can’t post. After one of the snowiest, coldest winters on record in parts of the country, it’s…

  • | |

    McCain v Obama on Tax: Is It Really Just the Lesser of Two Evils?

    Obama and McCain continue to battle it out about the issue that most Americans seems to care about right now: the economy. To hear each talk, it just can’t get much worse (can it?). McCain spins Obama’s tax proposal as “the biggest tax increase since World War II.” Obama compares McCain’s plan to that of…